MFMP Long Term Padua Glowstick Test Now Live

UPDATE: (Jul 29, 2105)

The MFMP/Me356 re-heat of the Padua Glowstick reactor has begun. Below is the livestream video of the test from the MFMP Youtube channel.

You can also follow the test here (with streaming data): http://www.lenr-experiment.tk/

The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project is setting up for a new test ‘somewhere in Eastern Europe’. The plan is to re-test the glowstick reactor that was tested in Padua earlier this year for a full week with data being provided live. Bob Greenyer says that the test might start today, but that’s not confirmed yet.

On the MFMP Facebook page there’s a post which explains that Me356 (who is working with the MFMP on this test) has found that there is still a vacuum in the Glowstick after the test in Pauda three months ago. (See here)

The plan is to use a non-contact IR thermometer to control the PID controller (which is used to maintain a constant temperature), rather than the thermocouple that was used with the Padua test.

Bob says there should be ‘more data than ever’ from this test. The Youtube description gives this list:

It is hoped that data for the following will be available.

PCE-830 power monitoring
Optris Pi 160 monitoring
1000 5V pulse per 1kw hour pulses in stream
Ambient temp K-Type
Temperature from IR gun (outside core, outside cement)
Temperature from K-Type (outside core, embedded in cement)
Pulse to triac
Pressure
Counts per minute from Geiger Counter

Here’s a video from the MFMP showing the setup:

  • Ged

    Fantastic guys! This is quite a step forward for open science data gathering and sharing, bravo! Looking greatly forward to this data flood and what it shows.

    What plans are there about the fuel? No change to the core since Padua? Any other changes to the device or setup?

    • Bob Greenyer

      Thanks. me356 is a real asset of our small (but growing) community.

      The fuel is the same as Padua, that is, Parkhomov Ni and LiAlH4 – however, it is in Alumina not Mullite.

      We could not see if it was doing anything profound in Padua as French Customs strikes held up the PCE830 in transit there.

      Alan Goldwater has noted that we have yet to see anything interesting in cell re-heats (other than coil to TC shorts and therefore failure of PID control). Countering that, Nick Oseyko has said “I saw good results with re-heating my cores several times”, though we do not have the had facts on that, Parkhomov did also report some lesser effect on re-heat and then there is Rossi.

      Perhaps it comes down to time, Alan has been unable to run his re-heats for long periods. The hope is, with non-contact control, this can run for a week in the 1200ºC+ internal temp range even if the TC fails. In worst case scenario, it can provide a test bed for the up and coming me356 SiC reactors – which are like a super well designed version of the Bang reactor – with locating geometry to prevent the SiC tube from contacting the Alumina core – which we now know starts to conduct measurably and increasingly above 1000ºC. Those test will run variants of Parkhomov fuel – see recent comments on this thread.

      http://goo.gl/UCGrkS

      In addition, he is looking to create fast current rate of rise with his EGBT and custom transistor – to tap into the large magnetic field change potential that seemed to be important for many researchers including Cravens, Schwatz etc and most recently Sonsheng. See here:

      http://goo.gl/30Za4G

  • Bob Matulis

    Nice!

  • MFMP_like

    i have already lost the track.
    Has already MFMP showed COP>1?.
    Is this only to confirm the COP>1 or are we still looking for first excess heat as the Parkhomov experiment?
    Can somebody update on that?
    By the way thanks MFMP you do a great work.
    Thanks

    • Bob Greenyer

      It would appear we can be marginally more confident about the evidence we saw in Celani wires starting Dec 12th 2012 where there was evidence of 12.5% excess. This is because of Celani confirming software and instrument configurations that lead to an under estimation of power input in NI-Week 2012 and ICCF-17. This is reported here:

      https://goo.gl/22WYlb

      The *GlowStick* GS3 showed some anomalies, which have partially been explained away.

      Neither Mathieu or Alan want to call it.

      It will come down to statistically significant elemental or isotopic shifts in line with those reported by other claimants. To that effect, we have multiple samples with at least two parties in double blind full elemental analysis – to the best of my knowledge, this is the first time this belt and braces approach to analysis has been done in LENR.

      Reporting on this should come from the middle of August as soon as we get the results in!

      Nail biting time.

      For me personally, only statistically significant non-naturally occurring isotopic ratios in multiple samples compared to fuel from the same tests will be able to dot all the i’s and t’s.

  • Sanjeev

    The setup looks like that of me356. So perhaps he joined MFMP.
    Here is another video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f38WWz2k-7Y

    • Frank Acland

      Yes, they are working together on this — at an undisclosed location in Eastern Europe.

    • R101

      That hole is the wall right behind the apparatus makes it look like something blew up 🙂

  • MFMP_like

    i have already lost the track.
    Has already MFMP showed COP>1?.
    Is this only to confirm the COP>1 or are we still looking for first excess heat as the Parkhomov experiment?
    Can somebody update on that?
    By the way thanks MFMP you do a great work.
    Thanks

    • Bob Greenyer

      It would appear we can be marginally more confident about the evidence we saw in Celani wires starting Dec 12th 2012 where there was evidence of 12.5% excess. This is because of Celani confirming software and instrument configurations that lead to an under estimation of power input in NI-Week 2012 and ICCF-17. This is reported here:

      https://goo.gl/22WYlb

      The *GlowStick* GS3 showed some anomalies, which have partially been explained away.

      Neither Mathieu or Alan want to call it.

      It will come down to statistically significant elemental or isotopic shifts in line with those reported by other claimants. To that effect, we have multiple samples with at least two parties in double blind full elemental analysis – to the best of my knowledge, this is the first time this belt and braces approach to analysis has been done in LENR.

      Reporting on this should come from the middle of August as soon as we get the results in!

      Nail biting time.

      For me personally, only statistically significant non-naturally occurring isotopic ratios in multiple samples compared to fuel from the same tests will be able to dot all the i’s and t’s.

  • GreenWin

    Nice setup. Will this stream live at any point?

    • Bob Greenyer

      Yes

      • Gerard McEk

        I look forward to this test. Has it been started yet?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Adding to that for example, we have Skip with his furnace control and Alan Goldwaters *GlowStick* 4 nearing completion.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Unless anyone has a better plan – this is the current one for the Padua cell re-heat

          1. increase the temperature to 300°C in 1 hour, then hold it for 30 minutes.

          2. continue in increasing until 850°C in 7 hour – which is around 1200ºC+ internal. ( about 700W, 81.98V 8.54A )

          https://goo.gl/hv4NLq

          3. hold it with PID as long as possible at this temp.

          4. We have a little headroom, if power usage stays constant ( i.e. nothing interesting going on – we can creep it up a little after a few days)

      • Bob Greenyer

        In part because it is a moving goalpost.

        He was using ceramic and sodium silicate for sealing. Then following a discussion after my visit, he switched to epoxy.

        Some of his ash looks like it has Alumina in it (it is crumbly and different coloured to ours)

        He changed from toaster wire …. to Kanthal A1 russian equivalent.

        He had directly attached heaters – then made effectively a tube furnace

        He has a switched tap transformer and is back to thyristors

        He has no fuel holder, then he did on an unknown steel type.

        Denis Vasilenko (Firax Tech) did a very accurate re-construction of an analogue of his first experiment – but with flow calorimetry recently. The test reactor failed however.

        Whilst the Padua cell had both Parkhomov Ni and LiAlH4,it did not have an Mullite tube. Mullite as SiO and alkaline metal oxides in it and these may be important. Also, it may become porous. Any of these factors may play a role.

        Holding all of this in mind – the *GlowStick* 4 that Alan Goldwater is preparing is the most ‘accurate’ – Mullite, Parkhomov Ni + LiAlH4 – A later variant may have added the other components that may end up being part of his fuel.

  • GreenWin

    Nice setup. Will this stream live at any point?

    • Bob Greenyer

      Yes

  • clovis ray

    ok, go get em guys, everything looks very professional ,

  • R101

    Looking forward to this Bob. It appears things have been a bit quiet on the replication front lately.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Publicly I guess. However, that may be because the experiments are getting more refined and people are hard at work on putting them together.

  • Gerard McEk

    I look forward to this test. Has it been started yet?

    • Bob Greenyer

      No

  • Bob Greenyer

    Unless anyone has a better plan – this is the current one for the Padua cell re-heat

    1. increase the temperature to 300°C in 1 hour, then hold it for 30 minutes.

    2. continue in increasing until 850°C in 7 hour – which is around 1200ºC+ internal. ( about 700W, 81.98V 8.54A )

    https://goo.gl/hv4NLq

    3. hold it with PID as long as possible at this temp.

    4. We have a little headroom, if power usage stays constant ( i.e. nothing interesting going on – we can creep it up a little after a few days)

    • sebbie

      would it make sense to hold constant power inputs rather than constant temperatures? or do both?

      • Bob Greenyer

        The PID will vary the power to hold the temperature – hopefully, in theory, what we are looking for is a significant drop of input power and the temperature holding steady.

      • tobalt

        PID’ing the temperature is also a soft safety measure which can in some cases prevent the apparatus from failing due to overtemperature in case an exothermal reaction occurs.

        • tobalt

          just to be exact, because my post is not clear:
          with PIDing i mean: stabilizing the temperature via PID

  • Bob Greenyer

    XP Pro rocks – everything works on it – sadly the machines of the time were not that powerful. Net result – cannot run

    – Optris

    – PCE

    – Geiger

    – Webcam

    – ManyCam

    – Google hangouts stream

    together – so me356 is installing a laptop with 3X the speed. The setup will be used for several experiments – so just as well to be robust for long term runs.

    This is pushing back the start time.
    The pressure sensor has pipe threads (tapered) – 1/8 NPT. So if you torque it enough it will seal by compression of the threads. I use the PTFE tape as a lubricant, to make it easier to torque fully and for disassembly if needed. Don’t use any sealer compound that might have solvents or other contaminants.

    • Andre Blum

      Bob, raspi’s and arduino’s rock, too.

      can you share a copy of the software and system configurations you are running, so that we can review? Also, is there a contingency plan for when the raspi fails? Please do not make the mistake of writing small pieces of data to the raspi’s SD card too often. It will fail very quickly.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Hi Andre,

        The data will be streamed to Plot.ly also – Does anyone know how to capture that, other than recording locally in say a video screen capture?

        The intention is to real ease stuff yes. the code is in a state of flux as more things are added to it and revised.

  • Bob Greenyer

    XP Pro rocks – everything works on it – sadly the machines of the time were not that powerful. Net result – cannot run

    – Optris

    – PCE

    – Geiger

    – Webcam

    – ManyCam

    – Google hangouts stream

    together – so me356 is installing a laptop with 3X the speed. The setup will be used for several experiments – so just as well to be robust for long term runs.

    This is pushing back the start time.
    The pressure sensor has pipe threads (tapered) – 1/8 NPT. So if you torque it enough it will seal by compression of the threads. I use the PTFE tape as a lubricant, to make it easier to torque fully and for disassembly if needed. Don’t use any sealer compound that might have solvents or other contaminants.

    • Andre Blum

      Bob, raspi’s and arduino’s rock, too.

      can you share a copy of the software and system configurations you are running, so that we can review? Also, is there a contingency plan for when the raspi fails? Please do not make the mistake of writing small pieces of data to the raspi’s SD card too often. It will fail very quickly.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Hi Andre,

        The data will be streamed to Plot.ly also – Does anyone know how to capture that, other than recording locally in say a video screen capture?

        The intention is to real ease stuff yes. the code is in a state of flux as more things are added to it and revised.

  • Bob Greenyer

    The PID will vary the power to hold the temperature – hopefully, in theory, what we are looking for is a significant drop of input power and the temperature holding steady.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Should be ready to start test very soon.

    • Mats002

      Yes! Today is yesterday’s tomorrow.

      • tobalt

        PID’ing the temperature is also a soft safety measure which can in some cases prevent the apparatus from failing due to overtemperature in case an exothermal reaction occurs.

        • tobalt

          just to be exact, because my post is not clear:
          with PIDing i mean: stabilizing the temperature via PID

    • Sanjeev

      You can try the zoom button (click on it and drag on the curves).
      You can also drag the top of the axis to zoom it.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Should be ready to start test very soon.

    • Mats002

      Yes! Today is yesterday’s tomorrow.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Sadly, replacement better laptop is still giving blue screens of death – so need another machine. Test will not start today.

    It is good that it is happening at the beginning.

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      I just hope you guys get this all sorted out on Friday so that you can start the test at say 18:00 hour? Would be a perfect start to my weekend 😉

  • Bob Greenyer

    Ok – new machine – installed. AND IT IS RUNNING!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thEKQFmFEkE

    http://www.lenr-experiment.tk/

    And it is still today here!

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      Image is very sharp at 720p. Best image yet!

      As always, I will enjoy following the test.

    • Bob, looks like you’re testing in front of Al Capone’s vault. Thanks for the good work.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Ok – new machine – installed. AND IT IS RUNNING!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thEKQFmFEkE

    http://www.lenr-experiment.tk/

    And it is still today here!

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      Image is very sharp at 720p. Best image yet!

      As always, I will enjoy following the test.

    • Bob, looks like you’re testing in front of Al Capone’s vault. Thanks for the good work.

  • LuFong

    Very impressive! Looking forward to some interesting results.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Plan is to let it rise to 750ºC on the outside over the next 8 hours.

    • Ged

      Good luck guys! It’s a tough little cell.

      • Bob Greenyer

        so far so good. Hope to keep it at 850 for at least a day before trying to push it too far.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Plan is to let it rise to 750ºC on the outside over the next 8 hours.

    • Ged

      Good luck guys! It’s a tough little cell.

      • Bob Greenyer

        so far so good. Hope to keep it at 850 for at least a day before trying to push it too far.

  • Bob Greenyer

    The thermocouple in the Plot.ly live data is reading ambient.

  • tobalt

    do they finally have the middle voltage reading this time around ?

    • Ged

      This one is a pure, single core dogbone, not two separate pieces; so, no middle anything to measure.

    • Sanjeev

      To me it looks very close to the calibration values at this time. (550W @ 850C).
      For some reason the chart embedded here is showing old data.

      • Bob Greenyer

        The test calibration of this cell in Padua put it in-line with the GS2.

        Yes, it is close to calibration. Alan Goldwater has not seen anything interesting in re-heats, but they were not long lived – hopefully this will be. What this test is meant to iron out is snags ( a few found already) in running long term experiments ready for me356 SiC reactors. If during the period we see a big signal, then so much the better.

        • Bob Greenyer
        • Sanjeev

          What is causing the left/right difference in temperatures?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Most likely coil winding density. On the colour video feed, you can see that some of the windings are sticking out the end of the outer sheath – that is, the wire has expanded meaning there is a little less density on the left side.

            This is one of the real values of a correctly used thermal imaging camera over other means of assessing output – you get to see what, where (well, at least for one side).

          • Sanjeev

            Yes, surely, an IR cam is valuable. With an IR sensor, this setup gets rid of all TC related issues. No guess work needed.

          • nietsnie

            Thanks for your replies. And Bob and co. – thanks again for doing this in a way that allows those of us on the sidelines to watch.

            Sangee – I tried using the zoom feature. This allows me to blow up the graph to the point where I can see changes in the current. But, when I do, the changes in pressure no longer fit on the graph. So, I’m still unable to compare delta current or IR with delta pressure.

            Bob – That’s very good to know – and it works. If I use that feature to isolate only the pressure plus either IR or current (by turning off the other traces) I get a meaningful comparison of two of them at a time. And that’s good enough to get what I really want to see (if not ideal…).

