Re: [Vo]:Ceramic-to-metal hermetic bonding

[CB Sites]

You know Axil, maybe they are based on the internal pressure estimates I've
read here.  When the MFMP finally had the pressure transducer stabilized
they had 100psi which decreased linearly to 0 after power off.   A redo of
that experiment would be worth doing just to get the kinks out of the
pressure gauge.  Then you might see the disassociation of LiAlH4 to Li and
H in the pressure change.  As another vortexian mentioned, I don't think
that has ever been published.  So knowing PV=nRT the value 'n' can be
deduced or the expected value of P can be deduced with temp as some have
already done.   Given a temperature goal, and perhaps knowing the strength
of the contain these can be designed into the experiment.  So instead of
worrying about seals, just design a tube that can contain hydrogen gas at
1400C and be loaded with fuel under a vacuum to maintain purity of the
reactants.


On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> I think that MFMP is concerned about melting or exploding the core.
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 11:07 PM, CB Sites  wrote:
>
>> I agree with you Bob.  Getting a good seal will be the challenge of this
>> experiment.   I've seen a few electron micrographs of hydrogen is Si and
>> other metals and it is amazing how deep H will migrate into a lattice.
>> Jones Benne points to the S-bond.com.   It will take something more than
>> that to seal this structure at the high temps, high pressure and
>> embrittlement from hydrogen gas in this experiment.Knowing the pressure
>> and core temp is a noble cause, but until replication is done, do we know
>> enough about the phenomena to pursue those experiments?
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Bob Cook  wrote:
>>
>>>  Jones--
>>>
>>> Unless the thermal expansion of the alumina body is matched to the
>>> expansion of the Stainless Steel sleeve, it will be very hard to maintain a
>>> seal.  The thermal stresses will become very high at the interface of the
>>> two materials. I think that the pressure changes seen in the recent MFMP
>>> test were due to thermal expansion acoustic emissions upon each increase in
>>> temperature.  This emission caused the pressure sensor to spike.   A sonic
>>> acoustic emission monitor would be valuable to deduce where the strain is
>>> and its intensity as a function of heating, if good sealing of the
>>> connection is necessary.  I am not sure the objectives of the test required
>>> such sealing and pressure containment.
>>>
>>> (Acoustic emission monitoring is an old technique to look for micro
>>> cracking in fission reactor equipment that happens during thermal
>>> transients.  Its quite sensitive and has/had been resisted by reactor
>>> vessel manufacturers, because it was so good for identifying defects in
>>> their forgings that other wise might not be discovered.)
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> *From:* Jones Beene 
>>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 03, 2015 1:49 PM
>>> *Subject:* [Vo]:Ceramic-to-metal hermetic bonding
>>>
>>>  It is possible to bond alumina, such as a modified dogbone reactor
>>> directly to stainless tubing, using the proprietary S-bond alloy :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.s-bond.com/blog/2011/04/04/ceramic-metal-bonding-part-one/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The advantage would be allowing a permanent fill port for hydrogen,
>>> along with a pressure gauge, and other feed-thru accommodations which are
>>> more easily ported into metal then into ceramic.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The design problem would be in keeping this metal part of the reactor
>>> cooler than the rest of the reactor – and the simple solution for that is
>>> to add a long ceramic extension tube to the dogbone, which extension is not
>>> powered and it can be as long as the reactor itself with a decreasing
>>> temperature gradient, then to add the stainless plumbing to the far end of
>>> the ceramic extension tube using S-bond. This keeps the heated segment
>>> spatially removed from the stainless. There would be a hot-end and a
>>> cold-end, and the entire unit would be much longer.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> For any dogbone device to move towards commercialization, far more
>>> control must be implemented, including fuel availability and pressure – and
>>> this means adding hydrogen from a tank at a controlled pressure. A ceramic
>>> to metal bond is one way to do that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am assuming that hydrogen is the only consumable, at least until
>>> testing from Parkhomov shows otherwise.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Ceramic-to-metal hermetic bonding

[Axil Axil]

I think that MFMP is concerned about melting or exploding the core.

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 11:07 PM, CB Sites  wrote:

> I agree with you Bob.  Getting a good seal will be the challenge of this
> experiment.   I've seen a few electron micrographs of hydrogen is Si and
> other metals and it is amazing how deep H will migrate into a lattice.
> Jones Benne points to the S-bond.com.   It will take something more than
> that to seal this structure at the high temps, high pressure and
> embrittlement from hydrogen gas in this experiment.Knowing the pressure
> and core temp is a noble cause, but until replication is done, do we know
> enough about the phenomena to pursue those experiments?
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Bob Cook  wrote:
>
>>  Jones--
>>
>> Unless the thermal expansion of the alumina body is matched to the
>> expansion of the Stainless Steel sleeve, it will be very hard to maintain a
>> seal.  The thermal stresses will become very high at the interface of the
>> two materials. I think that the pressure changes seen in the recent MFMP
>> test were due to thermal expansion acoustic emissions upon each increase in
>> temperature.  This emission caused the pressure sensor to spike.   A sonic
>> acoustic emission monitor would be valuable to deduce where the strain is
>> and its intensity as a function of heating, if good sealing of the
>> connection is necessary.  I am not sure the objectives of the test required
>> such sealing and pressure containment.
>>
>> (Acoustic emission monitoring is an old technique to look for micro
>> cracking in fission reactor equipment that happens during thermal
>> transients.  Its quite sensitive and has/had been resisted by reactor
>> vessel manufacturers, because it was so good for identifying defects in
>> their forgings that other wise might not be discovered.)
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> *From:* Jones Beene 
>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 03, 2015 1:49 PM
>> *Subject:* [Vo]:Ceramic-to-metal hermetic bonding
>>
>>  It is possible to bond alumina, such as a modified dogbone reactor
>> directly to stainless tubing, using the proprietary S-bond alloy :
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.s-bond.com/blog/2011/04/04/ceramic-metal-bonding-part-one/
>>
>>
>>
>> The advantage would be allowing a permanent fill port for hydrogen, along
>> with a pressure gauge, and other feed-thru accommodations which are more
>> easily ported into metal then into ceramic.
>>
>>
>>
>> The design problem would be in keeping this metal part of the reactor
>> cooler than the rest of the reactor – and the simple solution for that is
>> to add a long ceramic extension tube to the dogbone, which extension is not
>> powered and it can be as long as the reactor itself with a decreasing
>> temperature gradient, then to add the stainless plumbing to the far end of
>> the ceramic extension tube using S-bond. This keeps the heated segment
>> spatially removed from the stainless. There would be a hot-end and a
>> cold-end, and the entire unit would be much longer.
>>
>>
>>
>> For any dogbone device to move towards commercialization, far more
>> control must be implemented, including fuel availability and pressure – and
>> this means adding hydrogen from a tank at a controlled pressure. A ceramic
>> to metal bond is one way to do that.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am assuming that hydrogen is the only consumable, at least until
>> testing from Parkhomov shows otherwise.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Ceramic-to-metal hermetic bonding

[CB Sites]

I agree with you Bob.  Getting a good seal will be the challenge of this
experiment.   I've seen a few electron micrographs of hydrogen is Si and
other metals and it is amazing how deep H will migrate into a lattice.
Jones Benne points to the S-bond.com.   It will take something more than
that to seal this structure at the high temps, high pressure and
embrittlement from hydrogen gas in this experiment.Knowing the pressure
and core temp is a noble cause, but until replication is done, do we know
enough about the phenomena to pursue those experiments?


On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Bob Cook  wrote:

>  Jones--
>
> Unless the thermal expansion of the alumina body is matched to the
> expansion of the Stainless Steel sleeve, it will be very hard to maintain a
> seal.  The thermal stresses will become very high at the interface of the
> two materials. I think that the pressure changes seen in the recent MFMP
> test were due to thermal expansion acoustic emissions upon each increase in
> temperature.  This emission caused the pressure sensor to spike.   A sonic
> acoustic emission monitor would be valuable to deduce where the strain is
> and its intensity as a function of heating, if good sealing of the
> connection is necessary.  I am not sure the objectives of the test required
> such sealing and pressure containment.
>
> (Acoustic emission monitoring is an old technique to look for micro
> cracking in fission reactor equipment that happens during thermal
> transients.  Its quite sensitive and has/had been resisted by reactor
> vessel manufacturers, because it was so good for identifying defects in
> their forgings that other wise might not be discovered.)
>
> Bob
>
> - Original Message -
> *From:* Jones Beene 
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Sent:* Saturday, January 03, 2015 1:49 PM
> *Subject:* [Vo]:Ceramic-to-metal hermetic bonding
>
>  It is possible to bond alumina, such as a modified dogbone reactor
> directly to stainless tubing, using the proprietary S-bond alloy :
>
>
>
> http://www.s-bond.com/blog/2011/04/04/ceramic-metal-bonding-part-one/
>
>
>
> The advantage would be allowing a permanent fill port for hydrogen, along
> with a pressure gauge, and other feed-thru accommodations which are more
> easily ported into metal then into ceramic.
>
>
>
> The design problem would be in keeping this metal part of the reactor
> cooler than the rest of the reactor – and the simple solution for that is
> to add a long ceramic extension tube to the dogbone, which extension is not
> powered and it can be as long as the reactor itself with a decreasing
> temperature gradient, then to add the stainless plumbing to the far end of
> the ceramic extension tube using S-bond. This keeps the heated segment
> spatially removed from the stainless. There would be a hot-end and a
> cold-end, and the entire unit would be much longer.
>
>
>
> For any dogbone device to move towards commercialization, far more control
> must be implemented, including fuel availability and pressure – and this
> means adding hydrogen from a tank at a controlled pressure. A ceramic to
> metal bond is one way to do that.
>
>
>
> I am assuming that hydrogen is the only consumable, at least until testing
> from Parkhomov shows otherwise.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Re: Right-on AGP

[Bob Cook]

Jones--

Is the latent heat  you talk of latent heat of vaporization?  Or is it of 
decomposition to Li vapor and H?   The high conductivity seems like a desirable 
parameter to distribute heat around the reactor and limit melting and sintering 
during a LENR.

