Posts by bjhuang

Quote from Drgenek

To make a true complete cycle comparison, if the heat (electrical power) to drive LENR comes from electrical power, then the true heat input needs to consider the efficiency of production of electrical power from heat. Hence, there is need for a correction of at least the efficiency of heat to power of combined cycle power plant. So, if COP is 1.3 based on electrical heat to heat output, then the true efficiency would be 1.3 x .62 =0.81 which is not enough to be sustainable. In contrast when burning AquaFuel the heat/torque compared to heat predicted from chemical composition is 3.03 which is just barely sustainable with combined cycle power design. For AquaFuel, there is still the question of how much of the heat is produced to produce Aquafuel and how cost effective is the carbon fuel used to produce it. In the case of a cost to dispose of the organic material, then the cost of fuel is a not issue, so heat produced in AquaFuel production is the bonus that make a profit.

Of course, the issue goes away if LENR can be run as a sustained reaction at high temperature. Perhaps Brillant Light Power has succeeded. We will see. I would welcome a result that suggests a true complete cycle from anyone, including Egley or LEC.

I have estimated that the steam power generation cycle will be sustainable (without input from conventional energy) if COP > 5.0. this may require several years development. But, in near future, maybe within 5 years, a significant energy saving of steam power plant (> 20%) is possible when LENR reaches COP > 2.5. the waste heat can also be utilized in seawater desalination.

Quote from Drgenek

I think you are saying that that if a plasmoid survives combustion that the positive and negative charged particle in the plasmoid could be accelerated by MHD to increase specific impulse. By using fuel with higher specific impulse, a spacecraft wouldn't need as much mass to travel in space. Further, a nuclear reaction might provide the high energy dense fuel needs to power the MHD.

I had heard a story about forty years ago that, the jet engine thrust can be increased if water was injected into the combustion chamber. this could also happen in gas turbine power system when water is injected into combustion chamber. Is this related to what you mentioned

Quote from Diadon Acs

My approach is to thermalize it by the use of a large mass energy screening material like graphite. In theory it should thermalize a majority of radiation and transition the emitted energy to the thermal spectrum. I haven't worked out the math for specific heat capacity of the said carbon mass, or even began experimenting with it yet, except for some graphitic nanoparticles. I want to run it through some people who can help predict the outcome as well as have all the sensor equipment in place to proper record the data. Taking care to not destroy the experimental apparatus and benchtop in the process would be ideal *:D.

If these strange radiations are intertwined with neutrons somehow, a water medium should help to slow down any high energy neutrons if they are present and a graphite sleeve should increase the heat production of these reactors as a black body absorber. While I don't think there is Fission chain reaction products being emitted, strong thermal emissions are pretty well documented, so focusing on transitioning the energy into the thermal state would be novel I believe. I hypothesize using a graphite shield should increase efficiency, and perhaps the COP of these systems?

Happy experimenting, whether they may take place in the mind or on a bench top.

this kind of so-called "radiation shield" has ever been considered by us when we feel something strange in energy balance during LENR and some strange results of SEM/EDX on the ruptured copper pipe. just wait and see with more test results.

Thanks Bob Greenyer taught me a great course of nuclear physics in his well-prepared video. Indeed, I learn a lot from this and try to be a good student of him. However, I need to take a while to understand all his precious opinions. Just like I took about one and half years to be able to answer some of his many questions given during ICCF-22 in Italy, 2019.

As an engineer, all the engineering approach needs scientific basis. Unfortunately, LENR is an unknown new technique or new science and following the conventional thinking may not get engineering breakthrough. But ‘old’ scientific basis is still very important to give engineering approach a right guidance.

I do appreciate very much and need some more good ideas for us to realize the engineering application of LENR very soon.

Dear Curbina,

thanks for your questions which are answered as follows:

Q1: technical details of how to build, control and monitor this kind of set up with us eventually, thinking on independent replication.

A1: We will publish a paper soon to disclose more details about our machine design and control for independent replication. From my experience, a little change in the design of the machine could change a lot in performance just like in our VCS and DHX machines. Fortunately, the performance of our machines can be replicated once all the operating conditions are set and well controlled.

For VCS-2 (only change a new compressor in VCS-1), we took about 5 months to tune to reach a better result than VCS-1.

For DHX-2, we only change the wall thickness and size of the double-pipe heat exchanger, the performance never reaches the results of DHX-1.

The replication of LENR phenomena seems difficult even in a simple mechanical system without chemical phenomena. From my experience, I can realize how difficult in the replication of Fleischmann and Pons’s results. We must put more strength on this in future.

Q2: conditions that triggered the higher COPs

A2: The operating conditions triggering the higher COP is made by trials and errors. Sometimes, it happens by chance. The maximum COP (2.55) in DHX-1 was found under a “abnormal operation” by my student. Since LENR is an unknown new technique or new science, following the conventional thinking cannot get breakthrough. For example, we made a new DHX-2 with larger heat transfer surface (to obtain higher heat transfer rate) and thicker pipe wall (to avoid pipe rupture) from the fundamental principle of heat transfer and mechanics, it sounds right in heat transfer and strength of material, but not in LENR.

Q3: colder water was better, but was it the only condition that allowed higher COPs? What about water flow? Was the water distilled or tap water? Did you analyze the water for synthesis of new elements?

A3: This is not conclusive yet. For VCS-2, COP seems not so sensitive in inlet cold water temperature if tuned well.

We used water from RO (reverse osmosis). We are arranging a measurement of water obtained in COP>1 to see if there is synthesis.

Q4: experiment with copper foil in an ultrasound water bath, Can you share the thickness of the foil, as it looks heavily eroded and this is similar to some pitting found by Roger Stringham.

A4: The copper foil thickness is 0.08mm. I put some additives in the water to result in a quite serious erosion as seen in my photo.

Q5: I hope you can continue to work in this kind of research or at least to direct new researchers in this direction in the short term.

A5: I am planning to do so. And surely need your support. Many thanks!!!

Dear all,

Thank Curbina have noted my presentation in ICCF-23.

I presented and shared some up-do-date results we have done after ICCF-22 (Italy).

As an engineering people, we have answered the question of existence of excess energy in kW scale through a heat transfer process involving cavitation from two machines we have built.

It is interesting that our results are updated every day. Right after the presentation on June 11, my colleague got an exciting result in machine VCS-2 after tuning about 5 months. The replacement of new compressor can work better if tuned carefully.

I revise my ppt file in p.13:

• VCS-1 was tested for 2 years under various operating conditions.
• Test result shows that COPx >1 (excess energy) exists and can be repeated. COPx = 1.29~1.97 (VCS-1).
  • But the compressor (Copeland) breaks down at the end of 2020 due to overheating.
• Replacing compressor with different models (VCS-2), COPx is improved after tuning for about 5 months. Maximum COPx is 2.05.
• P.15 slide in the revised ppt file shows some interesting results which needs more studies.

The conclusion of the ICCF-23 presentation is summarized:

• Excess energy in kW scale can be induced from simple heat exchanging process involving cavitation.
• The test results of the heat-exchange systems (VCS and DHX) shows that COPx > 1 exists (maximum 2.55 in DHX) under some design and operating conditions, which makes water become fuel.
• The excess energy index (COPx) is defined on the basis of 1^st law of thermodynamic and can be used in the experimental data analysis to identify the existence of excess energy phenomena.
• Material problems will be eventually encountered for the machines having excess energy with COPx >1 (for example, in DHX at COPx 2.55) since extremely high pressure or high temperature will be induced by LENR.
• The phenomenon of COPx > 1 is related to cavitation, nano-bubbles implosion, and possible LENR. More research by scientists are needed.
• As engineering people, we are focusing on the duplication of the best performance obtained during the studies to provide a reliable, simple and cheap machine to harvest energy from water.

It is noticeable that the copper pipe surface seems forms CuO nanowires as seen from SEM results. This implies that high temperature 500-700^oC was induced and causes copper pipe buckling.

Last, material problems will be eventually encountered for the machines with excess energy (LERN) since extremely high pressure and high temperature will be induced by LENR. This is what we face at present. I hope that we will not meet the same serious problem as ITER, and the ordinary material technology (high heat conduction, high strength under high temperature and high pressure, easy manufacture) can solve this problem when COPx reaches 10.

I revised the presentation of June 11 in ICCF-23 right after the conference (different from the video) and post here to share with LENR people.

As I promised in ICCF-22/Italy, I have done my best in LENR research before my retirement (Aug 1, 2021).

Thank all of you.

Quote from JedRothwell

Stringham has published many papers, which you will find in the index at LENR-CANR.org. Enter "Stringham" under "All Authors":

https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1081

here is my slides in ICCF22. Excess Energy from a Vapor Compression System 0911rev.pdf

I appreciate very much all you guys for doing a great job, some of you even spent whole life on LENR.

I am very happy to read the comments from Curbina who says that I am “delving in uncharted waters" but following the scientific evidence. The word “notorious” excess of heat generation is interesting to me as I am working outside the box. And the story of the conspiracy theory is what I never thought. For me, nothing to loss since only less two years to work on LENR before my retirement.

JedRothwell’s comments and information are valuable too since I don’t know much about those LENR companies’ inside story.

Cavitation Energy Systems, lnc may be worth to follow (http://cavitationenergysystems.com/ ).

In my ICCF22 presentation, “During the Q&A session at least two persons asked if I had found any evidence of mechanical damage and/or transmutation in the copper pipes that compose the cavitation chamber of the machine”.

My answers to Q&A in ICCF22:

1. No transmutation was studied. Hope some scientists can help us in the future. We need some more funding to do the science work.
2. Copper ion was found in the condensed water of hot steam. Probably comes from copper tube erosion. The condensed water was thought good for health, able to fast cure wound healing etc as claimed by the company B (but I doubt that).
3. The VCS machine can run continuously for 2 years (12 hr per day) for making water to sell. No copper damage was observed.
4. One thing I can disclose here. The water scaling inside copper pipes of steam generator in VCS is quite different from the experience in steam boilers. Scaling still occurs even using the feed water treated by a strict industrial water purification process. This confused us. We have to do some science work on that.
5. We have run three equipment with possible LENR. One failed to observe COP>1. The other one (VCS) presented in ICCF22 has COP>1. The third one is designed by me using different mechanism shows COP>1. This machine is much simpler than VCS. We are carefully and repeatedly calibrating all instruments for final check before making conclusion and publishing. Even the digital power meter for measuring heating power was carefully calibrated using a thermometry designed by ourselves.

As I said in ICCF22, I came across to study LENR just by chance. The LENR machine looks familiar to me but the theory is not. It seems the phenomena pf cavitation, micro-bubbles, intense implosion are common to them. As an engineer, we don’t have to understand everything inside but just utilize it with well-developed reliable, efficient, and cheap equipment. Just like the metal stuffs made thousand years ago and is exhibited today in museums. In 2000 years ago, there existed no “material science”. The “technology” made them ! The user generally knows nothing inside about what they utilize. "Science" will follow up the "technology".