me356 Verified
  • Member since Mar 13th 2015
  • Last Activity:

Posts by me356

    Unfortunately no. The latest experiment was only made from curiosity if I can get excess heat also with a different kind of reactor where it was not possible previously.
    When time will come I will share all the data.
    I think that I am able to replicate the effect with quite high success now so the research of fully working reactor with optimal characteristics will be rapid.
    Later I will be able to produce required amount of reactors and even ship it to any place in the world. But this will be state when it will simply work as a ready product where all safety issues will be resolved to not harm anybody.
    Of course it must be legal and not breach any patent.

    Mats002: I can't answer it to be 100% correct.
    David Fojt: If you are using LAH as the main hydrogen source and you want to not reach too high pressures you have to:
    a) increase free volume of the fuel chamber
    b) went excess hydrogen out
    c) reduce LAH


    By reduction of LAH you will reduce also Lithium content that is contained there. Thus you have to add Lithium in a different way.

    To explain success of Parkhomov I am convinced that:
    - his reactors were leaky to some degree thus excess hydrogen was wented out, yet there was enough lithium to produce LiH when needed - bad timing will result to null results - different nickel, LAH, reactor design - will not allow excess heat triggering. Absolutely nobody really replicated his work precisely and I think that even Alexander was not able to reproduce it always.
    - his manometer was not calibrated properly so the output was not precise and/or readout in the important events were not recorded, were overlooked or manometer simply not worked correctly (especially due to optical and manual records).
    - he used extreme conditions to start the excess heat that were always at the edge of used materials.


    Even if the fuel was prepared carefully it could be useless due to contamination during the run.


    Stephen Shorland: I think that parallel and serial connection of the reactors where one can interfere with each other can lead to these results. For example if there is some output from one reactor that can stimulate reaction of a second reactor (unused output - e.g. some sort of radiation) it can be utilized for boosting the reaction when second reactor is in SSM. By such cascade you can achieve much longer SSM periods just because you can cleverly harness all the output products. Thus COP can be multiplied a few times even that the basic technology is very same.

    eros: Fortunately no.
    Jack Cole: Yes, I have tried it a few times.
    wishfulThinking: I recommend so that the pressure is around 1 bar absolute - without external control it is not too easy. Because of safety and reactor integrity it is good to keep pressure low. Then you have to decrease it before triggering excess heat.


    Normally the problem is, that LiAlH4 will give you too much hydrogen, on the other hand you have not too much Lithium for the reaction. So you have to wait very long time if you have no additional pressure control until the pressure is low enough - can take hours - weeks if it is a wrong ratio.
    To allow reversible reaction of LAH that will give you good "control" you need more Lithium - this is very dependent on the composition of LAH.
    Alternatively you will lack aluminium if the reaction is too strong if too much of pure lithium was needed to add (but I guess that this is acceptable for the first tests).
    I recommend to not use LAH at all for the first tests if you have an external pressure control.

    It took approximately 1.5 hour. But the fuel was previously prepared (without lithium).
    At least in case where Rossi was not able to control and/or monitor all the development inside it was simply necessary to wait.

    wishfulThinking: pure Lithium in a wire form, temperature was approx. 960°C on the heater.
    Internal temperature was so high that nickel melted at the end of the test.


    I have already created design that allow precise calorimetric measurement nearly without thermal losses.
    I can connect my reactor even to a water grid, tank, etc.

    1. Yes, but temperature and pressure must be controlled very carefully. With LiAlH4 you have easier control but also more margins to stay in (thus more safe but more possible issues).
    2. Hopefully no.
    3. Boiling.

    To answer mystery about - how temperature and power can be same at the same time, while excess heat is on and off?
    It is not that easy to simply answer, but it depends on where you measure the temperature - if temperature is measured at the spot, where the fuel is not present, the heater temperature will be virtually not affected. Thus power to the heater will be constant (maintained at the temperature)
    The heater was touching the tube only barely.


    On the other hand, if you are measuring it at the spot where the fuel is, everything will change.


    In my experiments, to make sure that there is no error, I am controlling the reactor by multiple temperature sources (IR, TC) and even by power analyser.
    This will exclude many possible errors.


    Test that was performed yesterday was started just for curiosity, I expected 40% success / 60% fail. But it was success since previously I was unable to get clear excess heat that laster for longer time with this kind of reactor.


    axil: I can't answer it yet, since the issue is more complicated and I have started measurement of RF in 1/3 of the run (when it was more interesting) and it was already present.
    With my other reactors RF is present too and is even stronger and starts to appear with temperatures around 200°C. It is so intense that even scintillator can see it as extremely low energetic gamma peak (or peaks) that are at the specific energies (each reactor has slightly different).