          • Sanjeev

            Yes, enabling only the traces you want to compare works better.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We get so much back by working this way – it forces a certain discipline – but hopefully, every time we learn for the next time and things get better.

  • tobalt

    do they finally have the middle voltage reading this time around ?

    • Ged

      This one is a pure, single core glowstick, not two separate pieces I believe; so, no middle anything to measure this time.

  • R101

    Umm, event is over. Is everything ok? Someone said overload?

    • ecatworld

      Still going. New livestream video above (they have to move to a new video stream every 8 hours.)

  • R101

    Umm, event is over. Is everything ok? Someone said overload?

    • Frank Acland

      Still going. New livestream video above (they have to move to a new video stream every 8 hours.)

  • Bob Greenyer

    New live stream Started nearly 3 hours ago:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g6xHP3YQsY

    There was overlimit at the PCE-830 as it was set to 10A on the probe for accuracy. me356 switched the measurement range to 100A and it is fixed.

    Unfortunately it required to restart PCE software and some data were nullified I guess. But everything is recorded on the live stream / current on rPi

    Next step is to continue until 850°C for 1,5 hours. According to the GS2 type calibration

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WOGxzZkZvRmNXOUU/view

    This should be around 1200ºC+ inside.

  • Bob Greenyer

    New live stream Started nearly 3 hours ago:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g6xHP3YQsY

    There was overlimit at the PCE-830 as it was set to 10A on the probe for accuracy. me356 switched the measurement range to 100A and it is fixed.

    Unfortunately it required to restart PCE software and some data were nullified I guess. But everything is recorded on the live stream / current on rPi

    Next step is to continue until 850°C for 1,5 hours. According to the GS2 type calibration

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WOGxzZkZvRmNXOUU/view

    This should be around 1200ºC+ inside.

  • Gerard McEk

    Test looks to be going well. Let us hope that finally excess heat will be experienced. It looks you are using proper equipment! Good luck me356 and MFMP!

    • Bob Greenyer

      Well – it is a re-heat, and Alan Goldwater notes we have not seen much of interest on re-heats, but others have. Having said that, Alan has not been able to re-heat for long, and the intention is that this platform is for full monitoring of long-run tests. We shall see if we can run this for a long time – perhaps a week or more. At the moment we are going to hold steady at this temperature for an extended period.

      This non-contact control will is a testbed for me356’s SiC based tests.

      • Sanjeev

        I do not remember if this is old, but the date of upload is 30th July 2015. This may be of some help for replicators. Potassium (K2CO3) is revealed as the catalyst and many other details are given. I know no one likes DGT anymore, but this is by NASA.

        Executive Summary of visit to Defkalion Headquarters,
        Michael A. Nelson, NASA
        http://www.scribd.com/doc/272993947/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion#scribd

        • Bob Greenyer

          Thanks for this Sanjeev,

          Interestingly it says

          “Gamma radiation below 300 Kev is generated from the reaction”

          They have kind of reported this before

          “Use of electrical signal to separate H2 into H (Rossi never publicly claimed this)”

          This is the arc.

          “DK shuts down instantly by bleeding H2 off of chamber. Can also use magnetics.”

          Last part is interesting

          • Sanjeev

            Yes, interesting. Some of the info is new for me. I guess they used the catalyst(s) to create defects in Ni lattice, which works better (if you assume it works). This is a clue apart from a clear mention of the catalyst.
            It also hints to the possibility that E-Cat uses some kind of electric stimulation.
            The clues given in the document are worth trying out (if nothing else works).

          • Ecco

            I believe you’re right. If you remember the icelandic LENR paper linked a couple weeks ago on ECW (I believe), their authors simply used a commercially available iron-oxide based potassium doped catalyst, and nothing else as active material. By searching more information on the net about heterogeneous catalysts, you will find out that many of them (usually compounds of two or more metal oxides) inherently have a high amount of lattice defects. According to some LENR researchers, these defects (also called vacancies) are among the keys for understanding anomalous effects, and in my opinion the long “loading” times required for pure metals to start showing them is that they need time to develop defects due to long-term wear and stresses. So, a material with built-in stable lattice defects would bypass that phase and be a good starting point for LENR possibly occurring.

            The nonmetallic support of most solid heterogeneous catalysts can also store hydrogen in its atomic form upon adsorption through the hydrogen spillover effect, which is an advantage compared to pure metals, and I think you might know already how the presence of atomic hydrogen is regarded as important in LENR.

          • Sanjeev

            Vacancies and lattice defects should definitely lower the loading time and may achieve a higher loading ratio.
            Their trick to break H2 into H and distort it with a high electric field also (intuitively) falls well in place.
            Although, most of us do think that DGT never had anything working, I have a suspicion that they did develop something which worked, but could not commercialize it because of IP issues. They admitted copying Rossi’s method in public, which must have prevented any big investments for the fear of legal actions.
            It is not impossible, seeing that Parkhomov succeeded and Jiang in his latest experiment got some results even without any catalysts.

          • Ecco

            Makes you wonder how much of the publicly known information released by DGT (knowingly or not) was actually Rossi IP. By the way, have a look at this:

            https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWS%26PROFESSORS/pdf/MileyClustLPB.pdf

          • Sanjeev

            Thanks for the link. Good to see some formal research from LENR heavyweights on this subject. DGT’s theory may not be so far fetched after all.
            It should not be very difficult to directly apply a high electric potential (perhaps pulsed) to the powder, which is prepared with some lattice breaking substances. I hope me356, Alan or someone will try that someday.

          • nietsnie

            The changes in pressure don’t seem to be coupled to either IR temp or current. It looks to me as if it periodically leaks and then recovers. Sometimes the leaks are relatively large and sudden. But, sometimes the increases are also relatively large and sudden. Right now, and for some time, the general direction is down. It hit in the 9’s of psi for the first time in a long time recently.

          • Bob Greenyer

            If the coil can last – we’d like to keep heating until well past a point were the pressure is below atmospheric

          • nietsnie

            If it gets below atmospheric I guess you’d have to conclude that it isn’t a leak but rather evidence of a reaction? Gas being used up by some process. But, that also makes the periodic, uncoupled, *increases* in pressure more interesting too – and also the periodic cycling back and forth between them.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Many LENR experiments appear to “Breathe” we saw it with Celani – and Mike McKubre gave a whole lecture on it at ICCF18

          • nietsnie

            What were his thoughts as to the potential mechanism?

          • Bob Greenyer

            hydrogen going into and out of the lattice – perhaps as a result of heat releasing events and following dissipation of that heat

          • nietsnie

            Interesting… I wish I could see temp, current, and pressure on the graph, all in reasonable scale, at the same time to see if that seems evident. This is maybe research for when the experiment is over and the data is published. I don’t see pressure coupled with temp though with just those two traces, at least. Nor do I see pressure coupled with current, with just those two – although there’s a lot of noise in the current signal which makes it harder to know for sure without signal processing to smooth the trace.

          • Bob Greenyer

            That is because you need to look at the additional live data here:

            http://lenr-experiment.tk

            there is pressure and the VoltCraft IR gun that provides the spot temperature that the PID is targeting.

            Ignore the current on this.

            the TC is ambient.

          • nietsnie

            This is the live graph with traces for current, ambient tc, ir temp, and pressure – right? If so, it is what I have been watching. By following your excellent tip about how to shut off traces I have been able to get a very good feel for pressure vrs reactor temp and an ok feel for pressure vrs current. But, I can’t see reactor temp vrs current because of the scale issue. Ideally, I’d like to notice that there was a change in pressure while the current dropped but the reactor temp stayed more or less the same.

            I was thinking this would show evidence of the hydrogen cycling as a result of LENR energy production you were mentioning. If hydrogen going into or out of lattice (as change in pressure) corresponds to heat production which is absorbed by a drop in current. But – I should be able to look at this more carefully when the data is published at the end of the experiment.

            This is great stuff, Bob.

          • Bob Greenyer

            if me356 has the time in coming months, he has the capability to hack the output from the PCE830 – then you would get very accurate power data along with the rest.

          • nietsnie

            Harmonics vrs power production would be very interesting…

          • Bob Greenyer

            Some strange pressure spikes and decays now.

          • nietsnie

            Frenetic current changes too.

          • Ged

            Getting quite a bit of power swings too, from 940 to 890 or so.

          • Mats002

            Swing of up to 0.2 psi with a irregular frequency of about 3 minutes, can not see the overall trend – still going down and at which rate (roughly)?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Just dipped under 5

          • Mats002

            In the pic below it swings around 5.3 at 17.30 and now at about 19.30 it swings around 4.6 that is about 0.35 psi per hour. Atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi so we have a partial vaccum since long?

          • Sanjeev

            Yes, I guess it was in vacuum since start (as the writeup above says).
            The tiny swings are most likely noise, but there is a very slow trend downwards. (See Alan reply below).

          • Bob Greenyer

            it is psi gauge…. all the time it is positive there is no vacuum

          • Bob Greenyer
          • R101

            Possibly could be due to the mass within shrinking?

          • nietsnie

            I suppose that if it’s leaking then the mass might shrink and that could explain the loss of pressure. But, then the pressure goes up again and it’s harder to imagine mass leaking back in.

          • Mats002

            Pressure is below 0.2 now.

          • Sanjeev

            Pressure is touching 0 after 5 days !
            As Bob clarified below, it needs to be negative to be below atmospheric.

            According to the Lenz team, it takes pre-loaded Ni (hydrogenated) and either a temperature or pressure “kick” to start the lenr. The reactor is already preloaded now, and I hope it will survive for a few more days for such kick tests.

          • Mats002

            Touching but not past below yet…

          • Sanjeev

            Just went below 0.

          • Mats002

            This padua glowstick do not have Parkhomov Ni as I recall, it probably have Hunter Chemical AH50 Carbonyl Nickel , anyone can tell more about this?

          • Sanjeev
          • Mats002

            Sanjeev, I find an interesting conversation we had, see comments at: http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/04/23/iccf19-day-1-april-13-2015-live-thread/#comment-1974067818

            Parkhomov started to see XH when pressure went below 0 at 800 C and when pressure leveled out at 0,5 bar (about -7 psi) at 1200 C XH was in full bloom.

            Parkhomov had a pressure drop from 5 bar (about 70 psi) to -0,5 (bar) in about 10 hours, His comment about padua glowstick was according to Bob “Dr. Parkhomov told us that he thinks we had too little dead volume.”

            I can not find any reference to which Ni was used but all the discussions afterward indicates NOT Parkhomov Ni, but I am sure this answer can be found somewhere, just have not found it yet.

            This day can be exciting 😉

          • Sanjeev

            I recall that the experiment is Padua was arranged just because Parkhomov brought his powder with him and gave it to MFMP. The video titles all show “Parkhomov fuel”. Perhaps Bob here can confirm if it was same exact powder or something was missing in it.

            Pressure values can be different because this design is different, pressure can be a variable, but not sure how critical it is.

          • Mats002

            Yes you are right, the video titles says “Parkhomov fuel” – how could I miss that?

          • artefact

            Ecco made a graph for input vs. temperature:
            http://i.imgur.com/WYGVCgl.png

          • Mats002

            Hot spot (green) seams to climb at a bit faster rate than the others, or…?

          • nietsnie

            I notice that power no longer varies in the plot.ly graph when isolated. It’s stuck at 8.6 ‘C’. Is this an indication that it’s on max all the time now?

          • nietsnie

            OK. Clearly off PID and on manual control now.

          • nietsnie

            Also – good morning everyone!

          • Mats002

            Godmorning nietsnie! Here in Sweden the time is 17.05, same as the experiment.

          • nietsnie

            Here it is *much* earlier. Earlier still since it was such a late night. If that video feed hadn’t run out I might not have gotten any sleep. That was fortunate for me. I notice that the next one must have started up shortly after I gave up.

          • artefact

            from the video chat:

            “magicsnd1 As a casual reference point, during my last GS3 test, I saw ~1100°C (IR) at the outside with 1.2 kW input. That data was not logged by DAQ.
            So this test is running about 100° hotter. “

          • Mats002

            13:35: Input power 1.02 KVA (from youtube) at Temp about 1114 C (from plotly)
            17:48: Input power 1.24 KVA (from youtube) at temp about 1174 C (from plotly)

            60 C up for 200 VA up at 1114 C.

          • Mats002

            Temp just fell quickly from the stable 1050 down to 1020, what is happening?

          • Mats002

            Please keep on commenting about the levels of temp and pressure, I am out to fill the refrigerator for my family. Typical that have to happen now! 😉

          • Mats002

            Below 0! I wonder at which pressure the Ni lattice is fully loaded with H, it should come to a point where pressure can’t go any lower.

          • Bob Greenyer
          • Obvious

            Looking good.

          • magicsnd1

            The small variations in the pressure data are just noise from the sensor resolution limit. With 1600 psi being full scale, a change of 0.1 psi is just .006%. This does suggest use of a sensor with lower full-scale rating for future tests.

          • nietsnie

            Gotcha…

          • nietsnie

            Actually – now I’m not sure I agree anymore. If you step back a little, the pressure ‘breathing’ changes are so regular and predictable that it’s hard to believe they’re random noise. At the same time they also don’t seem to be coupled with reactor temperature so it’s hard to believe they represent increases in current from the PED. I think this is something else.

          • nietsnie

            One thing puzzling me: the realtime YouTube page lists 3 different temps output from the IR sensor (L, K, R). The apparent preferred one is the ‘K’ location in the middle of the reactor – which is also reported in the IR picture below it. It currently reports ~980 C – and L and R are around 1023 and 1068 respectively. But on the plot.ly graph, IR temp hovers around ~1050. What does that represent? I thought possibly (L+R)/2, but that’s a little too low.

          • Sanjeev

            Its the temperature from IR gun, which is also controlling the input power.

          • Ged

            The L, K, and R are the Optris camera, not the IR gun; so the values are a little different. The IR gun is a spot, while the Optris is integrating across the entire area selected in the image window.

          • nietsnie

            Oh, I see. There are two instruments then. That explains why they’re different. Is the IR gun pointed at the same spot identified as ‘K’ by the Optris? If so, why to they differ by 70 C? Which is more likely to be accurate? Any idea?

          • Bob Greenyer

            measuring the central gap we have.

            – K-Type TC embedded under the cement between two coil windings and on outside of central alumina core. The output is on the black battery powered (so failure of TC does not bring system down as in previous runs) digital multimeter in the foreground left bottom of the video feed (easier to see in day)

            – VoltCraft IR gun (rated to 2200ºC) laser cited to centre of the central gap and on the OUTSIDE of the cement. The output is in the live data feed here as IR Temp

            http://lenr-experiment.tk

            and this is used as the input to the PID that controls the triad delivering power to the coil.

            – Optris “K” which is showing the highest temperature pixel in the zone which is less than optimally placed – of the OUTSIDE of the cement at the bottom. This is also the main temp shown.

            Much of the variation is real, it is due to position and the fact that the TC is closer to the core and embedded.

            All alumina temperatures are read with the Optris manuals recommendation for ceramic emissivity of 0.95, although we established in earlier research that 0.92 may be more appropriate. We are recording RAVI files so post analysis with changing of the emissivity will be possible.

          • nietsnie

            The geiger counter is reading slightly higher than it has every time I’ve glanced at it in the past. I wonder what that means?

          • nietsnie

            Oh – well, now it’s back down to 23 or so. It was reading in the low thirties for a couple of minutes there until I decided to speak up about it. False interest alarm I suppose.

