On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Bob Higgins <[email protected]> wrote:
> The Li and Al are going to be present in equal amounts in the fuel, but > only the Al will show in the XRD. XRD has a pretty small spot and you can > be pretty sure that the measurement diameter will not include much that is > not the Ni particle. OTOH, SIMS is a much bigger spot size and it would be > easy to pick up stray LiAlH4 in the fuel in the fringes of measurement. > nowhere do you see aluminum in the fuel. > > > So, in SIMS, why didn't we see the Al on the Ni fuel powder? It is > somewhat of a mystery, but what is reported are the raw counts. SIMS is a > micro-sputtering process, and it is possible that the Li atoms sputter like > crazy, maybe orders of magnitude faster than the Al. IMHO, you would need > to see some kind of equalized measurement by SIMS of LiAlH4 (for example) > to see how it sputters. In other words, you would like an abundance > equalization of the count based on the sputter rates. I suspect there is > no Li on the Ni in the fuel, but chance particles of the LiAlH4 in the > vicinity that are sputtered and the Li just sputters orders of magnitude > faster than anything else. The Li counts are somewhat of a mystery, but > not a compelling one. > table 1 shows a lot of lithium as measured in tha same way as the ash. The lithium is 1/3 the amount as the ash. This lithium must have been added by a fuel preperation process. > > There is extremely little C in the system. The C that shows up is > primarily from contamination by the conductive black tape to which the > powders are adhered to place them in the XRD or SIMS instruments. > the last line of the Lugano report said that there ws a large amount of carbin in the fuel that when away in the ash. > > Who knows in the story of the Fe? I can guess that the Fe could have gone > in as nanopowder in the fuel and wouldn't have been noticed as a "particle" > in the SEMs because of its small size. The nano Fe may dissolve in the > molten Li-Al, and upon cooling, condense as a larger particle. If I were > adding Fe to the mix, I would be inclined to add it as a nanopowder to help > insure its dissolution in the molten Li-Al. > There was not eveidence that Li-Al formed. The purity of the lithium on the surface of the nickel particle does not support the idea of element transport by lithium metal: iton or aluminum. Lithium was the only liquid at play at reactor temperatures. > > > On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The Lugano report said that the nickel particle varient was the same >> particle kind and the fuel was very find grained with a gray color. >> >> "All of the Ni becomes quickly surface coated with liquid Li-Al-H. " >> >> Not so. The nickel particles are covered by pure lithium from the fuel >> (see below). No aluminum is found in the analysis and the lithium coat is >> very thiin and uniform since the nanowire coat looks crip and sharp. >> >> The iron particle was not in the fuel to begin with. It must have formed >> by some accretion process. The iron might be a transmutation product of >> carbon, Iron was present in the fuel. There was a large amount of carbon >> found in the fuel but none found in the ash. >> >> The liquid lithium may carry iron is a desolved form to condense in a >> large particle. But no iron is found on the nickel particle so that speaks >> against ion transport by liquid metal. >> >> The purity of the lithium on the surface of the nickel particle does not >> support the idea of element transport by lithium metal, the only liquid at >> play at reactor temperatures. >> >> Figure 9 shows a large amount of lithium on the nickel particles IN THE >> FUEL. Rossi coated the nickel with lithium in the FUEL. Replicators do not >> do this. They use untreated nickel powder. Have you all missed this? >> >> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Bob Higgins <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Note that there are many optimizations of carbonyl processing designed >>> to produce, in particular, long strand connected particles with high >>> surface area optimized for nickel metal hydride battery performance. I >>> suspect that Rossi used a standard variant of this process that is >>> available COTS. It is well known that Rossi has a history of using the >>> Vale T255 grade - a jar of it was seen in one of his videos. It appears >>> that in the Lugano fuel, the T255 was not used, but the Ni was probably >>> another carbonyl variant. >>> >>> At high temperature (>300C) and in the presence of H2, the oxide readily >>> is stripped from the Ni particle surface and other metals readily wet to >>> the clean Ni surface. As the temperature continues