In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Thu, 8 May 2014 19:50:52 -0400: Hi, [snip]
Thank you for proving my point that the cathode is an engine. ;) ><[email protected]> wrote: > > >> You do not calculate the energy density of engines. You calculate the >> energy >> density of fuels. >> >> (Unless as Jed mentioned, you are stuck with the Hydrogen in the cathode, >> and it >> is not replaceable - in which case the outlook for CF is far more >> restricted.) >> > >I do not think that would be a major problem. It is easy to work around it. > >First, a well-established fact: The reaction produces helium. Roughly half >of that comes out of metal, and the other half goes deeper in, and McKubre >points out. That tells us that some gas does get trapped in the metal, and >even the dynamic flux of an active cold fusion cell does not drive it out >automatically. Of course, helium is not hydrogen, but still, it does >indicate there is trapped gas. > >Now for some speculation. Suppose that gas loading, electrolysis and other >methods all depend on a "trapped supply" of hydrogen in the metal, as I >suggested. We still know how to drive the hydrogen and helium out, by >various methods. We may have to turn off the reaction while doing that, and >then reload the metal and start it up again. That would be a problem if >entire machine ran with a single metal cathode, or one single discrete >batch of gas loaded powder. But there is not need to make it that way. If >the load/deload duty cycles were about equal, that means you need 10 >cathodes to do the work that 5 cathodes could do full time. That is of no >importance, except that it makes the machine a little less compact than it >would be otherwise. You would not grouse about it any more than you would >complain that a 6-cylinder automobile ICE fires only one cylinder at a >time, so it operates at 1/6 of total capacity. > >(Actually some early ICEs and Diesel engines had only one cylinder, but I >expect they vibrated like the dickens and made a lot of noise.) > >Controlling and keeping track of the load/deload cycles would call for >sophisticated computer controls, but any kind of cold fusion engine will >need this. It will call for multiple independently sealed cell, rather than >a single discrete cell. That will make manufacturing a little more >complicated, but with robotic assembly lines it will hardly affect the >cost. Nowadays, increased complexity does not increase the cost of >machinery much, and it does not reduce reliability. That is why hybrid >automobiles work so well. It is worth the trade-off in complexity, even >though you end up with a machine that can only be assembled by robots, and >that can only be operated with computer controls. > >- Jed Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
