MFMP Seeks Help With Bill of Materials for E-Cat Replication

This was posted by Bob Greenyer of the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project on the Replication Thread

Can you help us make a BOM?

We are starting to put together a Bill of Materials (BOM) and wondered if you could help!

Here is the BOM so far

http://bit.ly/1tNvEm8

A tip for what else might be needed is here

http://bit.ly/1weo4kH

We’ll also need some angle iron and bolts for a support frame and some radiation detectors etc. post what you think we need, where to get it from and cost.

  • Otto1923

    You know, one very valuable mode of exploration for MFMP with this setup would be to test out the many ways that have been suggested for producing fraudulent results, for instance heating, isotope production, etc

  • Dr. Mike

    ronzonni,
    The “electromagnetic pulses” are barely mentioned in the “Introduction”.
    Dr. Mike

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Replicating the effect is much more important than replicating the E-Cat, as long as the replication can be replicated by others.

  • Obvious

    Rossi used to have a very old man make the nickel charge for him. More recently IH is able to make it themselves. The particle size and shape seem to be as important as the actual composition.

  • Bernie777

    MFMP and Admin……Please do not call the MFMP test a “replication” or “duplication” of Rossi’s E-Cat tests or the third party E-Cat tests. It is an LENR test using the third party test results as a guide. Negative results could be very unfair and detrimental to the E-Cat, not unlike the F & P fiasco.

    • Daniel Maris

      If so, IH have only themselves to blame. There are many ways they could confirm the crediblity of the E Cat without compromising their IP. If it puts pressure on them to be more open, that can only be to the good.

      • Bernie777

        I agree they are doing a terrible job of publicity but maybe they have other considerations we are not aware of.

        • jousterusa

          IH has the device, and can manufacture it in working condition for customers, who can use it to save themselves a ton of money. That’s all that Rossi wants, so whether they replicate really or subtly or almost doesn’t matter except, perhaps, to posterity.

          • Bernie777

            It matters on how fast LENR is introduced and how fast it replaces fossil fuel.

    • Obvious

      The MFMP tests are conceptual replications, not an exact copy. The more subtly different ways that the excess heat is obtained, the greater the scales tip towards whether it is proof of the effect, cumulatively. Presumably, an exact replication would leave us with exactly the same unanswered questions that we already have.

      • Bernie777

        You are right, of course, it is a conceptual, but I am concerned about the practical implications of negative publicity, should their test be negative. MFMP tests are no different than hundreds of other LENR tests that have been preformed which detected excess heat. They should not call it a duplication of an E-Cat.

        • Obvious

          I get your point. Perhaps an “attempted replication of the Rossi Effect”, rather than a “replication of the E-Cat”, is a better wording.

  • psi2u2

    Very valid considerations, Bob!

  • Axil Axil

    For many reasons, there is major reluctance from many quarters to believe the Calorimeter remote sensor based acquisition data provided by the 6 professors.

    I suggest the use of an Air Flow Calorimeter with a computer interface installed as a useful LENR capability to develop.

    This is how it is built

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZKDqWQNEdw

    Here is how the software looks

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eAtki8LjQU

    • Bob Greenyer

      Please see latest post

      https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject

      I think a live and a dummy side by side with same input power and a scanning pyrometer specifically engineered to see correct temperatures from Alumina and a overview thermal imager would be able to determine if one was a lot hotter

      • Ophelia Rump

        Just boil off a large quantity of water. Then calculate BTUs.
        Dummy run the same quantity to get the efficiency of the rig.

        Elegant primitive for the win!

        • Axil Axil

          The early Rossi demo’s were plagued with the wet steam problem. In their Demo. DGT boiled off the water but only counted that steam as 100C water in there COP calculations. This was still not acceptable by many.

        • US_Citizen71

          I like your idea but I would go further. Make two identical setups for boiling water. The setups would be closed loop, with the steam produced run through a condenser and collected in separate large flat bottomed flasks that are each sitting on a digital scale accurate to .1g or better. The water supply for the condensers can be run off the same input via a T. Equal calibration of the flow can be shown by filing two large containers at the same time. Run one with the dummy and one with an active cell. This way power in, temperature measurements and the weight of condensed water can be plotted live side by side.

      • Axil Axil

        This won’t give you the COP

    • Ophelia Rump

      If it were for any other purpose it would be an excellent idea.
      A novel testing method would be a novelty, not an attraction.

    • Omega Z

      Devils Advocate.
      How do we know your device works as said?
      How do we know your device is properly calibrated?
      We demand it be built by 3rd party unknown to you.
      OK, It works. But there is no accepted theory. So-
      How do we know you didn’t design a trick into it?
      You think LENR may be real. Your biased.
      We need years to study this device.

