Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
Axil,You omitted radiation. See the Chan comment for turning that into electrical power at:http://open-source-energy.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=659page=43 Hound Dog"Axil AxilSat, 03 Nov 2012 14:44:39 -0700 This variety of experiment should measure, total energy input versus totalenergy output.To properly get this result, should not the hydrogen and oxygen berecombined to produce heat output? This energy of gas recombination shouldbe added to the heat produced in the electrolyte solution for a propercomparison that might show over unity output.To simplify the details of the experiment, the volume of the gas producedby electrolysis could be measured and a calculation of its heat contentmight be used in calculation of total heat output of the electrolyte cell.Cheers: AxilOn Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I have no problem with sharing--there has been too little of that so far. I've been planning at some point to set up a site to detail the work so others could do it if they would like. With the app I have written, there would be no problem with having it upload data to a server after the run is completed. What I am testing is having it automatically email the data to me as an attachment when it has finished. That way I know the experiment is complete, and I can take a look at the data. I would prefer to detail each piece of equipment involved and where to buy it, as that is helpful to the hobbyist like me. Jack On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.comwrote: If at some point you think you see something, are you interested in making your data series (for both good and unsuccessful runs) available? Doing would have the following tradeoffs: + you would be helping to advance hobbyist science - you would no longer have the inside scoop into whatever is happening, making it harder to get priority on any potentially (very) lucrative patents. This question is also for any other amateurs attempting data acquisition. We could set up a site of some kind to host the data files. Eric Sent from my iPhone On Nov 3, 2012, at 4:22, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I have not yet tried KOH. Once I get all the kinks worked out of this, there is no reason I couldn't run several simultaneous electrolytic cells (recording data from all)."
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
Have you tryed potassium hydroxide, the Blacklight Electrolyte? Axil. On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I shot a little video of my latest experiment with borax. It is controlled with an Android phone, IOIO microcontroller, and relay bank. I am switching back and forth between AC and DC current supplies. Pardon the mess of wires as I am early in the process. It is interesting how the electrolyte turns a copper brown color. That was after running 1 1/2 days on DC current at 5 to 13 watts. I'm using the same 8 nickels on the thoriated tungsten rod as a cathode and 4 stainless steel washers as the anode. There is more heating and almost no bubbles on AC. I'm not sure what brown color is about. I've seen this repeatedly. What I'm interested to try is to see the max temperature achieved by AC alone, then DC alone, and then AC and DC alternating for different periods of time. http://youtu.be/sH90M85S2mE Regards, Jack
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
I have not yet tried KOH. Once I get all the kinks worked out of this, there is no reason I couldn't run several simultaneous electrolytic cells (recording data from all). On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 1:21 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Have you tryed potassium hydroxide, the Blacklight Electrolyte? Axil. On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I shot a little video of my latest experiment with borax. It is controlled with an Android phone, IOIO microcontroller, and relay bank. I am switching back and forth between AC and DC current supplies. Pardon the mess of wires as I am early in the process. It is interesting how the electrolyte turns a copper brown color. That was after running 1 1/2 days on DC current at 5 to 13 watts. I'm using the same 8 nickels on the thoriated tungsten rod as a cathode and 4 stainless steel washers as the anode. There is more heating and almost no bubbles on AC. I'm not sure what brown color is about. I've seen this repeatedly. What I'm interested to try is to see the max temperature achieved by AC alone, then DC alone, and then AC and DC alternating for different periods of time. http://youtu.be/sH90M85S2mE Regards, Jack
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
If at some point you think you see something, are you interested in making your data series (for both good and unsuccessful runs) available? Doing would have the following tradeoffs: + you would be helping to advance hobbyist science - you would no longer have the inside scoop into whatever is happening, making it harder to get priority on any potentially (very) lucrative patents. This question is also for any other amateurs attempting data acquisition. We could set up a site of some kind to host the data files. Eric Sent from my iPhone On Nov 3, 2012, at 4:22, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I have not yet tried KOH. Once I get all the kinks worked out of this, there is no reason I couldn't run several simultaneous electrolytic cells (recording data from all).
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
I have no problem with sharing--there has been too little of that so far. I've been planning at some point to set up a site to detail the work so others could do it if they would like. With the app I have written, there would be no problem with having it upload data to a server after the run is completed. What I am testing is having it automatically email the data to me as an attachment when it has finished. That way I know the experiment is complete, and I can take a look at the data. I would prefer to detail each piece of equipment involved and where to buy it, as that is helpful to the hobbyist like me. Jack On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: If at some point you think you see something, are you interested in making your data series (for both good and unsuccessful runs) available? Doing would have the following tradeoffs: + you would be helping to advance hobbyist science - you would no longer have the inside scoop into whatever is happening, making it harder to get priority on any potentially (very) lucrative patents. This question is also for any other amateurs attempting data acquisition. We could set up a site of some kind to host the data files. Eric Sent from my iPhone On Nov 3, 2012, at 4:22, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I have not yet tried KOH. Once I get all the kinks worked out of this, there is no reason I couldn't run several simultaneous electrolytic cells (recording data from all).
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
This variety of experiment should measure, total energy input versus total energy output. To properly get this result, should not the hydrogen and oxygen be recombined to produce heat output? This energy of gas recombination should be added to the heat produced in the electrolyte solution for a proper comparison that might show over unity output. To simplify the details of the experiment, the volume of the gas produced by electrolysis could be measured and a calculation of its heat content might be used in calculation of total heat output of the electrolyte cell. Cheers: Axil On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I have no problem with sharing--there has been too little of that so far. I've been planning at some point to set up a site to detail the work so others could do it if they would like. With the app I have written, there would be no problem with having it upload data to a server after the run is completed. What I am testing is having it automatically email the data to me as an attachment when it has finished. That way I know the experiment is complete, and I can take a look at the data. I would prefer to detail each piece of equipment involved and where to buy it, as that is helpful to the hobbyist like me. Jack On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.comwrote: If at some point you think you see something, are you interested in making your data series (for both good and unsuccessful runs) available? Doing would have the following tradeoffs: + you would be helping to advance hobbyist science - you would no longer have the inside scoop into whatever is happening, making it harder to get priority on any potentially (very) lucrative patents. This question is also for any other amateurs attempting data acquisition. We could set up a site of some kind to host the data files. Eric Sent from my iPhone On Nov 3, 2012, at 4:22, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I have not yet tried KOH. Once I get all the kinks worked out of this, there is no reason I couldn't run several simultaneous electrolytic cells (recording data from all).
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
Started a new run this evening. I finished the coding for a fully automated experimental series, and I'm running a trial run to make sure everything is working correctly. For the trial run, here is my procedure: Run a 3 minute baseline with no power to collect temp data. Run a 5 minute run with 12V 400 mAmp. Let cell cool to within 5 degrees F of ambient. Run another 5 minutes with 12V 400 mAmp. Let cell cool to within 5 of ambient. Run 5 minutes @ 24VDC and 800 mAmp. Let cell cool to within 5 of ambient. Run 5 minutes with alternating between 24VDC 800 mAmp 8 seconds and 24VDC/12VDC rapid alternating pulses for 2 seconds (120-150 pulses per second) Continue recording data while cools to within 5 of ambient. For now, I'm just testing everything out, and not really expecting any LENR to be happening. If the delta T for run 4 is statistically significantly greater than run 3, we may suspect something interesting is happening. I'm sampling temp and amperage every 10 seconds. I'll post a video update when I get time to upload. Regards, Jack On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: There are some interesting pieces of equipment on this website that may be useful in experimenting. http://www.amazing1.com/hv-hf-power-supplies.htm In particular, I'm thinking the high frequency AC would be useful in inducing high surface current flow in the electrodes (i.e., Robert Godes method). On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Chuck, I blew my wall wort power supplies. The IOIO board current for USB charging was set to low causing my phone to lose a connection with the board. This then caused the AC and DC supplies to short together. Which is not that big of a deal as I still have some that I haven't burned up yet. Really, I need to get some good power supplies with protection against things like that. The AC ones burn out pretty easily, so it is definitely better to pulse them on and off to give them time to cool. Anyway, I took that opportunity to relocate everything to my basement as the temperature variations in the garage add a complicating layer to all the measurements. At the same time, I got my temp sensors in from Atlas Scientific. I then hooked them up to the IOIO board and did the programming to measure the voltages and convert to temperature. They are working well. Just last night, I got everything set up again. I need to do a little more programming to save the recorded temperature values to a file. If I can get an AC power supply that will hold up, I'll do a several day automated run. 1. Run on DC only and see the max temp achieved. 2. Run on AC only and see the max temp achieved. 3. Run AC/DC switching and see the max temp achieved. I think in theory #3 should produce a max temp somewhere in between 1 and 2. If it's greater than 1 and 2, that would be very interesting. I'll make another video once I start running again. Jack On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Jack for the find. Good info. I love the idea of doing a CF experiment via an Android phone app. Just add a couple of thermistors and a hacked together current and voltage multi-meter function and you will have all necessary measurements for calorimetry data collection. How is the experiment going by the way? For the DC/AC do charge the nickel with H. So, on the DC cycle, you will want to nickel to be Cathod (-) this time. The idea with the AC, is you want as much hydrogen stuffed into the niickel lattice as you can get initially. Once the surface lattice is loaded several atoms deep, switch the current to AC. Summery; start high-current DC with Nickel as the Cathode (-) to infuse H into the Nickel lattice. Then apply AC to alternate the electro-motive forces on the H in the lattice. If you using two nickels in the AC/DC experiment, then the nickel on the (-) cathode should get hot during the AC cycle. The purpose of the AC is to create an EMF that will vibrate the H such that fusion probability increases. Best Regards, Chuck On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Chuck. It's a fun hobby. I don't program in Java having done so much in visual basic over the years. Fortunately, I found a language for Android that is very much like VB called Basic4Androidhttps://www.plimus.com/jsp/redirect.jsp?contractId=1715566referrer=1047706. It has a library for the IOIO board. On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.comwrote: Thanks for sharing the video Jack. I really like how your controlling that with and Android and IOIO microcontroller.I'm a beginner Android developer and the little IOIO PIC device is really cool. That is a great way of doing a duty cycle on the AC/DC. Here is a nice discussion on the IOIO (yo-yo) board for others that might be interested.
