Does this work?

(from here)  Use a nickel wire in hydrogen gas and you can do the same experiment.

Use a nickel wire in hydrogen gas and you can do the same experiment. In fact it even works with Nichrome resistance wire, that is a nickel and copper alloy.
You can demonstrate LENR by putting a resistance heater using Nichrome heating elements, that you buy at the store, into a container of hydrogen gas at low pressure, and turn it on. Measure the temperature on the outside of the container filled with air and you get one temperature. Measure it filled with hydrogen and you get higher temperature. You can get an accurate measure of the LENR generated power by measuring the power into the heater, and measuring the heat generated by the heater with a flowing water calorimeter about the container.

(Thanks Brad Arnold for putting me onto this one.)


1 – Does a higher container temperature prove that LENR is happening?  Could it be that hydrogen conducts heat off of the nichrome wire better?  Could it be that the presence of hydrogen causes the temperature to

2 – What of calorimetry?  Flow calorimetry is great if there’s enough heat to have it make sense.  In lower heat situations would it not be better to put the thing in a container with a known volume of water, and time how long it takes to raise the water temperature x degrees?  This surely is the easier setup.

3 – Can you measure heat from this design that is greater than unity?  If you can, then it is a fully valid LENR proof of concept.  Why make it more complicated than it needs to be.

4 – In the interest of Einstein’s “make it as simple as possible, but no simpler”, what safety precautions are required to make this device?

5 – Whats the easiest way to get the hydrogen?  Electrolysis?  Buy it in a bottle?

6 – What exactly would the setup look like?

This looks like the makings of an “as simple as possible” project.

<— To main blog

About these ads

Tags: , , , , ,

59 Responses to “Does this work?”

  1. Simon Derricutt Says:

    This is how I would do it:

    You really need at two identical containers, and at least two thermocouples, though another one to measure room temperature would be useful. You’ll need an accurate voltmeter and ammeter per container, or at least they should agree with each other if measuring the same current or voltage. You’ll need a cupboard or something similar (large cardboard box?) to stop draughts from messing up the measurements.

    Each container has a Nichrome resistance wire inside it – the sort of thing that is used in an electric fire. It would help if you trim them to be equal resistance. You’ll need to get the electrical connections in through the container wall, with insulators that are also gas-tight. Fill one can with Hydrogen. You can electrolyse water to get this if you want to – I’ve found that Sodium Carbonate (washing soda) in de-ionised water is an adequate electrolyte and there’s no chance of Chlorine being produced. You can also get it by dropping Zinc into Hydrochloric Acid. Collecting it, storing it and piping it to where you want it is probably the hardest task of this job. If someone really wants to do this I’ll put up a drawing and photo. This home-made Hydrogen is going to be saturated with water-vapour, but this should not affect any of the measurements.

    Getting the Hydrogen into your can is tricky, since you really want absolutely no Oxygen in there with it. Since air is so much heavier than Hydrogen, you need to fill the can upside down through a small hole, and have a second hole with a small length of fine rubber tube on it going down. The Hydrogen displaces the air, and when you get Hydrogen coming out of the escape tube you can stop filling and stop off the tubes. How to tell if you’ve got Hydrogen coming out? It’s got no smell or colour – I’d be tempted to take a sample outside and light it…. A better way is by using a vacuum pump to get rid of the air in the tin first, but this is definitely more complex to set up.

    Providing you don’t have bad connections and thus sparks, it’s not too much of a risk if there’s Oxygen in there – Hydrogen/Oxygen implodes with a sharp pop, so it’s not like a natural gas explosion. In case your tins aren’t strong enough to take this, however, best to do this in the open somewhere.

