Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.

[.:.gotjosh]

Thanks for this post Axil, i have some comments and questions below...

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 05:25, Axil Axil  wrote:

> *
> *
>
> *“With temperature above the set the reactor is automatically stopped”*
>
> *
> *
>
> *It the temperature continues to rise above another set point, the control
> box releases the hydrogen gas into the water loop piping though the
> controlled opening of an electrically controlled valve. This action vents
> excess heat to the outside environment and serves to depress the reaction.
> *
>
> **
>

in my design i will prefer bimetal valves for solid state non-electronic
control if possible.
eg: http://www.emsclad.com/examples/thermal-controls.html

> * *
>
> *“How much would the temperature of the metal rise?”*
>
> * *
>
> *The nickel oxide powder will have a substantial amount of hydrogen stored
> in the lattice interstices at the surface of the nickel oxide powder where
> the oxygen has been depleted by the erosive action of hydrogen impingement
> at the surface or into the surface to some depth of the powder.*
>
What do you say the previous question(s) about H2O production between H2 and
the O from NiO ?

> * *
>
> * *
>
> *When the heat sink of the water coolant is removed, this nuclear reaction
> in the lattice interstices will continue until the temperature of at the
> surface of the powder reaches the melting point of nickel. The lattice
> interstices will begin to close as nickel migrate to these lattice
> interstices sites displacing the absorbed hydrogen gas. *
>
> * *
>
> *“Will the nuclear reaction stop due to high temperatures or will it be
> enhanced?”***
>
> * *
>
> *With some number of these heat producing sites disabled, the temperature
> at the surface of the reaction vessel will stabilize and slowly begin to
> fall.*
>
So you think it is totally self regulating in a melt down situation? and the
electronically controlled valves are only to prevent the meltdown?

> * *
>
> *This leaves open the possibility for the use of thorium in the internal
> heater. Thorium has been used in vacuum tubes for many years with no
> radiation danger.*
>

How confident are you about the tungsten vs nichrome question for element
material? is SiC another reasonable possibility? Or is it too dangerous to
have any C around?

Can you further explain the potential benefit of Thorium?


Finally, I have a question about the radiation shielding layers... if the
reactor is operating between 400 and 600C optimally, how can the lead
shielding remain solid? or if the borated water solution is used, won't that
vaporize?

thanks to you all for your insightful contributions and engagement.

> * *
>

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[.:.gotjosh]

I guess that makes comments like this one:
"It is a little unusual to see someone viciously attack himself." even more
meta-bizarre...

complex crew around here... guess its gonna take me some time to learn the
ropes...
;)

hope we can also manage to reverse engineer these hot felines along the way.

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 14:06, Terry Blanton  wrote:

> Jed and Jones are
> alter egos of Robert Park who frequently argues with himself on this
> list.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Notes on Rossi Device new version 4/19/2011 -- H gas pressure

[.:.gotjosh]

Axil,
I agree about 5g in proportion, but the K&E report says:
"The central container seen in figure 3 has an estimated volume of 50 cm3
and it contains 50 grams of nickel."
I also thought about the powder density/porosity and chose a number close to
the full density of nickel metal, as i imagined those pores would/could be
filled with the hydrogen gas.
If I use your suggestion of 3g/cc then the amount of hydrogen at 25atm will
be 0.07g
and the pressure will increase in a similar way:
25.05 293 20
26.75 313 40
28.46 333 60
30.17 353 80
31.88 373 100
36.16 423 150
40.43 473 200
44.71 523 250
48.98 573 300
57.53 673 400
66.08 773 500
74.62 873 600
83.17 973 700
108.81 1273 1000


On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 16:15, Axil Axil  wrote:

> I question the amount of nickel used. The one liter (1000 cc) Cat-E used
> 100 grams of catalyst. By proportion, a 50 cc volume should use only 5 grams
> of catalyst. The density of the catalyst is too high. It should be about
> 3g/cc since it is porous.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:33 AM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>
>> I would love a copy of that doc... please do send one my way.
>>
>> i also made a calculation based on that line from the K&E report
>> - surprisingly i got zero comments - although i consider it a very relevant
>> issue... 25 atm at startup is much more at 500C... i would love it if
>> someone could double check these calculations and perhaps include them in
>> the details documents.
>>
>> using the estimate of 0.09 grams of hydrogen pressurized
>> into a 50cc chamber with
>> 5cc occupied by 50g of nickel (at 8.8g/cc)
>> and 45cc unoccupied (for the hydrogen to fill)
>> with a starting pressure of ~24atm at 20C
>> the pressure will grow to ~64atm at 500C
>>
>> atm  deg K deg C
>> 24.22   293 20
>> 25.87   313 40
>> 27.53   333 60
>> 29.18   353 80
>> 30.83   373 100
>> 34.97   423 150
>> 39.10   473 200
>> 43.23   523 250
>> 47.36   573 300
>> 55.63   673 400
>> 63.90   773 500
>> 72.16   873 600
>> 80.43   973 700
>> 105.23  1273 1000
>>
>> (are my calculations correct ? -
>>
>> https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl=en_GB&hl=en_GB&key=0Aj441n89_v_VdHhXMHZ6MmlRWlh0RVJKYVBwd3B4amc&output=html
>> )
>>
>>
>> (note: K&E say 0.11g hydrogen but they are ignoring the space that the
>> nickel occupies - and the 50cc is an estimate anyway)
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 00:43, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>>
>>> Alan J Fletcher  wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's from the K&E report :
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> - Jed
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[.:.gotjosh]

Its really entertaining and all, but do you two really have to pollute every
single thread with this stuff? are you twin brothers from a former life who
just bicker constantly as a way of showing love?

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 02:25, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>
>> Still great but at a level which is consistent of my predicted COP in the
>> Swedish testing of COP of 10.
>>
>
> Get your story straight! Your prediction was "at least 1000:1" not 10.
> Right here:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg45088.html
>
>
>
>
>> Again – before the flood of denials, character assassination and finger
>> pointing . . .
>>
>
> You are assassinating your own character! First you say 1000:1, then you
> angrily say that your own assertion is "insane slander with no basis in
> fact." That is correct: it is insane slander. But you yourself said it. It
> is a little unusual to see someone viciously attack himself.
>
> You could retract, I suppose.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[.:.gotjosh]

It might talk a bit longer.  They don't actually *have* and ECat yet.
I would be surprised if they get one any time soon.


I concur.

Erik Furberg
April 17th, 2011 at 7:19
AM

Dear Mr. Rossi,

Its nice to hear that you will deliver your devices to University of Uppsala
and to the University of Stockolm. When will you deliver to them and do you
know if it is possible to go there and see the device in action?

Andrea Rossi
April 17th, 2011 at 8:39
AM

Dear Mr Erik Furberg:
We are organizing. I suppose it will be at the same time when we will
deliver the 1 MW plant in Greece.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Re: [Vo]:Notes on Rossi Device new version 4/19/2011 -- H gas pressure

[.:.gotjosh]

I would love a copy of that doc... please do send one my way.

i also made a calculation based on that line from the K&E report
- surprisingly i got zero comments - although i consider it a very relevant
issue... 25 atm at startup is much more at 500C... i would love it if
someone could double check these calculations and perhaps include them in
the details documents.

using the estimate of 0.09 grams of hydrogen pressurized
into a 50cc chamber with
5cc occupied by 50g of nickel (at 8.8g/cc)
and 45cc unoccupied (for the hydrogen to fill)
with a starting pressure of ~24atm at 20C
the pressure will grow to ~64atm at 500C

atm  deg K deg C
24.22   293 20
25.87   313 40
27.53   333 60
29.18   353 80
30.83   373 100
34.97   423 150
39.10   473 200
43.23   523 250
47.36   573 300
55.63   673 400
63.90   773 500
72.16   873 600
80.43   973 700
105.23  1273 1000

(are my calculations correct ? -
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl=en_GB&hl=en_GB&key=0Aj441n89_v_VdHhXMHZ6MmlRWlh0RVJKYVBwd3B4amc&output=html
)


(note: K&E say 0.11g hydrogen but they are ignoring the space that the
nickel occupies - and the 50cc is an estimate anyway)

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 00:43, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Alan J Fletcher  wrote:
>
>>
>> That's from the K&E report :
>>
>
> Thanks.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Only a matter of time

[.:.gotjosh]

can you provide links to Piantelli's patents?

