MFMP and Me356 Testing — Monday, May 29 (New Live Test Started)

Here’s a new thread for another day of testing by the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project who are going again to visit Me356. From the testing so far, there has been no clear evidence that Me356 has a working LENR reactor. Me356 has posted some comments on the previous thread explaining that he has been working over the last day (when the MFMP were taking a break), hoping to get something ready for today that will work better.

A new video from the MFMP has been posted on Facebook, made as they are driving to Me356’s place — see here: https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/videos/1539545506076143/

They say that Me356 has told them that he won’t be able to use an earlier reactor for testing today, so I assume they will be working with the reactor they used on Friday and Saturday, perhaps after Me356 has made some modifications. I’ll add more info in this post as it is made available today.

MFMP have posted a couple of new videos today; one showing a new ground attachment, and one showing the flow of water supply following a fix of a pump by Me356.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYHw58mark4&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFvnMzfzRS8&feature=youtu.be

The latest update from Bob Greenyer: “Testing dummy reactor now as heat source for exchanger to characterise the thermal losses in the mass flow calorimetry.”

Live data feed for test that has just started:

https://freeboard.io/board/MwMhlL

  • artefact

    “11:23 UTC – starting a water flow test to see if it is smoother now after Me356 made a change to turn off a pressure pump.”

  • artefact

    “11:23 UTC – starting a water flow test to see if it is smoother now after Me356 made a change to turn off a pressure pump.”

  • Mike Henderson

    What I’d like to see:
    1) Evidence of ignition. (Visual glow, neutrons, gamma spectrum, EMF, sustained steam generation…)
    2) COP > 1.
    3) Continue the positive working relationship.

  • Mike Henderson

    What I’d like to see:
    1) Evidence of ignition. (Visual glow / Optris, neutrons, gamma spectrum, EMF, sustained steam generation…)
    2) COP > 1.
    3) Continue the positive working relationship.

  • justaskin

    I assume Me356 is with the MFMP team on site again today and so we won’t get any live video feed from the test, right?

  • cupid

    Once more into the breach, dear friends, once more.

  • PIKU

    bob,be patience. remember rossi´s bologna test it took about 4 hours from start before ssm started.good luck!

  • Bob Greenyer

    Test of flow regularity of supply water

    me356 identified that a pump to a boiler was the cause of the saw tooth irregularity in the AURA MFC test run 1.

    Looks nice and regular with this bypassed

    https://youtu.be/ZFvnMzfzRS8

  • Bob Greenyer

    Test of flow regularity of supply water

    me356 identified that a pump to a boiler was the cause of the saw tooth irregularity in the AURA MFC test run 1.

    Looks nice and regular with this bypassed

    https://youtu.be/ZFvnMzfzRS8

    • message from freeboard

      Someone in freeboard has mentioned possible air bubbles inside Sensus turbine to be one possible cause of low flow rate. Just in case that helps …

  • Bob Greenyer

    Grounding peg

    New ground attachment appears to have fixed grounding issues.

    https://youtu.be/yYHw58mark4

  • Bob Greenyer

    Grounding peg

    New ground attachment appears to have fixed grounding issues.

    https://youtu.be/yYHw58mark4

    • LesioQ

      A bucket of water into the ground would fix things further. It’s very dry down there …

      • Bob Greenyer

        It is 2m into the ground

        • 2 meter’s into dry ground does not give an effective earth.
          There is a need to check the earth ground loop impedance.
          A little salt with the water helps too.
          will rot the metal a little , which looks to be a length of steel tee section.
          A copper clad earth rod or two would have been a little better.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Testing dummy reactor now as heat source for exchanger to characterise the thermal losses in the mass flow calorimetry.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      It might be informative to repeat this short test with a lower flow rate, in order to see what happens at higher output temperatures.

  • artefact

    “12:00 UTC – me356 has agreed to give some ash samples from previous reactors for us to test, say with EDX or ICP MS”
    🙂

    • Bob Greenyer

      This is good news as, like with Suhas, it will give some indication if he has observed LENR in the past.

      • Mats002

        Hi Bob! Are you going for an active run of the reactor today or post-test only?

        • They will be attempting an active run soon (perhaps after pastries 🙂

          • georgehants

            A nice glass of Red would help it all run better, I think, ha

          • Mats002

            Mmm – think I have to get some too 🙂

          • Andreas Moraitis

            They should sacrifice one to Mr. Murphy.

          • US_Citizen71

            I think he prefers toast, butter side down. ; )

  • artefact

    “12:00 UTC – me356 has agreed to give some ash samples from previous reactors for us to test, say with EDX or ICP MS”
    🙂

    • Bob Greenyer

      This is good news as, like with Suhas, it will give some indication if he has observed LENR in the past.

      • Mats002

        Hi Bob! Are you going for an active run of the reactor today or post-test only?

        • simpleanswer

          active run

        • They will be attempting an active run soon (perhaps after pastries 🙂

          • georgehants

            A nice glass of Red would help it all run better, I think, ha

          • Mats002

            Mmm – think I have to get some too 🙂

          • Andreas Moraitis

            They should sacrifice one to Mr. Murphy.

          • US_Citizen71

            I think he prefers toast, butter side down. ; )

  • Bob Greenyer

    It is 2m into the ground

  • LesioQ

    A timestamp on Freeboard screen would be of value.

  • LesioQ

    Huge energy losses at Water Flow Test 6 … ?
    Will be a hot dungeon for You, guys.

  • nietsnie

    Their getting ready for the run now…

    • nietsnie

      Jeeze… I hate it when people misuse ‘their, they’re, there’. How embarrassing for them.

      • Mats002

        I know – have to think twice or more to get it right ^^

  • artefact

    “We are nearly ready, again. Bob is making a mask for his photographic film.
    Me356 is setting up the reactor and the control computer.”

    • “He started the pump and the control box”
      “Controller turned on.”

  • nietsnie

    Their getting ready for the run now…

    • nietsnie

      Jeeze… I hate it when people misuse ‘their, they’re, there’. How embarrassing for them.

      • Mats002

        I know – have to think twice or more to get it right ^^

  • artefact

    “We are nearly ready, again. Bob is making a mask for his photographic film.
    Me356 is setting up the reactor and the control computer.”

  • nietsnie

    Bob – don’t forget to reset COP Moving Avg.

  • nietsnie

    Bob – don’t forget to reset COP Moving Avg.

  • nietsnie

    What happened just now with the GCA-01C Geiger counter? It just registered a count of over 1.3 M. Hoping that is an instrumentation error…?

    • Mats002

      Dead battery on the GCA geiger counter… sourcing a new one

      • Mats002

        Done now

  • nietsnie

    What happened just now with the GCA-01C Geiger counter? It just registered a count of over 1.3 M. Hoping that is an instrumentation error…?

    • Mats002

      Dead battery on the GCA geiger counter… sourcing a new one

      • Mats002

        Done now

  • artefact

    “Me356 brought in a fire extinguisher” Safety first! 🙂

    • Mats002

      Wonder if that is a good sign or bad… 😉

      • nietsnie

        Won’t help with that mushroom cloud.

        • Mats002

          Or if it produces a black hole

  • artefact

    “Me356 brought in a fire extinguisher” Safety first! 🙂

    • Mats002

      Wonder if that is a good sign or bad… 😉

      • nietsnie

        Won’t help with that mushroom cloud.

        • Mats002

          Or if it produces a black hole

  • Bruce__H

    The excitement is high! But I would surprise me if 2 groups who have never collaborated before can meld together their systems and get them working well just over a couple of days. Empirical research doesn’t work like that. Even a measured COP of 10 today would not persuade me that there is real excess heat. Nor would a measured COP of 1 persuade me there is no excess heat.

    Regardless of whether today’s results are positive or negative, my hope is that this collaboration can be placed on a long term footing. I can see that every time the MPFP team have a measurement session they learn something so I hope that they get multiple cracks at the setup.

    Edit: This post was written before any of Monday’s results came out.

  • “Freshly prepared reactor is in place and hooked up.”

  • “Freshly prepared reactor is in place and hooked up.”

  • “He started the pump and the control box”
    “Controller turned on.”

  • artefact

    “Controller turned on”

  • artefact

    “Controller turned on”

  • Bob Greenyer

    Layout of MFC with dummy heater replacing heat source

    https://youtu.be/J3AGQWRhCEE

  • “Start button pressed 14:40 UTC”

    • “14:46 – The reactor is buzzing more than last run. Must have been changes to the heater.”

    • “[14]:49 Half way through start-up process, acording to Me356”

      • Mats002

        Sounds promising!

    • “The water flow shows small dips occasionally that we can correlate to household water usage events like flushing toilets. Still way better than the last test.”

  • Bob Greenyer

    Layout of MFC with dummy heater replacing heat source

    https://youtu.be/J3AGQWRhCEE

  • “Start button pressed 14:40 UTC”

    • “14:46 – The reactor is buzzing more than last run. Must have been changes to the heater.”

    • “[14]:49 Half way through start-up process, acording to Me356”

      • Mats002

        Sounds promising!

    • “The water flow shows small dips occasionally that we can correlate to household water usage events like flushing toilets. Still way better than the last test.”