    Place the containers in your box, wire them up, apply the battery and measure the temperatures of the two cans and log it over time. Measure the voltage and current into each can. Once you’ve got to the maximum it’ll get, switch off and go have a beer or two while everything cools off. Swap the locations of the two cans and do it again. Next, empty the one can of Hydrogen and fill the other, and then run the sequence again so you now have four sets of measurements. You should find that the can with the Hydrogen in will get hotter, even though it receives the same electrical power. The extra temperature, in this type of calorimetry, corresponds to the extra energy, since the heat dissipation of the can is closely linear to the temperature providing there are no odd draughts that hit one and not the other. This is why the cans are swapped in location, and then in contents too. Averaging the measurements gives greater accuracy and also takes out the systematic errors (we hope).

    If you are putting in enough power to get the Nichrome reasonably warm (around 400°C, which is a very dull red) then you can expect about another couple of watts per square metre of wire surface. Measure the wire diameter, multiply it by Pi and then multiply again by the length to get the surface area. You’ll probably find that the area is a small fraction of a square metre, so maybe you’ll be getting 1/10 watt extra when you’re putting in around 100 watts or so. This is in the region of 0.1%, possibly much less, so it’s going to be hard to measure it in the back yard. The thermocouples will need to be calibrated before you start – if not against a standard, then you should at least know the offset of one against the other.

    To improve things, you can take apart a toaster – that normally has tape rather than round wire resistances. It’s still going to be on the edge of what you can measure at home.

    Risks are the usual ones with Hydrogen – it makes an explosive mix with air and you can’t see or smell it. Make only enough for what you need, and use copper, brass or thick rubber tubing to move it around.

    Sorry I can’t get this explanation into a nutshell, but I’ve condensed it a lot. I haven’t done this experiment – the gains are very small and hard to measure, so it is only worth it as a demo rather than trying to get useful amounts of reaction.

  2. brucefast Says:

    What about the material of the container? I understand that hydrogen gas cannot be contained by steel. What about glass? I know that glass risks shattering in the event of BOOM, but it also allows people to see in, which is cool.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Bruce – Aluminium, Copper or Brass are good, and have low diffusion rates for Hydrogen with little embrittlement. Stainless steel is reasonable, but the Hydrogen will slowly pass through it and make the steel brittle – not a good choice for a long-term machine (see Defkalion’s and Rossi’s devices, which seem to be stainless steel) but OK for the length of time you’ll be running this experiment. Stainless steel will also take part in the reaction – a bit like building a stove out of hardwood.

      Glass such as Pyrex will be fine, but if there’s an explosion it will shatter. You could use glass-coated steel as maybe the best material, but it’s somewhat expensive to get the defect-free coating needed. I’d use Brass or a similar Copper alloy as the container, since it can be easily machined and is stable. If you want to run really hot, then we’ll have to find something else, maybe fused Alumina.

    • brucefast Says:

      What of plastics? Would it be reasonable to use ptfe piping to run hydrogen into your container?

      What about a glass container inside of a plastic or metal container where the outer container’s role is to absorb the shock, or contain the shrapnel of any explosion?

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Bruce – I’m not sure about PTFE, but I would be happy to use it since it’s OK with most things. The fine plastic tube you get in a MIG welder gun-lead should do the job, or if you use rubber then the fuel-return piping from a diesel engine is sufficient and easy to get. Putting a glass or plastic container in a metal one to provide back-up is OK, but you’ll be getting pretty hot so most plastics are not going to take it. If they can they’ll be expensive and difficult to get hold of.

      Since you’re asking the kinds of questions I would expect if you were actually intending to try it, check out a dead toaster for your materials. This should supply you resistance wire in tape form, which will have more surface area and therefore a bigger effect than round wire. It also gives you some mica or something similar to wind the wire around. The smaller your wire coil gets, the easier it will be to sort out the rest – you really don’t need much Hydrogen to make it work, and the smaller the canister the better (less likely to break if the re’s Oxygen and a spark, and you get a bang). Aim for somewhere around the 50cc or less – a large wineglass. Wind the tape around a few bits of cut-outs from the mica sheet, and cut notches in the sides of the mica to keep it in place and to supply a projecting bit of mica to keep the wire away from the metal walls, if you’re using that. If there’s enough wire, use several wound bits of mica joined together electrically and separated by offcuts of mica. Use screw connections to join the wires to each other and to your terminals. To get the current in and out of the can, use a PTFE plug and/or instant gasket – rated to 250°C.

