Simple New 'Differential Calorimetric' Reactor Design.
-
From the other thread:
Display MoreSoon to start testing a batch of fuel that has been extensively sonicated, vacuumed and flush-hydrogenated at low temperatures as a slurry in Heptane. Chosen for its viscosity (low) and its boiling point ((relatively high) heptane is a pure alkyl-group hydrocarbon with no bound oxygen. The base Ni is 20 micron particle size, doped - for various reasons - with 10% Cu and 10% micronised acetylene derived carbon black. After sonication the fuel mix was allowed to settle to the bottom of the flask, the heptane decanted and replaced with much more volatile hexane. After 3 hexane washes LiAlH4 and LiH (total 10%) were added to the hexane suspended fuel. These hydrides are soluble in hexane btw. The hexane was then removed by low-pressure evaporation (500mB approx) while hydrogen was bubbled through it continuously. This might be useful from the hydrogenation angle, but as a bonus it definitely speeds up evaporation.
The end result of this is something like Ni particles intimately connected with fragments of Cu,C, and wrapped in Li hydrides deposited from solution. Cake-mix!
Since I am building a new differential calorimetric version of our standard reactor type, which requires serious calibration, I'm unlikely to get in a run with this fuel before Friday. Pretty much all of this process is being recorded on video, which LFH will edit into shape and put on our website soon.
What fun!
The above experiment is related to the new setup of the photo in the opening post here.Can you expand a bit on how you obtained carbon black from acetylene?
In some processes acetylene is used to obtain single- or few- layer graphite, i.e. graphene, although generally not of quality suitable for most conventional uses.
http://www.k-state.edu/media/n…/graphenepatent12517.html
QuoteMANHATTAN — Forget catalysts and expensive machinery — a Kansas State University team of physicists has discovered a way to mass-produce graphene with three ingredients: hydrocarbon gas, oxygen and a spark plug.
Their method is simple: Fill a chamber with acetylene or ethylene gas and oxygen. Use a vehicle spark plug to create a contained detonation. Collect the graphene that forms afterward. [...]
-
For simple differential thermometry, consider wiring two thermocouples in series, with the polarity reversed. The output of the series string will then be proportional to the temperature difference between the two junctions. It is necessary to use a pair of thermocouples that are closely matched across the entire expected temperature range. as an alternative, the system can be calibrated with the two junctions at the same temperature, so the output vs temperature will give a calibration curve for post-correction of the data.
For details, see http://www.nutechengineers.com/dtmwt.html
-
-
'can' writing. I'm aware that incomplete combustion of hydrocarbons produces soot which can be used as a quick&dirty amorphous carbon source. I'm only saying that some variations of the process can produce higher quality carbon like graphite (e.g. though pyrolysis, which would be called pyrolytic graphite) or even graphene (with the method recently discovered at the KSU as shown in the previous link).
The latter is interesting in the context of high voltage discharge experiments, although they're not the subject of your upcoming test. -
The main uncontrolled error I can see here is that the hot port filling, especially if it melts or vaporises, can act as a heat pipe at some temperatures giving much higher thermal conductivity. This will change heat profile and therefore effective thermal resistance.
It could be reduced by forcing an isothermal wrapper of hot ports: but I'm not sure how you'd do that given the temp range.
Regards, THH
-
Awesome looking setup. I'm eager to see what results may be obtained with the fuel mixture.
-
The main uncontrolled error I can see here is that the hot port filling, especially if it melts or vaporises, can act as a heat pipe at some temperatures giving much higher thermal conductivity. This will change heat profile and therefore effective thermal resistance
What do you mean by 'hot port filling'? The Alumina fuel tubes (not shown) the Quartz port tubes themselves? The Kanthal wire heater coils will usually peg out at around 1400C, everything else is good for much more than that.
-
For simple differential thermometry, consider wiring two thermocouples in series, with the polarity reversed. The output of the series string will then be proportional to the temperature difference between the two junctions.
