I just began working with the EU data.  The best calibration I see so far is 
from 12/7/2012.  Do you know of a better time period to use?


I will give the model to the MFMP when I have played with it a bit longer.


It will be interesting to see how the 8 watt test results behave, and that will 
be soon I hope.


Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: Arnaud Kodeck <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 3:25 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device



I’m very curious tosee your model with data of EU cell when 8W apparent excess 
was shown. Youshould give your model to the FMFP.
 
Concerning the a, b and ccoefficients, the borosilicate glass will have in this 
regard a better behaviour.The radiation loss at the 4th power of temperature 
will play lessimportance than with the quartz tube.
 
Arnaud



From:David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: mardi 25 décembre 2012 20:45
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Modelof Celani Device

 
Thanks for the compliment.  I useddata from the US cell since I wanted to 
improve the model with information thatwas likely to be quiet.  Now that I have 
this tool working well, it istime to use it to our advantage.  The beauty of 
this analysis is that itoperates throughout the entire transition period as the 
temperature isincreasing within the cell.  It will work very well to 
demonstrate whetheror not there are any special temperatures of interest that 
may arise as thetemperature is effectively swept. 

 

I have not applied it to the EU case yetsince I am not sure that a good 
calibration has been obtained thus far withoutany excess heating and due to the 
fact that I just perfected the model.  Iguess I am getting a bit slow these 
days.

 

The data I used is shown in the lastposting for reference.  Now may be the time 
to begin to analyze the EUdata and that will be my next endeavor.

 

The model requires accurately calibratedvalues for the a, b, and c coefficients 
of the second order fit for power inputversus temperature of the cell.  This 
has been a near perfect second orderfunction for all of the data thus far and I 
have my fingers crossed that itwill continue to be true.  If the cells are 
modified in some manner thatchanges this behavior drastically then a more 
difficult differential equationmight result.  I also need to have at least one 
curve generated by achange in input power drive such as from 10 watts steady 
state to 48 wattssteady state.  This transition information is used to 
calculate theeffective thermal capacity of the cell.  With accurate 
measurements ofthese parameters I can plot the temperature versus time behavior 
to a highdegree of accuracy.

 

Dave



-----OriginalMessage-----
From: Arnaud Kodeck <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 2:21 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device


Dave,

 

You have made a veryinteresting analysis. What your model say when a +8W 
apparent excess heat wasreported with EU cell? Can your model able to calculate 
the apparent excesspower anytime? Not when equilibrium has been reached.

 

For the data, did youtake the UScell or EU cell? UScell is currently less 
interesting has the celani’s wire seems to befried.

 

Merry Christmas,

Arnaud




From: David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: mardi 25 décembre 2012 20:08
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Modelof Celani Device


 

Mark, I can give you a hint as to howwell the model matches the actual real 
life data.  I have plotted a curveof the difference between the actual data and 
my model prediction.  Thedifference looks like random noise that is more or 
less evenly distributedabout 0 volts throughout the entire power input to 
temperature outputtransition.  This includes the case I analyzed beginning at 
48.2 watts andending with 82.7 watts.  I see no evidence of any curvature 
associatedwith the error between my simulation and the real data.  There is a 
small,almost sinusoidal, signal hidden deeply within the noise that 
continuesthroughout the entire time frame which in this case is 9541 seconds 
long. 


 


The total noise peaks tend to be in thevicinity of .5 degrees C while the 
average of the flat noise is more in linewith .2 degrees C.  Perhaps I should 
make a plot of the output and send itfor you to review.   It is pretty 
impressive to see consistent noise whenthe large time domain transition signal 
is balanced out.


 


My mention of the possible excess poweris based upon my having to include an 
additional 1 watt of input power for mymodel to achieve the perfect match.  It 
is quite obvious that the extrapower is required for the curve to fit so 
perfectly.


