me356: Reactor parameters [part 1]

    • Official Post

    just a stupid idea from a really non chemist (not even good cooker). :whistling:

    maybe did parkhomov lose much H through leaks. moderate porosity allowing only H to leak.
    LiAlH4 if you lose some H2 is

    for Al alone, maybe it is not bad...

    • Official Post

    @me, very amazin!

    For how long did it then stay at 11 bar?

    Do you think it was:

    1. Hydrogen absorption (Pressure decrease from 7.5 bar to 2 bar)
    2. Possibly, LENR reaction (Pressure increase due to heat generation from 2 to 11 bar) ?

    Could you also measure temperature at the same time?

  • It was at 11 bars for at least 2 hours, but it very slowly decreased to 9 in following 5 hour as it happened previously (before such event was triggered) from 10 to 7.4 bars.
    I think that it was abnormal hydrogen absorption else I can't find any other explanation as the tube wasn't leaky for sure.

    I have tried to achieve same effect again (in the same run). I have waited for the pressure to be around 8 bars (so the conditions are similar). I have increased the temperature again (at least +1°C/s) and suddenly it happened for the second time. But this time, it dropped to 1 AP or less.
    I have increased the temperature all the time and all the time pressure was decreasing. During the heating I have made few short stops and pressure decrease was slower. I wanted to bring it as close as possible to zero so I increased the temperature as long as possible until it was 1200°C @ 0 bar relative.

    Unfortunately from this point I was unable to desorb the hydrogen back at all. So it is at 0 bar even I have tried all possible "tricks". It seems as that from some point it is not possible easily to revert it back.

    On the other hand, today, I have examined the tube after the experiment and I saw some strange marks in the alumina.
    On the upper side, I can see micro cracks as they copy heat circle. Under this place, at the bottom of the tube it seems that the fuel is roughly visible as when it melted alumina tube to some extent and is closer to the outer surface.
    This mean that it is very possible there was more than 2000°C locally. Interesting is, that it was not at the hot spot of the heater.

    Alumina tube wasn't damaged by the heater as it does not touched it at all so the reason for such anomaly comes from the inside. My alumina tube should stand 1800°C continuously.
    I have recorded this event by the Optris Pi and all other equipment so all the data can be examined.

    I can't be certain yet, but I am sure that there was really unusual behavior at least with the pressure which is probably the most important factor.
    There wasn't any failure, there was no thermocouple, heater is working just perfectly.

    Unfortunately I have not measured temperature higher than ~1200°C, maybe there wasn't higher but maybe (very likely) Optris was not able to detect it as it was covered partially by the heater and Optris has only 160x120 resoltion which mean it may not sense the temperature between spirals of the heater at all.
    Also, there was no stainless steel or other metal in the alumina, so the hotspot can be really just local. In my case it seems to be around 2cm.

    I will try to take some photos.

  • I have to share my latest thoughts as it makes very good sense to me.
    If I am not wrong and this video:

    External Content
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    is showing real LENR, then I know how to get excess heat with much higher reproducibility with Hot Cat-like design.

    We want to make reactor that will simply create heat not in the air atmosphere, but we want that it will create heat mainly from INSIDE in the Hydrogen atmoshpere.
    This is the big difference.

    If you are heating something in the air, you will loose energy, but hydrogen is the best gaseous thermal conductor thus it will conduct the heat more efficiently to the surface of the reactor. Thus we must get COP > 1.
    Now we have to ask ourselves, if it is really LENR or just trickery? Is it really so simple or there is something more behind this. Maybe part of this is that simple, but there is also something (Lithium?) that can make the process even more efficient and this is where a nuclear part is involved.

    And now the part, how to heat our hot cats from inside. If you have induction cooker, then you should know, that with a proper coil and pulses, you can melt the iron. Did you saw hot, glowing coils somewhere in Rossi's reactors? I think that he is hiding this, because it can reveal this matter (how it works).
    You have to use fat coils and high currents with short and fast pulses to heat the iron. Then your fat coil will not be so hot, instead iron that is near can be that hot that you can liquify it.

    So you have to build similar circuit that is doing such modulation and put iron tube or something with iron or similar material in the reactor. So with fuel you will always get higher COP, then without it.

    And now, somebody should tell me, if we are really getting _excess heat_ or we are doing our heaters just more efficient.

  • Hi Me,

    You get it.

    Looking at Rossi's patent one can see that the key part of the reactor is the wafer.

    The heating resistor is situated in the plane of symmetry of the wafer, exactly in the middle of the fuel.
    That way, all the input power is directed to the fuel with a 100% efficiency ! No lost to the environnement.
    Compared to the current dog bones the needed power is divided by 2, to the advantage of the COP !
    As a consequence the size of the resistor can be reduced.

    Also the resistor is protected from oxydation for a longer life time.
    Beeing at about the same temperature as the fuel the resistor has a faster response for temperature control.

