Dave, Jones, etal.-- I am not sure I understand the mechanism of energy transfer at the kilo hertz frequency when the geometry is not so straight forward.
Normally an alternating magnetic field creates an alternating electric field at the exact location (space coordinate going to zero in the limit) and at the same time (time being continuous from 0 in the + “direction”). For normal electron conductance in a good conductor the particle electrons are thought to accelerate in the local electric field until they interact with other particles, including electrons, and deposit some of this energy with the interacting particle, causing it to vibrate as phonic energy (heat). All the interactions are coupled by the electric field created by the charge of the electron and the respective interacting particles. In a varying electric field within a conductor the same type of particle interactions occur and cause phonic lattice heat additions. Rotating magnetic fields cause locally rotating electric fields which are thought to create local loops of electrons in motion (eddy currents) which interact with lattice particles much the way electrons in linear motion interact, except the electrons circular motion also creates a magnetic field that changes the magnetic field locally within the loop. Some of the rotational energy may be changed to a photon which may escape the conductor as EM radiation. That is what derives from classic EM theory. With lattices that have electrons with intrinsic spin, the varying magnetic fields may cause changes of intrinsic spin states, if the resonances are correct. The energy between these spin states is in discrete quantum intervals as influenced by the local magnetic field. The result of energy sharing among the various lattice particles, including the nuclei, (coupling) is complex and IMHO not considered in simple electronic calculations being discussed in this thread. The magnification of local magnetic fields is further complicated by the creation of SPP transient entities. These new things arise from the complex geometry, including size and effective 2 dimensions, and well controlled frequencies of the driver magnetic and electric fields. Bob Cook From: David Roberson Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2015 6:39 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:The good, the bad and the ugly Jones, I agree with your desire to find an easy to use and inexpensive heating method. I am just pointing out that it may become a very difficult task to get efficient heating unless the drive coil is a reasonable match to the load. You can visualize what I am pointing out by taking a normal pot load and raising it above the heating coil. Once you get beyond a certain elevation, the amount of heat deposited into the pot reduces rapidly. This is due to the mismatch that occurs in impedance. It makes a great deal of sense to try to use one of those inexpensive systems but don't be surprised to find that it is difficult to heat the load to the desired level unless it is flat and spread out. Magnetic flux coupling is the key parameter and it falls rapidly with shape mismatch and distance. Also, the conductive and magnetic characteristic of the fuel is a big factor that is going to add confusion to the testers. A simple wire heating system is far easier to meter and calibrate in my opinion. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, Jun 13, 2015 8:55 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:The good, the bad and the ugly Dave, Although I agree with what you say in principle about reflected resistance and leakage flux, the advantages of an efficient, inexpensive inductive power source (the cooktop) which is easily adaptable to boil-off calorimetry is so impressive that it could swing the decision the other way. This is especially true if there is no resistive heater wire to fail. The problem of the parallel resistive load, or lack thereof - can be elegantly met by incorporating that load into the design of the calorimeter itself. IOW – there will be adequate proof (for all but the most entrenched skeptics) if it can be shown that thermal gain exist by a comparison of mass loss of evaporation of water, say 100 grams out of 1 kg - in two comparative ways – one way using water only as the load, using the full area coverage of the primary coil and with no leakage – against the other way, which is using the same amount of water, same general geometry but with an added ampule of fuel (modestly insulated) which is optimized for this type of power. I am striving to find a simple baseline comparative test, not necessarily side-by-side, but “sequentially comparative” … yet with the added capability of calculating enthalpy via the evaporated mass against the known standard… AND… using also using grid power at the wall as input, in both cases, so that there is no whining over power analysis. There will be a 16% overhead, more likely 20% in practice, so the minimum gain which will be acceptable is COP of about 1.24. I am convinced that this level of gain is possible at moderate fuel temperature based on the Thermacore papers, more so than anything later. From: David Roberson Getting the power into the load is the key to making one of these devices operate efficiently. If a small amount of the magnetic flux from the drive coil intercepts the fuel pellet then the reflected resistance appearing across the resonate load is going to be quite large. The voltage swing is limited by the devices and the supply rail so it is important to get the parallel resistive component of the reflected load small enough. I believe that a design where the drive coil is shaped like a cylinder with the fuel inside offers the best opportunity to obtain adequate drive. This seems to be where the replicators are going at the moment. A flat drive coil would not be the best due to it having plenty of leakage magnetic flux missing the fuel pellet. This then leads