10KW LENR Demonstrator?

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

parallel
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:24 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Post by parallel »

That's great. All strength to him. Get a few early-followers prepared to risk real money to buy the thing, and then we can all buy one and copy it if it works out. Great!
There you go again.

What part of "we don't get paid until after the E-Cat performs to spec" do you not understand?

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Post by Axil »

NiO is the answer

The use of hydrogen reduction of oxide creates abundant lattice defects in NiO or any other oxide when exposed to hot hydrogen over an extended timeframe.

Hydrogen based NiO reduction will create large numbers of O vacancies in the surface of the NiO crystal.

The presence of O vacancies leads to an increase in the adsorption energy of H2 and substantially lowers the energy barrier associated with the cleavage of the H-H bond. At the same time, adsorbed hydrogen can induce the migration of O vacancies from the bulk to the surface of the oxide.

These large numbers of O vacancies provide the nuclear active sites where large numbers of hydrogen atoms are drawn and packed in. The oxygen within the bulk of the NiO particle will strongly attract H into the particle.

This hydrogen reduction process of NiO will produce a nickel metal foam like structure on the surface of the NiO particle heavily packed with H.


See the following

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=w ... c-6x3952CA


Abstract:

Reduction of an oxide in hydrogen is a method frequently employed in the preparation of active catalysts and electronic devices. Synchrotron-based time-resolved X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray absorption fine structure (NEXAFS/EXAFS), photoemission, and first-principles density-functional (DF) slab calculations were used to study the reaction of H2 with nickel oxide. In experiments with a NiO(100) crystal and NiO powders, oxide reduction is observed at atmospheric pressures and elevated temperatures (250-350 °C), but only after an induction period. The results of in situ time-resolved XRD and NEXAFS/EXAFS show a direct NiO to Ni transformation without accumulation of any intermediate phase. During the induction period, surface defect sites are created that provide a high efficiency for the dissociation of H2. A perfect NiO(100) surface, the most common face of nickel oxide, exhibits a negligible reactivity toward H2. The presence of O vacancies leads to an increase in the adsorption energy of H2 and substantially lowers the energy barrier associated with the cleavage of the H-H bond. At the same time, adsorbed hydrogen can induce the migration of O vacancies from the bulk to the surface of the oxide. A correlation is observed between the concentration of vacancies in the NiO lattice and the rate of oxide reduction. These results illustrate the complex role played by O vacancies in the mechanism for reduction of an oxide. The kinetic models frequently used to explain the existence of an induction time during the reduction process can be important, but a more relevant aspect is the initial production of active sites for the rapid dissociation of H2.

raphael
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:16 am
Location: TX

Post by raphael »

According to Axil: An independent exciter is required exclusive of heat.

Probably true unless the exciter could, quite improbably, be isolated from the heat coming from the reaction.

Pursuant to this thought, I'm looking at one of the latest pics and seeing both a pair of wires supplying current (apparently) to a heating element clamped to the exterior. I'm also seeing a pair of wires entering the end of the dingus through what looks like a threaded plug that has been drilled and then, subsequent to the insertion of said second pair of wires, cemented shut. Inquiring minds would like to know whether (and/or what) role the pair of wires has in regulating the excitation process. Notably the gauge of the wires in either pair looks to be in the range of 18...24.
"As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden." Chauncey Gardiner

Giorgio
Posts: 3068
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

Kahuna wrote:Here are their email addresses if you are interested
hanno@mech.kth.se
sven.kullander@fysast.uu.se
I will mail them tonight, thanks for the addresses.
I will post here any reply I will get from them.

Giorgio
Posts: 3068
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

parallel wrote:Having now read your second post (that overlapped with mine), no, I'm not accusing you of being a perfectionist, but rather failing to recognize that the people running the tests were reasonably intelligent.

As I said above, they should be able to recognize if the excess heat was well above the possible measurement errors. Yes, the measurements could have been done better. But the latter does not imply fraud.

Read that quote from Rossi above again. He is not interested in the sort of validation you seem to require before believing in LENR.
I said this before. Even smart people time by time get so much convinced of something they want t believe that they miss some very basic point.

Bona fide does not mean that you can skip a correct scientific procedure. Especially when the process you are testing has the possibility to be a game changer at all levels of our energy technology.

If he is not interested in public scrutiny he should avoid to make one, but if you do one than you must do it in a professional way.

It does not take a genius to understand this.

AcesHigh
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:59 am

Post by AcesHigh »

Giorgio wrote:
parallel wrote:Having now read your second post (that overlapped with mine), no, I'm not accusing you of being a perfectionist, but rather failing to recognize that the people running the tests were reasonably intelligent.

As I said above, they should be able to recognize if the excess heat was well above the possible measurement errors. Yes, the measurements could have been done better. But the latter does not imply fraud.

Read that quote from Rossi above again. He is not interested in the sort of validation you seem to require before believing in LENR.
I said this before. Even smart people time by time get so much convinced of something they want t believe that they miss some very basic point.

Bona fide does not mean that you can skip a correct scientific procedure. Especially when the process you are testing has the possibility to be a game changer at all levels of our energy technology.

If he is not interested in public scrutiny he should avoid to make one, but if you do one than you must do it in a professional way.

It does not take a genius to understand this.
well, I dont like Rossi for more personal reasons. His last name... bad memories from 1982. :x

Giorgio
Posts: 3068
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

Axil wrote:NiO is the answer
No is not.
I already discussed NiO reduction with H2 before, is a very common industrial process.
You cannot get more than 50 Wh/kg out of it.