Bob


- Original Message - 
  From: Jones Beene 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 7:06 PM
  Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Right-on AGP


  Conclusion p 35: We conclude that not only does LiH have the very high 
specific latent heat desirable  for provision of heat to a solar powered high 
altitude aircraft, but it also has a very  favorable heat transport rate, with 
an effective thermal conductivity that rivals or exceeds that of copper.

   

  That is extraordinary in itself, but how does high thermal conductivity 
translate into actual gain?

   

   

   

  From: Terry Blanton 

   

  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBU0Q5N2VIN2J5Q2M/view?usp=sharing

RE: [Vo]:Re: Right-on AGP

[Jones Beene]

Conclusion p 35: We conclude that not only does LiH have the very high specific 
latent heat desirable  for provision of heat to a solar powered high altitude 
aircraft, but it also has a very  favorable heat transport rate, with an 
effective thermal conductivity that rivals or exceeds that of copper.

 

That is extraordinary in itself, but how does high thermal conductivity 
translate into actual gain?

 

 

 

From: Terry Blanton 

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBU0Q5N2VIN2J5Q2M/view?usp=sharing

Re: [Vo]:Re: Right-on AGP

[Jed Rothwell]

Terry Blanton  wrote:


> Here's one funded by the old AEC (1960) . . .
>

The old A.E.C. . . . Yes . . .

Along the trail you'll find me lopin'
Where the spaces are wide open
In the land of the old A.E.C., *yahoo*
Where the scenery's attractive
And the air is radioactive
Oh, the wild west is where I wanna be

- Tom Lehrer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LuXCkibX-k

Re: [Vo]:Re: Right-on AGP

[Terry Blanton]

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Mark Jurich  wrote:

Other sources say that decomposition occurs from 900 – 1000 °C, with no
solid reference that I can find to back it up...

The equilibrium plot is shown on p.29 of this document:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBU0Q5N2VIN2J5Q2M/view?usp=sharing

Re: [Vo]:Re: Right-on AGP

[Terry Blanton]

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Mark Jurich  wrote:

>   Here are my references, in chronological order:
>
> Here's one funded by the old AEC (1960), A Survey Report on Lithium
Hydride by CE Messer: (somewhat redundant)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBaWdESmMxOVhDMGc/view?usp=sharing

Re: [Vo]:Ceramic-to-metal hermetic bonding

[Bob Cook]

Jones--

Unless the thermal expansion of the alumina body is matched to the expansion of 
the Stainless Steel sleeve, it will be very hard to maintain a seal.  The 
thermal stresses will become very high at the interface of the two materials. I 
think that the pressure changes seen in the recent MFMP test were due to 
thermal expansion acoustic emissions upon each increase in temperature.  This 
emission caused the pressure sensor to spike.   A sonic acoustic emission 
monitor would be valuable to deduce where the strain is and its intensity as a 
function of heating, if good sealing of the connection is necessary.  I am not 
sure the objectives of the test required such sealing and pressure containment. 
   

(Acoustic emission monitoring is an old technique to look for micro cracking in 
fission reactor equipment that happens during thermal transients.  Its quite 
sensitive and has/had been resisted by reactor vessel manufacturers, because it 
was so good for identifying defects in their forgings that other wise might not 
be discovered.)

Bob
  - Original Message - 
  From: Jones Beene 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 1:49 PM
  Subject: [Vo]:Ceramic-to-metal hermetic bonding


  It is possible to bond alumina, such as a modified dogbone reactor directly 
to stainless tubing, using the proprietary S-bond alloy :

   

  http://www.s-bond.com/blog/2011/04/04/ceramic-metal-bonding-part-one/

   

  The advantage would be allowing a permanent fill port for hydrogen, along 
with a pressure gauge, and other feed-thru accommodations which are more easily 
ported into metal then into ceramic. 

   

  The design problem would be in keeping this metal part of the reactor cooler 
than the rest of the reactor - and the simple solution for that is to add a 
long ceramic extension tube to the dogbone, which extension is not powered and 
it can be as long as the reactor itself with a decreasing temperature gradient, 
then to add the stainless plumbing to the far end of the ceramic extension tube 
using S-bond. This keeps the heated segment spatially removed from the 
stainless. There would be a hot-end and a cold-end, and the entire unit would 
be much longer.

   

  For any dogbone device to move towards commercialization, far more control 
must be implemented, including fuel availability and pressure - and this means 
adding hydrogen from a tank at a controlled pressure. A ceramic to metal bond 
is one way to do that.

   

  I am assuming that hydrogen is the only consumable, at least until testing 
from Parkhomov shows otherwise.

   

   

   

Re: [Vo]:FYI: The Swedish Military is funding LENR research.

[Blaze Spinnaker]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra0e97Wiqds

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Blaze Spinnaker 
wrote:

> This is smart science.   Keeping an open mind and trying all options, even
> if they're small probability because they can to a huge payoff.
>
> I'd love it if we could do something like this for LENR
>
>
> http://www.wsj.com/video/this-robot-is-changing-how-we-cure-diseases/C44DAE3D-C7FD-4C87-9E3F-685498A0C2CB.html
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 7:46 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>>
>> http://wavewatching.net/fringe/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Reactions-with-nickel-and-hydrogen142972_TMP.pdf
>>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Re: Right-on AGP

[Jones Beene]

Thanks to Mark for relevant citations. Most observers have a working hypothesis 
by now and categorize the lithium functionality as both carrier of hydrogen and 
as a nuclear reactant. My hope is to get an isotope analysis soon, independent 
of Rossi’s machinations.

 

Until isotope analysis paints a different picture, I’m in the minority in 
believing that there is no nuclear reaction of lithium here since all possible 
reactions will produce gamma radiation which is not seen. 

 

The issue will possibly be resolved this month, since there are a surprising 
number of replications in progress. For me, the explanation that best fits the 
facts is that hydrogen is being transformed into the DDL state by magnetic 
interaction with SPP (surface plasmon polaritons) aided by Rydberg value 
catalysts (such as nickel and lithium). This is the deepest ground state, which 
has been recently associated with dark matter. It has a signature spectral line 
at 3.5 keV and there has been an explosion of papers from cosmologist who now 
identify this line as dark matter – and it fits into the Dirac equation as a 
dense state of hydrogen. The signature which would solve the mystery is a soft 
x-ray which will not be easy to confirm, as it is easily absorbed, but it can 
be done using a pinhole technique.

 

 

From: Mark Jurich 

 

Here are my references, in chronological order:

 

[1] The thermal decomposition of lithium aluminum hydride, Garner & Haycock 
(1951)

  
http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royprsa/211/1106/335.full.pdf

 

[2] PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OF LITHIUM HYDRIDE AS A HIGH-TEMPERATURE INTERNAL 
COOLANT, Modisette (1957)

  http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1957/naca-rm-l57f12a.pdf

 

[3] INVESTIGATION OF LITHIUM HYDRIDE AND MAGNESIUM AS HIGH-TEMPERATURE INTERNAL 
COOLANTS WITH SEVERAL SKIN MATERIALS, Modisette (1958)

  
http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc53069/m2/1/high_res_d/19660024045.pdf

 

[4] The Thermal Decomposition of Lithium Aluminum Hydride, Block & Gray (1964)

  http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ic50025a009

 

[5] Desorption of LiAlH4 with Ti- and V-based additives, Blanchard, Brinks, 
Hauback & Norby (2004)

  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921510703005415

 

[6] Hydrogen, lithium, and lithium hydride production, US 20130047789 A1 (2013)

  http://www.google.com/patents/US20130047789

 

Notes

- [1] is the classic paper (1951) everyone seems to refer to.

- [2] is prelim of [3], with slightly different content, describing the 
reversible LiH decomposition reaction

- [4] if this isn’t referenced in any paper regarding LiAlH4 Thermal 
Decomposition, the paper is suspect (1964, 2 pages, but unfortunately behind a 
pay wall, maybe if someone searches hard enough, they’ll find it; I’ll look 
after I post this. Has DSC Plots, breaking down the H2 Evolution at various 
temps, but at standard pressures)

- [5] Behind a pay wall, but what you see on the page is good enough... The do 
NOT reference [4]!

- [6] Some nice Vapor Pressure curves in here!

- I also came across this book via the Internet (as well as Axil), but I do not 
have it (looks very useful):

http://www.bookmantraa.com/thermophysical-properties-lithium-hydride-deuteride-tritide-their-solutions-with-lithium-book-72683.html

 

- Mark Jurich

 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:FYI: The Swedish Military is funding LENR research.

[Blaze Spinnaker]

This is smart science.   Keeping an open mind and trying all options, even
if they're small probability because they can to a huge payoff.