to rise, the liquid >>> Li-Al-H foams and froths as it releases its hydrogen. All of the Ni >>> becomes quickly surface coated with liquid Li-Al-H. Much of the fine >>> nanoscale Ni features dissolve in this metal and reach an equilibrium of Ni >>> (~5%) dissolving into the melt AND condensing out of the melt back onto the >>> particle surface. There could be a type of "co-deposition" of the Ni >>> taking place with simultaneous deposition of Ni-H or with hydrogen anions. >>> >>> Also taking place at the same time is the sintering of the Ni. Wherever >>> particles touch, they will grow together, and pull together into a more >>> compact form. >>> >>> There is a tremendous amount of alumina present in the form of tubes and >>> cement. It is hard to ascribe the alumina particle as part of the ash - it >>> is probably just debris. >>> >>> The same cannot be readily said about the iron particle. Why such a >>> large particle would be useful in the fuel is not clear, nor is it clear >>> what happens to the iron in the liquid Li-Al (I am not a chemist). Li and >>> Fe do form compounds such as LiFePO4. Perhaps some percentage of the Fe >>> dissolves into the liquid Li-Al-H and enhances the liquid state reaction in >>> some way. Perhaps it participates in the co-deposition on the surface of >>> the Ni to enhance the liquid-solid metal interface LENR reaction. It is >>> probably naive to think the large Fe particles in the fuel are there by >>> chance, and probably also unreasonable to think they wouldn't dissolve in >>> the very active liquid metal environment. Rossi is known to have used Fe >>> in his low temperature eCat fuel. >>> >>> Bob Higgins >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> The nickel particles grains looks like they have moved around under the >>>> influence of some EMF stimulation and have found each other. Electrostatic >>>> abreaction can do this. There should be a strong dipole based electrostatic >>>> attraction at work that takes advantage of the apparent EMF induced >>>> vibratory particle movement in the fuel mix. It looks like the lithium >>>> never recombines with the aluminum at 400C and above having found a home on >>>> the surface of the Nickel particles, covering all the prticles completely >>>> in a very thin layer. >>>> >>>> The aluminum forms it own particle as shown the formation of a huge >>>> luminum oxide particle of over a 120 microns in length. I wount’t thing >>>> this could happen with the aluminum not at its melting temperature. >>>> >>>> The iron particle is truly large being some 300 by 100 microns in size. >>>> How could this particle be formed if it was not in the fuel to begin with. >>>> The fuel was observed to be very fine grey particles. 300 microns is not >>>> fine powder. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> in 8. fuel Analysis it states: >>>>> >>>>> The fuel contains natural nickel powder with a grain size of a few >>>>> microns. >>>>> >>>>> so the nickel must move around at tempertures where lithium is liquid. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I misunderstood the particle analysis in the Lugano report, On page >>>>>> 50 of the Lugano report, I just realized that the nickel fuel particle >>>>>> had >>>>>> a hugh natural abundance of pure lithium content. Its size may not have >>>>>> changed between when it was fuel through the time that it became ash. >>>>>> It's >>>>>> huge. Consistently, Table 1 also shows a lot of lithium in the fuel. This >>>>>> particle configuration is not consistence with the commensally availible >>>>>> nickel particles used by replications. That stuff is about 5 microns >>>>>> average and contains lots of carbon but no lithium. Rossi has somehow >>>>>> processed the commensally available particles to add lots of lithium. Did >>>>>> Rossi give his COTS nickel particles some sort of lithium bath in a fuel >>>>>> fabrication process. >>>>>> >>>>>> In figure 3, there is lots of carbon in particle 1. But in figure 9, >>>>>> there was none. How can that be? The fuel should contain lots of carbon. >>>>>> Why does fig. 9 not show any? Both types of test should have shown >>>>>> carbon, >>>>>> >>>>>> The nickel particles are huge at about 100 microns, There are a >>>>>> number of them in the micrograph (a) on page 44. It is unlikely that >>>>>> nickel >>>>>> particles can move around much in a particle fuel mixture with lithium >>>>>> aluminum hydride powder. So how could they gather together in an >>>>>> aggragation of such large numbers unless they came into the fuel mix as >>>>>> 100 >>>>>> Micron particles to begin with. >>>>>> >>>>>> If anybody has an explanation I am willing and able to be educated. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