A pair of thermocouples reverse connected will only be accurate if the temperature difference is zero. The reason for this is that the Seeback coefficient is not a linear function of temperature. So if TC #1 is at 300C and TC #2 at 301C the voltage difference will not be the same as of TC #1 is at 500C and TC#2 is at 501C. Consult the following URL to see how the Seeback coefficient varies with temperature. For a small differential temperature delta a linear assumption may be acceptable.
https://www.google.com/search? q=J+thermocouple+graph&site=webhp&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjS1b3jmKPTAhVO0GMKHa-UDFUQsAQILQ&biw=1338&bih=847#imgdii=GhM165JLsS8NnM:&imgrc=xhxM153nEHAGXM:
-
What do you mean by 'hot port filling'? The Alumina fuel tubes (not shown) the Quartz port tubes themselves? The Kanthal wire heater coils will usually peg out at around 1400C, everything else is good for much more than that.
So I mean wherever the active fuel gets put (inside the quartz tubes?). A difference between the active and control tubes - needed to distinguish the two - can also make for a difference in the thermal conductivity change at various temperatures.
-
Th
So I mean wherever the active fuel gets put (inside the quartz tubes?)
The active fuel goes into a sealed alumina tube, as does a control sample (an equal weight of iron powder) and that goes one into each port. The reactor system is calibrated to run isothermal and the shape size and weight of the alumina tubes is identical. There is no thermal or electrical connection between ports. So if it is suddenly NOT isothermal, you know something is happening. The attached pictures shows the fuel tube system these it are of the very first system we designed. On Mk 4 now.
-
Well, I ran the new and very carefully prepared fuel today, slowly up to 900C+ on pure DC. Nada,
Maybe you did ultrasonic part wrong? NAE supposed to be near surface but smooth surface is not good..
You just linked paper that say ultrasonificated (with ultrasound _probe_) nickel powder may take 100000 fold hydrogen, like raney Ni.
Me365 say "even one liter hydrogen can disappear". I suggest that you got/make probe sonotrode with 1.5kw/50²mm =0,6w/mm² (Suhas) power level (D~11mm @70w) and do 200hrs cavitation erosion for Ni powder (+water and 1-3%KOH)
http://imajeenyus.com/electron…asonic_driver/index.shtml
Because:
--clip--
https://www.hielscher.com/prob…efficiency-comparison.htm
Whilst a ultrasonic bath provides a weak sonication with approx. 20-40 W/L
ultrasonic probe-type devices can easily couple approx. 20.000 W/L--/clip--
It maybe need (water) "hammer" as me365..
How separated heater project, one for fuel one for LiAlH to controll pressure accurately? -
Do you stop increasing temperatures at 900°C for any particular reason? If the background idea behind these experiments since you're using LiAlH4 in self-contained tubes is still to replicate Parkhomov, he originally didn't report seeing excess heat below 1000-1050°C (exact thermocouple location not clear), and specifically he wrote that he saw it above 1100 °C. Have a look at this graph made using his data from the attached pdf.
For what it's worth, last year BEC user on LENR-Forum (Brillouin) reported that excess heat from Lugano/Parkhomov replications starts only at very high temperatures (>1300°C, probably inside the tube), not clear if from internal testing or from others' work - although I don't remember this datapoint from anybody else.
-
Hi Can.
Actually I ended up at 947C. I can go higher easily, but was reluctant to fry the thermocouples. Really this run was about calibration and learning to handle the equipment. It went very well, as I find I can dial in a power level for any temperature, hit the go button and both ports will go up (or down) in synch to the temperature I wanted, +/- 1 or 2 C at the most. Pretty neat with no thermostats.
This week I will have the square-wave pseudo AC systems (H-Bridges) between PSU(s) and Reactors and for those it will be worth frying a few TC's - but generally speaking, if anything is going to happen, you see it starting at 7-800C, no need to shoot for the stars too soon.Thanks for your input. A.
-
Ok, I see. The impression I got so far from others' observations is that in absence of a direct stimulus aiming for the maximum possible temperature seems to be the way to go, but it's just an impression so far.
Have you monitored pressure (speaking of which, how was excessive hydrogen from the LiAlH4 bled off) ? Not even transient temperature fluctuations not worth of being called a sign of positive COP been observed in this experiment?
