Freethinker's replication attempts

Quote from Longview

Nice videos, FreeThinker. It really makes it clear how dedicated you are to doing it right. And the battery story, humorous but what a lesson to us all.

I mentioned sometime back the possible use of a sapphire rod. Actually there are fairly cheap sapphire windows:

http://www.edmundoptics.com/op…ws/sapphire-windows/1904/

They claim good transmissivity from 200 to 5,500 nm (0.2 to 5.5 um). Your bright yellow is producing a lot of energy in the mid visible, that is 500 nm, and of course a lot more in the longer wavelenths including "mid-IR". By the way, I strongly recommend you wear ordinarly oxy-acetylene welding googles when looking at your reactor.... lenses of eyes are fairly routine to replace now, but not retinas!

One could close off your opening allowing much closer positioning for the pyrometer / IR photometer using such a window (assuming the IR transmission was good through the photodiode's spectral range--or even a true pyrometer... Anyway, a sapphire window could be attached at the outside surface of your firebrick, occluding the "hole" or maybe even at another position in the "hole" to create a double walled conduction and convection block. An Al2O3 tube with two sapphire window ends and an evacuated interior would likely be better than a solid rod-- far less conductive and far broader spectral transmissivity, and perhaps cheaper than a sapphire rod. Such an "IR / Vis / UV light pipe", cemented right into the "hole" itself should allow very close image coupling to your IR scope. The much thinner pair of end panes would attenuate less of the thermal signal than a solid rod, regardless of the spectrum. The idea being to get the optical / pyrometric device to "see" only the inside of the reactor rather than a bunch of additional cold brick with a little hot spot.

Display More

Thanks.

I have considered sapphire glass in my double end open variant of the tube with the purpose of doing crude spectroscopy, but the special size requirements made them costly, believe minimum order was 10, not to mention the challenge of making a spectrometry, for my special interest in UV. Final kill, apart from cost and lead time was that sapphire would not cut it as it attenuates quickly at 200nm and the breakpoint is really quality related and the producer did not want to give me full spec on the pieces. Anybody has a high resolution spectrometer in 100-400(or about)nm lying about in the basement? No?

BTW the special range for the Voltcraft Pyro is 8-14um.

Quote from Mats002

Good idea with a window into the core. Not only will it give better/new measurements, but also opens a way to stimulate/trigger active sites with laser pulses, which might be an option equal to heat pulse or EM stimulation.

But for now, I have full respect and understanding for replicating closer to Lugano/Parkhomov, having some good results in that realm first.

Thanks.

As I wrote Longview above, I contemplated a window of sapphire at one end, which could be used to stimulate with a laser of appropriate wavelength. My intent of doing spectroscopy, and you stimulation proposal, I guess, both require for the fuel powder to be present in the alumni tube and not enclosed in a SS tube as my current setup is using.

But nevertheless food for thought.

Quote from Longview

I bet someone does.

Recall my post earlier on the Ocean Optics device, from some suppliers at around $599 US. I have seen those advertised for about 15 years, so there should be some even in surplus auctions at universities. The interface to a PC might be somewhat archaic, but that is how they were originally brought to market. I forget the standard now, but it was basically on a card "way back then".

I see this link below to a quite good window "Amtir-1" (60% t) at 1.5 to 10, and drops nicely from to about 55% from 11 out to 13 um. I did not see the temperature tolerance. Some windows in the IR cannot stand much heat at all. Other IR windows are linked there, calcium fluoride good out to about 20 um with a mp of 1,419 deg. C, and cadmium telluride good out to 30 um and mp of 1,092 deg C. I would at least check the prices. If necessary, make an appeal for assistance...

(Warning the melting points for each was from the "never-to-be-trusted-online-encyclopedia", and also may not correlate well to operation as a window... although the temperature maximum on the calcium fluoride looks promising--- I should not have to remind that both CaF and CdTe are very likely extremely toxic. Mill, grind, dissolve or fire with the greatest respect, please).

http://www.janis.com/products/…owTransmissionCurves.aspx

Display More

I appreciate your tenacity. Thanks for the link, BTW. I checked them out. As did I Oceans (have done so before), they have a nice line of products.

BUT:

I have an established scope, and will execute in that scope. When that scope has come to an end, I will evaluate and contemplate options. Until then I will stay on target. That means, no window, no spectrometer, no vaccum pumping or inert gas filling of the reactor, or any other idea that stray to far away from the current setup. Only minor mods to secure reaching the target.

But your ideas are excellent. Sorry for being such a bore.

Post mortem on my first active reactor.
https://docs.google.com/docume…trx4xp0s/edit?usp=sharing

Quote from Tarun

Thanks for the report.
As far as I know, there is no way to conclude anything from a melt down such as this, except to do -
1. Elemental and isotopic analysis
2. Compare the cooling curve with that of calibration cooling curve. If there was anomalous heat at the time of melt down , then it will show up in such comparison. The rate of cooling will be different.