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
Chuck, I blew my wall wort power supplies. The IOIO board current for USB charging was set to low causing my phone to lose a connection with the board. This then caused the AC and DC supplies to short together. Which is not that big of a deal as I still have some that I haven't burned up yet. Really, I need to get some good power supplies with protection against things like that. The AC ones burn out pretty easily, so it is definitely better to pulse them on and off to give them time to cool. Anyway, I took that opportunity to relocate everything to my basement as the temperature variations in the garage add a complicating layer to all the measurements. At the same time, I got my temp sensors in from Atlas Scientific. I then hooked them up to the IOIO board and did the programming to measure the voltages and convert to temperature. They are working well. Just last night, I got everything set up again. I need to do a little more programming to save the recorded temperature values to a file. If I can get an AC power supply that will hold up, I'll do a several day automated run. 1. Run on DC only and see the max temp achieved. 2. Run on AC only and see the max temp achieved. 3. Run AC/DC switching and see the max temp achieved. I think in theory #3 should produce a max temp somewhere in between 1 and 2. If it's greater than 1 and 2, that would be very interesting. I'll make another video once I start running again. Jack On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Jack for the find. Good info. I love the idea of doing a CF experiment via an Android phone app. Just add a couple of thermistors and a hacked together current and voltage multi-meter function and you will have all necessary measurements for calorimetry data collection. How is the experiment going by the way? For the DC/AC do charge the nickel with H. So, on the DC cycle, you will want to nickel to be Cathod (-) this time. The idea with the AC, is you want as much hydrogen stuffed into the niickel lattice as you can get initially. Once the surface lattice is loaded several atoms deep, switch the current to AC. Summery; start high-current DC with Nickel as the Cathode (-) to infuse H into the Nickel lattice. Then apply AC to alternate the electro-motive forces on the H in the lattice. If you using two nickels in the AC/DC experiment, then the nickel on the (-) cathode should get hot during the AC cycle. The purpose of the AC is to create an EMF that will vibrate the H such that fusion probability increases. Best Regards, Chuck On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Chuck. It's a fun hobby. I don't program in Java having done so much in visual basic over the years. Fortunately, I found a language for Android that is very much like VB called Basic4Androidhttps://www.plimus.com/jsp/redirect.jsp?contractId=1715566referrer=1047706. It has a library for the IOIO board. On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for sharing the video Jack. I really like how your controlling that with and Android and IOIO microcontroller.I'm a beginner Android developer and the little IOIO PIC device is really cool.That is a great way of doing a duty cycle on the AC/DC. Here is a nice discussion on the IOIO (yo-yo) board for others that might be interested. http://androidcontrol.blogspot.com/2011/10/ioio-board-for-android-control-io.html Best Regards, Chuck On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I shot a little video of my latest experiment with borax. It is controlled with an Android phone, IOIO microcontroller, and relay bank. I am switching back and forth between AC and DC current supplies. Pardon the mess of wires as I am early in the process. It is interesting how the electrolyte turns a copper brown color. That was after running 1 1/2 days on DC current at 5 to 13 watts. I'm using the same 8 nickels on the thoriated tungsten rod as a cathode and 4 stainless steel washers as the anode. There is more heating and almost no bubbles on AC. I'm not sure what brown color is about. I've seen this repeatedly. What I'm interested to try is to see the max temperature achieved by AC alone, then DC alone, and then AC and DC alternating for different periods of time. http://youtu.be/sH90M85S2mE Regards, Jack
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
There are some interesting pieces of equipment on this website that may be useful in experimenting. http://www.amazing1.com/hv-hf-power-supplies.htm In particular, I'm thinking the high frequency AC would be useful in inducing high surface current flow in the electrodes (i.e., Robert Godes method). On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Chuck, I blew my wall wort power supplies. The IOIO board current for USB charging was set to low causing my phone to lose a connection with the board. This then caused the AC and DC supplies to short together. Which is not that big of a deal as I still have some that I haven't burned up yet. Really, I need to get some good power supplies with protection against things like that. The AC ones burn out pretty easily, so it is definitely better to pulse them on and off to give them time to cool. Anyway, I took that opportunity to relocate everything to my basement as the temperature variations in the garage add a complicating layer to all the measurements. At the same time, I got my temp sensors in from Atlas Scientific. I then hooked them up to the IOIO board and did the programming to measure the voltages and convert to temperature. They are working well. Just last night, I got everything set up again. I need to do a little more programming to save the recorded temperature values to a file. If I can get an AC power supply that will hold up, I'll do a several day automated run. 1. Run on DC only and see the max temp achieved. 2. Run on AC only and see the max temp achieved. 3. Run AC/DC switching and see the max temp achieved. I think in theory #3 should produce a max temp somewhere in between 1 and 2. If it's greater than 1 and 2, that would be very interesting. I'll make another video once I start running again. Jack On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Jack for the find. Good info. I love the idea of doing a CF experiment via an Android phone app. Just add a couple of thermistors and a hacked together current and voltage multi-meter function and you will have all necessary measurements for calorimetry data collection. How is the experiment going by the way? For the DC/AC do charge the nickel with H. So, on the DC cycle, you will want to nickel to be Cathod (-) this time. The idea with the AC, is you want as much hydrogen stuffed into the niickel lattice as you can get initially. Once the surface lattice is loaded several atoms deep, switch the current to AC. Summery; start high-current DC with Nickel as the Cathode (-) to infuse H into the Nickel lattice. Then apply AC to alternate the electro-motive forces on the H in the lattice. If you using two nickels in the AC/DC experiment, then the nickel on the (-) cathode should get hot during the AC cycle. The purpose of the AC is to create an EMF that will vibrate the H such that fusion probability increases. Best Regards, Chuck On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Chuck. It's a fun hobby. I don't program in Java having done so much in visual basic over the years. Fortunately, I found a language for Android that is very much like VB called Basic4Androidhttps://www.plimus.com/jsp/redirect.jsp?contractId=1715566referrer=1047706. It has a library for the IOIO board. On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.comwrote: Thanks for sharing the video Jack. I really like how your controlling that with and Android and IOIO microcontroller.I'm a beginner Android developer and the little IOIO PIC device is really cool.That is a great way of doing a duty cycle on the AC/DC. Here is a nice discussion on the IOIO (yo-yo) board for others that might be interested. http://androidcontrol.blogspot.com/2011/10/ioio-board-for-android-control-io.html Best Regards, Chuck On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I shot a little video of my latest experiment with borax. It is controlled with an Android phone, IOIO microcontroller, and relay bank. I am switching back and forth between AC and DC current supplies. Pardon the mess of wires as I am early in the process. It is interesting how the electrolyte turns a copper brown color. That was after running 1 1/2 days on DC current at 5 to 13 watts. I'm using the same 8 nickels on the thoriated tungsten rod as a cathode and 4 stainless steel washers as the anode. There is more heating and almost no bubbles on AC. I'm not sure what brown color is about. I've seen this repeatedly. What I'm interested to try is to see the max temperature achieved by AC alone, then DC alone, and then AC and DC alternating for different periods of time. http://youtu.be/sH90M85S2mE Regards, Jack
[Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
I shot a little video of my latest experiment with borax. It is controlled with an Android phone, IOIO microcontroller, and relay bank. I am switching back and forth between AC and DC current supplies. Pardon the mess of wires as I am early in the process. It is interesting how the electrolyte turns a copper brown color. That was after running 1 1/2 days on DC current at 5 to 13 watts. I'm using the same 8 nickels on the thoriated tungsten rod as a cathode and 4 stainless steel washers as the anode. There is more heating and almost no bubbles on AC. I'm not sure what brown color is about. I've seen this repeatedly. What I'm interested to try is to see the max temperature achieved by AC alone, then DC alone, and then AC and DC alternating for different periods of time. http://youtu.be/sH90M85S2mE Regards, Jack
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
Thanks for sharing the video Jack. I really like how your controlling that with and Android and IOIO microcontroller.I'm a beginner Android developer and the little IOIO PIC device is really cool.That is a great way of doing a duty cycle on the AC/DC. Here is a nice discussion on the IOIO (yo-yo) board for others that might be interested. http://androidcontrol.blogspot.com/2011/10/ioio-board-for-android-control-io.html Best Regards, Chuck On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I shot a little video of my latest experiment with borax. It is controlled with an Android phone, IOIO microcontroller, and relay bank. I am switching back and forth between AC and DC current supplies. Pardon the mess of wires as I am early in the process. It is interesting how the electrolyte turns a copper brown color. That was after running 1 1/2 days on DC current at 5 to 13 watts. I'm using the same 8 nickels on the thoriated tungsten rod as a cathode and 4 stainless steel washers as the anode. There is more heating and almost no bubbles on AC. I'm not sure what brown color is about. I've seen this repeatedly. What I'm interested to try is to see the max temperature achieved by AC alone, then DC alone, and then AC and DC alternating for different periods of time. http://youtu.be/sH90M85S2mE Regards, Jack
Re: [Vo]:New experiment started AC/DC
Thanks Chuck. It's a fun hobby. I don't program in Java having done so much in visual basic over the years. Fortunately, I found a language for Android that is very much like VB called Basic4Androidhttps://www.plimus.com/jsp/redirect.jsp?contractId=1715566referrer=1047706. It has a library for the IOIO board. On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for sharing the video Jack. I really like how your controlling that with and Android and IOIO microcontroller.I'm a beginner Android developer and the little IOIO PIC device is really cool.That is a great way of doing a duty cycle on the AC/DC. Here is a nice discussion on the IOIO (yo-yo) board for others that might be interested. http://androidcontrol.blogspot.com/2011/10/ioio-board-for-android-control-io.html Best Regards, Chuck On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: I shot a little video of my latest experiment with borax. It is controlled with an Android phone, IOIO microcontroller, and relay bank. I am switching back and forth between AC and DC current supplies. Pardon the mess of wires as I am early in the process. It is interesting how the electrolyte turns a copper brown color. That was after running 1 1/2 days on DC current at 5 to 13 watts. I'm using the same 8 nickels on the thoriated tungsten rod as a cathode and 4 stainless steel washers as the anode. There is more heating and almost no bubbles on AC. I'm not sure what brown color is about. I've seen this repeatedly. What I'm interested to try is to see the max temperature achieved by AC alone, then DC alone, and then AC and DC alternating for different periods of time. http://youtu.be/sH90M85S2mE Regards, Jack
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Hello Mark, I have been using regular tap water. Your question makes me reconsider the alternatives. Where can I find a source for distilled water that is readily available? I assumed that the large quantity of Borax or other electrolyte would dominate the reaction and the water at my location is of excellent quality and exhibits an extremely large impedance until the powders are added. Dave -Original Message- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 26, 2012 1:43 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Dave, Sorry if I missed it, but are you using tap water, or distilled/deionized water? -mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 9:57 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started That appears like a pretty good process for the nickel. Jack, I will follow your procedure after I complete a couple of experiments. I tried something interesting today that I plan to investigate further. I acted like a manual switch for a couple of nickels where I reversed the DC current periodically to see how the coatings behaved. I let current flow until the resistance reached about 50 ohms in one direction and then reversed the current until the same value was seen in the other direction. This procedure was carried out for about 5 cycles. Initially, a green coating was deposited upon the positively connected nickel which was then flaked off by the reverse current. A significant amount of green material was deposited within my electrolyte due to the cyclic coating and flaking. The AC was then applied and I noticed that very little gas was escaping from the electrodes even though a current of 1 to 2 amps was flowing. The resistance remained low during the AC testing which is in process as I write. The electrolyte evaporated twice to a level that had to be replenish as typical. This post is a quick update. Dave -Original Message- From: Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Jack, that is just about right. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Dave, You wrote: Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. I think you can get this with the oxidization process with using a nickel as the anode with DC for a couple of hours to form the green oxidized copper. The green oxidized copper can then be burned off with a torch. My approach has been to first use the nicked as an anode for 1 to 2 hours. Burn off the oxidized copper with a torch. Then slow treat with hydrogen as the cathode and low current DC for a few days. Then switch to AC. With respect to the B2O3, I've found that most of this will burn off. But I have some that simply melted into a transparent clear blob adhering to some of the surfaces of the nickels. Take care, Jack On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting. I performed a small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green coating that was so evident with DC. Instead, there was a jet black coating being formed upon the nickels. Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel connected to the positive terminal. I allowed this process to continue for a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish looking finish where the old coatings were. This finish has a rough appearance. So far the bottom line is that AC drive behaves far differently than DC drive in this system. I can definitely see boiling electrolyte temperatures between the two nickels with AC drive while far fewer bubbles of gas are released by the active mechanisms as compared to DC drive. With AC, the effective resistance of the combination remains much lower than with DC current. The high resistance appears to correspond with the deposition of the green coating that follows DC current flow. My present transformer will not allow me to achieve the 100-140 volt drive levels so that would have to be achieved by some other means. I have a few ideas regarding the use of an adjustable transformer, but that would be difficult to handle. I do not feel comfortable with direct connection by metallic path to the AC mains. It would be too easy to become electrocuted with one
RE: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
I asked because as 'clean and pure' as you might think your tap water is, there's a lot of minerals and other stuff that will likely be attracted to your electrodes. What's the difference between distilled and deionized? http://www.distilleddeionizedwater.com/deionized-water-vs-distilled-water/ Deionized water is deeply demineralized, ultrapure water with the resistivity close to 18 megohm-cm. It is used in microelectronics, printed circuit boards, instrument manufacture, pharmacy, washing liquids, etc. Most supermarkets have some kind of distilled water (commonly used in steam irons). Deionized water can be obtained from any chemical supply house. -Mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 10:11 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Hello Mark, I have been using regular tap water. Your question makes me reconsider the alternatives. Where can I find a source for distilled water that is readily available? I assumed that the large quantity of Borax or other electrolyte would dominate the reaction and the water at my location is of excellent quality and exhibits an extremely large impedance until the powders are added. Dave -Original Message- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 26, 2012 1:43 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Dave, Sorry if I missed it, but are you using tap water, or distilled/deionized water? -mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com mailto:dlrober...@aol.com? ] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 9:57 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started That appears like a pretty good process for the nickel. Jack, I will follow your procedure after I complete a couple of experiments. I tried something interesting today that I plan to investigate further. I acted like a manual switch for a couple of nickels where I reversed the DC current periodically to see how the coatings behaved. I let current flow until the resistance reached about 50 ohms in one direction and then reversed the current until the same value was seen in the other direction. This procedure was carried out for about 5 cycles. Initially, a green coating was deposited upon the positively connected nickel which was then flaked off by the reverse current. A significant amount of green material was deposited within my electrolyte due to the cyclic coating and flaking. The AC was then applied and I noticed that very little gas was escaping from the electrodes even though a current of 1 to 2 amps was flowing. The resistance remained low during the AC testing which is in process as I write. The electrolyte evaporated twice to a level that had to be replenish as typical. This post is a quick update. Dave -Original Message- From: Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Jack, that is just about right. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Dave, You wrote: Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. I think you can get this with the oxidization process with using a nickel as the anode with DC for a couple of hours to form the green oxidized copper. The green oxidized copper can then be burned off with a torch. My approach has been to first use the nicked as an anode for 1 to 2 hours. Burn off the oxidized copper with a torch. Then slow treat with hydrogen as the cathode and low current DC for a few days. Then switch to AC. With respect to the B2O3, I've found that most of this will burn off. But I have some that simply melted into a transparent clear blob adhering to some of the surfaces of the nickels. Take care, Jack On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting. I performed a small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green coating that was so evident with DC. Instead, there was a jet black coating being formed upon the nickels. Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel connected to the positive terminal. I allowed this process to continue for a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish looking finish where the old coatings were. This finish has a rough appearance. So far the bottom line is that AC drive