      IH/Rossi just need to build a few working plants for customers.
      Let Science catch up latter. Those who try to suppress this technology are few, but they control the Ivory Towers.

  • the_solist

    Better High temperature camera:
    http://www.ebay.com/itm/Flir-T400-Infrared-Thermal-Imaging-Camera-320-X-240IR-T300-360-Upgraded-to-2000C-/221581907334?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item33974f9586

    I would also go for a better power analyzer, either a good scientific one or a Fluke:
    http://en-us.fluke.com/products/power-quality-tools/

    As my friend Anders stated in one of my earlier posts, you should probably use a thicker resistance wire. I was looking for a mention of the wire thickness in the text but didn’t find it so I got a range from pixel analyses in Photoshop. It is clear from the images in the report that Rossi is using a wire around 3-4 mm (AWG 9-6). My guess would be AWG 8 or 3mm depending on the standard they use.

  • pierre

    i need to know what the setup costs are and the variable cost of each trial run, within 10% variance where possible

  • Alain Samoun

    As Mr.Moho said below,IH seems to be ready to work with certain entities like NGO. What is the status of MFMP? Can MFMP applies for an NGO status? Like “For advancement in science for not polluting new energies and…”. – Something like that?
    Whatever, I will send some money to MFMP.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Is it really necessary to start with those extremely expensive cameras? Perhaps it would be enough to use a digital IR thermometer in the initial phase, such as this one:

    http://ecat.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/HotCat-measure.jpg

    Determining a COP >> 1 does not require maximum accuracy. Maybe it would even be possible to borrow an IR camera in order to calibrate the thermometer.

  • Dr. Mike

    Bob,
    Good luck on your project. Your list is missing the “pulse generator” , which is mentioned in the “introduction” of the report, shown in the picture of the experimental set-up, but not shown in the electrical diagram. For each fuel mixture you try, you will need to run a matrix of pulse rates, pulse widths, and pulse amplitudes. You should check the literature published by others working on LENR to see if any hints are given that would help in setting the parameters for the pulses. (I remember something about the Ni lattice having a resonance at around 1MHz, but you should double check this.)
    Another suggestion would be to use Inconel for the heater wire, since it was specified that this mostly Ni based heater wire was used in the Rossi reactor. It would be an interesting experiment to build a second reactor with the Kanthal APM heater wire (which is a Fe-Cr-Al alloy) to see if the Inconel wire is an important parameter. (Note: There are many kinds of Inconel and the type was not specified in the report, but most are about 95% Ni.)
    Another parameter the may be key to getting the LENR to work is the temperature ramp rate for starting up the reactor. First the hydrogen must be released from the metal hydride- too fast of a ramp rate might not be good for the reactor. Also with Li known to be present in the reactor there is a good possibility that some of it is diffusing into the Ni during the ramp-up phase and thereby aiding the LENR reactions.
    One other thing you need to do before you start the experiment is verify that your Ni powder looks similar to that shown in the SEM photos in the report. The morphology of the powder is known to be a critical factor.
    Another consideration is make sure that the reactor you build is leak tight since if hydrogen leaks out after the reactor warms up you probably won’t see any LENR reactions. The feed-throughs for the heater wire and the thermocouple are going to be quite prone to leaks. You might want to include a port for pressurizing the reactor to verify there are no leaks before running any experiments. (The port could be removed and sealed before experiments start.)
    One final consideration is that it will likely be at least twice as hard to duplicate the second generation E-Cat as it would the first generation E-Cat. Rossi gathered a lot of knowledge on the the first generation E-Cat before he built the hot-Cat.
    Dr. Mike

  • Andreas Moraitis

    IH/Rossi have filed patent applications on their technology, including the „catalyst“. These files will become accessible to the public after 18 months. That means we will see them possibly in the second half of 2015. By the way, even if MFMP discovers the secret before the publication date, IH’s intellectual property would be protected by the “first to file” principle, provided that the patents will be granted.

  • Freethinker

    ” Is there information that MFMP has ….”

    Ever heard about Brian Ahern?

    I understand your point about a failed replication may be treated as indicative to the fact that the ECAT does not work. But right now that splash will not be so very big. When IH can readily offer products to customers, it will all be moot.

    • Mr. Moho

      From the IH press release:
      http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-has-acquired-andrea-rossis-e-cat-technology-241853361.html

      […] They have committed to make it broadly available because of its
      potential for impact. IH is considering partnerships with industry
      participants, universities and NGO’s to ensure the technology is
      developed in a thoughtful and responsible manner.[…]

      I would too suggest to at least try to contact them for more information about what they meant there.

