OPEN SOURCE DIY LENR

Discussion in 'Home Power and Microgeneration' started by amdx, Apr 26, 2012.

  1. amdx

    amdx Guest

    amdx, Apr 26, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. amdx

    amdx Guest

    On 4/26/2012 2:20 PM, amdx wrote:
    > Here's a site that discusses an open source LENR design.
    >
    > http://e-catsite.com/2012/04/25/athanor-open-source-lenr-steps-forward/
    >
    > Here are the google translated (with someones translation corrections)
    > instructions to build one. (can be found in the link above)
    >
    > http://ecatsite.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/athanor-instructions1.pdf
    >
    > Mikek
    >
    >


    Don't ya just hate it when no one responds to your post?
    Even if it's just to call you a %$##&@ drip!
    Mikek :)
     
    amdx, Apr 30, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. amdx

    mike Guest

    On 4/29/2012 5:43 PM, amdx wrote:
    > On 4/26/2012 2:20 PM, amdx wrote:
    >> Here's a site that discusses an open source LENR design.
    >>
    >> http://e-catsite.com/2012/04/25/athanor-open-source-lenr-steps-forward/
    >>
    >> Here are the google translated (with someones translation corrections)
    >> instructions to build one. (can be found in the link above)
    >>
    >> http://ecatsite.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/athanor-instructions1.pdf
    >>
    >> Mikek
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Don't ya just hate it when no one responds to your post?
    > Even if it's just to call you a %$##&@ drip!
    > Mikek :)


    you provided ON-TOPIC information.
    you did NOT ask a question.
    you got no reples.
    BEST NEWSGROUP EVER!!!

    Be careful what you wish for ;-)
     
    mike, Apr 30, 2012
    #3
  4. amdx

    j Guest

    On 4/30/2012 12:29 AM, mike wrote:
    > On 4/29/2012 5:43 PM, amdx wrote:
    >> On 4/26/2012 2:20 PM, amdx wrote:
    >>> Here's a site that discusses an open source LENR design.
    >>>
    >>> http://e-catsite.com/2012/04/25/athanor-open-source-lenr-steps-forward/
    >>>
    >>> Here are the google translated (with someones translation corrections)
    >>> instructions to build one. (can be found in the link above)
    >>>
    >>> http://ecatsite.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/athanor-instructions1.pdf
    >>>
    >>> Mikek
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Don't ya just hate it when no one responds to your post?
    >> Even if it's just to call you a %$##&@ drip!
    >> Mikek :)

    >
    > you provided ON-TOPIC information.
    > you did NOT ask a question.
    > you got no reples.
    > BEST NEWSGROUP EVER!!!


    You don't always need a reply. Many of the "worst" threads are full of
    replies!

    The experiment is interesting, but beyond my means or desires. And there
    is little practical I can add. It appears that since this doesn't even
    have nickel that the reaction is totally within the hydrogen gas and the
    nickel in the LENR or the tungsten here is either a catalyst or a
    conductor.

    So,thanks. But I have nothing to add that would be helpful. Even my
    level of speculation is speculative!

    Like most here, I'm standing by.

    Jeff

    >
    > Be careful what you wish for ;-)
     
    j, Apr 30, 2012
    #4
  5. amdx

    amdx Guest


    >
    > So,thanks. But I have nothing to add that would be helpful.
    > Like most here, I'm standing by.
    >
    > Jeff


    Yes, "I'm standing by" is correct, I think I've been
    watching the E-cat/LENR saga for about 8 months now.
    I hope it is the new technology that drives the future.

    Mikek
     
    amdx, Apr 30, 2012
    #5
  6. amdx

    mike Guest

    On 4/30/2012 1:21 PM, Morris Dovey wrote:
    > On 4/30/12 2:44 PM, amdx wrote:
    >
    >>> So,thanks. But I have nothing to add that would be helpful.
    >>> Like most here, I'm standing by.
    >>>
    >>> Jeff

    >>
    >> Yes, "I'm standing by" is correct, I think I've been
    >> watching the E-cat/LENR saga for about 8 months now.
    >> I hope it is the new technology that drives the future.
    >>
    >> Mikek

    >
    > I'm not standing by, but neither am I exactly zooming. The ancillary
    > stuff needed to control pressure and temperature is still evolving, and
    > every time I manage to complete some part of it, I find a better way to
    > get the job done. Already the (updated) drawing on the web page has been
    > obsoleted (replaced by a simpler design that eliminates one of the
    > steppers and allows use of "wet" hydrogen).
    >
    > I've improved the pre-ignition heating algorithm to allow the software
    > to dynamically adjust the degree of "aggressiveness" of the heating, and
    > recently posted a plot of the family of heating power curves (shown as
    > duty-cycle percentage vs reactor temperature) and have been working on
    > smarter heat control.
    >
    > I'm pretty sure that a lot of people are going to have something working
    > before I do, but when I do get there I think my design will be less
    > expensive, safer, and more scalable in both directions.
    >
    > I appreciate the links. I don't really know enough yet to comment
    > meaningfully on other designs - but so far nearly everything I've seen
    > has been encouraging for me. :)
    >


    I just can't believe this stuff works.
    It's such a GAME CHANGER that anybody with a working system should/could
    provide a credible demonstration.

