From avalonbiker at yahoo.com Mon Jun 7 15:37:48 2010 From: avalonbiker at yahoo.com (Nick Reiter) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 12:37:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [NewCandle] Some stray observations with foil roll hydrolysis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <363405.87134.qm@web65403.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Hi Keith and all, Amidst this era of semi plugged holes and dodging tornados, A few this-and-that observations with some more foil roll experiments. One that you had suggested, and that I finally got around to trying, was the use of sch40 PVC tube forms to prevent the swelling and crushing inward of the foil rolls, once the hydrolysis starts to kick in in earnest. Set up a typical "rapid" bucket, using 6 half-rolls and distilled water, with 20ml of H2O2 as a kicker/accelerant. Difference being that he half rolls were all fitted with 3/4" ID PVC tube forms. I really had anticipated that either enough heat would be evolved and/or pressure, that the rolls would crush the plastic and squish it. I was wrong - basically, the bucket began its usual fine stream gas evolution at about 24 hours, then after another 24, went to a fizzing bubbling plateau. However rather than achieving the full rolling boil / bubbling maximum (usually lasting about 4 to 6 hours) the plateau simply went about that span of time, then began to meekly drop off. In a way, curious - the inability of the rolls to swell when heavy gas generation began seems like it capped the whole process! Even the outer turns of the foil rolls - usually turned to an eroded crusty gray after the peak - remain fairly un-altered. Still have not done any tests with applied voltage to rolls - that is probably next up on the guitar. I'm out of commission for a few days, getting my gall bladder out, but might be able to set something up with forced gradients next week. Three other tests are worth noting. In one, I set up a peroxide "fast" bucket but placed it in the lab refrigerator. Arrhenius would predict a diminishing of the reaction rate by about a factor of 3. As it turned out, it was nearly a week before slight bubbling begins, and a heavier gas evolution never kicked in, even after another 10 days after that. Removing the bucket from the refrigerator, and allowing it to come up to about 25C kicked the typical rate of gas generation in, after the traditional 24 hours. No other anomalies noted. Another bucket was tried using aluminum fluoride as a salt. Results were uninspiring. Lastly, a special test, suggested by Sam Faile. I managed to get a free sample of about 100 feet of 99% tin metal foil from Torrey Crane alloys. I re-rolled this onto a 1 inch diameter form, and immersed the roll into a .1M aqueous solution of lead acetate. Sam and I wanted to see if the rolled structure would influence the precipitation or reaction rate with the lead in solution. Results so far are indeterminate - I don't think it was nearly as reactive as we predicted it might be. However we do seem to be making a continuously evolving crust on the solution surface that is honestly a compound I can't identify (without my EDS!) Its in the form of micro-crystal plates - all hexagonal, but foliated like mica. Whatever it is doesn't melt or decompose til somewhere above 500C Odd thing is that oxides, hydroxides, acetates of tin and lead none of them appear to be hexagonal. Don't know what it is. So the fascination rolls on. Leave or take the pun. Looking forward to Keiths next update! All the best, NR From NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com Tue Jun 8 13:27:55 2010 From: NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com (Keith Nagel) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 10:27:55 -0700 Subject: [NewCandle] Some stray observations with foil roll hydrolysis In-Reply-To: <363405.87134.qm@web65403.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Howdy Nick, Let's not forget the Equity markets plunge into double dip territory... I've not done much new with this experiment, just letting the old ones play out. None of my experiments broke out into uncontrolled boiling. My submerged half roll has, after a few weeks of fizzing, begun winding down. Half potential peaked around 1.02 volts, now down to .97 and falling. While the half potential is not the same as measuring the corrosion current, it does reflect the magnitude of that current. The full roll sitting in 1 inch of electrolyte is also fizzing away, although the swelling at the bottom may well be reducing the amount of electrolyte able to wick up the foil. This arrangement makes possible experiments with very little electrolyte, and is one I would focus on for further experimentation. My point with the inner core was to keep the system constant over the period of corrosion, and it sounds like that's what it did. Obviously allowing the foil leaves to expand lets more product escape and permit more fresh electrolyte to flow in. If there are any special effects due to close foil spacing, best not to let them part, yes? As you said, if we