May 23, 2013

E-Cat第三者試験結果 PART2:3月のTEST(その2)



Analysis of data obtained with the “dummy”
By “dummy” is meant here the same E-Cat HT2 used for the test described in Part 2, but provided with an inner cylinder lacking both the steel caps and the powder charge.


This “unloaded” device was subject to measurements performed after the 116-hr trial run, and was kept running for about six hours.


Instrumentation and data analysis were the same as those used for the test of the active E-Cat HT2.


We prefer to present the data relevant to the dummy beforehand, since these data made it possible to perform a sort of “calibration” of the E-Cat HT2, as shall be pointed out below.

The electrical power to the dummy was handled by the same control box, but without the ON/OFF cycle of the resistor coils.

ダミーへの電力は、同一の制御ボックスによって処理された、しかし抵抗コイルのON / OFFサイクルはなしとなる。

Thus, the power applied to the dummy was continuous.

したがって、ダミーに印加される電力は連続的であった 。
Power to the dummy’s resistor coils was stepped up gradually, waiting for the device to reach thermal equilibrium at each step.


In the final part of the test, the combined power to the dummy + control box was around 910-920 W.

試験の最後の部分で、ダミー+コントロールボックスへの合成パワーは、だいたい 910から920Wだった。

Resistor coil power consumption was measured by placing the instrument in single-phase directly on the coil input cables, and was found to be, on average, about 810 W.

抵抗コイルの消費電力は、コイル入力ケーブルに直接的に単相の測定器を配置することによって測定した、それで、平均して、約810 W であることが見出された。

From this one derives that the power consumption of the control box was approximately = 110-120 W.

これから、導出できることは以下である、コントロールボックスの消費電力は約=110-120 W.あった。

At this power, the heat produced from the resistor coils alone determined an average surface temperature (flange and “top” excluded) of almost 300 °C, very close to the average one found in the same areas of the E-Cat HT2 during the live test.

このパワーで、単独抵抗コイルから発生する熱は、ほぼ300°Cという平均表面温度(フランジと "トップ"は除く)を決定した、ライブ・テスト中にE-キャットHT2の同じ領域で発見される平均に非常に近接しています。

Various dots were applied to the dummy as well.


A K-type thermocouple heat probe was placed under one of the dots, to monitor temperature trends in a fixed point.


The same probe had also been used with the E-Cat HT2 to double check the IR camera readings during the cooling phase.


The values measured by the heat probe were always higher than those indicated by the IR camera: this difference, minimal in the case of the E-Cat HT2, was more noticeable in the dummy, where temperature readings proved to be always higher by about 2 °C.


The most likely reason for the difference is to be sought in the fact that the probe, when covered with the dot securing it the surface, could not dissipate any heat by convection, unlike the areas adjacent to it.


In order to evaluate the power emitted by the dummy by radiation and convection, we decided to divide the image of the cylindrical body into 5 areas, to each of which, by means of dots, we assigned an average emissivity of 0.80.


Lastly, the analysis of images relevant to the “top” determined for
this area another value for ε: 0.88.



Fig. 13. Dummy measurement set-up.


Center: laptop display showing the thermal image of the dummy divided into 5 areas, and the dark shadow of the thermocouple, with probe point located under a dot.


Left: thermocouple LCD display, indicating a temperature of 244.5 °C.


This is relevant to the same area which the IR camera reading of 242.7 °C, visible on the laptop display, refers to.


Lower thermal exchange between the probe and the environment is the most likely cause for the difference.


The difference is most likely caused by lower thermal exchange between the probe and the environment..

For each of the five areas, energy emitted by radiation was calculated.


 Once again, Stefan-Boltzmann’s formula multiplied by the area taken into consideration was used, as in Part 1, equation (5).


Power emitted by convection was calculated by equations (9) and (10).


The equations are repeated below for clarity’s sake, followed by a table summarizing the results.


AreaDummy = 2πRL = 989.6 ・ 10^-4 [m2]
AreaTop = πR2 = 63.61 ・ 10^-4 [m2]
Note that coefficients C" and n of (10) have the same value calculated for the December test, namely C" = 1.32, and n = 0.25, whereas the diameter D is now = 9 cm.

注意してください、係数C"及びn(10)は、12月試験について計算された値と同じである、直径Dは、今、= 9 cmであるのに対しである。

Moreover, by AreaDummy the cylindrical body of the device is meant, without flange or “top”.

さらに、AreaDummy よって、デバイスの円筒体が意味され、フランジなし、あるいは、"トップ"。

Lastly, the contributing factor due to ambient temperature, termed “E_room” in (7) above, has already been subtracted from the power values associated with each area.


This was calculated assuming an ambient temperature value of 14.8 °C.


E_room = (5.67 ・10 ^ -8) (288)^4 (0.80) (198 ・10^-4) = 6.18 [W]

Table 6. Power emitted by radiation (E) and convection (Q) for each of the five areas.


The value of E_room, about 6.18 W, has already been subtracted from power E in the relevant area.

E_roomの値は、約 6.18 W、既に関連分野でのパワーEから差し引かれています。
By means of the second thermal imagery camera, it was possible to monitor the temperature of the “top”, which was almost stable at 225 °C.


Using the second thermal imagery camera, it was possible to monitor the temperature of the breech, which was almost stable at 225 °C.


We were thus able to compute the contributing factor to the total radiating energy associated with this part of the dummy: a value of E-E_room = 17 W.

そこで我々は、ダミーのこの部分に関連付けられた総放射エネルギーに貢献する要因を計算することができました:E-E_room= 17 Wの値

As for the flange, it was not possible to evaluate its temperature with sufficient reliability, despite the fact that it was partially framed by both IR cameras.


A careful analysis of the relevant thermal imagery revealed how part of the heat emitted from the flange was actually reflected heat coming from the body of the dummy.


In fact, the position of the flange is such that one of its sides constantly receives radiative heat emitted by the body of the cylinder: if we were to attribute the recorded temperature to the flange, we would risk overestimating the total radiative power.

実際には、フランジの位置は、こんな感じである、その側面の一つは、シリンダ体によって放出された放射熱を常に受けるようになっている : もし、私たちが、記録された温度がフランジに起因するとした場合、私達は総放射パワーを過大評価する危険があるでしょう。

Conservation of energy was used to evaluate the contributing factor of the flange, and of all other not previously accounted factors, to the total energy of the dummy.


Thus, we get:

This last value is the sum of the contributive factors relevant to all unknown values, namely: flange convection and radiation, “top” convection (NB convection only), losses through conduction, and the margin of error associated with our evaluation.


Since the temperatures reached by the dummy and by the E-Cat HT2 during their operation were seen to be quite similar, this value will also be used to calculate the power relevant to the E-Cat HT2, where it will be attributed the same meaning.