      Before you start, though, calculate what sort of effect you might see, and whether you’ll actually be able to measure it with kit you can buy. My thermocouples will read to 0.1°C, and this means that you’ll start to see a difference once the case gets above around 200°C – there’s an 0.1°C “bobble” as with any digital measurement. Since there is also some variation between K-type thermocouples, leave the thermocouples with the cans to measure the difference, or maybe go as far as swapping the thermocouples round and doing another 4 sets of measurements. It’s going to take a while. It’s not easy to measure such small differences – one of the reasons it’s not really been noticed.

      Flow calorimetry is preferred, but is really tricky to set up if you want to be sure of the answers to this degree of accuracy.

  3. Roger Bird Says:

    From Emily Deans, MD: “Brazil nuts are also a bit high in omega 6 fatty acids and radium, as it happens, which might be a reason not to make them a major staple of your diet.”

    Please explain to me why this is not an indication of transmutation of elements. Why would one particular plant manage to be able to have radium in it in amounts that could be dangerous and all of the other food plants from that area would not also have radium in them.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Roger – some plants, lichens and algae will collect and concentrate various elements. They can thus be used for removing those elements from a polluted area, and I’ve seen some projects in bioengineering that are aimed at improving this capability specifically for de-pollution efforts. It’s also a cheap way of “mining” once it’s perfected.

      It doesn’t need transmutation to explain this, though of course it may be happening in some cases. Once people accept the possibility of transmutation and really look for it, we may see good evidence emerge. We may also see some bioengineering aimed at improving the capability, too.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      It’s possible to receive a harmful overdose of selenium from eating too many Brazil nuts.

      Cavitation occurs in plants during drought conditions but not necessarily transmutation.
      “Acoustic detection has been used to investigate the incidence of cavitation in whole potted Ricinus plants subjected to water stress by withholding water. Cavitation proceeded rather slowly and was detectable before and during wilting. Techniques which restricted
      water uptake more drastically such as root cooling or overlapping cuts induced more rapid “click” production and wilting; a response already described for excised leaves. When water stress was removed by rewatering, or rewarming a cooled root system, cavitation soon ceased. This response was more sluggish of over-delayed.
      Cavitation in aging leaves on well watered plants has also been examined. Despite the onset of senescence over many days there was no evidence that dry patches, which often develop extensively, are a consequence of water shortage induced by xylem blockage. Leaves, falling naturally by abscission in still air, were often remarkably turgid with water potentials similar to those of healthy attached leaves. Only after losing water was cavitation apparent, as usual for excised mature leaves. Sometimes more persistent leaves did cavitate in situ, just before abscission, showing that in normal leaves xylem blockage can occasionally precede leaf fall by several hours.”

  4. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    When Bubble Cavitation Becomes Sonofusion
    Roger S. Stringham
    First Gate Energies, PO Box 1230, Kilauea, HI 96754

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Thanks Iggy – this is another one that looks like it could be done in the back shed, and since it outputs about 40 extra watts for 50 watts input energy (total 90W, COP=1.8) for a 1cm square of foil, this is far easier to actually measure. Looking at the way it’s done, it ought to work with ordinary water and Nickel, too. I don’t know whether the explanation Stringham gives is the real one to explain P+F’s results (and thus other electrolysis, too) but it seems to be a much better explanation than Widom-Larsen of why there are no gammas produced in LENR. I’ll read it a few more times to get the information learnt.

