Jones Beene and I have continued working on alternatives for new experiments. Jones has been running several experiments that have shown interesting results, but he is trying to rule out mundane explanations. Our latest idea is to fix the “fuel” to a lighted surface with epoxy. Jones’ latest idea was a clever adaptation of MFMP’s glow stick. He painted the fuel on half of a florescent light and is comparing the performance to the unpainted side.
Jones notes the following early results:
For the “glow-stick fl” there are a few early results, which need to be repeated at increased power levels. With wall P-in of 3 watts (2 watts HV to the 12” tube), the null side temperature levels off at 1.10 C over ambient, while the active side (with hydride) maintains a range of 2.3-2.6 C with a differential of 1.2-1.5 C. The light-activated “paint” consists of approximately 40% hematite, 40% TiH2, 20% LiNiCoMnO2 in clear Varathane. LiNiCoMnO2 is a cathode material used in Li-ion batteries. It was a replacement spillover catalyst for KCO3 (long story).
One mundane explanation for small apparent thermal gain, not yet ruled out is that the TiH2 reacts slowly with the resin (polyurethane)… or that another light triggered chemical reaction is possible, but care has been taken to completely seal the paint so that air is not available as an oxidant. Longer term testing at higher input can rule out chemistry and determine scalability to useful levels.
I have been working on building a new conduction calorimeter, but hope to run an epoxy fuel experiment with a light box this weekend. The fuel will be affixed to nickel foil, and we’ll compare the fuel with and without TiH2. The only difference for the comparison will be the exclusion of the component that would be theoretically expected to be necessary for the formation of UDH (the hydrogen supply).