Skip to comments.Celani Replication
Posted on 12/18/2012 5:20:58 PM PST by Kevmo
Keep up to date with our replication of experiments based on Celani's cell right here. Please feel free to add your comments to the blog entries.
LIVE DATA | Experiment Log USA | Euro | Latest Video | RSS feed of blog posts | RSS feed of all comments
Other Progress - Updated w/ Video
on 17 December 2012.
Our USA team has spent a great deal of our time last week supporting Mathieu's tests with the Euro Cell last week. In between configuring, graphing, and writing, we have managed to make progress in other areas.
We have a new borosilicate cell assembled. This is Pyrex brand borosilicate, which is still different from the Duran-Schott tubing used by Celani and by Mathieu in the Euro Cell. This new cell is using Macor ceramic for the wire supports. Both wires are NiCr.
We did a pressure sweep with hydrogen from 8 bar to 1 bar and graphed the indicating temperatures again. This is to continue to exploring the apparent change of temperature we observed in our first cell.
For the next test, we added some mineral wool insulation on each end of the cell to cut off most of the heat path to the flanges. We expect this will make the T_GlassOut more constant over pressure.
The insulation is held in place by a wrap of copper wire. We did a run over the weekend, but we are re-running it today because the power ended up at 47 W instead of 48 W. Keep watching.
This has a new electrical pass through design. We detected a leak with one of them and then fortified it again. It is testing now and appears to be our tightest cell, yet. It was losing 0.003 Bar per hour at 4 Bar (absolute) internal pressure. Here you can see the long pass-throughs. The length should keep the seal from seeing high temperatures and allows for several sealing layers within it.
The Air Flow Calorimeter has been wired, instrumented and is just starting to be characterized for thermal stability. Here are a few pictures.
After we get comfortable that we are measuring and controlling correctly, the next step with that calorimeter is to test it with a control load and see what we measure. We will definitely share that data as soon as we have it.
Anybody wanna volunteer to come play in the shop and help build other calorimeters and apparatus? We have the inclination, but we need more man power. Qualified volunteers will get free lodging, lunches, and a really cool prototyping shop to help manifest their ideas into reality. To qualify, you need really strong shop skills, mechanical design and CAD skills, and an ability to tolerate Minnesota in the winter.
Update: The Euro Team was on the Smart Scarecrow Alternative Energy Hour show. Here is the video (link to youtube)
Write up of EU Cell Baselines ( Update #1 - New Video)
on 14 December 2012.
The big questions are: Is the excess energy real?? And how much is real?? In short, YES , we are seeing excess energy as far as we can tell. There is still a chance that we are fooling ourselves, but that chance is getting smaller and smaller as we rule out potential error after error.
The amount of energy is AT LEAST 5 WATTS. We have reason to believe it may be more. Below is an explanation of how we arrived at the baselines we did.
This blog entry took a while to put together. It is worth noting that while our team was focused on working out some technical details to make the experiment happen and then focused on pulling the data together for ourselves and for Celani, our awesome core of followers has been providing us with as many insights as we could have hoped to come up with from weeks of our own work. The power of the crowd is working!
Below is the graph of all the calibration runs on the Euro Cell in terms of temperature rise for each power.
The first run was way below the others. The last tests, with the active wire in helium, fell close to this lowest curve.
Why are the other calibrations higher than the first? Possibility 1: The oxide coated control wire started generating excess heat after taking on some loading during the first calibration. This is Celani's inclination. If this is the case, we can safely say that we are demonstrating approximately 5 watts more output energy than the oxide coated constantan wire did. Possibility 2: T_Glass Out sensor was less thermally connected to glass than in later runs.
From all these calibration lines, we decided to use the highest as the most conservative number, and the lowest because that was closest to how the installed Celani Wire was working under Helium with the exact same T_glassout sensor location. See graph below.
These are the lines we fit the formulas for the P_Out from. Here are the curve fit data and resulting equation parameters.
This is another view of the same thing. Mathieu prepared this for Celani to include in a presentation in Rome this morning.
When we look at the equivalent power to achieve that Delta T_out according to each base line, we get the following:
This graph was provided by one of the commentators and shows that the total amount of radiated energy from the glass is only about 31 Watts. While it does not account for all the 48 W of input power to the cell, it is still an increase of energy output from before the very same wire was loaded with hydrogen. The remaining energy output is in the form of convection. From Nic:
We still have a low and high estimate based on the calibration baseline we take as reference. Low is Calib CuNi44 H2 1bar High is Calib 360L He 1bar
Then the SB calculation gives us a Cell Coefficient (CC) CC= Correction_Factor * BlackBodySurface * Emissivity * SB_Constant Low: CC = 3.740958E-09 High: CC = 4.514090E-09
I took Emissivity = 1, since the Correction_Factor (CF) is modifying it anyway. Low: CF = 1.500 High: CF = 1.810
Finally the Output Power is: P_SB_out = CC * (T_glassout^4 - T_ambient^4)
This model work very well as the errors between the model and the calibration curves are very small. The calibration data fits perfectly with the SB model, once the correct factor is estimated correctly.