wanted to just corrode some aluminum, strong lye would make a great boiling mess. Not sure how you'd apply a voltage to a roll. The whole genius of this system is that you get an electrochemically generated potential across the entire surface of the aluminum. I doubt you'd get much current to flow more than one layer deep into the roll with an external anode or cathode. If you mean my earlier suggestion, I just had in mind a couple of strips of foil in the electrolyte. This to show you what ordinary corrosion looks like under different current densities. I have noticed this thing about a "tipping point" with corrosion from making many metal salts using mineral acids, scraps of metal, and a heat source. You heat the mix until a distinct point where the reaction sort of takes off. You can lower the external temperature at that point and still see the rapid reaction. I previously understood this to be an indication that the oxide layer had been penetrated, but this is received wisdom. K. -----Original Message----- From: newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com [mailto:newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com]On Behalf Of Nick Reiter Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 12:38 PM To: New energy for the new world. Subject: [NewCandle] Some stray observations with foil roll hydrolysis Hi Keith and all, Amidst this era of semi plugged holes and dodging tornados, A few this-and-that observations with some more foil roll experiments. One that you had suggested, and that I finally got around to trying, was the use of sch40 PVC tube forms to prevent the swelling and crushing inward of the foil rolls, once the hydrolysis starts to kick in in earnest. Set up a typical "rapid" bucket, using 6 half-rolls and distilled water, with 20ml of H2O2 as a kicker/accelerant. Difference being that he half rolls were all fitted with 3/4" ID PVC tube forms. I really had anticipated that either enough heat would be evolved and/or pressure, that the rolls would crush the plastic and squish it. I was wrong - basically, the bucket began its usual fine stream gas evolution at about 24 hours, then after another 24, went to a fizzing bubbling plateau. However rather than achieving the full rolling boil / bubbling maximum (usually lasting about 4 to 6 hours) the plateau simply went about that span of time, then began to meekly drop off. In a way, curious - the inability of the rolls to swell when heavy gas generation began seems like it capped the whole process! Even the outer turns of the foil rolls - usually turned to an eroded crusty gray after the peak - remain fairly un-altered. Still have not done any tests with applied voltage to rolls - that is probably next up on the guitar. I'm out of commission for a few days, getting my gall bladder out, but might be able to set something up with forced gradients next week. Three other tests are worth noting. In one, I set up a peroxide "fast" bucket but placed it in the lab refrigerator. Arrhenius would predict a diminishing of the reaction rate by about a factor of 3. As it turned out, it was nearly a week before slight bubbling begins, and a heavier gas evolution never kicked in, even after another 10 days after that. Removing the bucket from the refrigerator, and allowing it to come up to about 25C kicked the typical rate of gas generation in, after the traditional 24 hours. No other anomalies noted. Another bucket was tried using aluminum fluoride as a salt. Results were uninspiring. Lastly, a special test, suggested by Sam Faile. I managed to get a free sample of about 100 feet of 99% tin metal foil from Torrey Crane alloys. I re-rolled this onto a 1 inch diameter form, and immersed the roll into a .1M aqueous solution of lead acetate. Sam and I wanted to see if the rolled structure would influence the precipitation or reaction rate with the lead in solution. Results so far are indeterminate - I don't think it was nearly as reactive as we predicted it might be. However we do seem to be making a continuously evolving crust on the solution surface that is honestly a compound I can't identify (without my EDS!) Its in the form of micro-crystal plates - all hexagonal, but foliated like mica. Whatever it is doesn't melt or decompose til somewhere above 500C Odd thing is that oxides, hydroxides, acetates of tin and lead none of them appear to be hexagonal. Don't know what it is. So the fascination rolls on. Leave or take the pun. Looking forward to Keiths next update! All the best, NR _______________________________________________ NewCandle mailing list NewCandle at ipdiscover.com http://ipdiscover.com/mailman/listinfo/newcandle_ipdiscover.com From avalonbiker at yahoo.com Sat Jun 19 17:17:31 2010 From: avalonbiker at yahoo.com (Nick Reiter) Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 14:17:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [NewCandle] next up In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <57347.75927.qm@web65415.