  • Bob Greenyer

    Data streaming,

    Reactor in place

    First aid and fire extinguisher in place

    We are go on MFC Run 2

    • artefact

      I wish us all good luck

    • Mats002

      What is that?

      • Looks like a first-aid box.

        • nietsnie

          It’s for the earlier radiation burns.

    • SG

      Best wishes. Thank you to the remarkable dedication of the MFMP team, regardless of the results.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Data streaming,

    Reactor in place

    First aid and fire extinguisher in place

    We are go on MFC Run 2

    • artefact

      I wish us all good luck

    • Mats002

      What is that?

      • Looks like a first-aid box.

        • nietsnie

          It’s for the earlier radiation burns.

    • SG

      Best wishes. Thank you to the remarkable dedication of the MFMP team, regardless of the results.

  • Frederic Maillard

    cop 15 !?!

  • Jag Kaurah

    patience Jag patience

  • Jag Kaurah

    patience Jag patience

  • artefact

    “Looks like about 14:50 the steam finally hit the heat exchanger when the output temperature started to rise quickly.”

    • “14:56 – “Going to leave some time to stabilize and then move to another mode” – Me356”

      • artefact

        Instant COP is getting slowly better

        .. over 1 now..

        • artefact

          Dios mio!

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Pout now > Pin, after a phase of stabilization.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Ah, they changed the flow rate…

      • Interesting question by Bob Higgins in the dashboard:
        “[…]does his [me356] controller presently report he is getting a COP of 8 or does it agree with MFMP’s measure of COP.”

        • Bob Greenyer

          me356 has no measurement of COP and this was an untested reactor – until we started testing it

          • What is the controller doing then?
            On which information are its decisions based?
            It has to measure something or not?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Don’t know – we suspect internal pressure, temperature and feed pump flow rate and water pulse size

  • artefact

    “Looks like about 14:50 the steam finally hit the heat exchanger when the output temperature started to rise quickly.”

    • “14:56 – “Going to leave some time to stabilize and then move to another mode” – Me356”

      • artefact

        Instant COP is getting slowly better

        .. over 1 now..

        • artefact

          Dios mio!

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Pout now > Pin, after a phase of stabilization.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Ah, they changed the flow rate…

  • nietsnie

    Outlet temp is going up while power is staying roughly the same.

  • Mats002

    Up over 1 on instant now! It is climbing quite steady…

    • artefact

      output climbed higher the in was for a “long” time..

  • nietsnie

    Outlet temp is going up while power is staying roughly the same.

  • Mats002

    Up over 1 on instant now! It is climbing quite steady…

    • artefact

      output climbed higher the in was for a “long” time..

  • artefact

    “15:03 Changed the flow rate of the pump to the reactor”

    • Mats002

      COP Average should be ok anyway – it is hitting … !

      • Andreas Moraitis

        I think that was due to the altered flow.

        • Mats002

          It was very close to 1 now back to 0.97 but rising again…

          • Gerard McEk

            Questions to ME356:
            Based on your experience what do you expect of this test:
            1. COP will go up if this test is continued
            2. The COP will probably not increase
            3. The COP will stay on about 1

            Assuming the COP stays at about 1, will you be able to prepare a test that shows with 100% certainty a COP>2?
            If yes, how much time do you need?

          • me356

            Yesterday I have found that the reactor melted inside and at the end of day the driving resistance has shorted. It was found that used heater had an issue from manufacturing process.
            Today after couple of hours it was possible to extract the resistance and put there a new one.
            Unfortunately the old heater was melted and joined to the core which lead to big troubles during replacement. Due to this it caused even bigger hydrogen leak that was present from the beginning. So possible operation and performance was limited even more.

            1. No due to the major hydrogen leak. Only with frequent recharging.
            2. it will increase if the reactor will be flawless
            3. see 1 and 2.

            Yes, this was also planned. But this test had no certainty for absolutely anything.

          • SG

            Thank you for graciously hosting the MFMP team. I hope you will receive Bob again in the future once you have addressed these issues, and continue to press forward with opening your reactor up for scrutiny. There is no better trusted group of people in our community than the MFMP. And as LENRG mentioned, we will be in your corner as long as you agressively push for open verification.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Me356, just one speculative thought: Maybe the inner shell of your heat exchanger is a good IR reflector? That might be a reason for overheating the reactor core. You could reduce this effect by using a different material, or coating the inner surface with an IR-absorbing paint. In case that the paint would get too hot you could leave some free space between the reactor and the exchanger (heat transfer will be primarily radiative at elevated temperatures).

            Thanks again for your offer to the MFMP.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            To put it more clearly: By „inner shell“ I meant the part that points toward the reactor (actually an „outer shell“ if only the heat exchanger is considered).

          • Gerard McEk

            Me356, thank you for your answer. I am sure that you must be very disappointed, just like almost everybody following the LENR saga. I hope you will be able to prove with help of MFMP that you really master LENR soon.

  • artefact

    “15:03 Changed the flow rate of the pump to the reactor”

    • Mats002

      COP Average should be ok anyway – it is hitting … !

      • Andreas Moraitis

        I think that was due to the altered flow.

        • Mats002

          It was very close to 1 now back to 0.97 but rising again…

          Stable at 0.98 now…

  • artefact

    Now input over 1000W

  • artefact

    Now input over 1000W

  • Gerard McEk

    There was a moment that P-out>P-in, why didn’t the COP move from zero?

  • Gerard McEk

    There was a moment that P-out>P-in, why didn’t the COP move from zero?
    What does omega mean?
    What scale belongs to the outlet temperature?

  • Mats002

    1! – and avarage COP still rising!

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Input power reduced. Better look at the “Total Excess Energy Estimate”.

      • Mats002

        I know that’s where we will find break-even but average over 1 is a milestone so far. It’s fun!

        • Andreas Moraitis

          It’s still a temporary value, influenced by the thermal inertia of the system and possible changes in the settings.

  • Mats002

    1! – and avarage COP still rising!

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Input power reduced. Better look at the “Total Excess Energy Estimate”.

      • Mats002

        I know that’s where we will find break-even but average over 1 is a milestone so far. It’s fun!

        • Andreas Moraitis

          It’s still a temporary value, influenced by the thermal inertia of the system and possible changes in the settings.

  • Bob Greenyer

    me356 shares a range of ‘ash’ samples from previous research

    https://steemit.com/science/@mfmp/me356-shares-a-range-of-ash-samples-from-previous-research

    • LION

      BOB this is great, tongue wigglers can say what they like but the samples will speak for themselves. Congratulations to me356, everyone who makes a step forward helps everyone else too.

  • Karl Venter

    cop going up faster now?
    any reason
    looking at freebord

  • Bob Greenyer

    me356 shares a range of ‘ash’ samples from previous research

    https://steemit.com/science/@mfmp/me356-shares-a-range-of-ash-samples-from-previous-research

    • LION

      BOB this is great, tongue wigglers can say what they like but the samples will speak for themselves. Congratulations to me356, everyone who makes a step forward helps everyone else too.

  • Karl Venter

    cop going up faster now?
    any reason
    looking at freebord

  • pelgrim108

    Why is the power reading on freeboard not following Ohm’s law?
    Anybody know this?

    • Bob Greenyer

      It is AC – Phase angle etc.

      Follow the two power analysers

      • pelgrim108

        Ok, I understand. Thanks.

      • Instant COP above 2 for about 40 seconds!
        The reactor seems to be getting ready now!
        Keep going like this!

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Input power has dropped again. If they would switch it off, the instant ‘COP’ would get infinite (or maybe the software would crash). However, this does not mean anything.

          If the COP would rise over 1 after an equilibrium phase, without any changes in input power or flow rate, there might be something going on.

          • Yes, but the ouput power stayed the same for minutes, while input was slowly decreased…

          • Ged

            Yeah, and the averaged COP is slowly growing too, as is the excess energy calculation. Much better than last time at least, and seems promising!

          • nietsnie

            Excess Energy has dropped over time. Forty minutes or so ago it was above -0.2 (in the -0.19’s). We’re not gaining ground on it longer term.

          • nietsnie

            At any rate, still a ways away from COP of 10.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            It would be good if the total excess estimate had been included in the plotly diagram.

          • nietsnie

            Yes.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Still possible due to thermal inertia, I think. Difficult to analyze, though, if the system is not fully calibrated.

        • Mats002

          It’s like playing the roulette – you win some and loose some but in the long run the bank win and you lose money…

          • nietsnie

            Can anyone explain why the COP Moving Average has been above 1 for over an hour and yet the Total Excess Energy has slowly lost ground over the same period of time? That doesn’t make sense to me.

          • Mats002

            I thought the same. One explanation is that most of the loss was made during startup. If you take away the first 30 minutes or so I think it should be positive overall. Add to that thermal losses from control box, reactor and heat exchanger and the COP should be even better. But we should also account for the error bars in the total system to at least +/- 10% so it is hard to tell. It is tantalizing.

          • US_Citizen71

            The moving average does drop below 1 just not for long intervals. The TEE value is decreasing but ever so slowly. So COP is something like .9999

          • nietsnie

            Oh, I see COPMA is below 1 now. I guess I just hadn’t looked while that was happening.

        • Jag Kaurah

          Looks like the reactor is starting to work

          • It’s deluding.
            As long as the “Total Excess Energy Estimate” decreases (going deeper into the negative) there is still more energy put into the device than came out.

