Jack Cole Reports Reactor Meltdown in Experiment (Update: Finds Parkhomov-like Pattern in Testing)

UPDATE: Thanks to artefact for finding this interesting comment made by Jack Cole on his LENR-Cold Fusion website (see comment on March 28th here: http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/2015/03/26/promising-results-parkhomov-experiment/)

Jack writes:

“The work has been ongoing. I have had some good results, but did not want to report them until I was certain. I have been using LAH instead of alternative hydrogen sources recently. I had a recent experiment that demonstrated the same pattern as Parkhomov’s results. Decreasing power maintained a higher temperature at 1130 to 1200C. Basically, it took ~77W to maintain 1000C, but only 55-60 to maintain 1130C. Also, took ~77W to maintain 1200C (the same as 1000C). The alumina tube melted through where the fuel was in the tube. Anyway, I need to be able to repeat this to be fully convinced. My alumina tube quality is a problem, which I think will reduce the reproducibility.”

Jack Cole of LENR-Coldfusion.com website, who has been involved in experimenting with Parkhomov-style LENR reactors, has reported today on the vortex-l mailing list that in an experiment he carried out yesterday, a reactor made of 95 per cent alumina went into a meltdown state. Picture is below:

meltedalumina
Source: LENR-Coldfusion.com
http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IMG_20150317_084823_361.jpg

 

Jack writes:

The furnace sealant which I coated it [the reactor] with completely melted and agglomerated to the bottom of the cell (also appears to be mixed with melted alumina) . . . The tube was purchased from China and is purportedly 95% pure. It was supposed to have a continuous operating temperature of 1500C.

[. . .]

The input power was ~260W. I don’t know what the R value of the insulation is. I had the cell surrounded by high purity alumina powder and covered with a thin sheet of ceramic insulation. I used standard 120V AC 60hz with a triac type dimmer switch (chops the waves starting at V=0). I’ll have to check with the manufacturer to see what the remaining 5% of the tube is. The heating element was Kanthal A1. It’s strange that the heating element was able to completely melt at points. In the past, it has always failed before melting.

I was using INCO type 255 nickel, TiH2, LiOh, KOH, aluminum powder, and Fe2O3. Good idea on the small amount of fuel which should cause some localized melting.

He said that this was the first time he had use a triac to control the input current, and the thermocouple he was using failed during the experiment, so he does not have any temperature measurements.

He later broke open the reactor and found that the fuel had formed into a solid stick (see picture below)

brokentube
Source: LENR-Coldfusion.com

http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IMG_20150317_134300_957.jpg

 

He said in examining the inside of the tube, discoloration and a metal coating make it hard to determine if there was melting on the inside of the tube, but he thinks that might be possible (see pictures at these links: http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/meltedtubeinner.png ; http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/melted2.png

Many thanks to Jack for this report — it’s very interesting to see what happens in the various experiments people are carrying out, and to see the heads of the LENR community put together to try and determine what might have happened here. It might be significant that is was not high purity alumina (95%) — the composition of the other 5% might have made a difference here.

Jack says he plans to do a control run an experiment of a similar reactor without fuel inside to see if he gets the same results. That should be quite telling. If the same result occurs, then we might be looking at something other the LENR as the cause of the meltdown.

  • Omega Z

    “He later broke open the reactor and found that the fuel had formed into a solid stick (see picture below)”

    I’m Sorry. I have to say it.
    It really does look like a “Stick”.
    🙂

  • pg

    the link to the complete paper is this: http://www.governmentattic.org

  • http://lenr-coldfusion.com/ Jack Cole

    I’m not certain of the cause yet. I’m not claiming this is LENR. More experimentation is needed. I did this experiment while awaiting shipment of new equipment for building a new apparatus.

  • pg

    from 22Passi, interesting documents:

    Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) report on High Energy Science & Technology Assessment workshop, June 29, 2007

    “Dr. Mitchell Swartz, JET Energy, INC presented a brief summary of the results of excess heat experiments in electric-field loaded deuterated metals: Excess Heat in Electric-Field Loaded Deuterated Metals.

