You have to be very careful of your formulations and observations when using Fe2O3 in this chemical system. Both the unoxidized Al and Li will form a thermite reaction with the Fe2O3 which is very energetic. The Li thermite reaction will probably ignite first when the LiAlH4 decomposes to LiH and liquifies. If the Fe2O3 is finely divided, the reaction can proceed very quickly and can melt even the alumina at over 2000C. If you have electrical coils inside with the fuel, as the system heats up, a hot spot in the wire (maybe from corrosion) can ignite the thermite reaction.
I think this is why Rossi used such large particles of Fe2O3 in his reactor. Apparently he wanted this as a catalyst, but if the particles were just too small it made a rapid thermite reaction and burned up his reactor. Bob On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 6:09 PM, Jack Cole <jcol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jones, > Yes, good memory on the potassium and iron oxide. Specifically, I used > KOH, aluminum, nickel, Fe2O3, and LAH. There were a few experiments with > quick thermal accelerations followed by melting wires. My instrumentation > at the time was not good enough to determine if it was a power spike or if > it was likely internally generated. I would have to try again with my > better instrumentation. I might as well set up the cell phone muon > detector app while I'm at it. Good find for Blaze. > > Thanks for the ideas. > Jack > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 5:48 PM Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > >> *(resend – is anyone else having troub**l**e posting?)* >> >> *From:* Jack Cole >> >> Ø I wrote a short post about two papers that are of interest, but >> are negative regarding Ni+LAH. Jean-Paul Biberian has conducted a series of >> experiments with the Parkhomov formula … after some 20 experiments >> utilizing mass flow calorimetry revealed no excess heat. Additionally, >> Budko and Korshunov report a series of 17 experiments generating no excess >> heat…. My conclusion at this point is that nickel and LiAlH4 does not >> reliably produce excess heat, and if it does at all, it is rare. >> >> Regrettably that seems to be the agonizing situation which we are facing; >> plus, given many other failures not reported - it is recognizable that >> Rossi may have forfeited the chance for a valid patent -- by holding back >> on details which have prohibited those “skilled in the art” from >> replicating the effect. >> >> Many observers seem to have their own opinions about what was left out, >> but fortunately Leif Holmlid has come to the rescue with a catalyst >> known to produce dense hydrogen. A population of dense hydrogen may be >> required for success. There probably is more than one way to get it, and >> that detail is what Rossi has left out. If so, then it would be wise to >> read Holmlid. >> >> BTW Jack – if memory serves, you used iron oxide and potassium in an >> early experiment which melted the heating wire. Looking back at that >> incident - what is the possibility that a large sudden gain from dense >> hydrogen which reacted too fast and caused the runaway? >> >> (a special spillover catalyst called “Shell 105”, used by Holmlid, >> contains iron oxide and potassium) >> >>