            The ouput energy is very well oriented to the input energy, so it’s hard to say if there is something happening.
            Such effects can be related to the mass flow calorimeter and heat exchanger.

          • Zeddicus23

            The negative excess energy due to approximately 6% heat losses seems to be much larger than the “total excess energy estimate”. This suggests a COP which is actually somewhat larger than 1.

          • Hopefully, we have to wait for the data analysis afterwards.

          • Steve Albers

            Each power out peak is slightly higher than the last, as is the output temperature. Unsure though if the COP is rising much yet.

          • Ged

            Kinda like a lawnmower chugging at startup.

          • nietsnie

            Give it another pull, Ged.

          • Steve Albers

            Interesting spike just now in power out, bucking the trend, but then really dropped off.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Spot sample of power analysis

      https://youtu.be/gM3CSs6H2c8

  • pelgrim108

    Why is the power reading on freeboard not following Ohm’s law?
    Anybody know this?

    • Bob Greenyer

      It is AC – Phase angle etc.

      Follow the two power analysers

      • pelgrim108

        Ok, I understand. Thanks.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Spot sample of power analysis

      https://youtu.be/gM3CSs6H2c8

  • Has me356 already switched into the “other mode”?

  • Interesting question by Bob Higgins in the dashboard:
    “[…]does his [me356] controller presently report he is getting a COP of 8 or does it agree with MFMP’s measure of COP.”

    • Bob Greenyer

      me356 has no measurement of COP and this was an untested reactor – until we started testing it

      • What is the controller doing then?
        On which information are its decisions based?
        It has to measure something or not?

        • Bob Greenyer

          Don’t know – we suspect internal pressure, temperature and feed pump flow rate and water pulse size

  • Instant COP above 2 for about 40 seconds!
    The reactor seems to be getting ready now!
    Keep going like this!

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Input power has dropped again. If they would switch it off, the instant ‘COP’ would get infinite (or maybe the software would crash). However, this does not mean anything.

      If the COP would rise over 1 after an equilibrium phase, without any changes in input power or flow rate, there might be something going on.

      • Yes, but the ouput power stayed the same for minutes, while input was slowly decreased…

        • Ged

          Yeah, and the averaged COP is slowly growing too, as is the excess energy calculation. Much better than last time at least, and seems promising!

          • nietsnie

            Excess Energy has dropped over time. Forty minutes or so ago it was above -0.2 (in the -0.19’s). We’re not gaining ground on it longer term.

          • nietsnie

            At any rate, still a ways away from COP of 10.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            It would be good if the total excess estimate had been included in the plotly diagram.

          • nietsnie

            Yes.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Still possible due to thermal inertia, I think. Difficult to analyze, though, if the system is not fully calibrated.

    • Mats002

      It’s like playing the roulette – you win some and lose some but in the long run the bank win and you lose money…

  • Steve Albers

    Looks like the running COP has a slight periodicity since the timing of the 10 minute running average is just slightly longer than the time between the input power peaks and instant cop period.

  • Steve Albers

    Looks like the running COP has a slight periodicity since the timing of the 10 minute running average is just slightly longer than the time between the input power peaks and instant cop period. If the running average time period was reduced just slightly (e.g. to 9.5 minutes) it could dampen out this periodicity.

  • Mats002

    From the log:
    Right now the test is in that tantalizing but unclear performance level. It is better than Saturday when the system showed a 0.9 COP at relatively stable input levels, It is not a sufficiently strong signal, though, to be able to have confidence that there really is anything more coming out.

    • Ged

      Seems a good summary so far. If only there was a way to try to stimulate the reactor.

      • Mats002

        Kick it? ^^

        • Ged

          I like the cut of your jib.

        • nietsnie

          Spray a little ether in the carburetor. That’s what we used to do with my mom’s Morris Minor.

  • Mats002

    From the log:
    Right now the test is in that tantalizing but unclear performance level. It is better than Saturday when the system showed a 0.9 COP at relatively stable input levels, It is not a sufficiently strong signal, though, to be able to have confidence that there really is anything more coming out.

    • Ged

      Seems a good summary so far. If only there was a way to try to stimulate the reactor.

      • Mats002

        Kick it? ^^

        • Ged

          I like the cut of your jib.

        • nietsnie

          Spray a little ether in the carburetor. That’s what we used to do with my mom’s Morris Minor.

  • Steve Albers

    The last two blue neutron spikes correlate with the COP peaks, right at the end of the output power peaks.

  • Steve Albers

    The last two blue neutron spikes correlate with the COP peaks, right at the end of the output power peaks.

  • Jag Kaurah

    Looks like the reactor is starting to work

    • It’s deluding.
      As long as the “Total Excess Energy Estimate” decreases (going deeper into the negative) there is still more energy put into the device than came out.

      The ouput energy is very well oriented to the input energy, so it’s hard to say if there is something happening.
      Such effects can be related to the mass flow calorimeter and heat exchanger.

      • Zeddicus23

        The negative excess energy due to approximately 6% heat losses seems to be much larger than the “total excess energy estimate”. This suggests a COP which is actually somewhat larger than 1.

        • Hopefully, we have to wait for the data analysis afterwards.

    • Steve Albers

      Each power out peak is slightly higher than the last, as is the output temperature. Unsure though if the COP is rising much yet.

      • Ged

        Kinda like a lawnmower chugging at startup.

        • just watching

          Or like a slowly drifting ground voltage

        • nietsnie

          Give it another pull, Ged.

      • Steve Albers

        Interesting spike just now in power out, bucking the trend, but then really dropped off. Might mark the pump change mentioned in the blog.

  • VrLes Qhr

    So do we have Resonance ?! 😉

  • Mats002

    From the log:
    16:46 – changing the pump to a lower flow to run slightly hotter and make dry steam

    • Ged

      This shall be interesting.

    • Engineer48

      Hi Mats2,

      And how do they know when or if the reactor is generating dry / superheated steam?

      Need to measure reactor outlet steam pressure and steam temperature to know that. Can’t see that either is being measured.

      • Mats002

        Hi Eng,
        Don’t know answer to that, hope Bob can fill in some answers here when he gets time.

  • Mats002

    From the log:
    16:46 – changing the pump to a lower flow to run slightly hotter and make dry steam

    • Ged

      This shall be interesting.

    • Engineer48

      Hi Mats2,

      And how do they know when or if the reactor is generating dry / superheated steam?

      Need to measure reactor outlet steam pressure and steam temperature to know that. Can’t see that either is being measured.

      • Mats002

        Hi Eng,
        Don’t know answer to that, hope Bob can fill in some answers here when he gets time.

  • nietsnie

    Can anyone explain why the COP Moving Average has been above 1 for over an hour and yet the Total Excess Energy has slowly lost ground over the same period of time? That doesn’t make sense to me.

    • Mats002

      I thought the same. One explanation is that most of the loss was made during startup. If you take away the first 30 minutes or so I think it should be positive overall. Add to that thermal losses from control box, reactor and heat exchanger and the COP should be even better. But we should also account for the error bars in the total system to at least +/- 10% so it is hard to tell. It is tantalizing.

    • US_Citizen71

      The moving average does drop below 1 just not for long intervals. The TEE value is decreasing but ever so slowly. So COP is something like .9999

      • nietsnie

        Oh, I see COPMA is below 1 now. I guess I just hadn’t looked while that was happening.

  • Mats002

    Question to Bob/Me356:
    The fuel was not processed enough but do you consider that fuel is being further processed during this run and if so there is a chance for better performance the longer the run last?

  • Mats002

    Question to Bob/Me356:
    The fuel was not processed enough but do you consider that fuel is being further processed during this run and if so there is a chance for better performance the longer the run last?

  • Mats002

    Thanks to Can over at LENRForum for graphing COP without the first startup part:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cc92919cd0251a67bae312d95e03c24dd575729e8d8dee283c10c0c13846b958.png

    • nietsnie

      Bob, considering if the dummy heater has a known output, have you calculated how much heat is lost by the rig in the earlier test? That could be added into to total.

    • Rene

      Mats thanks. The charts indicate the medium and long term COP, within measurement precision limits, is not significant. No excess heat measured.

      • Mats002

        Q&A with Can:

        About the COP graph: MFMP Average (red line) goes over 1 while your blue calculation goes just below 1. Would you like to comment that please?

        For some reason the rolling average (both 5-minute – provided by MFMP – and 15-minute, but I also tried 30-minute with similar results) of the “instant” power out/in COP is giving ~10% higher values than the COP calculated using cumulative energy out/in, even after starting the calculation at a later time in the test. Since my excess energy calculation matches that also provided by MFMP, I think there could be something off with the instant COP values.

  • Mats002

    Thanks to Can over at LENRForum for graphing COP without the first startup part:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cc92919cd0251a67bae312d95e03c24dd575729e8d8dee283c10c0c13846b958.png

    • nietsnie

      Bob, considering if the dummy heater has a known output, have you calculated how much heat is lost by the rig in the earlier test? That could be added into to total.

    • Rene

      Mats thanks. The charts indicate the medium and long term COP, within measurement precision limits, is not significant. No excess heat measured.