          • Bob Greenyer

            normal background whilst I was there was 20-30

          • nietsnie

            I few minutes ago it was in the low 40s. Is geiger counter data being captured? Is it part of what will be available later? It’s almost certainly a dead end – but for awhile I thought I saw a pattern between temp, pressure and cpm.

          • Bob Greenyer

            The geiger counter is data is being captured internally to the GC and data will be able to be synched by referring to the youtube clip.

          • nietsnie

            I’m not sure what you mean by ‘…by referring to the youtube clip’…

          • Bob Greenyer

            After getting the download CSV from the Geiger counter – can look at date stamps and CPM against the recorded you-tube streams to synchronise all data

          • nietsnie

            I think I see. The GC data is date stamped? So it should be able to be inserted into a database table and synched to the rest of the collected data that should also be date stamped, yes? Alternately, if you just wanted to visually compare against the video data you could do it manually that way too.

    • Bob Greenyer

      GS2 calibration – basis for estimating any anomalies.

      https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WOGxzZkZvRmNXOUU/view

  • Gerard McEk

    Test looks to be going well. Let us hope that finally excess heat will be experienced. It looks you are using proper equipment! Good luck me356 and MFMP!

    • Bob Greenyer

      Well – it is a re-heat, and Alan Goldwater notes we have not seen much of interest on re-heats, but others have. Having said that, Alan has not been able to re-heat for long, and the intention is that this platform is for full monitoring of long-run tests. We shall see if we can run this for a long time – perhaps a week or more. At the moment we are going to hold steady at this temperature for an extended period.

      This non-contact control will is a testbed for me356’s SiC based tests.

  • Bob Greenyer

    GS2 calibration – basis for estimating any anomalies.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WOGxzZkZvRmNXOUU/view

  • Bob Greenyer

    The plot.ly data is reporting spikes of 9.96A when the thyristor turns on when targeting this 850ºC – this is very close to the 10A trip for the power to the coil. This may limit the headroom.

    It may actually be higher in a very short time frame and that is why the PCE-830 was reporting over limit when the probe was set to 10A.

    • Bob Greenyer

      me356 says that he feels there is plenty of headroom, he does not have confidence in the current reported on plot.ly and the thyristor is running nice and cool at 35ºC

  • Bob Greenyer

    The plot.ly data is reporting spikes of 9.96A when the thyristor turns on when targeting this 850ºC – this is very close to the 10A trip for the power to the coil. This may limit the headroom.

    It may actually be higher in a very short time frame and that is why the PCE-830 was reporting over limit when the probe was set to 10A.

    • Bob Greenyer

      me356 says that he feels there is plenty of headroom, he does not have confidence in the current reported on plot.ly and the thyristor is running nice and cool at 35ºC

  • Sanjeev

    To me it looks very close to the calibration values at this time. (550W @ 850C).
    For some reason the chart embedded here is showing old data.

    • Bob Greenyer

      The test calibration of this cell in Padua put it in-line with the GS2.

      Yes, it is close to calibration. Alan Goldwater has not seen anything interesting in re-heats, but they were not long lived – hopefully this will be. What this test is meant to iron out is snags ( a few found already) in running long term experiments ready for me356 SiC reactors. If during the period we see a big signal, then so much the better.

      • Sanjeev

        What is causing the left/right difference in temperatures?

        • Bob Greenyer

          Most likely coil winding density. On the colour video feed, you can see that some of the windings are sticking out the end of the outer sheath – that is, the wire has expanded meaning there is a little less density on the left side.

          This is one of the real values of a correctly used thermal imaging camera over other means of assessing output – you get to see what, where (well, at least for one side).

          • Sanjeev

            Yes, surely, an IR cam is valuable. With an IR sensor, this setup gets rid of all TC related issues. No guess work needed.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Experiment still running

    http://www.lenr-experiment.tk

    I think Youtube cut at 4 hours

  • Bob Greenyer
  • nietsnie

    I’m watching the plot.ly graph with autoscale engaged. The pressure trace is meaningful. IR temp is almost a horizontal line – although I can see by hovering over it that it varies by small amounts. I think this is because it has to scale with the ambient temp in the room – which is hundreds of degrees lower. And it’s nearly impossible to tell what is happening to current because it doesn’t have its own scale on the graph this time either (it seems to be using the temperature scale…) so it’s just a vague squiggle at the bottom of the graph. I would expect for changes in pressure to be coupled with changes in temperature, but I can’t see that they are. Is there any way that the graph can be changed to remove the ambient trace and add the third current scale? Or else, add a scale for both the ambient temp and current?

    • Sanjeev

      You can try the zoom button (click on it and drag on the curves).
      You can also drag the top of the axis to zoom it.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Click on a legend item to enable or disable it

      • lars

        Could you explain all the facts on the screen in a simple way and why its important, please
        thank you

    • nietsnie

      Thanks for your replies. And Bob and co. – thanks again for doing this in a way that allows those of us on the sidelines to watch.

      Sangee – I tried using the zoom feature. This allows me to blow up the graph to the point where I can see changes in the current. But, when I do, the changes in pressure no longer fit on the graph. So, I’m still unable to compare delta current or IR with delta pressure.

      Bob – That’s very good to know – and it works. If I use that feature to isolate only the pressure plus either IR or current (by turning off the other traces) I get a meaningful comparison of two of them at a time. And that’s good enough to get what I really want to see (if not ideal…).

      • Sanjeev

        Yes, enabling only the traces you want to compare works better.

      • Bob Greenyer

        We get so much back by working this way – it forces a certain discipline – but hopefully, every time we learn for the next time and things get better.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Click on a legend item to enable or disable it

  • Bob Greenyer
    • R101

      Thanks Bob!

  • Sanjeev

    I do not remember if this is old, but the date of upload is 30th July 2015. This may be of some help for replicators. Potassium (K2CO3) is revealed as the catalyst and many other details are given. I know no one likes DGT anymore, but this is by NASA.

    Executive Summary of visit to Defkalion Headquarters,
    Michael A. Nelson, NASA
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/272993947/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion#scribd

    • Bob Greenyer

      Thanks for this Sanjeev, I do think it has been published before

      Interestingly it says

      “Gamma radiation below 300 Kev is generated from the reaction”

      They have kind of reported this before

      “Use of electrical signal to separate H2 into H (Rossi never publicly claimed this)”

      This is the arc.

      “DK shuts down instantly by bleeding H2 off of chamber. Can also use magnetics.”

      Last part is interesting

      • Sanjeev

        Yes, interesting. Some of the info is new for me. I guess they used the catalyst(s) to create defects in Ni lattice, which works better (if you assume it works). This is a clue apart from a clear mention of the catalyst.
        It also hints to the possibility that E-Cat uses some kind of electric stimulation.
        The clues given in the document are worth trying out (if nothing else works).

  • Stephen

    I notice that the next one “Padua Cell Reheat #5” is on the MFMP Facebook site. It seems to me that the pressure is dropping now.

    • Bob Greenyer

      I have notice that you can drag the right hand of the bottom axis and bring in future time to plot longer graphs.

      • Sanjeev

        It starts erasing the tail of the graph.

        • Bob Greenyer

          you are right

    • Bob Greenyer

      Fifth part is here:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RbOC_wmfUw

      We will hold at this temperature until this evening – and then move a little up. The ambient is nice and flat and all looks good so far.

      Ecco has produced a graph of power vs temp so far – interestingly it appears to become linear above 700ºC

      http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/500-padua-cell-reheat-long-term-test-live-now

      • Ged

        Interesting, that is not what we should be seeing for standard heating.

        • Sanjeev

          But it matches with the calibration, more or less exactly. (Eyeballed opinion).

          • Bob Greenyer
          • timycelyn

            What would be really useful would be a screen grab of the image above, with all the data fields annotated (I think I can count 20) to act as a key for those of us that are watching, but are not so intimately involved.

            If it could be displayed either near the current active window (where this mail is) or maybe in Franks’s narrative above, that would be great.

            cheers

            Tim

          • Bob Greenyer

            Here you go!

            Overview of stream layout

            https://goo.gl/EPtjfv

          • timycelyn

            thanks Bob, that’s exactly what I was hoping for. This will help observers like myself a lot.

            Frank – would it be worth displaying the ‘key’ or this link up in the text somewhere, otherwise the link will soon get buried as the thread grows….

            cheers

            tim

          • Bob Greenyer

            Key to note is the VAR component which is added to the total.

            From wiki

            “In electric power transmission and distribution, volt-ampere reactive(var) is a unit in which reactive power is expressed in an AC electric power system. Reactive power exists in an AC circuit when the current and voltage are not in phase.”

          • R101

            Thanks Bob for posting these up to date hyperlinks.

          • Bob Greenyer

            A pleasure

  • Stephen

    I notice that the next one “Padua Cell Reheat #5” is on the MFMP Facebook site. It seems to me that the pressure is dropping now.

    • Bob Greenyer

      I have notice that you can drag the right hand of the bottom axis and bring in future time to plot longer graphs.

      • Sanjeev

        It starts erasing the tail of the graph.

        • Bob Greenyer

          you are right

  • Bob Greenyer

    Fifth part is here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RbOC_wmfUw

    We will hold at this temperature until this evening – and then move a little up. The ambient is nice and flat and all looks good so far.

    Ecco has produced a graph of power vs temp so far – interestingly it appears to become linear above 700ºC

    http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/500-padua-cell-reheat-long-term-test-live-now

    • Ged

      Interesting, that is not what we should be seeing for standard heating.

      • Sanjeev

        But it matches with the calibration, more or less exactly. (Eyeballed opinion).
        Perhaps Ecco can plot them together for a clear view ?

  • Bob Greenyer
    • Sanjeev

      Things look stable.
      In fact too static 😀

      • Mats002

        I don’t want to be kinky but:

        “2. continue in increasing until 850°C in 7 hour – which is around 1200ºC+ internal. ( about 700W, 81.98V 8.54A )”

        We are at 20 hours with 780 C still at 560W, do we have a protocol or someone sleeping at work? 😉 😉

        • Daniel Maris

          Your English is very good Mats – but do you mean cheeky? 🙂

        • Bob Greenyer

          target temperatures are off the IR gun which is controlling the PID as part of the non-contact power drive.

          http://lenr-experiment.tk

          Temp IR is targetting 1000ºC on the night of 31/8 – 1/9

          • Daniel Maris

            Do you mean 31/7 – 1/8?

          • Bob Greenyer

            yes – should sleep more

  • Bob Greenyer
    • Sanjeev

      Things look stable.
      In fact too static 😀

  • Gerrit

    Temperature is rising rapidly now.

  • Mats002

    I don’t want to be kinky but:

    “2. continue in increasing until 850°C in 7 hour – which is around 1200ºC+ internal. ( about 700W, 81.98V 8.54A )”

    We are at 20 hours with 780 C still at 560W, do we have a protocol or someone sleeping at work? 😉 😉

    • Bob Greenyer

      target temperatures are off the IR gun which is controlling the PID as part of the non-contact power drive.

      http://lenr-experiment.tk

      Temp IR is targetting 1000ºC on the night of 31/8 – 1/9

  • Bob Greenyer
    • timycelyn

      What would be really useful would be a screen grab of the image above, with all the data fields annotated (I think I can count 20) to act as a key for those of us that are watching, but are not so intimately involved.

      If it could be displayed either near the current active window (where this mail is) or maybe in Franks’s narrative above, that would be great.

      cheers

      Tim

      • Bob Greenyer

        Here you go!

        Overview of stream layout

        https://goo.gl/EPtjfv

        • timycelyn

          thanks Bob, that’s exactly what I was hoping for. This will help observers like myself a lot.

          Frank – would it be worth displaying the ‘key’ or this link up in the text somewhere, otherwise the link will soon get buried as the thread grows….

          cheers

          tim

          • Bob Greenyer

            Key to note is the VAR component which is added to the total.

            From wiki

            “In electric power transmission and distribution, volt-ampere reactive(var) is a unit in which reactive power is expressed in an AC electric power system. Reactive power exists in an AC circuit when the current and voltage are not in phase.”

    • R101

      Thanks Bob for posting these up to date hyperlinks.

      • Bob Greenyer

        A pleasure

  • nietsnie

    The changes in pressure don’t seem to be coupled to either IR temp or current. It looks to me as if it periodically leaks and then recovers. Sometimes the leaks are relatively large and sudden. But, sometimes the increases are also relatively large and sudden. Right now, and for some time, the general direction is down. It hit in the 9’s of psi for the first time in a long time recently.

    • Bob Greenyer

      If the coil can last – we’d like to keep heating until well past a point were the pressure is below atmospheric

      • nietsnie

        If it gets below atmospheric I guess you’d have to conclude that it isn’t a leak but rather evidence of a reaction? Gas being used up by some process. But, that also makes the periodic, uncoupled, *increases* in pressure more interesting too – and also the periodic cycling back and forth between them.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Many LENR experiments appear to “Breathe” we saw it with Celani – and Mike McKubre gave a whole lecture on it at ICCF18

          • nietsnie

            What were his thoughts as to the potential mechanism?

          • Bob Greenyer

            hydrogen going into and out of the lattice – perhaps as a result of heat releasing events and following dissipation of that heat

          • nietsnie

            Interesting… I wish I could see temp, current, and pressure on the graph, all in reasonable scale, at the same time to see if that seems evident. This is maybe research for when the experiment is over and the data is published. I don’t see pressure coupled with temp though with just those two traces, at least. Nor do I see pressure coupled with current, with just those two – although there’s a lot of noise in the current signal which makes it harder to know for sure without signal processing to smooth the trace.

          • Bob Greenyer

            That is because you need to look at the additional live data here:

            http://lenr-experiment.tk

            there is pressure and the VoltCraft IR gun that provides the spot temperature that the PID is targeting.

            Ignore the current on this.

            the TC is ambient.

          • nietsnie

            This is the live graph with traces for current, ambient tc, ir temp, and pressure – right? If so, it is what I have been watching. By following your excellent tip about how to shut off traces I have been able to get a very good feel for pressure vrs reactor temp and an ok feel for pressure vrs current. But, I can’t see reactor temp vrs current because of the scale issue. Ideally, I’d like to notice that there was a change in pressure while the current dropped but the reactor temp stayed more or less the same.

            I was thinking this would show evidence of the hydrogen cycling as a result of LENR energy production you were mentioning. If hydrogen going into or out of lattice (as change in pressure) corresponds to heat production which is absorbed by a drop in current. But – I should be able to look at this more carefully when the data is published at the end of the experiment.

            This is great stuff, Bob.

          • Bob Greenyer

            if me356 has the time in coming months, he has the capability to hack the output from the PCE830 – then you would get very accurate power data along with the rest.

          • nietsnie

            Harmonics vrs power production would be very interesting…

          • R101

            Possibly could be due to the mass within shrinking?

          • nietsnie

            I suppose that if it’s leaking then the mass might shrink and that could explain the loss of pressure. But, then the pressure goes up again and it’s harder to imagine mass leaking back in.

        • magicsnd1

          The small variations in the pressure data are just noise from the sensor resolution limit. With 1600 psi being full scale, a change of 0.1 psi is just .006%. This does suggest use of a sensor with lower full-scale rating for future tests.

          • nietsnie

            Gotcha…

          • nietsnie

            Actually – now I’m not sure I agree anymore. If you step back a little, the pressure ‘breathing’ changes are so regular and predictable that it’s hard to believe they’re random noise. At the same time they also don’t seem to be coupled with reactor temperature so it’s hard to believe they represent increases in current from the PED. I think this is something else.