I'd love it if we could do something like this for LENR

http://www.wsj.com/video/this-robot-is-changing-how-we-cure-diseases/C44DAE3D-C7FD-4C87-9E3F-685498A0C2CB.html

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 7:46 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

>
> http://wavewatching.net/fringe/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Reactions-with-nickel-and-hydrogen142972_TMP.pdf
>

[Vo]:Vortex-l mailings vs Vortex-l Archives

[Harvey Norris]

When I post to the list a yahoo pop-up comes up with the address already there 
as frequently posted addresses, so I use it.  But this time I manually printed 
the address in. It appears that my post may not appear in the mailings to my 
email address. At the same time that (correct)pop up address also appears next 
to other misspelled versions which I don't choose. They are there because I 
misspelled the address before on sendings, in which case the mailer demon sends 
a mailing back that lets me know the address is wrong or non existent as it 
could not be sent to the desired party. But yahoo includes these misspelled 
addresses in their list of frequently used sent addresses. This gets 
frustrating so the last time recently I sent a test letter that did go through 
upon notification that it was a test letter, but now I see other variations of 
this external controller taking place. I think I should be entitled to see all 
the postings from vortex-l@eskimo.com , not just the ones this external 
controller decides to send to me. The point in matter here is this; when I went 
to the archives I saw several posts from Frank Znidarsic made which are 
recorded in the archives, but these were not sent to my email address itself. 
So this is not just happening to me, it also involves other posters. Why is the 
vortex list malfunctioning like this? Is it a matter for Bill to decipher? Is 
another govt agency censoring certain vortex emails to be sent out to the 
members so that they only receive the mailings they select for them???Sincerely 
inquisitive,Harvey D Norris
Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances 
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/

[Vo]:Re: Right-on AGP

[Mark Jurich]

Here are my references, in chronological order:

[1] The thermal decomposition of lithium aluminum hydride, Garner & Haycock 
(1951)
  
http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royprsa/211/1106/335.full.pdf

[2] PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OF LITHIUM HYDRIDE AS A HIGH-TEMPERATURE INTERNAL 
COOLANT, Modisette (1957)
  http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1957/naca-rm-l57f12a.pdf

[3] INVESTIGATION OF LITHIUM HYDRIDE AND MAGNESIUM AS HIGH-TEMPERATURE INTERNAL 
COOLANTS WITH SEVERAL SKIN MATERIALS, Modisette (1958)
  
http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc53069/m2/1/high_res_d/19660024045.pdf

[4] The Thermal Decomposition of Lithium Aluminum Hydride, Block & Gray (1964)
  http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ic50025a009

[5] Desorption of LiAlH4 with Ti- and V-based additives, Blanchard, Brinks, 
Hauback & Norby (2004)
  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921510703005415

[6] Hydrogen, lithium, and lithium hydride production, US 20130047789 A1 (2013)
  http://www.google.com/patents/US20130047789

Notes
- [1] is the classic paper (1951) everyone seems to refer to.
- [2] is prelim of [3], with slightly different content, describing the 
reversible LiH decomposition reaction
- [4] if this isn’t referenced in any paper regarding LiAlH4 Thermal 
Decomposition, the paper is suspect (1964, 2 pages, but unfortunately behind a 
pay wall, maybe if someone searches hard enough, they’ll find it; I’ll look 
after I post this. Has DSC Plots, breaking down the H2 Evolution at various 
temps, but at standard pressures)
- [5] Behind a pay wall, but what you see on the page is good enough... The do 
NOT reference [4]!
- [6] Some nice Vapor Pressure curves in here!
- I also came across this book via the Internet (as well as Axil), but I do not 
have it (looks very useful):
http://www.bookmantraa.com/thermophysical-properties-lithium-hydride-deuteride-tritide-their-solutions-with-lithium-book-72683.html

- Mark Jurich


From: Mark Jurich 
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 11:56 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Right-on AGP

Hi Jones:

   Without going into all the details, your calculations are in line with the 
language-translated Parkhomov information.  At the point of estimating the 
corrected pressure due to heating, he simply multiplies the 50 bar/atmosphere 
pressure by 2, to obtain 100 atmospheres.  I’m not sure where you obtained the 
900 °K value for the temperature, but all current estimates are that the 
internal temperature for the Parkhomov Cell is no more than about 1000 °C 
(probably lower than this), based on where his thermocouple was located.  His 
plots approach 1300 °C where he was measuring at...

  ... Crunching through all the possible numbers, I get a top end of 3425psi 
using all the “extreme” values.  Since the MFMP DogBone has Stainless Steel 
extension on it, the volume has now increased and I would be making a wild 
guess at the added volume, but I would say 30% more (perhaps Bob H./MFMP can 
give us some more accurate estimate)?

   I believe Parkhomov is assuming [virtual] loss/leaking of H2 when obtaining 
his factor of 2 pressure increase with temperature (and perhaps it has 
something to do with the equilibrium conditions that will be obtained when the 
2LiH <> 2Li + H2 reversible reaction occurs at the temperatures/pressures 
involved.  But this is all pure speculation on my part, since there are no 
remarks that I can find.  Please note that Parkhomov had no way of knowing the 
actual pressures, since he did not measure them, as far as I know...

... He does refer to “> 850 °C” for the above reversible reaction, but I 
believe he obtained this value from the Boiling Point of LiH (850 °C) at 
Standard Pressure.  Actually LiH starts to decompose before it boils (according 
to some literature), so for anyone to mention the Boiling Point of LiH (as I 
have just did), is highly questionable.  Other sources say that decomposition 
occurs from 900 – 1000 °C, with no solid reference that I can find to back it 
up...

... I have about 5 references here concerning all this, and will try to post 
them when I get more time...

- Mark Jurich


From: Jones Beene 
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 9:40 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: [Vo]:Right-on AGP

Has anyone determined that the high internal pressure claimed by Parkhomov is 
even possible? Did he claim 500 psi? I cannot find the reference today, but the 
numbers are probably out there and at first glance – score one for AGP.

Btw – in a search of Vortex, it turns out Parkhomov was mention by Rothwell way 
back in 2012: Author: Y. Bazhutov … A. Parkhomov et al, Year of Conference: 
2012 Title: “Investigation of Radiation Effects at Loading Ni, Be and LaNi5 by 
Hydrogen”. Very appropriate.

Just in case no one else has done it– here are back of envelope calcs – 
rounding off slightly: molar volume of hydrogen gas (assuming ideal gas at 1 
atmosphere of pressure) is 24.5 liters (o

[Vo]:Ceramic-to-metal hermetic bonding

[Jones Beene]

It is possible to bond alumina, such as a modified dogbone reactor directly
to stainless tubing, using the proprietary S-bond alloy :

 

http://www.s-bond.com/blog/2011/04/04/ceramic-metal-bonding-part-one/

 

The advantage would be allowing a permanent fill port for hydrogen, along
with a pressure gauge, and other feed-thru accommodations which are more
easily ported into metal then into ceramic. 

 

The design problem would be in keeping this metal part of the reactor cooler
than the rest of the reactor - and the simple solution for that is to add a
long ceramic extension tube to the dogbone, which extension is not powered
and it can be as long as the reactor itself with a decreasing temperature
gradient, then to add the stainless plumbing to the far end of the ceramic
extension tube using S-bond. This keeps the heated segment spatially removed
from the stainless. There would be a hot-end and a cold-end, and the entire
unit would be much longer.

 

For any dogbone device to move towards commercialization, far more control
must be implemented, including fuel availability and pressure - and this
means adding hydrogen from a tank at a controlled pressure. A ceramic to
metal bond is one way to do that.

 

I am assuming that hydrogen is the only consumable, at least until testing
from Parkhomov shows otherwise.

 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Axil Axil]

The element analysis was done based on just a few grains of material. This
is like trying to determine who will be elected to office  by polling just
one person. The results of the transmutation analysis are indeed uncertain.

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Bob Cook  wrote:

>  Axil--
>
> Have you seen any data that confirms the presence of H gas at the end of
> the Lugano test or any other Hot-Cat
> test?  I presume the containment of H is a guess on your part.
>
> Bob
>
> - Original Message -
> *From:* Axil Axil 
> *To:* vortex-l 
> *Sent:* Saturday, January 03, 2015 7:23 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone
>
>  http://luratia.com/graphene/graphene-is-impermeable
>
> Graphene is impermeable to all gases including hydrogen but it will let
> water through like it was not even there,
>
> http://phys.org/news/2012-01-graphene-supermaterial-superpermeable.html
>
> I segest a surface coating of nano Graphene produced by an application of
> nano powdered Graphene on the inside surface of the Alumina tube to keep
> the hydrogen in.
>
> The GO membrain
>
> http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1112/1112.3488.pdf
>
> I believe this use of Nano Graphene to make the inside surface of the
> alumina impermeable to gas exfiltration was the reason why large amounts of
> carbon was found in the fuel load of Rossi's Hot Cat.
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>>  Let us not underestimate Rossi.
>>
>> The account of how Rossi loaded the fuel into the alumina tubes told by
>> the TPR2 report does not sound like Rossi when through a complicated time
>> consuming and/or involved alumina sealing process to protect against
>> hydrogen leakage.
>>
>> An excerpt from the Lugano report:
>>
>> "A thermocouple probe, inserted into one of the caps, allows the control
>> system to manage power supply to the resistors by measuring the internal
>> temperature of the reactor. The hole for the thermocouple probe is also the
>> only access point for the fuel charge. The thermocouple probe cable is
>> inserted in an alumina cement cylinder, which acts as a bushing and
>> perfectly fits the hole, about 4 mm in diameter. When charging the reactor,
>> the bushing is pulled out, and the charge is inserted. After the
>> thermocouple probe has been lodged back in place, the bushing is sealed and
>> secured with alumina cement. To extract the charge, pliers are used to open
>> the seal."
>>
>> These recent tests by MFMP indicate that sealing alumina from hydrogen
>> leakage is a challenge. But the Rossi Hot Cat did run for weeks without
>> apparent loss of hydrogen. Rossi has come up with a way to effectively seal
>> alumina.
>>
>> How could have Rossi made the alumina tube resistant to hydrogen leakage?
>>
>> Could Rossi have used a self sealing additive included in the fuel mix
>> that entered the pores of the alumina after the reactor was started to
>> minimize hydrogen exfiltration?
>>
>> There was a large amount of carbon in the element analysis of the fuel
>> load. Could it be that Rossi used a organic sealant to stop hydrogen
>> leakage?
>>
>> An excerpt from the Lugano report:
>>
>> "Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel also
>> contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these are
>> not found in the ash."
>>
>> Where did all those rather high concentrations of elements go? Could it
>> be that the C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, and Mn were nano particles used to seal the
>> fuel including hydrogen by blocking the pores of the alumina in a self
>> anodizing process in the initial stages during of reactor startup? Carbon
>> is a well know hydrogen blocker.
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Axil Axil]

>From the TPR2  report: "The elements C, H, O, N, He, Ar and F cannot be
measured quantitatively by this technique. "

There is a blink spot in the analysis involving hydrogen.