    Put it in a black box in my garage with armed guards.
    Power comes out in some form, heat, electricity, radiation.
    Any idiot with a stopwatch, thermometer and a milk jug of water
    can tell if it puts out more energy than known processes of the same
    mass. We're talking about HUGE relative energy output.
    Shouldn't be hard
    to measure at all. Accuracy is irrelevant if it's huge.

    All this obfuscation smells, but it don't quack.
     
    mike, Apr 30, 2012
    #6
  7. amdx

    j Guest

    On 4/30/2012 7:09 PM, Morris Dovey wrote:
    > On 4/30/12 4:18 PM, mike wrote:
    >
    >> I just can't believe this stuff works. It's such a GAME CHANGER that
    >> anybody with a working system should/could provide a credible
    >> demonstration.

    >
    > If you're really all that impatient, why don't /you/ give it a try?
    >
    >> Put it in a black box in my garage with armed guards. Power comes out
    >> in some form, heat, electricity, radiation. Any idiot with a
    >> stopwatch, thermometer and a milk jug of water can tell if it puts
    >> out more energy than known processes of the same mass. We're talking
    >> about HUGE relative energy output. Shouldn't be hard to measure at
    >> all. Accuracy is irrelevant if it's huge.

    >
    > Agreed - but when it comes right down to it, only an idiot (or a
    > suicidal maniac) would do what you describe.
    >
    >> All this obfuscation smells, but it don't quack.

    >
    > Duck soup: All you need is a 5" piece of 1" steel pipe with a
    > hydrogen-tight cap for each end. Drill and tap the pipe for a
    > hydrogen-tight fitting for attachment of a hydrogen supply line. Install
    > one of the caps, put an ounce and three quarters of filamentary nickel
    > nanopowder inside the pipe, and install the other end cap.


    I see this somewhat differently. It looks to me that it requires a
    current flow. There are anodes and cathodes in all these that you see
    details for.

    Here is something from a dozen years ago:

    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ArataYanomalousp.pdf

    As far as being a useful device, it depends on what for and how
    efficient it is. A low COP is useful for heating, but not useful for
    generating power. If the efficiency of your thermal engine/generator is
    25%, you would need a COP of 4 to break even. And electricity is not a
    cheap energy source. Figures I saw ran around a COP of 6 for the best
    models.

    On the other hand, I think that you Morris, will make the most progress
    of us all. I'm excited...

    Jeff

    >
    > Cooking the duck: Remove all air and moisture from inside the pipe and
    > fill it with hydrogen at, say, 250 psi (I'd suggest disconnecting the
    > hydrogen supply when that's been done) - and heat the pipe to a uniform
    > 200ËšC with your homeowner-type propane torch. I wouldn't expect the
    > pressure to exceed 500 psi, but I don't have any experience on which to
    > base that expectation. Still, how much can a little increase in pressure
    > really matter?
    >
    > If all goes well, the pipe will stay hot for some number of hours
    > (perhaps 3-5) after you stopped applying heat. It may even continue to
    > get hotter in which case the pressure will continue to rise. (I hope
    > your pipe doesn't quack!)
    >
    > If you'll send me a photo of your ready-to-go test reactor, I'll send
    > you a couple of ounces of nickel powder.
    >
    > If you prefer that someone else do the work and take the risk in your
    > stead, then you'll just have to live with /their/ schedule, or lack
    > thereof. :)
    >
     
    j, May 1, 2012
    #7
  8. amdx

    mike Guest

    On 4/30/2012 10:37 PM, Morris Dovey wrote:
    > On 4/30/12 7:57 PM, j wrote:
    >
    >> I see this somewhat differently. It looks to me that it requires a
    >> current flow. There are anodes and cathodes in all these that you see
    >> details for.
    >>
    >> Here is something from a dozen years ago:
    >>
    >> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ArataYanomalousp.pdf
    >>
    >> As far as being a useful device, it depends on what for and how
    >> efficient it is. A low COP is useful for heating, but not useful for
    >> generating power. If the efficiency of your thermal engine/generator
    >> is 25%, you would need a COP of 4 to break even. And electricity is
    >> not a cheap energy source. Figures I saw ran around a COP of 6 for
    >> the best models.