As we struggle with which baseline is really appropriate, perhaps we should extrapolate the pre-loading performance of the actual Celani Wire in which the wire location, emissivity, and sensor location are all exactly the same as during the loading and following live run. Below is an illustration of this approach.
. According to this baseline, we are getting 64.9 Watts (64.9 - 48.0 = 16.9 Watts excess).
One more piece of data to contend with - Interestingly, the graph of T_Glassin does not show the first calibration run to be that much below the others. I (Ryan) believe this is a hint that the first run was lower because of a variation in thermal contact between the thermocouple and the glass.
The graph below is meant to illustrate how the temperatures from each run were interactive with the pressures and gas types. Each of these lines represents one of the calibration runs The power and temperature started out low. As the power stepped up, the temperature rose, which caused the gas pressure to rise also. The runs starting at higher pressure showed a larger pressure rise in bars (following the ideal gas law). The one perfectly vertical line was adjusted at each step to hold a constant pressure.
The effect we demonstrated on Cell 1 in the USA is not applicable to the current run in Cell 2 because the pressure is very close to constant at just over 1 bar.
We look forward to more advice and analysis by the many, many sharp individuals out there. We also look forward to more design suggestions for how to do the experiment in better ways. Similarly, if anyone else is interested in trying the experiment for themselves or at their institutions, let us know. Facilitating research into the New Fire is our goal.
Addendum: Mathieu has put together this nice summary of the early results in a PDF document:
The Cold Fusion/LENR Ping List
Keywords: ColdFusion; LENR; lanr; CMNS
business, news, extended, tech
LOL, It’s not cheap but I’m sure the govt will buy it.
Thanks for the ping.
Another replication of Celani’s work:
This is of great interest to me.
ANYone here who has personal knowledge of this group’s work prior to this article, please PM me.
Or, if you have had contact with these folks, please PM me.
Not personal, sorry. But there has been pretty much "real-time" discussion of it at E-Cat World. I believe all their data is on-line at the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project (www.quantumheat.org).
RE: [Vo]:STMicroelectronics report on their version of the Celani apparatus
Jones Beene Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:03:08 -0800
In reply to Harry Veeder’s message:
>”Neutron and gamma continuous recording in ST
>lab. No difference for spectra during experiments
>showing extra heat and background”
>Does this mean they did not detect any anomalous gamma or neutrons
>If so then it is more evidence that the Celani doesn’t produce excess heat.
RvS: > It’s still possible that any putative excess heat is either non
nuclear, or a
form of nuclear that doesn’t produce gammas and doesn’t rely on neutrons.
Or ... both, depending on semantics. In fact, the vast majority of nuclear
reactions in stars do not produce gammas or neutrons.
99.9999+ % of all stellar nuclear reactions consist of only a single
reversible reaction. It can be called reversible proton fusion (RPF), and
has been generally ignored by science. Due to the short lifetime of the new
nucleus, it is confusing to use the word “fusion” at all. Two protons
temporarily bind to helium-2 (aka the diproton) and then, after a tiny
delay, the reaction reverses. Only rarely does anything else happen.
The Pauli exclusion principle tells us that two identical fermions -
particles with half-integer spin like protons - have a combined wave
function that is anti-symmetric with respect to exchange of the particles
and cannot really fuse (with one extremely rare exception - which is why the
sun can eventually produce heat in a very slow burn).
“In the Sun, deuterium-producing events are rare (diprotons, the much more
common result of nuclear reactions within the star, immediately decay back
into two protons)....”
In short, almost all stellar fusion in reversible and it is likely that this
proton reaction happens in condensed matter as well. RPF always produces
quantum color change in quarks, due to same wave function incompatibility -
which can be exothermic or endothermic. It is possible that some solar heat
derives from this mechanism.
RPF apparently occurs in Casimir cavities or within a metal matrix in an
earthly environment, and it seems from all of these Ni-H experiments going
back to 1991, that the process can be engineered to be exothermic with no
This is a strong working hypothesis for Ni-H energy gain. It involves excess
heat, no gammas and no neutrons. Average proton mass is depleted. Color
change is coupled to the matrix via magnons.