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 20:24, Peter Gluck  wrote:

> Piantelli's

Re: [Vo]:Fuel rod surface area versus 1 liter bottle

[.:.gotjosh]

thanks to Robin for this well grounded calculation:

 in order to transfer 15 kW, the temperature differential across the steel
> would have to be about 165 K. Given that the reaction occurs at many
> hundreds of
> degrees, and steam production would limit the cold side temperature to
> about 100
> degrees, this is well within the capability of even the E-kitten, and it
> isn't
> designed to output anywhere near 15 kW.
>
> In short, the limit for the E-kitten would be about (500-100)*91*W/K=36.4
> kW.


from the thread [Vo]:Heat transfer in a water heater and nuclear plant

is it possible to agree that the heat transfer is not such a problem?

the accuracy may be questionable for many other reasons, but the possibility
for steel to transfer 15-40kW seems quite plausible, both via the tea pot
hypothesis and the above calculation for the e-kitten.



anyway, I think you guys are cute to get so fired up over this!

>
> Please, in the interest of your own integrity – move on to something more
> productive than inventing straw man arguments.
>
>
>
> When the Swedish experiments are complete, and there is little doubt that
> they will be performed to higher standards - then I will remind you of how
> far off you were to think the Bologna demo was accurate.
>
>
>
> Jones
>

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]: resistive heaters not for heating?

[.:.gotjosh]

it makes alot of sense to me, but then why does rossi, repeatedly state in
his blog that they can turn off the resistance and keep running, they just
don't for safety reasons??

has anyone other than rossi confirmed that the reactor can continue to
produce heat when disconnected from both the hydrogen source and the
electrical source?

perhaps if the flow rate of the cooling water is drastically slowed down,
then the reaction can manage to sustain itself without the additional
excitation from this field propagation?

hmmm.



On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 22:03, Roarty, Francis X
wrote:

> Axil,
>
> both resistive and inductive heaters will produce magnetic fields –  A
> resistive heater can operate on AC or DC but an inductive heater will short
> out if fed DC. The resistive heater is still equivalent to a conductor which
> will produce an ac or pulsating dc magnetic field if you choose to feed it
> with such a waveform and I think that is what we want to use. An inductive
> heater is essentially a coil which will develop a counter EMF that rounds
> off your pulse (choking current) while the resistive heater will give you a
> current waveform with a sharper rise time which is what you want since you
> are endorsing this much faster field propagation as opposed to thermal
> propagation to explain the control loop – and I concur.
>
> Regards
>
> Fran
>
>
>
> *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, April 18, 2011 3:53 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]: resistive heaters not for heating?
>
>
>
> To the best of my knowledge, induction h eating is the process of heating
> electrically conducting object (magnetic types of stainless steel but not
> non magnetic copper) by electromagnetic induction where eddy currents are
> generated within the metal and resistance leads to Joule heating of the
> metal. An induction heater (for any process) consists of an electromagnet,
> through which a high-frequency alternating current (AC) is passed. Heat may
> also be generated by magnetic hysteresis losses in materials that have
> significant relative permeability. The frequency of AC used depends on the
> object size, material type, coupling (between the work coil and the object
> to be heated) and the penetration depth.
>
>
>
> The magnetic field will pass thought non magnetic materials like copper,
> aluminum, electrical wire insulation or glass without being effected and
> terminate within magnetic materials.
>
>
>
> The copper inductive coils i n the Rossi reactor probably lie under the
> inclosing copper header pipe and wrap around the RV.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:15 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>
> axil, please forgive me if these are ignorant questions: are you sure that
> the heating elements are "inductive"? isn't there a difference between
> inductive heating and resistive heating? Isn't it true that inductive
> heating will not work with copper?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 21:05, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>
>
> The current producing the inductive heating will flow primarily on the
> outside surface of the stainless steel reaction vessel (RV) wall due to the
> skin effect. Little or a reduced current will flow on the inside surface of
> the RV wall. No magnetic field will exist on the inside of the RV where the
> hydrogen is pressurized.
>
>
>
> The magnetic field lines will be parallel to the circumference of the RV
> cylinder causing the heating current to flow along the skin of the RV. This
> is prescribed by the right hand rule.
>
>
>
> The will be a large negative electrostatic field produced by the flowing
> electrons which form the inductive heating current. This negative current
> charge will attract the positive hydrogen ions into the oxygen vacancies on
> the nickel oxide powder lying on the inside surface of the RV wall.
>
>
>
> This attractive force will supplement the force exerted by the
> electronegative oxygen atoms within the NiO at or very near the inner
> surface of the RV wall.
>
>
>
> At startup, the induced current will be substantial at about 10 amps.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 2:03 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>
> Hey Mark!
> Axil and I have been dancing around this idea also in a recent thread
> (http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg45022.html)
>
> I have a strong feeling that there are some electro-magnetic effects
> playing an important role here .
>
> and I also found this tidbit on wikipedia:
> > Nickel is a naturally magnetostrictive material, meaning that in the
> > presence of a magnetic field, the material undergoes a sma

Re: [Vo]: resistive heaters not for heating?