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Bob Cook  wrote:

>  Axil--
>
> Have you seen any data that confirms the presence of H gas at the end of
> the Lugano test or any other Hot-Cat
> test?  I presume the containment of H is a guess on your part.
>
> Bob
>
> - Original Message -
> *From:* Axil Axil 
> *To:* vortex-l 
> *Sent:* Saturday, January 03, 2015 7:23 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone
>
>  http://luratia.com/graphene/graphene-is-impermeable
>
> Graphene is impermeable to all gases including hydrogen but it will let
> water through like it was not even there,
>
> http://phys.org/news/2012-01-graphene-supermaterial-superpermeable.html
>
> I segest a surface coating of nano Graphene produced by an application of
> nano powdered Graphene on the inside surface of the Alumina tube to keep
> the hydrogen in.
>
> The GO membrain
>
> http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1112/1112.3488.pdf
>
> I believe this use of Nano Graphene to make the inside surface of the
> alumina impermeable to gas exfiltration was the reason why large amounts of
> carbon was found in the fuel load of Rossi's Hot Cat.
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>>  Let us not underestimate Rossi.
>>
>> The account of how Rossi loaded the fuel into the alumina tubes told by
>> the TPR2 report does not sound like Rossi when through a complicated time
>> consuming and/or involved alumina sealing process to protect against
>> hydrogen leakage.
>>
>> An excerpt from the Lugano report:
>>
>> "A thermocouple probe, inserted into one of the caps, allows the control
>> system to manage power supply to the resistors by measuring the internal
>> temperature of the reactor. The hole for the thermocouple probe is also the
>> only access point for the fuel charge. The thermocouple probe cable is
>> inserted in an alumina cement cylinder, which acts as a bushing and
>> perfectly fits the hole, about 4 mm in diameter. When charging the reactor,
>> the bushing is pulled out, and the charge is inserted. After the
>> thermocouple probe has been lodged back in place, the bushing is sealed and
>> secured with alumina cement. To extract the charge, pliers are used to open
>> the seal."
>>
>> These recent tests by MFMP indicate that sealing alumina from hydrogen
>> leakage is a challenge. But the Rossi Hot Cat did run for weeks without
>> apparent loss of hydrogen. Rossi has come up with a way to effectively seal
>> alumina.
>>
>> How could have Rossi made the alumina tube resistant to hydrogen leakage?
>>
>> Could Rossi have used a self sealing additive included in the fuel mix
>> that entered the pores of the alumina after the reactor was started to
>> minimize hydrogen exfiltration?
>>
>> There was a large amount of carbon in the element analysis of the fuel
>> load. Could it be that Rossi used a organic sealant to stop hydrogen
>> leakage?
>>
>> An excerpt from the Lugano report:
>>
>> "Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel also
>> contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these are
>> not found in the ash."
>>
>> Where did all those rather high concentrations of elements go? Could it
>> be that the C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, and Mn were nano particles used to seal the
>> fuel including hydrogen by blocking the pores of the alumina in a self
>> anodizing process in the initial stages during of reactor startup? Carbon
>> is a well know hydrogen blocker.
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--

[Axil Axil]

Let us not underestimate Rossi.

The account of how Rossi loaded the fuel into the alumina tubes told by the
TPR2 report does not sound like Rossi when through a complicated time
consuming and/or involved alumina sealing process to protect against
hydrogen leakage.

An excerpt from the Lugano report:

"A thermocouple probe, inserted into one of the caps, allows the control
system to manage power supply to the resistors by measuring the internal
temperature of the reactor. The hole for the thermocouple probe is also the
only access point for the fuel
charge. The thermocouple probe cable is inserted in an alumina cement
cylinder, which acts as a bushing and perfectly fits the hole, about 4 mm
in diameter. When charging the reactor, the bushing is pulled out, and the
charge is inserted. After the thermocouple probe has been lodged back in
place, the bushing is sealed and secured with alumina cement. To extract
the charge, pliers are used to open the seal."

These recent tests by MFMP indicate that sealing alumina from hydrogen
leakage is a challenge. But the Rossi Hot Cat did run for weeks without
apparent loss of hydrogen. Rossi has come up with a way to effectively seal
alumina.

How could have Rossi made the alumina tube resistant to hydrogen leakage?

Could Rossi have used a self sealing fuel additive included in the fuel mix
that entered the pores of the alumina after the reactor was started to
minimize hydrogen exfiltration?

There was a large amount of carbon in the element analysis of the fuel
load. Could it be that Rossi used a organic sealant to stop hydrogen
leakage?

An excerpt from the Lugano report:

"Sample 2 was the fuel used to charge the E-Cat. It’s in the form of a very
fine powder. Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel
also contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these
are not found in the ash."
Where did all those rather high concentrations of elements go? Could it be
that the C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, and Mn were nano particles used to seal the
fuel including hydrogen by blocking the pores of the alumina in a self
anodizing process in the initial stages during reactor startup? Carbon is a
well know hydrogen blocker.

For example, reposted here  for your convenience...

http://luratia.com/graphene/graphene-is-impermeable

Graphene is impermeable to all gases including hydrogen but it will let
water through like it was not even there,

http://phys.org/news/2012-01-graphene-supermaterial-superpermeable.html

I segest a surface coating of nano Graphene produced by an application of
nano powdered Graphene on the inside surface of the Alumina tube to keep
the hydrogen in.

The GO membrain

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1112/1112.3488.pdf

I believe this use of Nano Graphene to make the inside surface of the
alumina impermeable to gas exfiltration was the reason why large amounts of
carbon was found in the fuel load of Rossi's Hot Cat.

As a design alternative, the stainless steal outer shell could be treated
to produce a Graphene inter layer to make this shell hydrogen tight.


On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 4:02 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

> But a counter to this argument is the simplicity of the sealing that was
> done with the Rossi Hotcat during the latest third party test.  I find it
> very difficult to believe that he was able to achieve a long lasting
> hydrogen seal with his system.  The scientists were there when it was done
> and they made no mention of anything of special note.  I am inclined to
> believe that the high pressure hydrogen is not that important.
>
> Of course, if his fuel is designed to absorb the freed hydrogen by some
> process then the problem become less difficult to resolve.
>
> In his recent blog entry he made it clear that he had little incentive to
> help the MFMP guys with their choice of fuel.  I find it difficult to agree
> with his position especially if there is nothing to his special sauce than
> what has already been tried.  We are clearly missing something that he
> retains as a trade secret.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>  -Original Message-
> From: Axil Axil 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Sat, Jan 3, 2015 3:45 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--
>
>  Remember in the latest Dog Bone test, all the hydrogen leaked out before
> the LENR reaction had a chance to take hold. The assumption is that there
> needs to be enough freed high pressure hydrogen produced to catalyze the
> LENR reaction.
>

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Bob Cook]

Axil--

Have you seen any data that confirms the presence of H gas at the end of the 
Lugano test or any other Hot-Cat 
test?  I presume the containment of H is a guess on your part.

Bob
  - Original Message - 
  From: Axil Axil 
  To: vortex-l 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 7:23 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone


  http://luratia.com/graphene/graphene-is-impermeable

  Graphene is impermeable to all gases including hydrogen but it will let water 
through like it was not even there,

  http://phys.org/news/2012-01-graphene-supermaterial-superpermeable.html

  I segest a surface coating of nano Graphene produced by an application of 
nano powdered Graphene on the inside surface of the Alumina tube to keep the 
hydrogen in.

  The GO membrain

  http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1112/1112.3488.pdf

  I believe this use of Nano Graphene to make the inside surface of the alumina 
impermeable to gas exfiltration was the reason why large amounts of carbon was 
found in the fuel load of Rossi's Hot Cat.



  On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

Let us not underestimate Rossi.

The account of how Rossi loaded the fuel into the alumina tubes told by the 
TPR2 report does not sound like Rossi when through a complicated time consuming 
and/or involved alumina sealing process to protect against hydrogen leakage.

An excerpt from the Lugano report:

"A thermocouple probe, inserted into one of the caps, allows the control 
system to manage power supply to the resistors by measuring the internal 
temperature of the reactor. The hole for the thermocouple probe is also the 
only access point for the fuel charge. The thermocouple probe cable is inserted 
in an alumina cement cylinder, which acts as a bushing and perfectly fits the 
hole, about 4 mm in diameter. When charging the reactor, the bushing is pulled 
out, and the charge is inserted. After the thermocouple probe has been lodged 
back in place, the bushing is sealed and secured with alumina cement. To 
extract the charge, pliers are used to open the seal."

These recent tests by MFMP indicate that sealing alumina from hydrogen 
leakage is a challenge. But the Rossi Hot Cat did run for weeks without 
apparent loss of hydrogen. Rossi has come up with a way to effectively seal 
alumina.

How could have Rossi made the alumina tube resistant to hydrogen leakage?

Could Rossi have used a self sealing additive included in the fuel mix that 
entered the pores of the alumina after the reactor was started to minimize 
hydrogen exfiltration?

There was a large amount of carbon in the element analysis of the fuel 
load. Could it be that Rossi used a organic sealant to stop hydrogen leakage?

An excerpt from the Lugano report:

"Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel also 
contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these are not 
found in the ash."

Where did all those rather high concentrations of elements go? Could it be 
that the C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, and Mn were nano particles used to seal the fuel 
including hydrogen by blocking the pores of the alumina in a self anodizing 
process in the initial stages during of reactor startup? Carbon is a well know 
hydrogen blocker.

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--

[David Roberson]

But a counter to this argument is the simplicity of the sealing that was done 
with the Rossi Hotcat during the latest third party test.  I find it very 
difficult to believe that he was able to achieve a long lasting hydrogen seal 
with his system.  The scientists were there when it was done and they made no 
mention of anything of special note.  I am inclined to believe that the high 
pressure hydrogen is not that important.

Of course, if his fuel is designed to absorb the freed hydrogen by some process 
then the problem become less difficult to resolve.

In his recent blog entry he made it clear that he had little incentive to help 
the MFMP guys with their choice of fuel.  I find it difficult to agree with his 
position especially if there is nothing to his special sauce than what has 
already been tried.  We are clearly missing something that he retains as a 
trade secret.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Sat, Jan 3, 2015 3:45 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--


Remember in the latest Dog Bone test, all the hydrogen leaked out before the 
LENR reaction had a chance to take hold. The assumption is that there needs to 
be enough freed high pressure hydrogen produced to catalyze the LENR reaction.

