In a LENR system that is separated into two parts: a CAT and a MOUSE, the MOUSE pumps the polaritons that feeds the CAT. The COP of the system is a function of how efficiently the MOUSE can generate polaritons from the input power that drives the MOUSE.
Optimizing MOUSE polariton production efficiency is a way to improve the COP of the system. For example, if the MOUSE uses a high efficiency spark which consumes little power to produce polaritons, then the COP of the system could exceed 6. Such optimization might be done by using a fast repeating very short duration spark that features a very low duty cycle. But the CAT can also pump its own polaritons. This self-generated CAT polariton generation process increases as the CATs temperature increases and oftentimes results in meltdown. Depressing the propensity for the Cat to pump its own polaritons could also make the system less reactive to burn up. This might be done by employing a thermostatically controlled very high efficiency cooling system that rapidly removes heat from the CAT. I recommend a liquid metal based heat pipe cooling system. Or if cooling is done passively, an integrated SiC heat exchanger distributed throughout the volume of the CAT might be functional. On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:20 AM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > I modeled the behavior of core heat generation as a smooth function of > temperature. Various functions and power series relationships have been > modeled, but noisy generation was not attempted. If too much variation in > heat power output is encountered then the process would become more > difficult to stabilize. In that case my main concern would be that a burst > in heat power output would kick the device over the threshold that leads to > thermal run away. > > Rossi has never given a clue as to whether or not this type of issue > effects operation of his devices. The recent published tests that > displayed the surface temperature of the Hotcat versus time appeared to be > very consistent from cycle to cycle. That suggests that variation is not > too severe. > > Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Tue, Apr 15, 2014 10:00 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thermal inertia > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 9:43 AM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com>wrote: > > I hope this short description of how I model the ECAT operation helps to >> clarify the process. If you have additional questions please feel free to >> ask. > > > When you were modeling the thermodynamics of the reaction, did you use a > stochastic model for the reaction itself? If so, did you look at the > effect of different variances in the temperature excursions? > > Eric > >