 


The data I used was from 11/30/2012 at2200 hours according to my download from 
the MFMP replication site.  Iused the history points for my curve fitting and 
analysis.  I fitted thetransition between the two power levels shown above.  I 
just took a lookat the small noisy sinusoidal signal hidden within the noise 
and it appears tobe in the ballpark of 2000 seconds in period.   Maybe this 
corresponds tothe cycle time for the heating system.


 


I guess I can attempt an RMS noise measurementwhich will be next on my list.  
The small sinusoidal interference willcolor that result a bit.  I will report 
the results of the test whencompleted.


 


Dave


-----Original Message-----
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 12:18 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device



Dave:


Can you perform some stats on the model vsreality and give us the std deviation?


-Mark


 



From: David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 20129:15 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Modelof Celani Device



 


During the night Santa brought me a gift! A thought occurred to me that there 
is a very good explanation for the 30to 40 second time constant exponential 
waveform that I have been seeking. In order to get the best curve fit to the 
exact solution of thedifferential equation I have been forced to modify the 
constant of integrationslightly away from the ideal value as determined by 
steady state measurements. This seemed strange, but now I realize that it is 
required to compensatefor the displacement of the rising edge due to the above 
delay. 



 



It is necessary to add back the initialplug of energy lost when the best 
differential equation solution is followed. This ideal solution for the best 
overall data match must start at a valuethat is below the actual temperature of 
the cell at t=0 in order to accommodatethe delayed behavior.  The addition of 
this missing energy is exactly theamount required!



 



So now I can say with confidence thatthere exists a delay mechanism which 
retards the reading of the temperature atthe outer glass surface.  This delay 
is in addition to the ideal nonlinear differential equation solution time 
domain response which is discussedbelow.  So, another way to envision the 
effect is to realize that it takes30 to 40 seconds before the addition of heat  
applied to the cell isregistered at that test point.  An exponential smoothing 
(filtering)factor is applied.



 



My suspicion is that the extra pulse ofheat must be distributed within the gas 
and then result in a temperaturereading at the outer glass monitor after 
heating the envelop.  The heatingof the other structure elements may also be 
involved in the overall action.



 



A careful review of the waveform hintsthat the test might be demonstrating an 
excess power of about 1 watt during theexperiment that supplied the data.  This 
is a small amount of excess powerand only additional, careful analysis would 
enable me to be sure.  Atleast it is in the right direction!  My virtually 
perfect curve fit to thedata tends to support this conclusion.



 



Merry Christmas!



 



Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: David Roberson <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 2:13 am
Subject: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device



The data has been flooding in from theMFMP and I have been seeking a time 
domain model of the system behavior whenpower to the Celani replication device 
is modified.   Most of myeffort has been exerted by analyzing the rising edge 
of the time domainwaveform when the drive power is stepped up by a significant 
amount.  Thetemperature follows a certain path as it ramps up to the value 
required tobalance the input and output power of the cell. 



 



We have been fortunate in this particularcase to find that the relationship 
between temperature and input power is wellbehaved and follows a second order 
curve to a remarkable degree.  It isnot uncommon to see a curve fit with 
R^2=.9999 or better in many independenttest runs.  I initially was expecting to 
see a power series that includeda forth order term of significance due to the 
S-B radiation equation. This has not ever been dominate in any test and I still 
am trying tounderstand why this is true.  For the time being I will accept this 
gifthappily.



 



A quick glance at the shape of the risingedge of the temperature curve suggests 
that it follows an exponential.  Ithus began my model by making that assumption 
and got fairly reasonableresults.  It was always evident that my curve fit 
contained holes, but acouple of degrees of error did not seem too excessive at 
that time.  Beinga perfectionist, I decided to improve the situation and to 
determine how well amodel could match the real life test.



 



I very soon added a second exponential tothe mix and noticed that the fit 
improved remarkably.  Also, I noticedthat the second real frequency was close 
to the second harmonic of the first onedetermined by my earlier work.  A light 
went off inside my head and Irealized that this would be expected since the non 
linearity is mainly ofsecond order in the relationship between variables.  Now, 
I saw that theaccuracy of my model was becoming very acceptable.  There 
remained a shortperiod of time at the initial power increase where the fit was 
not as good as Ihoped.  To fix this problem I added another exponential with an 
associatedtime constant of about 40 seconds.  With this model, I could obtain 
anexcellent match between my simulation and the real world data.