    • Bob Says:

      Iggy, like Simon said, this is very doable. A while back I did some cavitation experiments and had good success, but put them on the back burner as the NanoSpire radiation got me a bit scared. It would be interesting to confirm this (COP = 1.8) and if so, look at re-engineering to get a much better COP.
      Hydrogen + Energy + Metal ==> LENR (GAS or Liquid)
      It would be great if the big brains would figure out the common mechanism for all this, so real planning could be used.

  5. mark Gatti Says:

    Best practice is never use brass with hydrogen ,only stainless.I didn’t really believe it till my first hho cell melted its copper conections .cheer sMark G

    • brucefast Says:

      Very interesting. Thanks for the info. I, however, am planning to use glass and plastic. Hopefully it’ll work. I’m planning a lexan shield to mitigate against BOOM!

  6. mark Gatti Says:

    Also the hydrogen /porousity with steel and stainless looks like it was an anti hydrogen myth promulgated presumeably by people worried about it taking away there profits and position ,ref Roy Mcalistar using 1st world war german hydrogen storage cylinders 80yrs later . Hydrogen embritlement in welding is another story altogether.

    • brucefast Says:

      I highly doubt your thesis here. Consider this,
      > If there are specific methods of measuring the hydrogen induced brittleness of steel, it seems difficult to believe that the phenomenon is invalid.
      > If hydrogen didn’t impregnate steel, how does it make it brittle?
      > If hydrogen impregnates steel, would it not come out the other side?

      A google search of Roy Mcalistar, and found virtually nothing on ww1 hydrogen storage. Were the tanks pressurized? If nothing else could get out, would hydrogen stay in at one atmosphere simply because nothing was trying to replace it?

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Mark – why I specified Copper or Brass:
      Alloys don’t follow a linear relationship of their mixtures, but if you look at buying stainless steel commercially they state how they’ve avoided Hydrogen being absorbed in it, so it’s a fair bet that Hydrogen is easily absorbed in it and also that it has bad effects on the ductility and other properties such as fatigue fracturing.
      Aluminium is good, and easy to work as well as easy to get hold of. For the wire, try (or a Canadian supplier if you can find one) if you can’t get an old toaster. Pure Nickel foil, if you want wider tapes and can cut the foil into tapes, is available at ridiculous costs (>$200 for a 2″ square) from a lab supplier. The Lexan shield can probably be bought in a chainsaw shop as the simplest head-shield.

  7. Simon Derricutt Says:

    Bruce – a few other thoughts. Since you don’t need that much Hydrogen, it’s probably easier to make it chemically rather than by electrolysis. Try dropping bits of scrap Aluminium into a solution of caustic soda (NaOH). Your collecting bottle needs to be full of water (or caustic soda solution) with no air at all in before you start collecting the Hydrogen. This can be a vigorous reaction if you make the solution too strong or put too much Aluminium in at one time, so you’ll need to practise a bit to get the quantities right.

    Lexan polycarbonate is also sold for the sacrificial shields for arc-welding visors, and you can probably buy a few dozen of these for a few dollars – may be cheaper than getting a head-shield helmet and cutting what you want.

    It may be useful to try to get a thermocouple interface that will give you better than 0.1°C resolution and accuracy, and to use shielded thermocouple wires to stop stray AC hum pickup. Temperature measurement will be the most difficult bit to get right. Calibrating the thermocouples just before a run will be essential to get good results as they vary a little bit each time you plug them in. To get the best results, you need to reduce the heat-dissipation capability of the container (so that a small difference in heating power translates to a larger difference in temperature) by keeping the outsides free of projections and maybe using an insulating coat, though of course variations in the insulation between the two containers will give you a systematic error you’ll have to cancel out by swapping the contents of the containers.

    • brucefast Says:

      Thanks, Simon. This is very helpful. I love the aluminum/caustic soda approach as I can get both of those items easily enough.