True. To some extent. And then again not true, because the morphology can tell you something about things that happened. In terms of deducing LENR activity, I agree. But I dont agree with " there is no way to conclude anything"
I must also insist on that meltdown and breaking the coil is not necessarily the same point in time, so you might have had LENR just moments ago, but when the coil breaks, the cooldown will be one without HAD.

After 5 runs on a dummy tube with no pressure integrity (1-1.6bar) and no LAH but only Alumina powder as dead mass in the reactor tube, I now have a tentative calibration diagram. I'm in this moment doing a Alumina powder and LAH run, the third in a row to see if it makes any difference. The two earlier runs have had a leaky reactor, seal giving in at about 10 bar. The runs have still given a few data point to match in the diagram, and there are so far no deviation (conditions ok as there have been some pressure and thus H2 present). Hopefully today's run will keep pressure.

In the calibration diagram is a curve plotted. It's an ad-hoc curve based on analysing the points and taking height for both systematic errors as well as random errors. Any future data point that reside above that line is a LENR event candidate.

Note that the points represent the maximum temperature for that input power.

Quote from axil

It looks like aluminum oxide has the same chemical character as potassium because of the superatom effect. Al2O and potassium are isoelectrically identical. Aluminum oxide may produce the same rydberg hydrogen formation function that potassium does. If Rossi is changing his tube material, he must add a potassium catalyst into his fuel mix. If Rossi reports a unsuccessful switch of tube material away from Alumina, then we know what he is doing. Al2O commonly exists as a gas, since the solid state is not stable at room temperature and is only stable between 1050 and 1600 °C. Aluminium (I) Oxide is formed by heating Al and Al2O3 in vacuo while in the presence of SiO2 and C, and only by condensing the products.Information is not commonly available on this compound due to instability, complex high-temperature spectra, difficult detection, and identification. In reduction, Al2O is a major component of vapors of Al2O3. There are also 12 valence electrons in Al2O.

One of the reasons why Parkhomov may be successful in his replication efforts is the presence of SiO2 as an impurity in the alumina tube that he uses. Together with Carbon, the pair of compounds creates a Rydberg Hydrogen Matter formation catalyst when Al2O is produced.

hmm.... My tubes are 99,7% Al2O3 (C799; Max temp 1850°C) and the people supplying me have no clear spec on the remaining 0.3% components but it is suggested that it is MgO, SiO2, CaO and Y2O3.. I wonder if that small part of SiO2 would suffice. Carbon I may have in minute amounts due to the fiber and adhesive in the small tape I use to cover the hole in the core. I do not have vacuum... only a massive partial pressure of H2 that may be anything between 5-50 bar... Sound that I may not need to apply ... Seriosuly. Thanks for the Potasium/Al2O relationship info.

I am starting (fingers crossed) my active run in the modified test bed with insulation tomorrow, Tuesday. I have spent a lot of time making dummy runs with Al2O3 and Al2O3+LiAlH4 and have now completed my calibration set https://drive.google.com/file/…RRW5jRGc/view?usp=sharing.

Quote from Tarun

There is no significant difference between the temperatures with and without H2. This is a good finding and can be useful for other experimenters, who are wondering whether to do a calibration with H2 inside.
All the best for the fueled run!

Thanks.

It started out ok, with nice H2 pressure build up, but then,as it was close on completing its first reaction leg, and panning out on 18 bar, I wanted to just lower the temp a bit, pulling the power few sec and put it on. I did so ant the temp started up, but the pressure continued on a downward trajectory from which it did not recover. The seal was busted. Don't ask me WHY Just lowering the temp a short time should not do it, I think. I will have a new reactor going asap. In the light of Rossi patent, it may take a couple of days as I ponder if to make ready the heater for Ni powder that I am building. The run did not pan out the way I planned, not the slightest indication of over unity, and tomorrow, when I get back to the lab, the H2 will gone from the reactor. I will start it up again, while working on the Ni powder drying thing.

Yesterday I started with another reactor, based on my auxiliary, lower quality, Alumina pipes. It worked out well and the tube proved be good containing pressure. Today, I started up the reactor anew, the hydrogenation phase been done yesterday. The pressure at room temp was 18 bar. When having runned for a while, It started become worrying, because the continuing high pressure, may mean that the Ni had not been loaded. As I pushed the reactor into the 1100C on the shell, there was a loud bang, quite startling. The power continued to pump, and through the hole carved in the insulation, to be used by the IR gun, it was evident that the shell was broken, as was the reactor tube, as the closed end was gone, and the filler rod was peeking out the hole. Coil intact, filler rods intact. New try coming up.