Axil wrote:The use of hydrogen reduction of oxide creates abundant lattice defects in NiO or any other oxide when exposed to hot hydrogen over an extended timeframe.

Hydrogen based NiO reduction will create large numbers of O vacancies in the surface of the NiO crystal.

The presence of O vacancies leads to an increase in the adsorption energy of H2 and substantially lowers the energy barrier associated with the cleavage of the H-H bond. At the same time, adsorbed hydrogen can induce the migration of O vacancies from the bulk to the surface of the oxide.

These large numbers of O vacancies provide the nuclear active sites where large numbers of hydrogen atoms are drawn and packed in. The oxygen within the bulk of the NiO particle will strongly attract H into the particle.

This hydrogen reduction process of NiO will produce a nickel metal foam like structure on the surface of the NiO particle heavily packed with H.
You forgot that you have a LIMITED amount of H inside the chamber.
The hydrogen inside is not even enough to stoichiometrically complete the NiO reduction if the 40 gr. of material inside the chamber was all NiO.

Giorgio
Posts: 3068
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

AcesHigh wrote:well, I dont like Rossi for more personal reasons. His last name... bad memories from 1982. :x
Well, good memories for me :D

parallel
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:24 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Post by parallel »

If he is not interested in public scrutiny he should avoid to make one, but if you do one than you must do it in a professional way.
It's his dime. He can do it in any way he pleases.
Who are you to tell him it must be done in a particular way?

It was a demonstration, not a rigorous validation. As Rossi says, the only real validation is if his customers find that it works all year long.

raphael
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:16 am
Location: TX

Post by raphael »

According to Kahuna: Also, the heating resistor is located outside the copper pipe through which the water flows around the interior stainless reactor cell.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Upon further reflection, this may not be the case. What's clamped to the bottom of the chamber could easily be a connector through which the current is conducted into the interior of the thing (specifically to an assembly that is attached to the bottom of the H2-inlet valve and dropped in from above).

If yes, then the diameter of said assembly would have to be less than an inch.
"As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden." Chauncey Gardiner

raphael
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:16 am
Location: TX

Post by raphael »

c-o-r-r-e-c-t-i-o-n

With regard to my last post, the H2-inlet valve actually connects to a "tee" which connects to the copper "chamber" below. (There's what looks like a reducer fitting on the upward-projecting part of the tee and then maybe a relief valve or some other sort of termination.)

The downward-projecting part of the tee is where the H2, presumably, flows into an "assembly" of some sort where the heat-producing components reside.

From a fabrication perspective, it would probably be useful if this assembly/reactor could be pre-fastened to the tee and then dropped into the chamber and secured. Ditto from a maintenance perspective, etc.

Sidebar to Axil: You are calling the device a "Cat-E" when "E-Cat" is the term that Rossi is using....
Last edited by raphael on Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
"As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden." Chauncey Gardiner

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Post by Axil »

I believe that when Rossi talks about using only milligrams of catalyst, he is not making a mistake. The patent contains “a patent of interest section” where a number of these patents address ion production, acceleration, and their direction.

I believe that Rossi is ionizing NiO particles and firing them into the reaction vessel at high speed with the intent of imbedding them into the wall of the stainless steel (SS) vessel.

If the exciter is magnetic and/or electrostatic force, the only place that these forces will have effect is on or very near the surface of the SS reaction chamber.

The big Cat-E (10 KW) was said to contain only a gram of catalyst. That is too small a volume of catalyst to fill a 1000 cm3 vessel. However, it is sufficient to coat its walls with a rough thick surface layer. A Cat-E totally filled with nanopowder with all of it producing heat cannot pass that internal heat to the wall of the SS vessel very well.

Tight nanoparticle packing needed for efficient heat transfer would work against efficient hydrogen flow and vice versa.

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Post by Axil »

You forgot that you have a LIMITED amount of H inside the chamber.
The hydrogen inside is not even enough to stoichiometrically complete the NiO reduction if the 40 gr. of material inside the chamber was all NiO.
We are talking miligrams of NiO here.

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

Raphael, I hope you recognise this forum is about polywell fusion.

I suppose it is inevitable that it gets hijacked for other questionable schemes that also claim fusion, but just to point this out that this thread is neither news nor related to polywell.

Giorgio
Posts: 3068
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

parallel wrote:
If he is not interested in public scrutiny he should avoid to make one, but if you do one than you must do it in a professional way.
It's his dime. He can do it in any way he pleases.
Who are you to tell him it must be done in a particular way?

It was a demonstration, not a rigorous validation. As Rossi says, the only real validation is if his customers find that it works all year long.
Read back what I wrote several times in the previous pages:
Giorgio wrote:Of course he does not have any need or obligation to follow rules dictated by others. It's his company and his invention, he can do and behave as he pleases.
That has been my opinion from the start and it didn't change.
The statement above is just a simple consideration about you pointing out that the test was done in an intelligent way.
parallel wrote:Having now read your second post (that overlapped with mine), no, I'm not accusing you of being a perfectionist, but rather failing to recognize that the people running the tests were reasonably intelligent.
They might be extremely smart and intelligent, but the test was done in an amateurish way.
If you want to make a public test and you consider yourself smart, than make it smart. That's my point.

Post Reply