    He explained his methods for controlling measurement error and system noise by using dual calorimeter measurements that allowed precise differential measurement and integration of power. He was thus able to compare measurements of several different instruments to allow judgment of consistency in his reported results.

    The diffusion and electrophoresis equations show the advantages of low conductivity electrolytes and relatively high voltages for loading D into the electrodes with co-deposition of electrode material. btained energy and power gains over the D charging (loading) input power and discussed the importance of determining optimized operating points. Impressively, he showed a video demonstrating enough power to spin the propeller of a model airplane.”

    Professor Michael Melich, W.E. Meyer Institute for Systems Engineering, Naval Postgraduate School, talked about transmutation as the signal for detecting LENRusing experiments conducted in a Deuterium cell with an electrolytic Pd diffusion barrier. Quantifying the transmutation products as an experimental approach potentially affords greater sensitivity and reproducibility than excess heat, since the new elements are not present initially and can be detectable in very small concentrations.

    Low Energy Nuclear Reactions are showing some remarkable progress with respect to energy (excess heat) production and transmuted element detection, but experiments remain only thinly reproducible. LENR also suffers from a basic lack of understanding of the governing physics.

    There is also a compelling need for a theory that can explain production rates and lead to specific electrode treatments and electrolyte compositions and predictions of reaction power, energy and products. The Widom theoretical construct appears promising, but lacks robust experimental verification and rigorous peer review.

    LENR still suffers from negative publicity associated with Cold Fusion and is viewed as being conducted outside the domain of legitimate, mainstream science. Nonetheless, the persistent and increasingly repeatable demonstrations of excess heat and transmutation suggest that there is something here worth pursuing. DTRA should not do so alone, but rather foster consortia that would help bring discipline and rigorous experimental protocol to this field. Additionally, efforts to better understand the physics ofLENR as well as the development of first-principle predictive models are

    encouraged.

    In a February 2002 report entitled, “Thermal and Nuclear Aspects of the Pd/D20 System,” Dr. Frank E. Gordon, Head of the Navigation and Applied Sciences Department of the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, San Diego, wrote: “We do not know if Cold Fusion will be the answer to future energy needs, but we do know the existence of Cold Fusion phenomenon through repeated observations by scientists throughout the world. It is time that this phenomenon be investigated so that we can reap whatever benefits accrue from additional scientific understanding. It is time for government funding organizations to invest in this research.” From July 31-August 3, 2006, the National Defense Industrial Association and the Office of Naval Research co-hosted a Naval Science & Technology Partnership Conference in Washington, D.C., where Dr. Gordon hosted an “LENR Breakout Session” to discuss Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command research developments in low energy nuclear reaction research.

    Coverage of Dr. Gordon’s remarks in the New Energy Times contained the following claim about U.S. government support for Cold Fusion research: “Although the U.S. Department of Energy has yet to fund studies in the area, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, long known for boldness in funding research, has been funding small LENR projects quietly for many years and recently has taken a renewed interest in the subject.”

    The Internet abounds with additional reports of undetermined veracity suggesting that DARPA support for LENR, while discreet, is ongoing. However, little evidence suggests that the focus of this research is oriented toward the development of weapons.”

    The polarizing history of LENR is a detriment to expanding research efforts and it seems unlikely that deployable/useable devices could be expected within a five to ten year horizon. Some low-level funding by 6.1 agencies seems appropriate, both to exploit the possibility of a breakthrough and to monitor other (international) research in this field. Nonetheless, DTRA should not go it alone; rather, it should provide the leadership to build interagency research consortia with a focus on fostering improved research facilities and rigorous experimental protocols.Recent trials confirmed that following standard electrolysis experiments, the diffusion barrier contained elements not present before the runs. In principle, the results of a single run can then be analyzed by other labs to determine the degree of consistency in detection of small concentrations of transmuted elements.”

