me356's TWO Secrets For Excess Heat Revealed?

Short VERSION:

Secret #1 - Vacuum your nickel under heat.

Secret #2 Apply additional hydrogen in a step like manner after heating of LiAlH4.

Update #1

In an old post by Me356, he reveals the first and second secrets of producing excess heat!

https://www.lenr-forum.com/for…1/?postID=16659#post16659
"What replicators really need is vacuum pump and some additional hydrogen source. This will solve many problems."

Here is the entire post in case he deletes it.

Quote

I hope that in terms of weeks. More time mean a better COP. My goal is at least COP of 3 that should be convincing enough and quite usefull for a real usage.
There are many many things to try that could improve it dramatically, but it takes a lot of time to develop a new design that can utilize the improvement. And of course most of these are wrong.
I am learning new things with each experiment so I have no recipe yet.

What replicators really need is vacuum pump and some additional hydrogen source. This will solve many problems.

I believe that MFMP will achieve higher COP very soon too, it is just matter of time.

I understand what he means by the above.

First, the need for a vacuum pump is obvious. Oxygen, carbon monoxide, and other trapped gases must be removed from the nickel lattice. They fill up space that hydrogen needs. Until the oxygen, carbon, and other gases are removed, very little hydrogen will be able to enter the lattice. This has been mentioned repeatedly by different individuals.

Secondly, the need for a second source of hydrogen is obvious. Focardi and others have discovered that hydrogen can be best absorbed by utilization of steps of pressure. You allow a quantity of hydrogen to be absorbed and then you add more hydrogen pressure so even more can be absorbed. Focardi utilized many steps of hydrogen absorption. When it comes to systems utilizing LiAlH4, a very slow ramp up in the hydrogen release temperature range may simulate this. However, having a supplemental source of hydrogen pressure like Songsheng utilized will allow you to increase the hydrogen pressure at temperatures far beyond that of hydrogen release by LiAlH4.

Thirdly, Me356 has mentioned how areas of clean nickel seemed to irradiate heat much more powerfully than oxidized nickel. Utilizing an initial stage of nickel cleaning is very important.

The first two of these secrets match up perfectly to Me356's post in which he mentions there are two things that could boost the success rate of Rossi Effect replications to 90%. The use of a vacuum pump and the addition of extra hydrogen in addition to LiAlH4 (only Songsheng has done this) match perfectly!

me356: Reactor parameters [part 2]

Quote

Hank
Mills: there are usually at least two problems. One which nearly
nobody is doing, but is done by a successfull replicators (if done,
chances of getting excess heat is probably 90% higher) and second
that all unsuccessfull replicators are unaware. Second one is not
mentioned in any replication report and even not all successfull
replicators might be aware of this.

But
you can still find at least a hint in one report.

Display More

So you see, everything matches up.

Now please use this information to replicate!!

----

Vacuum you're fuel -- at least your nickel.

The secret above is super-freaking-simple and is, in my opinion, the secret (out of the two that Me356 stated existed) that would allow for a 90% success rate if performed by replicators. The percentage may be a bit of an exaggeration, because there are many factors that must be considered in the replication of the Rossi Effect. But unless you vacuum your nickel, preferably under heat, to remove trapped water, suck out trapped gases, vaporize contaminants, and create surface features you're success rate will be extremely low.
You are now probably thinking, "He's probably just guessing and donesn't know for sure."
Well, you could be right, and I could be wrong. But I seriously don't think so.
Here's why:

- The wise grandmaster of nickel-hydrogen fusion, Focardi, vacuumed his nickel under heat for the reasons listed above. Check out all of the papers he co-wrote. This vacuuming process is mentioned repeatedly. It was a critical aspect of fuel preperation.

- Songsheng Jiang, who has produced some of the must stunning replications of the Rossi Effect including long term self sustain at high (1300C) and lower (around 180C) temperatures vacuumed his fuel before applying heat -- for twenty four hours!

- There was a report from Defkalion that if they did not properly vacuum their fuel for an extended period of time, the output would be dramatically reduced. You may or may not believe they ever produced any excess heat. But the fact that vacuuming would make a difference in the output measured makes me think some excess heat was produced at least on certain occasions.

