Issue 31
infinite energy
new energy foundation
who are we?
apply for grants
donate to nef
infinite energy magazine
  about the magazine
subscribe
subscribe
subscribe
back issues
read ie
author instructions
change of address
contact us
advertising
gene mallove collection
biography
publications
photographs
video
resources
  lenr-canr magazine index in the news
in the news
links
research
  mit and cold fusion report technical references
key experimental data
new energy faq
youtube

 

 

infinite energy


New Energy Research Laboratory Device and Process Testing Update
Published in IE Volume 6, Issue #31 May, 2000. By Ed Wall.
Hydrosonic Pump
The heart of the Hydrosonic Pump is a spinning aluminum cylinder immersed in water with indentations drilled into its rim, which cause cavitation of the water due to the extreme shearing forces on the water. Anomalous heat production has been claimed for this device.

The Hydrosonic Pump unit testing has proved to be more challenging than expected. Providing power proved to be time-consuming. We still have not tried turning on the Hydrosonic Pump motor at our new laboratory, but we expect no problems. This will have to be done at night, as required by the power company, just in case the motor does cause a problem for them.

An ideal testing situation would be one in which the test could be run for an indefinite period without affecting its environment temperature, where the inlet water temperature and flow rate would be constant. This might be realizable if we had a pair of huge water tanks in a temperature regulated environment, but that is impractical.

Besides, these tanks would have the problem of changing pressures as the water level changed.

Ten gallons/minute is a good target range for testing, according to Kelly Hudson of Hydrodynamics, Inc.1-7 The water to our building has a flow rate that is closer to one gallon/minute, so the idea of a closed system utilizing an auxiliary pump and radiator made a lot of sense (see diagram). It would allow steady-state conditions to be attained for an extended period if the heat could be removed from the system at a steady rate. The room in which we test has a high ceiling, and we can open two garage doors, so the air around the device could probably be maintained at a pretty constant temperature for many hours.

A fantastically good deal on an unused large surplus brass centrifugal pump, worth about $2000, came along and was too hard to resist at $165, but had a flow rate closer to 80 gallons/minute. This seemed like a minor problem, because we could divert most of the output flow back to the input and use a valve to control the flow rate delivered to the Hydrosonic Pump.

We have a fairly precise Dwyer water flow meter that is rated at 2% of full scale (10 gallons/minute) accuracy, along with a totalizing water meter (total quantity measured) that has good resolution. After a rather interesting plumbing adventure, we were able to turn on our circulating pump and have it pump at different rates through the water meters. A 9% difference was found between the two meters, so another reference method is a must. We intend to divert the flow into a barrel while drawing water from another barrel and measure the time it takes to pump a known volume. This change of configuration may affect the flow rate, but this is not a big problem, because the two meters' flow rates will be recorded during barrel volume and timing measurement. By running the pump at different flow rates, a calibration of the flow meters can be performed.

For a while, it looked like we would be generating Hydrosonic data soon, but an unexpected complication happened. The inlet side of the pump is at a lower pressure than atmospheric. The pump is pumping so vigorously that it heats up the water rapidly. There are only about four gallons of water circulating. That is not a big problem, because we can blow air through the radiator and keep it cool. A likely problem will occur when we turn on the Hydrosonic Pump and the water gets hot. To see what the auxiliary pump will do when the water gets hot, we let the auxiliary pump run for a while and heat the water. As water heats, its vapor pressure increases, so it can boil at the pump inlet, where the pressure is the lowest in the circuit.

A rapid thumping sound developed at around 55C and gradually slowed in frequency while increasing in intensity as the temperature rose. When the water temperature approached 60C, it sounded like a water hammer, then suddenly quiet. The water flow stopped completely as well. This was a big surprise, and it soon dawned on us that it would be a much bigger surprise if the Hydrosonic Pump had been allowed to heat the water to this range. The sudden cessation of flow would mean that the water that was in the Hydrosonic Pump would suddenly boil, producing superheated steam, which reaches high pressure, and would probably destroy our radiator and plumbing, and could scald an unwary witness. There is a pressure relief in the form of a radiator cap, but a surge of pressure like one caused by a loss of water flow would be far too much for that.

So, the plumbing was reworked with a larger diameter pipe and hose in order to maintain a higher pressure at the pump inlet. This seems to have had its desired effect, as the flow velocity is much reduced at the pump inlet, and we were able to run the temperature up to above 75C when the seals failed on one flow meter and the other one just stopped working. The readings on the meters diverged at elevated temperatures, so calibration of both must be performed at a range of temperatures.

The best way to proceed now is to provide sufficient air flow through the radiator to keep the temperature of the water flowing through the flow meters at a low level, then calibrate flow measurement in that temperature range. We would like to try a range of operating water temperatures, and perhaps pressurize the system a little (with an inert gas) to see if any affect on energy efficiency is apparent.

Dash Cell
We are continuing development of the Dash cell experiment apparatus8 and can report that cutting Pyrex is something that should be approached carefully. The recombiner is held in a chamber made from Pyrex and Teflon. The recombiner itself is the same catalyst used in the Case cell, manufactured by United Catalysts, Inc., which Dr. Dash finds to work very well.

A Thermonetics Seebeck Envelope Calorimeter (SEC) was ordered, and is expected to arrive soon. We actually began construction of our own SEC, but the potting compound, which was advertised specifically for thermocouples, etched out the solder from our device. This was a serious aggravation, as our SEC contained over 1500 thermocouples, and its performance was quite good (sensitivity: 0.045 V/W; noise floor of 1 mV without thermostatic reference; very low heat source position sensitivity). Another SEC is under construction with a different type of potting compound, epoxy. A nichrome wire heater with a precise resistance was made for use with a wall-mounted power supply in a feedback controlled water heater for the SEC thermostatic reference, but the same potting compound destroyed that as well. The 'condensation' that was reported in IE No. 29 on the inside of Dash's SEC turned out to be leakage from the water jacket. It has been repaired and their group is back to producing data.

Case Cell Retrospective
In the process of testing a proprietary device, we discovered that the valve used in the Case catalytic fusion cell work was not that good for vacuum work; it may have admitted considerable oxygen. It is hard to tell. Better valves are an absolute requirement.

References

  1. http://www.hydrodynamics.com/
  2. Huffman, M. 1995. "From a Sea of Water to a Sea of Energy? An Adventure in Hands-on Experimental Science," Infinite Energy, 1, 1, 38-44.
  3. Rothwell, J. 1996. "Notes on the Talk by James Griggs of HydroDynamics, Inc. at the Cold Fusion and New Energy Symposium, January 20, 1996," Infinite Energy, 1, 5/6, 25-27.
  4. Mallove, E. 1998. "Device and Process Testing Updates," Infinite Energy, 4, 21, 14-15.
  5. Mallove, E. and Rothwell, J. 1999. "Testing of the Hydrosonic Pump Rotary Cavitation Device," Infinite Energy, 4, 23, 28-29.
  6. Wall, E. and Mallove, E. 1999. "Device and Process Testing Updates," Infinite Energy, 4, 24, 57.
  7. Wall, E. and Kooistra, J. 1999. "Device and Process Testing Updates," Infinite Energy, 5, 28, 29.
  8. Wall, E. 2000. "Device and Process Testing Update," Infinite Energy, 5, 29, 52-53.



Copyright © 2014-2015. All rights reserved. E-mail: staff@infinite-energy.com