Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
In reply to Roarty, Francis X's message of Wed, 19 Jan 2011 08:07:46 -0500: Hi, [snip] >on Wednesday, January 19 Mark Iverson said [snip]" If that won't reverse the >runaway condition fast enough, inject a contaminating gas... Perhaps, of all >things, steam?" [/snip] > >Hi Mark, > I agree a reaction quashing gas is a good idea but not steam which is > very reactive and could permanently damage the catalyst- rather an inert gas > like helium to quickly change pressure and ratio of available reactants to > activated geometry. >You might have to purge the gas mix before restarting but at least the >catalyst should still be activated. >Regards >Fran Note that some "inert" gasses are also Mills catalysts, so might not exactly have the expected effect. ;) A better gas to use might be Nitrogen. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
I sent this earlier and nothing came back through vortex to me, so I'm sending it again. On Jan 19, 2011, at 7:38 AM, Mark Iverson wrote: Hi Fran: Yes, agreed... The comment about steam was only half serious! The thought there was that the steam was 'exhaust' and dilution of the 'fuel' with exhaust would decrease efficiency. But that was thinking of this thing like an internal combustion engine... However, no one has commented at all about the main point of my posting. There was all this concern and angst about a runaway reaction and, oh my, how dangerous this is, and its going to be soo difficult to make a 'safe' reactor. It has been said, by Rossi himself, that the reaction stops very quickly (within seconds, or a few tens of seconds?) after you stop the hydrogen flow... -Mark I made some comments regarding reaction control, via thermal cycling here: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg41599.html I suspect it is not flow but pressure drop, the loss of hydrogen partial pressure, that is the important result from "turning off the hydrogen". Confirmation of this concept occurs in the form of a gamma "flash" that occurs when the hydrogen is shut off. This flash is what is expected by the deflation fusion model. As the hydrogen concentration quickly drops, due to the small nano-powder grain size, the tunneling rate momentarily jumps, as does the reaction rate. If the grain size were larger, this degassing process would last longer, and the momentary increase in nuclear activity would be called "heat after death". The reaction is quickly shut down because in a nano-powder the effect of the loss of hydrogen concentration, quickly overwhelms the momentarily increased tunneling rate. This quick shut down might not happen in the case where melting of the powder occurs, and longer diffusion paths exist. This is of course speculation, as is almost all talk about the Rossi device, given the little we know about it. Even Rossi says he doesn't understand why it works. Everyone is forced into speculating when talking about issues like this. Replacing the hydrogen flow with another gas flow, e.g. carbon dioxide, has the effect of cutting the hydrogen partial pressure while simultaneously sustaining a cooling flow. While engineering these kinds of simple parameters, gas pressure and temperature, are readily engineered, the longer term effects of other parameters, such as changing lattice structure, magnetic and electric fields, grain size stability, and transmutation product accumulation, may present as yet unknown control risks. Those are my speculations. 8^) Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
On Jan 19, 2011, at 7:38 AM, Mark Iverson wrote: Hi Fran: Yes, agreed... The comment about steam was only half serious! The thought there was that the steam was 'exhaust' and dilution of the 'fuel' with exhaust would decrease efficiency. But that was thinking of this thing like an internal combustion engine... However, no one has commented at all about the main point of my posting. There was all this concern and angst about a runaway reaction and, oh my, how dangerous this is, and its going to be soo difficult to make a 'safe' reactor. It has been said, by Rossi himself, that the reaction stops very quickly (within seconds, or a few tens of seconds?) after you stop the hydrogen flow... -Mark I made some comments regarding reaction control, via thermal cycling here: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg41599.html I suspect it is not flow but pressure drop, the loss of hydrogen partial pressure, that is the important result from "turning off the hydrogen". Confirmation of this concept occurs in the form of a gamma "flash" that occurs when the hydrogen is shut off. This flash is what is expected by the deflation fusion model. As the hydrogen concentration quickly drops, due to the small nano-powder grain size, the tunneling rate momentarily jumps, as does the reaction rate. If the grain size were larger, this degassing process would last longer, and the momentary increase in nuclear activity would be called "heat after death". The reaction is