Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device

Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device

http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.3913

Authors:Giuseppe Levi, Evelyn Foschi, Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson, Lars Tegnér, Hanno Essén
(Submitted on 16 May 2013)
Abstract: An experimental investigation of possible anomalous heat production in a special type of reactor tube named E-Cat HT is carried out. The reactor tube is charged with a small amount of hydrogen loaded nickel powder plus some additives. The reaction is primarily initiated by heat from resistor coils inside the reactor tube. Measurement of the produced heat was performed with high-resolution thermal imaging cameras, recording data every second from the hot reactor tube. The measurements of electrical power input were performed with a large bandwidth three-phase power analyzer. Data were collected in two experimental runs lasting 96 and 116 hours, respectively. An anomalous heat production was indicated in both experiments. The 116-hour experiment also included a calibration of the experimental set-up without the active charge present in the E-Cat HT. In this case, no extra heat was generated beyond the expected heat from the electric input. Computed volumetric and gravimetric energy densities were found to be far above those of any known chemical source. Even by the most conservative assumptions as to the errors in the measurements, the result is still one order of magnitude greater than conventional energy sources.

Comments: 29 pages, 15 figues, plus plots and diagrams

Subjects: General Physics (physics.gen-ph)
Cite as: arXiv:1305.3913 [physics.gen-ph]

Conclusions
The two test measurements described in this text were conducted with the same methodology on two different devices: a first prototype, termed E-Cat HT, and a second one, resulting from technological improvements on the first, termed E-Cat HT2. Both have indicated heat production from an unknown reaction primed by heat from resistor coils. The results obtained indicate that energy was produced in decidedly higher quantities than what may be gained from any conventional source. In the March test, about 62 net kWh were produced, with a consumption of about 33 kWh, a power density of about 5.3 • 10^5, and a density of thermal energy of about 6.1 • 10^7Wh/kg. In the December test, about 160 net kWh were produced, with a consumption of 35 kWh, a power density of about 7 • 10^3W/kg and a thermal energy density of about 6.8 • 10^5Wh/kg. The difference in results between the two tests may be seen in the overestimation of the weight of the charge in the first test (which was comprehensive of the weight of the two metal caps sealing the cylinder), and in the manufacturer’s choice of keeping temperatures under control in the second experiment to enhance the stability of the operating cycle. In any event, the results obtained place both devices several orders of magnitude outside the

Even from the standpoint of a “blind” evaluation of volumetric energy density, if we consider the whole volume of the reactor core and the most conservative figures on energy production, we still get a value of (7.93 ± 0.8) 102 MJ/Liter that is one order of magnitude higher than any conventional source.
Lastly, it must be remarked that both tests were terminated by a deliberate shutdown of the reactor, not by fuel exhaustion; thus, the energy densities that were measured should be considered as lower limits of real values.

The March test is to be considered an improvement over the one performed in December, in that various problems encountered in the first experiment were addressed and solved in the second one. In the next test experiment which is expected to start in the summer of 2013, and will last about six months, a long term performance of the E-Cat HT2 will be tested. This test will be crucial for further attempts to unveil the origin of the heat phenomenon observed so far.

Last year everyone was saying the correct way to measure input VS output and COP was with calorimetry? What changed?

Also, why does he need to use three phase A/C on the heaters? A heater is seen electrically as just an inductive resister so using three phase makes zero sense, except for those who failed in A/C math in electronics. It's a lot harder to calculate power used with a simple meter even an RMS meter. I'd rather use I x V=W than bust out the trig necessary to accurately measure A/C.

They should have used D/C, measured the voltage and current and bingo, you have power in without having to worry about phase angle or all the other things measuring A/C current accurately has in its way whenever reactance is involved.

They did use single phase A/C for one of the other experiments.

What ever happened with Defkalion?

This sure sounds like technobabble:

… a cylinder having a silicon nitride ceramic outer shell, 33 cm in length, and 10 cm in diameter. A second cylinder made of a different ceramic material (corundum) was located within the shell, and housed three delta-connected spiral-wire resistor coils. Resistors were laid out horizontally, parallel to and equidistant from the cylinder axis, and were as long as the cylinder itself. They were fed by a TRIAC power regulator device which interrupted each phase periodically, in order to modulate power input with an industrial trade secret waveform. This procedure, needed to properly activate the E-Cat HT charge, had no bearing whatsoever on the power consumption of the device, which remained constant throughout the test. The most important element of the E-Cat HT was lodged inside the structure. It consisted of an AISI 310 steel cylinder, 3 mm thick and 33 mm in diameter, housing the powder charges. Two AISI 316 steel cone-shaped caps were hot-hammered in the cylinder, sealing it hermetically.

Was there radiation detected, did they mention lead shielding, analysis of the end product of the reaction?

So, now it's not a secret catalyst, it's a secret waveform which would be incredibly easy to figure out. Rossi changes his tune every time we hear him. His responses to the questions from the Florida certification folks are awesome in their complete B.S.

He is doing nothing but damage to legitimate LENR/LANR research.

"Last year everyone was saying the correct way to measure input VS output and COP was with calorimetry? What changed?"

Nothing changed. Calorimetry WAS done. The method used to do it was different, but just as valid.

Because three phase is ultimately more efficent use of electricity. It doesn't matter, because they measured the current draw on each phase UPSTREAM of the control box. What happens in the control box is basically irrelevant to the COP determination.

"They should have used D/C, measured the voltage and current and bingo, you have power in without having to worry about phase angle or all the other things measuring A/C current accurately has in its way whenever reactance is involved."

Rossi uses what he wants to. The three-phase setup is almost certainly how deployed commercial devices will be driven. Why should he use DC for a demonstration??

"They did use single phase A/C for one of the other experiments."

Yes, because that is easier to implement. The three-phase version of the circuitry probably wasn't designed yet.

"What ever happened with Defkalion?

I'm sure we will hear from them soon, and from many of the rest of Rossi's competitors, as well.

This sure sounds like technobabble:

Not technobabble at all. A perfectly straightforward description of the construction of the device. Nothing odd there. The choices of materials do tell me that Rossi is targeting VERY high temperature operation eventually.

"Was there radiation detected, did they mention lead shielding, analysis of the end product of the reaction?"

I didn't see that mentioned, but Bianchi did radiation measurements on the earlier tests of the hot cat. His results are available online.

"So, now it's not a secret catalyst, it's a secret waveform which would be incredibly easy to figure out. Rossi changes his tune every time we hear him. His responses to the questions from the Florida certification folks are awesome in their complete B.S.

"Not mentioned" is not the same as "not used". And why would Rossi give out his most valuable trade secret(s), as his IP protection is very weak.

"He is doing nothing but damage to legitimate LENR/LANR research."

A lot of people involved in the "legitimate LENR/LANR research" field disagree with you.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.