      My general plan is to place the LENR device in a container with a fixed volume of water. I then plan to time how long it takes to increase the temperature by a fixed amount (say 10c). I plan a few other controls, such as having the water container kept at a controlled temperature of about 1/2 way between the bottom and top temperatures (If I keep it in a 20c room, and heat it from 15c to 25c the gains/losses from the room should pretty much cancel.) In addition, I think that I will have the water container insulated. I also believe that I will need to agitate or stir the water to keep its temperature constant at all corners. Hopefully with these controls I should be able to get a valid measurement with a 0.1 precision thermometer (which are easy to come by).

      If I can’t get enough LENR to measure with this sort of rig, then I think that the approach might be more than is feasible as a simple kit.

  8. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    There has been some speculation that some form of potassium might be a catalyst for NiH LENR.

    A gentleman by the name of John Downs just suggested that a safer hydrogen source for the E-Cat might be Potassium Formate or Cesium Formate. John Downs is the Formate Manager at Cabot Chemicals. Both Cesium Formate and Potassium Formate are used in the oil drilling industry. Potassium Formate is sometimes used as a road or runway de-icer. It’s fairly inexpensive, about $95/kg, but is listed as a hazmat and is sold only to labs and businesses.

    Downs claims that both of these formates are known to cause hydrogen penetration into nickel, and such penetration is controlled by temperature.

    John Downs
    May 6th, 2012 at 1:58 PM
    Dear Andrea – Your E-Cat reactors may run better using potassium formate or cesium formate solutions (i.e. water-based liquids) as the source of hydrogen. Both of these formate solutions are known to inject (charge) nickel with atomic hydrogen when heated, and will generate a steady flow of hydrogen into the nickel powder in the E-Cat. The rate of hydrogen insertion into the nickel can be controlled by the temperature, and any excess hydrogen produced in the reactor will raise the pressure and move the reaction equilibrium back towards formate. You could rent out (lease) the formate solutions to your E-cat users ( I guess you are leasing out your E-cat reactors too, like a car rental business ?) and take them back for regeneration after a certain amount of time/depletion. This could be a much better, simpler and safer process than messing around with pressurised hydrogen. The formate solutions are non-hazardous, “green”, safe to handle and available in kilotonne quantities. I am a formate specialist. For further information about formate solutions, and their use as safe liquid sources of hydrogen, contact :

    • Bob Says:

      Iggy, this seems like it might work if increasing Hydrogen dampens the reaction. That’s no a given to me. There may be more of a Gaussian response to temperature. It’s an interesting approach that may work, but my gut feel is that things are more complex than this and will need to be controlled explicitly. No much science, just an opinion.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Iggy and Bob – This actually looks like a very intelligent idea, if it does what John Downs says. With Rossi, the reaction will start to work at around 200°C, above the melting-point of Potassium Formate but I can’t find the details of the temperature at which it starts to decompose and thus donate Hydrogen. Since Downs suggests using it as a solution, it wouldn’t work in Rossi’s reactors (they run dry) but could be a help in Brillouin’s wet boiler design or in a cavitation design.

      Maybe another example of the benefits of open-source, where people round the world try to find solutions to problems.

  9. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    High Speed Materials Testing

    • Bob Says:

      Interesting, this looks like what NASA is trying to do with their 64 grid blocks with different material. The key is getting the right test conditions to test for the right response.

  10. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    If this new water spitting idea works and if we can get CF up to 850°C.

  11. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Jaro Jaro Theory:

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Looks like Rossi can’t keep his methods secret – they’ll figure it out on Vortex.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Simon, I figured out that CVD = chemical vapor deposition,
        but what does Jaro refer to when he speaks of CNTs?

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Bob got there first. I hadn’t worked out CVD though. Thanks.

        Their argument does seem to hang together, though. It also means that Rossi is probably using dusty plasma, so microwaves rather than just sparks (possibly instead of sparks). It makes the start-up time at least understandable, if he has to grow the nanotubes each time.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Aha! Carbon NanoTubes.

      • Bob Says:

        I think CNT is referring to Carbon Nano Tubes, which was part of the discussion. Not sure where they got onto CNT though, that’s some real Sherlock Holmes work if he picked it up from Rossi.

