New reactor design - transparent and spark triggered

    • Official Post

    @Paradigmnoia

    Quote

    But it sure has the, ahem, potential to be nasty.


    I think the chances of catching a stray 400kV electrical hit are hopefully small. Keep one hand in your pocket when working with EHT is a good policy. (Not holding your nuts though) Good chance stray HT might screw a few instruments though. However, because of the (probable) impossibility of getting useful data out of a system running a permanent 400kV plasma-arc the plan is to use the arc in bursts only.


    BTW, someone earlier in the thread asked about Quartz tubes with plain end-caps.LFH have just put into stock some low-cost 130X10mm Quartz tubes with a 2mm wall thickness. We also have plain fittings for them, or can engineer any extra fittings (tubes, valves etc) for the end-caps you fancy.


    axil. Thanks for the link- I had read the Klimov paper but some time ago - a useful reminder. I note he was also using Nickel Electrodes. I have plenty of lead shielding, and good Beta/Gamma/X-ray detection. Unlike Klimov and co though I wont be adding copper and iron to the fuel- but more on that later.

  • But it's always better to expose the nickel negative charge, which attracts & implants the protons, not just vibrates it.


    While that would appear on the face of it to make sense.... very clearly the Lipinski-UGC WIPO application shows definite far stronger yields from positive target biases. With also the necessity to alternate the fields frequently, the highest yields being square waves superimposed on DC positive bias at up to 1400 Hz.


    All seems to be evidence that for low energy fusions there must be some form of anionic proton (H minus, H2 minus or?) involved.

  • Correct, so I take that to suggest that H minus is present, and perhaps is the actor.


    I appreciate the "DIY" sentiment, Zephir_AWT. I'm unfortunately not able to do much bench work, yet. Caring for an elder, and having my tools scattered far and wide.


    If I could get everything together in one place, I actually have a lot of high voltage AC and DC equipment to choose from, including HV diodes etc.


    One dream I may have come close to realizing is a high voltage, relatively fast rise time, amplifier. It is a vacuum tube design based on old
    electrostatic speaker driver circuit (drive that with a simple signal generator such as a BK Precision). It appears however that the waveforms for LENR
    are actually not so demanding.... or so the current round of tentative results suggest.

  • Hi all


    As has been noted by others in this forum The Dusty Plasma explanation of LENR and Rydberg Matter give us a possible explanation for the biggest puzzle in Physics and Cosmology; Dark Energy and Dark Matter. The fact that energy released from some of Professor Leif Homlid' Professor Sveinn Olafsson and that others have noted in their experiments seems to be in that same dark part of the Terahertz radiation spectrum where there is little in the way of detection equipment gives a hint.


    It would be nice to put an LENR reactor in front of an airport T Ray scanner. It would also be interesting to see what the effect of T rays was on an LENR reactor.


    Kind Regards walker

  • I think the chances of catching a stray 400kV electrical hit are hopefully small. Keep one hand in your pocket when working with EHT is a good policy. (Not holding your nuts though) Good chance stray HT might screw a few instruments though. However, because of the (probable) impossibility of getting useful data out of a system running a permanent 400kV plasma-arc the plan is to use the arc in bursts only.


    Mills uses more than 1000 Amperes!


    One short point. In a H/D Plasma You can only initiate pre LENR states of H/D like condensed planar aligned H*/D*? filaments. In all Experiments so far the LENR reaction happened in the cathode or sometimes anode. This is also true for the over rate H-production Plasma electrolysis.


    Mills believes that the process he sees is H-H*1/2->H* ¼ and so on. But this is very unlikely to go further, because of a missing sustaining statistics for deeper states.
    What I believe mfp can see is the opposite reaction way: 2 H--> 2H* 1/x → 2H*1/137 (sudden collaps to neutron like partikel) which combine with a nucleus. The afterglow of this process is a kind of Bremsstrahlung which fakes a Mills process...

  • I have plenty of lead shielding, and good Beta/Gamma/X-ray detection.


    Just to state the obvious, as I'm sure you're already aware, but the quartz tube will surely stop the betas (and, of course, alphas). It seems your only chance of detecting radiation will be in the (harder?) x-ray and gamma ranges. Maybe piezoelectric sensors would give interesting data.