  • tobalt

    Good zo see that the ir cam works so stably. But it should not be used to judge absolute temperature! In the real test make sure to use both TC to assess the temperature And use the Ir cam to measure if the relative ir temp is in line with the TCs. This will let you validate if temperature drifts and jumps are real.

    oh. And measure the damn power individually for all the tested chambers. Any test without this will be a waste of time.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Any test will be a null somehow if it does not show statistically significant elemental or isotopic shifts (preferably non-naturally occurring isotopic ratios).

      What is needed is enough apparatus to give a good indication that something may have happened whilst recording what was done, with the result ash being fully and independently analysed using double blind methodology.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Overview of stream layout

        https://goo.gl/EPtjfv

        • nietsnie

          Thanks Bob. This is *very* helpful to me. Can’t tell the players without a program…

  • tobalt

    Good zo see that the ir cam works so stably. But it should not be used to judge absolute temperature! In the real test make sure to use both TC to assess the temperature And use the Ir cam to measure if the relative ir temp is in line with the TCs. This will let you validate if temperature drifts and jumps are real.

    oh. And measure the damn power individually for all the tested chambers. Any test without this will be a waste of time.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Any test will be a null somehow if it does not show statistically significant elemental or isotopic shifts (preferably non-naturally occurring isotopic ratios) that would imply a net energy yield from transmutations identified.

      What is needed is enough apparatus to give a good indication that something may have happened whilst recording what was done, with the result ash being fully and independently analysed using double blind methodology.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Overview of stream layout

    https://goo.gl/EPtjfv

    • nietsnie

      Thanks Bob. This is *very* helpful to me. Can’t tell the players without a program…

  • Bob Greenyer

    section 8

    Pressure dropping – K-type over 1000ºC hot spot over 1100ºC

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BS-oX1QRiE

  • Bob Greenyer

    section 8

    Pressure dropping – K-type over 1000ºC hot spot over 1100ºC

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BS-oX1QRiE

  • Bob Greenyer
  • Obvious

    Looking good.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Some strange pressure spikes and decays now.

    • nietsnie

      Frenetic current changes too.

    • Ged

      Getting quite a bit of power swings too, from 940 to 890 or so.

  • Mats002

    Swing of up to 0.2 psi with a irregular frequency of about 3 minutes, can not see the overall trend – still going down and at which rate (roughly)?

    • Bob Greenyer

      Just dipped under 5

      • Mats002

        In the pic below it swings around 5.3 at 17.30 and now at about 19.30 it swings around 4.6 that is about 0.35 psi per hour. Atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi so we have a partial vaccum since long?

        • Sanjeev

          Yes, I guess it was in vacuum since start (as the writeup above says).
          The tiny swings are most likely noise, but there is a very slow trend downwards. (See Alan reply below).

          • Bob Greenyer

            it is psi gauge…. all the time it is positive there is no vacuum

  • nietsnie

    One thing puzzling me: the realtime YouTube page lists 3 different temps output from the IR sensor (L, K, R). The apparent preferred one is the ‘K’ location in the middle of the reactor – which is also reported in the IR picture below it. It currently reports ~980 C – and L and R are around 1023 and 1068 respectively. But on the plot.ly graph, IR temp hovers around ~1050. What does that represent? I thought possibly (L+R)/2, but that’s a little too low.

    • Sanjeev

      Its the temperature from IR gun, which is also controlling the input power.

    • Ged

      The L, K, and R are the Optris camera, not the IR gun; so the values are a little different. The IR gun is a spot, while the Optris is integrating across the entire area selected in the image window.

    • nietsnie

      Oh, I see. There are two instruments then. That explains why they’re different. Is the IR gun pointed at the same spot identified as ‘K’ by the Optris? If so, why to they differ by 70 C? Which is more likely to be accurate? Any idea?

      • Bob Greenyer

        measuring the central gap we have.

        – K-Type TC embedded under the cement between two coil windings and on outside of central alumina core. The output is on the black battery powered (so failure of TC does not bring system down as in previous runs) digital multimeter in the foreground left bottom of the video feed (easier to see in day)

        – VoltCraft IR gun (rated to 2200ºC) laser cited to centre of the central gap and on the OUTSIDE of the cement. The output is in the live data feed here as IR Temp

        http://lenr-experiment.tk

        and this is used as the input to the PID that controls the triad delivering power to the coil.

        – Optris “K” which is showing the highest temperature pixel in the zone which is less than optimally placed – of the OUTSIDE of the cement at the bottom. This is also the main temp shown.

        Much of the variation is real, it is due to position and the fact that the TC is closer to the core and embedded.

        All alumina temperatures are read with the Optris manuals recommendation for ceramic emissivity of 0.95, although we established in earlier research that 0.92 may be more appropriate. We are recording RAVI files so post analysis with changing of the emissivity will be possible.

  • nietsnie

    The geiger counter is reading slightly higher than it has every time I’ve glanced at it in the past. I wonder what that means?

    • nietsnie

      Oh – well, now it’s back down to 23 or so. It was reading in the low thirties for a couple of minutes there until I decided to speak up about it. False interest alarm I suppose.

      • Bob Greenyer

        normal background whilst I was there was 20-30

        • nietsnie

          I few minutes ago it was in the low 40s. Is geiger counter data being captured? Is it part of what will be available later? It’s almost certainly a dead end – but for awhile I thought I saw a pattern between temp, pressure and cpm.

          • Bob Greenyer

            The geiger counter is data is being captured internally to the GC and data will be able to be synched by referring to the youtube clip.

          • nietsnie

            I’m not sure what you mean by ‘…by referring to the youtube clip’…

          • Bob Greenyer

            After getting the download CSV from the Geiger counter – can look at date stamps and CPM against the recorded you-tube streams to synchronise all data

          • nietsnie

            I think I see. The GC data is date stamped? So it should be able to be inserted into a database table and synched to the rest of the collected data that should also be date stamped, yes? Alternately, if you just wanted to visually compare against the video data you could do it manually that way too.

  • nietsnie

    We are in need of a Padua Cell Reheat #10 link.

    • nietsnie

      It’s going through stretches now where the PID has a hard time keeping the temp at target after a long run not having that problem. I don’t know whether that’s an indication that the additional heat source is sputtering, or if it’s that the kanthal is wearing out.

      • Sanjeev

        Current has flatlined for some reason.

        • Mats002

          At plotly the current is flat at 8.26 A, but youtube show 11.32 A and there is also a chopping of the AC-power signal either at the zero (to avoid EM dirty signals) or as time-slizing the input power for dirty AC giving EM.

          What do we know about this now? Input power unknown for us now?

          • Sanjeev

            The video is showing input power, voltage and current just fine. Something odd with plotly current.

          • Mats002

            Video #12: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4eph_q3TBTo

            Were are all the ECW people today?

          • Bob Greenyer

            I was in the garden.

          • Mats002

            Hi Bob, I run back and forth to the computer and smartphone while doing domestic stuff and talking to family members, we are four. The GS holds well and the instrumentation is better than ever so I have high hopes this time!

          • Bob Greenyer

            Well – we did not expect too much from this run… what we did want to see is if we could have something powered and running “Long Term” that was fault resilient and provide robust data streaming.

            I think we are on the way to achieving that.

            Looking at this fuel will tell us a lot, recently I have seen that Aluminium can be used to stop sintering. If the fuel can be ground, then we can take the advice of the new russian report and feed some of the “ash” in to the next run

            The PCE-830 never arrived in Padua – so it became just a cake baking exercise. If we feel it merits analysis, it will be interesting to see if we have statistically meaningful non-natural ratio isotopes in the ash.

          • Mats002

            Isotope change and excess heat go together so I am not very optimistic about ash-analysis from Padua GS2, but that is only my layman’s view of what I have seen up to now.

    • Mats002

      15:52: Plotly temp fell from 1150 to 1050 in 12 minutes probably because of less or no input power, followed by a steep increase in temp up to 1168. Pressure followed the temp down from -0,25 to -0,72 with a time delay of almost 5 minutes.

      16:10: Rocking temp up and down steeply in the 100C range.

  • nietsnie

    We are in need of a Padua Cell Reheat #10 link.

  • Bob Greenyer
  • nietsnie

    Pressure is down in the 1’s now.

  • nietsnie

    Pressure is down in the 1’s now.

  • nietsnie

    Pressure is below 1 now.

  • nietsnie

    Pressure is below 1 now.

  • nietsnie

    It’s going through stretches now where the PID has a hard time keeping the temp at target after a long run not having that problem. I don’t know whether that’s an indication that the additional heat source is sputtering, or if it’s that the kanthal is wearing out.

  • nietsnie

    If anyone is still up – we need a tenth episode.

  • nietsnie

    If anyone is still up – we need a tenth episode.

  • Mats002

    Pressure is below 0.2 now.

  • Sanjeev

    Pressure is touching 0 after 5 days !
    As Bob clarified below, it needs to be negative to be below atmospheric.

    According to the Lenz team, it takes pre-loaded Ni (hydrogenated) and either a temperature or pressure “kick” to start the lenr. The reactor is already preloaded now, and I hope it will survive for a few more days for such kick tests.

    • Mats002

      Touching but not past below yet…

      • Sanjeev

        Just went below 0.

    • Mats002

      This padua glowstick do not have Parkhomov Ni as I recall, it probably have Hunter Chemical AH50 Carbonyl Nickel , anyone can tell more about this?

      • Sanjeev
        • Mats002

          Sanjeev, I find an interesting conversation we had, see comments at: http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/04/23/iccf19-day-1-april-13-2015-live-thread/#comment-1974067818

          Parkhomov started to see XH when pressure went below 0 at 800 C and when pressure leveled out at 0,5 bar (about -7 psi) at 1200 C XH was in full bloom.

          Parkhomov had a pressure drop from 5 bar (about 70 psi) to -0,5 (bar) in about 10 hours, His comment about padua glowstick was according to Bob “Dr. Parkhomov told us that he thinks we had too little dead volume.”

          I can not find any reference to which Ni was used but all the discussions afterward indicates NOT Parkhomov Ni, but I am sure this answer can be found somewhere, just have not found it yet.

          This day can be exciting 😉

          • Sanjeev

            I recall that the experiment is Padua was arranged just because Parkhomov brought his powder with him and gave it to MFMP. The video titles all show “Parkhomov fuel”. Perhaps Bob here can confirm if it was same exact powder or something was missing in it.

            Pressure values can be different because this design is different, pressure can be a variable, but not sure how critical it is.

          • Mats002

            Yes you are right, the video titles says “Parkhomov fuel” – how could I miss that?

  • Mats002

    Below 0! I wonder at which pressure the Ni lattice is fully loaded with H, it should come to a point where pressure can’t go any lower.

  • Mats002

    Temp just fell quickly from the stable 1050 down to 1020, what is happening?

    • Mats002

      Please keep on commenting about the levels of temp and pressure, I am out to fill the refrigerator for my family. Typical that have to happen now! 😉

  • Stephen

    K temp is increasing is thuis due to temperaturen steps in the test?

    • artefact

      On Youtube:
      Bob Greenyer: Plan is to start dropping temp and then bursting it back on

      • Sanjeev

        Yes, kicks !

      • Sanjeev

        The rate of temperature rise in the heater to initiate the heat
        generating mode must be greater than or equal to 0.5 °C/sec

        – Lenz report
        So a jump of 10C should be made in just 20 secs.

  • Stephen

    K temp is increasing is thuis due to temperaturen steps in the test?

    • artefact

      On Youtube:
      Bob Greenyer: Plan is to start dropping temp and then bursting it back on

      • Sanjeev

        Yes, kicks !

      • Sanjeev

        The rate of temperature rise in the heater to initiate the heat
        generating mode must be greater than or equal to 0.5 °C/sec

        – Lenz report
        So a jump of 10C should be made in just 20 secs.

  • Sanjeev

    Current has flatlined for some reason.

    • Mats002

      At plotly the current is flat at 8.26 A, but youtube show 11.32 A and there is also a chopping of the AC-power signal either at the zero (to avoid EM dirty signals) or as time-slizing the input power for dirty AC giving EM.

      What do we know about this now? Input power unknown for us now?

      • Sanjeev

        The video is showing input power, voltage and current just fine. Something odd with plotly current.

  • Mats002

    13:35: Input power 1.02 KVA at Temp about 1114 C, let’s use this a a reference later on.

  • Mats002

    13:35: Input power 1.02 KVA at Temp about 1114 C, let’s use this a a reference later on.

  • artefact

    Ecco made a graph for input vs. temperature:
    http://i.imgur.com/WYGVCgl.png

    • Mats002

      Hot spot (green) seams to climb at a bit faster rate than the others, or…?

  • Mats002

    15:52: Plotly temp fell from 1150 to 1050 in 12 minutes probably because of less or no input power, followed by a steep increase in temp up to 1168. Pressure followed the temp down from -0,25 to -0,72 with a time delay of almost 5 minutes.

    16:10: Rocking temp up and down steeply in the 100C range.

  • Mats002

    More rocking of input power but the video stream just ended, do we have another url?

  • Mats002

    More rocking of input power but the video stream just ended, do we have another url?

  • Robert Dorr
  • Mats002

    Video #12: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4eph_q3TBTo

    Were are all the ECW people today?

    • Bob Greenyer

      I was in the garden.

      • Mats002

        Hi Bob, I run back and forth to the computer and smartphone while doing domestic stuff and talking to family members, we are four. The GS holds well and the instrumentation is better than ever so I have high hopes this time!

        • Bob Greenyer

          Well – we did not expect too much from this run… what we did want to see is if we could have something powered and running “Long Term” that was fault resilient and provide robust data streaming.

          I think we are on the way to achieving that.

          Looking at this fuel will tell us a lot, recently I have seen that Aluminium can be used to stop sintering. If the fuel can be ground, then we can take the advice of the new russian report and feed some of the “ash” in to the next run

          The PCE-830 never arrived in Padua – so it became just a cake baking exercise. If we feel it merits analysis, it will be interesting to see if we have statistically meaningful non-natural ratio isotopes in the ash.

          • Mats002

            Isotope change and excess heat go together so I am not very optimistic about ash-analysis from Padua GS2, but that is only my layman’s view of what I have seen up to now.

  • nietsnie

    I notice that power no longer varies in the plot.ly graph when isolated. It’s stuck at 8.6 ‘C’. Is this an indication that it’s on max all the time now?

    • nietsnie

      OK. Clearly off PID and on manual control now.

  • nietsnie

    Also – good morning everyone!

    • Mats002

      Godmorning nietsnie! Here in Sweden the time is 17.05, same as the experiment.

      • nietsnie

        Here it is *much* earlier. Earlier still since it was such a late night. If that video feed hadn’t run out I might not have gotten any sleep. That was fortunate for me. I notice that the next one must have started up shortly after I gave up.

  • nietsnie

    Right now the input power has dropped way down but the temperature is going up.

    • nietsnie

      For future reference watch at 17:22.

      • artefact

        back to 9.05 in the plot. I can see no changes in the video.

        • nietsnie

          I was watching plot.ly with current and temp TC turned off. At about 17:21, the temp plummeted. I switched off temp and switched on current to see if the input power had changed. It had – the current was dropped by more than half. But then, at about 17:22, it started going back up again. It held that in spite of the current remaining consistent at it’s lower setting. So, in summary, input power went down and stayed there. Output power went down – but then came back up and stayed there until the power was increased several minutes later. It looked like energy production to me.

          • Sanjeev

            There is some delay between the power change and temperature change. (The time constant for the system.) So if the power change is fast it can appear that the temperature starts rising after the power went down, but its actually responding to the previous power up.