- Bob Greenyer gave extensive advice to Me356 before the period of testing began in which he experienced tremendous success. One piece of advice was to review the Cannon patent. In that patent, exposing fuel to a high vacuum is mentioned multiple times. If the Cannon patent influenced Me356, the most obvious thing he could have learned was to vacuum his fuel.

- It has been alleged that Andrea Rossi used a vacuum pump to do the same for his fuel. This makes absolute total sense. Rossi is an avid patent reader and would have found the reference in the Cannon patent. Also, he studied the work of Focardi and the other early Ni-H researchers who stressed the importance of such vacuuming. The thought he would NOT have vacuumed his fuel is absurd. Now, there may be some versions of the hot cat that work in which fuel vacuuming is not required, if for example molten metals *may* remove some contaminants. But I feel that not vacuuming your fuel is taking a big risk.

My opinion is that it is highly probably that vacuuming your nickel as part of a rigorous preparation program is mandatory to achieve a successful LENR replication. It could lead to success rates as high as 80%, 70%, or 60%. Those percentages may not sound extremely high, but the overall success rate in producing measurable, significant excess heat is probably around 1-2%. There have been more failures than most people realize.

There are other critical aspects that are important in producing a successful replication. But this is a very good start.

PS

1 - You can't heat LiAlH4 while vacuuming it or the hydrogen content will be released.

2 - Apparently, LiAlH4 and nickel powder can be vacuumed together if they are not heated. Be careful not to suck the powder up into your pump.

3 - Heating the nickel opens up the metal so that contaminants are more easily removed. Possibly, this can allow you to reduce the time spent vacuuming the fuel. Focardi used a temperature of 625C. The combination of baking and vacuum may create microcavities as per "Fluid Heater."

"You didn't mention that heat means above 750C.. or higher."

The highest temperature that Focardi used to vacuum/anneal his nickel bar was 625C or 900K.

Axil,

I'm convinced Rossi performed multiple fuel prep processes on the Lugano fuel before it was ever placed into the reactor. Most likely, vacuum/annealing of the nickel powder was one of these processes. He also most likely pre-hydrogenated the nickel among multiple other processes. We know from other LENR tests that active fuel that has already adsorbed large quantities of hydrogen can retain that hydrogen even after being removed from the reactor.

Multiple stages of fuel prep are required to be guaranteed that an LENR system will produce excess heat. However, I think a simple mixture of nickel and LiAlH4 can *sometimes* work even if it has only been minimally processed or not at all. But if someone does not vacuum their fuel and pre-hydrogenate, their chance of producing excess heat is low.

At an absolute minimum, anyone who attempts to replicate a Lugano style device should vacuum their fuel so that hydrogenation can take place inside the active reactor.

POST REMOVED. DEEPLY INAPPROPRIATE. Alan.

Quote from JedRothwell

Wyttenbach wrote:

Rossi definitely engaged in fraud during the 1-year test. It is blatant. He did not even make an effort to hide it.

I agree that this is what the preponderance of the evidence shows at this time. What kind of fraud is not so clear. The "test" setup involved fraudulent representation. The "test" was conducted in such a way as to raise reasonable, even necessary doubt. That does lead to a default inference that everything he did was fraud. That is not proof, though. Nevertheless, the possibility of fraud has been on the table since 2011. I and others maintained multiple possibilities, and probably IH did the same. With the events laid out in Rossi v. Darden, the probability of fraud went way up. So, then, what about Lugano?

IH makes no claim of fraud on the part of the "Lugano professors." Nor have I seen any evidence of it. Rather, people -- even professors, and especially professors who are outside their expertise -- make mistakes.

Quote

With Lugano, he literally had a hand in dealing with post experiment material, and he had in his possession some isotope-shifted material, so I expect he added some to the powder.

Basically, this is possible. If so, the only fraudster here is Rossi. The Lugano professors committed a number of face-palm errors. Allowing him to handle the fuel (before and after) was one. It seems they were terminally naive. I've seen a number of academics, not familiar with what might be called the "social problem" of LENR, act similarly, imagining that this is like any ordinary academic investigation. In academia, the suspicion of fraud is strongly avoided. Many have treated Rossi as if he were a scientist. He never was. He has some interest in science, but his training is weak, and his understanding of the scientific method is defective, he showed that in 2011.

Kullander and Essen had a healthy willingness to approach Rossi with an open mind. But their brains fell out. They overlooked the obvious.

Quote

After the 1-year test he sent the Lugano researchers another sample which came up with the same isotopic shift, to the same extent. That is obviously fake. There is no way a reactor that ran for a year producing 1 MW would produce exactly the same transmutation as a small reactor which ran for a few weeks.

I have a mind that generates dialectical antitheses. They should not be taken as bald assertions, they are merely opposite statements. Lugano did not produce as much heat as claimed; MFMP is apparently claiming that it was 5 to 10% of what was claimed. That level of XP might produce isotopic shifts over a month. The 1 MW reactor supposedly operated for a year. (We do not actually know the fuel life, whether or not fuel tubes were replaced). If it was operating with some XP, but a much lower level, it is indeed possible that isotopic shifts would occur.

On the other hand, Rossi manipulation of the fuel is a simpler hypothesis, and definitely plausible. He may have had leftover "ash" from 2014, so he simply gave some to Bo Hoistad in May, 2016. We do not have clear information that this material came from the Doral plant, but we do know that Rossi removed the fuel on the last day of the "test." I.e., when it was over. That fuel would have belonged to IH. What did he do with it?

Quote

I do not think the others involved in this experiment were engaged in fraud, but I wouldn't know. I can see they did a half-assed job.

Yeah.

When the report came out, discussion on the CMNS list was varied. Some thought the results were very interesting. Some thought that there were serious problems. And some considered "both." McKubre thought it interesting but pointed out the very serious problem of no calibration at full input power. That was one of the face-palm errors, with a flimsy excuse given. (In fact, one would want calibration all the way up to claimed power, but that would have been difficult to impossible without modification of the setup (additional heater coils!), and would probably have been unnecessary. As has been pointed out, calibration could have been done at a series of input powers so that the temperature behavior was known and could be inferred, at least, to somewhat higher power. But some artifacts can set in at higher temperatures. It would have been better, probably, to calibrate after the experimental run.

Jed, I don't think you will mind if I mention that you were the first one to notice -- AFAIK -- the in-our-faces-obvious-obvious. That this wasn't noticed immediately really shows how blind we can be. Almost literally. The Lugano measurement of power was dependent upon the calculation of surface temperature of 1400 C. That is what most critiques have focused on, the possible errors in using an IR camera to estimate temperature of an object like that reactor.

However, at 1400 C, the reactor would have been white-hot, painful to look at. It was, instead, apparently, a dull red and uneven in that. We all have a portable optical calorimeter that will tell us approximate temperatures. Our eyes. It's a bit crude ... but this should have immediately ruled out, for the Lugano team, the temperature they were calculating.

Artifacts abound in LENR calorimetry. I understand skepticism based on this issue. I also have come to a conclusion that the work is being done competently by some, and cumulatively by many, but I still wanted to see quantitative confirmation. It comes in various forms. The correlation between loading ratio and heat, between current density and heat, are interesting and supporting. But the correlation between heat and helium nails it.

If the "Rossi effect" were shown to generate correlated transmutations, through independent testing, it would be definitive. However, IH claims they could not get measurable heat. The MFMP claim somewhat negates that, though at levels far below what Rossi had been claiming (5% - 10% of the Lugano claimed result).

Heh! How would it be if IH loaned their "Rossi reactors" to MFMP? They certainly could do it, once the smoke clears from Rossi v. Darden. IH could pay MFMP expenses and more, perhaps, or simply allow it. Because of legal complications, I would not advise this until Rossi v. Darden is settled, with one exception. They could make the offer and if Rossi allows it, it could be done. And the conditions of that could make it clear, if Rossi refuses, that he is the one that does not want any independent testing. They could be under NDA, to allay Rossi fears of his secrets getting out, though, in fact, that barn door was left open long ago, when he sold the reactor and the IP to IH without requiring confidentiality on their part.