[.:.gotjosh]

thanks for the clarification. does the patent and/or blog mention induction?
or is this an advancement since the patent?
i find many references to resistance but none to induction...but maybe i am
missing something...

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 21:53, Axil Axil  wrote:

>  To the best of my knowledge, induction heating is the process of heating
> electrically conducting object (magnetic types of stainless steel but not
> non magnetic copper) by electromagnetic induction where eddy currents are
> generated within the metal and resistance leads to Joule heating of the
> metal. An induction heater (for any process) consists of an electromagnet,
> through which a high-frequency alternating current (AC) is passed. Heat may
> also be generated by magnetic hysteresis losses in materials that have
> significant relative permeability. The frequency of AC used depends on the
> object size, material type, coupling (between the work coil and the object
> to be heated) and the penetration depth.
>
>
>
> The magnetic field will pass thought non magnetic materials like copper,
> aluminum, electrical wire insulation or glass without being effected and
> terminate within magnetic materials.
>
>
>
> The copper inductive coils in the Rossi reactor probably lie under the
> inclosing copper header pipe and wrap around the RV.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:15 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>
>> axil, please forgive me if these are ignorant questions: are you sure that
>> the heating elements are "inductive"? isn't there a difference between
>> inductive heating and resistive heating? Isn't it true that inductive
>> heating will not work with copper?
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 21:05, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The current producing the inductive heating will flow primarily on the
>>> outside surface of the stainless steel reaction vessel (RV) wall due to the
>>> skin effect. Little or a reduced current will flow on the inside surface of
>>> the RV wall. No magnetic field will exist on the inside of the RV where the
>>> hydrogen is pressurized.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The magnetic field lines will be parallel to the circumference of the RV
>>> cylinder causing the heating current to flow along the skin of the RV. This
>>> is prescribed by the right hand rule.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The will be a large negative electrostatic field produced by the flowing
>>> electrons which form the inductive heating current. This negative current
>>> charge will attract the positive hydrogen ions into the oxygen vacancies on
>>> the nickel oxide powder lying on the inside surface of the RV wall.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This attractive force will supplement the force exerted by the
>>> electronegative oxygen atoms within the NiO at or very near the inner
>>> surface of the RV wall.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> At startup, the induced current will be substantial at about 10 amps.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 2:03 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey Mark!
>>>> Axil and I have been dancing around this idea also in a recent thread
>>>> (http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg45022.html)
>>>>
>>>> I have a strong feeling that there are some electro-magnetic effects
>>>> playing an important role here.
>>>>
>>>> and I also found this tidbit on wikipedia:
>>>> > Nickel is a naturally magnetostrictive material, meaning that in the
>>>> > presence of a magnetic field, the material undergoes a small change in
>>>> > length.[41] In the case of nickel, this change in length is negative
>>>> > (contraction of the material), which is known as negative
>>>> > magnetostriction and is on the order of 50 ppm
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 19:31, Mark Iverson 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Could the magnetic field generated by the resistive heaters be
>>>> inducing some
>>>> > other effects that help promote the reaction, or inductively heat the
>>>> > Nickel???
>>>> >
>>>> > -Mark
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: resistive heaters not for heating?

[.:.gotjosh]

axil, please forgive me if these are ignorant questions: are you sure that
the heating elements are "inductive"? isn't there a difference between
inductive heating and resistive heating? Isn't it true that inductive
heating will not work with copper?


