Posts by David Fojt

    My bad ... you are right this time ;-) He found firstly a decrease of pressure not an increase. But we don't know how the Li was ... I mean alone or with H. From wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_hydride : I quote "

    LiH is produced by treating lithium metal with hydrogen gas:

    2 Li + H2 → 2 LiH

    This reaction is especially rapid at temperatures above 600 °C. Addition of 0.001–0.003% carbon, or/and increasing temperature or/and pressure, increases the yield up to 98% at 2-hour residence time"

    The reactor was at 580°C, so if it crossed the 600°C threshold, a lot of LiH is formed from Li and H. Afterwards when the temperature increase further then LIH decomposes

    All replicators have to test first alone LIH to know how fast its breathes then ONLY adding powders .

    As well as you should know if this behavior remains in relation with standard LIH breathing .. or not.

    Hello David,


    If you increase the temperature at the edge of equilibrium (and for the same pressure) Lithium hydride decomposes LiH -> Li+ + H-. The description given by BTE Dan is going in the direction of a decomposition of LiH.

    Dear Arnaud,

    If you increase temperature, yes, Lithium hydride decomposes LiH -> Li+ + H-. Therefore by this way, you should INCREASE pressure by H- releasing then it's the opposite that what has been observed BTE Dan.

    As far as I am aware of, hydrogen initially decomposes from hydrides at the very least in atomic form, so if a large amount of hydrogen can be composed and recomposed in a short period of time, that also means that atomic hydrogen can be provided quickly and in large amounts.


    Furthermore, the possibility of formation of excited species of hydrogen during the process should be considered too:

    https://www.researchgate.net/p…cies_using_metal_hydrides

    Yes Can,

    probably the best explanation remains Hydride breathing therefore what saw BTE Dan remains strange too because it was a reverse hydride behavior.

    3g of Ni powder, .45g of LAH, .2g of pure Li metal.


    The coil was at 250 W which gives 580 C in the fuel. I held the power steady there for 40 minutes. The pressure was holding constant at that point ( 1.8 bar). When the rapid absorption occurred I had just stepped the coil power instantly to 600 W, but there was no time for the reactor to climb much in temperature. The rapid pressure drop happened within seconds of stepping the power to 600 W.

    Hi BTE Dan,

    Nice to have added pure lithium therefore i don' t understand why so much LAH ? You should do a large dead volume because pressure's reactor remains low if we compare with LAH amount ??

    You said:

    I guess if this hydrogen breathing concept is really just LiH reversing modes a couple of times as you pass through certain temperatures, all of this may not be important and it may be unrelated to LENR or XH. I know that me356 thinks they are related, but I'm not sure how he connected the two.


    I'm totally agree with you because normally when you increased power , pressure should have climbed and not go down according to LIH equilibrium..Is hydrogen's amount contracted on nickel ?

    It's probable following Wyttenbach explanation and Lenr field. In this case, are H2 deposited onto nickel then catalysed in monoatomic H before "condensing"? Or directly condensed onto nickel from H2 form ? About first hypothesis i suggest that balance between total H2 amount and total surface of Ni is important. Because Ni surface should not be completely saturated with H2 in order to keep enough surface for its dissociation in H.

    Now, you said when you increased power from 250 to 600W, H amount seemed to "condense", maybe it wasn't power which do that rather.. magnetic field associated......

    Now, did you used "Mullite" as reactor vessel ?

    Are you sure BTE Can that hydrogen disappeared onto Nickel rather than by LIH recombinaison ? During this phenomenom i suggest you were à little above 950*, right ?

    Hi Alan, Eros,

    To avoid all misunderstanding you can do this type of surface by electron beam sputtering. So here no bubbles no ultrasound.. just special device sets.

    This sample isn't for experiment in relation with ECAT HT like's.


    Another point Alan, could you send me by private email parkhomov 's powder analysis you sell,( if you still have ?) where we saw some % of carbon ?

    CAN you wrote:

    But also keep in mind that in iron/carbon steel the disappearance of magnetism is related to the appearance of the austenite phase, and viceversa. In other words, an iron-carbon alloy with a lower austenite transition temperature would also have a lower Curie temperature than pure iron.


    Austenitic phase is FCC cristal then Ferritic is CC cristal, i'm not aware that FFC for iron is amagnetic ?

    Therefore for SS steel , difference between magnetic SS or not, is in relation with nickel added in SS alloy ( quickly SS with Nickel becomes amagnetic)

    It 's strange but real.

    David Fojt

    I didn't imply that it's a hard limit for induction, but it would certainly have a significant influence on the efficiency of the process. Try using this calculator:

    http://www.rfcafe.com/referenc…skin-depth-calculator.htm


    Above their Curie temperature all materials have a relative magnetic permeability (μr) of 1.

    If Rossi uses Iron ( or cobalt or a mix) then plays between 750° to 950° , it should be ok, no ?

    For my point of view curie point is really a secondary problem if you compare with the need of massive H+.

    Dear Dewey Weaver,

    I must have been stupid and unfair to you.

    Also, I don't want to explain myself in the case rossi/IH fight and especially do not comment..

    This is why I followed this tedious business from very far.

    Hovewer just 2 questions, Was rossi's long duration test in Florida in relation with his technology "low temperature " ?

    Did you tested (you and IH) his high temperature technology ?


    Regards DF

    Can, Curie temperature has never been a limit for induction therefore above this point we need more power to induce the same level of eddy current.

    BTE Dan, you wrote:

    No one has created the ultra-detailed procedure for how to build and test a reactor that can be replicated by others. This is the fundamental problem in the LENR field, and it's why most of the scientific community ignores the field. To outsiders it looks like a bunch of guys working on perpetual motion machines.


    Therefore all replicator's have followed thoughts from Parkhomov and others.

    Everyone believes in a miraculous powder that does everything..

    I need to remember that P&F lattice, Fralick lattice produces a huge amount of H+ , as long as one is not able to produces full H+ with powder , no way.

    H- is the Piantelli's way therefore Focardi may be did not share this, nor Rossi.

    It's a bullshit to believe that LIH dissociation will bring DIRECTLY the good "ion" onto powder.

    No carbon, no exotic additive for P&F, no perlinpinpin powder......( french expression)

    The target should not to find the miraculous mix rather the good mecanism.........


    Now how do a massive quantity of H+ without help of lattice's bulk, just powders ?

    Hi Bob,

    You said:

    There are obscure reports of XH generation is systems with pure Ni (Thermacore, Mizuno, Piantelli, Brillouin). Most of these reports seem to have the XH generated when the H2 pressure is low - below 1 bar absolute pressure (a vacuum), but not always. However, each report normally involves a special experimental protocol tailored to the form of the Ni. Most of these pure Ni reports are also using wire or other Ni solid forms, and not powder (is there any reviewed report of XH from pure Ni powder and hydrogen?). Based on my reading and puzzling together of the theory of why Piantelli's Ni rods produced XH, his protocol will not work for powders [my speculation, although Piantelli's says powders didn't work].


    About Piantelli or before Focardi it seems that Ni surface structure was important for XH, this is why to try to improve XH, then they sputtered Ni onto SS rod to create some nanostructures.

    For my understanding it's also important, this is why i try to make the same. Below own last results we should need, from MEB, 2 days ago.





    The only way we will advance is if we share what we find and what we know. We have to be careful about what we claim as fact and what is speculation [Axil] so as to not confuse other experimenters.


    Totally agree

    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.

    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

    Dear SIR Rothwell,

    Behind the planet Rossi, some guy as Focardi, Fralick, japan people have made interesting results from where we can be inspired.

    Another unknow and great results/experiments not related here helps also to work.


    DF

    Alan,

    following your understanding about Rossi, some parts are wrong or everythings ?

    In this case, should we stop all replication Rossi's like ?


    DF


    Post moved here from RvD2. To start a new topic. Alan.

    Thank you for your help, CAN, and your reactivity,

    Yes, indeed, this point is around 750 ° where you will find already, the gamma phase.

    This phase represents a stable FCC crystal structure such as nickel or palladium.

    Very very nice your charts, so i plan to draw something for a best sharing/understanding.

    Many people have considered using spark plugs discharges to make H +, however this amount of H + will remain ridiculously low compared to diffusion through a metal lattice.


    Inside your link we can read:

    "H-traps in steel may be classified in three categories (9): Attractive Traps, Physical Traps, and Mixed Traps. In Attractive Traps, H atoms are subjected to attractive forces which are of four types: electrical fields (electron vacancy introduced by any defect), stress fields (induced by dislocation, grain boundary…), temperature gradient and "thermodynamical" force.

    DF

    Hi Bob,


    Generally, you follow a way from where some results already have been found ( MFMP, AP, etc) by LAH , Ni carbonyl +Al way.

    Therefore to increase succes rate, we could imagine also another hypothesis as for myself fuel/Li separation.

    Alexander P, i remember used something as a cardridge to fill his fuel sometimes.

    We could imagine a steel separation to leave Li outside cartridge ( Li between in fact this metal cartridge and ceramic heater support)

    In this case, the steel wall should be used as a membrane what will produce a lot of H+ wich will take place both where Lenr occurs.

    To add something, the steel wall will be well coupled with magnetic field ( from heaters) to do Eddy current directly where full H+ will stay.

    The reactor core so Inside steel tube will be the dead volume where we should fill just LAH to bring H2 and "false powder"( Rossi case).

    By LIH breathing H2 will cross the SS wall.

    Therefore, we need for this, a steel ( or something else ) very transparent to H2.

    So my question is, what type of steel we should use to do that ? would be transfer speed sufficient from 750° ?


    DF

    Adding LI to LAH avoids too much pressure pics then doesn't excessively solicit the reactor. It is not chemical, it is mechanical !