          • nietsnie

            On Plot.ly, current had been consistent at 8 point something for the entire width of the graph. Then it dropped to, I think, 3 point something. As you would expect, IR temp dropped as well. But, then IR temp went back up to the range that it had previously been in before the current drop – but current stayed at 3 point something. Current was held at 3 something for over 8 minutes, I think, yet temp never really dropped significantly again until after current was raised back up – several minutes later. So, this was not a temperature reaction delay issue.

            Is there any way to ‘rewind’ plot.ly?

          • Sanjeev

            Can’t rewind it, but it all will be there to review once the experiment is over and raw data is provided.
            But you can rewind the video and see if it shows anything special around that time.

    • Sanjeev

      It looks like its in manual mode now. But the plotly and PCE numbers do not agree.

      • Mats002

        Hot spot is moving, wonder what that means?

        • Sanjeev

          Can mean many things. Perhaps its bored sitting there. 😀

          • Mats002

            Ha ha, I getting bored sitting here too if everything keeps stable…

          • Sanjeev

            Well I check it once in an hour or so and come here and post something random. Unfortunately, its not showing anything extraordinary. The inside temperature must have already reached 1300°C.

          • nietsnie

            Again, on plot.ly, current drops by over half – temp remains roughly in the 1073 – 1074.5 range.

          • Mats002

            Thanks to Ecco Yumi: me356 said that current values from plot.ly should not be relied upon.

          • Sanjeev

            Thanks for clearing it. There is no correlation between plotly current and PCE values anymore. The power values shown in the video seem to be ok.

          • nietsnie

            OK, too bad then – but thanks Mats. It was exciting looking – but too good to be true. Is the problem in the IR gun? the feed of current data to plot.ly?

          • Mats002

            What if pressure is a key to start the reaction? This text is taken from ECW article http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/03/21/mfmp-reports-parkhomov-breakthrough-90-minutes-of-excess-heat/

            “For the first time [Parkhonmov] successfully managed to mount a pressure gauge installation. With slow heating, the maximum pressure of 5 bar at 200 ° C was reached, and then the pressure was reduced at a temperature of about 1000C to become negative. The most powerful vacuum of about 0.5 bar at a temperature of 1150 ° C was.”

            MFMP GS2 have now been at 1170 for hours and pressure decrease slowly below -1 psi, about -0.7 bar. Why do Padua GS2 take so long time to lower the pressure? Parkhomov’s comment about Padua glowstick was according to Bob Greenyer “Dr. Parkhomov told us that he thinks we had too little dead volume.”

            If so – why is negative pressure important?

          • Mats002

            -1 psi should be -0.07 bar, so the partial vacuum is very tiny now.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Might allow Chemical / Physical Vapour Deposition to create nano structures of the right size.

          • Mats002

            Time for some sleep soon, I hope that Parkhomov-like low pressure will occur in the GS2 in due time, it will give more information about the pressure issue.

            The GS platform robustness with plotly and youtube broadcasting is a success whatever the outcome of this run.

          • Bob Greenyer

            It is a good location and the host is supremely capable.

            The aim was to see what the reactor platform could do long term with a control system that is non-contact allowing for fault tolerance.

            There GS4 will have Mullite like Parkhomov and a much better lower area to volume of fuel ratio. The other components of mullite might be key – but perhaps these could be added into an Alumina tube.

            There are a whole range of additives being discussed and with a platform and control system we can trust to not fail part way into experiments – we can be more confident of seeing something if it is possible.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We now have a “No Fuel” zone!

          • Bob Greenyer
          • nietsnie

            So, where does the unreliability of the data currently being displayed in plot.ly originate? Are all the feeds going to it unreliable, or just some (like just the IR gun), or is it something that is happening to the data after it gets to plot.ly? Most importantly, will the experiment data that is currently being squirrelled away suffer from the same issue(s) that the plot.ly graph does?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Sorry – we have messaged many times that the current data on plot.ly is not correct. What other unreliable thing are you referring to?

          • nietsnie

            Thanks for responding, Bob. I spent days watching that plot.ly graph – so naturally I’m curious. Here’s what I want to know.
            1. Are all the traces in the plot.ly data incorrect – or is it just some of them?
            1b. If only some – which ones?
            2. Where did the problem originate? Before or after being sent to plot.ly?
            2b. If before – will the data files also have this problem?

          • nietsnie

            Oh wait – I see. This is a “who’s on first” problem. When you say “current” you mean it in the electrical sense – not “present tense”. I kept reading it as the the plot.ly data right now was not correct, which left open the possibility that the plot.ly data in the past was correct – and it also didn’t seem defined yet as to whether *all* the present traces were incorrect, or just some of them.

            That caused me to wonder where the problem originated since if it happened in plot.ly then the eventual published data points would not be negatively affected. Whereas, if it happened at the source then potentially IR, input power, ambient temp, and pressure would all be wrong both on the screen and in the experiment data.

            I couldn’t understand why you wouldn’t answer my question and seemed so put out. Now I understand.

          • Ged

            Oh hoh! Useful for seeing the temperature gradient.

          • Mats002

            See goo.gl/U3huim

          • Sanjeev

            Tiny shift. I’d be very impressed if it moved from the right to left part for example.

  • nietsnie

    Right now the input power has dropped way down but the temperature is going up.

    • nietsnie

      For future reference watch at 17:22.

      • artefact

        back to 9.05 in the plot. I can see no changes in the video.

        • nietsnie

          I was watching plot.ly with current and temp TC turned off. At about 17:21, the temp plummeted. I switched off temp and switched on current to see if the input power had changed. It had – the current was dropped by more than half. But then, at about 17:22, it started going back up again. It held that in spite of the current remaining consistent at it’s lower setting. So, in summary, input power went down and stayed there. Output power went down – but then came back up and stayed there until the power was increased several minutes later. It looked like energy production to me.

          • Sanjeev

            There is some delay between the power change and temperature change. (The time constant for the system.) So if the power change is fast it can appear that the temperature starts rising after the power went down, but its actually responding to the previous power up.

          • nietsnie

            On Plot.ly, current had been consistent at 8 point something for the entire width of the graph. Then it dropped to, I think, 3 point something. As you would expect, IR temp dropped as well. But, then IR temp went back up to the range that it had previously been in before the current drop – but current stayed at 3 point something. Current was held at 3 something for over 8 minutes, I think, yet temp never really dropped significantly again until after current was raised back up – several minutes later. So, this was not a temperature reaction delay issue.

            Is there any way to ‘rewind’ plot.ly?

          • Sanjeev

            Can’t rewind it, but it all will be there to review once the experiment is over and raw data is provided.
            But you can rewind the video and see if it shows anything special around that time.

  • artefact

    from the video chat:

    “magicsnd1 As a casual reference point, during my last GS3 test, I saw ~1100°C (IR) at the outside with 1.2 kW input. That data was not logged by DAQ.
    So this test is running about 100° hotter.
    Based on the IR2200 measurement. ”

    “Pointed at the center gap. The Optris is showing ~1100 there, so I would say close match overall. “

    • Mats002

      13:35: Input power 1.02 KVA (from youtube) at Temp about 1114 C (from plotly)
      17:48: Input power 1.24 KVA (from youtube) at temp about 1174 C (from plotly)

      60 C up for 200 VA up at 1114 C.

    • sebbie

      you didnt take the whole quote:

      “Pointed at the center gap. The Optris is showing ~1100 there, so I would say close match overall.”

  • Sanjeev

    It looks like its in manual mode now. But the plotly and PCE numbers do not agree.

    • Mats002

      Hot spot is moving, wonder what that means?

      • Sanjeev

        Can mean many things. Perhaps its bored sitting there. 😀

        • Mats002

          Ha ha, I getting bored sitting here too if everything keeps stable…

          • Sanjeev

            Well I check it once in an hour or so and come here and post something random. Unfortunately, its not showing anything extraordinary. The inside temperature must have already reached 1300°C.

        • Mats002

          See goo.gl/U3huim

          • Sanjeev

            Tiny shift. I’d be very impressed if it moved from the right to left part for example.

  • Mats002

    Hot spot now moved down, I guess Ni powder melted and flow downwards…

  • Mats002

    Hot spot now moved down, I guess Ni powder melted and flow downwards…

  • nietsnie

    Again, on plot.ly, current drops by over half – temp remains roughly in the 1073 – 1074.5 range.

    • Mats002

      Thanks to Ecco Yumi: me356 said that current values from plot.ly should not be relied upon.

      • Sanjeev

        Thanks for clearing it. There is no correlation between plotly current and PCE values anymore. The power values shown in the video seem to be ok.

      • nietsnie

        OK, too bad then – but thanks Mats. It was exciting looking – but too good to be true. Is the problem in the IR gun? the feed of current data to plot.ly?

  • Mats002

    What if pressure is a key to start the reaction? This text is taken from ECW article http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/03/21/mfmp-reports-parkhomov-breakthrough-90-minutes-of-excess-heat/

    “For the first time [Parkhonmov] successfully managed to mount a pressure gauge installation. With slow heating, the maximum pressure of 5 bar at 200 ° C was reached, and then the pressure was reduced at a temperature of about 1000C to become negative. The most powerful vacuum of about 0.5 bar at a temperature of 1150 ° C was.”

    MFMP GS2 have now been at 1170 for hours and pressure decrease slowly below -1 psi, about -0.7 bar. Why do Padua GS2 take so long time to lower the pressure? Parkhomov’s comment about Padua glowstick was according to Bob Greenyer “Dr. Parkhomov told us that he thinks we had too little dead volume.”

    If so – why is negative pressure important?

    • Mats002

      -1 psi should be -0.07 bar, so the partial vacuum is very tiny now.

      • sebbi

        The pressure gauge hasn’t been recalibrated, so we don’t know for sure that we’re below atmospheric. Moreover the pressure before the run was -8psi (IIRC). Assumption was made that this was a vaccuum, but there is a chance that it is simply atmospheric pressure (due to not being calibrated). Alan said they would be able to do calibration after the run.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Might allow Chemical / Physical Vapour Deposition to create nano structures of the right size.

      • Mats002

        Time for some sleep soon, I hope that Parkhomov-like low pressure will occur in the GS2 in due time, it will give more information about the pressure issue.

        The GS platform robustness with plotly and youtube broadcasting is a success whatever the outcome of this run.

        • Bob Greenyer

          It is a good location and the host is supremely capable.

          The aim was to see what the reactor platform could do long term with a control system that is non-contact allowing for fault tolerance.

          There GS4 will have Mullite like Parkhomov and a much better lower area to volume of fuel ratio. The other components of mullite might be key – but perhaps these could be added into an Alumina tube.

          There are a whole range of additives being discussed and with a platform and control system we can trust to not fail part way into experiments – we can be more confident of seeing something if it is possible.

  • Bob Greenyer

    We now have a “No Fuel” zone!

    Making use of the defunct Pressure zone

    • Ged

      Oh hoh! Useful for seeing the temperature gradient.

  • Bob Greenyer
  • nietsnie

    So, where does the unreliability of the data currently being displayed in plot.ly originate? Are all the feeds going to it unreliable, or just some (like just the IR gun), or is it something that is happening to the data after it gets to plot.ly? Most importantly, will the experiment data that is currently being squirrelled away suffer from the same issue(s) that the plot.ly graph does?

    • Bob Greenyer

      Sorry – we have messaged many times that the current data on plot.ly is not correct. What other unreliable thing are you referring to?

      • nietsnie

        Thanks for responding, Bob. I spent days watching that plot.ly graph – so naturally I’m curious. Here’s what I want to know.
        1. Are all the traces in the plot.ly data incorrect – or is it just some of them?
        1b. If only some – which ones?
        2. Where did the problem originate? Before or after being sent to plot.ly?
        2b. If before – will the data files also have this problem?

      • nietsnie

        Oh wait – I see. This is a “who’s on first” problem. When you say “current” you mean it in the electrical sense – not “present tense”. I kept reading it as the the plot.ly data right now was not correct, which left open the possibility that the plot.ly data in the past was correct – and it also didn’t seem defined yet as to whether *all* the present traces were incorrect, or just some of them.

        That caused me to wonder where the problem originated since if it happened in plot.ly then the eventual published data points would not be negatively affected. Whereas, if it happened at the source then potentially IR, input power, ambient temp, and pressure would all be wrong both on the screen and in the experiment data.

        I couldn’t understand why you wouldn’t answer my question and seemed so put out. Now I understand.

  • Stephen

    i’m quite curious about the pressure.

    Is it on average still decreasing over time at steady rate? or changing its rate of decrease?

    I wonder if there is out gassing when the apparatus is heated up after a cool down and more absorption when the temperature is at steady state… or the if the overall absorption rate is steady even when we have changes in temperature?

    Is there an explanation for the 0.1 or PSI steps seen earlier in the test? I wonder if this is due to effects local to the pressure sensor or more global in the device?

    • Bob Greenyer
    • Sanjeev

      Hot spot has jumped to left and both L & R sides are at same temp now.

      • Mats002

        OMG! You said before THAT would wake you up!

        • Stephen

          just did it again!

          • Mats002

            Yep! I saw it happen, L and R have almost same temp now.

          • Bob Greenyer

            L has higher average temperature, and look at the swings.

          • Sanjeev

            The 20C swing at 17:28 is interesting, but I guess there was a power kick of 1.4KW a minute before that.

        • Sanjeev

          Ya… I was surprised !
          But now the conditions are different. The power levels are higher and Ni is most probably molten. Heater wire must have shifted or something else changed.

          If it had shifted sides when things were cooler, it would have suggested some heat coming out from left side. But that did not happen at that time.

          • Stephen

            I think when it cooled down earlier it switched again to the other side and switched back when it got hotter again. But I suppose this could still be consistent with molten material running to the left side when it is hot enough. It will be interesting to see how it develops.

            Interesting that the hot spot is now on the Right even though it more than10 degrees cooler that the left over all

      • Bob Greenyer

        dammit – you beat me!

        There was a 40ºC difference in section 12 between the average of the regions

        • Sanjeev

          Normally with increasing temperature, the difference would increase. So something else has caused it to become same, such as molten Ni flowing to left. But then its only 1 gram.

  • Stephen

    I’m quite curious about the pressure.

    Is it on average still decreasing over time at steady rate? or changing its rate of decrease?

    I wonder if there is out gassing causing higher pressure above that expected from the ideal gas law when the apparatus is heated up, especially after a previous cool down? More absorption when the temperature is at steady state? Or if the overall absorption rate is steady even when we have changes in temperature? If so perhaps once we have a good vacuum the rate of gas release into the vacuum can be controlled thermally.

    Is there an explanation for the steps in pressure of about 0.1 PSI that were seen earlier in the test? I wonder if this is due to effects local to the pressure sensor or more global in the device?

  • Bob Greenyer
  • Sanjeev

    Hot spot has jumped to left and both L & R sides are at same temp now.

    • Mats002

      OMG! You said before THAT would wake you up!

      • Sanjeev

        Ya… I was surprised !
        But now the conditions are different. The power levels are higher and Ni is most probably molten. Heater wire must have shifted or something else changed.

        If it had shifted sides when things were cooler, it would have suggested some heat coming out from left side. But that did not happen at that time.

        • Stephen

          I think when it cooled down earlier it switched again to the other side and switched back when it got hotter again. But I suppose this could still be consistent with molten material running to the left side when it is hot enough. It will be interesting to see how it develops.

          Interesting that the hot spot is now on the Right even though it more than10 degrees cooler that the left over all

    • Bob Greenyer

      dammit – you beat me!