quickly shut down because in a nano-powder the effect of the loss of hydrogen concentration, quickly overwhelms the momentarily increased tunneling rate. This quick shut down might not happen in the case where melting of the powder occurs, and longer diffusion paths exist. This is of course speculation, as is almost all talk about the Rossi device, given the little we know about it. Even Rossi says he doesn't understand why it works. Everyone is forced into speculating when talking about issues like this. Replacing the hydrogen flow with another gas flow, e.g. carbon dioxide, has the effect of cutting the hydrogen partial pressure while simultaneously sustaining a cooling flow. While engineering these kinds of simple parameters, gas pressure and temperature, are readily engineered, the longer term effects of other parameters, such as changing lattice structure, magnetic and electric fields, grain size stability, and transmutation product accumulation, may present as yet unknown control risks. Those are my speculations. 8^) Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
RE: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
If you go back to the Miley/Holmlid finding of hydrogen densities in the IRH range, then a "runaway" reaction is not out of the question, even at low pressure (or by stopping the H2 flow). Horace, Terry and a few others who have followed both LENR and Mills will probably remember the Vince Cockeram experiment years ago, which unfortunately was not published AFAIK, but which resulted in a strong runaway and meltdown of the quartz tube. ... this is from a flash subliminal message from Sparber's 'Cheshire cat,' reminding me of this incident, which sadly will lost to history soon. It is anecdote, sure, but in my book the veracity ranks higher than whatever Rossi may have told an interviewer, which is always predicated to a degree on considerations that are more personal than truthful. Is there an Italian idiom for "red herring" ?? Jones
RE: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
Mark, I think the danger is to the Casimir geometries in the synthetic catalyst formed by the nano powders not to the people standing around the equipment. I disagree with Ed Storms theory that this is first and foremost a nuclear reaction but agree with his assessment regarding the narrow thermal band that must be maintained to produce excess heat - very much like starting a fire by blowing on an ember wrapped in kindling you got to get the flow just right. The Rayney nickel confirmation is almost certainly an example of runaway and is growing whiskers or melting closed according to stiction force as the metal overheats into a plastic state. (and why you must return the powder to BLP for reactivation). The slow accumulation of excess heat in Arata's work is probably starvation as the translated reactants slowly leach out of the Casimir geometry and do so by disassociating and then reforming at lesser fractional values proportional to whatever the current level of Casimir suppression happens to be in the current surrounding geometry. In a runaway or near runaway condition this can clearly lead to tunneling and nuclear reactions but in the classic example of catalytic action it can also lead to repeated chemical reactions occurring at a greatly accelerated rate. I think most people would admit that catalytic action is the causative factor for reactions but only a few individuals are willing to consider a chemical reverse reaction of h2 - 2h1 fueled by change in Casimir force /super catalytic action (ashless) - and I may stand totally alone in positing that the change in Casimir force / change in vacuum energy density is actually relativistic. This relativistic position based on Naudts theory of the hydrino as relativistic hydrogen results in a remarkable condition where two nearby atoms can be nearly stationary relative to each other but experiencing different equivalent accelerations. It would also lend support to my posit that h1 can translate freely between these different equivalent acceleration zones but the covalent bond of h2 would oppose this translation resulting in an asymmetry -meaning the covalent bond in a changing Casimir geometry could act as Maxwell's demon when near the disassociation threshold. Regards Fran -Original Message- From: Mark Iverson [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 11:39 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something! Hi Fran: Yes, agreed... The comment about steam was only half serious! The thought there was that the steam was 'exhaust' and dilution of the 'fuel' with exhaust would decrease efficiency. But that was thinking of this thing like an internal combustion engine... However, no one has commented at all about the main point of my posting. There was all this concern and angst about a runaway reaction and, oh my, how dangerous this is, and its going to be soo difficult to make a 'safe' reactor. It has been said, by Rossi himself, that the reaction stops very quickly (within seconds, or a few tens of seconds?) after you stop the hydrogen flow... -Mark -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X [mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 5:08 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something! on Wednesday, January 19 Mark Iverson said [snip]" If that won't reverse the runaway condition fast enough, inject a contaminating gas... Perhaps, of all things, steam?" [/snip] Hi Mark, I agree a reaction quashing gas is a good idea but not steam which is very reactive and could permanently damage the catalyst- rather an inert gas like helium to quickly change pressure and ratio of available reactants to activated geometry. You might have to purge the gas mix before restarting but at least the catalyst should still be activated. Regards Fran
RE: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
Hi Fran: Yes, agreed... The comment about steam was only half serious! The thought there was that the steam was 'exhaust' and dilution of the 'fuel' with exhaust would decrease efficiency. But that was thinking of this thing like an internal combustion engine... However, no one has commented at all about the main point of my posting. There was all this concern and angst about a runaway reaction and, oh my, how dangerous this is, and its going to be soo difficult to make a 'safe' reactor. It has been said, by Rossi himself, that the reaction stops very quickly (within seconds, or a few tens of seconds?) after you stop the hydrogen flow... -Mark -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X [mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 5:08 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something! on Wednesday, January 19 Mark Iverson said [snip]" If that won't reverse the runaway condition fast enough, inject a contaminating gas... Perhaps, of all things, steam?" [/snip] Hi Mark, I agree a reaction quashing gas is a good idea but not steam which is very reactive and could permanently damage the catalyst- rather an inert gas like helium to quickly change pressure and ratio of available reactants to activated geometry. You might have to purge the gas mix before restarting but at least the catalyst should still be activated. Regards Fran
RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
on Wednesday, January 19 Mark Iverson said [snip]" If that won't reverse the runaway condition fast enough, inject a contaminating gas... Perhaps, of all things, steam?" [/snip] Hi Mark, I agree a reaction quashing gas is a good idea but not steam which is very reactive and could permanently damage the catalyst- rather an inert gas like helium to quickly change pressure and ratio of available reactants to activated geometry. You might have to purge the gas mix before restarting but at least the catalyst should still be activated. Regards Fran
Re: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:18:11 -0800: Hi, [snip] >I am finally caught up with reading all the postings, and I fully expected >someone to have pointed >out the obvious way to stop a runaway condition... Shut off the hydrogen!! >Has it not been said >NUMEROUS times that the thing stops very quickly after the hydrogen supply is >shut off?? > >I MUST be missing something here... That's too simple, and I'm the slow one of >the bunch! > >If that won't reverse the runaway condition fast enough, inject a >contaminating gas... Perhaps, of >all things, steam? Probably not a good idea. Hot finely divided Ni and steam => NiO + H2. In short one would be adding Hydrogen. ;) BTW perhaps this is what happened to all the water?? ;^) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
[Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
I am finally caught up with reading all the postings, and I fully expected someone to have pointed out the obvious way to stop a runaway condition... Shut off the hydrogen!! Has it not been said NUMEROUS times that the thing stops very quickly after the hydrogen supply is shut off?? I MUST be missing something here... That's too simple, and I'm the slow one of the bunch! If that won't reverse the runaway condition fast enough, inject a contaminating gas... Perhaps, of all things, steam? I have to disagree about Jed's assertion of how long and difficult it will be to make the thing 'safe'... There are thousands of top-notch engineers who could devise any number of solutions and safeguards in no time at all. But if regulatory agencies have to also approve it, all I can say is I hope I live long enough to at least see it approved! -Mark -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 3:24 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no? Terry Blanton wrote: > Based on this (gross) assumption, some really good feedback controls > are going to be required on a commercial product. Whether that is true or not, one thing seems certain to me: it would lunacy to install thousands of these machines without regulations, and without first spending billions of dollars to ensure safety. [...deleted...]
