On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Bob Higgins <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree that in the future, it may be valuable to use inductive heating on > LENR devices that could evolve from the Lugano/Parkhomov/glowstick > reactors. However, at this stage in the game, I don't feel this technology > is necessary or desirable. It is not desirable because it is difficult > technology to assess how much source heat is being delivered to the reactor > core - in a way that is not equivocal. > The amount of power delivered to the reactor can be controlled in either one of two ways: either by adjusting the power that is delivered to the reactor directly when the power is constantly applied over time as is done for the wire heater, or by delivering the power in bursts of maximum power in short increments of time. Delivering power in bursts is best done in the case of RF starting when a minimum temperature is detected and applied until the desired maximum temperature is reached. The changing character of the RF does not matter when power is delivered to the reactor is bursts. Only the minimum and maximum temperature are controlling parameters. We need simple heating that can be readily be modeled. In the case of > induction heating, the load impedance will be constantly changing as the > core undergoes chemical and phase changes over temperature. This will mean > that the tuning of the inductively coupled elements will have to be > dynamically adjusted. You will constantly be faced with determining at > each impedance match how much power is going into the core or directly into > the calorimeter or the surroundings. It may prove painful to be able to > compare the result to a dummy run due to different dynamic impedance > matches. > If RF is produced by very high freqency EMF, only skin heating of the reactor will occur as happens now with the wire heater, The RF heater and the wire heater are the same in this case. > > The reason people are having trouble with resistive heaters is, quite > simply, because they are not getting assistance from excess heat in the > core. From looking at the reported successful experiments, excess heat > (XH) should be turning on in the 700-900C range, and if you are getting > this XH, then it won't be that hard to get to a core temperature of 1200C. > OTOH, if there is no excess heat, you will be driving the heater coil very > hard to get to that same temperature (probably by a factor of 2), which > will greatly shorten its life. > > When RF at high frequency is used to deliver input power, the outer surface of the reactor becomes the heting element. This outer surface will not burn out because the power is delivered equally over the entire surface. > Another observation is that the present heater coil designs can be > improved by using a larger diameter heater wire. The larger the wire, the > longer it will last at temperatures in excess of 1200C. Generally this > will mean trending to lower resistance coils and lower voltage drive. > Lower voltage drive is not a problem if you design for it. > The surface skin of an alumina tube or a zirconia tube will handle temperatues between 2000C to 3000C. > > Also, I believe these reactors should be better insulated until such time > as XH is observed. I realize that the insulation will create a potential > for run-away reaction when XH occurs, but that would be the best possible > news if it happened. When it does happen, just start again with less > insulation. The insulation will allow you to reach the 1200C range with > less input heater power and will allow you to detect a smaller XH in early > experiments. You can hope for a home run, but don't count on it. It is > much more likely that a small XH will be detected before you optimize to > realize a larger COP. > The RF coil made from of water cooled copper pipe can be completly covered with insolation so that all the heat is removed from the reactor using the coolant water flow. A dummy reactor running in parallel can determine how much heat is produced by the RF input. > >