    >
    > There appear to have been a whole train of "hints" along the way that
    > some kind of LENR is possible. The Arata and Zhang report would appear
    > to fall into that category - but, until Rossi, I didn't see anything
    > that looked as if it might be other than a lab curiosity.
    >
    > The physics folks are now guessing that a Ni/H LENR /should/ be able to
    > produce something like 3,000,000 times as much energy as would be
    > produced by burning that same amount of hydrogen in an oxygen-rich
    > environment. I have no way of knowing whether that's true, but if it is
    > I think all discussions of COP become irrelevant.
    >
    >> On the other hand, I think that you Morris, will make the most
    >> progress of us all. I'm excited...

    >
    > Everyone needs at least a little excitement in their life; and I'm
    > flattered that you would say that - but I sincerely hope that, once the
    > real physics folks gain a little traction, my own efforts will fade to
    > insignificance.
    >
    > From my perspective, the trial Mike wanted has already been done in
    > Italy. Rossi has not been as forthcoming as any of us would have liked,
    > but that's his choice, and his alone, to make.
    >
    > It was pure coincidence that just as I needed a compact, high-output
    > heat source for testing a new solar generator design, Rossi announced to
    > the world that he had a new <drum roll, please> compact, high-output
    > heat source...
    >
    > Rossi has provided (sometimes unintentionally) a fairly interesting
    > trail of hints. Some of these have been explicit, and some have to do
    > with what he doesn't do. He said at one point that he had an explosion
    > at start-up and in all of his demonstrations that I've seen on video, he
    > connects up the hydrogen supply and brings the system up to pressure -
    > and then disconnects the hydrogen line before applying heat. If you've
    > been following his work, you may have noticed that the demonstrations
    > have been limited to about four and a half hours - which I'm guessing to
    > be the amount of time that initial charge of hydrogen lasts before the
    > system is (literally) out of gas.
    >
    > I don't think Rossi would disconnect the hydrogen supply without having
    > good reason for doing so.
    >
    > I may be reading too much into this, bit I'm not very enthusiastic about
    > having even a low-energy nuclear reactor explode right beside me. I'm
    > pretty sure that I can design (and maybe build) a combination control
    > and data acquisition system to eliminate the danger of an explosion and,
    > at the same time, acquire the most detailed reactor behavioral data yet.
    >
    > I apologize for being a bit rough on Mike - I really don't think we can
    > yet do a safe garage test - and if it turns out that these things
    > actually can produce 3,000,000 times the energy of a small chemical
    > explosion, you'd taking some serious chances - and for what gain?
    >


    There's always an excuse to follow the previous excuse that follows.....
    Ok, I'll grant you some slack on the risk. But the concept is the same.
    You don't need a megawatt demonstration behind the curtain.
    All you need is a small scale that continuously produces a LOT more
    power than
    you can get from any known combustion process of the same mass.
    It can be in a black box, but I gotta see all around it and measure
    what goes in and out. You don't need to know anything about what's
    going on inside the box.

    But what do we get??? A HUGE pile of pipes and tanks. A test that
    runs for a very short time with no oversight on the ins and outs.
    And the big elephant in the room...that boxcar sized generator running
    next to it.

    If you had a credible demo, you'd have to hire an army to keep away
    the investors with boxcars full of development cash.

    This is a GAME CHANGER. Whoever makes it work will make a bazillion
    dollars and possibly save the world. Statues will be erected.
    Yet, we still got nothin' but excuses and futures.

    I have this recurrent dream of the ghost of Stanley Meyers driving
    his water-powered car in the free-energy parade with Rossi ridin' shotgun.

    I hope it works.
    I expect something like this will eventually work.
    I wouldn't invest a dime in the current crop of people telling tall tales.