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Hi all, Just wanted to post a quick update on a couple of rolled foil topics. One concerns an experiment I hope to finally be able to try this coming week - one that had like so many been on the back burner too long... Long while back, it seemed to me like the primary capping mechanism or "governor" on the actual effectiveness of the roll hydrolysis in either pure water or salt water was the eventual capping action of the oxide layer. Only in a reactor where the pH was either too high (NaOH:H2O) or acidic (H2SO4 etc) to prevent the capping oxide would it be predicted that the entirety of the Al foil could be consumed. In a neutral water reactor, ya get your 48 hours of happy H2 bubbles, then gas evolution goes down as the system gets capped off. What I am going to do is place a pure water reactor or one with a peroxide kicker in one of my larger ultrasonic tanks, and simply give it an occasional 15 minute sonication, once the heavy bubbling sets in. Will the ultrasonic be enough to re-crack or spall oxides and keep the gas production flowing? We'll find out. On the other end of things, with the large roll of tin metal foil in lead acetate:H2O, it seems as though after nearly a month now, suddenly a heavy precipitation has set in, although with no visible gas production. The tin metal foil on the outer turn at least has taken on a blackish-gold hue - quite surprising and colorful. More of the as-of-yet not analyzed hexagonal platelet crystals form nearly continuously. Whatever these are, they have a decomposing or melting temp above 500C. I just can't get anywhere further with saying what the stuff is, without EDS or at very least some FTIR (though I am trying to line up the latter on a barter basis with a friend in Cleveland) When dried out, the mystery material is quite dielectric, and seems like it exhibits a visible diamagnetic nature as well - a rare earth magnet will cause some grains in a petri dish to hop and pop about. Hope everyone's summer projects are coming along well! Horace, you lurking on here anymore? Hows things up in the Northcountry? Jones, what in the devil are you into these days? All the best, n From jonesb9 at pacbell.net Sat Jun 19 18:06:59 2010 From: jonesb9 at pacbell.net (Jones Beene) Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 15:06:59 -0700 Subject: [NewCandle] next up In-Reply-To: <57347.75927.qm@web65415.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <57347.75927.qm@web65415.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <01c501cb0ffb$bd0720c0$37156240$@net> Hi Nick, all .... Glad to see you are still chipping away. As for me, the focus is nanopowder these days, and on finding a way that the Arata-type material can move into a useful realm. It will not be easy, due to the low delta-T. BTW, any of us can make these powders rather cheaply down to a few nm. It's a surprisingly lo-tek --> hi-tek situation for the active material (if you are not in a hurry). BTW some of your results with foils probably goes back to the occasional nano-dimension of active spots in the thin layers (which are 100 times too thick to being with). Ever hear of nano-thermite ? The energy there may go beyond chemical. "Ballotechnic" is a word that has been used. Quick question - is anyone out in newcandle-land experienced in Stirling engine tech? I have been trying to get feedback on a potential improvement, but can find few who have taken the Stirling as seriously as it should be taken. First off - it seems almost everyone looks at them as the toys and models that show up everywhere these days; but those are low efficiency (very low) and few appreciate that the "real" Stirling is only efficient with high internal pressurization. And probably only with a gas above its inversion temperature! There is a good theoretical reason for that. This requirement effectively limits its use to two gases, if you are going for efficiency instead of a toy. Jones From NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com Tue Jun 22 13:13:30 2010 From: NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com (Keith Nagel) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 10:13:30 -0700 Subject: [NewCandle] next up In-Reply-To: <57347.75927.qm@web65415.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Howdy Nick, There is another factor limiting reaction rates, preceding the buildup of oxide on the aluminum surface. That is the sparging of the reaction products H2 and OH. Acids and alkali can increase solubility of the OH, preventing the formation of oxide on the surface. Just having some physical space between the foil leaves promotes the flushing of the OH, hence our observations about limited reaction rates in foil rolls where the inner core is solid to prevent swelling. Ultrasonic stimulation will undoubtedly get things moving, especially if you pulse the thing regularly or run it continuously. While I think it exciting to see these things rocking and rolling, what is more important to me is the "long tail" reactions made possible by the large surface area. So I haven't been focused on making a boiler ( N. seems to have that nailed down pretty well ) so much as a reaction engine. The final form I have come to with that in mind is a roll with a solid core sitting in an inch or so of electrolyte. That system works well with very small amounts of electrolyte and reacts for a long time, at a slow but consistent rate. I had carved up a few wine bottles to make a glass container large enough to hold a 12" roll of foil; all I need is an easy way to put a solid inert support into a commercial foil roll and I'll start a few runs with silver/aluminum nitrate. K. -----Original Message----- From: newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com [mailto:newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com]On Behalf Of Nick Reiter Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 2:18 PM To: New energy for the new world. Subject: [NewCandle] next up Hi all, Just wanted to post a quick update on a couple of rolled foil topics. One concerns an experiment I hope to finally be able to try this coming week - one that had like so many been on the back burner too long... Long while back, it seemed to me like the primary capping mechanism or "governor" on the actual effectiveness of the roll hydrolysis in either pure water or salt water was the eventual capping action of the oxide layer. Only in a reactor where the pH was either too high (NaOH:H2O) or acidic (H2SO4 etc) to prevent the capping oxide would it be predicted that the entirety of the Al foil could be consumed. In a neutral water reactor, ya get your 48 hours of happy H2 bubbles, then gas evolution goes down as the system gets capped off. What I am going to do is place a pure water reactor or one with a peroxide kicker in one of my larger ultrasonic tanks, and simply give it an occasional 15 minute sonication, once the heavy bubbling sets in. Will the ultrasonic be enough to re-crack or spall oxides and keep the gas production flowing? We'll find out. On the other end of things, with the large roll of tin metal foil in lead acetate:H2O, it seems as though after nearly a month now, suddenly a heavy precipitation has set in, although with no visible gas production. The tin metal foil on the outer turn at least has taken on a blackish-gold hue - quite surprising and colorful. More of the as-of-yet not analyzed hexagonal platelet crystals form nearly continuously. Whatever these are, they have a decomposing or melting temp above 500C. I just can't get anywhere further with saying what the stuff is, without EDS or at very least some FTIR (though I am trying to line up the latter on a barter basis with a friend in Cleveland) When dried out, the mystery material is quite dielectric, and seems like it exhibits a visible diamagnetic nature as well - a rare earth magnet will cause some grains in a petri dish to hop and pop about. Hope everyone's summer projects are coming along well! Horace, you lurking on here anymore? Hows things up in the Northcountry? Jones, what in the devil are you into these days? All the best, n _______________________________________________ NewCandle mailing list NewCandle at ipdiscover.com http://ipdiscover.com/mailman/listinfo/newcandle_ipdiscover.com From NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com Tue Jun 22 13:24:04 2010 From: NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com (Keith Nagel) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 10:24:04 -0700 Subject: [NewCandle] next up In-Reply-To: <01c501cb0ffb$bd0720c0$37156240$@net> Message-ID: Hey Jones, You've mentioned the thermite thing before; I am very curious how one performs calorimetry on that kind of reaction. Must be exciting! I've been considering doing something with thermite for some time, as I am told one can ignite an aluminum pipe with thermite. Some practical tips on working with the stuff would be appreciated, entirely seperate from the nano/LENR stuff which I'm sure you are sworn to secrecy over (grin). That is to say, some general advice on working with thermite in a scientific context would be appreciated. K. -----Original Message----- From: newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com [mailto:newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com]On Behalf Of Jones Beene Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 3:07 PM To: 'New energy for the new world.' Subject: Re: [NewCandle] next up Hi Nick, all .... Glad to see you are still chipping away. As for me, the focus is nanopowder these days, and on finding a way that the Arata-type material can move into a useful realm. It will not be easy, due to the low delta-T. BTW, any of us can make these powders rather cheaply down to a few nm. It's a surprisingly lo-tek --> hi-tek situation for the active material (if you are not in a hurry). BTW some of your results with foils probably goes back to the occasional nano-dimension of active spots in the thin layers (which are 100 times too thick to being with). Ever hear of nano-thermite ? The energy there may go beyond chemical. "Ballotechnic" is a word that has been used. Quick question - is anyone out in newcandle-land experienced in Stirling engine tech? I have been trying to get feedback on a potential improvement, but can find few who have taken the