I would like to suggest and experimental modification as follows: Instead
of using an internal sheath heater, generate heat by applying a high
frequency square wave alternating current directly to the nickel mesh.

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 6:15 PM Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:

> <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>> A molten salt coolant in a flow calorimeter with an inlet temperature of
>> e.g.
>> 300 C and an outlet temperature of 300+ C, would allow both accurate
>> measurement
>> and high power operation concurrently. The whole should be well insulated
>> to
>> ensure low losses.
> That would hold the entire cell at a high temperature, both inside and
> outside. I have a feeling the reaction wants to see temperature gradients.
> It wants to see heat flowing through the top mesh, to the next, to the next
> and out the stainless steel wall. I don't know why, and I do not have
> rigorous proof of that, but that's what the data seems to indicate.
> Mizuno probably has a stronger grasp of this. There are a zillion details
> he knows that I do not. He also has quite a lot of conventional material
> science theory that explains why low loading probably works better. This
> started off as a 23-page paper that would have ended up 50 pages if we had
> put in everything interesting. For the last several weeks I have been
> ruthlessly cutting out everything that does not directly tell the reader:
> "How To Do This, Hands-on." Focus, focus, focus.
> We can always write another paper.
>> Such an arrangement would not only allow for accurate measurement, it
>> would also
>> constitute a prototype power reactor.
> I don't think we will have any trouble making this into a power reactor!
> It gets hot in a hurry. We have estimates of the amount of Ni that was
> activated, and projections of how high the power will go when more of it is
> activated. We are far below the limit. I am sure of that. The question is:
> can it be controlled at high heat, with a high output to input ratio? I
> sure hope so. But I sure hope Mizuno does not try to test that himself in
> the lab. Because the place is a dump, and a fire trap, and severely damaged
> by the earthquake. His SEM and other instruments were never fixed. The
> GoFundMe kept him in business, but just barely. I hate to think of him by
> himself doing high temperature experiments in such dangerous conditions. I
> am hoping that other people replicate and then run with this. Frankly, I am
> hoping thousands of people replicate.
> I hope many people try to replicate, because based on my experience, most
> who try to replicate will screw up. Typically, you find out years later
> they did their own version which was nothing like the original. I am just
> making up a pretend example here . . . but the paper says keep the pressure
> between 100 and 300 Pa. Some know-it-all guy will say: "This is gas
> loading, so we need high pressure. Make it 30 atm!" Which is 3 million Pa.
> It won't work. He'll tell the world, "This is a fraud! It doesn't work" but
> he won't reveal any details of his experiment, so we will never find out he
> got a critical parameter wrong by a factor of 10,000.
> I can *feel* that happening! Right now! Some nitwit out there is getting
> ready to do this wrong, despite weeks and weeks of our efforts to provide
> clear instructions. So I hope enough people do it according to the
> instructions that some of them will succeed. But you never know.
> One person did it already, and it seems to work.
> - Jed

Reply via email to