  12. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    via vortex

    Lucky Saint · 37 weeks ago
    No. Take 2 copper disks size of a penny. Put a dent in one. Mix ultra fine magnesium hydride soft iron powder and nickel powder in equal portions. Make sure ALL ball milling, preparation and procedures are strictly inert atmosphere and dry box manipulations. Compress a portion of the mix to a small pill which fits easily into the disk indentation. Seal the chamber, welding with jeweler’s tools. Place reactor in a small beaker with water. Place on top of induction coil heating unit. Cause the water to boil from heat induced by alternating magnetic field. Once boiling, turn off the induction heater. Keep adding water as the boiling will continue by itself for ? years. Mine is still boiling after over 5 years.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Iggy – since you put this up I’ve been wondering how it works. I suspect that it might work better if the “inert atmosphere” was in fact Hydrogen, but it is one of those things that you can’t really say it works without testing it. The insistence on “inert” adds a bit of credence to this – too long a time in Oxygen atmosphere tends to oxidise the material away once you reach nano-dimensions (pyrophoric). Something to play with when one of us has some free time (and a ball-mill).

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Simon, no catalyst is mentioned….so is it magnesium?
        Why copper? For its heat sink ability, or does it
        contribute to the nuclear reaction. Is a disc the
        best shape or would a bead or sphere be better?
        Do you think the liberated hydrogen must be disassociated?

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Could a buckyball be used for the container?

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Iggy – The Nickel is the catalyst, as is the Iron – why both is something I don’t know. Magnesium ought to be good as a lattice. Overall it just seems like too many bits are there. Copper is good at resisting Hydrogen percolation, so any Hydrogen in there (released by heating the Magnesium Hydride) should stay there rather than just disappear – Aluminium should be almost as good, as should Brass (though harder to peen over and seal).

        It’s one of those things I can’t really see working, but then that applies to the rest of LENR based on older theory. If it does work, I think that the shape is not that critical except for heat-dissipation needs – could be why it’s a pair of disks.

        If it really keeps going for 5 years+, then that’s a lot of energy. It’s also a long time not to take a holiday, since you need to keep the water topped up.

  13. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    NASA & Boeing seem to consider LENR a comer and are actively studying various heat engine designs to best harness LENR energy to propel aircraft. See pages 82 – 86.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Thanks Iggy. It looks like they’re simply following Rossi, since they are saying the Ni-H reaction produces Copper. The longer Rossi takes to get there, the longer that 2013 start date starts moving, too. At least they’ve got other heat sources lined up….

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        I’ve a hunch that NASA and some other US Govt agencies know much more about Rossi’s progress than he’s revealed publicly….and another hunch that Rossi & Obama will pop an “October Surprise” announcement.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        A discouraging word:

        Andrea Rossi
        July 22nd, 2012 at 5:05 PM

        Dear Paolo:
        The certification for the domestic apparatus will take much more time.
        Warm Regards,

      • Bob Says:

        This is very discouraging. I have gotten UL approval in the past and it always took about 2 months. Curious how long it took others.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        I wonder if this is the “establishment’s” way of limiting the economic disruption that would be caused by both industrial and domestic E-Cats being released simultaneously?

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Iggy – the disruption will take off pretty slowly, since there’s only going to be a certain manufacturing capability initially. It’ll take 5 years before the major effects start to be seen.

        Meantime it seems that cheap energy is really needed in the Western economies, and that the disruption is going to be well-compensated by the advantages – it makes no sense to delay such a thing (not that government edicts always make sense…). Could be they are thinking out how to tax it effectively, though, and thus delaying it a bit. It makes more sense to me that the technology isn’t actually into UL yet, and UL aren’t going to say one way or the other.