    • greggoble

      It is interesting the year (2007) of this report. In 2008 the NASA SUGAR Volt LENR aircraft contract was initiated, followed in 2009 by the Spaceworks LENR spaceplanes contract. Nice to see this reports’ advice was heeded. Thanks to whoever filed the freedom of information act request that made this report available, I’ll add it to the compilation, “U.S. LENR Manhattan Project – U.S. Advanced LENR Technology”

      By the by… Seldon Technologies has transferred assignment of their LENR patents to ECOGLOBAL HOLDINGS, INC

      Methods of generating energetic particles using nanotubes and articles thereof
      https://www.google.com/patents/WO2012088472A1

      Methods of gas confinement within the voids of crystalline material and articles thereof
      https://www.google.com/patents/US20090123789A1

      LEGAL EVENTS

      Date Apr 24, 2013 Assignment

      Owner name: ECOGLOBAL HOLDINGS, INC., MAURITIUS

      ASSIGNOR:SELDON TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

      NASA LENR History

      This Final Report summarizes the work accomplished by the Boeing Subsonic Ultra Green
      Aircraft Research (SUGAR) team in Phase 1, which includes the time period of October 2008
      through March 2010. The team consisted of Boeing Research and Technology, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, General Electric, and Georgia Tech. http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110011321.pdf

      The DOD 6.1 research agencies from 3/28/2014

      Guide to FY2015 Research Funding at the Department of Defense (DOD)
      Contact: James Murday, DC Office of Research Advancement 202 824 5863, [email protected]
      https://research.usc.edu/files/2011/05/Guide-to-FY2015-DOD-Basic-Research-Funding-.pdf

      Overview
      DOD funds research that is relevant to its mission, predominantly drawing on engineering,
      computer/information science, and physical sciences. However, DOD also funds some limited
      social science, medical, and life science basic research. In addition to basic research (labeled 6.1, or BA1), DOD funds applied research (6.2, or BA2) and advanced technology development (6.3, or BA3). Universities get about 50% of the 6.1, 15% of the 6.2, and 10% of the 6.3 funding. But the 6.2 and 6.3 funding at Universities is dominated by University Affiliated Research Centers (UARC) and other entities that are structured to handle greater deadline, security classification, and reporting requirements. On 6.2/6.3 projects, it is not unusual for a University professor to be a collaborator with industry, a university affiliated organization (such as the Information Sciences Institute (ISI) and Institute for Creative Technologies (ICT) at USC), or a DOD laboratory/center.

      DOD relies heavily on technological advantage; research and engineering must be marshaled to
      meet tomorrow’s defense challenges. Given today’s globalized access to knowledge and the
      rapid pace of technology development, innovation, speed, and agility have taken on greater
      importance to DOD efforts. The Department has identified seven priorities: Autonomy, Counter
      Weapons of Mass Destruction, Cyber Sciences, Data-to-Decisions, Electronic Warfare, Engineered Resilient Systems, and Human Systems. The major basic research funding opportunities originate in the three Service research offices, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA), the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), the Defense Medical Research and Development Program (DMRDP), and the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP), which is managed by DOD. Large-scale opportunities arise from the annual Multidisciplinary University Research Initiatives and from periodic Center competitions. Applied research (6.2) and advanced technology development (6.3) are also funded by the Services, DARPA, DTRA, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) and other DOD agencies. For the Army and Air Force, the 6.2 and 6.3 funds are managed out of their Laboratories and Commands.

      • greggoble

        NASA LENR April 2005

        Advanced Energetics for Aeronautical Applications Volume II

        David S. Alexander MSE Technology Applications, Inc., Butte, Montana
        http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20050170447.pdf

        Acronyms and Abbreviations – LENR low energy nuclear reaction

        5.4 Condensed Matter Nuclear Science ………………………………………………….89
        5.4.1 General Background and Introduction…………………………………………………… 89
        5.4.2 Disclaimer for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science…………………………………. 89
        5.4.3 Electrochemically Induced Deuterium Fusion in Palladium …………………….. 89
        5.4.4 The ICCF-10 Paper by Drs. Dennis G. Letts and Dennis J. Cravens,
        “Laser Stimulation of Deuterated Palladium: Past and Present” ………………. 90
        5.4.5 The ICCF-10 Paper by Dr. Yasuhiro Iwamura, et al., “Low Energy Nuclear
        Transmutation in Condensed Matter Induced by D2 Gas Permeation
        through Pd Complexes: Correlation Between Deuterium Flux and
        Nuclear Products”……… 90
        5.4.6 The ICCF-10 Paper by H. Yamada, et al., “Analysis by Time-of-Flight
        Secondary Ion Mass Spectroscopy for Nuclear Products in Hydrogen
        Penetration through Palladium” ….. 91

        • GreenWin

          Greg, THX++.