On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 21:05, Axil Axil  wrote:

>
> The current producing the inductive heating will flow primarily on the
> outside surface of the stainless steel reaction vessel (RV) wall due to the
> skin effect. Little or a reduced current will flow on the inside surface of
> the RV wall. No magnetic field will exist on the inside of the RV where the
> hydrogen is pressurized.
>
>
>
> The magnetic field lines will be parallel to the circumference of the RV
> cylinder causing the heating current to flow along the skin of the RV. This
> is prescribed by the right hand rule.
>
>
>
> The will be a large negative electrostatic field produced by the flowing
> electrons which form the inductive heating current. This negative current
> charge will attract the positive hydrogen ions into the oxygen vacancies on
> the nickel oxide powder lying on the inside surface of the RV wall.
>
>
>
> This attractive force will supplement the force exerted by the
> electronegative oxygen atoms within the NiO at or very near the inner
> surface of the RV wall.
>
>
>
> At startup, the induced current will be substantial at about 10 amps.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 2:03 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>
>> Hey Mark!
>> Axil and I have been dancing around this idea also in a recent thread
>> (http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg45022.html)
>>
>> I have a strong feeling that there are some electro-magnetic effects
>> playing an important role here.
>>
>> and I also found this tidbit on wikipedia:
>> > Nickel is a naturally magnetostrictive material, meaning that in the
>> > presence of a magnetic field, the material undergoes a small change in
>> > length.[41] In the case of nickel, this change in length is negative
>> > (contraction of the material), which is known as negative
>> > magnetostriction and is on the order of 50 ppm
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 19:31, Mark Iverson 
>> wrote:
>> > Could the magnetic field generated by the resistive heaters be inducing
>> some
>> > other effects that help promote the reaction, or inductively heat the
>> > Nickel???
>> >
>> > -Mark
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Gas Poisoning Unimportant if its Fusion But . . .

[.:.gotjosh]

Regardless of any possible quantity of NiO added to the reactor as am
intentional catalyst,
i assume that each particle of Ni powder will be coated with NiO, either
from standard handling, processing such as baking, or from being heated to
400-500C to start the reactor (with some residual oxygen in the chamber).

do we agree on this?

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 20:39, Peter Gluck  wrote:

> Just call me Peter please- I am as far I remember one of the founding
> members of Vortex and I have only friends here.
> It is easy to make approximate calculations if you tell me how many grams
> of NiO will be in which space. However I ask you that before continuing to
> think about NiO (very implausible) do a bit of web search
> for Ni nanoclusters or Ni nanotechnology- discovery style; there are more
> chances that Ni is associated with an other metal-  If Rossi really has an
> catalyst.
> Peter
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:16 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>
>> Dr Gluck, can you or anyone else provide calculations about point b?
>> if a portion of the 100micron particles of nickel powder are coated
>> with a thin layer of NiO (as they would be if baked between 600-1200C
>> in air), how much water are we talking about? and if the water is the
>> result of the O from NiO and H2 from the hydrogen gas, how much
>> additional pressure would accumulate?
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 21:28, Peter Gluck  wrote:
>> > You are right, or not?
>> > a) the cleaning must be done prior to introducing hydogen read please
>> patent
>> > 2010/058288
>> > b) if AxilAxil's NiO hypothesis is real, then water will be formed in
>> the
>> > reaction space and at 400 C it will develop a considerable pressure.
>> > I do not think that NiO is the key, excuse me for that. For the time
>> given
>> > it is only a mental construct.
>> > Peter
>> >
>> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:14 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> the swedes indicate that the H2 was loaded without first purging the
>> >> chamber.
>> >>
>> >> Axil's hypothesis of the involvement of NiO further strengthens that
>> >> small quantities of air/oxygen in the chamber ought to be ok.
>> >>
>> >> > prior to that it is gas unloaded active sites- all the gaseous
>> >> > competitors
>> >> > of hydrogen are removed completely. I think this is a sine qua non
>> >> > condition
>> >> > for such a system to work.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Dr. Peter Gluck
>> > Cluj, Romania
>> > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Gluck
> Cluj, Romania
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Gas Poisoning Unimportant if its Fusion But . . .

[.:.gotjosh]

Are you of the opinion that he doesn't?

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 20:39, Peter Gluck  wrote:

>  If Rossi really has an catalyst.
> Peter
>

Re: [Vo]:Gas Poisoning Unimportant if its Fusion But . . .

[.:.gotjosh]

Dr Gluck, can you or anyone else provide calculations about point b?
if a portion of the 100micron particles of nickel powder are coated
with a thin layer of NiO (as they would be if baked between 600-1200C
in air), how much water are we talking about? and if the water is the
result of the O from NiO and H2 from the hydrogen gas, how much
additional pressure would accumulate?

