In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 30 Jun 2011 10:28:30 -0700: Hi, [snip]
I'm somewhat surprised that no one tries Lanthanum alloys, since these are used for Hydrogen storage, implying high loading. >An unusual predicament is lurking in the background of the field of LENR, >due to Rossi's (apparent) success. > >Prior to Rossi, palladium-deuterium - Pd-D - was king. Now it is looking >like Ni-H will be the heir to the throne. Generally this change in focus >away from exotic materials seems like a good thing, to the extent Rossi's >results can be trusted. > >However, several dozen of the top researchers in the LENR field were a bit >miffed by this change in direction, since they had built careers around >Pd-D; and many of them may have jumped ship. After all, getting rid of two >expensive components in an experiment should be "win-win" - IF - Rossi's >extraordinary results can be duplicated without them. > >The reason I am bringing this point up is that there could be a promising >"middle ground" which is ignored in a rush to switch to Ni-H. It is possible >that this middle ground has a valid end-use, even if the Rossi effect is >proved. That end use would be dense deuterium in a matrix which does not >require precious metals and in a situation where one might desire actual >fusion. > >As a few of you might have guessed, the big opportunity for this would be >'targets' for ICF hot fusion. A target which contains a low cost alloy which >is loaded with dense deuterium could be most important in the big picture, >since it might then be possible to employ "tabletop" accelerators to provide >"inertia," instead of giant lasers, etc. More on that later .... > >First issue - we do know that Rossi says that deuterium quenches the heat >reaction in his reactor. In fact, he claimed to use deuterium for that very >purpose: quenching. But like so many Rossi-isms, this one may be another >exaggeration. > >Moreover - a null result with what 'should be' the more active isotope - may >be true only for the precise materials Rossi is using; and in other >combinations it may be possible to find results with deuterium which have >special advantages (such as for ICF targets, etc) and where you do not want >extra energy until it is needed. > >We do know that prior researchers have gotten mixed results with nickel and >deuterium, but far less than with Pd-D. However, the major problem is that >nickel alone does NOT load to high levels, and even nano-nickel does not >load well. In Pd-D LENR, the one criterion which is deemed important is >loading of close to 1:1. That would be one atom of deuterium for every atom >of palladium. This ratio is hard to achieve without palladium, BUT a ratio >of over 4:1 has been achieved in an alloy of nickel and palladium. This is >the famous Arata-Zhang alloy. > >The effort now is to move to alloys of nickel but without exotic metals, and >that is where Brian Ahern's work can possibly help those researchers who >want to stay with deuterium, yet get away from palladium - and still achieve >excellent loading. It is estimate that Pd would cost $5,000 ounce if used in >LENR or in ICF fusion due to the demand/supply situation. > >A few days ago, Brian was running a new alloy of Zr65%-Ni25%-Cu5%-Fe5%. This >was spin cast, calcined in air and ground in a ball mill, so that in the end >there is a ceramic "support" composed of zirconia, ZrO2 - in which are >imbedded nano-islands of the alloy, which is metallic nickel-copper-iron. >This is identical to his recent presentation at MIT, except for the addition >of iron to the alloy. > >When baked at mid-range of temperature, zirconium "wants" to oxidize >preferentially and that is the physical property that makes "nano-islands" >of alloy a natural feature of this technique. The support particles are >ground to 50 microns or so, and the result is millions of nanoislands of >alloy embedded in each ceramic particle. > >Here is where it might get interesting for the deuterium researchers. This >material loaded to a ratio of 2.5:1 ! And that is based on the ceramic mass >as well, so it could be way more than double wrt to only the metal atoms. >This is spectacular, under either circumstance. > >There is no apparent reason why it should not load to the same high level >with deuterium, but this will not be tried by Brian, and that is why I am >mentioning it now. Ahern is very concerned about the energy crisis - and is >open about his results, and wants to see the benefit of them spread to as >many areas as possible. > >This is the first nanopowder alloy to load well containing no precious >metal. All of Brian's previous nano-nickel alloys have not loaded well >unless palladium was a component in the alloy. This is a fine point to the >casual observer, but there will be a few here who will appreciate the >implications. I do not think that ICF can be economically feasible if >palladium is required, for instance. > >The curious thing about all of this is that the nano-nickel which did not >load was still producing net heat gain, ala Rossi. And wouldn't you know it >- this one, which loads well, has yet to produce net excess heat. Go >figure. That is why LENR is so frustrating. The devil is in the details. > >Again - this is a FIRST, in the sense of the first common alloy to load well >which contains NO palladium nor any other precious metal, and it loads at >modest pressure without electrochemistry. That is why it could be important >for use with deuterium, especially for ICF targets. They should benefit from >a deuterium density which orders of magnitude higher than liquid, for >instance. > >So have at it. And consider this as public domain information. > >Jones > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