  • Nicholas Cafarelli

    Hey Jack.

    Regarding the melting: there is a $6 sensor which can be rigged up with an arduino to monitor hydrogen. Total cost to see live numbers via USB to a laptop is under $20 USD.

    I am unable to recall if you have implemented a system to detect leaks.

    I can provide links for sourcing the sensor, an arduino board, and how to set the system up.

    If measurements can be made, guesswork is reduced.

    http://ni.comli.com

  • Axil Axil

    The hydrogen combustion theory does not explain why the heat is restricted primarily to the outside of the tube. The tube would have a lower melting temperature than the pure alumina powder covering. Hydrogen that is coming from inside the tube would melt the tube as well as the alumina power covering it. There is no localization of tube melting where the tube would be fractured. The tube as the origin of the hydrogen would have been exposed to a higher heat than the insolated covering. The alumina covering and the heater wire looks like it is totally melted and not subjected to the concentration of hot spot melting.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Inside the reactor there is no oxygen, so one might expect that the melting starts on the outside. A crack, as in the MFMP ‘Bang’ experiment, would not be required in case that the alumina is porous.

      • Axil Axil

        The hydrogen autoignition temperature, the temperature of spontaneous ignition in air, is 500 °C (932 °F).

        If the alumina tube was porous enough to support hydrogen combustion, the hydrogen would have been long gone before the temperature of hydrogen combustion was ever reached.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          We do not know exactly at which temperature the decomposition of the hydrogen source was completed. Besides, it is possible that the permeability of the alumina increases at higher temperatures. Anyway, additional experiments would be required to clarify these questions.

  • wernerml

    Sounds like he had all the ingredients for a Thermite reaction.

    http://www.instructables.com/id/Thermite/

    • Nigel Appleton

      Yes, I favour the thermite theory too. Iron-based thermite is hard to ignite, but one ignited, burns very hot – some say over 2300 deg C

      • Obvious

        Hot thermite powder explodes. If you want to melt something, it must be ignited, so the thermite reaction burns. It takes a very high temperature, localized, to ignite it properly. Less than a gram of thermite is probably going to be less than impressive.

  • Omega Z

    Note to Self:

    Do not buy E-cat reactors manufactured in China. 🙁

  • Nicholas Cafarelli

    Hydrogen combustion with air results in a flame of roughly 2200 C.

    It is pure conjecture on my part that a hydrogen leak or leaks might in part explain the melt damage.

    Hydrogen combustion with pure oxygen results in a flame of roughly 3200 C.

    I look forward with great anticipation to news of the control experiment – an unfueled reactor.

    I also find great solace in the realization that Jack’s safety procedures make meltdowns survivable.

    http://ni.comli.com

    • Ophelia Rump

      Would there be enough hydrogen to account for that?

      Is the electrical heating capable of doing that damage with a dummy load incapable of fusion?

      Only if you can exclude those two possibilities can you begin to consider other causes.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Hydrogen combustion seems to be the most likely cause. See my answer to Anon_2012_2014 on this thread:

        http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/03/05/close-up-of-a-melted-parkhomov-reactor/

        (Note that there is a typo. The energy content of 1 g H2 comes to 141.8 (not 1418) kJ, but the 1503 J for 10.6 mg are correct.)

        As always, there are some unknowns: Some of the heat will be taken away by the casing, and a pressure drop due to leaking would reduce the starting temperature. So we might need a few more Joules per mm^3 alumina, but all things considered I think that the chemical energy is sufficient to produce the observed effect.

        • Ophelia Rump

          Thank you for running the numbers for us Andreas.
          It’s nice to gain some incite into how this is going. Much obliged!

      • Nicholas Cafarelli

        Borosilicate glass has a melting point around 820oC (1,508oF).

        • Ophelia Rump

          Quartz glass becomes expensive and difficult to handle. I would make the tube sufficiently large enough to dissipate the heat over a broad enough surface to lower the outer surface temperature for the Borosilicate to acceptable levels.