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Checked the labels. I think you will find that most distilled water has also been deionized.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
You should be able to find it at most grocery stores. You can get a couple of gallons inexpensively. On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:11 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Hello Mark, I have been using regular tap water. Your question makes me reconsider the alternatives. Where can I find a source for distilled water that is readily available? I assumed that the large quantity of Borax or other electrolyte would dominate the reaction and the water at my location is of excellent quality and exhibits an extremely large impedance until the powders are added. Dave -Original Message- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 26, 2012 1:43 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Dave, Sorry if I missed it, but are you using tap water, or distilled/deionized water? -mark *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com dlrober...@aol.com?] *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2012 9:57 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started That appears like a pretty good process for the nickel. Jack, I will follow your procedure after I complete a couple of experiments. I tried something interesting today that I plan to investigate further. I acted like a manual switch for a couple of nickels where I reversed the DC current periodically to see how the coatings behaved. I let current flow until the resistance reached about 50 ohms in one direction and then reversed the current until the same value was seen in the other direction. This procedure was carried out for about 5 cycles. Initially, a green coating was deposited upon the positively connected nickel which was then flaked off by the reverse current. A significant amount of green material was deposited within my electrolyte due to the cyclic coating and flaking. The AC was then applied and I noticed that very little gas was escaping from the electrodes even though a current of 1 to 2 amps was flowing. The resistance remained low during the AC testing which is in process as I write. The electrolyte evaporated twice to a level that had to be replenish as typical. This post is a quick update. Dave -Original Message- From: Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Jack, that is just about right. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Dave, You wrote: Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. I think you can get this with the oxidization process with using a nickel as the anode with DC for a couple of hours to form the green oxidized copper. The green oxidized copper can then be burned off with a torch. My approach has been to first use the nicked as an anode for 1 to 2 hours. Burn off the oxidized copper with a torch. Then slow treat with hydrogen as the cathode and low current DC for a few days. Then switch to AC. With respect to the B2O3, I've found that most of this will burn off. But I have some that simply melted into a transparent clear blob adhering to some of the surfaces of the nickels. Take care, Jack On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting. I performed a small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green coating that was so evident with DC. Instead, there was a jet black coating being formed upon the nickels. Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel connected to the positive terminal. I allowed this process to continue for a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish looking finish where the old coatings were. This finish has a rough appearance. So far the bottom line is that AC drive behaves far differently than DC drive in this system. I can definitely see boiling electrolyte temperatures between the two nickels with AC drive while far fewer bubbles of gas are released by the active mechanisms as compared to DC drive. With AC, the effective resistance of the combination remains much lower than with DC current. The high resistance appears to correspond with the deposition of the green coating that follows DC current flow. My present transformer will not allow me to achieve the 100-140 volt drive levels so that would have to be achieved by some other means. I have a few ideas regarding the use
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Checked the labels. I think you will find that most distilled water has also been deionized. Note that at grocery stores they sell both distilled water and purified water. You want the distilled type. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Good Luck with the new experiments David. I think you will see some interesting effects. Regarding the sparks and light flashes, I ran across a paper that describes an spark effect, but it was seen in the 100-140Volt range. Horace Heffner describes it in his paper; http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/GlowExper.pdf It could be that the local electric potential is large enough that the sparkle effect happens. Anyway, with the AC, do try the DC pre-charging. If there is a true LENR effect, I would think this is one of the better ways of see it.The pre-charging might allow coating of the cupronickel with B2O3 which Mile's hints was one method of rapid LENR in his youtube video. In addition, as Storm's has suggested, you might pre-fill the lattice dislocations. Once the AC begins, hopefully you will see a robust heating effect. With AC, you should see the Na2[B4O5(OH)4] oscillating back and forth, and swarms of H+ push through the Cu-Ni B4O5(OH)4 surface. I found some old notes, that indicated in DC, the green salts could be CuB2O3 and darker salts as NiB2O3. See if you can spot a glow too. Maybe it's Cherenkov radiation. Anyway, Have fun. It's been interesting to see how much more bizarre this little experiment gets. Chuck On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:54 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It is time for a change in my experimentation. I spent a lot of time and energy with the sodium carbonate electrolyte and DC current without being able to report any proven excess power. There is evidence that the Borax electrolyte might lead to more definitive results so that is what I began using again today. Earlier I started using Borax after finding that table salt was a terribly corrosive material. I used the Borax for several days as it slowly ate away at my positively connected electrodes before I decided to go to the sodium carbonate. I stuck with the sodium carbonate for so long since I was mainly concerned about the hydrogen loading of the cathode which should have been similar with either electrolyte. Today, I rewound a transformer to yield 21 volts AC RMS. This is an ideal way to drive the system with AC since the transformer automatically isolates it from the AC mains and leads to a safe experiment. I am using 21 volts because that is all I obtained with the transformer core with which I started when I placed as many turns as possible (36) in the secondary slot with the wire size that was convenient. I was worried that this might not be enough voltage, but found that I could still drive the cell with between 1 and 2 amps RMS depending upon the spacing between the electrodes. The joule losses within the transformer are quite low and it is in no danger of overheating. The cell is receiving around 40 watts of power which is within reason. I am using a Pyrex dish for my cell, the same one that I have been using for several days. It is open and wide so the cell temperature is fairly low due to large heat loss. I am curious as to whether or not I get the strange sparks that seemed so prevalent with my earlier DC system. I have noticed that there is a lot less gas being released at the electrodes due to the AC drive current. The AC drive current does not appear to cause the green deposits that were so evident with the DC current. I initially allowed the green mess to be plated upon one of the test nickels attached to the positive DC supply connection. After a period of time the green material was shaken off and a dark deposit replaced it as the current increased. I do not know what material is plating that nickel, but it allows for good conductivity. I placed my old reliable nickel on the other electrode for the AC testing. The poor nickel has been undergoing electrolysis for many days, has been heated red hot and quenched 5 times, has been soaked in a mild acid for a couple of days, and then sanded to roughen its surface. I am not sure what else I can do to make it more miserable! Dave
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting. I performed a small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green coating that was so evident with DC. Instead, there was a jet black coating being formed upon the nickels. Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel connected to the positive terminal. I allowed this process to continue for a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish looking finish where the old coatings were. This finish has a rough appearance. So far the bottom line is that AC drive behaves far differently than DC drive in this system. I can definitely see boiling electrolyte temperatures between the two nickels with AC drive while far fewer bubbles of gas are released by the active mechanisms as compared to DC drive. With AC, the effective resistance of the combination remains much lower than with DC current. The high resistance appears to correspond with the deposition of the green coating that follows DC current flow. My present transformer will not allow me to achieve the 100-140 volt drive levels so that would have to be achieved by some other means. I have a few ideas regarding the use of an adjustable transformer, but that would be difficult to handle. I do not feel comfortable with direct connection by metallic path to the AC mains. It would be too easy to become electrocuted with one careless maneuver. My AC RMS voltage is 21 volts for these tests so the resistance must remain less than 10 ohms between the terminals if I am to drive the system with 2 amps of current. I am able to achieve this goal without too much difficulty when the green coating is absent. I need to perform more experimentation with this combination. The salts you suspect are interesting. Do you suspect that the normal oxides of the nickel and copper are suppressed? Also, I am not aware of any visual change to the surface of the nickel if hydrogen has entered. Would anyone expect a color change or other indication when this happens? I would love to see the glow that Horace mentions and perhaps that day will come when I figure a good way to drive the cell in a safe manner. It is apparent that I will need to pre-charge the nickels before applying the full voltage unless I want to melt my experiment. If I used my typical resistance of 10 ohms and set the input AC to 100 volts RMS, I would generate 1000 watts of power at a current of 10 amps. I wonder if the sparks I saw with the sodium carbonate were somehow related to the glow mentioned by Horace. My results were correlated with the open circuit voltage rising toward 50 volts as it attempted to maintain the current at a constant level. The sparks suggest to me some form of burning mechanism and I got a large dose of the vapor by accident once when watching the phenomena too closely. It was a strong odor that I hope is not carcinogenic. The smoke I breathed was definitely not water vapor. Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. Dave P.S. AC in my posting is standard line frequency in the US which is 60 hertz. -Original Message- From: Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Good Luck with the new experiments David. I think you will see some interesting effects. Regarding the sparks and light flashes, I ran across a paper that describes an spark effect, but it was seen in the 100-140Volt range. Horace Heffner describes it in his paper; http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/GlowExper.pdf It could be that the local electric potential is large enough that the sparkle effect happens. Anyway, with the AC, do try the DC pre-charging. If there is a true LENR effect, I would think this is one of the better ways of see it.The pre-charging might allow coating of the cupronickel with B2O3 which Mile's hints was one method of rapid LENR in his youtube video. In addition, as Storm's has suggested, you might pre-fill the lattice dislocations. Once the AC begins, hopefully you will see a robust heating effect. With AC, you should see the Na2[B4O5(OH)4] oscillating back and forth, and swarms of H+ push through the Cu-Ni B4O5(OH)4 surface. I found some old notes, that indicated in DC, the green salts could be CuB2O3 and darker salts as NiB2O3. See if you can spot a glow too. Maybe it's Cherenkov radiation. Anyway, Have fun. It's been interesting
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Dear Dave, You wrote: Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. I think you can get this with the oxidization process with using a nickel as the anode with DC for a couple of hours to form the green oxidized copper. The green oxidized copper can then be burned off with a torch. My approach has been to first use the nicked as an anode for 1 to 2 hours. Burn off the oxidized copper with a torch. Then slow treat with hydrogen as the cathode and low current DC for a few days. Then switch to AC. With respect to the B2O3, I've found that most of this will burn off. But I have some that simply melted into a transparent clear blob adhering to some of the surfaces of the nickels. Take care, Jack On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting. I performed a small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green coating that was so evident with DC. Instead, there was a jet black coating being formed upon the nickels. Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel connected to the positive terminal. I allowed this process to continue for a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish looking finish where the old coatings were. This finish has a rough appearance. So far the bottom line is that AC drive behaves far differently than DC drive in this system. I can definitely see boiling electrolyte temperatures between the two nickels with AC drive while far fewer bubbles of gas are released by the active mechanisms as compared to DC drive. With AC, the effective resistance of the combination remains much lower than with DC current. The high resistance appears to correspond with the deposition of the green coating that follows DC current flow. My present transformer will not allow me to achieve the 100-140 volt drive levels so that would have to be achieved by some other means. I have a few ideas regarding the use of an adjustable transformer, but that would be difficult to handle. I do not feel comfortable with direct connection by metallic path to the AC mains. It would be too easy to become electrocuted with one careless maneuver. My AC RMS voltage is 21 volts for these tests so the resistance must remain less than 10 ohms between the terminals if I am to drive the system with 2 amps of current. I am able to achieve this goal without too much difficulty when the green coating is absent. I need to perform more experimentation with this combination. The salts you suspect are interesting. Do you suspect that the normal oxides of the nickel and copper are suppressed? Also, I am not aware of any visual change to the surface of the nickel if hydrogen has entered. Would anyone expect a color change or other indication when this happens? I would love to see the glow that Horace mentions and perhaps that day will come when I figure a good way to drive the cell in a safe manner. It is apparent that I will need to pre-charge the nickels before applying the full voltage unless I want to melt my experiment. If I used my typical resistance of 10 ohms and set the input AC to 100 volts RMS, I would generate 1000 watts of power at a current of 10 amps. I wonder if the sparks I saw with the sodium carbonate were somehow related to the glow mentioned by Horace. My results were correlated with the open circuit voltage rising toward 50 volts as it attempted to maintain the current at a constant level. The sparks suggest to me some form of burning mechanism and I got a large dose of the vapor by accident once when watching the phenomena too closely. It was a strong odor that I hope is not carcinogenic. The smoke I breathed was definitely not water vapor. Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. Dave P.S. AC in my posting is standard line frequency in the US which is 60 hertz. -Original Message- From: Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Good Luck with the new experiments David. I think you will see some interesting effects. Regarding the sparks and light flashes, I ran across a paper that describes an spark effect
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started -- Sodium + Epsom Salts explosion
Another warning on electrolysis and stuff http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol9.pdf p64 Lakshmanan During sodium metal dissolution in aqueous Epsom salts, it was accidentally discovered that a massive explosion occurs in 0.85 M Epsom solution on the completion of Na dissolution. ... However, at the end of Na dissolution, i.e., 30 s after Na addition, an intense and massive explosion occurred, accompanied with Na aerosol release and a shock wave as well as vaporization of Borosil glass beaker containing salt solution. The explosion attracted the attention of everyone in the building due to its high intensity, even people in rooms far from the one where the experiment was carried out. Molten glass needles flew all around, making holes too small to be seen with the naked eye in two plastic water bottles at two different locations about 2 m from the explosion. I was standing 4–5 m from the cell when it exploded. The needles scratched my hand. Borosil glass vaporizes at temperatures 1000°C. This fact indicates that a very high temperature has indeed been reached in this experiment. The timing of the explosion (20–25 s after Na addition) is prima facie evidence that hydrogen somehow got trapped in the solution. A normal hydrogen explosion occurs within 5–10 s after Na addition in dilute salt solutions, and the intensity of a normal explosion is not sufficient to vaporize the glass beaker.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started -- Sodium + Epsom Salts explosion
