Bob and Mark-- One potential minor correction to the volume should account for the increase (or decrease)in volume with temperature due to thermal expansion of the alumina tube and the added materials inside the tube.
Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Higgins To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:08 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Explosion May Be Out of Control LENR Mark, Alan Goldwater is working on a complete description of this that is being reviewed. One thing I recently added was the 2-volume, 2-temperature calculation, which, even with the ideal gas formula cuts the theoretical pressure to about 60%. I think Alan may be planning to discuss with you the 2-volume, 2-temperature calculation extended with the van der Walls formulation. So, Alan created a document walking through the volumes and mass calculations for the fuel and it is being reviewed at this time - it still is not ready with all of the effects. However, there is no reason not to give you what he is starting with to see if you come up with the same pressure estimates. The primary heated volume having the fuel was calculated to be 0.844ml, and the cooler dead volume was 0.611ml. The best estimates of the fuel (by Alan) was 0.565g of Vale T255 Ni + 0.105g of LiAlH4. The initial fuel volume displacement estimate was 0.177ml which reduces the internal volume of the heated area. The alumina tube ID was 3.81mm, and the OD of the rod taking up the dead space was 3.17mm. The OD was slightly under 6.35mm (1/4"), leaving a wall thickness of about 1.25mm. The sintered Ni rod that remained was about 3.15mm diameter. The Li-Al film on the ID of the tube is estimated to be 25-100 microns in thickness. Aside from the dimensions, there is no way to estimate the proximity of the OD of the sintered Ni and the ID of the alumina. Bob On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Mark Jurich <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Bob: Thank you so much for the rather concise/informative update involving the Dog Bone Explosion Run. I have a couple comments and questions to ask and I am hoping you know the answers to them or can direct me or this note to someone who might know. The “hoped” (or planned) weight % of Ni Powder in the fuel/charge was indeed 90%. My current estimate puts it at slightly above 84%. I realize that when you wrote 90% the implied error is +/- 10%, but I believe we are narrowing in to this value. Of course, this is based on the latest MFMP Information and is still subject to review. We are all anxiously awaiting the next update concerning the fuel/charge amount. Do you know what Alumina Tube Inside Diameter and Wall Thickness is? I would like to verify these values and attempt to determine whether the Hydrogen Gas Pressure (or what Hydrogen Gas Pressure) might cause the Alumina Tube to fracture. A link to the Alumina Tube Material Data Sheet would be extremely helpful. If you follow some of the links here at Vortex-L, my current estimate for the maximum pressure is 9641 psi +/- at least 10% error. Do you know what the Outside Diameter of the Sintered Ni Rod was? I know it may have been mentioned before. I am curious if there was any noticeable gap between the rod and the Alumina Wall. FYI: Here are the links to the fuel/charge materials used in this experiment, as far as I know: http://www.vale.com/EN/business/mining/nickel/NickelProducts/T255%20-%20Premium.pdf http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/product/aldrich/199877 Thanks, Mark Jurich From: Bob Higgins Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 10:35 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Vo]:Explosion May Be Out of Control LENR I received the broken shards of the alumina tube from the MFMP Parkhomov-like experiment from Ryan Hunt. The intent was to have analyzed the metal film on the inside of the alumina to see if it is Li-Al alloy and to try to re-assemble the pieces to form at least one full circumference of the tube. So far, piecing the tube together has been unsuccessful; however, I have found 2 pieces each having a large portion of the circumference - in one case 94 degrees of an arc and in another 106 degrees. In both cases, the ID of the alumina tube is completely covered with the metal film with no visual evidence at the boundaries of the metal tapering in thickness. Statistically, there is nothing to suggest that these pieces were centered on the bottom of the tube. Also, none of the shards show any transition from covered to uncovered with metal. Based on this, I surmise that the interior of the tube at 1057C had a complete circumferential ring of liquid Li-Al in a thin continuous layer. It appears that the liquid Li-Al wetted to the alumina, perhaps with the hydrogen and high temperature cleaning of the alumina surface. With the wetting, the surface tension of the liquid metal, and the high interior pressure, I believe the liquid metal was forced to cover the inner circumference of the tube while it was liquid. The chemical effect of the Li on the alumina may also have been instrumental in the wetting of the metal solution to the ceramic. There is no supporting evidence for a gravity fed river of liquid Li-Al metal at the bottom of the tube. Visual examination under the microscope shows the supposed Li-Al film to be developing small white crystals, well distributed upon its surface. These are probably LiOH from exposure to the humidity in the air. Alan Goldwater is being sent sample shards with the metal coating to do a microscope video of an etch in water. The Vale T255 Ni, that was 90% by weight of the fuel, sintered into a porous rod the shape of the interior of the tube. After the explosion, the sintered rod of Ni was found intact in the remains of the SiC heater. There is no evidence that this Ni was ever bonded or immersed in the Li-Al metal. Though contact was likely, it appears that the molten Li-Al did not wet to the Ni. The samples will also be examined in the SEM and with XRF. Bob Higgins On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Bob Higgins <[email protected]> wrote: I am going to re-assemble the pieces of the reactor tube to determine more about the metal film deposited on the inside of the tube. In one shard, it looks to be about 0.0037" in thickness and appears as a cooled, once liquid metal. It is probably a Li-Al alloy. The liquid Li-Al alloy may form a gravity fed river on the bottom of the reactor tube. Reconstruction of the tube will tell us whether this was a gravity fed river or if it was deposited around the complete circumference. Also, we will be having, at minimum, XRF done on both the metal on the alumina, and the sintered Ni rod that was left after the experiment (in combination with SEM views). Another observation is that there is NO evidence of alumina chemical erosion by the Li. There is no evidence yet that this was not a chemical weakening of the tube - it appears to be a simple hot, high pressure failure of the tube. This tube was notably thinner than Parkhomov's tube. Bob Higgins
