BTE-Dan: Replication Attempt for This Week

  • Here are the steps I used for live reactor testing this week (pic below).


    · Mix six diverse Ni powders in equal portions.

    · Place Ni powder in a 99% relative humidity environment for 40 hours.

    · Bake Ni powder under vacuum for 6 hours at 250 C.

    · Still at 250 C, cycle H2 gas in at 7 psi for 20 min, then pull a vac for 10 minutes. Repeat 8 times.

    · Mix fuel: 3g Ni powder, .3g of LAH, .18g of pure Li metal. Stir and then mix using mortar and pestle.

    · Put fuel centered in OBE tube and seal off tube ends with Swageloks. Set temp to 110 C and pull vacuum for 1 hour.

    · Still at 110 C, cycle H2 gas in at 7 psi for 20 minutes, then pull a vac for 10 minutes. Repeat 6 times.

    · Load Ni step-wise using external H2 source for 30 psi, 60 psi, 90 psi, 120 psi, and 150 psi.

    · Slowly ramp up coil power over many hours.

    · Apply triggers after temperature is stable for coil powers of 600W, 900W, 1340W, and 1600W (for fuel at 847 C, 1036 C, 1215 C, 1330 C).

    · Triggers include:

    ______o Step pressure up and then down and vice versa.

    ______o At various pressures, apply 20 kV DC over the length of tube interior. (Pressure is high enough to prevent a plasma.)

    ______o Lower pressure to give a DC plasma with 70W of power in the plasma itself.

    ______o AC plasma.

    ______o Vary AC plasma frequency.

    ______o Step coil power from high to lower and vice versa.

    ______o Slow AC plasma frequency down and use narrow pulses so that that the plasma will extinguish and then re-ignite every 25 milliseconds. (Waveform pics below.)

    ______o Sweep AC plasma frequency continuously using various sweep times.

    ______o Sweep coil frequency continuously using various sweep times.

    ______o Vary coil drive waveform. Use sine wave at 15 kHz. Later use AC pulses to send current both positive and negative through coil at 500 Hz.

    ______o Do all of the above trigger tests in various combinations (there are infinite possibilities!)


    Results? No excess heat. And nothing above background on Geiger Counter or Neutron Detector.


    I have a unique set-up. For example, I can drive the coil or plasma with any arbitrary waveform. I have two amazing amplifiers to do this, and each is driven by an arbitrary waveform generator.


    But I have to admit I’m pretty discouraged right now. This is truly like looking for a needle in a haystack. It’s a lot of guessing - and a lot of luck is involved for hitting upon the right combination for all variables. I had high hopes that the plasma would trigger some excess heat.


    Given my set-up capabilities - any ideas?


    If me356 and the India team working the MFMP are really going to share their steps, maybe it makes more sense to just wait and see what they share before trying more tests.


    lenr-forum.com/attachment/2166/



    lenr-forum.com/attachment/2167/

  • Building a QuarkX reactor does not seem to be that complicated.


    Use Boron Nitride as the reactor tube to support temperature upto 3000C.


    see post below for background.


    Rossi Replication Technology


    Put some Aluminum Lithium Hydride enriched in Lithium 7 (99%) in the tube based on the size of the tube.


    Use nickel electrodes at each end of the tube.


    Preheat the tube to at least 2000C.


    Set up a very high voltage DC induced electrostatic field (50 to 100 kilovolts as per Rossi's patent) between the electrodes that does NOT involve the production of a spark.


    https://patentscope.wipo.int/s…621/PDOC/WO2016018851.pdf


    Configure a quadrupole magnetic field with the center of the quadrupole centered along the axis of the tube.


    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.05249.pdf



    220px-VFPt_quadrupole_coils_1.svg.png


    Quadrupole.gif


    From


    Nucleon polarizability and long range strong

    force from I=2 meson exchange potential





    If the tube stays hot at 2000C or above, then the reactor is working.