to a solid state device load that has a resistive component that is too large in parallel. Eddy currents are the mechanism used to absorb the power. The currents have both a resistive and inductive component which are reflected into the primary circuit. The inductive part tends to change the resonate frequency of the drive system. The resistive part becomes the load into which power is absorbed. An interesting issue is going to be the penetration depth of the magnetic flux into the fuel. All of the material above a certain region of the fuel will act like a partial shield depending upon its conductivity. The better the conductivity, the less penetration into the pellet. This should show itself as variation in the heat deposited into the fuel pellet depending upon the shape. A flat pellet would tend to be more evenly heated than a taller one. I am confident that a good design can be obtained provided the fuel conductivity does not change too greatly as it is consumed in the reactor. It is going to take some adjusting of shape and frequency in order to make a well designed system. Also, the resonate drive frequency will likely need to be modified slowly with time. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, Jun 13, 2015 4:05 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:The good, the bad and the ugly Eddy currents work to produce heat in a metal or an metal oxide insolator on the micro level which still exists in a metal or oxide over it curie point. http://www.asminternational.org/documents/10192/3451119/ACFAA5C.pdf/98899692-8a69-446d-ac9a-38b8fab3a160 Hysteresis goes away beyond the Curie point, but eddy currents are still avalible for a skin effect. On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: Bob, There is a pretty good article on Wiki for induction cookers, but a look at the patents turns up more than meets the eye in a superficial account. The obvious part is that there is a Litz wire copper pancake coil inside the cooktop, driven by silicon to low to mid kilohertz range – 25-75 kHz. The coil has maybe 100 turns, while the bottom of the cooking pot effectively forms a single shorted turn. According to Wiki, this forms a virtual transformer which steps down the voltage and steps up the current so that the shorted current becomes heat - localized in high-resistance steel - while the driving coil stays cool. That is fairly straightforward but some designs are more efficient than others. So… there is more to the story than simply RF induction. US6956188 to GE describes an integrated capacitor, which must be resonant - and other patents have clues about special frequencies. JL Naudin and others have claimed that they can actually convert one of these devices into a gainful power source, using a Tesla bifilar pancake - but his logic is flawed and data is misinterpreted. See “Gegene” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OlLRrTSvYU Anyway, one of these cooktops could probably be converted to drive a LENR experiment with efficient power … including heat plus whatever advantages can be derived from RF waves (in the sense of Dardik “superwaves”) but on paper it should only work up to the Curie point of nickel which is low. That is what is so interesting about the Ukrainian device – apparently titanium hydride works to high temperature, even though it is not ferromagnetic and no nickel is used. It would be nice to have more detail on their design. Are they burning hydrogen and titanium in air? From: Bob Cook Jones-- You are correct about induction heating. My youngest daughter recently bought a new induction heating stove. Nothing gets hot but the bottom of the pot, and the water in the pot starts boiling almost immediately. There is very fast and efficient energy transfer to the inside bottom of the pot. Its not clear what the coupling is. It must be some sort of resonance coupling IMHO. I can imagine three mechanisms: 1. Nuclear magnetic resonance, 2. Magnetic resonance from an induction coil with electrons in a conductor, 3. Spin coupling of electrons in a magnetic field in the the pot’s metal lattice, i.e., direct phonic (thermal) energy with a resonant magnetic field the driver. I bet the designers know the mechanism, but do advertise it, if is nuclear or spin coupling. The unit my daughter has an Asian company brand name. Bob Cook From: Jones Beene Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 10:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Vo]:The good, the bad and the ugly As Peter laments, there are two extremes in the recent LENR news. Thomas Clark’s report lucidly states exactly what many of us having been saying for months about the flawed Lugano report. The good news in the provocative site: http://tet.in.ua/index.php/en/ Which is the Laboratory of Experimental Physics — also known as “TET” — in Ukraine and also in Moscow. Curiously, it combines Russian and Ukrainian efforts towards alternative energy. The curious part of this partnership goes all the way back to Chernobyl – another joint effort that resulted in catastrophe, but which result could be rectified to a large extent if this new effort is successful. The induction coil seems to offer the most promise to me – especially when the copper coil can double as the calorimeter - in the way Jack Cole has proposed. The Ukrainians seem to be doing exactly the same thing with the pictured coil which is covered in furnace cement. The problem with this approach, as Jack has documented on his blog, is capturing a larger proportion of the input energy than is normally possible with an induction setup. I believe this can be done. I have recently seen a report showing that induction cooktops, when properly designed at the best resonance level can actually apply more net energy from the grid to a cooking utensil than direct contact with the traditional resistive heating element – which is a surprise since we assume the latter is nearly 100% (it isn’t). Jones