Nice reference Alan, Yes, I also encourage the basement experimentalist to be-careful with these experiments. The boranes (ie. B_x H_y) can be toxic, and even explosive. B2H4 is rocket fuel. Throw sodium in the mix, hydrogen and oxygen, Its like lighting a match. Chemically. I ran these types of experiments for a couple of years and never had any problems.That is the way I would treat it. It's not something you would do in you high school chemistry class, but don't be concerned if a high-school-er does it (at low voltage!). Certainly have a Geiger counter handy for the heck of it. Storms has it right. A long period of Geiger counter readings should expose the phenomena. What looks like a slight rise or fall certainly could be a low level fusion signature. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Another warning on electrolysis and stuff http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol9.pdf p64 Lakshmanan During sodium metal dissolution in aqueous Epsom salts, it was accidentally discovered that a massive explosion occurs in 0.85 M Epsom solution on the completion of Na dissolution. ... However, at the end of Na dissolution, i.e., 30 s after Na addition, an intense and massive explosion occurred, accompanied with Na aerosol release and a shock wave as well as vaporization of Borosil glass beaker containing salt solution. The explosion attracted the attention of everyone in the building due to its high intensity, even people in rooms far from the one where the experiment was carried out. Molten glass needles flew all around, making holes too small to be seen with the naked eye in two plastic water bottles at two different locations about 2 m from the explosion. I was standing 4–5 m from the cell when it exploded. The needles scratched my hand. Borosil glass vaporizes at temperatures 1000°C. This fact indicates that a very high temperature has indeed been reached in this experiment. The timing of the explosion (20–25 s after Na addition) is prima facie evidence that hydrogen somehow got trapped in the solution. A normal hydrogen explosion occurs within 5–10 s after Na addition in dilute salt solutions, and the intensity of a normal explosion is not sufficient to vaporize the glass beaker.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Jack, that is just about right. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Dave, You wrote: Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. I think you can get this with the oxidization process with using a nickel as the anode with DC for a couple of hours to form the green oxidized copper. The green oxidized copper can then be burned off with a torch. My approach has been to first use the nicked as an anode for 1 to 2 hours. Burn off the oxidized copper with a torch. Then slow treat with hydrogen as the cathode and low current DC for a few days. Then switch to AC. With respect to the B2O3, I've found that most of this will burn off. But I have some that simply melted into a transparent clear blob adhering to some of the surfaces of the nickels. Take care, Jack On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting. I performed a small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green coating that was so evident with DC. Instead, there was a jet black coating being formed upon the nickels. Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel connected to the positive terminal. I allowed this process to continue for a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish looking finish where the old coatings were. This finish has a rough appearance. So far the bottom line is that AC drive behaves far differently than DC drive in this system. I can definitely see boiling electrolyte temperatures between the two nickels with AC drive while far fewer bubbles of gas are released by the active mechanisms as compared to DC drive. With AC, the effective resistance of the combination remains much lower than with DC current. The high resistance appears to correspond with the deposition of the green coating that follows DC current flow. My present transformer will not allow me to achieve the 100-140 volt drive levels so that would have to be achieved by some other means. I have a few ideas regarding the use of an adjustable transformer, but that would be difficult to handle. I do not feel comfortable with direct connection by metallic path to the AC mains. It would be too easy to become electrocuted with one careless maneuver. My AC RMS voltage is 21 volts for these tests so the resistance must remain less than 10 ohms between the terminals if I am to drive the system with 2 amps of current. I am able to achieve this goal without too much difficulty when the green coating is absent. I need to perform more experimentation with this combination. The salts you suspect are interesting. Do you suspect that the normal oxides of the nickel and copper are suppressed? Also, I am not aware of any visual change to the surface of the nickel if hydrogen has entered. Would anyone expect a color change or other indication when this happens? I would love to see the glow that Horace mentions and perhaps that day will come when I figure a good way to drive the cell in a safe manner. It is apparent that I will need to pre-charge the nickels before applying the full voltage unless I want to melt my experiment. If I used my typical resistance of 10 ohms and set the input AC to 100 volts RMS, I would generate 1000 watts of power at a current of 10 amps. I wonder if the sparks I saw with the sodium carbonate were somehow related to the glow mentioned by Horace. My results were correlated with the open circuit voltage rising toward 50 volts as it attempted to maintain the current at a constant level. The sparks suggest to me some form of burning mechanism and I got a large dose of the vapor by accident once when watching the phenomena too closely. It was a strong odor that I hope is not carcinogenic. The smoke I breathed was definitely not water vapor. Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. Dave P.S. AC in my posting is standard line frequency in the US which is 60 hertz. -Original Message- From: Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Good Luck with the new experiments David. I think you will see some interesting
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
That appears like a pretty good process for the nickel. Jack, I will follow your procedure after I complete a couple of experiments. I tried something interesting today that I plan to investigate further. I acted like a manual switch for a couple of nickels where I reversed the DC current periodically to see how the coatings behaved. I let current flow until the resistance reached about 50 ohms in one direction and then reversed the current until the same value was seen in the other direction. This procedure was carried out for about 5 cycles. Initially, a green coating was deposited upon the positively connected nickel which was then flaked off by the reverse current. A significant amount of green material was deposited within my electrolyte due to the cyclic coating and flaking. The AC was then applied and I noticed that very little gas was escaping from the electrodes even though a current of 1 to 2 amps was flowing. The resistance remained low during the AC testing which is in process as I write. The electrolyte evaporated twice to a level that had to be replenish as typical. This post is a quick update. Dave -Original Message- From: Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Jack, that is just about right. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Dave, You wrote: Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. I think you can get this with the oxidization process with using a nickel as the anode with DC for a couple of hours to form the green oxidized copper. The green oxidized copper can then be burned off with a torch. My approach has been to first use the nicked as an anode for 1 to 2 hours. Burn off the oxidized copper with a torch. Then slow treat with hydrogen as the cathode and low current DC for a few days. Then switch to AC. With respect to the B2O3, I've found that most of this will burn off. But I have some that simply melted into a transparent clear blob adhering to some of the surfaces of the nickels. Take care, Jack On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting. I performed a small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green coating that was so evident with DC. Instead, there was a jet black coating being formed upon the nickels. Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel connected to the positive terminal. I allowed this process to continue for a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish looking finish where the old coatings were. This finish has a rough appearance. So far the bottom line is that AC drive behaves far differently than DC drive in this system. I can definitely see boiling electrolyte temperatures between the two nickels with AC drive while far fewer bubbles of gas are released by the active mechanisms as compared to DC drive. With AC, the effective resistance of the combination remains much lower than with DC current. The high resistance appears to correspond with the deposition of the green coating that follows DC current flow. My present transformer will not allow me to achieve the 100-140 volt drive levels so that would have to be achieved by some other means. I have a few ideas regarding the use of an adjustable transformer, but that would be difficult to handle. I do not feel comfortable with direct connection by metallic path to the AC mains. It would be too easy to become electrocuted with one careless maneuver. My AC RMS voltage is 21 volts for these tests so the resistance must remain less than 10 ohms between the terminals if I am to drive the system with 2 amps of current. I am able to achieve this goal without too much difficulty when the green coating is absent. I need to perform more experimentation with this combination. The salts you suspect are interesting. Do you suspect that the normal oxides of the nickel and copper are suppressed? Also, I am not aware of any visual change to the surface of the nickel if hydrogen has entered. Would anyone expect a color change or other indication when this happens? I would love to see the glow that Horace mentions and perhaps that day will come when I figure a good way to drive the cell in a safe manner. It is apparent that I will need to pre-charge the nickels before applying the full
RE: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Dave, Sorry if I missed it, but are you using tap water, or distilled/deionized water? -mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 9:57 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started That appears like a pretty good process for the nickel. Jack, I will follow your procedure after I complete a couple of experiments. I tried something interesting today that I plan to investigate further. I acted like a manual switch for a couple of nickels where I reversed the DC current periodically to see how the coatings behaved. I let current flow until the resistance reached about 50 ohms in one direction and then reversed the current until the same value was seen in the other direction. This procedure was carried out for about 5 cycles. Initially, a green coating was deposited upon the positively connected nickel which was then flaked off by the reverse current. A significant amount of green material was deposited within my electrolyte due to the cyclic coating and flaking. The AC was then applied and I noticed that very little gas was escaping from the electrodes even though a current of 1 to 2 amps was flowing. The resistance remained low during the AC testing which is in process as I write. The electrolyte evaporated twice to a level that had to be replenish as typical. This post is a quick update. Dave -Original Message- From: Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Jack, that is just about right. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Dave, You wrote: Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the nickel surface selectively? It might be possible to selectively erode the copper leaving NAE in large quantities. I think you can get this with the oxidization process with using a nickel as the anode with DC for a couple of hours to form the green oxidized copper. The green oxidized copper can then be burned off with a torch. My approach has been to first use the nicked as an anode for 1 to 2 hours. Burn off the oxidized copper with a torch. Then slow treat with hydrogen as the cathode and low current DC for a few days. Then switch to AC. With respect to the B2O3, I've found that most of this will burn off. But I have some that simply melted into a transparent clear blob adhering to some of the surfaces of the nickels. Take care, Jack On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting. I performed a small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green coating that was so evident with DC. Instead, there was a jet black coating being formed upon the nickels. Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel connected to the positive terminal. I allowed this process to continue for a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish looking finish where the old coatings were. This finish has a rough appearance. So far the bottom line is that AC drive behaves far differently than DC drive in this system. I can definitely see boiling electrolyte temperatures between the two nickels with AC drive while far fewer bubbles of gas are released by the active mechanisms as compared to DC drive. With AC, the effective resistance of the combination remains much lower than with DC current. The high resistance appears to correspond with the deposition of the green coating that follows DC current flow. My present transformer will not allow me to achieve the 100-140 volt drive levels so that would have to be achieved by some other means. I have a few ideas regarding the use of an adjustable transformer, but that would be difficult to handle. I do not feel comfortable with direct connection by metallic path to the AC mains. It would be too easy to become electrocuted with one careless maneuver. My AC RMS voltage is 21 volts for these tests so the resistance must remain less than 10 ohms between the terminals if I am to drive the system with 2 amps of current. I am able to achieve this goal without too much difficulty when the green coating is absent. I need to perform more experimentation with this combination. The salts you suspect are interesting. Do you suspect that the normal oxides of the nickel and copper are suppressed? Also, I am not aware of any visual change to the surface of the nickel if hydrogen has entered. Would anyone expect a color change or other indication when
RE: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Hello Dave, I wish you the best in your new campaign tests with borax. Please, keep us up to date with discoveries and challenges you will have to face. Arnaud _ From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: mercredi 24 octobre 2012 02:54 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started It is time for a change in my experimentation. I spent a lot of time and energy with the sodium carbonate electrolyte and DC current without being able to report any proven excess power. There is evidence that the Borax electrolyte might lead to more definitive results so that is what I began using again today. Earlier I started using Borax after finding that table salt was a terribly corrosive material. I used the Borax for several days as it slowly ate away at my positively connected electrodes before I decided to go to the sodium carbonate. I stuck with the sodium carbonate for so long since I was mainly concerned about the hydrogen loading of the cathode which should have been similar with either electrolyte. Today, I rewound a transformer to yield 21 volts AC RMS. This is an ideal way to drive the system with AC since the transformer automatically isolates it from the AC mains and leads to a safe experiment. I am using 21 volts because that is all I obtained with the transformer core with which I started when I placed as many turns as possible (36) in the secondary slot with the wire size that was convenient. I was worried that this might not be enough voltage, but found that I could still drive the cell with between 1 and 2 amps RMS depending upon the spacing between the electrodes. The joule losses within the transformer are quite low and it is in no danger of overheating. The cell is receiving around 40 watts of power which is within reason. I am using a Pyrex dish for my cell, the same one that I have been using for several days. It is open and wide so the cell temperature is fairly low due to large heat loss. I am curious as to whether or not I get the strange sparks that seemed so prevalent with my earlier DC system. I have noticed that there is a lot less gas being released at the electrodes due to the AC drive current. The AC drive current does not appear to cause the green deposits that were so evident with the DC current. I initially allowed the green mess to be plated upon one of the test nickels attached to the positive DC supply connection. After a period of time the green material was shaken off and a dark deposit replaced it as the current increased. I do not know what material is plating that nickel, but it allows for good conductivity. I placed my old reliable nickel on the other electrode for the AC testing. The poor nickel has been undergoing electrolysis for many days, has been heated red hot and quenched 5 times, has been soaked in a mild acid for a couple of days, and then sanded to roughen its surface. I am not sure what else I can do to make it more miserable! Dave
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
It is time for a change in my experimentation. I spent a lot of time and energy with the sodium carbonate electrolyte and DC current without being able to report any proven excess power. There is evidence that the Borax electrolyte might lead to more definitive results so that is what I began using again today. Earlier I started using Borax after finding that table salt was a terribly corrosive material. I used the Borax for several days as it slowly ate away at my positively connected electrodes before I decided to go to the sodium carbonate. I stuck with the sodium carbonate for so long since I was mainly concerned about the hydrogen loading of the cathode which should have been similar with either electrolyte. Today, I rewound a transformer to yield 21 volts AC RMS. This is an ideal way to drive the system with AC since the transformer automatically isolates it from the AC mains and leads to a safe experiment. I am using 21 volts because that is all I obtained with the transformer core with which I started when I placed as many turns as possible (36) in the secondary slot with the wire size that was convenient. I was worried that this might not be enough voltage, but found that I could still drive the cell with between 1 and 2 amps RMS depending upon the spacing between the electrodes. The joule losses within the transformer are quite low and it is in no danger of overheating. The cell is receiving around 40 watts of power which is within reason. I am using a Pyrex dish for my cell, the same one that I have been using for several days. It is open and wide so the cell temperature is fairly low due to large heat loss. I am curious as to whether or not I get the strange sparks that seemed so prevalent with my earlier DC system. I have noticed that there is a lot less gas being released at the electrodes due to the AC drive current. The AC drive current does not appear to cause the green deposits that were so evident with the DC current. I initially allowed the green mess to be plated upon one of the test nickels attached to the positive DC supply connection. After a period of time the green material was shaken off and a dark deposit replaced it as the current increased. I do not know what material is plating that nickel, but it allows for good conductivity. I placed my old reliable nickel on the other electrode for the AC testing. The poor nickel has been undergoing electrolysis for many days, has been heated red hot and quenched 5 times, has been soaked in a mild acid for a couple of days, and then sanded to roughen its surface. I am not sure what else I can do to make it more miserable! Dave
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
