I do like the idea of the Ni tube and putting the heater element inside
for all the reasons you listed. This could result in a very simple to
make cell as thermal heat, H2 and vacuum only needs to be applied to the
inside of the tube. Using a stainless tube with Ni electroplated and
electropolished on the inside could result in a nice compact design with
little external corrosion potential. Maybe fit a collar type finned heat
around the outside of the tube
(http://www.aavidthermalloy.com/products/standard/320105b00000g sort of
like this but longer) to make thermal transfer to passing fluid very
efficient. Also make the heat sink streamlined and optimised for fluid.
I like it. Maybe call it the Vortex cell?
Why did they design the Piantelli cell the way they did? Maybe because
they are not experienced engineers with grease under their fingernails
and a lot of time at the "Coal Face" where necessity is the mother of
invention??
As for the other replicators, may I suggest they did not have Vortex to
call upon?
AG
On 11/8/2011 10:04 PM, [email protected] wrote:
A nice idea could also be: Use a nickel tube and apply heat as well as hydrogen
/inside/ of the tube.
If there are any gamma rays or particles that trigger other reactions, the
efficiency should be better.
Also parasitic heat losses are minimized, because the hottest surface is inside.
Also preparation (glowing in vacuum) should be easier.
I dont understand the idea behind the Piantelli-Focardi design of apparatus.
It seems to be inefficient to me and difficult to measure.
It must also been said, many have tried to replicate it, so far I know Fiat
and some universities are among them.
One group reported, they have observed all effects that Focardi& Piantelli
have reported,
but could not measure excess heat.
Dont know, if they reported gamma rays.
If you do a precise replication, expect it to be difficult and possibly without
result because
many have already tried.
Peter
