I have read Jeff Morriss' presentation about his experiment. It is very nicely constructed, but there are several important misses in replication of Parkhomov. One is the lack of using LiAlH4 which dissociates eventually into a liquid LiH film on the surface of the Ni which was long since stripped of its oxide by heating in high temperature H2. LiH is an ionic hydride with the hydrogen being in the form of hydrogen anions (which Piantelli implicates in his Ni-H reaction). Another difference we (MFMP) observed is that Parkhomov's reactors leaked. By the time these were at excess heat producing temperatures (>900C), the hydrogen pressure was a partial vacuum in the 0.25-0.5 bar absolute range. It appears that Parkhomov's seals began leaking at the peak pressure of about 5 bar and continued to leak from there on. Above 800C, the LiH began re-absorbing some of the H2, drawing it into a partial vacuum. MFMP's seals have been much better and hence did not strictly replicate Parkhomov's actual protocol.
Jeff may also be having trouble due to supplying H2 using a nafion based H2 generator. Nafion is also an H2O conductor and it has a dessicant dryer on the output. There will always be some H2O being supplied with the H2 in his system. I don't mean this as a criticism at all! Jeff ran a good experiment. I am just trying to point out potential issues that could be complicit in failure to replicate. I wrote a long email to Jeff about it. Bob Higgins On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > See the slides here: > > > http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Attachment/470-E-cat-cell-to-post-pdf/?s=f386c23c9028da91b72c24b95d920d4381f273fc > > These are nice slides describing what looks like solid, well-made > equipment. > > Conclusion, p. 15: > > "Lack of excess energy, despite close adherence to Parkhomov protocol > indicates that key information is missing > > * Assume that both Rossi, and Parkhomov did generate COP >>1 . . . > > > That seems like an unfounded assumption. I would say an equally likely > conclusion is that Parkhomov did not get excess heat and the results are a > mistake. I do not think the Lugano experiment produced any excess heat. It > is difficult to judge from the report. > > - Jed > >