I decided to perform an experiment where less current was flowing into my cell. I noted that 1 ampere of current still demonstrated sparks once the electrolyte had mostly boiled away. The earlier experiments were using 2 or 3 amps so I was curious if a threshold effect was present. The large flashes seem to be non existent at this current level. Sparks tend to be less frequent but energetic when using either my old test nickel or a new one connected to the supply negative terminal. As before, the sparks originate on or very near to the negative connected nickel. I still believe that this effect is of a chemical nature and not LENR. I wonder if the concentration of heat within a small volume is causing the carbonate to decompose and escape. There exists the possibility that some hydrogen or possibly sodium related phenomena is present. Has anyone else witnessed this strange effect? Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 1:43 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started The flashes of light that emit a puff of smoke may be occurring somewhat like you describe. The fact that they are located only in the vicinity of the negative supply connected nickel suggests that hydrogen is also a factor or perhaps the emission of electrons from that electrode is important. I agree that the bubbles are envolved as they are causing the voltage to vary significantly during this event. I also wonder if sparks due to the large electric field across the bubbles are igniting hydrogen in the area? I suppose the puffs of smoke could have been condensed water vapor. It was evident that the cell content was boiling vigorously between the electrodes during that episode and a far smaller quantity of vapor was always being emitted due to the high liquid temperature. Perhaps small hydrogen explosions suppled enough energy to make the big puffs. The sparks that are of short duration and not directly associated with the flashes behave in a different manner. These tiny events appear to radiate away from the nickel or thick white deposit extremely rapidly and in a straight line. They have the appearance of being shot from a point on the surface outward. If I recall, they look as if they were traveling one to two inches before becoming invisible. When I saw a group of them synchronized it reminded me of the science fiction films of wild time machine emissions. In this strange case they originate in several different locations and travel is random directions. Each one moves independent of the others but synchronized very closely in time. On a few occasions I noticed that there appeared to be a single tiny region typically along one edge of the nickel from which a series of the short duration sparks would originate. These sparks would shoot out in a straight line away from the active region while each one headed in a semi random direction. Here I use the word semi random because they tended to head outward within a cone shaped pattern of perhaps 45 degrees span. During these bursts of sparks I became concerned as it looked like a flame would originate from there. A volcano erruption of hot cinders from its crater is somewhat similar in appearance. This behavior is quite difficult to put into words and I apologize for my poor description! You should perform a similar experiment if you want to add a small dose of excitement to your day. I am not sure of exactly what is occurring at this time but I suspect that it is of a chemical nature. If it is an LENR effect, then everyone should be able to experience it as it happens with regularity. (Poor Dave mumbles to himself as he experiences a short period of brain death due to his attempt to describe the indescribable.) Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 12:24 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started It's possible that as the electrolyte evaporates, and there is not sufficient electrolyte to make a fully-immersed path from anode to cathode (you'll have to confirm that), there are moments when the liquid withdraws from point(s) on one of the electrodes - because of the tendency of water to form minimum-area surfaces due to surface tension, for example. At this moment, even a relatively low voltage might be enough to arc across the tiny, just-formed air gap between the exposed cathode and the withdrawing electrolyte. The arc would be visible as a tiny spark. The spark could vaporize a tiny bit of the withdrawing water, and the conductivity of the microscopic puff of steam could kill the arc a moment later. This effect could occur repeatedly and rapidly. Jeff On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:14 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would be nearly impossible to catch the spark in the act with single frame
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Le Oct 19, 2012 à 4:34 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com a écrit : I still believe that this effect is of a chemical nature and not LENR. I wonder if the concentration of heat within a small volume is causing the carbonate to decompose and escape. There exists the possibility that some hydrogen or possibly sodium related phenomena is present. Has anyone else witnessed this strange effect? I recommend that anyone attempting electrolysis familiarize him or herself with Melvin Miles's work, e.g., [1,2]. Even if the chemistry goes well beyond one's training, his papers are helpful in getting a sense of how complex the (non-LENR) reactions are in these systems. The main way that they are helpful is in instilling fear in the heart of anyone seeking to draw any kind of conclusion about what is observed. Eric [1] and [2], http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol8.pdf, p. 12 ff. and 115 ff.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Eric, I am running 3 amps of DC through my system. The sparks occur when the electrolyte is getting low, deposits are collecting on both nickels, and the supply voltage is varying a lot. I would guess that I am getting a couple of amps per square cm due to the deposits covering nickel area and many large bubbles as the electrolyte is boiling. There are sparks and bright yellow looking flashes that are very near or on the negative terminal connected nickel. I also see puffs of smoke rising after a large flash. These displays are quite interesting to watch. My supply most likely has a large capacitor connected across its output since I found that the two nickels will stick together with a bright flash if I allow them to touch when out of the cell. I wonder if the excess burst of energy due to capacitor discharge is evolved in the activity. This behavior appears every time I allow the electrolyte to boil until the cell is almost dry. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Oct 16, 2012 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 4:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I finally obtained a safe alternative that is working at the moment. I am getting sparks and all. Thanks for the idea. Does anyone know if sparks are common? What is the amperage per cm^2? Eric
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Dave, can you take some pictures and post? On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 8:26 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Eric, I am running 3 amps of DC through my system. The sparks occur when the electrolyte is getting low, deposits are collecting on both nickels, and the supply voltage is varying a lot. I would guess that I am getting a couple of amps per square cm due to the deposits covering nickel area and many large bubbles as the electrolyte is boiling. There are sparks and bright yellow looking flashes that are very near or on the negative terminal connected nickel. I also see puffs of smoke rising after a large flash. These displays are quite interesting to watch. My supply most likely has a large capacitor connected across its output since I found that the two nickels will stick together with a bright flash if I allow them to touch when out of the cell. I wonder if the excess burst of energy due to capacitor discharge is evolved in the activity. This behavior appears every time I allow the electrolyte to boil until the cell is almost dry. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Oct 16, 2012 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 4:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I finally obtained a safe alternative that is working at the moment. I am getting sparks and all. Thanks for the idea. Does anyone know if sparks are common? What is the amperage per cm^2? Eric
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
It would be nearly impossible to catch the spark in the act with single frame photography since the duration is so short. I am confident that anyone could get similar results if they use sodium carbonate along with a supply like I am using. All they need do is dissolve plenty of the carbonate in the bath and allow the water to vaporize. It happens on every experiment now, even with new nickels. During certain spark events I see two or three sparks appear simultaneously at different locations around and upon the nickel attached to the negative supply terminal. This reminds me of lightning streamers. Many times the flash appears to be underneath the thick white deposit that coats most of the test nickel. I do not recall ever seeing a spark or flash at the other nickel and they are both coated and separated by a distance of about 1 to 1.5 inches. I am not sure what the sparks represent, but the fact that it can be obtained so easily leads me to believe that it is most likely not LENR related. My suspicion is that this is some chemical reaction that occurs as a result of intense heating at the point where the released electrical energy is focused. Could it be the result of a plasma reaction within the hydrogen gas and carbonate? I have added water after the sparking phenomena finally concludes and the thick nickel deposits dissolve back into the solution. There is no additional sparking after these deposits are gone and the bath level increased. On occasion, I have seen a long burst of sparking from the edge of the test nickel when water has just been added to the bath but before the deposit has started to dissolve. On a couple of occasions, I was afraid a fire would begin at the point of intense spark emission. Fortunately, this never lasts for a significant length of time. The sparking and flashing phenomena continues to occur within the same experimental setup after the freshly added water has vaporized again. I performed this test several times, each taking a couple of hours. The main clue I detect is that the sparks are always associated with the negative connected nickel which should be emitting hydrogen gas. For this reason, I suspect that the gas may become ignited by some high intensity of heat or local electrical spark or plasma due to the high open circuit voltage of my supply. The vapor that often arises during the bright flashes has a strong odor but dissipates quickly. I hope that this description of my observations is helpful. I can go into more details if you wish. Dave -Original Message- From: Teslaalset robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:56 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Dave, can you take some pictures and post? On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 8:26 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Eric, I am running 3 amps of DC through my system. The sparks occur when the electrolyte is getting low, deposits are collecting on both nickels, and the supply voltage is varying a lot. I would guess that I am getting a couple of amps per square cm due to the deposits covering nickel area and many large bubbles as the electrolyte is boiling. There are sparks and bright yellow looking flashes that are very near or on the negative terminal connected nickel. I also see puffs of smoke rising after a large flash. These displays are quite interesting to watch. My supply most likely has a large capacitor connected across its output since I found that the two nickels will stick together with a bright flash if I allow them to touch when out of the cell. I wonder if the excess burst of energy due to capacitor discharge is evolved in the activity. This behavior appears every time I allow the electrolyte to boil until the cell is almost dry. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Oct 16, 2012 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 4:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I finally obtained a safe alternative that is working at the moment. I am getting sparks and all. Thanks for the idea. Does anyone know if sparks are common? What is the amperage per cm^2? Eric
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
It's possible that as the electrolyte evaporates, and there is not sufficient electrolyte to make a fully-immersed path from anode to cathode (you'll have to confirm that), there are moments when the liquid withdraws from point(s) on one of the electrodes - because of the tendency of water to form minimum-area surfaces due to surface tension, for example. At this moment, even a relatively low voltage might be enough to arc across the tiny, just-formed air gap between the exposed cathode and the withdrawing electrolyte. The arc would be visible as a tiny spark. The spark could vaporize a tiny bit of the withdrawing water, and the conductivity of the microscopic puff of steam could kill the arc a moment later. This effect could occur repeatedly and rapidly. Jeff On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:14 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would be nearly impossible to catch the spark in the act with single frame photography since the duration is so short. I am confident that anyone could get similar results if they use sodium carbonate along with a supply like I am using. All they need do is dissolve plenty of the carbonate in the bath and allow the water to vaporize. It happens on every experiment now, even with new nickels. During certain spark events I see two or three sparks appear simultaneously at different locations around and upon the nickel attached to the negative supply terminal. This reminds me of lightning streamers. Many times the flash appears to be underneath the thick white deposit that coats most of the test nickel. I do not recall ever seeing a spark or flash at the other nickel and they are both coated and separated by a distance of about 1 to 1.5 inches. I am not sure what the sparks represent, but the fact that it can be obtained so easily leads me to believe that it is most likely not LENR related. My suspicion is that this is some chemical reaction that occurs as a result of intense heating at the point where the released electrical energy is focused. Could it be the result of a plasma reaction within the hydrogen gas and carbonate? I have added water after the sparking phenomena finally concludes and the thick nickel deposits dissolve back into the solution. There is no additional sparking after these deposits are gone and the bath level increased. On occasion, I have seen a long burst of sparking from the edge of the test nickel when water has just been added to the bath but before the deposit has started to dissolve. On a couple of occasions, I was afraid a fire would begin at the point of intense spark emission. Fortunately, this never lasts for a significant length of time. The sparking and flashing phenomena continues to occur within the same experimental setup after the freshly added water has vaporized again. I performed this test several times, each taking a couple of hours. The main clue I detect is that the sparks are always associated with the negative connected nickel which should be emitting hydrogen gas. For this reason, I suspect that the gas may become ignited by some high intensity of heat or local electrical spark or plasma due to the high open circuit voltage of my supply. The vapor that often arises during the bright flashes has a strong odor but dissipates quickly. I hope that this description of my observations is helpful. I can go into more details if you wish. Dave -Original Message- From: Teslaalset robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:56 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Dave, can you take some pictures and post? On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 8:26 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Eric, I am running 3 amps of DC through my system. The sparks occur when the electrolyte is getting low, deposits are collecting on both nickels, and the supply voltage is varying a lot. I would guess that I am getting a couple of amps per square cm due to the deposits covering nickel area and many large bubbles as the electrolyte is boiling. There are sparks and bright yellow looking flashes that are very near or on the negative terminal connected nickel. I also see puffs of smoke rising after a large flash. These displays are quite interesting to watch. My supply most likely has a large capacitor connected across its output since I found that the two nickels will stick together with a bright flash if I allow them to touch when out of the cell. I wonder if the excess burst of energy due to capacitor discharge is evolved in the activity. This behavior appears every time I allow the electrolyte to boil until the cell is almost dry. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Oct 16, 2012 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 4:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
The flashes of light that emit a puff of smoke may be occurring somewhat like you describe. The fact that they are located only in the vicinity of the negative supply connected nickel suggests that hydrogen is also a factor or perhaps the emission of electrons from that electrode is important. I agree that the bubbles are envolved as they are causing the voltage to vary significantly during this event. I also wonder if sparks due to the large electric field across the bubbles are igniting hydrogen in the area? I suppose the puffs of smoke could have been condensed water vapor. It was evident that the cell content was boiling vigorously between the electrodes during that episode and a far smaller quantity of vapor was always being emitted due to the high liquid temperature. Perhaps small hydrogen explosions suppled enough energy to make the big puffs. The sparks that are of short duration and not directly associated with the flashes behave in a different manner. These tiny events appear to radiate away from the nickel or thick white deposit extremely rapidly and in a straight line. They have the appearance of being shot from a point on the surface outward. If I recall, they look as if they were traveling one to two inches before becoming invisible. When I saw a group of them synchronized it reminded me of the science fiction films of wild time machine emissions. In this strange case they originate in several different locations and travel is random directions. Each one moves independent of the others but synchronized very closely in time. On a few occasions I noticed that there appeared to be a single tiny region typically along one edge of the nickel from which a series of the short duration sparks would originate. These sparks would shoot out in a straight line away from the active region while each one headed in a semi random direction. Here I use the word semi random because they tended to head outward within a cone shaped pattern of perhaps 45 degrees span. During these bursts of sparks I became concerned as it looked like a flame would originate from there. A volcano erruption of hot cinders from its crater is somewhat similar in appearance. This behavior is quite difficult to put into words and I apologize for my poor description! You should perform a similar experiment if you want to add a small dose of excitement to your day. I am not sure of exactly what is occurring at this time but I suspect that it is of a chemical nature. If it is an LENR effect, then everyone should be able to experience it as it happens with regularity. (Poor Dave mumbles to himself as he experiences a short period of brain death due to his attempt to describe the indescribable.) Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 12:24 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started It's possible that as the electrolyte evaporates, and there is not sufficient electrolyte to make a fully-immersed path from anode to cathode (you'll have to confirm that), there are moments when the liquid withdraws from point(s) on one of the electrodes - because of the tendency of water to form minimum-area surfaces due to surface tension, for example. At this moment, even a relatively low voltage might be enough to arc across the tiny, just-formed air gap between the exposed cathode and the withdrawing electrolyte. The arc would be visible as a tiny spark. The spark could vaporize a tiny bit of the withdrawing water, and the conductivity of the microscopic puff of steam could kill the arc a moment later. This effect could occur repeatedly and rapidly. Jeff On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:14 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would be nearly impossible to catch the spark in the act with single frame photography since the duration is so short. I am confident that anyone could get similar results if they use sodium carbonate along with a supply like I am using. All they need do is dissolve plenty of the carbonate in the bath and allow the water to vaporize. It happens on every experiment now, even with new nickels. During certain spark events I see two or three sparks appear simultaneously at different locations around and upon the nickel attached to the negative supply terminal. This reminds me of lightning streamers. Many times the flash appears to be underneath the thick white deposit that coats most of the test nickel. I do not recall ever seeing a spark or flash at the other nickel and they are both coated and separated by a distance of about 1 to 1.5 inches. I am not sure what the sparks represent, but the fact that it can be obtained so easily leads me to believe that it is most likely not LENR related. My suspicion is that this is some chemical reaction that occurs as a result of intense heating at the point where the released electrical energy
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