  • axil Regarding the use of a Quadrupole.... Exactly....! It's this part that captured my eyes when I read it and made me think there may well be something in it. Then when started at this point and read through the rest I could see how they were trying to walk the reader through their ideas. There may be broader need for the test data of the QuarkX itself but to me the theoretical discussion was very intelligent despite what some others think. But I suppose you need to understand the significance of that point you raise here first.


    Regarding the initial heating are you sure the active part of the QuarkX was initially heated to 2000 deg C? I missed it in this paper? I'm sure the Hot Cat could well have been but I wonder if the QuarkX used some other kind of stimulation?


    Edit: Sorry BTE-Dan for getting a bit of Topic there... I jumped in with out reading the whole thread. Good luck with your test. It's really good to see yet another experimenter/replicator trying this.

  • The QX design has changed over time. It initially produced 100 watts at first then it was downsized to 20 watts. Now it is up to 240 watts in the latest version. The 100 watt QX temperature was just beyond the melting point of nickel. Now in the 240 watt version, its temperature is up to 2700C. Rossi when through a period of burnups where the alumina was not standing up to the high heat produced by the QX. He came up with a ultra high temperature replacement tube design which I beleive is Boron nitride. Rossi had to convert a block of this stuff into a tube so he says that he has created something that you can;t find on the market, There are no small such Boron nitride capillary tubes on the market. The magnetic field cannot pass through a metal tube so the tube must be a good electrical insulator like Boron nitride,

  • The magnetic field cannot pass through a metal tube so the tube must be a good electrical insulator like Boron nitride,


    Ah! A bit of a breakthrough in your thinking there, then.


    But which of these grades of Boron Nitride do you speculate the Quark uses, considering that the maximum service temperature in air of any of them is 1000C or less? They do tend to oxidise it seems. Or do you think he is using fully crystalline types? If so, perhaps you could explain how you drill a capillary hole in the hardest known substance?



  • Given my set-up capabilities - any ideas?


    Some thoughts: (1) Be systematic. Try controlling for one variable at a time. (2) Try adding a medium or heavy element to the "fuel," such as lead, tungsten, platinum or cesium.


    I don't suggest that (2) is a particularly promising lead, but it's something I see few people trying.

  • I think Piantelli has mentioned that heavy elements like Tungsten can give rise to radiation problems - or perhaps they are opportunities?


    A customer of ours at Lookingforheat has had an unexpected (possibly) positive XSH result for which sadly I do not have supporting data. That is so often the way of these things as we know.:( However, the key factors seem to be as follows.


    PID/PWM controlled DC heating, extremely low DeltaT, around 1C/Minute all the way up to 1000C. A copper wire coil is also wound very closely around the fuel tube, though not connected electrically. At first glance this seems to be a nonsensical idea, but it has since occurred to me that since the Cu will rapidly form a coat of relatively non-conductive oxide there is a possibility of it harbouring induced currents from the heater coils, which it lies inside and parallel with the internal magnetic field lines it creates. (think Solenoid).


    Finally, this tube was run 3X under this protocol, and nothing happened till the third time. Sadly, this is all the information I have, and I because of the limited and unverified information I have offer it more as a stimulus for thought and discussion than as a proposed method.


    Last thought. Try Titanium.

  • Hi Alan,

    It could be possible also to put Inside reactor a Cobalt rod (close to powder) to do that.

    Remember that Parkhomov used a SS cartridge to fill powder.

    Therefore as, in this case, powder is used, normally no impact should have been seen.

    The only way for XH hypothesis could have been powder sticked onto reactor wall.

    In this case "a special treatment" required to this wall , should be interesting.. ( cavities ? )


    DF

  • It could be possible also to put Inside reactor a Cobalt rod (close to powder) to do that.


    From Craig Cassarino's notes from communications with Industrial Heat an "iron core" is mentioned, but the circumstances of how it's used and how it did come up in discussions are not clear.