      • Mats002

        Q&A with Can:

        About the COP graph: MFMP Average (red line) goes over 1 while your blue calculation goes just below 1. Would you like to comment that please?

        For some reason the rolling average (both 5-minute – provided by MFMP – and 15-minute, but I also tried 30-minute with similar results) of the “instant” power out/in COP is giving ~10% higher values than the COP calculated using cumulative energy out/in, even after starting the calculation at a later time in the test. Since my excess energy calculation matches that also provided by MFMP, I think there could be something off with the instant COP values.

  • Rene

    Moving average COP 1.06. To account for losses and precision of the setup, I would have to see a COP of 1.2 to be convince some minor LENR is happening. So, this indicates nothing significant happened.
    Was a free steam flow video ever taken?
    Leaving the testing equipment behind while the MFMP team goes to their next visit is a good idea. A lot has been learned about dirty electrical power, floating grounds, variable water inlet pressure, RFI affecting particle measuring apparatus. Basically, prior to today, I would not have high confidence in any claims about heat output and COP simply because the measurements could have been tainted by numerous interference sources. For however long the calibrated equipment is there and noise cleanup protocols are in place, I look forward to seeing what me356 can accomplish in getting his reactor(s) working. Maybe after Suhas tests the MFMP team can swing by Czechia if results warrant another look, time and funds permitting.

    • Ged

      The power cycling makes it a bit harder to tell what is happening too.

      • Rene

        The smoothed 15 minute running average clearly shows nothing significant is happening.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Rene,

          Agree.

          • Chapman

            deep sigh….

            I am saddened at the results, but incredibly impressed with the efforts of the MFMP team, as well as the real time analysis and feedback by YOU guys here on the forum. VERY enjoyable… Thanks.

          • Stephen Taylor

            Data analysis will take a while. Will be interesting to get MFMP’s thoughts.

          • Ged

            Could still be some interesting surprises hiding in the data that may help design future work.

  • Rene

    Moving average COP 1.06. To account for losses and precision of the setup, I would have to see a COP of 1.2 to be convince some minor LENR is happening. So, this indicates nothing significant happened.
    Was a free steam flow video ever taken?
    Leaving the testing equipment behind while the MFMP team goes to their next visit is a good idea. A lot has been learned about dirty electrical power, floating grounds, variable water inlet pressure, RFI affecting particle measuring apparatus. Basically, prior to today, I would not have high confidence in any claims about heat output and COP simply because the measurements could have been tainted by numerous interference sources. For however long the calibrated equipment is there and noise cleanup protocols are in place, I look forward to seeing what me356 can accomplish in getting his reactor(s) working. Maybe after Suhas tests the MFMP team can swing by Czechia if results warrant another look, time and funds permitting.

    • Ged

      The power cycling makes it a bit harder to tell what is happening too.

      • Rene

        The smoothed 15 minute running average clearly shows nothing significant is happening.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Rene,

          Agree.

          • Chapman

            deep sigh….

            I am saddened at the results, but incredibly impressed with the efforts of the MFMP team, as well as the real time analysis and feedback by YOU guys here on the forum. VERY enjoyable… Thanks.

  • Rene

    Bob, I recommend that the power-in values for the instantaneous COP readings should be offset by the measured reactor’s thermal time constant. That does require running a calibration pretest to determine the time constant, but it would stop or minimize the wild swings we see. At the very least, the moving average computations have to have an averaging window size twice that of the time constant.

    • Ged

      The peak to peak lag from the power cycling could be used to that end.

  • Rene

    Bob, I recommend that the power-in values for the instantaneous COP readings should be offset by the measured reactor’s thermal time constant. That does require running a calibration pretest to determine the time constant, but it would stop or minimize the wild swings we see. At the very least, the moving average computations have to have an averaging window size twice that of the time constant.

    • Ged

      The peak to peak lag from the power cycling could be used to that end.

    • Engineer48

      Rene,

      Knowing the mass flow rate, the inlet and outlet temps on the secondary side of the MFMP heat exchanger should provide a very good energy output figure. That figure will be smoothed by all the thermal mass of the entire system.

      I’m sure the 2 power meters can provide a good real time integration of the power delivered to the reactor. Just need a steady state situation for say 15 minutes to measure the COP.

      Fairly sure Me356 is adjusting every knob he can get his hands on to boost the COP, which makes looking at the data hard to do, because nothing stays constant for very long.

      For these old engineers eyes, there is no COP > 1 demonstrated so far.

  • Gerard McEk

    Questions to ME356:
    Based on your experience what do you expect of this test:
    1. COP will go up if this test is continued
    2. The COP will probably not increase
    3. The COP will stay on about 1

    Assuming the COP stays at about 1, will you be able to prepare a test that shows with 100% certainty a COP>2?
    If yes, how much time do you need?

    • me356

      Yesterday I have found that the reactor melted inside and at the end of day the driving resistance has shorted. It was found that used heater had an issue from manufacturing process.
      Today after couple of hours it was possible to extract the resistance and put there a new one.
      Unfortunately the old heater was melted and joined to the core which lead to big troubles during replacement. Due to this it caused even bigger hydrogen leak that was present from the beginning. So possible operation and performance was limited even more.

      1. No due to the major hydrogen leak. Only with frequent recharging.
      2. it will increase if the reactor will be flawless
      3. see 1 and 2.

      Yes, this was also planned. But this test had no certainty for absolutely anything.

      • SG

        Thank you for graciously hosting the MFMP team. I hope you will receive Bob again in the future once you have addressed these issues, and continue to press forward with opening your reactor up for scrutiny. There is no better trusted group of people in our community than the MFMP. And as LENRG mentioned, we will be in your corner as long as you agressively push for open verification.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Me356, just one speculative thought: Maybe the inner shell of your heat exchanger is a good IR reflector? That might be a reason for overheating the reactor core. You could reduce this effect by using a different material, or coating the inner surface with an IR-absorbing paint. In case that the paint would get too hot you could leave some free space between the reactor and the exchanger (heat transfer will be primarily radiative at elevated temperatures).

        Thanks again for your offer to the MFMP.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          To put it more clearly: By „inner shell“ I meant the part that points toward the reactor (actually an „outer shell“ if only the heat exchanger is considered).

      • Gerard McEk

        Me356, thank you for your answer. I am sure that you must be very disappointed, just like almost everybody following the LENR saga. I hope you will be able to prove with help of MFMP that you really master LENR soon.

  • “Time to pack it up.”

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Yes. Anyway, it’s not MFMP’s fault – they did an excellent job. Chapeau!

      • Mats002

        Applaus to both MFMP and Me356 – experiments beat discussions everytime!

        A LOT learned.

        • Ged

          Yep! Negative results are vitally important. And all this can be applied to their own work and the next stages with ECCO.

          • Mats002

            I am willing to get Me356 another chance. If there is another ‘fail’ of claims I think we learned how very skilled people can misinterpret COP measurements.

            ECCO next.

  • “Time to pack it up.”

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Yes. Anyway, it’s not MFMP’s fault – they did an excellent job. Chapeau!

      • Mats002

        Applaus to both MFMP and Me356 – experiments beat discussions everytime!

        A LOT learned.

        • Ged

          Yep! Negative results are vitally important. And all this can be applied to their own work and the next stages with ECCO.

          • Mats002

            I am willing to get Me356 another chance. If there is another ‘fail’ of claims I think we learned how very skilled people can misinterpret COP measurements.

            ECCO next.

    • Jerry Soloman

      WTG Poland

    • Steve D

      Disappointing. This means we have still yet to see any public demonstration of LENR and importantly under the watchful eye of MFMP et al. Rossi’s offerings are out of reach. I wonder if Parkhomov would be up to it?

      • sam

        Suhas is the one i am looking forward to MFMP testing.

  • Stephen Taylor

    Data analysis will take a while. Will be interesting to get MFMP’s thoughts.

    • Ged

      Could still be some interesting surprises hiding in the data that may help design future work.

  • Adam Lepczak

    Great job MFMP.
    As of now, data as measured by the testing team does not support me365’s claims of COP >1

    • Ged

      Definitely not, with this device. If there was a minor effect this last run, it wasn’t significant.

  • Adam Lepczak

    Great job MFMP.
    As of now, data as measured by the testing team does not support me365’s claims of COP >1

    • Ged

      Definitely not, with this device. If there was a minor effect this last run, it wasn’t significant.

  • radvar

    Question for me356:
    I can appreciate the desire for privacy while you work. However, I wonder if you would be willing to disclose your overall strategy in these efforts. Context can go a long way in interpreting perceptions. Along those lines: Are you planning to pursue major variants? Do you anticipate broader collaboration? Do you expect to publish at some point? Are you interested in commercializing your methods? Do you have other goals for the work?
    Do you have any time projections for such events?

  • Mats002

    OT: While waiting for aftermath and ECCO test and because Frank et al busted the ORBO by testing it, I suggest buy a Keshe Home Unit kit to test for €176. There are people out there who bought, build and claim to have overunity. It is electricity in and out, no calorimetry needed:

    https://www.dva.si/magrav-kits.html#ready

    Could be fun.

