What process of extracts hydrogen from a metal hydride?
What process of extracts hydrogen from a metal hydride?
If I had a liter of palladium metal hydride, saturated with hydrogen (about 900 liters of hydrogen at standard pressure) in a sealed container and I ran tap water through it, with a heating element (or igniter), and using only the oxygen dissolved or entrained in the water, could I recover the 3.18 kWh of hydrogen energy in the form of hot water? Or would I need to secretly oxygenate the water? Or would nothing happen?
Aero
I don't think much would happen, in that if anything did happen, the quantity of water required to provide oxygen to what was happening would be so large relative to the heat release that you could only extract it to use in an energy dense process with a heat pump. At that point why bother?
Interesting thing to do would be to keep it in container with a dump valve and pressurized by something flammable, like gaseous H2. Charge the material strongly electrostatically and just before release agitate it with ultrasonic waves.
Let it form a cloud and ignite it at multiple points in a symmetric pattern on one side of the cloud. Just do it from a distance...
Make sure you get it on Youtube.
Interesting thing to do would be to keep it in container with a dump valve and pressurized by something flammable, like gaseous H2. Charge the material strongly electrostatically and just before release agitate it with ultrasonic waves.
Let it form a cloud and ignite it at multiple points in a symmetric pattern on one side of the cloud. Just do it from a distance...
Make sure you get it on Youtube.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
Make sure you double the distance you think is safe, otherwise you will never make it to Youtube, nor in any other place on this earthTDPerk wrote:Let it form a cloud and ignite it at multiple points in a symmetric pattern on one side of the cloud. Just do it from a distance...
Make sure you get it on Youtube.
There are two considerations. If you have hydrogen present and oxygen present and sufficient temperature and or a catalyst (like nickel(?) then combustion could occur with some heat output.
But, there is a second consideration. Take depleted nickel( no hydrogen present). Then add hydrogen gas, preferably at increased pressure. The absorption/ weak binding of the hydrogen into the nickel to form a nickel hydride is an exothermic reaction. Using examples from nickel metal hydride batteries, when they are charged they heat up. I don't know the amount of heating, but it is certainly plenty to heat the Rossi apparatus for a brief to modest amount of time. With good insulation and only a trickle of cooling water this may last up to a few hours. Any combustion or fuel cell burning of hydrogen with entrained oxygen could add to this.
It suspect it would be difficult to maintain the heating for days (assuming those claims are true) unless the oxygen/ air is actively injected (such as through a venturi port as I suggested before. This is hard to envision with a slow water flow rate.
But these heating effects could add some heating while hidden ohmic heating input (unlikely unless the observers were stupid or in collusion), or, as I think suspect, gross inaccuracy in heat output measurements.
This consists of measuring the heat in only a small portion of the cooling water flow and representing it as the heat of the entire volume of water. It would be easy to plumb a small water diversion that received most of the heating, and then place the thermometer in this diverted stream.
I finally got a terrible quality video of one 'confirming test' to run. They showed an electrical outlet with an inductive amp meter hooked up, so the power input was checked- provided this was the only line into the control box. They did not show any other lines, but they also did not show views that would preclude them. The observers could have been told that other lines were for powering the controls, etc. If they accepted this without question, this would fall under the stupid category.
As an aside, the claim of all of the water flow being converted to steam (dry steam) at 100.5 degrees C is presumably used in their calculations of heat output. If only a portion was converted to steam the results could be off by as much as ~ 50-60%.
I calculated the amount of steam that would be produced by consuming ~ 4000W of power. The amount of steam formed, and the liquid water mass that would need to be heated and converted added up to ~ 2 liters per second of dry steam at ~ 100 degrees C and standard pressure.