      There was a 40ºC difference in section 12 between the average of the regions

      • Sanjeev

        Normally with increasing temperature, the difference would increase. So something else has caused it to become same, such as molten Ni flowing to left. But then its only 1 gram.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Hot spot switched sides!

  • Bob Greenyer

    Hot spot switched sides!

  • Stephen

    just did it again!

    • Mats002

      Yep! I saw it happen, L and R have almost same temp now.

      • Bob Greenyer

        L has higher average temperature, and look at the swings.

        • Sanjeev

          The 20C swing at 17:28 is interesting, but I guess there was a power kick of 1.4KW a minute before that.

          • Mats002

            I wish we could see it in the graph…

  • Mats002

    I have spent some time (more than I should honestly) looking at plotly and feel the need to share my perceptions with you – right or wrong:

    Pressure seams to level out at -4 psi (-0,28 bar) at 1170 C which is about half of Parkhomov’s partial vaccum at the same temperature. This might be the minimum pressure-at-high-temp to get from this setup and if so I think the system is at a balanced state of maximum loading of H into Ni. (is there another/better way of telling when loading have maxed out?)

    My study is limited to the plotly Temp (T) and Pressure (P) graphs, I r-e-a-l-l-y miss input power (current/voltage/wave form) graphs, but this is what I can see from the presented information:

    In theory when LENR happens there should be a burst of extra energy that increase temperature locally very fast. The nano/micro structure of the place where LENR take place should be destroyed, meaning that the lattice of loaded H at a Place will have isotope changes, giving structure changes in the lattice and in surrounding structures as well. SEM pictures of ash from both PdD and NiH experiments show this. LENR take place on the surface so underlying Ni lattices will be exposed to H when the outer layer is gone, probably vaporised, by the LENR event. Those places have been named Nuclear Active Environments (NAE:s).

    The LENR bursts of energy should show up on the IR gun (plotly Temp IR) because it is a very local point of measurement at the center of he fuel and this reading is both sensitive and fast. But there should be a delay between the LENR burst and instrument pickup because the added heat has to spread out through the walls of the device. There is no way to know this delay from the broadcasted data but can be known by an extra test after this experiment where the LENR source of heat is simulated by an internal heat source. MFMP/Me356 might already have such delay data to share?

    The added heat can rise T at different rates depending on the number of bursts happening at
    a particular moment. I suppose a single burst of LENR happens too fast and with too little energy to show up in T.

    There is another reason for T to rise and that is power added to the heater coil (Pin). I suppose this extra energy will be an ON/OFF thing, again I would be happy to learn more about this from MFMP/Me356. I suppose ON will bring a known fixed amount of heat and if so this will make T rise smooth at the same angle but dropping off a little bit with higher T. See 2015-08-03 13:18:50 for a rise from 1000 to 1110 C in 87 seconds, that is a maximum of 1,26C/sec.

    T rising because of Pin could be known and subtracted from T, thus showing ExcessT. This could be another live graph: ExcessT = T – T(Pin). Problem here is the time delay between heat from inside of the device and the more direct Pin, but this delay can be known. ExcessT must be explained and such a graph would be interesting to see as a base for discussion.

    T dropping is another story. In all cases T drops with the same rate when no LENR and no Pin is active. The rate of T dropping is known from the reference runs and T should never drop faster than that. A long drop like at 2015-08-03 12:12 shows a T up with 2C in the middle of the drop and if there is no Pin at that moment it most likely is because of LENR bursts. I suppose that 2C is above the noice-to-signal ratio in this setup but please fill me in on that.

    Pressure (P) seams to have some correlation to T, but not very obvious. Large Pin will give sharp rise of T and at those occasions I noticed that P increase with a delay of about 0.5 – 2 minutes. When T is hold stable, P is slightly dropping. When T is dropping, P follow down with longer delay or not at all, see 2015-08-03 13:35. What can keep P up when T is dropping like that? Interesting.

    In theory when LENR happens P should also rise because of higher inner T but then I see that P gets lower over time at the same average T. This should be because the destruction at NAE expose more Ni lattices to H, causing more loading of H into Ni lattices, and therefore lower P.

    The observed delay between T and P after LENR bursts is about 30 seconds, but they do not correlate in intensity. A large 2C LENR burst can give a small or large P gain, it should vary with the structural damages made by the LENR bursts. Damages that expose more Ni surfaces will lower P because H will load in new parts of Ni lattices. The up from heat is negated by more space for H.

    This is my premature test summary:

    a) The glowstick device is robust and gas tight at temps, pressures and durations long enough for LENR research
    b) The instruments used for measurement and control is fast and accurate enough, not needing TC makes this setup very reliable
    c) The solution used for control of Temp is very good and responsive over the range needed
    d) The data catched is detailed and should answer most questions about what is happening in the system
    e) By showing this data streamed live over internet others can follow and analyse the behaviour of the system, events can be discussed in real time over internet

    However I miss a few things:
    f) Plotly does not allow to analyze passed data, only real time data, no history
    g) Input power is missing as a running graph which makes it hard if not impossible to know if any excess heat actually happens during the run – can you please put it up there?!
    h) There are time delays in the system between Power_IN, Heat_OUT and Pressure_OUT that could be known and aligned in time giving a clear view about LENR_Heat and LENR_Pressure in real time
    What do you see?

    • Bob Greenyer

      There are ways to store Plot.ly data in DB that could be accessed in Run.

      me 356 thinks he can add the PCE830 data to plot.ly

      I have noticed that the pressure, recently, is leading temperature spikes – which is as you would expect if something was going on inside (not saying that it is)

      • Sanjeev

        I noticed it leading yesterday and day before yesterday also. Can’t remember if that was since the beginning. Any other explanations?

  • Mats002

    I have spent some time (more than I should honestly) looking at plotly and feel the need to share my perceptions with you – right or wrong:

    Pressure seams to level out at -4 psi (-0,28 bar) at 1170 C which is about half of Parkhomov’s partial vaccum at the same temperature. This might be the minimum pressure-at-high-temp to get from this setup and if so I think the system is at a balanced state of maximum loading of H into Ni. (is there another/better way of telling when loading have maxed out?)

    My study is limited to the plotly Temp (T) and Pressure (P) graphs, I r-e-a-l-l-y miss input power (current/voltage/wave form) graphs, but this is what I can see from the presented information:

    In theory when LENR happens there should be a burst of extra energy that increase temperature locally very fast. The nano/micro structure of the place where LENR take place should be destroyed, meaning that the lattice of loaded H at a Place will have isotope changes, giving structure changes in the lattice and in surrounding structures as well. SEM pictures of ash from both PdD and NiH experiments show this. LENR take place on the surface so underlying Ni lattices will be exposed to H when the outer layer is gone, probably vaporised, by the LENR event. Those places have been named Nuclear Active Environments (NAE:s).

    The LENR bursts of energy should show up on the IR gun (plotly Temp IR) because it is a very local point of measurement at the center of he fuel and this reading is both sensitive and fast. But there should be a delay between the LENR burst and instrument pickup because the added heat has to spread out through the walls of the device. There is no way to know this delay from the broadcasted data but can be known by an extra test after this experiment where the LENR source of heat is simulated by an internal heat source. MFMP/Me356 might already have such delay data to share?

    The added heat can rise T at different rates depending on the number of bursts happening at
    a particular moment. I suppose a single burst of LENR happens too fast and with too little energy to show up in T.

    There is another reason for T to rise and that is power added to the heater coil (Pin). I suppose this extra energy will be an ON/OFF thing, again I would be happy to learn more about this from MFMP/Me356. I suppose ON will bring a known fixed amount of heat and if so this will make T rise smooth at the same angle but dropping off a little bit with higher T. See 2015-08-03 13:18:50 for a rise from 1000 to 1110 C in 87 seconds, that is a maximum of 1,26C/sec.

    T rising because of Pin could be known and subtracted from T, thus showing ExcessT. This could be another live graph: ExcessT = T – T(Pin). Problem here is the time delay between heat from inside of the device and the more direct Pin, but this delay can be known. ExcessT must be explained and such a graph would be interesting to see as a base for discussion.

    T dropping is another story. In all cases T drops with the same rate when no LENR and no Pin is active. The rate of T dropping is known from the reference runs and T should never drop faster than that. A long drop like at 2015-08-03 12:12 shows a T up with 2C in the middle of the drop and if there is no Pin at that moment it most likely is because of LENR bursts. I suppose that 2C is above the noice-to-signal ratio in this setup but please fill me in on that.

    Pressure (P) seams to have some correlation to T, but not very obvious. Large Pin will give sharp rise of T and at those occasions I noticed that P increase with a delay of about 0.5 – 2 minutes. When T is hold stable, P is slightly dropping. When T is dropping, P follow down with longer delay or not at all, see 2015-08-03 13:35. What can keep P up when T is dropping like that? Interesting.

    In theory when LENR happens P should also rise because of higher inner T but then I see that P gets lower over time at the same average T. This should be because the destruction at NAE expose more Ni lattices to H, causing more loading of H into Ni lattices, and therefore lower P.

    The observed delay between T and P after LENR bursts is about 30 seconds, but they do not correlate in intensity. A large 2C LENR burst can give a small or large P gain, it should vary with the structural damages made by the LENR bursts. Damages that expose more Ni surfaces will lower P because H will load in new parts of Ni lattices. The up from heat is negated by more space for H.

    This is my premature test summary:

    a) The glowstick device is robust and gas tight at temps, pressures and durations long enough for LENR research
    b) The instruments used for measurement and control is fast and accurate enough, not needing TC makes this setup very reliable
    c) The solution used for control of Temp is very good and responsive over the range needed
    d) The data catched is detailed and should answer most questions about what is happening in the system
    e) By showing this data streamed live over internet others can follow and analyse the behaviour of the system, events can be discussed in real time over internet

    However I miss a few things:
    f) Plotly does not allow to analyze passed data, only real time data, no history
    g) Input power is missing as a running graph which makes it hard if not impossible to know if any excess heat actually happens during the run – can you please put it up there?!
    h) There are time delays in the system between Power_IN, Heat_OUT and Pressure_OUT that could be known and aligned in time giving a clear view about LENR_Heat and LENR_Pressure in real time
    What do you see?

    • Bob Greenyer

      There are ways to store Plot.ly data in DB that could be accessed in Run.

      me 356 thinks he can add the PCE830 data to plot.ly

      I have noticed that the pressure, recently, is leading temperature spikes – which is as you would expect if something was going on inside (not saying that it is)

      • Sanjeev

        I noticed it leading yesterday and day before yesterday also. Can’t remember if that was since the beginning. Any other explanations?

  • Stephen

    Pressure seems to be dropping again… about the same rate as earlier. what value in PSI should it be to be in the area of Parkhomov’s partial vacuum?

    • Mats002

      -7 psi
      Parkhomov started to see XH when pressure went below 0 at 800 C and when pressure leveled out at 0,5 bar (about -7 psi) at 1200 C XH was in full bloom.

      Parkhomov had a pressure drop from 5 bar (about 70 psi) to -0,5 bar (-7 psi) in about 10 hours.

      • Stephen

        Thanks Mats

        I think I saw the left temp is about 17 degrees above right now… interesting.

        Something is different in this temperature range apparently

  • Stephen

    Pressure seems to be dropping again… about the same rate as earlier. what value in PSI should it be to be in the area of Parkhomov’s partial vacuum?

    • Mats002

      -7 psi
      Parkhomov started to see XH when pressure went below 0 at 800 C and when pressure leveled out at 0,5 bar (about -7 psi) at 1200 C XH was in full bloom.

      Parkhomov had a pressure drop from 5 bar (about 70 psi) to -0,5 bar (-7 psi) in about 10 hours.

      • Stephen

        Thanks Mats

        I think I saw the left temp is about 17 degrees above right now… interesting.

        Something is different in this temperature range apparently

  • Mats002

    What is the signal/noice ratio on the plotly Temp IR, is a 2 C bump a significant signal? We had one at 18:51

  • Mats002

    What is the signal/noice ratio on the plotly Temp IR, is a 2 C bump a significant signal? We had one at 18:51

  • Sanjeev

    Big spikes. 10-20C.

    • Mats002

      Yep! Something is defintly happening now… I hope is it not end of heater coil.

    • artefact

      The plotly current also was not linear

      • Stephen

        Yup something going on there i think. Did that happen before when we had the other drops in pressure?

    • artefact

      80C difference between R and L now

    • Mats002

      From me356 via Bob:

      There are clearly visible temperature oscillations on the left side.

      With bare eye it seems that right side is overheating locally at the top, but left has nice symmetric glow.

      I really can’t answer why left side has increased temperature by maybe 65°C.

      • Mats002

        and “There was PID enabled all the time. I halted it little bit right now because current was over 13A.”

  • Sanjeev

    Big spikes. 10-20C.

    • Mats002

      Yep! Something is defintly happening now… I hope is it not end of heater coil.

    • artefact

      The plotly current also was not linear

      • Stephen

        Yup something going on there i think. Did that happen before when we had the other drops in pressure?

    • artefact

      80C difference between R and L now

      visually it looks like that the molten blob went much to the left.

    • Mats002

      From me356 via Bob:

      There are clearly visible temperature oscillations on the left side.

      With bare eye it seems that right side is overheating locally at the top, but left has nice symmetric glow.

      I really can’t answer why left side has increased temperature by maybe 65°C.

      • Mats002

        and “There was PID enabled all the time. I halted it little bit right now because current was over 13A.”

  • Stephen

    Pressure has Just shot up !! Already at + 4 Psi

    • Sanjeev

      But not the temp, it went down. Something burnt inside ?

      • Stephen

        I wonder of a movement of material of fuel could have this effect?

        • Bob Greenyer

          I think there was a core breach and what you are seeing is air leaking in and quenching

          • Stephen

            Yup it’s looking that way especially now the pressure stays at about the same level. Strange iTS still going up even though the temperature is dropping.

          • Bob Greenyer

            maybe something has bunged the hole?

            There is a LOT to study this day.

          • Stephen

            Could there have been gas trapped in the left hand Side by the fuel plug in the right hand Side that escaped once the fuel liquified ?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Section 16

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFPjnkXtfAc

            So the plan is to raise to 900 really slowly and see if L gets much hotter than R.

            What happens may tell us something.

          • Stephen

            Isnt + 7 PSI Well above atmospheric i thiught 0 was atmospheric on guage? Was the air in the leak heated so as to cause the Pressure increase?

          • Sanjeev

            May be the crack got quickly filled by molten fuel and the air got trapped inside, and got superhot.

          • Sanjeev

            It survived long enough for a meaningful ash analysis.
            I suggest cooling it down an inspecting the core, if it really cracked or not.

          • Curbina

            I’m sorry but I have not been following the test closely enough to understand what has happened, can any of you make an account of what happened? I understand the test is in risk of ending for a failure, is this true? There was any sign of potential excess heat or runaway reaction?

          • Bob Greenyer

            The test was a re-heat, to date we have not seen anything interesting in previous re-heats. The main purpose was to see if we could have a robust non-contact setup for data acquisition and live broadcasting for long term testing in readiness for me356s SiC cells.

            It allowed some snag finding and fixing.

            Having said that – the last day has been very interesting with lots to look into.

          • Curbina

            Thanks Bob, I read that something happened as a breach, or it was just apparent and the set up is still holding together?

          • Bob Greenyer

            we will only know in the autopsy. This cell has given a lot. It is still giving, but me356 has all the parts for his SiC now, and a platform and new understanding to test it.

