Rossi has said that he uses AC current in the heater and that DC current does not work. This might indicate 50 or 50 CPS AC current is used to induce heat in plasma and/or iron.
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > There are also iron particles in the fuel mix that might support inductive > heating local to the fuel mix. Inductive heating might result in the > primary heater wire being colder than the fuel charge thus casting a darker > shadow that we see in the pictures of the reactor in operation. I like the > inductive heating idea. > > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The tubercles on the nickel powder function to ionize the hydrogen using >> dipole motion induced by heat. >> >> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Robert Lynn < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> far above curie limit for Ni, magnetic fields won't move powder >>> magnetically, only ions, but temps are too low for significant Li or H ions >>> to exist, and no ionising radiation sources in evidence. >>> >>> On 13 October 2014 00:49, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Yes but in that case the core can be hotter then the cables. We don't >>>> know about the powder, and the changes of magnetic fields inside the core >>>> could stir the powder around and by changing that behavior you might end up >>>> controlling the reaction rate. Also inductive heating of an inner >>>> containing cylinder does produce a fast response to the actual cylinder >>>> which controls the heat radiative environment in there. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Robert Lynn < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> inductive heating only works on conductive materials with sufficient >>>>> thickness/area through which the changing magnetic flux passes to allow >>>>> eddy currents to form. With 150Hz pulses Nickel particles of tiny scale >>>>> would not be affected (like thin motor laminates) - it would only work to >>>>> heat a secondary metal body that could then heat via radiation (very >>>>> inefficient, and of no practical benefit). >>>>> >>>>> On 13 October 2014 00:35, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> How do we know that iti s resistive heating that is taking place? Bob >>>>>> Greenyer at MFMP sugested that it is an inductive heater this means that >>>>>> the wires >>>>>> get a bit cooler then the heated core. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Robert Lynn < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Fig 12b. page 26. Only just notice that they say they are >>>>>>> "inconel" resistance wires. But how can the resistor wire, external to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> reactor, glow more brightly than the reactor itself (implying it is >>>>>>> hotter)? Also if the reactor external surface is at 1250-1410°C, then >>>>>>> on >>>>>>> top of the 30-50°C temperature drop through the walls the resistive wire >>>>>>> would have to be even hotter (up towards 1500°C) in order to be able to >>>>>>> radiate the 900W! And there are no "inconel" metal wires that can >>>>>>> survive >>>>>>> such temperatures in air for a month. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/melting-temperature-metals-d_860.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is also a mistake in their discussion for these figures, the >>>>>>> metal resistors within the reactor would necessarily have to be hotter >>>>>>> than >>>>>>> the reactor itself if they are to be able to output heat into the >>>>>>> reactor. >>>>>>> But then again at >1450°C inconel resistance wires would have turned >>>>>>> into >>>>>>> puddles anyway. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The 2mm high fins on the outside, subjected to convective air >>>>>>> cooling would be 30-50°C colder than the base of the fins due to the >>>>>>> longer >>>>>>> conduction path and hence greater temperature drop through the alumina. >>>>>>> And that should influence the thermography to under-read, but also means >>>>>>> the temperature within the reactor would have to be even higher to >>>>>>> create >>>>>>> 1400°C average surface temperature. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So this proves that the thermographic temperature readings are off >>>>>>> by a very long way - at least 150-200°C too high if inconel wires that >>>>>>> max-out at about 1300-1350°C were to have survived for a month. We now >>>>>>> know there is a huge error, we just don't know the source of the error, >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> how big the error is. But eg 1210°C vs 1410°C would drop power output >>>>>>> by >>>>>>> 40% from that claimed so that the COP would be <2. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> With the existence of such a huge error of unknown source the claims >>>>>>> of power output cannot not be trusted at all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On the upside, it does however mean that the nickel was not melted, >>>>>>> and lithium vapour pressure was a lot lower. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