    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…-01-Exhibit-22.pdf#page=5

    http://coldfusioncommunity.net/amped-up-on-ampenergo/


    Quote

    Strength of magnetic field

    magnetic field of electricity flowing in wire

    coils around iron core T3

    1000 x stronger than coils only

  • TWO separate sources for TWO radiative yields.


    That there may be two separate sources is also apparent in the attached pictures below, more or less. As for their actual role, it's less clear, although hinted in the source for the first picture. Whether Ni+LiAlH4(+Li) actually fits within this description is unknown.

  • Ni + LAH Inside porous vessel then pure Li remains outside ?

    When LAH decomposes, both it sticks Ni onto vessel's wall, because this wall is porous.

    H from LAH goes through the wall to react with pure Li .

    Then you decrease T° so pressure LIH(from outside vessel) restores H which cross a second time the porous wall to reach NI..

    etc etc.

  • David Fojt

    From what I understand in the above example, the charges - assumed to be in the form of free powders - are located on the opposite ends of a sealed stainless steel (SS310) tube vessel (which is permeable to hydrogen above 800-900°C as you described in another thread).

  • Some thoughts: (1) Be systematic. Try controlling for one variable at a time. (2) Try adding a medium or heavy element to the "fuel," such as lead, tungsten, platinum or cesium.


    I don't suggest that (2) is a particularly promising lead, but it's something I see few people trying.

    FWIW, I tried tungsten as an additive with no effect in the past. Others have tried, if I'm not mistaken, uranium from old Fiestaware plates. I think Brian Albiston tried it with null results.

  • I think Piantelli has mentioned that heavy elements like Tungsten can give rise to radiation problems - or perhaps they are opportunities?


    Tungstens always needs Lead-shielding! Or you will pass away like other experimenters...


    From Craig Cassarino's notes from communications with Industrial Heat an "iron core" is mentioned, but the circumstances of how it's used and how it did come up in discussions are not clear.


    Don't forget about the Curie-T. Thus the magnet must stay "cool" or outside.

  • Tungstens always needs Lead-shielding! Or you will pass away like other experimenters...

    I'm still here for now at least. ;)


    While were at it. I also tried LiOH, aluminum, KOH, NaOH, titanium, TiH2, CaO, alumina powder mixes, stainless steel inserts, AC, DC, 120V, 240V, chopped, regular sine AC, thermal triggering, magnetic triggering, and with insulation to minimize input power.


    BTE-Dan, I came to the point where it was clear to me that either this doesn't work at all or there is a detail that has been hidden. I believe it is the former based on several lines of evidence. I understand your frustration since I felt that same after experiment after experiment came back null. My advice is to wait for some real empirical evidence of a working formula instead of applying yourself to testing out all these speculations.

  • Don't forget about the Curie-T. Thus the magnet must stay "cool" or outside.


    I mentioned that it's not clear for the sake of discussion. In another thread I've been recently involved in a short exchange with David Fojt on this matter where I concluded that if electromagnetic activation (e.g. through induced currents) has some kind of role it is likely best performed below the Curie point of the supposedly active material used. On that regard, iron or some kind of magnetic steel would be better for operation at high(er) temperature, compared to Nickel.


    [...] I believe it is the former based on several lines of evidence.


    Which ones?

  • FWIW, I tried tungsten as an additive with no effect in the past. Others have tried, if I'm not mistaken, uranium from old Fiestaware plates. I think Brian Albiston tried it with null results.


    I've seen tungsten mentioned. What I haven't seen is tungsten (or other heavier elements) with current applied to it, inside the reactor chamber, exposed to hydrogen. Curious if you tried that. When Brian Albiston mentioned that he had tried something with uranium or fiestaware (as I vaguely recall), it was something different than this, I think.


    My advice is to wait for some real empirical evidence of a working formula instead of applying yourself to testing out all these speculations.


    Despite my curiosity about heavier elements above, this sounds like good advice. It suggests that BTE-Dan and others should start from experimental writeups (e.g., from Piantelli) for experiments that witnessed (nominally) unambiguous excess heat or other interesting effect.