me356: Reactor parameters [part 1]

  • Chemonuclear Fusion is a
    type of low energy nuclear fusion that has been shown to produce
    energy in two experiments. Aneutronic nuclear fusion can provide
    unlimited electric power without polluting the environment with
    radioactive waste and greenhouse emissions. Chemonuclear processes in
    small dense white dwarf stars accelerate the rate of nuclear fusion
    and cause them to explode in spectacular supernova explosions.


    We
    started the Chemonuclear Fusion Project is to raise awareness of this
    new and vitally important source of environmentally clean energy and
    to promote research and development.


    The Chemonuclear Fusion
    Project is soliciting volunteers to help our crowdfunding and
    educational campaigns. Our crowdfunding webpages will soon be up and
    running. We want people to post to discussion groups and help us get
    the word out that aneutronic chemonuclear fusion might be the
    radiation free way to power the world if we can get the funding to
    build and test reactors.


    We want artists who can help us
    design T-shirts, mugs, and promotional items to sell and give away to
    our contributors. Writers to write promotional materials and post to
    web forums are also wanted. Video producers and professional and
    amateur scientists who can help the public understand the concepts of
    chemonuclear fusion are encouraged to contact us also.


    Visit our facebook page
    and give us a like. We welcome your comments and questions!


    https://www.facebook.com/chemonuclearfusionproject

  • I have examined tube from the last run with Stainless Steel reactor.
    I was unable to extract the fuel container yet, but I was able to extract rod that was touching the container.
    Obviously Lithium escaped from the container completely but I have found that there is very interesting formation.


    Color is very different than what I have seen in any previous run. There are drops of solid goldish material on the rod with probably Lithium oxide.

  • @David Fojt: I think it's difficult to find similar graphs because the absorption of hydrogen in nickel metal at low pressures is very small. At 1 bar the H/Ni ratio at the melting point of Ni is just below 0.001; it takes pressures in the order of several thousands bar to obtain any appreciable absorption.:


  • For this post I have returned to my older thread where I have tried to replicate work of Parkhomov.
    While I have changed some parameters I think that it could be still marked as e-cat replication.


    Today I have tried to verify my latest findings - to find if I can get excess heat with 1 year old stuff that was used/designed for Parkhomov replication. Result: Yes, it is.
    Fuel was completely prepared today in a few minutes.


    Now I am able to turn the excess heat on and off on will. This is something that allows me perfect verification and comparison.
    Achieved COP was only around 1.5, yet I didn't expected to be high as with my other reactors.


    Please check attached photos.
    One photo was taken while excess heat was On, second one while excess heat was Off (just 3 minutes later).
    Can any skeptic explain me, how this can be achieved (other than with some source of heat) if you have no heater inside? And to maintain this for at least few minutes...?


    Note that the glow was even 2 times further from the heater during the highest COP. Normally glow ends just under heater due to thermal conductivity.
    Also note, that temperatures of the heater are very same in both cases.
    Power was also very same.


    I can just say, that the fuel ends approx. 4cm far from the heater.

  • Hi me356,


    I think I'd need a bit more information about the conditions in the two cases, what was the same, what was different.


    I guess one case has fuel and the other not?


    Also I guess that both cases have reached equilibrium with some power through the heater, and have identical power? And you note that the rod on the other side of the wires from the main glowing body is much hotter in one case than the other?


    Or have I got the wrong end of the (glow)stick?

  • As I said, same power, both with very same fuel. Right photo was captured 3 minutes later when I turned excess heat off (Yes, it is possible).
    Absolutely nothing changed, just one is running with excess heat second one without. It is identical reactor, but photo was captured 3 minutes later. Later I have turned excess heat On again.


    Temperature of the heater is also same. You can see that the heater is heating stainless steel tube.
    But stainless steel tube on the left is glowing "on its own" even on the place where heater is not present.
    If you know what is thermal conductivity of a stainless steel you will see that something is really strange on the left photo..


    This is nothing to convince anybody. Just something for thinking..

  • OK - so you are saying:


    (1) The smaller dia stick does not glow at normal power (RH pic)
    (2) You turn on excess power - the smaller dia stick glows
    (3) You turn off excess power - the stick still glows after even 3 minutes, even though this is the same external condition as you had before. (LH pic)

  • So: the idea would be that when the smaller dia stick is glowing that is because the thermal conductivity inside the stick has changed and is lower, so conducting heat from the hot part through the stick. A temperature-dependent phase change might do this.


    Having made the phase-change happen the stick stays hotter and therefore the phase change stays changed.


    I'd predict from this that the adjacent end of the main stick would be slightly dimmer (because of the heat conducted out to the small dia stick). But I'm not sure if that would be visible. You've got pretty good quality photos so it might be.

  • Thermal conductivity is same in both cases. Internal and external pressure stays perfectly same. And even after changing it a few bars it can't produce such difference in any way (Tested a few times).


    Temperature of the heater was kept constant with 0.1°C precision by controller. Alternatively I can make constant power - I can drive my reactor by any variable.

  • Thermal conductivity is same in both cases. Internal and external pressure stays perfectly same. And even after changing it a few bars it can't produce such difference in any way (Tested a few times).


    Temperature of the heater was kept constant with…


    Can you please explain what leads you to think that thermal conductivity is the same inside the stick in the two cases?

  • H-G Branzell: the position was not changed. I have not touched the reactor at all. It didn't moved a single milimeter in any way I can imagine. But you are right that this effect could be done in this way.
    But it wasn't.