  • Stephen

    Pressure has Just shot up !! Already at + 4 Psi

    • Sanjeev

      But not the temp, it went down. Something burnt inside ?

      • Stephen

        I wonder of a movement of material of fuel could have this effect?

        • Bob Greenyer

          I think there was a core breach and what you are seeing is air leaking in and quenching

          • Stephen

            Yup it’s looking that way especially now the pressure stays at about the same level. Strange iTS still going up even though the temperature is dropping.

          • Bob Greenyer

            maybe something has bunged the hole?

            There is a LOT to study this day.

          • Stephen

            Could there have been gas trapped in the left hand Side by the fuel plug in the right hand Side that escaped once the fuel liquified ? If th pressure sensor is on the right hand Side the increase of pressure and decrease in temperature might have been due to this.

          • Stephen

            Isnt + 7 PSI Well above atmospheric i thiught 0 was atmospheric on guage? Was the air in the leak heated so as to cause the Pressure increase?

          • Sanjeev

            May be the crack got quickly filled by molten fuel and the air got trapped inside, and got superhot.

          • Sanjeev

            It survived long enough for a meaningful ash analysis.
            I suggest cooling it down an inspecting the core, if it really cracked or not.

  • Bob Greenyer

    From me356

    “There are clearly visible temperature oscillations on the left side.

    With bare eye it seems that right side is overheating locally at the top, but left has nice symmetric glow.

    I really can’t answer why left side has increased temperature by maybe 65°C.”

    since then the Left side when 80C higher than right… most of the rest of the experiment it was cooler by 40 ºC

    • Stephen

      K is hotter than R now i think

    • Mats002

      “Yes, I dont know what is this, but the heater will fail really soon. I can see that left side is much hotter while right is barely.”

      “I can’t hold the temperature too long as the resistance will be lower and lower -> current higher.”

      “I recommend just to lower the temperature slowly, else we can get more damage so the analysis will be not so easy. I am not sure but it looked like it was lava and heat was moving in the tube “

    • artefact

      HAD test coming soon. Temp will get down to 700C

      • Sanjeev

        Pressure is trailing the temp after the breach event.
        Bob would be happy to see this.

        • Sanjeev

          Shot.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Back from buying my daughters birthday present. What did I miss?

          • Sanjeev

            Pressure was leading the temp earlier, but after the “breach” its trailing.
            It may mean that the heat was coming from inside earlier, like you say below.

          • Bob Greenyer

            ooo. we’ll all have to look at the data more later and see if this is a candidate for ash analysis.

  • Bob Greenyer

    From me356

    “There are clearly visible temperature oscillations on the left side.

    With bare eye it seems that right side is overheating locally at the top, but left has nice symmetric glow.

    I really can’t answer why left side has increased temperature by maybe 65°C.”

    since then the Left side when 80C higher than right… most of the rest of the experiment it was cooler by 40 ºC

    • Stephen

      K is hotter than R now i think

    • Mats002

      “Yes, I dont know what is this, but the heater will fail really soon. I can see that left side is much hotter while right is barely.”

      “I can’t hold the temperature too long as the resistance will be lower and lower -> current higher.”

      “I recommend just to lower the temperature slowly, else we can get more damage so the analysis will be not so easy. I am not sure but it looked like it was lava and heat was moving in the tube “

  • artefact

    HAD test coming soon. Temp will get down to 700C

  • Obvious

    Man, that is one tough tube!

  • Obvious

    Man, that is one tough tube!

  • Sanjeev

    Pressure is trailing the temp after the breach event.
    Bob would be happy to see this.

    • Sanjeev

      Shot.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Back from buying my daughters birthday present. What did I miss?

        • Sanjeev

          Pressure was leading the temp earlier, but after the “breach” its trailing.
          It may mean that the heat was coming from inside earlier, like you say below.

          • Bob Greenyer

            ooo. we’ll all have to look at the data more later and see if this is a candidate for ash analysis.

  • Curbina

    I’m sorry but I have not been following the test closely enough to understand what has happened, can any of you make an account of what happened? I understand the test is in risk of ending for a failure, is this true? There was any sign of potential excess heat or runaway reaction?

    • Bob Greenyer

      The test was a re-heat, to date we have not seen anything interesting in previous re-heats. The main purpose was to see if we could have a robust non-contact setup for data acquisition and live broadcasting for long term testing in readiness for me356s SiC cells.

      It allowed some snag finding and fixing.

      Having said that – the last day has been very interesting with lots to look into.

      • Curbina

        Thanks Bob, I read that something happened as a breach, or it was just apparent and the set up is still holding together?

        • Bob Greenyer

          we will only know in the autopsy. This cell has given a lot. It is still giving, but me356 has all the parts for his SiC now, and a platform and new understanding to test it.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Er… what is this about.

    • Ged

      Very curious… If not an error of the data logging, it suggests something occurred with the lattice to release gas, and also gave off a large burst of heat that decayed slowly. Any chemical stuff should be long burned off by days of much higher temps, but could be some sort of physical rearrangement of the solid fuel material, or could suggest a burst of LENR activity if all else ruled out. It’s odd behavior, if not a data error.

      • Bob Greenyer

        I agree, I am learning a lot and enjoying the various twists and turns from this run.

    • Sanjeev

      Non-exponential decay. But we don’t know what the power looked like.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Er… what is this about.

    • Ged

      Very curious… If not an error of the data logging, it suggests something occurred with the lattice to release gas, and also gave off a large burst of heat that decayed slowly. Any chemical stuff should be long burned off by days of much higher temps, but could be some sort of physical rearrangement of the solid fuel material, or could suggest a burst of LENR activity if all else ruled out. It’s odd behavior, if not a data error.

      Edit: Just caught up with the stuff below–VERY interesting behavior indeed, I can’t explain this yet. A inward crack makes little sense as pressure is still positive compared to atmospheric. Mysterious, but interesting! Who knew this longer run would yield such fun ;).

      • Bob Greenyer

        I agree, I am learning a lot and enjoying the various twists and turns from this run.

    • Sanjeev

      Non-exponential decay. But we don’t know what the power looked like.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Section 16

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFPjnkXtfAc

    So the plan is to raise to 900 really slowly and see if L gets much hotter than R.

    What happens may tell us something.

  • Stephen

    Are we getting slightly elevated courts at moment?

    Seemed to be elevated to high 30s for à while nut now iTS bank to normal. I hope tonights test Goes Well.

  • Stephen

    Are we getting slightly elevated courts at moment?

    Edit: Seemed to be elevated to high 30s for à while even 40 now and then but now its back to normal so i guess its normal variation. I hope tonights test Goes Well.

  • Mats002

    Godmorning everyone! We have a new day here in Europe and the GS is a tuff little guy still going strong after 87 KWH of input energy, might hit 100 KWH today!

    I am thinking of the overall system summary. Input energy is clear, the problem is to define output energy from heat and we all now the answer to that: calorimetry.

    But heat-out should be possible to use for a ballpark estimation of energy-out and I am curious on such an estimation. Heat output is unevenly distributed over the GS device and also over time (we have seen a hotspot go from side to side for example) but the Optris Pi 160 can integrate this and I wonder if it is possible to have a summary reading from Optris Pi 160 for integrated heat as one number of average degree C over all time and all surface defined as the GS?

    And if we have such a number – how to calculate to an estimate of energy out? I know this is part of the Lugano report and has been discussed a lot here at ECW so all that is needed is that avarage number of C.

    I know very well this is not a reliable method to *know* output energy, it is more of an interesting exercise until true calorimetri data is available from future experiments.

  • Mats002

    Godmorning everyone! We have a new day here in Europe and the GS is a tuff little guy still going strong after 87 KWH of input energy, might hit 100 KWH today!

    I am thinking of the overall system summary. Input energy is clear, the problem is to define output energy from heat and we all now the answer to that: calorimetry.

    But heat-out should be possible to use for a ballpark estimation of energy-out and I am curious on such an estimation. Heat output is unevenly distributed over the GS device and also over time (we have seen a hotspot go from side to side for example) but the Optris Pi 160 can integrate this and I wonder if it is possible to have a summary reading from Optris Pi 160 for integrated heat as one number of average degree C over all time and all surface defined as the GS?

    And if we have such a number – how to calculate to an estimate of energy out? I know this is part of the Lugano report and has been discussed a lot here at ECW so all that is needed is that avarage number of C.

    I know very well this is not a reliable method to *know* output energy, it is more of an interesting exercise until true calorimetri data is available from future experiments.

  • timycelyn

    Have just been reviewing Padua cell reheat no17 on U tube. Surely we are looking at an LENR event there – around half way through the LHS (the live side) is around 100C hotter than the RHS (900 vs 800C). It appears that the power is slowly being turned down through the latter half, so the RHS goes cold first, then the LHS starts to follow it down. Watching the LHS go cold is really interesting, you can see the size of the ‘anomalous area’ decrease around 8:29:00

    Around 400C they swap back, with the RHS being approx 50C hotter than the LHS, which is reminiscent of the heat up of the cell over previous days.

    • Sanjeev

      As far as I know, both sides are “live” sides. There is no control side without fuel.

      • Sanjeev

        The resistance has increased from about 9 ohm at the start to 13 ohm at this time. Does this mean that there was no short and the heater is actually ok ?

        • Mats002

          My guess is that the wire partly melted giving different wire diameter at different locations and a more narrow diameter of wire will give more resistance at that place (higher ohm).

          The wire is coated with some material that hold it in Place, if that was not the case the wire should have been cut now.

          • Sanjeev

            Thinning of diameter explains the resistance rise.

            Another thing I notice now (t~10:00 in video) at P=180W
            R=550, L=400, Hot=570,
            From Ecco’s graph (posted below 2 days ago)
            At same power, R=450, L=430, Hot=470

            About 100C hotter at same power. Why?

          • Mats002

            Which video are you looking at? The current video is part 17: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXe_LEI5bmQ

          • Sanjeev

            Yes #17, the values are at t=10:00

          • Mats002

            One possible explanation is that there were a small breach and leak, giving another pressure inside, then sealed again. If so maybe Pin vs T behavour change, I don’t now.
            If so this should have happen at the high temp uncontrolled state 12 hours ago. Check if pressure is the same for the same stable T now.

          • Sanjeev

            No way to compare pressure. Although the difference is now not so much from previous values. (At t=11:00, difference is 50C, halved)

          • Mats002

            Hot spots can be due to melted and changed wire resistance. I wonder if the IR Temp at plotly is taken at wire or between? It should be between, isn’t the K area free from wire and used for TC?

          • Sanjeev

            Its aimed at K area, I guess. No wire there. But the temp I compared are at different points.

      • timycelyn

        Take a look at the RHS in the video stream – towards it’s end it is labelled “No Fuel”. Also, that’s how I remember the Padua trial (altho to my shame I haven’t gone back to look…)

        • Stephen

          Are we sure that there was à leak from outside originally? It seemed to me that it happend at the same time as the heat started to was transferring to the left side. The gas pressure went to + 8 bar well above atmospheric at 0. I wonder if actually it was internal. If there was a plug of material in the right side of the device maybe was gas trapped in the left side with no or little fuel. The pressure sensor would measure the gas in the right hand side. Perhaps as the temperature goes up the plug of material melts or vaporises or loosens enough to move so that the gas from the right hand side could pass. This would increase the pressure in the right hand side as seen and due to the change in volume and the initially lower temp of the left side result in a slight decrease in temperature at the time of th event as seen. Perhaps the change in pressure or redistribution of gas triggered the heating in the left hand side some how. When the device cools down perhaps the plug reforms ts seal.

          • Mats002

            So micro Ni powder can be packed by hand giving a H2 gas tight chamber? I don’t think so. Or this mystery plug was created by heat in the Padua run? Sounds far fetch to me.

            More possible is a breach-and-seal thing happened at high temp and at a transient of high pressure (which might not have been picked up by the pressure sensor), but this is just guessing.

            A breach-and-seal thing can be tested by compare of pressure vs temp before and after the event-of-breach (if it ever happened) I think.

          • Mats002

            100 KWH input energy just passed.

          • Stephen

            Good point about the H2. I agree it seems unlikely… I was originally wondering if the sintered nickel produced in Padua could form a sealed plug but I’m not an expert on materials. Just now I was wondering about other atmospheric gasses apart from Hydrogen but I suppose all these should have been absorbed already in Padua.

          • Mats002

            H is the smallest of atoms and H2 is the hardest of all gases to contain as I understand.

          • Stephen

            Yup I remember the discussions on sealing the the device and also Axil Axil explanation for capturing Rydberg Hydrogen in a balloon that relied on this property

        • Sanjeev

          “No fuel” area is where there are spacers, its on both sides.
          But better to confirm with Bob, I’m recalling whatever I can from the memory.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Recently asked me356 to move the geiger counter closer to the cell.

            shortly after – we had the highest readings of the whole run as far as I know 46-48 CPM

          • Sanjeev

            That makes it a good candidate for ash analysis.

          • Mats002

            Sanjeev, can you please describe what readings of 46-48 CPM at close range mean or tell us in this context?

          • Sanjeev

            Can mean some kind of radiation from the hot reactor. But its still too small to be sure. The normal was 30-35 cpm max.

          • Mats002

            Yes but after 100 KWH of energy in, something might radiate a little, but I have no clue why and what, and what is the distance for halfing the intensity? Just moving it closer can be the difference in readings?

          • Sanjeev

            Just heating it should not produce radiation, unless its lenr. I’m no expert, so let see what the report says.

          • Bob Greenyer
          • Bob Greenyer

            From me356

            “Today there was a moment, when I started the cooling process, but hot spot on the left side didn’t changed temperature for long time as it was powered by something else. Everything including average of L decreased temperature by more than 100°C.

            So there were really interesting phenomenons, but we can’t still be sure what really happened.

            Cell is maybe little bit bent, wire at the ends seems to be good. There are no cracks visible. So it looks like before the run.”

          • Stephen

            Should be great data in this test.

            i wonder if the drop in current was a transient effect (due to the hot spot or other reason) or permanent? Was the power still supplied during the cool down if so I suppose it was for sure a permanent failure? will applying a small current after the test will show anything?

          • Sanjeev

            Yes the hot spot was strange, glowing like an LED placed inside the tube. The whole tube was dark otherwise.
            I’d like to see the outer covers removed. Is there a defect in heater wire at that exact spot? Or after removing the heater, is there something on the reactor at that spot?

          • Ged

            Love to see a graph of that moment based on the Optrics.

          • Obvious

            If you are getting only peak 48 CPM, then the detector is terribly insensitive and may miss what you are looking for. I am used to around 250 CPS as a normal background.
            Please confirm at some point that the detector can tell the difference between basalt and granite. If it cannot, then I doubt it will see anything until it is too late.

          • Bob Greenyer

            He had his own microsievert detector that he noted at one point was high

          • Obvious

            Most detectors are designed to detect dangerous levels of radioactivity fairly effectively. But if you are looking for a weak signal, then perhaps at some point a much more sensitive scintilometer should be employed. There will be much more noise, which is unavoidable. At around 30 CPM, maybe 500 times more natural gammas are passing through the present detector unnoticed than are occurring. An increase of 100 CPS would only give 1.7 more CPM, well within the fluctuation of the present meter, and yet would be a significant increase over background.
            In other words, the present detector may be fine for safety purposes, but may not be sensitive enough to detect a weak but significant increase in radiation due to a reaction, if there is any.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Alan Goldwater, Bob Higgins and Mathieu Valat have scintillators.

            me356 does not – yet

          • Obvious

            Cool. It was just a suggestion for further testing. A good scint isn’t cheap, especially if you want a live computer friendly output channel.