 



I could have left it in this state, butit is hard to accept imperfection.  To 
pursue the matter further I used aLTSpice model of the system.   I guessed 
correctly in my first try withthe model and was rewarded with a well behaved 
simulation that included thesecond order distortion effects.  This model was 
used for a significanttime as it matched the real world waveforms everywhere 
except for the initialshort period that required another time constant to fix.



 



Looking at my spice model gave me aninteresting idea.  I used a capacitor to 
represent storage of the incomingenergy and the node it is connected to reads 
expected time domain temperaturefor the outside glass sensor.  In parallel with 
the storage capacitor is apair of current sources, one representing power 
applied to the cell, the otherpower being taken away by the various paths.  The 
draining current sourceappears as a parallel conductance who's value depends 
upon the voltage at thetemperature node.  I, of course, was seeking 
verification of the timeconstant associated with the exponential rise waveforms 
and attempted to usethe effective conductance value in parallel with my storage 
capacitor for aquick check.  This lead to the non linear differential equation 
definitionthat works so well.



 



It occurred to me that my model could beexpressed in the form of a non linear 
differential equation with a littlemanipulation of the shape.  Basically you 
have a parallel capacitor beingdriven by a current source that is paralleled by 
a non linear conductance. The non linear conductance is neatly defined by the 
second order equationderived from the calibration runs for the Celani cell.  
Now, all I had todo was to solve the non linear differential equation that I 
constructed andinsert the initial conditions to define the temperature and 
power over any timeframe.  My first thought was yipes!



 



I consulted our favorite source wikipediato find the solution to unusual 
integrals.  The one I needed to solve wasin the form of: Integral 
dx/(a*x^2+b*x+c) with initial condition of thetemperature of the steady state 
value just prior to the application of anincrease in power.  I transformed the 
time scale so that time = 0 was withthis application of extra power.  It turns 
out that there is an exactsolution to such an equation which you can look up at 
your convenience to savetime and space here.  I had to perform some interesting 
series adjustmentsto get the curve within the desired temperature band, and I 
was a bit rusty atfirst.  Finally, a perfect curve was being generated that 
matched the timedomain data extremely well except for that nagging time region 
at the verystart.



 



I continue to have to include anadditional exponentially rising pulse function 
with a time constant around 40seconds at the application of the extra drive to 
get virtually perfect trackingto the real world data.  Next, I included another 
drive current waveformof this nature to my spice model and it tweaks the start 
of the rising edge atiny amount much like a delay.  I am still seeking a good 
explanation forthe necessity of this extra pulse source and I wonder if it can 
be traced tothe IR effects or some other relatively large time constant such as 
the glassheating.



 



The nature of the extra leading edgedrive pulse can be described as a signal 
that begins at a certain level anddecays exponentially to zero with a time 
constant of 40 seconds.  Theeffective DC component of the waveform is taken out 
by the action of the nonlinear conductance.



 



One interesting observation is that thecalibration determined a,b, and c that 
constitute coefficients of the secondorder equation defining Power versus 
Outside Glass Temperature along with theinput power uniquely determine the 
steady state temperature of the device. These four variables define operation 
over the entire range of inputpowers.  My model also includes a capacitor that 
acts as the energystorage stand in.  One good temperature rising transition 
allows me tochoose the correct capacitor to enter into the model.   The 
additionalshort time exponential must be determined by curve fitting within a 
shortinitial period typically 100 seconds.



 



I have found this exercise interestingand educational.  If a good explanation 
for that initial power pulse isobtained I can relax and fool with the incoming 
data.  I am hoping that mycontributions will enable us to discover any excess 
power that may occur by itssignature outside of the normal that I now model and 
observe.



 



Dave









 

Reply via email to