  • Mats002

    OT: While waiting for aftermath and ECCO test and because Frank et al busted the ORBO by testing it, I suggest buy a Keshe Home Unit kit to test for €176. There are people out there who bought, build and claim to have overunity. It is electricity in and out, no calorimetry needed:

    https://www.dva.si/magrav-kits.html#ready

    Could be fun.

  • Stephen

    I wasn’t able to follow everything today unfortunately but I followed what I could. To me from what I saw that was a really very well run test today a bit frustrating as the data seems so tantalizingly close but I have to say it still somehow feels rewarding… probably because so much was learned.

    Thanks so much to MFMP and Me356 and everyone who participated here and elsewhere for running this test today. It gave me great hope for the future.

    Looking forward now to the deeper data analysis and seeing what it tells us about this particular test and also we can learn for future tests.

    Will there be a follow up test in the near future when Me356 feels ready for it?

  • Stephen

    I wasn’t able to follow everything today unfortunately but I followed what I could. To me from what I saw that was a really very well run test today a bit frustrating as the data seems so tantalizingly close but I have to say it still somehow feels rewarding… probably because so much was learned.

    Thanks so much to MFMP and Me356 and everyone who participated here and elsewhere for running this test today. It gave me great hope for the future.

    Looking forward now to the deeper data analysis and seeing what it tells us about this particular test and also we can learn for future tests.

    Will there be a follow up test in the near future when Me356 feels ready for it?

    I’d like to see this team in action again sometime soon.

  • Anon2012_2014

    Frank and Ecat World Community,

    Do this older LENR follower a favor and _please_ do make a headline if Bob/Me356 get a solid LENR confirming result. Like all of us, I am pulling for them.

    Thank you,

    Anon12

  • Anon2012_2014

    Frank and Ecat World Community,

    Do this older LENR follower a favor and _please_ do make a headline if Bob/Me356 get a solid LENR confirming result. Like all of us, I am pulling for them.

    Thank you,

    Anon12

  • Bruce__H

    Nothing can be concluded based on this first round of experiments — the MPFP crew are still ironing out the kinks in their measurement systems and don’t yet know how to take these data in the best manner possible, and ME356 was unprepared and had problems with his system. But that is OK, I wouldn’t expect clearly persuasive results from a collaboration like this for months much less 4 days (although the size of the effect plays a role … a whopping big effect is easier to home in on). Lets hope these 2 groups continue their collaboration.

    It all smells like science to me! And fun! Something that has been sorely lacking in Rossi’s work. Rossi’s mantra of letting the satisfaction of the customer be the measure of success should now be acknowledged by everyone here as the rubbish that it is. This is basic science, not engineering, and to get anywhere in basic science you need careful, methodical, researchers with a reputation for integrity. The MFMP gang fills that bill in spades with the extra (and brilliant!) addition of radical public transparency. Maybe now some of you in the LENR community without a research background will see what a great game research can be even when your preconceptions risk being dashed to pieces.

  • So either we have a con man who sued his victims to cap off his 6 year+ conspiracy whirlwind and a copycat troll who invited MFPM into his lair on the chance that they got a false positive and to see if they could see past his fake sincerity…

    OR

    …we have a tragicomic sequence of false starts, misunderstandings and suppression efforts.

    • me356

      I recommend to check the facts. Your informations looks to be very wrong and false.

      • Don’t be offended me356, we greatly appreciate your efforts and you’re now my favorite LENR researcher having cooperated with MFMP and engaging Live Open Science.

        But we have been trying to sort out fact from fiction in this whole bizarre LENR affair. We seek proof and we want this tech to emerge now. We need it now. I personally had high hopes for this test as you come across as skilled and sincere… and had claimed many working reactors. So when MFMP scheduled a test with you I expected a working reactor.

        Misunderstanding… new device not really ready for testing… I get it.

        It’s just that we can’t take anybody’s word for it. Anybody’s. There have been so many lies and so much misdirection already.

        • me356

          I understand you, but again there are not true informations in what you have written. I believe you will understand it soon once missing information is provided.

          • I look forward to additional info!

            What exactly do you consider false in what I wrote? I presented the scenarios that remain plausible to an outside observer. As a primary participant you get a different view of things of course, But out here in the peanut gallery we can only try to string together facts and observe behavior.

            If you have verifiable facts that prove your assertions, we welcome them. In fact, we beg and plead for them.

          • Dr. Mike

            It seems obvious that me356 really didn’t understand your original comment. I think he missed the “OR” part! However, it doesn’t seem fair to connect Rossi and me356 with the “and” portion of your first sentence. Misleading business partners and possibly failing to fulfill contractual requirements seems to me to be quite different from what I see as poor communication between me356 and the MFMP team. The one thing that I hope that is learned from this fiasco is that MFMP should insist on only testing a reactor that the inventor claims to be working. Their goal should be to determine if the performance of the reactor is what the inventor claims it to be.

          • Agreed, however the probability of me356 having working reactors and Rossi not is, in my opinion, negligibly small. That is the link for me.

            They also have in common that they have submitted a device for testing by teams of scientists.

          • Dr. Mike

            I agree that they both have produced working reactors with Rossi’s reactors probably having higher COP’s just because he has been working so much longer on the development. Although Rossi did submit a reactor to the Lugano scientists, he prevented them from running an adequate control and more or less dictated the calorimetry that they used, including I imagine how to take the optical temperature measurements incorrectly. At least me356 let MFMP bring their own measurement equipment and technique for measuring the reactor output.

          • Stephen Harrison

            Me, thanks for allowing these test, are you saying that the COP rates that you reported previously i.e. >6 still stand and that the reactor just tested was faulty.Do you still have confidence in your COP assessment techniques?

          • Well, it’s been 6 days. When can we expect the missing information?

        • Toussaint françois

          For me the results are depressing, for now on my hopes are focused on Suhas and Rossi tests.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            It was a clean, professionally conducted experiment, which is what we need. I would rather get depressed about a sloppy methodology with a doubtful outcome.

          • Toussaint françois

            I agree no problem with the experiment MFMP did a splendid job, it is the results which are far from the announced COP 5/10 that is depressing

          • More like trailing at halftime after an inexplicable own goal. Still time for a comeback.

      • Rip Kirbyian

        Is this to be interpreted as that the main motivation was not to verify LENR but your new untested device?

  • So either we have a con man who sued his victims to cap off his 6 year+ conspiracy whirlwind and a copycat troll who invited MFPM into his lair on the chance that they got a false positive and to see if they could see past his fake sincerity…

    OR

    …we have a tragicomic sequence of false starts, misunderstandings and suppression efforts.

    • me356

      I recommend to check the facts. Your informations looks to be very wrong and false.

      • Don’t be offended me356, we greatly appreciate your efforts and you’re now my favorite LENR researcher having cooperated with MFMP and engaging Live Open Science.

        But we have been trying to sort out fact from fiction in this whole bizarre LENR affair. We seek proof and we want this tech to emerge now. We need it now. I personally had high hopes for this test as you come across as skilled and sincere… and had claimed many working reactors. So when MFMP scheduled a test with you I expected a working reactor.

        Misunderstanding… new device not really ready for testing… I get it.

        It’s just that we can’t take anybody’s word for it. Anybody’s. There have been so many lies and so much misdirection already.

        • me356

          I understand you, but again there are not true informations in what you have written. I believe you will understand it soon once missing information is provided.

          • I look forward to additional info!

            What exactly do you consider false in what I wrote? I presented the scenarios that remain plausible to an outside observer. As a primary participant you get a different view of things of course, But out here in the peanut gallery we can only try to string together facts and observe behavior.

            If you have verifiable facts that prove your assertions, we welcome them. In fact, we beg and plead for them.

          • Dr. Mike

            It seems obvious that me356 really didn’t understand your original comment. I think he missed the “OR” part! However, it doesn’t seem fair to connect Rossi and me356 with the “and” portion of your first sentence. Misleading business partners and possibly failing to fulfill contractual requirements seems to me to be quite different from what I see as poor communication between me356 and the MFMP team. The one thing that I hope that is learned from this fiasco is that MFMP should insist on only testing a reactor that the inventor claims to be working. Their goal should be to determine if the performance of the reactor is what the inventor claims it to be.

          • Agreed, however the probability of me356 having working reactors and Rossi not is, in my opinion, negligibly small. That is the link for me.

            They also have in common that they have submitted a device for testing by teams of scientists.

          • Dr. Mike

            I agree that they both have produced working reactors with Rossi’s reactors probably having higher COP’s just because he has been working so much longer on the development. Although Rossi did submit a reactor to the Lugano scientists, he prevented them from running an adequate control and more or less dictated the calorimetry that they used, including I imagine how to take the optical temperature measurements incorrectly. At least me356 let MFMP bring their own measurement equipment and technique for measuring the reactor output.

          • MorganMck

            Agree, but why in the world couldn’t he come up with a working reactor to test on short notice after having claimed to have built and tested many of them? The fuel should not have been expended in prior testing if they are anything like Rossi claims (6+ month life). Why not just grab a proven reactor from the shelf and provide it rather than suffer the credibility issues that resulted from this disaster. I just don’t get it.

          • Dr. Mike

            Agree with you 100%. All details of the experiment should have been worked out with me356 before MFMP headed for Europe. That’s why I stated the main problem was poor communication.

          • Stephen Harrison

            Me, thanks for allowing these test, are you saying that the COP rates that you reported previously i.e. >6 still stand and that the reactor just tested was faulty.Do you still have confidence in your COP assessment techniques?

          • Well, it’s been 6 days. When can we expect the missing information?

        • Toussaint françois

          For me the results are depressing, for now on my hopes are focused on Suhas and Rossi tests.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            It was a clean, professionally conducted experiment, which is what we need. I would rather get depressed about a sloppy methodology with a doubtful outcome.

          • Toussaint françois

            I agree no problem with the experiment MFMP did a splendid job, it is the results which are far from the announced COP 5/10 that is depressing

      • Charlie tapp

        Just curious I remember you talking about going away from nickel hydrogen system to something else that is not patent yet. But you figured out how to make nickel hydrogen system work why not explain that system at least in private to mfmp so they can get there system to work? This would not affect your new system if I understand correctly. I may be wrong it seems all communication with you has been not what we all thought it was. Thanks for trying any pointers you can give will ba appreciated

      • Rip Kirbyian

        Is this to be interpreted as that the main motivation was not to verify LENR but your new untested device?

    • HAL9000

      LENRBuster’s scorecard: MFMP: 1, Claimant: 0

      • More like trailing at halftime after an inexplicable own goal. Still time for a comeback.

  • Stephen

    Thanks again to Me356 for keeping us updated with the test analysis from your end and in particular regarding the device.

    I really appreciated the test especially how anomalies from previous days were quickly investigated by the community and lessons learned about engineering and method robustly incorporated in to later testing especially the last days test.

    This is how real life testing occurs especially with first tests of new devices with new equipment. The lessons learned and how they are carried forward to the next tests is the most important thing. It gives me confidence seeing this as it’s familiar to my experience with other things.

    I liked the last day especially with the initial checkouts of the test equipment and heat exchanger followed by attempted calibration of the heat exchanger with the water heater and and evaluation of the “average COP” calculation before the actual test run. There will of course be later improvements but this approach looked really good.

    I think elsewhere others have mentioned having a pre test readiness review before subsequent tests which is a good idea I think, but I wonder if MFMP are thinking of having a post test review of this test maybe after a few days to allow the results to be digested and more understood? Or perhaps more appropriately online, an online “lessons learnt” document in one place that can be consolidated updated as things are thought of going forward.

    There are a lot of ideas already here and on LF etc about improving the calculation of Average COP, improving data analysis etc i suppose other ideas will become apparent in the next days.

    I also wonder if there could be a way to calibrated the test equipment on site of the test with a known steam source rather than the hot water source? It could be interesting to clearly identify heat losses in such an arrangement even if they are marginal.

    With the earlier sparging test would it have been beneficial to have the whole pipe insulated (even in the water) to ensure that the steam does not condense in the pipe causing pressure drop issues etc in the pipework before release into
    The bucket? I wonder if this could have caused steam flow issues in that particular test.

    Thanks Me356 and MFMP for keeping us updated and let us know if when and how we can help.

  • Stephen

    Thanks again to Me356 for keeping us updated with the test analysis from your end and in particular regarding the device.

    I really appreciated the test especially how anomalies from previous days were quickly investigated by Me356, MFMP and the wider online community and lessons learned about engineering and method robustly incorporated in to later testing especially the last days test.

    This is how real life testing occurs especially with first tests of new devices with new equipment. The lessons learned and how they are carried forward to the next tests is the most important thing. Well that along with strong team spirit and the gained mutual respect of different view points. It gives me confidence seeing this as it’s familiar to my experience with other things.

    I liked the last day especially with the initial checkouts of the test equipment and heat exchanger followed by attempted calibration of the heat exchanger with the water heater and and evaluation of the “average COP” calculation before the actual test run. There will of course be later improvements but this approach looked really good.

    I think elsewhere others have mentioned having a pre test readiness review before subsequent tests which is a good idea I think, but I wonder if MFMP are thinking of having a post test review of this test maybe after a few days to allow the results to be digested and more understood? Or perhaps more appropriately online, an online “lessons learnt” document in one place that can be consolidated updated as things are thought of going forward.

    There are a lot of ideas already here and on LF etc about improving the calculation of Average COP, improving data analysis etc i suppose other ideas will become apparent in the next days.

    I also wonder if there could be a way to calibrated the test equipment on site of the test with a known steam source rather than the hot water source? It could be interesting to clearly identify heat losses in such an arrangement even if they are marginal.

    With the earlier sparging test would it have been beneficial to have the whole pipe insulated (even in the water) to ensure that the steam does not condense in the pipe causing pressure drop issues etc in the pipework before release into
    The bucket? I wonder if this could have caused steam flow issues in that particular test.

    Thanks Me356 and MFMP for keeping us updated and let us know if when and how we can help.

  • Bruce__H

    If there is going to be more rounds of testing I would definitely have me356 prepare a dummy reactor. This is needed because there will be peculiarities of the actual physical arrangement on the test site that may not be apparent either before or after the actual test. For instance heat may end up warming the test equipment, lab benches, etc and this could go unaccounted for. By far the cleanest experimental design is to run a dummy with the same equipment which would automatically control for such things. Doing some sort of control in retrospect off-site (as was suggested t one point I think) just isn’t enough. And this dummy should be exactly the same as the active reactor except with the fuel unprocessed (as basically happened the series of tests we just saw. AND .. if possible … it would be best if nature of the particular reactor was blinded to the operators (this would take foresight but is doable).

    I foresee a long term win-win scenario here if me356 and the MFMP group keep up their collaboration. If me356’s setup does end up producing excess heat then we are into a new era of energy, if it doesn’t then we are into a new era of reliable testing of LENR claims and the LENR community can finally shuck off the “pathological science” tag. I’ll be contributing to the MPFP now because I think they have proved themselves. I hope others do likewise.

  • Bruce__H

    If there is going to be more rounds of testing I would definitely have me356 prepare a dummy reactor. This is needed because there will be peculiarities of the actual physical arrangement on the test site that may not be apparent either before or after the actual test. For instance heat may end up warming the test equipment, lab benches, etc and this could go unaccounted for. By far the cleanest experimental design is to run a dummy with the same equipment which would automatically control for such things. Doing some sort of control in retrospect off-site (as was suggested t one point I think) just isn’t enough. And this dummy should be exactly the same as the active reactor except with the fuel unprocessed (as basically happened the series of tests we just saw. AND .. if possible … it would be best if nature of the particular reactor was blinded to the operators (this would take foresight but is doable).

    I foresee a long term win-win scenario here if me356 and the MFMP group keep up their collaboration. If me356’s setup does end up producing excess heat then we are into a new era of energy, if it doesn’t then we are into a new era of reliable testing of LENR claims and the LENR community can finally shuck off the “pathological science” tag. I’ll be contributing to the MPFP now because I think they have proved themselves. I hope others do likewise.

  • interstellar hobo

    Every single lenr test mfmp has done has not shown a positive. It’s over. I’m sad but it is the reality. They tried.

    Rossi, me356, Celini, Parkhamov, defcalion et all have all made statements that do not live up to reality. There is too much bait and switch.

    Stick a fork in it. It’s done.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We have tested 3 samples recently, one from Parkhomov (KV3) reactor and two from Suhas (foil and processed fuel) and both appear to show transmutations. This would indicate LENR has taken place.

      In the case of Celani wire, our observed apparent excess from both calibration and real time comparison was in line with his observations when he adjusted for his NI week and ICCF17 errors. However, that work did not easily point to commercial grade heat production.

      Of course all of the team on AURA would have loved a high COP outcome, but just because it did not happen this time will not stop us.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        „We have tested 3 samples recently, one from Parkhomov (KV3) reactor and two from Suhas (foil and processed fuel) and both appear to show transmutations. This would indicate LENR has taken place.“

        Such results are certainly interesting, but even if confirmed they would be no proof of the possibility to get a COP > 1. See Cockroft-Walton or Farnsworth-Hirsch, for example (nuclear but COP < 1). What we need first is a decent COP, everything else may come later.

        Thank you anyway for the great show!

  • interstellar hobo

    Every single lenr test mfmp has done has not shown a positive. It’s over. I’m sad but it is the reality. They tried.

    Rossi, me356, Celini, Parkhamov, defcalion et all have all made statements that do not live up to reality. There is too much bait and switch.

    Stick a fork in it. It’s done.

    • Bruce__H

      Almost, but not quite. You can’t realistically anticipate a clean answer from a collaboration that starts up and then terminates 4 days later. It will need months of repeated attempts. But I do see in the MFMP a way to actually decide if this is all real or not. And then, just as you say, we will see if the people who populate this site really do have what it takes to pay attention to the lessons of nature rather than trying to force nature to conform to their expectations.

      Personally, I am all ready to admit the reality of excess heat if I see good evidence. I just haven’t seen it yet!

    • Bob Greenyer

      We have tested 3 samples recently, one from Parkhomov (KV3) reactor and two from Suhas (foil and processed fuel) and both appear to show transmutations. This would indicate LENR has taken place.

      In the case of Celani wire, our observed apparent excess from both calibration and real time comparison was in line with his observations when he adjusted for his NI week and ICCF17 errors. However, that work did not easily point to commercial grade heat production.

      Of course all of the team on AURA would have loved a high COP outcome, but just because it did not happen this time will not stop us.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        „We have tested 3 samples recently, one from Parkhomov (KV3) reactor and two from Suhas (foil and processed fuel) and both appear to show transmutations. This would indicate LENR has taken place.“

        Such results are certainly interesting, but even if confirmed they would be no proof of the possibility to get a COP > 1. See Cockroft-Walton or Farnsworth-Hirsch, for example (nuclear but COP < 1). What we need first is a decent COP, everything else may come later.

        Thank you anyway for the great show!

      • interstellar hobo

        I’m glad you have had some success. I never understood why the Celani research ended. Was it about science or you building your own commercial grade heat production, then? can’t necssarily have both. If you had excess heat with Celani why not publish the results. Positive proof of this would be earth shaking.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Celani had very serious problems with INFN and could not supply wires then Lugano report and our limited resources were focussed on establishing the validity of the emissivity determination in Lugano and then, following the release of the Rossi patent, the viability of the claims implied to yield significant excess.

  • HAL9000

    The ECCO testing should provide a much more satisfying result. Sonoluminescense can be reproduced in the amateur lab for a few hundred dollars. The next step up is sonofusion, which I think is the approach to LENR that Suhas has successfully achieved. MFMP is ready for this challenge, thanks to the me365 trek. This next LENRbuster chapter should be a great ride!

    • Bob Greenyer

      Sonoluminescense may take part in the converging acoustical arrangement of the fuel processing stage, but less likely IMPO in the reactor (although there is high levels of ultrasound).

      I agree about the potential for positive outcome, just based on steam ejection rate and dryness. I will post a video on that in due course.

  • HAL9000

    The ECCO testing should provide a much more satisfying result. Sonoluminescense can be reproduced in the amateur lab for a few hundred dollars. The next step up is sonofusion, which I think is the approach to LENR that Suhas has successfully achieved. MFMP is ready for this challenge, thanks to the me365 trek. This next LENRbuster chapter should be a great ride!

    • Bob Greenyer

      Sonoluminescense may take part in the converging acoustical arrangement of the fuel processing stage, but less likely IMPO in the reactor (although there is high levels of ultrasound).

      I agree about the potential for positive outcome, just based on steam ejection rate and dryness. I will post a video on that in due course.

  • Dr. Mike

    Agree with you 100%. All details of the experiment should have been worked out with me356 before MFMP headed for Europe. That’s why I stated the main problem was poor communication.

  • Axil Axil

    “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.”

    Lessons can be drawn from this latest failure about the nature of LENR and what causes it to fail. ME356 has informed us that the reactor melted through at a hot spot and the hydrogen leaked out at this point of failure through the material that comprises the reactor tube.

    Rossi has had this problem for many years and it has only been resolved in the last year when Rossi realized that LENR will seek to reach a temperature that is beyond the containment capacity of the material that he had been using over the years.

    When Rossi moved to replace his tube material with something that can contain the maximum temperature that the LENR reactor can reach, then Rossi was on his way to achieving Sigma 5.

    Me356 has not learned this lesson from Rossi and because of this lack of understanding; his reactors will occasionally melt through.

    Rossi has given us this maximum temperature that the LENR reaction wants to reach when it is given its head. 3000K is that temperature for Rossi. His tube material is a ceramic insulator like alumina but melts at a temperature that exceeds the 3000K maximum temperature that LENR wants to get to. Until Me356 changes his tube material to contain the maximum temperature that LERN can attain, his reactor will not be ready for the marketplace.

    • LilyLover

      Thank you Axil for this analysis.

    • Sean

      Just watched a program about the secrets of the super elements. Using Rhenium seems to be a good material for heat resistance. Possibly combining with other materials will do the job. Melting point is published at 3459K .

      • Axil Axil

        Me356 states that a flaw in the heating element burned through the containment tube and destroyed the reactors hydrogen containment.

        I am concerned about ANY possibility that the containment of the ME356 reactor can be breached.

        We know that when the LENR reaction really gets going without control in a meltdown situation, it can vaporize concrete, rebar, stainless steel, and alumina. This observation implies that the LENR reaction can reach a temperature of 3000C and can bring in and feed on the matter that surrounds it.

        The electromagnetic nature of the LENR reaction requires that the material used to contain the LENR reaction must be an insulator like alumina. Ceramics that can contain the LENR reaction exist but these high temperature insulators are both hard to fabricate and expensive.

        It would be prudent to invest in the extra expense involved in the use of best available containment material to minimize any possibility of an uncontrolled breach of the LENR reactors containment no matter what the cause.

        I for one would not put a LENR reactor in my basement without the assuredly of absolute containment. If the LENR reaction gets out and invades my basement floor and begins a 3000C uncontrolled China syndrome type conflagration, I would think twice about recommending that reactor to my neighbors or in general supporting it publicly.

        • R101

          Don’t worry too much about the China Syndrome Axil.
          After all there’s currently three nuclear piles on a voyage to the centre of the earth at Fukushima Daiichi and no one seems to give damn.

          • Axil Axil

            True, but they are not in your own basement.

        • Sean

          Gosh, now I realise the hurdles that seem to be mounting up. Thank you for pointing this out. The LENR physics works. However I can now see the challenges ahead. Is it possible to hold these LENR materials in some sort of magnetic bottle?. I see now why they have to hold the fusion reactions in the Tokmak so as to keep away from other materials. A comparison is like an internal combustion engine. You can burn fuel an oxygen with ease, however look under the hood and there you have a lot of metallurgy and technology to support that burn and turn it in to useful work.

  • Axil Axil

    “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.”

    Lessons can be drawn from this latest failure about the nature of LENR and what causes it to fail. ME356 has informed us that the reactor melted through at a hot spot and the hydrogen leaked out at this point of failure through the material that comprises the reactor tube.

    Rossi has had this problem for many years and it has only been resolved in the last year when Rossi realized that LENR will seek to reach a temperature that is beyond the containment capacity of the material that he had been using over the years.

    When Rossi moved to replace his tube material with something that can contain the maximum temperature that the LENR reactor can reach, then Rossi was on his way to achieving Sigma 5.

    Me356 has not learned this lesson from Rossi and because of this lack of understanding; his reactors will occasionally melt through.

    Rossi has given us this maximum temperature that the LENR reaction wants to reach when it is given its head. 3000K is that temperature for Rossi. His tube material is a ceramic insulator like alumina but melts at a temperature that exceeds the 3000K maximum temperature that LENR wants to get to. Until Me356 changes his tube material to contain the maximum temperature that LERN can attain, his reactor will not be ready for the marketplace.

    • LilyLover

      Thank you Axil for this analysis.

    • Sean

      Just watched a program about the secrets of the super elements. Using Rhenium seems to be a good material for heat resistance. Possibly combining with other materials will do the job. Melting point is published at 3459K .

      • Axil Axil

        Me356 states that a flaw in the heating element burned through the containment tube and destroyed the reactors hydrogen containment.

        I am concerned about ANY possibility that the containment of the ME356 reactor can be breached.

        We know that when the LENR reaction really gets going without control in a meltdown situation, it can vaporize concrete, rebar, stainless steel, and alumina. This observation implies that the LENR reaction can reach a temperature of 3000C and can bring in and feed on the matter that surrounds it.

        The electromagnetic nature of the LENR reaction requires that the material used to contain the LENR reaction must be an insulator like alumina. Ceramics that can contain the LENR reaction exist but these high temperature insulators are both hard to fabricate and expensive.

        It would be prudent to invest in the extra expense involved in the use of best available containment material to minimize any possibility of an uncontrolled breach of the LENR reactors containment no matter what the cause.

        I for one would not put a LENR reactor in my basement without the assuredly of absolute containment. If the LENR reaction gets out and invades my basement floor and begins a 3000C uncontrolled China syndrome type conflagration, I would think twice about recommending that reactor to my neighbors or in general supporting it publicly.

        • R101

          Don’t worry too much about the China Syndrome Axil.
          After all there’s currently three nuclear piles on a voyage to the centre of the earth at Fukushima Daiichi and no one seems to give damn.

          • Axil Axil

            True, but they are not in your own basement.

        • Sean

          Gosh, now I realise the hurdles that seem to be mounting up. Thank you for pointing this out. The LENR physics works. However I can now see the challenges ahead. Is it possible to hold these LENR materials in some sort of magnetic bottle?. I see now why they have to hold the fusion reactions in the Tokmak so as to keep away from other materials. A comparison is like an internal combustion engine. You can burn fuel an oxygen with ease, however look under the hood and there you have a lot of metallurgy and technology to support that burn and turn it in to useful work.

    • cupid

      Something I’m not quite sure about. At that temperature hydrogen would have autoignited, thus causing an explosion. H2 being one of the most volatile gases there is, even a tiny amount would have made a noticeable impression on any containment.