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 21:28, Peter Gluck  wrote:
> You are right, or not?
> a) the cleaning must be done prior to introducing hydogen read please patent
> 2010/058288
> b) if AxilAxil's NiO hypothesis is real, then water will be formed in the
> reaction space and at 400 C it will develop a considerable pressure.
> I do not think that NiO is the key, excuse me for that. For the time given
> it is only a mental construct.
> Peter
>
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:14 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>>
>> the swedes indicate that the H2 was loaded without first purging the
>> chamber.
>>
>> Axil's hypothesis of the involvement of NiO further strengthens that
>> small quantities of air/oxygen in the chamber ought to be ok.
>>
>> > prior to that it is gas unloaded active sites- all the gaseous
>> > competitors
>> > of hydrogen are removed completely. I think this is a sine qua non
>> > condition
>> > for such a system to work.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Gluck
> Cluj, Romania
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>

Re: [Vo]: resistive heaters not for heating?

[.:.gotjosh]

Hey Mark!
Axil and I have been dancing around this idea also in a recent thread
(http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg45022.html)

I have a strong feeling that there are some electro-magnetic effects
playing an important role here.

and I also found this tidbit on wikipedia:
> Nickel is a naturally magnetostrictive material, meaning that in the
> presence of a magnetic field, the material undergoes a small change in
> length.[41] In the case of nickel, this change in length is negative
> (contraction of the material), which is known as negative
> magnetostriction and is on the order of 50 ppm

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 19:31, Mark Iverson  wrote:
> Could the magnetic field generated by the resistive heaters be inducing some
> other effects that help promote the reaction, or inductively heat the
> Nickel???
>
> -Mark

Re: [Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

[.:.gotjosh]

from wikipedia:
Nickel is a naturally magnetostrictive material, meaning that in the
presence of a magnetic field, the material undergoes a small change in
length.[41] In the case of nickel, this change in length is negative
(contraction of the material), which is known as negative
magnetostriction and is on the order of 50 ppm



On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 23:27, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 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.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 3:09 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
>>
>> Again, I think you are really onto something here also!
>> did you read my comment from this morning?
>> (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473&cpage=3#comment-33413)
>>
>> I really want to know where the elements of the electric resistive
>> heater are mounted. Does anyone have definitive info about that?
>> Could they even be in contact with the Nickel Powder/matrix?
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 19:48, Axil Axil  wrote:
>> > An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.
>> >
>> > One of the assertions coming from Rossi  is that the heat-output
>> > reaction
>> > can be started/stopped at the flick of a switch. If so, then there needs
>> > to
>> > be separate "exciter" (so to speak) exclusive of heat.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > An alterative exciter that controls the Rossi reaction which is not heat
>> > must be electrostatic and/or magnetic excitation of the walls of the
>> > stainless steel reaction chamber generated by the inductive heater.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Heat alone cannot be the factor that controls the reaction because the
>> > heat
>> > from nuclear processes would interfere (add to) with the application of
>> > control heat and result in a runaway meltdown.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

[.:.gotjosh]

sorry charles, didn't mean to offend you... but yes flash is required
for that system. my apologies to your iPhone ;)

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 00:12, Charles Hope
 wrote:
> Flash is required?!
>
> Sent from my iPhone.
>
> On Apr 17, 2011, at 17:36, ".:.gotjosh"  wrote:
>
>> I have begun to author a webspace at ahead.com:
>> http://ahead.com/begreencc/ecatrossi
>>
>> it is a bit more visual and zoomable than a wiki... although not as
>> searchable for the purely textual components...
>>
>> please contact me if you would like to collaborate / contribute...
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 23:21, Charles Hope
>>  wrote:
>>> I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than 
>>> passing around a word document.
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

[.:.gotjosh]

I have begun to author a webspace at ahead.com:
http://ahead.com/begreencc/ecatrossi

it is a bit more visual and zoomable than a wiki... although not as
searchable for the purely textual components...

please contact me if you would like to collaborate / contribute...

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 23:21, Charles Hope
 wrote:
> I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than passing 
> around a word document.
>

Re: [Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

[.:.gotjosh]

I agree that these are very relevant "what ifs", ad i also think
that there is a certain logic to the idea that the.
perhaps the reactor could continue to run and be controlled with no
electrical input to the resistors.
perhaps not.

i don't want to get too opinionated here until i build my third or
fourth working prototype ;-)

but for now, i want to wrap my head around a reasonable set of assumptions
so i can get my first one working (even if it is only producing 2:1)

perhaps it is good to clarify here that the patent application
explicitly says resistance heaters - is there new information that i
am unaware of indicating that induction heaters are used?