  • Lots of great ideas, information and suggestions. Thanks!


    As for the name, so far we have suggestions for E-nail, Sparky and Spark Producing Arcing Kitty. - more suggestions are welcome!!!


    In regards to radiation detection, we have some in place as there is always lots of reasons to be cautious with this type of experiments and equipment. It might be premature to have a long discussion about radiation just yet because there is plenty other ways to hurt ourself.


    The reactor is at the moment more of a PET project of Alan. The main focus in continuously the LENR TEST KIT Mk1 which is intended to be a reliable setup for performing Parkhomov type of experimentation and measurements. If Alan can get this new reactor operational I would however not rule out the possibility of selling it as a kit, or as a very least taking a few custom orders. After all, we are here to service the community of LENR experimentation, so we will produce whatever the experts wants us to work on, but there is still lots of room for various tests on the LENR TEST KIT Mk1.


    One of the things on our list is to provide equipment for people who wants to test the Rossi E-cat type of waveforms. (What some people presume might be the Rossi E-cat type of waveforms) I am currently calibrating
    a LENR TEST KIT Mk1, temp difference between the ports less than 2%. All in all a very good system and data derived from such as system is (I think) far more reliable than any system performing only one test at a time. Another advantage I like is the possibility for small-scale researchers of pre-baking powder and sealing the reactor cores within the system itself. Okey... I'm getting of topic here :)

  • @Alan Smith
    I wasn't thinking of electrocution hazard, although there is that potential... Standing back is a good idea, but does not help much for X-rays unless you stand waaay back.
    The pinch effect of a spark can initiate X-rays with keV energies up to 3 times the kV potential that initiates the spark.
    I know this has been tested at low kV potentials, but I don't know about high kV potentials. There probably is some upper limit.

  • I contend that a spark and a thermalized LENR reaction are incompatible due to the destructive EMF that the spark generates. Yet the spark is a great way to produce the precursors of the LENR reaction which must exist for the LENR reaction to fire up.


    The precursors are metastable and will remain viable through a reactor off cycle. This is the reason why a reactor can be restarted and shut down repeatedly while the fuel is still stable.


    Using a spark produces huge amounts of x-rays instead of infrared photons. This EMF production makes the use of LENR as a commercial product problematical. There are a number of strategies that can get around this x-ray problem.


    1 – as is done in the SunCell use a shield made of tungsten or carbon as a means to convert the XUV and X-rays into infrared EMF.


    2 – as done in the Rossi reactor, preprocess the fuel to create and then carry the metastable LENR reaction precursors from a fuel pre-preparation stage to a run time environment. In the fuel pre-prep stage, abundant X-rays are produced using a spark that forms the pre-cursors held inside sintered and porous micro particles of nickel between 1 and 100 microns on size.


    3 – as done in the DGT system fire the spark occasionally to produce the precursors then run spark free for a time until the reactor requires additional “fuel” to be manufactured. This method runs at a reduced COP because the spark destroys the thermalization produced by superconductivity after the spark is fired. It takes some time for the superconductivity to reestablish all the while X-rays are produced instead of infrared photons.

  • This spark assembly looks like a "hot" fusion approach called the Z-Pinch. As far as I understand, the Z-Pinch is related to the Tokomak design. What is the thinking behind this reactor approach with regards to LENR and how would the results be different from "hot" fusion?

    • Official Post

    GlowFish. This is what is known in the movie business as 'the elevator pitch'.


    The principal difference is that we are looking at temperatures below 1500C and reactor pressures of 1 bar of Hydrogen or below. So The spark is applied only intermittently as a 'trigger' - principally in an attempt to dissociate H2 to monatomic H. This may encourage it to make whoopee with the free Li/Ni powder circulating inside the reactor.

  • What is the thinking behind this reactor approach with regards to LENR and how would the results be different from "hot" fusion?


    Just 100 million degrees or so. And of course the much lower activation energy may dictate a reaction coordinate "surface" with different paths to products NOT giving rise to the same gammas etc.