      • Sanjeev

        Yes, no harm in taking some help from IH. But they will need to sign an NDA.
        Of course, the skeptics are going to twist it an consider MFMP as “friends” of IH. But if IH helps, it will cut the time to replicate to weeks instead of months or years.

        • Freethinker

          I’m just thinking, that even if it may speed things up, what would it mean for the openness of the project? What would it mean for any other experiments that they do, where there may be some contention about infringement or breakage of the the NDA?

          For sure, it would be good to get as much info as possible, but signing some NDA seem to me to be contrary to the spirit of the project.

          Still, Brian Ahern is associated with the team, and Rossi seem to hold him in some regard, http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=861&cpage=6#comment-1010924

          Maybe he has some insights that may make a quick replication possible without involing IH on a NDA level.

          • Ophelia Rump

            What is the “Spirit of the project”?

            • Freethinker

              That is a good question. And maybe I have a view that doesn’t fit the bill. But to me MFMP is about doing the experiments, openly and community supported.

              • Ophelia Rump

                Yes I got that and more from their website. I think they need to nail down the nitty gritty of their objectives, and non-objectives.
                It would be a shame for a noble cause to be driven off a cliff by yahoos!

        • clovis ray

          Hey, i posted this the other day ,hoping that Dr Rossi might caught it,

          With one exception, IH, did not want or need , publication of Dr Rossi’s find, and still don’t,, they will come out when they feel the need to. there is still work to be done, Dr. Rossi knows exactly what he is doing, better than anyone.
          MF/MF, in my opinion , are most likely to succeed, they need , money, if someone , knows how they can help with funds please do, while MIT has all the funding, we have to beg for hand outs, this is a shame, on earth.

          Dr. Rossi if you guys, want or need an independent open lab to reproduce your cat please consider, MF/MF, and if not, these young scientist, could use help, in order to continue their important work. hopefully your NDA has not totally gauged you, from teaching

    • ecatworld

      I don’t think any honest observer could take failure to replicate by the MFMP as proof that the E-Cat doesn’t work.

      MFMP does not have a roadmap — they are working from some known parameters and some that are unknown. They are looking for clues and will have to make assumptions about things that are not revealed.

      Also, they are not taking a ‘once and done’ approach. Their reactor design has a swappable core, so presumably they could be testing new recipes over a period of weeks, months, or even years.

      And yes, I realize I did say ‘honest’ observer.

      • Daniel Maris

        I think if MFMP come back and say “Not a flicker”, “dead as Dodo”, “nothing of interest” happened…then we might think the E Cat doesn’t work. But if they come back with say a COP of 1.1 and some interesting graph readings or effects, or there’s something unexpected about the ash, we may well think “Ah, well, Rossi is on to something, it’s just he’s learnt how to make it work well.”

        • artefact

          a failed experiment means nothing. Only that that exact recipe does not work.

          • Billy Jackson

            Edison’s myth of a 1000 light bulbs comes to mind. You can fail 999 times.. it only takes getting it right once…

            • Ophelia Rump

              I visited his workshops once. I will never forget, they looked like modified chicken coops in long rows. Heavy wooden shacks, and the attics were open to a walk way down the middle and anywhere you looked you could reach up and the attic was stuffed with every imaginable thing to use in trial and error brute force testing methodologies. I vividly remember being amazed how thick the sample of elephant leather was when the tour guide showed us. There was an impressive Library off the humble workshops and Edison had a cot in an alcove of the Library where he slept. His wife lived in the mansion up the hill. After seeing his workshop, I conclude that they really were dedicated to materials sciences as much as invention.

              • Billy Jackson

                that had to be an awesome experience.

      • clovis ray

        Might i add, that one thing that AR didn’t have that MF/MF has, that is all the great intelligent folks here on ECW to help, big difference, a thousand heads is better than one or two, lol

  • Billy Jackson

    I disagree with the statement that “This was due to MIT and others not knowing what they were doing” MIT Knew exactly what they were doing and intentionally fudged the test and the results.

  • Ged

    I understand your reasoning, but completely disagree. Replication, our own attempts, should never be held back except only in cases of safety. Trying is vital. We can learn just as much from failure as success, so do not fear it. In fact, we need to know the bounds of the system.

    We have all the knowledge to replicate. Even if we can’t get as high a COP as a fully self sustained reactor, it doesn’t matter. We know the parameters to test and we -must-. It is the only way to learn what is important or not and what role things like lithium, magnetic stimulation, and even zirconim play.

    Remember, we have knowledge from far more than just Rossi’s work, and it’s all finally coming together.

    This Rossi replication atempt is akin to the LENR holy grail. We must try!

  • Pierre

    Can you split the bom into fixed and variable…of course I didn’t look at it!

  • http://magicmusicandmore.com/ Barry S

    I think I can afford to fund the gram of nickel Bob.