    Really a masterpiece .

    That should not be too difficult to design an inverted dog bone...

  • I don't know if it is correct way of thinking, but we have to find suitable reason why there were successfull replications.
    1. Songsheng did the experiment with the heater in the closed chamber (With hydrogen) - so here is clear evidence, that it helps. As we can see, there are pressure Spikes when excess heat occurs. So what I think is, that you can drive absorption and desorption by using Nickel or similar material to modulate the output (efficiency of the heat transfer).
    2. Parkhomov and one Russian team were successfull maybe because fuel or its part penetrated the fuel tube (as I have saw in my last experiment, this is possible) which can then create extremely small hydrogen leaks which creates temporarily hydrogen atmosphere around the heater? And/or when enough power is applied you can heat the material inside the tube by electromagnetic induction. This is the reason why excess heat is observed by bigger power change even with DC voltage. Even induction with pure AC is not so efficient way to heat something metallic in the tube, you will need spikes, preferably rectangular pulses with kHz frequency to obtain better efficiency. In Parkhomov setup there may be lot of spikes.

    So if this is really correct way, then next run with such small modifications will be 100% successfull.

    • Official Post

    It was at 11 bars for at least 2 hours, but it very slowly decreased to 9 in following 5 hour as it happened previously (before such event was triggered) from 10 to 7.4 bars.
    I think that it was abnormal hydrogen absorption else I can't find any other…

    The results of piantelli are described in that Nasa presentation by Michael Nelson…d-Francesco-Piantelli.pdf
    page 25 looks like what you describe.
    You will sure extract more information from those slides.

  • That might be because there was LiAlH4 in there... Perhaps? ;)

    IiRC three or four years ago in one of the early demonstrations, there was a bottle of H2 gas attached to the reactor. No mention of LI or LiAlH4. At that time the Li component could have been thought to be the catalyst instead of a reactant and thus the 'secret catalyst'. (if they were still trying to understand what was really happening.?? ) ?( maybe?

  • [

    My speculation is that given the amount of Mn in the fuel, Parkhomov tried to increaslattice.e the amount of lithium by including material from the core of a Lithium Ion battery.

    The Russian are very resourceful.


    I'm just wondering at what point Li came into the materials/fuel mix and how others were able to get >1 COP without it or littlte Li . I thought that when Rossi teamed up with Siemens breifly, they , supposedly introduced Rossi to LiAlOH4 as a means to introduce H into the reaction chamber and do away with the H2 gas bottle. Everyone was commenting that LiAlOH4 melts at ~250C and releases H to be absorbed into the Ni lattice. Not much mentioned about Li at that time, or I completely missed it. ?( :huh: :sleeping:

  • OK, I am convinced more and more about my last theory, that you have to heat the fuel from inside, in the hydrogen atmosphere.

    Actually our Parkhomov-like reactors are working as induction heaters more or less. By heating with spiral-like heater it can heat surrounding metals - including Nickel.
    So our Nickel in the tube can to some extent be heated even more, than the rest of the fuel if induction works efficiently.
    This is maybe the reason, why we can observe some small anomalies in the heater power.

    So heat from the fuel is then transfered much efficiently due to hydrogen to the surface and in this way, we can get excess heat. It is pretty simple and it must work.

    We can improve induction heating efficiency just by plugging iron bar to the reactor and change the power supply to be similar to these from induction heaters.
    Everything this was showed previously by Russian team, for example here:

    External Content
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

  • me356: I understand what you are getting at, and I think you have a point. There will be inductive heating of the Ni (in tandem with the joule heating of the coil wire). But the contribution of the inductive component in thermal energy should be able to be computed. It is an EMF, a coil of known parameters, current and voltage known.

    The impedance effects, and the small scale temperature and pressure oscillations I see overlayed on those data, could come from activity within the core that changes the property of the EMF of the inductive heating element

    But you are not saying that this explain the excess heat? I mean, would it generate more than the power you put in? COP =6, transmutation, etc.

  • I am not sure In the part how excess heat is obtained.
    But I think that direct heating (from inside) or by induction heating can create much faster impulses for triggering LENR than with pure resistive heater that is outside the core.

    That mean that you can create much higher derivation in the temperature which can induce fast release of hydrogen from nickel. And in this way LENR can start much easily.

  • I may be mistaken but I do recall a report a while back (I think it was mentioned on the MFMP site) of a group that was attempting to set up an experiment with inductive heating. They used a "coil" made from copper tubing and they passed water through it for cooling. I am not sure whether anything came of it.

    Problem with inductive heating is that you then need a high power oscillator with resonant point tracking to drive the coil. Typically you need a frequencies in the kHz range to get effective heating as you basically are using a air-core transformer. I am not sure how much inductive heating you will actually get in a nickel powder with just the mains supply.