Stirling as seriously as it should be taken. First off - it seems almost everyone looks at them as the toys and models that show up everywhere these days; but those are low efficiency (very low) and few appreciate that the "real" Stirling is only efficient with high internal pressurization. And probably only with a gas above its inversion temperature! There is a good theoretical reason for that. This requirement effectively limits its use to two gases, if you are going for efficiency instead of a toy. Jones _______________________________________________ NewCandle mailing list NewCandle at ipdiscover.com http://ipdiscover.com/mailman/listinfo/newcandle_ipdiscover.com From jonesb9 at pacbell.net Tue Jun 22 14:31:35 2010 From: jonesb9 at pacbell.net (Jones Beene) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 11:31:35 -0700 Subject: [NewCandle] next up In-Reply-To: References: <01c501cb0ffb$bd0720c0$37156240$@net> Message-ID: <026801cb1239$253642e0$6fa2c8a0$@net> Keith, Ha! Hope you're kidding and/or that I did not give you the wrong impression! I have avoided nano-thermite like the plague - for any number of reasons, including "continuity" ;-) Even being infatuated with the unusual properties of aluminum, as I know you are, there are other ways to go than any kind of thermite. Or do you have a death wish? I have kept up with what is out there as far as information, as it is most interesting in the broader context - and definitely would advise anyone to read-up extensively before experimenting with any variety of nanopowder. They are all toxic. For instance, be aware that asbestos is only toxic because of its geometry! It is not chemistry but size plus chemistry. Carbon nanofibers are said to be as toxic as asbestos, and what can be more "natural" than carbon? ERGO - A glove box which can be flushed with a nonreactive gas is an absolute necessity. So many biotech outfits have gone belly up that you can often find one on eBay for less than $1000 or you can build one if you have the time. If you are not ready to spring for a glove box, then put off nanopowder till you are ready. Period. Do not be tempted. That is the best advice I can give for now. Would you play around with asbestos without that precaution? Same thing. As for how nanopowder can be made cheaply - that is the low tech part. You can pay for your glove box with this tip: Get a rock tumbler! Yep, you heard right. Preferably a small one the fits into your glove box in such a way that you can handle everything under an inert gas including changing the belt if necessary. A week in a rock tumbler will convert almost any "black" or micron powder into nanopowder and will also "mechanically alloy" two or more metals when run together. >From there on, you are on your own. Jones -----Original Message----- Hey Jones, You've mentioned the thermite thing before; I am very curious how one performs calorimetry on that kind of reaction. Must be exciting! I've been considering doing something with thermite for some time, as I am told one can ignite an aluminum pipe with thermite. Some practical tips on working with the stuff would be appreciated, entirely separate from the nano/LENR stuff which I'm sure you are sworn to secrecy over (grin). That is to say, some general advice on working with thermite in a scientific context would be appreciated. K. From NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com Tue Jun 22 16:11:36 2010 From: NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com (Keith Nagel) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:11:36 -0700 Subject: [NewCandle] next up In-Reply-To: <026801cb1239$253642e0$6fa2c8a0$@net> Message-ID: Hey Jones, Not kidding, but not directly interested in making nanothermite either. As you say, working with small particle size material involves glove boxes and inert atmospheres, as they tend to be pyrophoric amongst other things. Working with that stuff is like working with touch sensitive explosives, very difficult to do safely. But pretty important for anything involving catalysis ( this recent craze of nano-everything is a funding mechanism; size sensitive catalysis goes back something like a century and the literature is replete with things that are now being "redicovered" and patented. Our old friend aluminum is a good example of this, as we've discussed with the nano-pores in the oxide surface ). Let me rephase the question. I want to ignite the end of an aluminum tube. How do I do that? I have read from an _unreliable_ source that a large diameter tube filled with thermite will cause the tube to ignite, but obv. not just the end. I want just the end burning. Hell, I've been tempted to try smoking one of these rolls Nick and I have been fooling with, but that's not really what I'm after. I need a nice thick pipe. K. -----Original Message----- From: newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com [mailto:newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com]On Behalf Of Jones Beene Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 11:32 AM To: 'New energy for the new world.' Subject: Re: [NewCandle] next