I think it's a valid point to check the inner alumina tube for leaks, which can probably be done by careful postmortem. Also I wonder if the alumina tube holding the Ni - LiAlH4 was sealed in a vacum. That would be the only other concern is if it was filled under a vacum, or pumped down is if the seal broke somehow (thermal expansion?) of the fuel cylinder and seal.
As an alternative to the dog bone design and to rapidly test fuel mixture, I wonder how the alumina tube would do using microwave as the external heat source? That may help in LiAlH4 dehydrogenation process and Ni-H diffusion and would help make experimenting with fuel mix a little easier. On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 6:12 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > Eric, the calibration apparently is accurate according to the text. I > would guess that the insulation surrounding the water jacket and the > addition of extra insulation on the top surface ensures that most of the > heat ends up within the water. The calibration is key. > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Wed, Dec 31, 2014 6:01 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:The MFMP replication effort live on youtube. > > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 2:39 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> > wrote: > > In either of these three cases I would expect the active device to get >> hotter than had it been subjected to open air cooling. The trend is the >> same. >> > > The device may be hotter than it would be in the case of open-air > cooling. But since the water bath does not enclose the inner housing on > all sides, I suspect there is a significant heat loss through the top of > the inner and outer housing. Although I don't think you were addressing > this point, it seems to me that this would lead to an underestimation of > the true energy output. > > http://i.imgur.com/MoEJGv3.png [1] > > Eric > > > [1] Taken from > http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Lugano-Confirmed.pdf >