      • Mats002

        Yes both are live sides, Alan said that in the youtube chat yesterday night I recall.
        Can be verified if the chat is still there to see.

  • timycelyn

    Have just been reviewing Padua cell reheat no17 on U tube. Surely we are looking at an LENR event there – around half way through the LHS (the live side) is around 100C hotter than the RHS (900 vs 800C). It appears that the power is slowly being turned down through the latter half, so the RHS goes cold first, then the LHS starts to follow it down. Watching the LHS go cold is really interesting, you can see the size of the ‘anomalous area’ decrease around 8:29:00

    Around 400C they swap back, with the RHS being approx 50C hotter than the LHS, which is reminiscent of the heat up of the cell over previous days.

    • Sanjeev

      As far as I know, both sides are “live” sides. There is no control side without fuel.

      • timycelyn

        Take a look at the RHS in the video stream – towards it’s end it is labelled “No Fuel”. Also, that’s how I remember the Padua trial (altho to my shame I haven’t gone back to look…)

        • Sanjeev

          “No fuel” area is where there are spacers, its on both sides.
          But better to confirm with Bob, I’m recalling whatever I can from the memory.

      • Mats002

        Yes both are live sides, Alan said that in the youtube chat yesterday night I recall.
        Can be verified if the chat is still there to see.

  • Sanjeev

    Pressure is negative, shows no signs of a leak. Perhaps the reactor is fine, and ready for a quick re-heat. We saw interesting behavior at 1200C (outside).

  • Sanjeev

    Pressure is negative, shows no signs of a leak. Perhaps the reactor is fine, and ready for a quick re-heat. We saw interesting behavior at 1200C (outside).

  • Sanjeev

    The resistance has increased from about 9 ohm at the start to 13 ohm at this time. Does this mean that there was no short and the heater is actually ok ?

    • Mats002

      My guess is that the wire partly melted giving different wire diameter at different locations and a more narrow diameter of wire will give more resistance at that place (higher ohm).

      The wire is coated with some material that hold it in Place, if that was not the case the wire should have been cut now.

      • Sanjeev

        Thinning of diameter explains the resistance rise.

        Another thing I notice now (t~10:00 in video) at P=180W
        R=550, L=400, Hot=570,
        From Ecco’s graph (posted below 2 days ago)
        At same power, R=450, L=430, Hot=470

        About 100C hotter at same power. Why?

        • Mats002

          Which video are you looking at? The current video is part 17: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXe_LEI5bmQ

          • Sanjeev

            Yes #17, the values are at t=10:00

        • Mats002

          One possible explanation is that there were a small breach and leak, giving another pressure inside, then sealed again. If so maybe Pin vs T behavour change, I don’t now.
          If so this should have happen at the high temp uncontrolled state 12 hours ago. Check if pressure is the same for the same stable T now.

          • Sanjeev

            No way to compare pressure. Although the difference is now not so much from previous values. (At t=11:00, difference is 50C, halved)
            Edit: Its back to old values now and the left side has “come online”, it looks like the reactor 2 days ago, as if nothing happened.

        • Mats002

          Hot spots can be due to melted and changed wire resistance. I wonder if the IR Temp at plotly is taken at wire or between? It should be between, isn’t the K area free from wire and used for TC?

          • Sanjeev

            Its aimed at K area, I guess. No wire there. But the temp I compared are at different points.

  • Stephen

    Are we sure that there was à leak from outside originally? It seemed to me that it happend at the same time as the heat was transferring to the left side. The gas pressure went to + 8 PSI well above atmospheric at 0. I wonder if actually it was internal. If there was a plug of material in the right side of the device maybe was gas trapped in the left side with no or little fuel. The pressure sensor would measure the gas in the right hand side. Perhaps as the temperature goes up the plug of material melts or vaporises or loosens enough to move so that the gas from the right hand side could pass. This would increase the pressure in the right hand side as seen and due to the change in volume and the initially lower temp of the left side result in a slight decrease in temperature at the time of th event as seen. Perhaps the change in pressure or redistribution of gas triggered the heating in the left hand side some how. When the device cools down perhaps the plug reforms ts seal.

    • Mats002

      So micro Ni powder can be packed by hand giving a H2 gas tight chamber? I don’t think so. Or this mystery plug was created by heat in the Padua run? Sounds far fetch to me.

      More possible is a breach-and-seal thing happened at high temp and at a transient of high pressure (which might not have been picked up by the pressure sensor), but this is just guessing.

      A breach-and-seal thing can be tested by compare of pressure vs temp before and after the event-of-breach (if it ever happened) I think.

      • Stephen

        Good point about the H2. I agree it seems unlikely… I was originally wondering if the sintered nickel produced in Padua could form a sealed plug but I’m not an expert on materials. Just now I was wondering about other atmospheric gasses apart from Hydrogen but I suppose all these should have been absorbed already in Padua.

        • Mats002

          H is the smallest of atoms and H2 is the hardest of all gases to contain as I understand.

          • Stephen

            Yup I remember the discussions on sealing the the device and also Axil Axil explanation for capturing Rydberg Hydrogen in a balloon that relied on this property

  • Mats002

    100 KWH input energy just passed.

  • Mats002

    Thanks to Ecco Yumi, an updated version of the graph, keep in mind that new temps likely aren’t accurate but one possible interpretation is L and R and Hotspot is different (all over the place) because the wire has been messed up. But blue (K) is NOT over a wire and indicates higher yield: http://i.imgur.com/IIxyqHW.png

    • Sanjeev

      Great job Ecco.
      That’s what I was trying to show. There re-re-heat is not an exact repeat.
      Below 300C, its like a redistribution of heat, but above that its higher temp overall for same power inputs.

  • Mats002

    Thanks to Ecco Yumi, an updated version of the graph, keep in mind that new temps likely aren’t accurate but one possible interpretation is L and R and Hotspot is different (all over the place) because the wire has been messed up. But blue (K) is NOT over a wire and indicates higher yield: http://i.imgur.com/IIxyqHW.png

    • Sanjeev

      Great job Ecco.
      That’s what I was trying to show. The re-re-heat is not an exact repeat.
      Below 300C, its like a redistribution of heat, but above that its higher temp overall for same power inputs.

  • Stephen

    It seems that the hot spot is getting hotter as the rest is cooling now

    • Mats002

      Yes it is very visible in the youtube video now, can be a wire burning out, wi will now soon I guess…

      • Sanjeev

        May break there.

    • Sanjeev

      This clearly shows how wrong the idea of using just one TC is. If a hot spot occurs near the TC, it can be mistaken as a sign of excess heat. The calibration will not show any excess as the hot spot may not appear in same place or may not appear at all.

      • Mats002

        Yes and that would explain why many LENR experiments (but not all) is VUCA as Peter Gluck talked about.

        • Bob Greenyer

          When PROPERLY used (with correctly selected emissivity), thermal imaging is a good screening tool, It gives real time, recordable understanding of what is going on – it is also importantly non-contact.

          As Sanjeev has said, if it shows nothing more, This long run shows that single TC tests are next to meaningless. Harsh, but true.

          The best ways would be

          Properly done mass flow calorimetry
          Properly done Thermal imaging

          As Jean-Paul Biberian is finding, it is difficult to do MFC at these temperatures in a sealed container. Denis Vasilenko’s approach is good in that, whilst there is significant thermal losses – you can still use a range of sealing methods without them failing.

          The most certain would be detection of non-naturally occurring isotopic changes from fuel to ash.

          • Stephen

            some spikes in temperature at 15:08 and 15:11 was that when the GC was moved? I guess it was a hand in front of the sensor or something

          • Mats002

            Agree fule-ash isotopic shift is the best Evidence for LENR, but you want some strong indication of a good result BEFORE you decide to send samples for that kind of analysis.

            The strong indication can be assessed with MFC or IF clear XH as in COP > 2 for a longer time is happening, thermal imaging is good-enough for a correct decision about fuel-ash analysis.

            The Padua GS2 has been very well cooked, no doubt about it. But did it produce COP > 1?

            The captured datafiles will tell and if they tell COP like 1.1 then the desicion is not easy.

            The higher gamma readings of the geiger counter at the end of the run (after moved close to the device) also tell something but I do not have the knowledge to know what that means in this respect.

  • Stephen

    It seems that the hot spot is getting hotter as the rest is cooling now

    • Mats002

      Yes it is very visible in the youtube video now, can be a wire burning out, wi will now soon I guess…

      • Sanjeev

        May break there.

    • Sanjeev

      This clearly shows how wrong the idea of using just one TC is. If a hot spot occurs near the TC, it can be mistaken as a sign of excess heat. The calibration may not show any excess as the hot spot may not appear in same place or may not appear at all.

      • Mats002

        Yes and that would explain why many LENR experiments (but not all) is VUCA as Peter Gluck talked about.

        • Bob Greenyer

          When PROPERLY used (with correctly selected emissivity), thermal imaging is a good screening tool, It gives real time, recordable understanding of what is going on – it is also importantly non-contact.

          As Sanjeev has said, if it shows nothing more, This long run shows that single TC tests are next to meaningless. Harsh, but true.

          The best ways would be

          Properly done mass flow calorimetry
          Properly done Thermal imaging

          As Jean-Paul Biberian is finding, it is difficult to do MFC at these temperatures in a sealed container. Denis Vasilenko’s approach is good in that, whilst there is significant thermal losses – you can still use a range of sealing methods without them failing.

          The most certain would be detection of non-naturally occurring isotopic changes from fuel to ash.

          • Mats002

            Agree fule-ash isotopic shift is the best Evidence for LENR, but you want some strong indication of a good result BEFORE you decide to send samples for that kind of analysis.

            The strong indication can be assessed with MFC or IF clear XH as in COP > 2 for a longer time is happening, thermal imaging is good-enough for a correct decision about fuel-ash analysis.

            The Padua GS2 has been very well cooked, no doubt about it. But did it produce COP > 1?

            The captured datafiles will tell and if they tell COP like 1.1 then the desicion is not easy.

            The higher gamma readings of the geiger counter at the end of the run (after moved close to the device) also tell something but I do not have the knowledge to know what that means in this respect.

  • Mats002

    Wire burned out just now.
    What a show and SO much learned, thanks!!!
    And extra kudos to me356 behind the scene, this control system is a success I Think.

    • Bob Greenyer

      As this system matures – it will allow people to tellnet in – imagine reserving a slot and doing your own test on a live experiment. That is my vision for Live Open Science

      • Mats002

        Great vision, I can see experiments in space and other planets remote controlled and discussed in (almost) real time.

      • timycelyn

        bob, could u clarify one thing for me, is this a ‘single’ glowstick (ie fuel all the way through) or a ‘double ended’ one (one end dummy, one end live). From the discussion here it seems to be the former, but I just wnted to be certain….

        • Bob Greenyer

          It is fuel on both sides, estimated to run from the left of the “L” zone to at least the “R” of the right zone.

  • Mats002

    Wire burned out just now.
    What a show and SO much learned, thanks!!!
    And extra kudos to me356 behind the scene, this control system is a success I Think.

    • Bob Greenyer

      As this system matures – it will allow people to tellnet in – imagine reserving a slot and doing your own test on a live experiment. That is my vision for Live Open Science.

      need to refine the data upload so that can capture and display all data as it happens. HUGNet is fantastic for that – so maybe can re-purpose the code and or combine approaches.

      • Mats002

        Great vision, I can see experiments in space and other planets remote controlled and discussed in (almost) real time.

      • timycelyn

        bob, could u clarify one thing for me, is this a ‘single’ glowstick (ie fuel all the way through) or a ‘double ended’ one (one end dummy, one end live). From the discussion here it seems to be the former, but I just wnted to be certain….

        • Bob Greenyer

          It is fuel on both sides, estimated to run from the left of the “L” zone to at least the “R” of the right zone.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Recently asked me356 to move the geiger counter closer to the cell.

    shortly after – we had the highest readings of the whole run as far as I know 46-48 CPM

    • Sanjeev

      That makes it a good candidate for ash analysis.

      • Mats002

        Sanjeev, can you please describe what readings of 46-48 CPM at close range mean or tell us in this context?

        • Sanjeev

          Can mean some kind of radiation from the hot reactor. But its still too small to be sure. The normal was 30-35 cpm max.
          If there is radiation, there can be transmutations and so can appear in ash analysis.

          • Mats002

            Yes but after 100 KWH of energy in, something might radiate a little, but I have no clue why and what, and what is the distance for halfing the intensity? Just moving it closer can be the difference in readings?

          • Sanjeev

            Just heating it should not produce radiation, unless its lenr. I’m no expert, so let see what the report says.

          • Bob Greenyer
    • Obvious

      If you are getting only peak 48 CPM, then the detector is terribly insensitive and may miss what you are looking for. I am used to around 250 CPS as a normal background.
      Please confirm at some point that the detector can tell the difference between basalt and granite. If it cannot, then I doubt it will see anything until it is too late.

      • Bob Greenyer

        He had his own microsievert detector that he noted at one point was high

        • Obvious

          Most detectors are designed to detect dangerous levels of radioactivity fairly effectively. But if you are looking for a weak signal, then perhaps at some point a much more sensitive scintillometer should be employed. There will be much more noise, which is unavoidable. At around 30 CPM, maybe 500 times more natural gammas are passing through the present detector unnoticed than are occurring. An increase of 100 CPS would only give 1.7 more CPM, well within the fluctuation of the present meter, and yet would be a significant increase over background.
          In other words, the present detector may be fine for safety purposes, but may not be sensitive enough to detect a weak but significant increase in radiation due to a reaction, if there is any.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Alan Goldwater, Bob Higgins and Mathieu Valat have scintillators.

            me356 does not – yet

          • Obvious

            Cool. It was just a suggestion for further testing. A good scint isn’t cheap, especially if you want a live computer friendly output channel.

  • Stephen

    some spikes in temperature to 34 or 35 deg C at 15:08 and 15:11 was that when the GC was moved? I guess it was a hand in front of the sensor or something

  • Bob Greenyer

    From me356

    “Today there was a moment, when I started the cooling process, but hot spot on the left side didn’t changed temperature for long time as it was powered by something else. Everything including average of L decreased temperature by more than 100°C.

    So there were really interesting phenomenons, but we can’t still be sure what really happened.

    Cell is maybe little bit bent, wire at the ends seems to be good. There are no cracks visible. So it looks like before the run.”

    • Stephen

      Great work, should be great data in this test.

      i wonder if the drop in current was a transient effect (due to the hot spot or other reason) or permanent? Was the power still supplied during the cool down if so I suppose it was for sure a permanent failure? will applying a small current after the test will show anything?

    • Sanjeev

      Yes the hot spot was strange, glowing like an LED placed inside the tube. The whole tube was dark otherwise.
      I’d like to see the outer covers removed. Is there a defect in heater wire at that exact spot? Or after removing the heater, is there something on the reactor at that spot?

      • James Andrew Rovnak

        The hot spot moved from side to side during the long run. Thought it might be (ssm) LENR trying to take hold & a reversing current thru coil would help initiate & control & expand local spot. Will be interesting if something physical with the coil was found. Magic thought coil actually melted in some spots. IMHO Jim Liked Eccos finite element anaysis of B field around fuel element also!

    • Ged

      Love to see a graph of that moment based on the Optrics.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Post run in-situ images posted.

    http://goo.gl/a3Rdw5

  • Bob Greenyer

    Post run in-situ images posted.

    http://goo.gl/a3Rdw5