Fran,
If you could sputter the powder surface onto the fins of a brazed heat 
exchanger 
http://fintube.thomasnet.com/item/all-categories/finbraze--2/item-1010?&forward=1
 then the H2 could be inputted through a tube surrounding the finned exchanger 
(with an outer lead pipe shield if there actually is gamma to deal with.) The 
heat transfer fluid running through the center tube - center tube welded to the 
outer tube at the ends to maintain H2 pressure. Brazed fins for continuous duty 
to 950 F.

But it might be easier to have square fins with ~1-2 mm between them, and the 
adjacent two fins brazed closed on 3 sides. 
http://fintube.thomasnet.com/item/all-categories/stamped-plate-fin/item-1015?&forward=1
 Fill the top side with the nanopowders, vibrate to settle, H2 still loads from 
the outer tube. ???


----- Original Message ----- 
  From: francis 
  To: [email protected] 
  Cc: [email protected] ; Teofilo, Vince ; [email protected] 
  Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 7:21 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:New private E-Cat test with no input energy


  On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 12:42:10 Jay Caplan wrote [snip]I agree. Since several 
devices have melted down before, it is obvious that it doesn't need elec input 
to work, just reacting nearby the high temps of the resistance element. Once 
heated uniformly to reaction temps and self sustaining, the key would be to 
pull off the energy fast enough with heat transfer fluids to keep temps below 
trouble levels, but in the best reaction range. When GE gets hold of this and 
turns their process engineers on to it (after 15 yrs of NRC delays) you may 
well see superb results.[/snip]

   

  Jay, Nicely said - you beat me to it but additionally I would like to point 
out that Rossi referred to this as a "NEW" ecat. I think he meant it was fresh 
off the assembly line with a fresh charge of powder. This goes back to a 
previous thread where we were discussing the level of activity sites from the 
moment of formation and the "protection " of these sites from overheating. It 
might even be necessary to keep the outer reactor surface permanently wet to 
protect the most active geometry from simply degrading down to a sustainable 
"dry" geometry by overheating and melting the smallest portions of the cavities 
closed. Rossi doesn't want to see his devices follow the performance woes 
associated with MAHG devices that would initially appear to produce anomalous 
heat  but would  quickly  degrade down to almost nothing.

   

  I Agree with both you and Jones that an improved, faster and controllable 
heat sinking methodology is key to a free running reactor but think this will 
also require a new design where the entire reactor is designed as a heat 
exchanger  and  where the powder only exists as a thin layer/alloy sputtered or 
spin melted to the inner surface of the reactor wall (copper or SS). I would 
expect any bulk powder not annealed to a heat sink to very quickly reduce its 
active regions by overheating and  melting the Ni in those regions where 
Casimir geometry is smallest the moment gas molecules permeate the geometry.

  Fran

Reply via email to