up Keith, Ha! Hope you're kidding and/or that I did not give you the wrong impression! I have avoided nano-thermite like the plague - for any number of reasons, including "continuity" ;-) Even being infatuated with the unusual properties of aluminum, as I know you are, there are other ways to go than any kind of thermite. Or do you have a death wish? I have kept up with what is out there as far as information, as it is most interesting in the broader context - and definitely would advise anyone to read-up extensively before experimenting with any variety of nanopowder. They are all toxic. For instance, be aware that asbestos is only toxic because of its geometry! It is not chemistry but size plus chemistry. Carbon nanofibers are said to be as toxic as asbestos, and what can be more "natural" than carbon? ERGO - A glove box which can be flushed with a nonreactive gas is an absolute necessity. So many biotech outfits have gone belly up that you can often find one on eBay for less than $1000 or you can build one if you have the time. If you are not ready to spring for a glove box, then put off nanopowder till you are ready. Period. Do not be tempted. That is the best advice I can give for now. Would you play around with asbestos without that precaution? Same thing. As for how nanopowder can be made cheaply - that is the low tech part. You can pay for your glove box with this tip: Get a rock tumbler! Yep, you heard right. Preferably a small one the fits into your glove box in such a way that you can handle everything under an inert gas including changing the belt if necessary. A week in a rock tumbler will convert almost any "black" or micron powder into nanopowder and will also "mechanically alloy" two or more metals when run together. >From there on, you are on your own. Jones -----Original Message----- Hey Jones, You've mentioned the thermite thing before; I am very curious how one performs calorimetry on that kind of reaction. Must be exciting! I've been considering doing something with thermite for some time, as I am told one can ignite an aluminum pipe with thermite. Some practical tips on working with the stuff would be appreciated, entirely separate from the nano/LENR stuff which I'm sure you are sworn to secrecy over (grin). That is to say, some general advice on working with thermite in a scientific context would be appreciated. K. _______________________________________________ NewCandle mailing list NewCandle at ipdiscover.com http://ipdiscover.com/mailman/listinfo/newcandle_ipdiscover.com From jonesb9 at pacbell.net Tue Jun 22 16:37:28 2010 From: jonesb9 at pacbell.net (Jones Beene) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:37:28 -0700 Subject: [NewCandle] next up In-Reply-To: References: <026801cb1239$253642e0$6fa2c8a0$@net> Message-ID: <026c01cb124a$bc4b4340$34e1c9c0$@net> K Let me rephrase the question. I want to ignite the end of an aluminum tube. How do I do that? Dunno, but many things will burn in pure oxygen - have your tried that? If you don't have a tank around for welding, you can find the "recreational" variety of canned O2 inhalers on eBay. If it doesn't work, it may not be a total loss as they are supposed to clear up a hangover in record time ... From NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com Tue Jun 22 17:34:11 2010 From: NewCandleAdmin at ipdiscover.com (Keith Nagel) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:34:11 -0700 Subject: [NewCandle] next up In-Reply-To: <026c01cb124a$bc4b4340$34e1c9c0$@net> Message-ID: Jones, Yeah, that'd probably help. Pumping pure O2 through the free end of the pipe would make it easier to ignite. Once it got going the burn will go much faster; I wonder if it would just explode? I could see doing a small welding cannister of O2 with an attached tube fairly safely. Yet we still need to get that end burning. I assume the thermite works to ignite metal pipe because you have aluminum powder being oxidized by the iron oxide and that would "carry along" the solid metal aluminum into the reaction. A big pool of molten iron couldn't hurt either (grin). Thing is, I have seen people work aluminum with all kinds of torches and never seen a piece just light up and burn. Yet the stuff will burn up just like magnesium once it is going. K. -----Original Message----- From: newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com [mailto:newcandle-bounces at ipdiscover.com]On Behalf Of Jones Beene Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 1:37 PM To: 'New energy for the new world.' Subject: Re: [NewCandle] next up K Let me rephrase the question. I want to ignite the end of an aluminum tube. How do I do that? Dunno, but many things will burn in pure oxygen - have your tried that? If you don't have a tank around for welding, you can find the "recreational" variety of canned O2 inhalers on eBay. If it doesn't work, it may not be a total loss as they are supposed to clear up a hangover in record time ... _______________________________________________ NewCandle mailing list NewCandle at ipdiscover.com http://ipdiscover.com/mailman/listinfo/newcandle_ipdiscover.com