This method of sealing and the fact that the reactor is not purged of air means that the hydrogen is bound in a solid as a hydride at all times to metals in the reactor most likely aluminum or lithium.
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Robert Lynn <[email protected] > wrote: > if there was an inner metal cylinder to contain reactants (particularly > insanely leak-prone hydrogen at high temperatures) then it would be sealed > by welding not half assed approaches like alumina glue. Until you have > worked with hydrogen (I worked with stirling engines containing hydrogen) > it is hard to appreciate just how disrespectful it is of things like > hermetically sealed containers and thin walled materials of all types. > Anyone with similar experience would find the idea of such a small reactor > with low volume small fuel charge and large thin wall operating for a month > at 12-1400°C while retaining hydrogen fuel totally unbelievable. > > Also alkali metals are nasty on all metals that I am aware of at high > temperatures - particularly in heat pipe type applications like this - pure > lithium condenses on cooler wall surfaces, instantly dissolving metal atoms > from the surface and washing them away to the hot zone where the lithium is > evaporated. This leads to fast corrosion/eating away of basically all > metals as they are all slightly soluble in lithium, made worse by elevated > temperatures. This reactor is a lithium heat pipe, with hot nickel powder > heat source at the bottom of the tube and lithium washing down the walls > continually to deposit dissolved atoms at the bottom evaporation zone. > > On 13 October 2014 01:18, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> Robert I think you make good points, not sure what the inner cylinder is >> made of and I guess that if it is metal it has to be thin in order >> to not show up on the weight. There is also the possiblity that eddi >> current's heat the cyllinder at high temps but then can we keep the >> wires cold. Also, this is speculative, but we really don't know the inner >> process if this thing works, can there be a local magnetic field due >> to the reaction, the thing is the only way I can figure out that the >> nuclear process is happening without radiation is that the there is a >> deallocated >> electron squeezed between the reactants in the nuclear process that >> mediates the energy and momentum to the outer metal in the reaction in stead >> of releasing radiation, so there is a movement in the electron, if this >> is somewhat synchronized locally we might get some magnetics to show up. >> This >> is only speculating, but I think that we should be careful whith what we >> don't know, you seam to find good arguments against inductive heating, and >> this might leave us with resistive heating and a good evidence that the >> core is hot due to the reaction and not because of resistive heating. >> >> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Robert Lynn < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> far above curie limit for Ni, magnetic fields won't move powder >>> magnetically, only ions, but temps are too low for significant Li or H ions >>> to exist, and no ionising radiation sources in evidence. >>> >>> On 13 October 2014 00:49, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Yes but in that case the core can be hotter then the cables. We don't >>>> know about the powder, and the changes of magnetic fields inside the core >>>> could stir the powder around and by changing that behavior you might end up >>>> controlling the reaction rate. Also inductive heating of an inner >>>> containing cylinder does produce a fast response to the actual cylinder >>>> which controls the heat radiative environment in there. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Robert Lynn < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> inductive heating only works on conductive materials with sufficient >>>>> thickness/area through which the changing magnetic flux passes to allow >>>>> eddy currents to form. With 150Hz pulses Nickel particles of tiny scale >>>>> would not be affected (like thin motor laminates) - it would only work to >>>>> heat a secondary metal body that could then heat via radiation (very >>>>> inefficient, and of no practical benefit). >>>>> >>>>> On 13 October 2014 00:35, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> How do we know that iti s resistive heating that is taking place? Bob >>>>>> Greenyer at MFMP sugested that it is an inductive heater this means that >>>>>> the wires >>>>>> get a bit cooler then the heated core. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Robert Lynn < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Fig 12b. page 26. Only just notice that they say they are >>>>>>> "inconel" resistance wires. But how can the resistor wire, external to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> reactor, glow more brightly than the reactor itself (implying it is >>>>>>> hotter)? Also if the reactor external surface is at 1250-1410°C, then >>>>>>> on >>>>>>> top of the 30-50°C temperature drop through the walls the resistive wire >>>>>>> would have to be even hotter (up towards 1500°C) in order to be able to >>>>>>> radiate the 900W! And there are no "inconel" metal wires that can >>>>>>> survive >>>>>>> such temperatures in air for a month. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/melting-temperature-metals-d_860.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is also a mistake in their discussion for these figures, the >>>>>>> metal resistors within the reactor would necessarily have to be hotter >>>>>>> than >>>>>>> the reactor itself if they are to be able to output heat into the >>>>>>> reactor. >>>>>>> But then again at >1450°C inconel resistance wires would have turned >>>>>>> into >>>>>>> puddles anyway. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The 2mm high fins on the outside, subjected to convective air >>>>>>> cooling would be 30-50°C colder than the base of the fins due to the >>>>>>> longer >>>>>>> conduction path and hence greater temperature drop through the alumina. >>>>>>> And that should influence the thermography to under-read, but also means >>>>>>> the temperature within the reactor would have to be even higher to >>>>>>> create >>>>>>> 1400°C average surface temperature. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So this proves that the thermographic temperature readings are off >>>>>>> by a very long way - at least 150-200°C too high if inconel wires that >>>>>>> max-out at about 1300-1350°C were to have survived for a month. We now >>>>>>> know there is a huge error, we just don't know the source of the error, >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> how big the error is. But eg 1210°C vs 1410°C would drop power output >>>>>>> by >>>>>>> 40% from that claimed so that the COP would be <2. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> With the existence of such a huge error of unknown source the claims >>>>>>> of power output cannot not be trusted at all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On the upside, it does however mean that the nickel was not melted, >>>>>>> and lithium vapour pressure was a lot lower. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