It's a great description. I forgot about the fact that the H2 would still be evolving at the cathode and the sparks would likely ignite it. Combine that with the deposits formed by the electrolysis and a wide variety of results are possible. We'll try with sodium carbonate sometime soon. Unfortunately, we lack a good place to run experiments continuously for long periods of time. We are working on that, and also on better instrumentation (to be described on the blog eventually). Thanks very much for your detailed explanations! Jeff On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:43 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The flashes of light that emit a puff of smoke may be occurring somewhat like you describe. The fact that they are located only in the vicinity of the negative supply connected nickel suggests that hydrogen is also a factor or perhaps the emission of electrons from that electrode is important. I agree that the bubbles are envolved as they are causing the voltage to vary significantly during this event. I also wonder if sparks due to the large electric field across the bubbles are igniting hydrogen in the area? I suppose the puffs of smoke could have been condensed water vapor. It was evident that the cell content was boiling vigorously between the electrodes during that episode and a far smaller quantity of vapor was always being emitted due to the high liquid temperature. Perhaps small hydrogen explosions suppled enough energy to make the big puffs. The sparks that are of short duration and not directly associated with the flashes behave in a different manner. These tiny events appear to radiate away from the nickel or thick white deposit extremely rapidly and in a straight line. They have the appearance of being shot from a point on the surface outward. If I recall, they look as if they were traveling one to two inches before becoming invisible. When I saw a group of them synchronized it reminded me of the science fiction films of wild time machine emissions. In this strange case they originate in several different locations and travel is random directions. Each one moves independent of the others but synchronized very closely in time. On a few occasions I noticed that there appeared to be a single tiny region typically along one edge of the nickel from which a series of the short duration sparks would originate. These sparks would shoot out in a straight line away from the active region while each one headed in a semi random direction. Here I use the word semi random because they tended to head outward within a cone shaped pattern of perhaps 45 degrees span. During these bursts of sparks I became concerned as it looked like a flame would originate from there. A volcano erruption of hot cinders from its crater is somewhat similar in appearance. This behavior is quite difficult to put into words and I apologize for my poor description! You should perform a similar experiment if you want to add a small dose of excitement to your day. I am not sure of exactly what is occurring at this time but I suspect that it is of a chemical nature. If it is an LENR effect, then everyone should be able to experience it as it happens with regularity. (Poor Dave mumbles to himself as he experiences a short period of brain death due to his attempt to describe the indescribable.) Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 12:24 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started It's possible that as the electrolyte evaporates, and there is not sufficient electrolyte to make a fully-immersed path from anode to cathode (you'll have to confirm that), there are moments when the liquid withdraws from point(s) on one of the electrodes - because of the tendency of water to form minimum-area surfaces due to surface tension, for example. At this moment, even a relatively low voltage might be enough to arc across the tiny, just-formed air gap between the exposed cathode and the withdrawing electrolyte. The arc would be visible as a tiny spark. The spark could vaporize a tiny bit of the withdrawing water, and the conductivity of the microscopic puff of steam could kill the arc a moment later. This effect could occur repeatedly and rapidly. Jeff On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:14 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: It would be nearly impossible to catch the spark in the act with single frame photography since the duration is so short. I am confident that anyone could get similar results if they use sodium carbonate along with a supply like I am using. All they need do is dissolve plenty of the carbonate in the bath and allow the water to vaporize. It happens on every experiment now, even with new nickels. During certain spark events I see two or three sparks appear simultaneously at different locations around and upon the nickel
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Last evening I made a smaller version of the electrolysis bath and the nickel overheated and melted the plastic container at the contact point again as it was sparking and spitting. The heat may be the result of joule heating or some other process as the current (3 amps for this test) is concentrated to a small region of the nickel due to a heavy coating of some unknown thick white material over most of its surface . Since I want to experiment further along this interesting line, I need to use a more robust container that does not melt at the temperatures encountered. I found a small glass jar that measures 2 inches diameter by 4 inches high and placed the electrodes within. After I had started the electrolysis, I began to think of safety from gas explosion. This system is capable of capturing hydrogen much better that the old open ones before since the walls are higher and the exit path narrow in proportion. I know that I will have sparks and small flames as with the open system so now I would like to know if there is significant danger of explosion. Is anyone aware of reports of a relatively low volume open to the air glass cell exploding and causing injury or damage to the surroundings? Most of the jar volume will likely be filled with a mix of hydrogen and oxygen plus room air. I have not calculated the amount of energy contained within the captured hydrogen since a bad calculation could be dangerous. Please give me guidance before I reconnect this beast as it now is on standby. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 8:45 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started One final note that I want to include. I allowed the experiment to go into the unusual mode for the third time and made some measurements. The electrolyte was boiling as in the first two observations and I also noted sparks being emitted. Unfortunately, I let the system become too hot and it melted the bottom of my test container allowing the electrolyte to leak out. After this episode, I obtained a smaller container and started another round of testing. I will need to compete another calibration before useful data can be obtained. A most interesting afternoon. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 5:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started I have an interesting addition to this report. After I cleaned up the deposits and added water and electrolyte I let my experiment continue electrolysis. The effect happened again with some interesting differences. I noticed that the thin layer that coated the electrolyte bath came in the form of small floating islands about the size of a standard pencil lead. These came together to form a film over the surface. A much thicker deposit formed upon the active nickel that is like a form of crust. Then I noticed that sparks were being emitted from the edge of the active nickel! The sparks came intermittently and the intensity of the sparks varied. I saw actual flames on rare occasions which had me alarmed. Perhaps this is caused by the hydrogen becoming ignited at that electrode. The water between electrodes was at boiling temperature. I noticed that the supply voltage was varying by a large degree in the fashion of bubble bursting which could be due to the reduced path for ions to the nickel that is now covered with the white hard deposit. Next, I tapped the deposit mostly off of the nickels and added water to the bath. The surface deposit was stirred up so that things are returning toward normal. There still remains a layer of the white deposit on the top of the active nickel from which bubbles of hydrogen are exiting. This experiment is getting more interesting all the time. I hope to get to the bottom of the observations, but I have no idea what is occurring. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 3:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started I had an exciting afternoon. I replaced my control nickel with the 40 plus hour heat treated one that resembles an old penny now and began electrolysis. The reading of voltage was a bit unusual after the first hour of operation so I replenished the water and added a little additional sodium carbonate to allow the system to reach equilibrium. Just before I started to make the standard readings after approximately an hour of additional electrolysis a friend called me on the telephone so I was diverted. We spoke for I would guess about half an hour until line noise convinced me to go upstairs to accept another call. Both of us changed telephones but the noise was still bad as we continued our conversation. Perhaps 30 minutes later we finished the call and I went back to make
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
At 11:30 AM 10/16/2012, David Roberson wrote: I know that I will have sparks and small flames as with the open system so now I would like to know if there is significant danger of explosion. Is anyone aware of reports of a relatively low volume open to the air glass cell exploding and causing injury or damage to the surroundings? Most of the jar volume will likely be filled with a mix of hydrogen and oxygen plus room air. I have not calculated the amount of energy contained within the captured hydrogen since a bad calculation could be dangerous. Please give me guidance before I reconnect this beast as it now is on standby. This paper looks at various combinations http://conference.ing.unipi.it/ichs2005/Papers/120001.pdf H2-Air -- lower explosion limit is 4.3 mole% H2 H2-O -- lower explosion limit is 4 mole% H2 Can you put in a baffle or something to keep the H and O separate? Maybe a U-tube would be better than a jar.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
As others have pointed out, the only safe answer is to treat all electrolysis experiments with respect, doing them with adequate ventilation, whether that means under a fume hood or outdoors or the like. Of course we may break these rules and get away with many things, up until the unfortunate moment when we don't get away with it. Jeff On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 11:30 AM 10/16/2012, David Roberson wrote: I know that I will have sparks and small flames as with the open system so now I would like to know if there is significant danger of explosion. Is anyone aware of reports of a relatively low volume open to the air glass cell exploding and causing injury or damage to the surroundings? Most of the jar volume will likely be filled with a mix of hydrogen and oxygen plus room air. I have not calculated the amount of energy contained within the captured hydrogen since a bad calculation could be dangerous. Please give me guidance before I reconnect this beast as it now is on standby. This paper looks at various combinations http://conference.ing.unipi.it/ichs2005/Papers/120001.pdf H2-Air -- lower explosion limit is 4.3 mole% H2 H2-O -- lower explosion limit is 4 mole% H2 Can you put in a baffle or something to keep the H and O separate? Maybe a U-tube would be better than a jar.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
would two jars connented by a wire work? http://www.water4gasstore.com/product-p/dmjs002.htm Cheers:Axil On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 11:30 AM 10/16/2012, David Roberson wrote: I know that I will have sparks and small flames as with the open system so now I would like to know if there is significant danger of explosion. Is anyone aware of reports of a relatively low volume open to the air glass cell exploding and causing injury or damage to the surroundings? Most of the jar volume will likely be filled with a mix of hydrogen and oxygen plus room air. I have not calculated the amount of energy contained within the captured hydrogen since a bad calculation could be dangerous. Please give me guidance before I reconnect this beast as it now is on standby. This paper looks at various combinations http://conference.ing.unipi.it/ichs2005/Papers/120001.pdf H2-Air -- lower explosion limit is 4.3 mole% H2 H2-O -- lower explosion limit is 4 mole% H2 Can you put in a baffle or something to keep the H and O separate? Maybe a U-tube would be better than a jar.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Thanks Alan, I became chicken and decided to find an alternate container. The local grocery store had pyrex storage containers that were relatively small and flat so I got one and am using it. I was worried about the hydrogen collection with a ready ignition source. Dave -Original Message- From: Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Oct 16, 2012 3:30 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started At 11:30 AM 10/16/2012, David Roberson wrote: I knowthat I will have sparks and small flames as with the open system so now Iwould like to know if there is significant danger of explosion. Isanyone aware of reports of a relatively low volume open to the air glasscell exploding and causing injury or damage to the surroundings? Most of the jar volume will likely be filled with a mix of hydrogenand oxygen plus room air. I have not calculated the amount ofenergy contained within the captured hydrogen since a bad calculationcould be dangerous. Please give me guidance before I reconnect thisbeast as it now is on standby. This paper looks at various combinations http://conference.ing.unipi.it/ichs2005/Papers/120001.pdf H2-Air -- lower explosion limit is 4.3 mole% H2 H2-O -- lower explosion limit is 4 mole% H2 Can you put in a baffle or something to keep the H and O separate? Maybe a U-tube would be better than a jar.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
I finally obtained a safe alternative that is working at the moment. I am getting sparks and all. Thanks for the idea. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Oct 16, 2012 5:28 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started would two jars connented by a wire work? http://www.water4gasstore.com/product-p/dmjs002.htm Cheers:Axil On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 11:30 AM 10/16/2012, David Roberson wrote: I knowthat I will have sparks and small flames as with the open system so now Iwould like to know if there is significant danger of explosion. Isanyone aware of reports of a relatively low volume open to the air glasscell exploding and causing injury or damage to the surroundings? Most of the jar volume will likely be filled with a mix of hydrogenand oxygen plus room air. I have not calculated the amount ofenergy contained within the captured hydrogen since a bad calculationcould be dangerous. Please give me guidance before I reconnect thisbeast as it now is on standby. This paper looks at various combinations http://conference.ing.unipi.it/ichs2005/Papers/120001.pdf H2-Air -- lower explosion limit is 4.3 mole% H2 H2-O -- lower explosion limit is 4 mole% H2 Can you put in a baffle or something to keep the H and O separate? Maybe a U-tube would be better than a jar.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
David, I never had any problems either with an open system or a closed system. Just remember that hydrogen like to burn straight up, so if running covered, be sure the cover can be easily removed upward. When I ran closed, I used a large cork at the top, and all the gasses tended to recombine it the space between the top and the liquid. Since you have already saw a flame and sparks, you might want to submerge the jar in a water bath for a calorimetry measurements as well as to provide some safety. Just be careful, be prepared and use your better judgement. Best Regards, Chuck On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 2:30 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Last evening I made a smaller version of the electrolysis bath and the nickel overheated and melted the plastic container at the contact point again as it was sparking and spitting. The heat may be the result of joule heating or some other process as the current (3 amps for this test) is concentrated to a small region of the nickel due to a heavy coating of some unknown thick white material over most of its surface . Since I want to experiment further along this interesting line, I need to use a more robust container that does not melt at the temperatures encountered. I found a small glass jar that measures 2 inches diameter by 4 inches high and placed the electrodes within. After I had started the electrolysis, I began to think of safety from gas explosion. This system is capable of capturing hydrogen much better that the old open ones before since the walls are higher and the exit path narrow in proportion. I know that I will have sparks and small flames as with the open system so now I would like to know if there is significant danger of explosion. Is anyone aware of reports of a relatively low volume open to the air glass cell exploding and causing injury or damage to the surroundings? Most of the jar volume will likely be filled with a mix of hydrogen and oxygen plus room air. I have not calculated the amount of energy contained within the captured hydrogen since a bad calculation could be dangerous. Please give me guidance before I reconnect this beast as it now is on standby. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 8:45 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started One final note that I want to include. I allowed the experiment to go into the unusual mode for the third time and made some measurements. The electrolyte was boiling as in the first two observations and I also noted sparks being emitted. Unfortunately, I let the system become too hot and it melted the bottom of my test container allowing the electrolyte to leak out. After this episode, I obtained a smaller container and started another round of testing. I will need to compete another calibration before useful data can be obtained. A most interesting afternoon. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 5:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started I have an interesting addition to this report. After I cleaned up the deposits and added water and electrolyte I let my experiment continue electrolysis. The effect happened again with some interesting differences. I noticed that the thin layer that coated the electrolyte bath came in the form of small floating islands about the size of a standard pencil lead. These came together to form a film over the surface. A much thicker deposit formed upon the active nickel that is like a form of crust. Then I noticed that sparks were being emitted from the edge of the active nickel! The sparks came intermittently and the intensity of the sparks varied. I saw actual flames on rare occasions which had me alarmed. Perhaps this is caused by the hydrogen becoming ignited at that electrode. The water between electrodes was at boiling temperature. I noticed that the supply voltage was varying by a large degree in the fashion of bubble bursting which could be due to the reduced path for ions to the nickel that is now covered with the white hard deposit. Next, I tapped the deposit mostly off of the nickels and added water to the bath. The surface deposit was stirred up so that things are returning toward normal. There still remains a layer of the white deposit on the top of the active nickel from which bubbles of hydrogen are exiting. This experiment is getting more interesting all the time. I hope to get to the bottom of the observations, but I have no idea what is occurring. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 3:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started I had an exciting afternoon. I replaced my control nickel with the 40 plus hour heat treated one
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 4:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I finally obtained a safe alternative that is working at the moment. I am getting sparks and all. Thanks for the idea. Does anyone know if sparks are common? What is the amperage per cm^2? Eric
