New Paper By Gullström, Rossi - COP 22,000

Quote from Alan Smith

In fact the tubes are Sapphire - which is ok up to 2000C+ (2332K) , and operation is intermittent, so the plasma temperature might be too high for comfort, but the tube and the electrode temperatures fall within the bounds of possibility. Intermittence is even alluded to in the paper.

Alan, if the tubes are sapphire, why would they ascribe an emissivity of 0.9 and make their calculations based on blackbody emission from the tube surface? Surely it would have been recognized immediately that the tube was at a different temperature than the plasma if it was obviously clear like a sapphire tube. It makes it seem even more of a rookie mistake.

Reproduction of such a device sounds easy on the surface, but it is harder in practice. The hard part is the electrode sealing. Normally, for example in an electron tube or a neon tube, the metal to glass seal is done by melting the glass onto an oxidized molybdenum wire. Sapphire melts at 2050°C which would exceed the melting point of Ni by far but not the melting point of molybdenum. You would also have to somewhat match the thermal expansion of the metal and the tube material so it wouldn't break the seal over temperature. Then there is the issue of the LiAlH4. When it decomposes, it gives up a lot of H2 and the tube would explode unless the tube intentionally leaked or the LiAlH4 was pre-decomposed to reduce the amount of released H2. With Ni electrodes, that is not going to be a huge problem because the Ni to alumina/sapphire tube seal would leak. If a true seal were made, you would need a big buffer volume for the gas like they did in old gas lasers.

1. Frank Acland March 16, 2017 at 11:04 PM

   Dear Andrea,

   Are you using graphene to generate electricity by thermoelectric means with the QuarkX?

   Thank you very much,

   Frank Acland

2. Andrea Rossi March 17, 2017 at 8:08 AM

   Frank Acland:

   
   Not exactly: we are using the high conductivity properties of graphene to recover the electricity produced directly inside the QuarkX. It is an experimental phase. Now we know and have measured the electricity produced by the QuarkX and we are experimenting how to harness it efficiently.

   
   Warm Regards,

   
   A.R.

----------------------------------------------------------------

This statement that the excess electrons are produced inside the QuarkX does not jube with this experiment that deduces that the plasma is neutral: "This implies that the plasma has an equal amount of positive ions flying in the direction of the current and negative ions(electrons) in the opposite direction."

The test for static charge on the structure of the reactor implies that there is no electrons being emitted by that structure.

The graphite must be located on the outside of the cell and is picking up charge from the reactor. Where is that charge coming from?

Quote from Bob

It is apparently a very simple device. So a black box test should be easily conducted. MFMP could do it well! I wonder if that will happen?

I can see a reasonable path forward to build such a device, but there are a thousand ways to screw up a replication. If what you made didn't work, it wouldn't mean that Rossi's didn't work. It is better, as you say, to have a cooperative inventor who will allow validation of his device which he believes is in working order. It would be simple to make a reasonably accurate calorimeter for this. Get a 5-gallon bucket of water, put a horizontal 1" copper pipe through the middle of it, fill with water, and put the device in the middle of the copper pipe. Plug both ends with some fiberglass and insulate the bucket. When the device is operating, measure the rate of temperature rise of the water (mixing of the water would be good). If you carefully measure the input power as the integral of V(t)*I(t) the input and output powers would be obtained with high reliability. It doesn't make any difference what the Quark temperature is; all of the convected and radiated heat from it will pass into the water. The copper pipe temperature would never be more than 1-2°C over the water temperature. You would have enough water to insure no boiling (just stop the experiment before boiling occurred). You could also put in a resistor in the middle of the copper pipe in place of the device and run it over input power. It would be easy to calibrate out the heat losses. Easy to do and there are no high technology devices to be wrongly used - particularly if you have as high of COP as Rossi claims.

Using the spectrometer and the blackbody calculation as Gullstrom did makes me wonder if this was Rossi's choice. It also makes me wonder if the whole Optris based calculation of temperature, radiated heat, and convected heat was Rossi's misguided input to the professors running the Lugano experiment.