    This testing whether it works is not rocket science. Any idiot can
    do it. I'll supply the thermometer and the water. All you gotta
    do is show up with the demo.
    Convince me it works, and I'll break out that dime and 10e7 more of 'em.
     
    mike, May 1, 2012
    #8
  9. amdx

    Jim Wilkins Guest

    "Morris Dovey" <> wrote in message
    news:jnnsqh$p4r$...
    > .. I may be reading too much into this, bit I'm not very
    > enthusiastic about having even a low-energy nuclear reactor explode
    > right beside me. I'm pretty sure that I can design (and maybe build)
    > a combination control and data acquisition system to eliminate the
    > danger of an explosion and, at the same time, acquire the most
    > detailed reactor behavioral data yet.
    >
    > I apologize for being a bit rough on Mike - I really don't think we
    > can yet do a safe garage test - and if it turns out that these
    > things actually can produce 3,000,000 times the energy of a small
    > chemical explosion, you'd taking some serious chances - and for what
    > gain?
    >
    > --
    > Morris Dovey


    You might consider exposing this project on rec.crafts.metalworking to
    gain the benefit of the participants' very considerable experience in
    metal fabrication and computerized industrial controls, and science
    and technology in general. Read it first, though, as r.c.m can be MUCH
    nastier than this group.

    jsw
     
    Jim Wilkins, May 1, 2012
    #9
  10. amdx

    Jim Wilkins Guest

    "Morris Dovey" <> wrote in message
    news:jnp69q$nb$...
    > On 5/1/12 11:23 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
    > I'm not quite sure when it happened, but at one point I realized
    > that if I ever had to do a software project bigger than I could
    > handle alone, my dream team would be made up of the nastiest of the
    > bunch. Funny how that works. :)
    > Morris Dovey


    You should see me bash neo-nazi myths of the secret technology that
    coulda/shoulda won them the war.

    Brilliant curmudgeons:
    http://www.tinaja.com/
    http://www.jerrypournelle.com/jerrypournelle.c/chaosmanor/
    And the creator of "The Big Bang Theory"
    http://www.chucklorre.com/

    jsw
    Still an amateur curmudgeon.
     
    Jim Wilkins, May 1, 2012
    #10
  11. amdx

    j Guest

    On 5/1/2012 1:25 PM, Morris Dovey wrote:
    > On 5/1/12 11:23 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
    >

    <snip>
    > Before that I spent close to a decade as a regular on comp.lang.c -
    > which is/was useful precisely because there was no tolerance for error
    > or failure to RTFM / STFW, etc.


    All of the comp.lang don't suffer fools. I would imagine that
    comp.lang.c would be the toughest. comp.lang.perl had an insult bot
    , so I can imagine what c was like!

    Jeff


    I'm not quite sure when it happened, but
    > at one point I realized that if I ever had to do a software project
    > bigger than I could handle alone, my dream team would be made up of the
    > nastiest of the bunch. Funny how that works. :)
    >
     
    j, May 1, 2012
    #11
  12. amdx

    j Guest

    On 5/1/2012 1:37 AM, Morris Dovey wrote:
    > On 4/30/12 7:57 PM, j wrote:
    >
    >> I see this somewhat differently. It looks to me that it requires a
    >> current flow. There are anodes and cathodes in all these that you see
    >> details for.
    >>
    >> Here is something from a dozen years ago:
    >>
    >> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ArataYanomalousp.pdf
    >>
    >> As far as being a useful device, it depends on what for and how
    >> efficient it is. A low COP is useful for heating, but not useful for
    >> generating power. If the efficiency of your thermal engine/generator
    >> is 25%, you would need a COP of 4 to break even. And electricity is
    >> not a cheap energy source. Figures I saw ran around a COP of 6 for
    >> the best models.

    >
    > There appear to have been a whole train of "hints" along the way that
    > some kind of LENR is possible. The Arata and Zhang report would appear
    > to fall into that category - but, until Rossi, I didn't see anything
    > that looked as if it might be other than a lab curiosity.
    >
    > The physics folks are now guessing that a Ni/H LENR /should/ be able to
    > produce something like 3,000,000 times as much energy as would be
    > produced by burning that same amount of hydrogen in an oxygen-rich
    > environment. I have no way of knowing whether that's true, but if it is
    > I think all discussions of COP become irrelevant.


    As long as you have to put energy in COP is important. After a certain
    point it won't matter much.

    >
    >> On the other hand, I think that you Morris, will make the most
    >> progress of us all. I'm excited...

    >
    > Everyone needs at least a little excitement in their life; and I'm
    > flattered that you would say that - but I sincerely hope that, once the
    > real physics folks gain a little traction, my own efforts will fade to
    > insignificance.
    >
    > From my perspective, the trial Mike wanted has already been done in
    > Italy. Rossi has not been as forthcoming as any of us would have liked,
    > but that's his choice, and his alone, to make.
    >
    > It was pure coincidence that just as I needed a compact, high-output
    > heat source for testing a new solar generator design, Rossi announced to
    > the world that he had a new <drum roll, please> compact, high-output
    > heat source...
    >
    > Rossi has provided (sometimes unintentionally) a fairly interesting
    > trail of hints. Some of these have been explicit, and some have to do
    > with what he doesn't do. He said at one point that he had an explosion
    > at start-up and in all of his demonstrations that I've seen on video, he
    > connects up the hydrogen supply and brings the system up to pressure -
    > and then disconnects the hydrogen line before applying heat. If you've
    > been following his work, you may have noticed that the demonstrations
    > have been limited to about four and a half hours - which I'm guessing to
    > be the amount of time that initial charge of hydrogen lasts before the
    > system is (literally) out of gas.


