Why do you call these things reactors?
Keeps me wondering.
... And I wonder why you waste your time posing ridiculous questions on this site.
It is a reactor because it is prep'ed such that one expect some sort of reaction to take place within its confines.
It is quite a general term, it's use common place in physics and chemistry.
I'm am surprise you are unaware of this fact. Or maybe not.
On the other hand, it is possible that normal resistor wire is needed for LENR.
It is likely that SiC elements can't produce similar EM field.
Parallel conductors having an high amp running through them give rise to an electro magnetic force trying to pull the together inducing stress in the conductors. Also when heated there is a coefficient of expansion that will expand the metal with increased temperature (very small, but still). I surmise that the same goes for these kanthal coils.
Have you tried to apply the same ampere to the coil as is, without the reactor, to see if it can handle that stress? That in itself might be instructive.
In your reactor the coil plastered with Al203 mortar (or similar) leaving less room for these expansions and compressions. Possibly it could be useful to have the coil loose, protected by an outer alumina shell (like MFMP dogbone in Lugano?), but so as to be able to compress/expand as the heat and current rise. I will go that way in my own experiments, whenever I get ready to "go".
:lenr:
me356, 
excellent work.
In my mind it is very likely that you experienced an event of significance, with a very high temperature, and that the setup you have will eventually be successful.
Looking forward to future runs with great anticipation.
Much of the replication work is intended to imitate the Lugano experiment, and there is a highly COP-o-centric thinking, as one want the possibility to easilly compute input power and compare to the output. But for the recent experiments, where the output energy is not really evaluated at all, but only a differential is of interest, that is the difference between the dummy/calibration run and the active run in terms of measured temperature, then the input power is simply a book keeping index, and not important on absolute values.
What I mean with this is, that any ol' form of heating the reactor - no matter how inefficient it is, as long as it is controlled and can be same for the calibration run as for the active run - would be OK from an experimental perspective.
So sure, why not use a truckload of photons instead. It will be more expensive than a sturdy coil, and it would be worth trying. Deviating from the dog-bone and Lugano setup, there are other reasonable geometries that can be explored, and ways to deploy EM fields. The question is then if this is a replication of Lugano.
In my thinking, making a successfull run first with something allready shown to give result and changing setup later is a good approach. Also consider the reason WHY the 0.7mm Kanthal A1 wire would snap - granted that each turn in the coil is duely seperated - could be due to a surge in heat in the generator, maybe the solution is to go with Kanthal APM (slightly better thermal limit) and with a sturdier thickness, say 1mm. Or why not with the SiC adverticed by MFMP.
In terms of easy deployment and maintainance, having a SS tube with the active fuel inserted into the alumina reactor goes a long way to improve "rationality" in this. The reactor stays the same, you just deploy next experiment with a new SS tube.
So my 25 cent worth would be to stick with current paradigm, and when some real measure of success is found, expand and elaborate on geometries, energy souorces etc.
BTW what happened to Brian Ahern and his oven experiment? The silence indicate 1 of 3 possibilities: 1. He has not yet started. 2. He succeeded and is now silently continuing, seeking fame and fortune. 3. He failed utterly and does not feel like discussing it.
One fourth alternative is that the info is out there, and I just did not pay enough attention. 
SonoFusion is yet another story on the boxed in group thinking of the establishment punishing a scientist.
Some inertia in science is necessary, but being inert to the point where standing still is really, really bad.
At your local university library you might find :
Gaylord, N.G., J. Chem. Educ., "Reduction with Complex Metal Hydrides" 1957, 34 (8), p 367ff
DOI: 10.1021/ed034p367
Publication Date: August 1957
By all means possible, avoid any moisture, as I'm sure you know.
Thanks for that ref, will make an effort finding it.
Argon was my first choice when looking into the problem and tried to lay down a path to go. However, the analytical chemist I mentioned earlier, whom has an extensive experience in the field, did most, if not all, his work related to LiAlH4 in pharmaceutical industry using N2.