How much flow is that? Try blowing against the back of your hand as hard as you can. This forced peak expiratory flow in healthy adults is ~ 4-5 liters per second. So the steam flow would be ~ 1/2 of this. This is a fairly vigorous flow through a ~ 1/2 to 1 inch hose. It would very quickly burn a hand passed in front of it. A room would moderately quickly turn into a steam room. The poor quality of the video I saw makes it hard to judge, but it looked more consistent with the steam that might be coming out of a steam iron of tea pot that was on medium heat (perhaps in the range of 400-800 watts). This by itself makes me suspicious of the heat output claims.. This is with the claimed smaller machines producing ~ 4000 watts. The demos with claimed 10,000-20,000 watts heat output would have been putting out ~ 2-5 times as much steam, or up to ~ 10 liters per second. That would be ~ 600 liters per minute, or ~36,000 liters per hour. That would be ~ 36 cubic meters of steam per hour. Enough to completely fill a moderate sized room. Anybody checking the experiment repeatedly over several days would certainly note the sauna (or worse) conditions. Of course venting to the outside could mitigate this, and if so it should obviously be a noted portion of the setup.
Dan Tibbets
But, there is a second consideration. Take depleted nickel( no hydrogen present). Then add hydrogen gas, preferably at increased pressure. The absorption/ weak binding of the hydrogen into the nickel to form a nickel hydride is an exothermic reaction. Using examples from nickel metal hydride batteries, when they are charged they heat up. I don't know the amount of heating, but it is certainly plenty to heat the Rossi apparatus for a brief to modest amount of time. With good insulation and only a trickle of cooling water this may last up to a few hours. Any combustion or fuel cell burning of hydrogen with entrained oxygen could add to this.
It suspect it would be difficult to maintain the heating for days (assuming those claims are true) unless the oxygen/ air is actively injected (such as through a venturi port as I suggested before. This is hard to envision with a slow water flow rate.
But these heating effects could add some heating while hidden ohmic heating input (unlikely unless the observers were stupid or in collusion), or, as I think suspect, gross inaccuracy in heat output measurements.
This consists of measuring the heat in only a small portion of the cooling water flow and representing it as the heat of the entire volume of water. It would be easy to plumb a small water diversion that received most of the heating, and then place the thermometer in this diverted stream.
I finally got a terrible quality video of one 'confirming test' to run. They showed an electrical outlet with an inductive amp meter hooked up, so the power input was checked- provided this was the only line into the control box. They did not show any other lines, but they also did not show views that would preclude them. The observers could have been told that other lines were for powering the controls, etc. If they accepted this without question, this would fall under the stupid category.
As an aside, the claim of all of the water flow being converted to steam (dry steam) at 100.5 degrees C is presumably used in their calculations of heat output. If only a portion was converted to steam the results could be off by as much as ~ 50-60%.
I calculated the amount of steam that would be produced by consuming ~ 4000W of power. The amount of steam formed, and the liquid water mass that would need to be heated and converted added up to ~ 2 liters per second of dry steam at ~ 100 degrees C and standard pressure.
How much flow is that? Try blowing against the back of your hand as hard as you can. This forced peak expiratory flow in healthy adults is ~ 4-5 liters per second. So the steam flow would be ~ 1/2 of this. This is a fairly vigorous flow through a ~ 1/2 to 1 inch hose. It would very quickly burn a hand passed in front of it. A room would moderately quickly turn into a steam room. The poor quality of the video I saw makes it hard to judge, but it looked more consistent with the steam that might be coming out of a steam iron of tea pot that was on medium heat (perhaps in the range of 400-800 watts). This by itself makes me suspicious of the heat output claims.. This is with the claimed smaller machines producing ~ 4000 watts. The demos with claimed 10,000-20,000 watts heat output would have been putting out ~ 2-5 times as much steam, or up to ~ 10 liters per second. That would be ~ 600 liters per minute, or ~36,000 liters per hour. That would be ~ 36 cubic meters of steam per hour. Enough to completely fill a moderate sized room. Anybody checking the experiment repeatedly over several days would certainly note the sauna (or worse) conditions. Of course venting to the outside could mitigate this, and if so it should obviously be a noted portion of the setup.
Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.