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--

[Bob Cook]

David--

I think the reactor surface in the recent MFMP test was a stainless steel 
cylinder--not at all like an alumina reactor surface used in the successful 
Lugano and recent Russian tests. 

Bob
  - Original Message - 
  From: David Roberson 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 12:33 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--


  Could we be missing an important point by not considering the need for a 
catalyst that breaks apart hydrogen molecules into individual atoms?  If I 
recall, there was an iron compound of some type included within the Rossi fuel 
as well as many other elements that so far are not assumed necessary.

  My bet is that the details of this sort are what is missing.  Apparently just 
having high pressure hydrogen and nickel is not going to work well during a 
short term test.  Of course the aluminum and lithium may be important, but the 
latest MFMP test contained all of these.

  Dave







  -Original Message-
  From: Bob Cook 
  To: vortex-l 
  Sent: Sat, Jan 3, 2015 3:24 pm
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--


  Our related recent thread looked at conservation or lack of conservation of 
reactants within the dog bone reactor.  It generally assumed some function of 
Li-7 in the reaction.  It may be that Li-H vapor is actually the catalyst that 
aligns the Li-7 with the various Ni isotopes to allow the neutron tunneling of 
the Gullstrom theory to occur.  

  Li-H is probably a polar molecule with potentially non-zero spin in its 
electron structure.  Spin alignment/coupling with Ni isotopes may lead to lower 
energy states and facilitate coupling of the molecule when it encounters a Ni 
atom.  The coherence of the Li-7-H-Ni system results in a lower energy Ni 
isotope, letting go of the Li-6 at low energy as a result.  Li-6 energy could 
help distribute the energy from the reaction site  and not cause to much damage 
to the nano fuel structure.

  One would want to look for a spectrum of low energy Li-6 ions with differing 
energies associated with the different Ni isotope reactions involved to confirm 
such a reaction.

  Bob Cook
 
- Original Message - 
From: Bob Cook 
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone


Eric--

Also keep in mind the physics student, Carl-Oscar Gullstrom, at the Uppsala 
University and under one of the Lugano authors, has a theory that is similar to 
Robin's idea. Its worth reviewing. 

 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling

Bob
  - Original Message - 
  From: Eric Walker 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 10:16 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone


  On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bob Cook  wrote:


It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute the Li-7 to 
the Ni isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back in October and 
Eric has just reviewed.

  Just a small correction.  It was Robin that suggested that what was going 
on was a chain of 7Li(Ni,Ni)6Li neutron-stripping reactions.  This is a 
suggestion that I'm still partial to.  Unless there has been an error in my 
analysis, I'm inclined to think the percentage of lithium reported in the 2mg 
sample from the Lugano assay was unrepresentative of the percentage of lithium 
in the total charge by a factor of 10-20.  Admittedly, this is a heavy strike 
against the proposed involvement of 7Li, all else being equal.


Most advances in technology are based on a mixture of trial and error 
work and application of half-baked theory.  They go hand in hand.

  Nice summary.


  Eric

Re: [Vo]:Right-on AGP

[Axil Axil]

http://books.google.com/books?id=MYCBJIKpC2gC&pg=PA91&lpg=PA91&dq=lithium+hydride+pressure+temperature&source=bl&ots=KoJ1UxzxnA&sig=5Z3XBspYh0Wk8VPnwVfC7N50cws&hl=en&ei=QpotS6_hA4-Qtgf07aWKCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBkQ6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=lithium%20hydride%20pressure%20temperature&f=false

I think that this is a good reference to add to your collection.

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Mark Jurich  wrote:

>   Hi Jones:
>
>Without going into all the details, your calculations are in line with
> the language-translated Parkhomov information.  At the point of estimating
> the corrected pressure due to heating, he simply multiplies the 50
> bar/atmosphere pressure by 2, to obtain 100 atmospheres.  I’m not sure
> where you obtained the 900 °K value for the temperature, but all current
> estimates are that the internal temperature for the Parkhomov Cell is no
> more than about 1000 °C (probably lower than this), based on where his
> thermocouple was located.  His plots approach 1300 °C where he was
> measuring at...
>
>   ... Crunching through all the possible numbers, I get a top end of
> 3425psi using all the “extreme” values.  Since the MFMP DogBone has
> Stainless Steel extension on it, the volume has now increased and I would
> be making a wild guess at the added volume, but I would say 30% more
> (perhaps Bob H./MFMP can give us some more accurate estimate)?
>
>I believe Parkhomov is assuming [virtual] loss/leaking of H2 when
> obtaining his factor of 2 pressure increase with temperature (and perhaps
> it has something to do with the equilibrium conditions that will be
> obtained when the 2LiH <> 2Li + H2 reversible reaction occurs at the
> temperatures/pressures involved.  But this is all pure speculation on my
> part, since there are no remarks that I can find.  Please note that
> Parkhomov had no way of knowing the actual pressures, since he did not
> measure them, as far as I know...
>
> ... He does refer to “> 850 °C” for the above reversible reaction, but I
> believe he obtained this value from the Boiling Point of LiH (850 °C) at
> Standard Pressure.  Actually LiH starts to decompose before it boils
> (according to some literature), so for anyone to mention the Boiling Point
> of LiH (as I have just did), is highly questionable.  Other sources say
> that decomposition occurs from 900 – 1000 °C, with no solid reference
> that I can find to back it up...
>
> ... I have about 5 references here concerning all this, and will try to
> post them when I get more time...
>
> - Mark Jurich
>
>
>  *From:* Jones Beene 
> *Sent:* Saturday, January 03, 2015 9:40 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* [Vo]:Right-on AGP
>
>
> Has anyone determined that the high internal pressure claimed by Parkhomov
> is even possible? Did he claim 500 psi? I cannot find the reference today,
> but the numbers are probably out there and at first glance – score one for
> AGP.
>
> Btw – in a search of Vortex, it turns out Parkhomov was mention by
> Rothwell way back in 2012: Author: Y. Bazhutov … A. Parkhomov et al, Year
> of Conference: 2012 Title: “Investigation of Radiation Effects at Loading
> Ni, Be and LaNi5 by Hydrogen”. Very appropriate.
>
> Just in case no one else has done it– here are back of envelope calcs –
> rounding off slightly: molar volume of hydrogen gas (assuming ideal gas at
> 1 atmosphere of pressure) is 24.5 liters (or dm3/mol) at 300 °K, and the
> weight of a mole is two grams, so this gives 12 cc/mg for H2 at one bar and
> ambient - or 36 cc/mg at 900 °K elevated temperature.
>
> The “fuel” of Parkhomov was said to be 1/10 gram of LiAlH4 which is about
> 10% by weight hydrogen. This means that the weight of hydrogen, if none
> escapes is about 10 milligrams at the start. This means that the expanded
> gas would occupy about ~120 cc at STP, if released from the hydride -
> correct?
>
> OK. The interior volume of the reactor appears to be about 2.4 cc. so
> cramming 120 cc into 2.4 means that would require about 50-1 ratio... or 50
> bar BUT if the reactor and gas is at 900 °K, then 150 bar or 2,175 pounds
> per square inch is possible. So the bottom line is yes, even with slight
> diffusion into the alumina and no leaks, 500 psi is not only possible but
> on the low side. The important detail is what is the pressure at 10,20,30
> hours and so on?
>
> Apologies if this has been covered, or is not accurate but a lot of folks
> seem to second-guessing AGP, at least on a few points, and there appears to
> be no problem on this one.
>
> As of now, in terms of “trustworthiness” of reported data, based on past
> work, openness, and freedom from an agenda which would cause one to fudge
> data or salt the ash to be tested - I would give AGP a much higher ranking
> than AR. Let’s hope we get isotope data. This reaction is nearing the level
> of understanding.
>
> Jones
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Judgement deadline for CFsn 1/1/2015

[James Bowery]

The claim was judged false.  I now have the lowest score on ideosphere.com.

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:55 PM, James Bowery  wrote:

> Claim CFsn - Cold Fusion 
> Category: *Science & Technology:Physics*bid 0, ask 2, last 2Owner:0, Bank
> (i...@ideosphere.com)Judge:306, SMWinnie (smwin...@yahoo.com)created:
> 1994/09/23due date:TBDThe Claim
>
> Cold fusion of deuterium in palladium can produce over 10 watts/cc. net
> power at STP (standard temperature and pressure). Cold fusion is discussed
> on the fusion newsgroup .
>
> Judge's Statement
>
> Judgment will be entered on CFsn on or before January 1, 2015.
>
> I will judge based on the intent of this claim, if I perceive such intent
> to be obvious. If such intent is ambiguous I will judge on the basis of the
> precise wording. If both are ambiguous, I will look for a solution which
> follows IF/FX precedent insofar as such precedent is apparent to me and
> applicable to the claim. I will seek the guidance of the claim's
> owner/author in interpreting the claim. It's his or her question - s/he
> ought to get the answer sought. If I believe this claim to have met a YES
> or NO condition, and if I believe judgement will be controversial, I will
> post a prospective judgement to fx-discuss and forestall entering the
> judgement for a comment period to be announced in the post.
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--

[Axil Axil]

Remember in the latest Dog Bone test, all the hydrogen leaked out before
the LENR reaction had a chance to take hold. The assumption is that there
needs to be enough freed high pressure hydrogen produced to catalyze the
LENR reaction.

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--

[David Roberson]

Could we be missing an important point by not considering the need for a 
catalyst that breaks apart hydrogen molecules into individual atoms?  If I 
recall, there was an iron compound of some type included within the Rossi fuel 
as well as many other elements that so far are not assumed necessary.