    Hank Mills: Welcome to the forum.


    First from all I want to say, that I will share all the details, but for now I can't answer each question. I hope that it is understandable.
    Either due to lack of time.


    1. Nickel, Lithium and H2. But different combinations will work. Even trace amount of lithium can be enough.
    3. All and repeatedly.
    6. I believe that LiAlH4 can work in a few ways - you can get stable output. Aluminium is throttling the reaction, especially in a higher temperatures can be benefit. All in all lithium is very reactive and will react with the chamber sooner or later.
    7. I believe that LiH is not needed at all. It can be good to maintain reaction stable (turn it on and off when needed). But similar thing can be done also with LiAlH4 (due to fully reversible reaction).
    8. Li as vapor will work.
    10. Yes, I think so.
    11. Damage and reaction with materials you do not want.
    12. I have not tested it yet, but I am convinced that it will work at least for a few seconds. Especially after some modifications.


    I hope that it can help.

    Tarun: Yes, for sure there are many mechanisms how you can do so.
    When you check published patents, you can see at least few ways how to trigger and turn off the excess heat.
    Changing pressure, gas, mixture, electrical stimulation, ionizing source, sonic wave, etc.


    I can say, that with any missing part of the fuel it will not work during the same condition.


    Paradigmnoia: No, no heating element inside. Each reactor type has advantages and disadvantages.


    stefan:
    * Chemical energy? - maybe, but at the temperature that was present everything was decomposed.
    * Released energy in a phase change? - rather no, state of the excess heat can work for long time.
    * inductive heating? - can't be. This is stainless steel, it can't be heated with AC from the heater and with the power that was present. With true induction heater (that I've also tested) it will not heat stainless steel too much at around 50 KHz. You will need much higher frequencies and higher power - but what is really missing is a coil around the area that started to glow.

    GlowFish: This stainless steel chamber is able to operate at 1200°C safely. It can operate at 900°C continuously without any oxidation. I have never had a problem like this.
    Heater is cemented on the alumina tube.
    This issue can be completely excluded as I am able to get excess heat with completely different reactors (made from alumina).


    axil: Not yet. I have just verified that RF noise coming from the reactor is quite intense. Emmision can be shielded with 5mm thick aluminium block by 1/3.
    I am preparing new very sensitive pancake detector for a soft beta radiation measurement.

    I believe that there are no emmisions, at least with this reactor.
    I am doing constant measurement with 3 detectors (measurement of alpha, beta, gamma, neutrons), including NaI 2x2" scintillator probe (extremely precise) and it is holding around the background level.


    Even that it was not intended for public, I can share one video from excess heat onset.
    The video is of very poor quality. Maybe it will be interesting for you.


    https://vid.me/H2xn
    Excess heat onset from 0:15.

    Dear Prof. Celani,


    thank you very much for your input! Really appreciated!


    I have already learned a lot from your papers (and MFMP)! For sure I have to study more from your work.


    My personal theory is that producing atomic hydrogen more effectively is key to achieve higher COP.
    Atomic hydrogen that was created before can then enter a transition material directly without too much "effort".
    When transition material is then temporarily stressed it can yield excess energy, in very simple words.
    If you can do this very often, very fast and without material destruction, the highest COP is achieved.


    If rates of atomic hydrogen production vs recombination back to H2 are correct it will produce additional heat and H2 can be recycled without a loss.


    But there are so many things to try, that one can spend whole life to understand the process.

    You are right, but I wanted just to express that it is not "absolutely" necessary.
    With a proper construction you can still change pressure without affecting Li/LiH - for rapid research it is very usefull.

    My wire was not oxidized nearly at all - it was already shining (silvery) from the beginning.
    I have treated it with hydrogen always. At the beginning (first experiments) it was only LiAlH4 powder that allowed to achieve COP of 1.6. I had no equipment as today.
    Now I do not use any powders. Only H2 and vacuum pump. Vacuum pump can pump all the impurities out.
    After treating the nickel is shining even more and after repated hydrogenation it is able to change the resistance even by 40% up and down in a few seconds.
    This mean that hydrogen loading ratio is quite fast and it has great impact on the lattice.

    For sure I will manage independent measuring when it will be fully usable.
    For now I am only focusing on the COP. With higher COP it is not that easy to make false conclusions by anyone.
    I believe that working reactors can be shipped anywhere for testing when time will come.