Yes, that is correct. We do not have an SEM of Parkhomov's Ni particles. You don't know that they were not similar to MFMP's. However, the same thing happened to Parkhomov's particles as the MFMP particles - they were covered with liquid Li-Al-Ni-H at the time of the reaction and the fine features were substantially dissolved giving the Li-Al-Ni-H its 4% Ni. This tends to equalize bigger and smaller particles.
Parkhomov's choice of Ni powder seemed to have worked. He didn't get quite the COP claimed by the Lugano team for the HotCat (but the Lungano numbers appear to be wrong too high). In the Lugano case, look on page 43 Figure 2 - it is almost identical to the micrographs of MFMP, and MFMP was replicating Parkhomov. It is a pretty compelling case that all 3 experiments were commensurate at the core, save for some iron particles in the HotCat. On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have no problem with the surface features of the MFMP nickel powder. The > comparison was between Lagano and the latest Dr. Parkhomov's experiment of > the 27th/28th February. > > Where is the micrograph of that Russian powder? > > Your mixing apples and oranges. > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Axil, have you looked at the SEM images (courtesy of Ed Storms) of the Ni >> from the MFMP reactor? >> >> >> https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2fllFSWpFNVJoUlIxbERhRTE2M2FTY0s3TU9sZ2FsVG5wMGdodlE2ZW1JMVE&usp=sharing >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Axil, what you are describing as "proper sized" and "tubercles" are >>>> applicable to Rossi's low temperature catalyzed Ni fuel. >>>> >>> >>> For a temperature of 1200C, the proper size is about 2 microns give or >>> take. >>> >>> >>>> This is not what was used in the HotCat or Parkhomov experiment. SEM >>>> images of the Ni core from the MFMP experiment (Bang!) show that early on >>>> the Ni particles are completely reduced of oxide by the evolved hydrogen >>>> and by 300C, they are sintering into a sparse 3D web like structure. >>>> >>> >>> Page 43 figure 2 of the Lagano report shows a particle with tubercles. >>> The other has been melted. >>> >>> >>>> Then above 900C, the released Li-Al alloy molten metal is wetting to >>>> the Ni and actually dissolving the fine features while completely coating >>>> the Ni. This coating is a Li-Al-Ni-H alloy and this is likely a new >>>> modality of LENR with Ni inside liquid metal and with the hydrogen ions in >>>> the liquid metal. >>>> >>> >>> >>> There is no experimental proof of this statement. >>> >>> >>>> The iron in the Lugano experiment is a known catalyst to make LiAlH4 >>>> decompose at a lower temperature. >>>> >>> >>> true >>> >>> >>> >>>> That is probably why the Lugano HotCat worked better at a lower >>>> temperature than Parkhomov (the Lugano temperatures were significantly off, >>>> with the 1410C measurement probably ~1130C; I can send you the paper if you >>>> want). This also decreases that calculated COP by at least 20% which is >>>> getting closer to Parkhomov. >>>> >>> >>> Key to my point, Lugano demo worked better than the Parkhomov system >>> because Rossi's nickel particles are LENR reaction proven. Parkhomov nickel >>> did not work as stated by Parkhomov's own experimental analysis. >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Lugano and Parkhomov are commensurate. Rossi's low temperature eCat >>>> catalyzed fuel is different and the reaction there is gas phase. >>>> >>>> Rossi's nickel powder looks the same over all his applications. >>>> >>> >> >
