Jones,
Do you feel the tubing is used to exchange heat between the
powder and the coolant? I had assumed the coolant was outside the reactor but
now must consider the tubing instead of external cooling or some combination of
both. [snip] The patent itself specifically mentions having copper tubing
internally, which is the likely source of the so-called "transmutation" copper
(which is non radioactive but it should have residual counts if Rossi was
correct in thinking it to be a decay product of nickel). The copper which he
documents is more likely via electro-migration from the interior tubing. Rossi
has given no indication that he understands electro-migration.[/snip]
Fran
From: Jones Beene [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 5:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Rossi on-line Q&A posted
Fran,
The patent itself specifically mentions having copper tubing internally, which
is the likely source of the so-called "transmutation" copper (which is non
radioactive but it should have residual counts if Rossi was correct in thinking
it to be a decay product of nickel). The copper which he documents is more
likely via electro-migration from the interior tubing. Rossi has given no
indication that he understands electro-migration.
The suggestion for thermistor heating (at least the possibility thereof) came
from me, not Rossi or the patent - and it was based on the lack of any obvious
means for temperature control back to the "blue box".
Thermistors, unlike ANY other form of heating that I know of (like resistance
tape heating) do NOT require dedicated thermocouple feedback... That is most
important, since thermistors can be controlled by monitoring their own
impedance characteristics, and this is often done in industrial situations,
whereas the lack of apparent control of temperature otherwise, is most
problematic.
IOW if "control of temperature" is of high importance, and it would seem to be
given the five separate controllers when tape would only require one (or two
for redundancy), then it could only be accomplished via a few limited ways
1) thermistors
2) tape-heaters plus thermocouples - in order to provide feedback
3) wireless controllers - but that is incompatible with lead shielding
4) There is control wiring visible !
Again there is zero, nada, no evidence of any kind of feedback connection, in
any of the photos or videos, so we must assume either thermistor heating, lack
of control, or carefully hidden wiring (or RF wireless control, which is
possible but doubtful).
Needless to say - if there is carefully concealed wiring from thermocouples or
RTDs - that is suspicious in itself as it indicates expertise in concealment.
Jones
From: Roarty, Francis X
My post never posted! I may have used
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> instead of
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> because it never showed up on
the forum. It was regarding 100g NI powder that Rossi says needs replacement
every 6 months. I was looking at a 100g calibration weight and a 1 L container
and realized just how lost this would become in the reactor. Even in powdered
form it would not fill much more than the bottom of the container. In
subsequent emails someone was saying they normally use 1KG of a support with a
small amount of nickel powder but can no longer find it on the forum.
Please help me understand the physical arrangement here, We have 5?
Thermistors separated in an 1100g mix of some support catalyst Zirconia? (1kg)
and Ni powder (100g) located in a hydrogen pressurized 1 L reactor. I take it
the metal reactor has some copper lining inside and is externally cooled by an
intermittent water pump. I was originally assuming the reactor immediately
turns any water to steam but in the second experiment with greater water flow
and only a 5 degree delta I have to ask if the reactor is immersed in the
coolant?
Regards
Fran