As I am now committed investment-wise to N2, I will go with it. I guess it will have to be a matter of trial and error, and be sure to err on the safe side and not so it goes very wrong. If there are problems I will revise and go for argon. My understanding of He is that it is very difficult to contain, so opt to not use that.
Further, the fuel loading will be done in StainlessSteel tubes, the pressure being almost 1 bar, same as ambient. When loading the reactor the tube will be vented, carefully, (holes opened that will allow the hydrogen escape from the SS tube when the reactor is heated) before being inserted into the tube reactor. This means that the Argon would not be a part of the running reactor core, apart from quantities possibly adsorbed (likely very small amounts; how?) by the fuel or the inside of the SS tube, Thus Argon to me does not seem to be a problem.
Regarding the moisture. 
Yes. my DIY glovebox (not complete yet) will have drying materials such as Al2O3 and Bentonite at the bottom of the box, and I will make effort in determining the level of moist inside using a meter.
The reactions I mention are quite possibly present at some level in any lithium-containing LENR experiment-- regardless of the theory they are presumed to be built under. Watch for dust, fumes, "sweet tastes" or sweet smell -- diagnostic of a couple of bad metals, including beryllium. Note that BeO, the white solid oxide, even though very chemically inert, is quite insoluble in water and most other common solvents, BeO is perhaps even more toxic than Be metal. Inhalation of any form of either is to be absolutely avoided...
I purchased AlLiH4 from the net, recieved a sealed plastic bag of white powder. (50g) I have now placed it in a glas jar, tighly locked with pipe tape on the thread to secure air tightness. But when I handled the bag, I sensed a strong odouor, a bit on the sweet side.
What is your take on how LiAlH4 should smell like? Or could I have recieved something else? One never knows when buying from the net, receiving unmarked small plastic bags ...
Rest assure - as I have consulted with a lab chemist with more than 40 years of experience of work with LiAlH4 in lab environments - I will handle the compund and any fine powdered metals, in a dried, vaccum pumped, then Nitrogen flooded (slightly lower than 1bar), glovebox (DIY). Further, I will import needed chemicals, from distributers for which full documentation is readliy available henceforth.
Your caution goes to the sintered innards of the reactor as well. At any rate, I guess it will suffice to employ a face mask and quickly bag the contents (airthigt jars) for further analysis or storage?
Actually Rossi just put us both to shame with this talk of trademark for his pussy-cat.
What's interesting is Rossi's characterization of the device as being a gas something or other. The only gas involved is the gas that comes out of his a..
I believe your rantings qualifies as real gas... Maybe you can can it and sell it?
Or maybe you are allready doing that elsewhere on the net - you who don't have "a personal agenda disparaging Rossi".... 
Thanks for the excellent link. I have used pen and paper to get a hold, but it good with a tool you can play around with. Will use 16AGW myself.
The Raspberry approarch is also great - I intend to go there too later on, but for now I will rely on "off-the-shelf" products to datalog and control. A PID for temperature control via a TRIAC is not very expensive. Also found a cheap temp logger with 4 channels with adequate specs. Have my eye on a pressure logger too, but I need to get control on the pressure transducer to use first before I decide how to do that.
Nice to see that your line is fused decently I will try to keep myself safely within the limit of 10A with all things counted.
I am still some weeks away to have the setup complete, though 
, although I am pretty close to have all necessary parts.
for your efforts!
Could you elaborate on the PID you use, what TC you use? What settings you have in the PID? Please photo of PID, and specifics. Also, the coil - what material, thickness, and number of turns? You may have already disclosed this, but I just found out about your experiment. 
In EDIT: I found a couple ow naswers when going back
* So to get 10 ohms 20AWG Kanthal A1 wire 64 wraps is needed. This will take 96mm of the 100mm tube - perfect fit.
* I will use thermocouple K type with 1300°C Tmax because of good availability and fine parameters.