    Wikipedia has hydrogen burning as 61,000 BTU/lb multiply that by 3
    million and you have an enormous amount of energy for even a tiny amount
    of hydrogen.


    >
    > I don't think Rossi would disconnect the hydrogen supply without having
    > good reason for doing so.


    It would seem that more hydrogen would be unneeded.

    >
    > I may be reading too much into this, bit I'm not very enthusiastic about
    > having even a low-energy nuclear reactor explode right beside me. I'm
    > pretty sure that I can design (and maybe build) a combination control
    > and data acquisition system to eliminate the danger of an explosion and,
    > at the same time, acquire the most detailed reactor behavioral data yet.



    I think the key is to keep the oxydizers out.

    I'm thinking the pressure is not key. From the outline posted at the top
    of this thread, it looks like a fusion vacuum tube. The heat is there
    for similar reasons that you have a heater in a tube's cathode.
    Alternatively it could be a strong magnetic field. The containment
    appears to be glass.
    >
    > I apologize for being a bit rough on Mike -


    Didn't bother me at all. Of course, I'm not Mike!

    I really don't think we can
    > yet do a safe garage test - and if it turns out that these things
    > actually can produce 3,000,000 times the energy of a small chemical
    > explosion, you'd taking some serious chances - a



    nd for what gain?

    Form what I can gather this is a heisenberg uncertain kind of thing. You
    have a normal pattern of probabilities and then you have the low
    percentage one that is at the edge that "fuses". The key is to ratchet
    up the low probability... so more rare fusions take place. I don't see
    this as a runaway event. It doesn't look like fission where it multiplies.

    Now adding pressure has it's own risk, but I don't think you will need
    as much as you expect.

    Jeff
    >
     
    j, May 1, 2012
    #12
  13. amdx

    j Guest

    On 5/1/2012 2:55 PM, Morris Dovey wrote:
    > On 5/1/12 1:36 PM, j wrote:
    >
    >> All of the comp.lang don't suffer fools. I would imagine that
    >> comp.lang.c would be the toughest. comp.lang.perl had an insult bot
    >> , so I can imagine what c was like!

    >
    > It was strict enough for one of the regulars to call Dennis Ritchie out
    > for being off-topic, although there was a smiley attached to the post.
    >
    > [ For non-programmers, Dennis designed the C language and wrote its
    > first compiler - which was then used to produce the first version of
    > Unix. ]
    >


    :)

    That is very funny!!!!
     
    j, May 1, 2012
    #13
  14. amdx

    Jim Wilkins Guest

    "Morris Dovey" <> wrote in message
    news:jnpmiq$cqs$...
    > ...
    > Any moisture in the system could be a problem, since water's vapor
    > pressure skyrockets when heat is added - and I don't have any
    > control over how "dry" my hydrogen is going to be. This becomes an
    > entirely different problem from eliminating oxidizers.


    Only if liquid water is present. The vapor acts about like any other
    gas.
    Calcium Chloride (sidewalk deicer) is an effective dessicant after you
    heat-dry it to constant weight. You can buy pressure-tight dessicant
    cannisters to screw into air hoses for spray painting.

    jsw
     
    Jim Wilkins, May 1, 2012
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Adrian de los Santos

    Open Collector, open what ??

    Adrian de los Santos, Mar 8, 2004, in forum: Electronic Basics
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    585
    Adrian de los Santos
    Mar 8, 2004
  2. selva

    open collector and open drain

    selva, Apr 26, 2010, in forum: General Electronics Chat
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    967
    selva
    Apr 26, 2010
  3. sno

    More on rossi cold fusion/lenr.....

    sno, Jan 5, 2012, in forum: Home Power and Microgeneration
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    409
  4. sno

    More on rossi/lenr rf generator 17Jan2K12

    sno, Jan 18, 2012, in forum: Home Power and Microgeneration
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    375
  5. Simmon

    Open collector buffers VS Non Open Collector Buffers

    Simmon, Mar 6, 2014, in forum: General Electronics Chat
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    280
Loading...

Share This Page