There’s a comment on the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project’s Evernote site by Ryan Hunt, who was one of the team members conducting the test on the ‘dummy’ Dog Bone test yesterday. He comments about the emissivity measured in the testing:
” The main revelation was that the emissivity required for the camera to correctly interpret the temperatures on the surface was very close to .95. When we plugged in the emissivities cited from literature in the Lugano report (0.8 to 0.4), the apparent temperature was 1200 to 1500C at 900W in. Is our cast alumina significantly different than other alumina materials? ”
One part of his report in particular caught my attention. Ryan writes:
Meanwhile, here is some other interesting data. The uptick in temperatures at the end looks interesting. We saw something similar in the previous calibration on 2014-12-31, only we have extended it one more data point to 900W input. We have no clue what to make of it. We had no nickel or Hydrogen anywhere near the hot dog bone. Any suggestions? Could this be a change in material property like a thermal conduction change or radiant heat transmittance effect that could be misinterpreted?
This uptick in temperature will have to be looked at carefully, especially in comparison to what is measured in a fueled reactor to see whether ‘false positives’ could be being generated.