  • Jean Bourguignon

    A dramatic question is raised by some about the alternative use of PROVEN REACTOR instead of a new one. Although we praise the present approach with MFMP and Me356 in the front line to master LENR , we have also to point what Me356 wrote in the recent past : HE SAID HE DID NOT WANT to use PROVEN reactors working correctly, because they are not in a ” black box” and as such offer a view for any observer to CONFIDENTIAL PARTS (his 2 words). This is acceptable but that means Me356 really want to patent and make profit on all his reactors (I thought and hoped it could have been a gift to humanity…as he said himself in the “old” past). Anyway let’s pray for a real and quick breakthrough….;-)

    • Dr. Mike

      What difference does it make if a proven reactor or an unproven reactor goes in his black box? If he has to modify his reactor to put it in a black box, the black box version should have been proven to work before offering it to MFMP for testing. I for one hope that me356 does have something that he is able to patent and possibly make a little profit from his hard work. His improvements to LENR technology will be a gift to humanity even if he does earn some profit from that technology. Perhaps some of his ideas can be combined with Rossi’s to make a usable commercial reactor.

      • Jean Bourguignon

        Thanks for your reply, Mike. Yes, it makes a terribly strong difference because : because if a proven reactor was used, it would not indeed be in a “black box but in an open box, showing the visibility of those CONFIDENTIAL PARTS…. Unfortunately Me356 didn’t want to make that visibility related to “proven” reactor (whose design is clearly OPEN for his own work but not for ….others). Let’s go on with the best spirit and cooperative way, I agree with you .

    • hhiram

      Yeah, well that’s very convenient, isn’t it?

      “Sure, I’d love to demo an actual honest-to-God working cold fusion reactor and transform the world and instantly become one of the most famous heroes of human history, but nah… I think I’ll just use this junky alternate reactor that doesn’t actually work instead…”

      Pffff. I don’t buy any of it. It screams scam to me.

    • LesioQ

      Maybe this bad attitude was the reason for recent test failure, imposed by some higher entity.
      Magrave also is claimed to work only for ones with clear intentions…

    • Chapman

      I think the question regarding the importance of using a proven reactor can best be found by re-examining MFMP’s mission on site.

      They were not there to test the “out-of-the-box” market readiness of Me356’s manufacturing skills. They were there to verify the operational data reported by him concerning experiments with a LENR reactor of his own construction.

      I am not interested in weather any individual frog MIGHT sing. I came to the show because you said you had A PARTICULAR frog that DOES. SHOW me THAT one! Do not waste my time by merely inviting me along to search a pond for another that MIGHT be of equal talent. Where is the one with the cute little Top Hat that you told me about???

      I am not being critical here, I am simply saying that travelling all that way, only to be presented with a virgin reactor, and an attitude of “I don’t know WHAT it will do, but lets find out together” is frustrating. This was supposed to be a validation, not a collaborative experiment without predetermined expectation.

      Sorry, but “Show me the FROG from the video you posted. THAT’S what I came to see”.

      • Jean Bourguignon

        Anyway I like frogs….just to joke because you mentioned frogs..
        But seriouly , it’s sad again to see Me356 rejecting the use of a proven reactor because there would be visible ”confidential parts” and letting go home the brilliant team with a dramatic job on an unproven reactor….

      • Adam Lepczak

        I could not agree more. I was under the impression before the test that me356’s reactors are a “done deal” getting ready to go “industrial”. Even during the 1st test we were not communicated the fact that he didn’t have enough time to make fuel and it was only processed 1/14 – whatever that means.
        Make sure to select the right frog next time.

  • Dr. Mike

    What difference does it make if a proven reactor or an unproven reactor goes in his black box? If he has to modify his reactor to put it in a black box, the black box version should have been proven to work before offering it to MFMP for testing. I for one hope that me356 does have something that he is able to patent and possibly make a little profit from his hard work. His improvements to LENR technology will be a gift to humanity even if he does earn some profit from that technology. Perhaps some of his ideas can be combined with Rossi’s to make a usable commercial reactor.

  • georgehants

    Many thanks to all involved, look forward to future tests and good luck with them.
    Cold Fusion is for people not profit.

  • georgehants

    Many thanks to all involved, look forward to future tests and good luck with them.
    Cold Fusion is for all people not obscene profit for the few.

    • Liberalism is a disease

      Says who? If you spend years researching and developing a product and then bring it to market and millions buy your product…. You’ll make obscene profit. If you don’t like it don’t buy it; or spend most of your own life in school and on R&D and make it yourself. No one said it’s not for (available for a price) all people. Your statement implies that if the inventors make “obscene” profit then it’s not for everybody. I’m sure the researchers are delighted that many people will buy their hard earned product.

      And I agree with you in looking forward to future tests and wishing good luck to them.

      • Jarea

        Your greediness cannot compete with the one the biggest powers already have. They will crush any attempt to do it. Only a social and open movement can break that trend. If you worry about the amount of money invested, then you are shortsighted. The amount of money and expertise you earn if you really breakthrough to the market will make your rich even if you don´t have patents. You can see that model with any other device. What is important is the expertise and moreover to reach the market.

        • Jean Bourguignon

          Yes only genius like the inventor of the vaccine against polio gave it for free to humanity…..what a great man.

          • Stefan Resorb

            You just don´t get it. The guy who discovered the vaccine GOT PAYED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO DO SO. Rossi, for example, is risking his pension and everything he has to heal the world from CO2-Intoxication. If he succeeds, he should get all his wishes fullfilled. If being rich is one of his wishes: WHY NOT.

          • Jean Bourguignon

            Keep cool brother…no problem. Just to say that Salk clearly received wages for working on polio but gave up royalties and patents….As for our brother Rossi, time is ripe to have a clear and final vision of his achievements….even if he wishes to protect them😇

        • Liberalism is a disease

          Typical socialist reply. Yeah, my ” greediness”…… lol.

          Who’s more “Greedy”, if you can really even call it that.

          The person who spends many years and 10’s of thousands of dollars on a hard earned education.
          Puts in many more years of R&D and countless thousands of dollars.
          Takes all the risks of maybe not even succeeding.
          Then finally has his breakthrough and successfully put something to market.
          Now he collects his due rewards….THAT HE EARNED

          ***********OR**********

          The guy who did nothing but demands to have a piece of the other person’s product just because it’s simply to good to not have. I want it…… I want it NOW! ……..For free. Yeah, that’s fair. This Is True Greed. I must have it even though I did not earn it and I don’t want to have to pay for it because then the inventor would become what I perceive as obscenely rich.
          For further data on your socialist theories take your pride and joy case study Venezuela, or Argentina.
          LONG LIVE CAPITALISM

          • Stefan Resorb

            Hey mate, thumbs up for doing great work for society. If many people benefit from your work, you shall profit from it. Think this is natural. When people criticize capitalism it´s not about people like you. That´s the big mistake. It´s about people who have shitloads of money WITHOUT the work you did. Say: people who inherited their fortune. Or managers, who just manage the ingenuity of other people. Or CORPORATIONS. Say: BANKS.

            Anyway. About your examples: I would add Bolivia on your list, and think twice 🙂

            Best,
            Stefan

            LONG LIVE SOCIAL MARKET ECONOMY!

  • sam

    Suhas is the one i am looking forward to MFMP testing.

  • Chapman

    I think the question regarding the importance of using a proven reactor can best be found by re-examining MFMP’s mission on site.

    They were not there to test the “out-of-the-box” market readiness of Me356’s manufacturing skills. They were there to verify the operational data reported by him concerning experiments with a LENR reactor of his own construction.

    I am not interested in weather any individual frog MIGHT sing. I came to the show because you said you had A PARTICULAR frog that DOES. SHOW me THAT one! Do not waste my time by merely inviting me along to search a pond for another that MIGHT be of equal talent. Where is the one with the cute little Top Hat that you told me about???

    I am not being critical here, I am simply saying that travelling all that way, only to be presented with a virgin reactor, and an attitude of “I don’t know WHAT it will do, but lets find out together” is frustrating. This was supposed to be a validation, not a collaborative experiment without predetermined expectation.

    Sorry, but “Show me the FROG from the video you posted. THAT’S what I came to see”.

    • Adam Lepczak

      I could not agree more. I was under the impression before the test that me356’s reactors are a “done deal” getting ready to go “industrial”. Even during the 1st test we were not communicated the fact that he didn’t have enough time to make fuel and it was only processed 1/14 – whatever that means.
      Make sure to select the right frog next time.

  • Jarea

    Your greediness cannot compete with the one the biggest powers already have. They will crush any attempt to do it. Only a social and open movement can break that trend. If you worry about the amount of money invested, then you are shortsighted. The amount of money and expertise you earn if you really breakthrough to the market will make your rich even if you don´t have patents. You can see that model with any other device. What is important is the expertise and moreover to reach the market.

  • TheTruthIsOutThere

    Don’t get me wrong, but if ME365 said he was not ready for the test why did they visit him in the first place?.
    What arrangements were made and why air tickets and all expenses were made for a predicted failure ?.
    How much money were they spent from our donations for a simple “excuse us it was premature” ?
    Nobody stood up from any of the involved parties and say “I was who took the decision to move forward”, excuses only like noise in the environment.

  • So after all the excitement, it was basically a dud? Not enough material was ready for testing? Confidentiality wasn’t guaranteed on an open source testing platform? Maybe time to get Dr. Diamandis on board?

  • So after all the excitement, it was basically a dud? Not enough material was ready for testing? Confidentiality wasn’t guaranteed on an open source testing platform? Maybe time to get Dr. Diamandis on board?

  • Neanderthal

    For structural integrity of the electrodes use Rhenium