My bet is that the details of this sort are what is missing.  Apparently just 
having high pressure hydrogen and nickel is not going to work well during a 
short term test.  Of course the aluminum and lithium may be important, but the 
latest MFMP test contained all of these.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Sat, Jan 3, 2015 3:24 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--



Our related recent thread looked at conservation or lack of conservation of 
reactants within the dog bone reactor.  It generally assumed some function of 
Li-7 in the reaction.  It may be that Li-H vapor is actually the catalyst that 
aligns the Li-7 with the various Ni isotopes to allow the neutron tunneling of 
the Gullstrom theory to occur.  
 
Li-H is probably a polar molecule with potentially non-zero spin in its 
electron structure.  Spin alignment/coupling with Ni isotopes may lead to lower 
energy states and facilitate coupling of the molecule when it encounters a Ni 
atom.  The coherence of the Li-7-H-Ni system results in a lower energy Ni 
isotope, letting go of the Li-6 at low energy as a result.  Li-6 energy could 
help distribute the energy from the reaction site  and not cause to much damage 
to the nano fuel structure.
 
One would want to look for a spectrum of low energy Li-6 ions with differing 
energies associated with the different Ni isotope reactions involved to confirm 
such a reaction.
 
Bob Cook
   
  
- Original Message - 
  
From:   Bob   Cook 
  
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 11:21   AM
  
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog   Bone
  


  
Eric--
  
 
  
Also keep in mind the physics student,   Carl-Oscar Gullstrom, at the Uppsala 
University and under one of the   Lugano authors, has a theory that is similar 
to Robin's idea. Its worth   reviewing. 
  
 
  
 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling
  
 
  
Bob
  

- Original Message - 

From: Eric Walker 

To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 

Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 10:16 AM

Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone






On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bob Cook  wrote:




It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute   the Li-7 to the 
Ni isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back   in October and 
Eric has just reviewed.

Just a small correction.  It was Robin that suggested that what was going 
on was a chain of 7Li(Ni,Ni)6Li neutron-stripping reactions.  This is a 
suggestion that I'm still partial to.  Unless there has been an error in my 
analysis, I'm inclined to think the percentage of lithium reported in the 
2mg sample from the Lugano assay was unrepresentative of the percentage of 
lithium in the total charge by a factor of 10-20.  Admittedly, this is a 
heavy strike against the proposed involvement of 7Li, all else being equal.





Most advances in technology are based on a mixture of   trial and error 
work and application of half-baked theory.  They go   hand in hand.

Nice summary.





Eric

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone and other coupling ideas for Li-7--Ni reaction--

[Bob Cook]

Our related recent thread looked at conservation or lack of conservation of 
reactants within the dog bone reactor.  It generally assumed some function of 
Li-7 in the reaction.  It may be that Li-H vapor is actually the catalyst that 
aligns the Li-7 with the various Ni isotopes to allow the neutron tunneling of 
the Gullstrom theory to occur.  

Li-H is probably a polar molecule with potentially non-zero spin in its 
electron structure.  Spin alignment/coupling with Ni isotopes may lead to lower 
energy states and facilitate coupling of the molecule when it encounters a Ni 
atom.  The coherence of the Li-7-H-Ni system results in a lower energy Ni 
isotope, letting go of the Li-6 at low energy as a result.  Li-6 energy could 
help distribute the energy from the reaction site  and not cause to much damage 
to the nano fuel structure.

One would want to look for a spectrum of low energy Li-6 ions with differing 
energies associated with the different Ni isotope reactions involved to confirm 
such a reaction.

Bob Cook
   
  - Original Message - 
  From: Bob Cook 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 11:21 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone


  Eric--

  Also keep in mind the physics student, Carl-Oscar Gullstrom, at the Uppsala 
University and under one of the Lugano authors, has a theory that is similar to 
Robin's idea. Its worth reviewing. 

   
http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling

  Bob
- Original Message - 
From: Eric Walker 
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone


On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bob Cook  wrote:


  It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute the Li-7 to the 
Ni isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back in October and Eric 
has just reviewed.

Just a small correction.  It was Robin that suggested that what was going 
on was a chain of 7Li(Ni,Ni)6Li neutron-stripping reactions.  This is a 
suggestion that I'm still partial to.  Unless there has been an error in my 
analysis, I'm inclined to think the percentage of lithium reported in the 2mg 
sample from the Lugano assay was unrepresentative of the percentage of lithium 
in the total charge by a factor of 10-20.  Admittedly, this is a heavy strike 
against the proposed involvement of 7Li, all else being equal.


  Most advances in technology are based on a mixture of trial and error 
work and application of half-baked theory.  They go hand in hand.

Nice summary.


Eric

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Eric Walker]

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Bob Cook  wrote:

Also keep in mind the physics student, Carl-Oscar Gullstrom, at the Uppsala
> University and under one of the Lugano authors, has a theory that is
> similar to Robin's idea.


Yes -- I saw that.  I note that Gullstrom's writeup is dated several weeks
after Robin's post.  I do not have an opinion on the specifics in
Gullstrom's paper, which I haven't taken a close look at yet, and whose
merits I probably wouldn't be in a position to evaluate.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Ken Deboer]

I'm not sure if Axil gets credit for first bringing up graphene, but I've
often wondered if there weren't a role for it in either the macro- or nano-
structure of a device.  BTW, graphene can be 3d printed on regular
machines, while alumina can be 2d printed (with some difficulty I believe)
on laser lithography type 3d printers.
ken

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Bob Cook  wrote:

>  Eric--
>
> Also keep in mind the physics student, Carl-Oscar Gullstrom, at the
> Uppsala University and under one of the Lugano authors, has a theory that
> is similar to Robin's idea. Its worth reviewing.
>
>
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling
>
> Bob
>
> - Original Message -
> *From:* Eric Walker 
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Sent:* Saturday, January 03, 2015 10:16 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone
>
>  On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bob Cook  wrote:
>
> It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute the Li-7 to the
>> Ni isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back in October and
>> Eric has just reviewed.
>
>
> Just a small correction.  It was Robin that suggested that what was going
> on was a chain of 7Li(Ni,Ni)6Li neutron-stripping reactions.  This is a
> suggestion that I'm still partial to.  Unless there has been an error in my
> analysis, I'm inclined to think the percentage of lithium reported in the
> 2mg sample from the Lugano assay was unrepresentative of the percentage of
> lithium in the total charge by a factor of 10-20.  Admittedly, this is a
> heavy strike against the proposed involvement of 7Li, all else being equal.
>
>  Most advances in technology are based on a mixture of trial and error
>> work and application of half-baked theory.  They go hand in hand.
>
>
> Nice summary.
>
> Eric
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Right-on AGP

[Mark Jurich]

Hi Jones:

   Without going into all the details, your calculations are in line with the 
language-translated Parkhomov information.  At the point of estimating the 
corrected pressure due to heating, he simply multiplies the 50 bar/atmosphere 
pressure by 2, to obtain 100 atmospheres.  I’m not sure where you obtained the 
900 °K value for the temperature, but all current estimates are that the 
internal temperature for the Parkhomov Cell is no more than about 1000 °C 
(probably lower than this), based on where his thermocouple was located.  His 
plots approach 1300 °C where he was measuring at...

  ... Crunching through all the possible numbers, I get a top end of 3425psi 
using all the “extreme” values.  Since the MFMP DogBone has Stainless Steel 
extension on it, the volume has now increased and I would be making a wild 
guess at the added volume, but I would say 30% more (perhaps Bob H./MFMP can 
give us some more accurate estimate)?

   I believe Parkhomov is assuming [virtual] loss/leaking of H2 when obtaining 
his factor of 2 pressure increase with temperature (and perhaps it has 
something to do with the equilibrium conditions that will be obtained when the 
2LiH <> 2Li + H2 reversible reaction occurs at the temperatures/pressures 
involved.  But this is all pure speculation on my part, since there are no 
remarks that I can find.  Please note that Parkhomov had no way of knowing the 
actual pressures, since he did not measure them, as far as I know...

... He does refer to “> 850 °C” for the above reversible reaction, but I 
believe he obtained this value from the Boiling Point of LiH (850 °C) at 
Standard Pressure.  Actually LiH starts to decompose before it boils (according 
to some literature), so for anyone to mention the Boiling Point of LiH (as I 
have just did), is highly questionable.  Other sources say that decomposition 
occurs from 900 – 1000 °C, with no solid reference that I can find to back it 
up...

... I have about 5 references here concerning all this, and will try to post 
them when I get more time...

- Mark Jurich


From: Jones Beene 
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 9:40 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: [Vo]:Right-on AGP

Has anyone determined that the high internal pressure claimed by Parkhomov is 
even possible? Did he claim 500 psi? I cannot find the reference today, but the 
numbers are probably out there and at first glance – score one for AGP.

Btw – in a search of Vortex, it turns out Parkhomov was mention by Rothwell way 
back in 2012: Author: Y. Bazhutov … A. Parkhomov et al, Year of Conference: 
2012 Title: “Investigation of Radiation Effects at Loading Ni, Be and LaNi5 by 
Hydrogen”. Very appropriate.

Just in case no one else has done it– here are back of envelope calcs – 
rounding off slightly: molar volume of hydrogen gas (assuming ideal gas at 1 
atmosphere of pressure) is 24.5 liters (or dm3/mol) at 300 °K, and the weight 
of a mole is two grams, so this gives 12 cc/mg for H2 at one bar and ambient - 
or 36 cc/mg at 900 °K elevated temperature.

The “fuel” of Parkhomov was said to be 1/10 gram of LiAlH4 which is about 10% 
by weight hydrogen. This means that the weight of hydrogen, if none escapes is 
about 10 milligrams at the start. This means that the expanded gas would occupy 
about ~120 cc at STP, if released from the hydride - correct? 

OK. The interior volume of the reactor appears to be about 2.4 cc. so cramming 
120 cc into 2.4 means that would require about 50-1 ratio... or 50 bar BUT if 
the reactor and gas is at 900 °K, then 150 bar or 2,175 pounds per square inch 
is possible. So the bottom line is yes, even with slight diffusion into the 
alumina and no leaks, 500 psi is not only possible but on the low side. The 
important detail is what is the pressure at 10,20,30 hours and so on? 