It would be a little bit surprising that anyone would attempt a blackbody calculation from an alumina-bodied reactor. Either they will have ignored three years of contentious debate, or they will have had no desire to convince anyone who is not already convinced. (I guess it's not surprising that a collaboration with Rossi would use such an approach.)

ETA: just to clarify, I don't know what was used, and it might not have been alumina.

In the paper, there are many references to pions and mesons. Can anyone put these concepts into plain language so that common non professional readers can understand how these particles function in the LENR reaction?

Quote from Eric Walker

It a little bit surprising that anyone would attempt a blackbody calculation from an alumina-bodied reactor. Either they will have ignored three years of contentious debate, or they will have had no desire to convince anyone who is not already convinced. (I guess it's not surprising that a collaboration with Rossi would use such an approach.)

Filiberto Drawec
November 17, 2016 at 8:42 AM

Dr Andrea Rossi:

The material the quarkx is made with is in commerce or you had to invent it?

-------------------------------------------

Andrea Rossi
November 17, 2016 at 8:52 AM

Filiberto Drawec:

We had to invent it. No commercial materials could stand the temperatures we reach.

Warm Regards,

A.R.

---------------------------------

The structural material that the QuarkX is made from is not alumina or similar. And that material does not radiate electrons at high temperatures,

Or carbon? Aka BLP?

Quote from axil

Andrea Rossi
November 17, 2016 at 8:52 AM

Filiberto Drawec:

We had to invent it. No commercial materials could stand the temperatures we reach.

Warm Regards,

A.R.

---------------------------------

Display More

Carbon and sapphire is nothing to invent...Anybody in town who really believes in this BS? It seems that AR is able to "invent" and manufacture in his container or garage more or less alone (would love to know who is "we") almost everything he wants and needs, that none of the world famous material research centers around the globe can create with their millions of $ and hundreds of excellent and well experienced scientists...maybe we are going to see new elements at the end of the periodic table soon (when 5 sigma is accomplished)....

@zorud

Nearly all world famous research centers shy away from anything LENR related. Because they don't want to lose their world famous reputation. Many if not most ground-breaking innovations are brought about by loners.

Quote from zorud

Carbon and sapphire is nothing to invent...Anybody in town who really believes in this BS? It seems that AR is able to "invent" and manufacture in his container or garage more or less alone (would love to know who is "we") almost everything he wants and needs, that none of the world famous material research centers around the globe can create with their millions of $ and hundreds of excellent and well experienced scientists...maybe we are going to see new elements at the end of the periodic table soon (when 5 sigma is accomplished)....

Rossi has been around for a long time. Over the years, he has made some friends. Rossi has these friends that he can talk to when he has a problem. For example, he can ask material scientists at Boeing. R. Mills got his idea for the liquid metal electrode from somebody from his web site.

... nice way of saying "I believe in this loner and his great invention". Hope mankind can benefit from this soon.

The next choice after alumina would probably be zirconia. The melting point for zirconia is 2715°C and it has many manufacturers. It's thermal expansion is better matched to metals, so it would be better for trying to make a seal. The transparency issues with zirconia are similar to alumina. Zirconia is more of a thermal insulator than alumina. The desired tube size would probably have to be made to order. Zirconia starts out as a good electrical insulator (until coated inside by the Li-Al).

Can someone confirm, that the current QuarkX is still the one we have been told about a year ago with a blurry blue picture? A 30mm long stick, 1mm diameter, packed and covered with unknown high tech materials, delivering thrust, electricity, light and enormous heat at the same time? We will probably know by the time when the indipendent demonstration and test will happen...

Quote from zorud

Can someone confirm, that the current QuarkX is still the one we have been told about a year ago with a blurry blue picture? A 30mm long stick, 1mm diameter, packed and covered with unknown high tech materials, delivering thrust, electricity, enormous heat at the same time? We will probably know by the time when the indipendent demonstration and test will happen...

In the long term reactor checkout process, Rossi has made numerous upgrades to that initial reactor design. His blog entry history has indicated a reduction in reactor size and a change in structural material over this extended testing timeframe. Rossi has had many failures and has made adjustments to correct them as he as preceded to sigma 5.