    Can or Wyttenbach, or others, who remembers the person who would have seen the ecat open and surprised that it was empty ?

    Hi Can,

    silicon carbide is really stable at high temperature (coefficient of expansion). it should avoid to break too quickly some coated particle.

    I would know Piantelli suggestion about stainless steel, if you find.

    Sorry for mistake but i told about iron carbon chart, so a FFC structure is found at high temperature named austenite in french. The same structure at low temperature is named martensite. This is why we have the hydrogen embrittlement phenomenom well know.

    Following this chart you can see a point from where austenitic structure starts at around 750°. This is iron with around 0,8% carbon.

    So you could load stainless steel particle at the same T° of LIH decomposition.

    So H+ can go and stays easily trough lattice between grains.

    At high temperature SS leaks strongly above 800° according to Bob Higgins too.

    I would like to know , Bob, how fast a vessel with 2bars absolute could lose 1 bar, for example ??

    Therefore Bob, about FT catalyst or Al role, we can not agree on everything.


    DF

    Great job Can,


    to explain utility of a gap between Ni and LI, i think Liquid lithium moves strongly ( with heat) at Ni surface , Remember it's a big sized atom if you compare with H. In this case it should break "H entities" which try to exist, that's all.

    This is why sometimes Parkhomov be succesfull. He used mortar then increased amount of Ni particle sintered then somewhere existed some gap where H could go but not Liquid Li.

    About aluminium, at high T°, it is melted so should not stick onto nickel. To add something, Beta metal as aluminium is well dissolved with H , so don't form stable compounds.

    I'm really interested by iron rather steel. Because Inside Lugano report we saw possible Iron particle. Following my understanding, it could be porous iron coated onto thermical stable carbo-silicon nucleus. Very nice hypothesis about curie point and possible cavity entities..

    Another hypothesis is austenitic steel powder coated onto a neutral core, why ?

    Because we see a lot of Radial grain gaps where could help to form H entities areas Without being disturbed by lithium.

    Therefore we need for this a special steel with exactly 0,77 % of carbon to allow breathing ( loading/unloading) from 750 °.


    https://www.google.fr/search?q…N3zhrM:&spf=1494846146112


    DF


    Hi BTE Dan, you wrote below:

    But if the above is correct, that creates a mystery: Why don't people see much higher pressures after the LAH melts? (... Perhaps as the pressure increases not all of the hydrogen in the LAH gets released.)


    Clearly, LAH is never totally broken without help of Li added or maybe oxygen.

    In the case of Shongsheng rather than Parkhomov , its really bigger dead volume has helped too.


    As Me356 said, for beginners, it should be better to drive runs only by LIH.


    DF

    David Fojt

    The value of the boiling of Li is not established. At the high temperatures and low pressures where the Ni + LiAlH4 reactions have been shown to produce XH, the fuel is coincidentally near the boiling point of Li. In my last experiment, I raised the temperature to 1200°C and reduced the pressure to about 1 PSIA (50 Torr). This should have caused the Li to boil, yet I saw no XH or radiations stimulated by that action.


    I am 70% through modification of my Labview control application to add both the .wav file command and to provision the DAQ for a 3rd counter input for the neutron detector. The next run will included neutron counts along with the SI-8B and scintillator ROI counts. There will be added another column in the .csv data for the neutron count. Also, another physical connector must be added to my bulkhead for the neutron counter output to be wired to the DAQ module. Today I am also epoxying a new reactor tube. I will probably want to run a calibration run with the magnetic field coil in place before the next fueled run. This will allow me to test that all of the hardware and software mods work as expected.

    Hi Bob, thanks for reply.

    About experiment you describe you said "reduced the pressure to 50 Torr" but how fast you do that ? Remember what you said shongsheng during his 2th experiment, he increased pressure up to 10 bars then strongly dropped.

    It seemed to be important to trigger reaction ? Sorry for my bad English but help me for the precise meaning of"XH".

    About your neutron detector, i know you are close M Valat, so who made it ? Is another copy for sale ?


    DF

    I would like to know what thinks Bob or Alan also about Li evapored role ?

    Dear Can, you wrote,

    He has suggested that when starting (triggering) the reaction, pressure should be maintained very low, in the order of 1 millibar or less. During the preceding hydrogenation phase it can be higher. At 1 millibar Lithium evaporates at about 772°C (see this page). From what he writes it doesn't sound that just causing the Li to evaporate will start a reaction, there has to be a trigger of some sort (so far undisclosed), in addition to a properly prepared metal surface.

    it seems to be difficult to maintain a long time the reactor at enough low pressure to evaporate enough Li to do something with it ?

    But if we really do it what role it could have ? A joint catalysis onto Nickel to stick easily both an atom of Li and H ?

    An atom of liquid lithium is alone the same for a gazeous lithium maybe a difference of polarity ? In few words what could be an advantage of a gaseous lithium atom ?

    DF