Apologies if this has been covered, or is not accurate but a lot of folks seem 
to second-guessing AGP, at least on a few points, and there appears to be no 
problem on this one.

As of now, in terms of “trustworthiness” of reported data, based on past work, 
openness, and freedom from an agenda which would cause one to fudge data or 
salt the ash to be tested - I would give AGP a much higher ranking than AR. 
Let’s hope we get isotope data. This reaction is nearing the level of 
understanding.

Jones

 

[Vo]:Analogies to triple polarized film paradox

[Harvey Norris]

 Some years ago I invented the 666 machine in my garage. I took a electric 
motor driven three phase AC car alternator and with those three AC inputs I 
patterned three diagonal series sequences as shown 
here;http://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/6638773467/By then reversing the 
middle segment polarity of each phase and resonating the balanced outputs this 
created six interior magnetic compressions; resulting in six magnetic 
expansions outwards from the poles created from this 1/6th cycle interference 
pattern. Essentially with this method SIX off timed magnetic fields were 
created from a source that only employed THREE off timed signals as its input. 
But very funny magnetic measurements ensued from these poles as what was also 
created was a situation where the induced signal made by induction with 
neighboring phases was actually being made AHEAD in time from what was received 
by the phase rotation dictated by the delivery wires. In fact what appeared to 
be happening was that this advanced timing errant induced signal started 
reacting with itself!  Each time the cycle was repeated it advanced itself 
further apart in time from its (original) source of emf. A voltage vector that 
rotates in time or a phasor effect was made. Every 24 cycles it would return to 
its origin point and start all over again. In the meantime,(pun intended) this 
extra signal rotating in time would interact with its line delivery voltage so 
that it could completely oppose that line signal after 12 cycles of time 
rotation, and then 12 cycles later could constructively add to the line input 
signal. Situations were devised whereby dual secondaries could interact 
inductively with themselves so that they could completely oppose the primary 
vibration to enter its secondary and for a portion of time (pun intended) the 
machine would work backwards and instead the output could power the 
input.http://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/8291688443/
Later on discrepancies in time itself were noted as follows;Google "Topological 
Evidence of Time Distortion in the 666 machine" 
www.youtube.com/watch?v=uakJJKGf-mM.A theory of 3D vectors to explain the 
results showing how  the traditional 2D vectors plotted out on a flat paper 
could be curved into a cone shape to account for the observed results taking 
place. This method shows that the curvature of time-space can be altered to 
account for the results taking place, and that we DONT have to travel near the 
speed of light for these relativistic effects to take place. Later on I 
analyzed this in reference to the triple polarized film paradox; where the 
light from two polarized films crossed at right angles completely blocked the 
light transmission, but when an intermediary film placed at an equidistant 
angle between the two outer films would then allow the light to proceed through 
all three polarized film segments. I reasoned that the three 666 machine 
secondaries were like three polarized film segments  off set at an angle to 
only slightly diminish the light going through them.  Then like the INVERSE 
example of the polarized film paradox, the middle segment of film was now made 
at a right angles to the outer segments. In this analogy three 
(secondary)sources of emf are obtained so that when put in series 97% of what 
would be obtained if all three signals were completely unified in time result. 
( The flat paper vector drawing of the input voltages predicts that only 86% of 
the total should be received.)  Now to make the analogy the MIDDLE voltage 
contribution of that element is minimized by shorting that element out, 
allowing a free vibration from its primary influence to unsue, but also making 
its voltage contribution to the series chain to approach zero volts. The end 
result of this machination is that now the output voltage EXCEEDS the sum of 
its inputs. But like the polarized film paradox the new relationship brought on 
by the outer and inner films SUPERCEEDS  what would be obtained from just what 
the outer elements alone would deliver. And indeed the ordinary laws of 
addition are ~ what is obtained when we reference the voltages obtained by 
relying on what the inner to outer seriesed voltage readings 
provide.https://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/16104981376/
Latest video; Overunity of voltage summations in actual energized 
field.http://youtu.be/DAWku6HsDjwPioneering the Applications of Interphasal 
Resonances http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Bob Cook]

Eric--

Also keep in mind the physics student, Carl-Oscar Gullstrom, at the Uppsala 
University and under one of the Lugano authors, has a theory that is similar to 
Robin's idea. Its worth reviewing. 

 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling

Bob
  - Original Message - 
  From: Eric Walker 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 10:16 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone


  On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bob Cook  wrote:


It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute the Li-7 to the Ni 
isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back in October and Eric has 
just reviewed.

  Just a small correction.  It was Robin that suggested that what was going on 
was a chain of 7Li(Ni,Ni)6Li neutron-stripping reactions.  This is a suggestion 
that I'm still partial to.  Unless there has been an error in my analysis, I'm 
inclined to think the percentage of lithium reported in the 2mg sample from the 
Lugano assay was unrepresentative of the percentage of lithium in the total 
charge by a factor of 10-20.  Admittedly, this is a heavy strike against the 
proposed involvement of 7Li, all else being equal.


Most advances in technology are based on a mixture of trial and error work 
and application of half-baked theory.  They go hand in hand.

  Nice summary.


  Eric

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Bob Cook]

I did not mean to slight Robin.  He always has interesting and well founded 
comments.

Robins suggestion seems to match the depletion of the Ni isotopes to one degree 
or another and also a potential depletion of Li-7.  

Eric--where does you factor of 10-20 come from?

I thought the depletion of Li-7 from the fuel was from 93% Li-7 and 7% Li-6 to 
ash with 7.9% to 42.5% Li-7 and would be consistent with the idea that the Li-7 
changed to Li-6.  The report did not quantitatively identify the depletion of
Li-7, only its relative isotopic abundance.  (7.9% of 93% is 1/12 or about 8% 
and 42.5% of 93% is 45%)

McKubre addresses this issue of Li-7 involvement in the Lugano test in his 
review of the test that can be found on page 11 of INFINITE ENERGY, Issue 118 
of November/December 2014. (McKubre points out that the authors of the test 
suggested that Be-8 was formed from Li-7 and H and that it decayed to 2 He 
atoms.  They did not address the mechanism for the Ni isotope changes.)

Bob
  - Original Message - 
  From: Eric Walker 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 10:16 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone


  On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bob Cook  wrote:


It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute the Li-7 to the Ni 
isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back in October and Eric has 
just reviewed.

  Just a small correction.  It was Robin that suggested that what was going on 
was a chain of 7Li(Ni,Ni)6Li neutron-stripping reactions.  This is a suggestion 
that I'm still partial to.  Unless there has been an error in my analysis, I'm 
inclined to think the percentage of lithium reported in the 2mg sample from the 
Lugano assay was unrepresentative of the percentage of lithium in the total 
charge by a factor of 10-20.  Admittedly, this is a heavy strike against the 
proposed involvement of 7Li, all else being equal.


Most advances in technology are based on a mixture of trial and error work 
and application of half-baked theory.  They go hand in hand.

  Nice summary.


  Eric

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Eric Walker]

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bob Cook  wrote:

It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute the Li-7 to the Ni
> isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back in October and Eric
> has just reviewed.


Just a small correction.  It was Robin that suggested that what was going
on was a chain of 7Li(Ni,Ni)6Li neutron-stripping reactions.  This is a
suggestion that I'm still partial to.  Unless there has been an error in my
analysis, I'm inclined to think the percentage of lithium reported in the
2mg sample from the Lugano assay was unrepresentative of the percentage of
lithium in the total charge by a factor of 10-20.  Admittedly, this is a
heavy strike against the proposed involvement of 7Li, all else being equal.

Most advances in technology are based on a mixture of trial and error work
> and application of half-baked theory.  They go hand in hand.


Nice summary.

Eric

[Vo]:A video helpful in understanding the Dog Bone

[Axil Axil]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaHq8BIS7Vs

Your Dog Bone will only run as long as you can keep hydrogen confined
inside it. Sealing the Dog Bone is essential is running the Ni-H reactor
for a long time...months.

Trying to understand what Rossi has done makes one appreciate how smart he
really is.

[Vo]:FYI: The Swedish Military is funding LENR research.

[Axil Axil]

http://wavewatching.net/fringe/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Reactions-with-nickel-and-hydrogen142972_TMP.pdf

[Vo]:Right-on AGP

[Jones Beene]

Has anyone determined that the high internal pressure claimed by Parkhomov
is even possible? Did he claim 500 psi? I cannot find the reference today,
but the numbers are probably out there and at first glance – score one for
AGP.

Btw – in a search of Vortex, it turns out Parkhomov was mention by Rothwell
way back in 2012: Author: Y. Bazhutov … A. Parkhomov et al, Year of
Conference: 2012 Title: “Investigation of Radiation Effects at Loading Ni,
Be and LaNi5 by Hydrogen”. Very appropriate.

Just in case no one else has done it– here are back of envelope calcs –
rounding off slightly: molar volume of hydrogen gas (assuming ideal gas at 1
atmosphere of pressure) is 24.5 liters (or dm3/mol) at 300 °K, and the
weight of a mole is two grams, so this gives 12 cc/mg for H2 at one bar and
ambient - or 36 cc/mg at 900 °K elevated temperature.

The “fuel” of Parkhomov was said to be 1/10 gram of LiAlH4 which is about
10% by weight hydrogen. This means that the weight of hydrogen, if none
escapes is about 10 milligrams at the start. This means that the expanded
gas would occupy about ~120 cc at STP, if released from the hydride -
correct? 

OK. The interior volume of the reactor appears to be about 2.4 cc. so
cramming 120 cc into 2.4 means that would require about 50-1 ratio... or 50
bar BUT if the reactor and gas is at 900 °K, then 150 bar or 2,175 pounds
per square inch is possible. So the bottom line is yes, even with slight
diffusion into the alumina and no leaks, 500 psi is not only possible but on
the low side. The important detail is what is the pressure at 10,20,30 hours
and so on? 

Apologies if this has been covered, or is not accurate but a lot of folks
seem to second-guessing AGP, at least on a few points, and there appears to
be no problem on this one.