Jed, about your scramming theories - from what i read on the blog, the
reaction is ended just by shutting off the resistors and the internal
hydrogen flow and increasing the water flow:
-
Mattia
March 22nd, 2011 at 3:13 PM
Dear Rossi,
how can you say that it‚s easy to cut the hydrogen supply and cool
down the E-Cat increasing the flow of water as much as necessary?
Levi said: we loaded the unit with hydrogen at the beginning, and then
the bottle was closed. It then worked for 18 hours with the bottle
closed.

Andrea Rossi
March 23rd, 2011 at 1:55 AM
Dear Mr Mattia Rizzi:
The internal hydrogen supply system is different from the external
supply system. The external (general) supply system is the one of
which you are talking about, but then the hydrogen makes a path that
is cut if power goes off or if we want for any reason.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
-
internal hydrogen path?
the hydrogen makes a path that is cut?
so there is a pressurized internal hydrogen chamber that has a
controlled release into the reaction chamber?

but if this is the case (that there is a digitally controlled release
of hydrogen into the reaction chamber), doesn't that represent a
single point of failure that could lead to over heating if the valve
ruptures or the integrity of the seal fails?


>
> That's grand, but what if heat is the only thing that works? What if
> electrostatic excitation has no effect on the reaction?
> I think it would make more sense to title this thread, "It would be nice ...

[Vo]:Chamber Pressure with changing temperature

[.:.gotjosh]

using the estimate of 0.09 grams of hydrogen pressurized
into a 50cc chamber with
5cc occupied by 50g of nickel (at 8.8g/cc)
and 45cc unoccupied (for the hydrogen to fill)
with a starting pressure of ~24atm at 20C
the pressure will grow to ~64atm at 500C

atm   deg K deg C
24.22   293 20
25.87   313 40
27.53   333 60
29.18   353 80
30.83   373 100
34.97   423 150
39.10   473 200
43.23   523 250
47.36   573 300
55.63   673 400
63.90   773 500

(are my calculations correct ? -
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl=en_GB&hl=en_GB&key=0Aj441n89_v_VdHhXMHZ6MmlRWlh0RVJKYVBwd3B4amc&output=html)

Re: [Vo]:Gas Poisoning Unimportant if its Fusion But . . .

[.:.gotjosh]

the swedes indicate that the H2 was loaded without first purging the chamber.

Axil's hypothesis of the involvement of NiO further strengthens that
small quantities of air/oxygen in the chamber ought to be ok.

> prior to that it is gas unloaded active sites- all the gaseous competitors
> of hydrogen are removed completely. I think this is a sine qua non condition
> for such a system to work.

Re: [Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

[.:.gotjosh]

Again, I think you are really onto something here also!
did you read my comment from this morning?
(http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473&cpage=3#comment-33413)

I really want to know where the elements of the electric resistive
heater are mounted. Does anyone have definitive info about that?
Could they even be in contact with the Nickel Powder/matrix?


On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 19:48, Axil Axil  wrote:
> An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.
>
> One of the assertions coming from Rossi  is that the heat-output reaction
> can be started/stopped at the flick of a switch. If so, then there needs to
> be separate "exciter" (so to speak) exclusive of heat.
>
>
>
> An alterative exciter that controls the Rossi reaction which is not heat
> must be electrostatic and/or magnetic excitation of the walls of the
> stainless steel reaction chamber generated by the inductive heater.
>
>
>
> Heat alone cannot be the factor that controls the reaction because the heat
> from nuclear processes would interfere (add to) with the application of
> control heat and result in a runaway meltdown.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:NiO is the answer

[.:.gotjosh]

You might be seriously onto something there...
next question: how to condition the powder to be optimally oxidized?

could it be as simple as baking in an air atmosphere somewhere between
600-1200C ?
(http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15337365)

I am getting more and more sure that i can make one of these at home
in my kiln ;-)

.:.gotjosh

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 20:25, Axil Axil  wrote:
> NiO is the answer
>
> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=11&ved=0CB0QFjAAOAo&url=https%3A%2F%2Fpubweb.bnl.gov%2Fpeople%2Ffrenkel%2FNIO%2Fjacs.pdf&ei=sgyrTauKHOn20gHnhcH5CA&usg=AFQjCNFQpN-Hy2kt7yqpK3zilbCxaDGbRA&sig2=IM5WSgAI5S3nc-6x3952CA
>
>