BUT plaese more info on the PID, and settings for your experiment.
.... I already told Frank a) I don't trust the Swedes. On my list of credible sources they are down there with the fat little white German in Innsbruck, Austria who churns out the Nigerian spam scam using computers at the public shopping mall internet cafe. b) The Swedes cannot be impartial with Russia next door c) I don't trust the Italians. They are good at art, wine, style, etc. Not logic and science. d) Since when did anything small and innovative and new come out of Europe? What's wrong with this picture?
Are you for real? What is wrong with the picture is likely that you are wildly generalizing and making ridiculous comparisons. What nation do you yourself stem, to be so high and mighty, may I ask?
Thanks for the report.
Tohoku University will be the subject of a poster session
I did not see new information, but it ay be an interesting moment to ask what is their vision.
Is it possible to take more hi res pictures and upload? Possibly take 4x4 pictures in more closeups, like creating a mosaic? It would so much better if more details could be read out of the pictures.
McKubre is truly on of the pillars of LENR. He is of course completely correct. Openness in LENR may set the stage for an unprecedented development. Likely strong interests in the background may beg to differ when it comes to how great rapid proliferation is, as their revenues and fortunes will be at risk.
My hope is that a thriving and viable scientific community will be created that is funded by public means and foundations supporting broad basic research in the field. It would complement the more or less "clandestine" and "bottom line" focus of big corps R&D divisions. To truly progress I think they are both needed. Balance in duality. As in so many other aspects of life.
feel any better?
Big corps in energy taking an early and big interest in LENR would mean a quick proliferation of a clean energy technology. This seem to be the Primary Directive for Tom Darden. Possibly it may explain that wording. 
Is it possible to upload a bit more high resolution pictures of the poster? Maybe like a 4x4 mosaic? The current image is just beyond the point of being readable.
Henry,
My aim? To have you drop this subject as it does not contribute in any way. You are have some personal beef with Alain, and seem happy to expand that to whomever confronts you.
Do note that "opinion" does not necessarily mean that what is said is nice, and can seem defaming to the other part, without being so. It is still opinion. Note also that aggression begets aggression. Alain likely to some extent base his opinion on the fact that groups like GSVIT often are quite (and needlessly) aggressive in their remarks in their self imposed quest to separate truths from lies.
Then, being convinced that they are wrong in some of their assertions it is no stretch to conclude that they are drawing their conclusions based on vague information and that the conclusions are in fact insinuating foul play. In that light, one might ask who is defaming who? Are not GSVIT defaming the scientists they try to debunk using aggressive language? Are you not aiming at defaming Alain in your very actions here?
Many are the critics to LENR that use this tactic, boiling down to the preset notion that LENR is not real, not a science, blatantly ignoring the massive amount of evidence that is at hand, and anybody that say anything to the contrary are by default either ignorant, deluded of fraudulent.
I see no defamation in the opinion expressed by Alain. But I do see resentment and anger in your comments. They amount to zero contribution to the debate.
Henry,
What is your aim? You seem so personally invested.
Alain has an opinion about GSVIT. Anybody who know who they are have an opinion. Big deal.
Alain is spending some time to keep a watchful eye on this subject. He share and disseminate information.
What be your contribution in this?
Seriously. Drop it. It is not contributing to anything worth while at this point.
Hurray! Science at work.
Not every paper written, report published, measurement taken, by scientist will be without flaws. We all know that. We are perhaps a bit too self conscious about at as LENR is still in question among acolytes of the patho skeptic persuasion, and they will grab any such revelation of flawed result as the final nail in the coffin, as though the coffin - in their mind - needed any more nails to be done.
It is good that data is scrutinized, and even though the experiments at hand were discounted, it does not mean that all LENR experiments have been discounted - not at all and far from it.
Mizuno might come out the wiser and device another experiment, that has a more clear cut calorimetry and get good results.
No worry.