As of now, in terms of “trustworthiness” of reported data, based on past
work, openness, and freedom from an agenda which would cause one to fudge
data or salt the ash to be tested - I would give AGP a much higher ranking
than AR. Let’s hope we get isotope data. This reaction is nearing the level
of understanding.

Jones

 

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Bob Cook]

It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute the Li-7 to the Ni 
isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back in October and Eric has 
just reviewed.   

There has been talk of the idea that Li-H vaporizes at about 900 degrees within 
the reactor chamber.   It would condense in the cooler cracks  and help seal 
the chamber if that is necessary.  In any case H may not be involved in the 
reaction and its exfiltration is not a problem.  Only the loss of Li would be a 
problem,  since it would be the necessary reactant with Ni in the Rossi device 
tested at Lugano.   As far as I know an accounting of H in the Lugano report 
was not accomplished. 

I also think there likely is a mechanism for distribution of heat energy within 
the reactor chamber to keep things from melting or sintering.  This would most 
likely be accomplished by a heat transfer gas of some sort.  It may be Li-H 
vapor, Li vapor or some other gas evolved from the fuel and/or the body of the 
reactor chamber as the device heats up.If the mechanism were EM, it would 
have to be a fairly local emission/absorption  reaction, otherwise it would not 
be effective in distributing the heat and maintaining a constant temperature.  

Of course this assumption would not be correct, if most of the LENR energy  is 
EM and escapes the local reaction site to be absorbed in the body of the 
alumina.   In that case the self sustaining mode would depend upon the 
conduction of heat from the alumina to the cooler internal reactor chamber to 
keep the reaction going.   Controlling the reaction would be a matter of 
keeping it hot given the cooling (loss of energy) from the reaction location--a 
nice problem to have when it comes to dynamics and control-- in that it would 
constitute a negative temperature coeff.   But assuming the LENR happens in a 
fixed temperature range and stops if it gets too hot, there is a built in 
negative temperature coeff. which also seems to me  to be a necessary feature 
of the reactor.   

The ideas hinge on the idea that resonances of some sort are necessary to get 
the reaction to occur.  There may be an effective resonant absorption cross 
section for LI-7 and the various Ni isotope reactions to facilitate the LENR 
reaction---phonic resonances with the nano particles of Ni fuel, EM resonances 
for photon absorption and emission, nuclear magnetic resonances etc., and/or 
some combination of these parameters.  I would guess understanding these 
resonant details, a complex problem, will be required to get a firm handle on 
the science of any specific LENR system.   

Engineering which includes a lot of trial and error is probably the most 
practical way to get a working device.  I think this is what Rossi has been 
doing over the years he has been working on his reactor.   Most advances in 
technology are based on a mixture of trial and error work and application of 
half-baked theory.  They go hand in hand.   Rossi's half baked theory turned 
out pretty good.

Mills I think also took this approach, but may have had a too--narrow 
perspective (a bias) of possible reactions and resonances considering his 
theory.   His has been and is a worthy endeavor, however. 

Bob  Cook
  - Original Message - 
  From: Axil Axil 
  To: vortex-l 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 7:23 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone


  http://luratia.com/graphene/graphene-is-impermeable

  Graphene is impermeable to all gases including hydrogen but it will let water 
through like it was not even there,

  http://phys.org/news/2012-01-graphene-supermaterial-superpermeable.html

  I segest a surface coating of nano Graphene produced by an application of 
nano powdered Graphene on the inside surface of the Alumina tube to keep the 
hydrogen in.

  The GO membrain

  http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1112/1112.3488.pdf

  I believe this use of Nano Graphene to make the inside surface of the alumina 
impermeable to gas exfiltration was the reason why large amounts of carbon was 
found in the fuel load of Rossi's Hot Cat.



  On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

Let us not underestimate Rossi.

The account of how Rossi loaded the fuel into the alumina tubes told by the 
TPR2 report does not sound like Rossi when through a complicated time consuming 
and/or involved alumina sealing process to protect against hydrogen leakage.

An excerpt from the Lugano report:

"A thermocouple probe, inserted into one of the caps, allows the control 
system to manage power supply to the resistors by measuring the internal 
temperature of the reactor. The hole for the thermocouple probe is also the 
only access point for the fuel charge. The thermocouple probe cable is inserted 
in an alumina cement cylinder, which acts as a bushing and perfectly fits the 
hole, about 4 mm in diameter. When charging the reactor, the bushing is pulled 
out, and the charge is inserted. After the thermocouple probe has bee

[Vo]:LENR activity continues in weekend

[Peter Gluck]

Dear Friends
a few ideas and news for today

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/01/lenr-news-january-3-2015.html

Wish you a fine weekend

Peter
-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Axil Axil]

http://luratia.com/graphene/graphene-is-impermeable

Graphene is impermeable to all gases including hydrogen but it will let
water through like it was not even there,

http://phys.org/news/2012-01-graphene-supermaterial-superpermeable.html

I segest a surface coating of nano Graphene produced by an application of
nano powdered Graphene on the inside surface of the Alumina tube to keep
the hydrogen in.

The GO membrain

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1112/1112.3488.pdf

I believe this use of Nano Graphene to make the inside surface of the
alumina impermeable to gas exfiltration was the reason why large amounts of
carbon was found in the fuel load of Rossi's Hot Cat.

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Let us not underestimate Rossi.
>
> The account of how Rossi loaded the fuel into the alumina tubes told by
> the TPR2 report does not sound like Rossi when through a complicated time
> consuming and/or involved alumina sealing process to protect against
> hydrogen leakage.
>
> An excerpt from the Lugano report:
>
> "A thermocouple probe, inserted into one of the caps, allows the control
> system to manage power supply to the resistors by measuring the internal
> temperature of the reactor. The hole for the thermocouple probe is also the
> only access point for the fuel charge. The thermocouple probe cable is
> inserted in an alumina cement cylinder, which acts as a bushing and
> perfectly fits the hole, about 4 mm in diameter. When charging the reactor,
> the bushing is pulled out, and the charge is inserted. After the
> thermocouple probe has been lodged back in place, the bushing is sealed and
> secured with alumina cement. To extract the charge, pliers are used to open
> the seal."
>
> These recent tests by MFMP indicate that sealing alumina from hydrogen
> leakage is a challenge. But the Rossi Hot Cat did run for weeks without
> apparent loss of hydrogen. Rossi has come up with a way to effectively seal
> alumina.
>
> How could have Rossi made the alumina tube resistant to hydrogen leakage?
>
> Could Rossi have used a self sealing additive included in the fuel mix
> that entered the pores of the alumina after the reactor was started to
> minimize hydrogen exfiltration?
>
> There was a large amount of carbon in the element analysis of the fuel
> load. Could it be that Rossi used a organic sealant to stop hydrogen
> leakage?
>
> An excerpt from the Lugano report:
>
> "Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel also
> contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these are
> not found in the ash."
>
> Where did all those rather high concentrations of elements go? Could it be
> that the C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, and Mn were nano particles used to seal the
> fuel including hydrogen by blocking the pores of the alumina in a self
> anodizing process in the initial stages during of reactor startup? Carbon
> is a well know hydrogen blocker.
>

Re: [Vo]:A bombshell of a different type?

[Alain Sepeda]

I don't think that the 2mg are a problem , that is more the number of
grains analysed.

it is like poling. the size of the sample have to be bigger if there is
tiny minorities. few samples are ok to measure the majority.

the problem like on polling is more about bias on the sampling, like taking
more tiny or big dust, the one from one part or another from the tube.

a thousand grains well mixed from the dust should be enough to be
representative.

we could do some compensation based on morphology like on poling.
on a thousand grains, make statistics on morphologies, and analyse grains
depending on morphologies, and then make a weighted average.

I'm not an expert in polling, but this seems to apply well here.

2015-01-03 8:36 GMT+01:00 Eric Walker :

> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:21 PM,  wrote:
>
> In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 8 Oct 2014 09:22:13 -0700:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>>
>> Li7 + Ni58 => Ni59 + Li6 + 1.75 MeV
>> Li7 + Ni59 => Ni60 + Li6 + 4.14 MeV
>> Li7 + Ni60 => Ni61 + Li6 + 0.57 MeV
>> Li7 + Ni61 => Ni62 + Li6 + 3.34 MeV
>> Li7 + Ni62 => Ni63 + Li6 - 0.41 MeV (Endothermic!)
>>
>> This series stops at Ni62, hence all isotopes of Ni less than 62 are
>> depleted
>> and Ni62 is strongly enriched.
>>
>
> The authors of the Lugano report mention a total energy balance of 1.5 MWh
> excess heat to be accounted for (p. 29).  Translating that value, we
> get 3.3e22 MeV.  If the average reaction is 3.5 MeV (just to choose an
> optimistic number), that means there were 9.4e21 reactions, and presumably
> 9.4e21 7Li atoms to be consumed in the process.
>
> The authors mention that in the sample of the fuel they looked at, there
> was 1.17 percent lithium (p. 53).  If we extrapolate out from the 2 mg
> sample they obtained to the 1 g of fuel from which it was taken (not
> necessarily wise), there would have been 0.0117 g * 1 mole / 6.94 g *
> 6.022e23 / mole = 1.0e21 atoms lithium in the total charge.  If we assume
> that that was 100 percent 7Li to be optimistic, that would mean there were
> about 1/10th the number of 7Li atoms needed to account for the 1.5 MWh that
> were produced.
>
> Judging from the fact that these calculations go back to the isotope
> ratios found in a single 2 mg sample of fuel, there's a lot of room for
> uncertainty.  But in this instance we've been optimistic about the average
> energy per reaction (3.5 MeV), about there being 100 percent lithium, and
> about all of the 7Li being consumed.  The actual heat balance is another
> variable that can be adjusted to within one's sense of uncertainty.  But it
> would have to be pretty far off for the reaction to consist entirely of 7Li
> neutron stripping reactions.
>
> Have I missed something important?
>
> Eric
>
>