        NASA and other TLAs probably know more than is revealed, but judging by the Boeing .pdf, if they do they’re also keeping pretty shtum about it. My feeling is that there are still control and manufacturing yield issues that remain a problem before a mass roll-out can occur.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Yeah, I guess that sometimes lab results are difficult to duplicate with mass production.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      Simon, is 1,000° C sufficient to power a hot-air turbine? Could E-Cat heat-exchangers replace the combustion chambers in a jet engine?

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Iggy – assume input air at 300K, output air at 1300K, so at constant pressure you have around 4.3 times the volume when you heat the air. Any reasonable turbine can use this – hot air or steam makes little difference. Jet engines run around this temperature (using things like single-crystal turbine blades that can take the heat) so replacing the burning-chamber with a heat-exchanger will happily drive the engine.

        At this temperature, though, Nickel is going to be softening and will start to sinter at around 600°C, so any Nickel dust (nano or micro) will clump together fairly quickly. If he’s got that temperature, he’s using Carbon and possibly Tungsten, but not Nickel.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        If he’s got that temperature, he’s using Carbon and possibly Tungsten, but not Nickel.

        That’s what I was thinking.

        Below is an informative link posted on ecatworld by GED. Tables 3.2 and 3.3 give the various lattice and atomic dimensions for various metals including nickel and tungsten.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Also some discussions on Osmium, which I’d never even considered – way too rare to be mass-production unless there’s a way to make it (using LENR…). Might be a good demo system, though.

      • Bob Says:

        Iggy – Sandia Labs in Denver has done a lot of work on CO2 turbines that look promising for turbo jets. They use it in a closed system under high pressure with the lower CO2 temperature giving big expansion compared to air.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Bob, I agree that CO2 would be better than air, but for jet propulsion i.e. aviation, you’re dealing with ram air.

        Simon, here’s another paper on the heat/mechanical properties of metals, posted by Axil Axil on vortex:

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        If you used a CO2 turbo to propel a plane, wouldn’t you need it to drive a prop?

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        July 23rd, 2012 at 1:19 PM

        Dr Rossi,

        Would the E-Cat process work for other elements (carbon, tungsten) for the sake of having a higher melting temperature with which to work?

        All the best,
        Andrea Rossi
        July 23rd, 2012 at 4:00 PM

        Dear Joe:
        My Friend, you always put questions I am not allowed to answer to!
        Warm Regards,

      • Bob Says:

        Iggy – I think they are looking at turning the turbo fans with the CO2 and heat the air giving it thrust. I think this is what Boeing is looking at doing. I haven’t payed a lot of attention as I want to see LENR work well before spending much time

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Iggy – if there’s any enclosed heat engine, running a cycle on a working fluid, then it will need to run some sort of fan to get it to produce thrust for an aircraft. Even a jet engine has fans and turbines to make it work. The only other way is a ramjet, where it has to have moving air to produce the working pressure, then heat the gas to give a higher volume of that pressure out the back end.

        In that Boeing/NASA file, they also discuss various forms of propeller, with the contra-rotating pair coming out well since it reduces the twist on the airstream behind it so doesn’t cause as much problem with the flying surfaces. It seems to me that a dual-engine approach may be useful – propellers of some sort to get up to speed then ramjets once it gets fast enough – the ramjets will be a bit more efficient and will also not produce twist on the airstream. Less problems with volcanic dust, too.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        One more oddball jet type…the pulse jet, which powered the infamous German Buzz-Bomb. Only one moving part, the intake valve, a shutter (like a venetian blind) which acts as a check-valve. The pulse jet has great power, excellent fuel economy, and is cheap to build, but is extremely noisy and the valve lacks durability.!

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Here’s a pulse jet RC model in flight.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Iggy – I can’t think of any way to get a pulsejet running with LENR, since it needs the cycling to make it work. I also watched the video of a valveless pulsejet working – pretty impressive and no moving parts but probably not that efficient. Ramjets would work OK, though, once you have 1000°C or so to play with.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 66 other followers

%d bloggers like this: