V. Dubinko: Anomalous Heat from Neodymium/Iron and Hydrogen

Interesting report, but there is no real evidence of LENR associated with this. It appears that the alloy was made as an amorphous metal and when hydrided, perhaps the hydrogen provided the "grease" to allow the metal to rapidly take a crystalline form that was a lower energy state of the metal lattice, giving off excess energy as exothermic temperature rise.

Is the first progress report available somewhere, or any other info?

Quote from BobHiggins

Interesting report, but there is no real evidence of LENR associated with this. It appears that the alloy was made as an amorphous metal and when hydrided, perhaps the hydrogen provided the "grease" to allow the metal to rapidly take a crystalline form that was a lower energy state of the metal lattice, giving off excess energy as exothermic temperature rise.

Agree that it is interesting but isn't convincing for LENR.

The observed temperature spike is common for metal hydrides when you have an appropriately placed temp measurement device. I find that Nd-Fe alloys are not well studied at this point, but there have been studies on Nd-Fe-B alloys (as they are used to make magnets). The powdering observed is known as decrepitation, and is common for brittle materials (Pd for example does not decrepitate on H absorption, but alloys might). The studies on those materials show strong dependence of H2 absorption characteristics on grain structure. Some studies show no absorption at room temp, but lots when heated. Others show good absorption at room temp with no heating required. Another aspect is the abs/des cycle number. If these results are from the material's initial 1-3 cycles of H2 abs/des, you have the problem of 'activation'. This has two aspects with Nd-Fe, a) the decrepitation massively increases the available surface area which leads to rapid absorption and heating (i.e., the spike), and b) surface contaminants, esp O, will react as well. Surface O will form water, so you have the heat of formation of water to consider, as well as the consumption of H2 which it seems was all attributed to hydride formation (which may not be correct). Usually hydride studies cycle the materials a few times to get past the activation process and into a stable form of the material in order to get reproducible behavior. Also, I note the Cu is blackened, which I think means copper oxide or some such has formed, which leads to the question, "Where did the O come from?" Which is why I asked for more info in my prior post...

The possible Role of Axions in LENR

Quote

The posit of this post is that anisotropic magnets produce the LENR reaction because the unbalanced field lines being a monopole field produces magnetic field lines that tend to be twisted thus producing excitation in the nucleons via CP symmetry breaking. Their Color force having been excited by twisting magnetic field lines, the proton and neutron will decay under the influence of the weak force.

I am confused as to why anyone believes that there is excess heat present.

For example:
At equilibrium, the tube warms 13K
It has a weight of 93.5g and a specific heat of 0.880 (they use too high a number)
The inner filling of copper was 1.6225 and specific heat of 0.385
NdFe was 2.3713 with a specific heat of 0.214
multiplying all this out:
13*(2.3713*0.214+1.6225*0.385+93.5*0.880) = 1084J

From the DSC calculation:
436.8J/g (conservatively) * 2.3713g =1040J

They are equal so it is what is expected.

They are actually triple counting the heat as the heat to melt the copper and raise the alumina tube is
generated by the chemistry and just redistributed.

An example is heating an iron rod with say 400J of energy and then plunging the hot rod into a cup of tea.
The tea will boil but you only count the end points at equilibrium not the heat needed to heat the rod to temp X nor even melt it (at
least to a first approximation).

see http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…enation-vladimir-dubinko/

There is no oxygen in the chamber that was evacuated to deep vacuum before H was let in. Calorimetry has been calculated based on the amount of absorbed H reported in the DSC, (and not just the sample weight) which results in seemingly "abnormal" heat production claimed in the report. Further study is needed to prolong the heat production beyond the chemical limits.

The neodymium alloys are very susceptible to hydrogen. This study may be of some interest here - both with respect to generation of heat during hydrogenation, both with respect to preparation of powder from rare earth magnets in home conditions. When Nd-Fe-B alloys are heated in hydrogen to above 650 C. the Nd22FeuuB matrix phase disproportionates into iron, neodymium hydride and ferroboron.

@Dubinko

Very interesting paper! I've some questions about it:
1) Did you try the experiment again ? Was it 100% repeatable ?
2) How was the EM impulsion done ? Frequency, Current ...

Thank you for sharing,
Arnaud

/* Also, I note the Cu is blackened, which I think means copper oxide or some such has formed, which leads to the question, "Where did the O come from?" */

It seems for me, that the Cu foil rather melted, thus revealing black underside of it instead of blackened. Please note, that the rest of copper surface remains perfectly shine, so no oxidation could actually run there.

@Vladimir

My time has been limited of late and I haven't done an exhaustive study on
these results, but one thing has become clearer to me regarding possible errors
in your analysis. Your temperature data is typical of a hydride's reaction with
hydrogen. One sees these kind of spikes in very active materials with rapid
absorption kinetics. Other materials give lower spikes that are more spread
out in time. In fact I recently had a poster at a conference on using this
fact to develop a near-real-time measure of hydride bed absorption.

But, your work is susceptible to the same criticism that was leveled at Fleischmann
and Pons, namely the possibility of 'hot spots'. You computations make the
implicit assumption that *all* the sample was at the spike temperature. But that
is an assumption. That assumption leads to a computed heat output well beyond
expected amounts, i.e. it indicates anomalous 'excess heat'. In general, it is
a good practice to reassess your assumptions when your logical process leads to
anomalous results. Frequently, one finds invalid assumptions. That is the root
cause of the 'hot spot' criticism, and it also applies to 'my' CCS problem as well.

So for now, as a conservative 'mainline' scientist, I am going to assume that your
spike temperature is NOT indicative of the whole sample, and thus your computation
of excess heat is probably incorrect. You can certainly prove me wrong, but not
with 'more of the same' data. You will have to improve your calorimetry to
resolve the 'hot spot' issue, just like F&P, Storms, McKubre, etc. did.

Alternatively, close the loop, and show a clear example of a self-sustaining
reaction that produces excess energy you can use and/or capture.

I would also caution you on your use of the terms related to 'melting'. While you
may be correct that due to heat transfer issues, the sample reaches very high
temperatures and 'melts' itself and the Cu, it is also true that lower temperatures
can also produce metal movement that _looks like_ melting, especially while in the
presence of hydrogen. Sintering for example is know to begin at ~half the melting
point, i.e. near 500-600 C for Cu. Likewise, you may be seeing an alloying reaction
of the Nd alloy with Cu, perhaps fostered by hydrogen also. Also, I recently
conducted studies with La-Ni-Al alloys that showed heating to 150-300C when the
hydrogen pressure (400-600 psia) ensured loading into the beta phase (H/M>= ~0.7)
induced changes in the material that were stable over time. You could be doing the
same thing.

As well, your films are highly amorphous, which is a higher energy form than the
normal, ordered metallic structure. Part of your heat may be a heat release from
a phase change occurring during the initial activation. You do report in your Part
1 paper that the amorphous phase has disappeared, so you might consider that issue.
Can you form a boat out of your Cu and put the powder in it and repeat the
experiment? That possibly would eliminate some of the issues above if the response
you observe is similar.

@Alan as well - I understand that the chamber was evacuated. I was specifically
referring to surface oxygen _already on the Nd alloy_ when it is placed in the
chamber because of absorption from room air that it sees after the film is made and
then removed from the vapor dep chamber and further processed (i.e. cut up,
transferred to reactor, etc.). In Part 1, Dr. Dubinko reports seeing Nd(OH)3 in
the XRD of the decrepitated powder. Are we doing heavy metal transmutation to O?
Or did we just have some O in the sample when it went into the reactor... The
presence of Nd(OH)3 suggests a surface O-hydrogen reaction, which is also
exothermic I believe.

As I said, I am not compelled by the data to believe that any excess heat has been
observed. Feel free to develop that compelling data!

It's a holiday here in the US. I probably won't be responding immediately to any
comments, if at all. I don't see the point in arguing further at this time anyway.
More data please...

@V. Dubinko

A more sensitive indicator of nuclear activity in this reaction is the detection of sub-atomic particle emissions. Piantelli has used this method to detect a 6.5 MeV sub-atomic particle being ejected from a cooling nickel bar that he has activated in his experiment a short time before.

Place your copper rapped package in a cloud chamber and see what particles come out. A before and after type test will show that the package is inactive before the experiment and is very active after the experiment. If a magnetic field is used in the cloud chamber, you can tell what charge that the particle carries, what type of particle it is and how much energy that it carries.

Don’t fall into the hot spot and excess heat morass that naysayers want to embroil you in. Subatomic particle detection is a very sensitive and definitive indicator of nuclear activity.

What kind of interferences and false signals can one get with a cloud chamber?

Quote from kirkshanahan

What kind of interferences and false signals can one get with a cloud chamber?

A cload chamber can produce an unambiguous signal that is easily interpreted by even the most unskilled witness without the need for data reduction and the like. The eyes of the witness tells the entire story of what is happening. It can be easily disseminated to the public on video. If hundreds of particle tracks are coming from the copper package, the eyes rightly conclude that the package is highly nuclear active.

This is no possibility of a false signal in this common sense based observation.

@kirkshanahanThanks for your comments. Some of the criticism cam be answered straightforward, such as (i) the oxygen trace in the samples – it was due to the delay in XRD for a couple of days after the first experiment. When we did next XRD of freshly hydrogenated samples, none was found; (ii) if you have a look at Fig. 3 of Part 2, you may see that it was not hot spots, but complete melting of all the Cu present; (iii) the heat of crystallization is clearly seen in the DSC of NdFe10 in the Ar atmosphere just above 500 C (Fig. 7) – it is ~6 J/g, which is negligible. However, generally I would agree on that reported results do not prove the excess heat to be produced, they just point out at the possibility of some hidden mechanisms of heat production. So it’s a kind of a teaser, at this stage. We are currently working on prolonging the reaction, which could help us to evaluate the produced heat and make more definite conclusions.

Another time honored LENR nuclear reaction detection method is the use of CR39 particle detection material.

Here again, the before and after reaction measurement can show that particles are produced by the LENR reaction. This method will measure the energy and flight path of the particles coming off the copper clad package. The way energy is produced in LENR is uncertain. Energy production can come in the form of particle production. Why not look for such a mechanism?