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
It will be interesting to see how well the stainless steel holds up. I tried a stainless steel spoon as an electrode and it worked fairly well but eventually began to rust. Perhaps the quality of steel makes a difference. I have spend most of the last two days calibrating my system and testing a control nickel. A function has been obtained that charts the power input as a function of the electrolyte bath temperature increase. If you take the difference in temperature between the bath at power and ambient and use the following relationship, you arrive at the nominal power inputted to my system. This assumes that there is no excess power and that is pretty well proven with a new nickel. The formula is Power = .0181*Delta Temp*Delta Temp + .4204*Delta Temp. This is a second order relationship which includes the point 0,0 by definition. My electrolysis bath measures 9.8425 cm by 15.875 cm with a depth of approximately 1/2 the diameter of a nickel. The area is 156.25 square cm. The bottom and all four sides are insulated by Styrofoam while the top is open to the air. My main test region is centered upon a power input of 20 watts with 2 amps of current. I performed a quick calculation of the radiation losses and it is apparent that most of the heat is escaping elsewhere. At the moment I am torn between wanting to treat my copper colored heat treated nickel with acid or continuing to look for excess heat before that step. I will make that decision tomorrow. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Oct 14, 2012 5:22 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Better results today, but still under-unity. I replaced the anode with 4 stainless steel washers soldered directly to the wire. Starting temp of the surrounding bath was 69.4F and last measure was 85.2F (for 1 gallon of water + 5 oz in the electrolytic cell). Average ambient temp 70.2F. Average input voltage is 12.1 and current is .69. Average COP .66 (low=.52 high=.80). Of course there is energy loss with power going into the electrolysis, which has not been included in the calculations. I'll keep it running and see how hot it can get or if anything changes. Jack On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: After running all night with my new setup, I observe no excess heat. The current dropped throughout the run. The COP values start at .43 and trail off to .12 at the end. Back to the drawing board. Thanks for your write-up Jeff. I have definitely seen significant heating in my experiments using a higher current level than you are using, but does not approach unity based on my last experiment. On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of us tried electrolysis with nickels in Borax today. No excess heat was observed. There are details here: http://pdxlenr.blogspot.com/2012/10/no-heating-observed-while-electrolyzing.html Jeff On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: You might try to erode the copper extrusions that erupt from the center of the coin. These copper eruptions have been produced by repeated heating. Remove this copper by etching the heat treated nickel in acid. This etching should produce the micro holes that we are interested in. Cheers: Axil On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 10:54 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Hi Jack, I am likewise interested in your results. The circulation pump might be an idea that I should incorporate since I am very carefully placing my temperature probe at the same location for readings. On occasions I get data that seems out of place by a couple of degrees C which might be due to the lack of mixing. Most of the time my data falls within a degree of the trend line using Excel. Today, I can definitely tell that I am not getting excess heat from my heat treated nickel. I substitute a fresh one as a control with the same current and placement. Today, the data from both samples are very close together within 1 watt out of 20 watts of heating. In my control run, the untreated nickel actually displays the slightly higher reading. My experimental setup consists of a medium sized salad container from Kroger food market surrounded by Styrofoam bottom and walls with the top open. The electrolyte is maintained at approximately one half the height of my sample nickels. I use small alligator clips and leads to connect to the supply which is a laboratory quality one that can output up to 60 volts DC if required. The sodium carbonate electrolyte typically allows me to drive 2 amps of current into the device with a voltage drop of 10 to 11 volts. My electrolyte bath is operating at 45 C at that current level. I generally make a calibration run by varying the current from 1 amp to 2.5 amps and accurately measuring the supply voltage. This gives me
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
the current from 1 amp to 2.5 amps and accurately measuring the supply voltage. This gives me a range of temperatures versus power input points that form a curve. I can detect whether or not a point is out of line fairly easily by its deviation from the curve. When the calibration is acting up, I make several additional test runs of an hour each to determine the most likely value. I allow the setup to run for approximately 1 hour for each point to ensure that the system has stabilized. My plans are to continue to test the heat treated sample for a number of additional hours before I try an alternate technique to modify the surface of this nickel or others. One interesting observation is that my torched and quenched nickel now looks very much like a copper penny in appearance. The surface coloration can not be wiped off with vigorous rubbing of a paper towel. The raised letters have a shiny copper look that does not exhibit any of the standard nickel shine. You would think that this is a large sized weathered penny by appearance although the normal nickel features are intact. As always, my test nickel is connected with leads to the negative terminal of the supply. A second nickel acts as my positive supply electrode. This is the configuration that should expose the test nickel to hydrogen by electrolysis. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 13, 2012 8:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Hi Dave, I will be interested to know your results. This evening, I started an experiment using my repeatedly-treated nickels (8) on a small thoriated tungsten rod. I'm using a penny connected to a chrome plated alligator clip for my anode (+). My last few runs seemed to show excess heat, but like you, I'm hesitant to make that claim without better measures and further experimenting. I was estimating heat loss by taking heat measurements of the bath after removing the electrodes to get the rate that the temperature of the bath was dropping. My current setup involves submerging the electrolytic cell in 1 gallon of water in a styrofoam minnow bucket. I have another 1 gallon of water in an identical minnow bucket to test temperature changes due to heat loss/gain from the environment. I will be taking measurements of voltage, current, temp of the water bath surrounding the electrolytic cell, and control cell for the next couple of hours. Tomorrow, I'll run all day and see what it can do over a longer period. I'm using borax for the electrolyte, and tracking the data in excel. The nickels have been treated at low current for 3 days as the cathode (after repeated heating with a torch and multiple prior experiments with the same set of nickels/tungsten). Monday, I should have a small submersible pump that I'll try in future experiments to keep the water surrounding the cell circulating. Jack On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:02 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: I have completed my electrolysis experiment using a standard issue nickel with a second one at the positive electrode. My electrolyte is sodium carbonate (Arm Hammer washing soda) which does not foul up the positive electrode as much as borax. For a short time it looked as though I was observing excess heat after my test nickel had been loaded with hydrogen for 40 plus hours. I performed a control and calibration run which seemed to indicate that I could not prove any excess heating. My test fixture does not appear to be capable of precise temperature measurement since it does not have a good stirring process and the control of the electrolyte level is difficult to maintain. A positive result would be too important of a determination for me to announce without better proof. For these reasons I decided to try another experiment. First, I took the 40 plus hour nickel and heated it to red heat with a gas torch. The nickel rapidly cooled off once the torch was removed so it was apparent that a lot of excess heat was not being generated as a result of elevated temperature. No flames appeared that could suggest that hydrogen was being released so I decided to begin another procedure. I took the test nickel and heated it to a red hot state and immediately dropped it into a water bath. This was repeated a total of 5 times in an effort to generate surface cracks due to the stress of rapid cooling. The main observation I noticed was that an oxide had formed upon the surface which could not be removed by wiping. One side seemed to have a thick brown oxide while the other exhibited less. I am not able to test for the actual materials present, but that does not prevent me from proceeded with my electrolysis of the nickel. The heat treated nickel is now undergoing electrolysis along with one that is not so treated acting as the positive
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
At 06:28 AM 10/15/2012, Jack Cole wrote: Input power. W = ((Amperage at Time 1 + Amperage at Time 2) / 2) * ((Voltage at Time 1 + Voltage at Time 2) / 2) * (Minutes in interval / 60) You are going to go nuts if you don't keep your units straight, and don't keep in mind the difference between power and energy. The forumula you give calculates average power for an interval (Time2 - Time1), then multiplies it by the time in hours, presumable to get watt-hours, not watts. Watt-hours are a measure of energy. That's not generally correct, because the energy is the integral of the power over time, not the product of the average energy and the time. If the current has no significant AC component, and you measure voltage and current frequently, you can sum the product in a spreadsheet. Otherwise it gets really complicated. In a standard CF experiment, the voltage/current measurements might be once per minute. Or in more sophisticated experiments, the measurements might be more frequent than that.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Thanks for the clarification. My intention there was to calculate watt-hours and to convert that to BTU in the next step. Is this good enough to get a rough estimate? I know it would be much better to have a data logger and do the measurements more frequently. I might do that at some point, but I am mainly interested in seeing if my results warrant the additional investment of time and money. Thanks again for your comments and I also wonder if you would think these results merit further experimentation. On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 06:28 AM 10/15/2012, Jack Cole wrote: Input power. W = ((Amperage at Time 1 + Amperage at Time 2) / 2) * ((Voltage at Time 1 + Voltage at Time 2) / 2) * (Minutes in interval / 60) You are going to go nuts if you don't keep your units straight, and don't keep in mind the difference between power and energy. The forumula you give calculates average power for an interval (Time2 - Time1), then multiplies it by the time in hours, presumable to get watt-hours, not watts. Watt-hours are a measure of energy. That's not generally correct, because the energy is the integral of the power over time, not the product of the average energy and the time. If the current has no significant AC component, and you measure voltage and current frequently, you can sum the product in a spreadsheet. Otherwise it gets really complicated. In a standard CF experiment, the voltage/current measurements might be once per minute. Or in more sophisticated experiments, the measurements might be more frequent than that.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
All of this work is suspect. First of all, an intepretive issue. First of all, the definition of COP. COP (Coefficient of Performance): A measurement of the instantaneous efficiency of heating or cooling equipment. It represents the steady-state rate of energy output of the equipment divided by the steady-state rate of energy input to the equipment, expressed in consistent units (i.e. http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/consumer/buildings/homes/ratings/terms.htm#wattwatts-out per watts-in or http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/consumer/buildings/homes/ratings/terms.htm#BtuphBtu/h-out per Btu/h-in). Thus, the resultant value of COP is unit less. Most vapor-compression heating and cooling equipment has COPs greater than unity. That means it delivers more heat energy than it consumes. Note, first of all: rate of energy refers to power. That's measured in watts, or BTU/hr. There is a significant level of confusion in writing about cold fusion between excess power (XP) and excess energy. Excess power is instantaneous, it is output power minus input power. That there is XP does not show that there is a nuclear reaction, because chemistry can do it. Further, simple delay can create an appearance of XP. If IP is the input power, then, COP = XP/IP. For example, dump a lot of power into a heating element for a second. The measured temperature of the whole device will rise *later*, as this heat is released to the electrolyte and reaches the temperature-measuring element. If the input power has been turned off, the COP, then, could be infinite, i.e. a rising temperature (for a short time) with no input power. Electrochemical cells can store energy, and that energy might later be released. It will show up, while being released, as XP. While energy is being stored, the cell will show negative XP. What is of true interest is excess *energy*. And because XE can be a result of chemical reactions, we are really looking for *anomalous* XE. This XE must be integrated over the life of the experiment, or one might simply be seeing the result of energy storage. Chemical energy might be stored, as well, in the initial composition of the cell. Cold fusion calorimetry must take into account all the inputs (which includes cell materials) and all the outputs (which includes evolved gas and whatever is left in the cell). So if you are looking for XP alone, you might easily find it, without it meaning much. I don't see the kind of data being reported that would allow someone with skill to interpret the results; instead, you report only a calculated COP. Without knowing the actual data, this isn't particularly meaningful. I'd expect to see -- and do see in raw experimental data from cold fusion researchers -- a spreadsheet with recording of ambient temperature, input current, input voltage, and cell temperature. In most work, input current is held constant (which is good up to well over 100 KHz), there is bubble noise below that frequency, and the power supply can compensate) and voltage varies. Under those conditions, constant current, voltage can be averaged over short periods and thus can be used to calculate input power. If current also varies, the calculation must be an integral, and if the variation is fast, as with bubble noise, the integration must be fast as well, i.e., with short integration intervals. This is why almost all cold fusion work is done with a power supply in constant current mode. You can easily make current regulators with a few dollars' worth of components. The Galileo project included instructions for making cheap current regulators to produce the specified protocol currents. You have calculated the Output Power by making assumptions about the volume of the electrolyte, cooling, etc. In cold fusion calorimetry, of the type you are attempting, OP is determined through calibrations, with known power input (from a heating element). I.e., with a known output power, with a particular experimental setup, there will be a certain temperature rise over ambient. There are still lots of problems, but this approach can get you close. Trying to calculate the heat loss from a cell is quite difficult; one is dealing with radiative loss, which is at the fourth power of the temperature difference, as well as conductive and convection losses. There is also the issue of energy carried away by the generated gases. If you are using DC power input, you might assume that all the generated hydrogen and oxygen are unrecombined. Most of it will be. A sign that you've done everything correctly would be a COP of 1.0 at steady-state. More accurately, the integral of the output energy should equal the integral of the input energy. At 06:28 AM 10/15/2012, Jack Cole wrote: After stopping the experiment and watching the temp drop, I see I was losing more heat than I thought. Taking this into account there appear to have been times over 100% efficiency (not
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
At 01:04 AM 10/15/2012, David Roberson wrote: It will be interesting to see how well the stainless steel holds up. I tried a stainless steel spoon as an electrode and it worked fairly well but eventually began to rust. Perhaps the quality of steel makes a difference. 316L stainless steel is an alloy optimized for corrosion resistance. In some reports, 316L steel is only surpassed by platinum for electrolytic anodes. However, stainless steel contains chromium, so anyone contemplating using stainless steel for electrolytic anodes -- and that would include stainless steel spoons -- should Google stainless steel electrolysis danger or the like, and take precautions. The stainless steel will slowly dissolve, resulting, it has been claimed, in a highly toxic form of chromium in the electrolyte. If so, if the concentration of hexavalent chromium is high enough, the electrolyte would need to be treated as toxic waste. As well, with active electrolysis, there could be some level of chromium contained in mist. It is possible to keep misting low, and one should not breathe the mist from an electrolytic cell, in general, unless the electrolyte is known to be free of toxic contaminants. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexavalent_chromium Unless this issue is clearly resolved, the electrolyte should not simply be dumped in drains or on the ground. There is some level of hysterical reaction to the possibility of hexavalent chromium; the amount from a short length of anode would be small; but I have not thoroughly investigated this. Stainless steel is obviously a common product, and 316L steel is recommended for food and surgical implants. Most of the concern about hexavalent chromium wrt stainless steel is over the welding of stainless steel, which causes airborne chromium, which is quite dangerous. To see a bit of the other side, http://aquauto.com/content/dispose-old-liquid Unfortunately, the exchange did not report the result of an EPA inquiry. I have stainless steel (316L) *yarn*. (This is 12 micron fibers twisted into a singles yarn and then countertwisted into a doubles yarn.) This would provide a lot of surface area But I've never used it for an anode. I sell this as part of a yarn and fiber business I could easily supply this. It's expensive by the kilogram, like $260, but you'd only need a little. If someone wants to try it, email me.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Abd, Thanks for your explanation. That is very helpful. Here is my raw data if you are interested. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmQQao2qEYIfdE9rTlplRVZ0STI0a1IwaGlXWVNWbGc I do think chemistry is happening with the Borax. Jack On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: All of this work is suspect. First of all, an intepretive issue. First of all, the definition of COP. COP (Coefficient of Performance): A measurement of the instantaneous efficiency of heating or cooling equipment. It represents the steady-state rate of energy output of the equipment divided by the steady-state rate of energy input to the equipment, expressed in consistent units (i.e. http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/**consumer/buildings/homes/** ratings/terms.htm#watthttp://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/consumer/buildings/homes/ratings/terms.htm#watt watts-**out per watts-in or http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/** consumer/buildings/homes/**ratings/terms.htm#Btuphhttp://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/consumer/buildings/homes/ratings/terms.htm#Btuph Btu/h-**out per Btu/h-in). Thus, the resultant value of COP is unit less. Most vapor-compression heating and cooling equipment has COPs greater than unity. That means it delivers more heat energy than it consumes. Note, first of all: rate of energy refers to power. That's measured in watts, or BTU/hr. There is a significant level of confusion in writing about cold fusion between excess power (XP) and excess energy. Excess power is instantaneous, it is output power minus input power. That there is XP does not show that there is a nuclear reaction, because chemistry can do it. Further, simple delay can create an appearance of XP. If IP is the input power, then, COP = XP/IP. For example, dump a lot of power into a heating element for a second. The measured temperature of the whole device will rise *later*, as this heat is released to the electrolyte and reaches the temperature-measuring element. If the input power has been turned off, the COP, then, could be infinite, i.e. a rising temperature (for a short time) with no input power. Electrochemical cells can store energy, and that energy might later be released. It will show up, while being released, as XP. While energy is being stored, the cell will show negative XP. What is of true interest is excess *energy*. And because XE can be a result of chemical reactions, we are really looking for *anomalous* XE. This XE must be integrated over the life of the experiment, or one might simply be seeing the result of energy storage. Chemical energy might be stored, as well, in the initial composition of the cell. Cold fusion calorimetry must take into account all the inputs (which includes cell materials) and all the outputs (which includes evolved gas and whatever is left in the cell). So if you are looking for XP alone, you might easily find it, without it meaning much. I don't see the kind of data being reported that would allow someone with skill to interpret the results; instead, you report only a calculated COP. Without knowing the actual data, this isn't particularly meaningful. I'd expect to see -- and do see in raw experimental data from cold fusion researchers -- a spreadsheet with recording of ambient temperature, input current, input voltage, and cell temperature. In most work, input current is held constant (which is good up to well over 100 KHz), there is bubble noise below that frequency, and the power supply can compensate) and voltage varies. Under those conditions, constant current, voltage can be averaged over short periods and thus can be used to calculate input power. If current also varies, the calculation must be an integral, and if the variation is fast, as with bubble noise, the integration must be fast as well, i.e., with short integration intervals. This is why almost all cold fusion work is done with a power supply in constant current mode. You can easily make current regulators with a few dollars' worth of components. The Galileo project included instructions for making cheap current regulators to produce the specified protocol currents. You have calculated the Output Power by making assumptions about the volume of the electrolyte, cooling, etc. In cold fusion calorimetry, of the type you are attempting, OP is determined through calibrations, with known power input (from a heating element). I.e., with a known output power, with a particular experimental setup, there will be a certain temperature rise over ambient. There are still lots of problems, but this approach can get you close. Trying to calculate the heat loss from a cell is quite difficult; one is dealing with radiative loss, which is at the fourth power of the temperature difference, as well as conductive and convection losses. There is also the issue of energy carried away by the generated gases. If you are using DC power input, you might assume that all
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
I had an exciting afternoon. I replaced my control nickel with the 40 plus hour heat treated one that resembles an old penny now and began electrolysis. The reading of voltage was a bit unusual after the first hour of operation so I replenished the water and added a little additional sodium carbonate to allow the system to reach equilibrium. Just before I started to make the standard readings after approximately an hour of additional electrolysis a friend called me on the telephone so I was diverted. We spoke for I would guess about half an hour until line noise convinced me to go upstairs to accept another call. Both of us changed telephones but the noise was still bad as we continued our conversation. Perhaps 30 minutes later we finished the call and I went back to make the measurements. My system was behaving very strange. I noticed that the bath had a thin white layer of material on its surface and a thick deposit was on the test nickel. This deposit was white and crystalline which I would guess is some type of carbonate. It was also very evident that a loud hissing noise was originating from the test system. I broke a hole through the thin layer covering the bath easily with my finger and noticed that it was very hot to the touch. The test nickel was also extremely hot. I decided to make the usual measurements and saw that the current was within normal range at 2.5 amps while the voltage had increased to 12.57 volts which is about 2 volts above typical. The liquid was reading 80 degrees C which is much higher than normal. With the measured delta C I would expect to have 86 watts of power being dissipated according to previous calibrations. The actual input was calculated as 31.425 watts. This will clearly be a significant measurement of excess power if it holds up to scrutiny. I suspect that the thin film on the surface of the electrolyte is acting as an insulator or some other issue is contributing to the strange results. I stirred up the electrolyte, cleaned off the nickel deposit and added additional water and sodium carbonate to see if the effect arises again. Regardless of whether or not this proves to be elusive, I had an interesting episode! By the way, I turned off the power to my test system and the line noise continued so I suspect the noise was generated by some other problem besides radiation emissions from my device (I sure hope so). Dave
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
I have an interesting addition to this report. After I cleaned up the deposits and added water and electrolyte I let my experiment continue electrolysis. The effect happened again with some interesting differences. I noticed that the thin layer that coated the electrolyte bath came in the form of small floating islands about the size of a standard pencil lead. These came together to form a film over the surface. A much thicker deposit formed upon the active nickel that is like a form of crust. Then I noticed that sparks were being emitted from the edge of the active nickel! The sparks came intermittently and the intensity of the sparks varied. I saw actual flames on rare occasions which had me alarmed. Perhaps this is caused by the hydrogen becoming ignited at that electrode. The water between electrodes was at boiling temperature. I noticed that the supply voltage was varying by a large degree in the fashion of bubble bursting which could be due to the reduced path for ions to the nickel that is now covered with the white hard deposit. Next, I tapped the deposit mostly off of the nickels and added water to the bath. The surface deposit was stirred up so that things are returning toward normal. There still remains a layer of the white deposit on the top of the active nickel from which bubbles of hydrogen are exiting. This experiment is getting more interesting all the time. I hope to get to the bottom of the observations, but I have no idea what is occurring. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 3:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started I had an exciting afternoon. I replaced my control nickel with the 40 plus hour heat treated one that resembles an old penny now and began electrolysis. The reading of voltage was a bit unusual after the first hour of operation so I replenished the water and added a little additional sodium carbonate to allow the system to reach equilibrium. Just before I started to make the standard readings after approximately an hour of additional electrolysis a friend called me on the telephone so I was diverted. We spoke for I would guess about half an hour until line noise convinced me to go upstairs to accept another call. Both of us changed telephones but the noise was still bad as we continued our conversation. Perhaps 30 minutes later we finished the call and I went back to make the measurements. My system was behaving very strange. I noticed that the bath had a thin white layer of material on its surface and a thick deposit was on the test nickel. This deposit was white and crystalline which I would guess is some type of carbonate. It was also very evident that a loud hissing noise was originating from the test system. I broke a hole through the thin layer covering the bath easily with my finger and noticed that it was very hot to the touch. The test nickel was also extremely hot. I decided to make the usual measurements and saw that the current was within normal range at 2.5 amps while the voltage had increased to 12.57 volts which is about 2 volts above typical. The liquid was reading 80 degrees C which is much higher than normal. With the measured delta C I would expect to have 86 watts of power being dissipated according to previous calibrations. The actual input was calculated as 31.425 watts. This will clearly be a significant measurement of excess power if it holds up to scrutiny. I suspect that the thin film on the surface of the electrolyte is acting as an insulator or some other issue is contributing to the strange results. I stirred up the electrolyte, cleaned off the nickel deposit and added additional water and sodium carbonate to see if the effect arises again. Regardless of whether or not this proves to be elusive, I had an interesting episode! By the way, I turned off the power to my test system and the line noise continued so I suspect the noise was generated by some other problem besides radiation emissions from my device (I sure hope so). Dave
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
One final note that I want to include. I allowed the experiment to go into the unusual mode for the third time and made some measurements. The electrolyte was boiling as in the first two observations and I also noted sparks being emitted. Unfortunately, I let the system become too hot and it melted the bottom of my test container allowing the electrolyte to leak out. After this episode, I obtained a smaller container and started another round of testing. I will need to compete another calibration before useful data can be obtained. A most interesting afternoon. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 5:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started I have an interesting addition to this report. After I cleaned up the deposits and added water and electrolyte I let my experiment continue electrolysis. The effect happened again with some interesting differences. I noticed that the thin layer that coated the electrolyte bath came in the form of small floating islands about the size of a standard pencil lead. These came together to form a film over the surface. A much thicker deposit formed upon the active nickel that is like a form of crust. Then I noticed that sparks were being emitted from the edge of the active nickel! The sparks came intermittently and the intensity of the sparks varied. I saw actual flames on rare occasions which had me alarmed. Perhaps this is caused by the hydrogen becoming ignited at that electrode. The water between electrodes was at boiling temperature. I noticed that the supply voltage was varying by a large degree in the fashion of bubble bursting which could be due to the reduced path for ions to the nickel that is now covered with the white hard deposit. Next, I tapped the deposit mostly off of the nickels and added water to the bath. The surface deposit was stirred up so that things are returning toward normal. There still remains a layer of the white deposit on the top of the active nickel from which bubbles of hydrogen are exiting. This experiment is getting more interesting all the time. I hope to get to the bottom of the observations, but I have no idea what is occurring. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 3:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started I had an exciting afternoon. I replaced my control nickel with the 40 plus hour heat treated one that resembles an old penny now and began electrolysis. The reading of voltage was a bit unusual after the first hour of operation so I replenished the water and added a little additional sodium carbonate to allow the system to reach equilibrium. Just before I started to make the standard readings after approximately an hour of additional electrolysis a friend called me on the telephone so I was diverted. We spoke for I would guess about half an hour until line noise convinced me to go upstairs to accept another call. Both of us changed telephones but the noise was still bad as we continued our conversation. Perhaps 30 minutes later we finished the call and I went back to make the measurements. My system was behaving very strange. I noticed that the bath had a thin white layer of material on its surface and a thick deposit was on the test nickel. This deposit was white and crystalline which I would guess is some type of carbonate. It was also very evident that a loud hissing noise was originating from the test system. I broke a hole through the thin layer covering the bath easily with my finger and noticed that it was very hot to the touch. The test nickel was also extremely hot. I decided to make the usual measurements and saw that the current was within normal range at 2.5 amps while the voltage had increased to 12.57 volts which is about 2 volts above typical. The liquid was reading 80 degrees C which is much higher than normal. With the measured delta C I would expect to have 86 watts of power being dissipated according to previous calibrations. The actual input was calculated as 31.425 watts. This will clearly be a significant measurement of excess power if it holds up to scrutiny. I suspect that the thin film on the surface of the electrolyte is acting as an insulator or some other issue is contributing to the strange results. I stirred up the electrolyte, cleaned off the nickel deposit and added additional water and sodium carbonate to see if the effect arises again. Regardless of whether or not this proves to be elusive, I had an interesting episode! By the way, I turned off the power to my test system and the line noise continued so I suspect the noise was generated by some other problem besides radiation emissions from my device (I sure hope so). Dave
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Keep us updated Dave, I never saw sparks in my experiments so you are onto something new. I do remembers several events though, that are just as you described, the voltage and current will just swing madly around as the water boils and it will last as long as electrolyte is available. But because I was using the 12V rail of a 65Watt PC power supply, at best It was just a little over 1.5A or 18W but I could not hold a small coffee jar of solution in my hands. I've been puzzled ever since. What you are seeing is so exciting. Best Regards, Chuck On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:45 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: One final note that I want to include. I allowed the experiment to go into the unusual mode for the third time and made some measurements. The electrolyte was boiling as in the first two observations and I also noted sparks being emitted. Unfortunately, I let the system become too hot and it melted the bottom of my test container allowing the electrolyte to leak out. After this episode, I obtained a smaller container and started another round of testing. I will need to compete another calibration before useful data can be obtained. A most interesting afternoon. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 5:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started I have an interesting addition to this report. After I cleaned up the deposits and added water and electrolyte I let my experiment continue electrolysis. The effect happened again with some interesting differences. I noticed that the thin layer that coated the electrolyte bath came in the form of small floating islands about the size of a standard pencil lead. These came together to form a film over the surface. A much thicker deposit formed upon the active nickel that is like a form of crust. Then I noticed that sparks were being emitted from the edge of the active nickel! The sparks came intermittently and the intensity of the sparks varied. I saw actual flames on rare occasions which had me alarmed. Perhaps this is caused by the hydrogen becoming ignited at that electrode. The water between electrodes was at boiling temperature. I noticed that the supply voltage was varying by a large degree in the fashion of bubble bursting which could be due to the reduced path for ions to the nickel that is now covered with the white hard deposit. Next, I tapped the deposit mostly off of the nickels and added water to the bath. The surface deposit was stirred up so that things are returning toward normal. There still remains a layer of the white deposit on the top of the active nickel from which bubbles of hydrogen are exiting. This experiment is getting more interesting all the time. I hope to get to the bottom of the observations, but I have no idea what is occurring. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 3:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started I had an exciting afternoon. I replaced my control nickel with the 40 plus hour heat treated one that resembles an old penny now and began electrolysis. The reading of voltage was a bit unusual after the first hour of operation so I replenished the water and added a little additional sodium carbonate to allow the system to reach equilibrium. Just before I started to make the standard readings after approximately an hour of additional electrolysis a friend called me on the telephone so I was diverted. We spoke for I would guess about half an hour until line noise convinced me to go upstairs to accept another call. Both of us changed telephones but the noise was still bad as we continued our conversation. Perhaps 30 minutes later we finished the call and I went back to make the measurements. My system was behaving very strange. I noticed that the bath had a thin white layer of material on its surface and a thick deposit was on the test nickel. This deposit was white and crystalline which I would guess is some type of carbonate. It was also very evident that a loud hissing noise was originating from the test system. I broke a hole through the thin layer covering the bath easily with my finger and noticed that it was very hot to the touch. The test nickel was also extremely hot. I decided to make the usual measurements and saw that the current was within normal range at 2.5 amps while the voltage had increased to 12.57 volts which is about 2 volts above typical. The liquid was reading 80 degrees C which is much higher than normal. With the measured delta C I would expect to have 86 watts of power being dissipated according to previous calibrations. The actual input was calculated as 31.425 watts. This will clearly be a significant measurement of excess power if it holds up to scrutiny. I suspect
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
After running all night with my new setup, I observe no excess heat. The current dropped throughout the run. The COP values start at .43 and trail off to .12 at the end. Back to the drawing board. Thanks for your write-up Jeff. I have definitely seen significant heating in my experiments using a higher current level than you are using, but does not approach unity based on my last experiment. On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of us tried electrolysis with nickels in Borax today. No excess heat was observed. There are details here: http://pdxlenr.blogspot.com/2012/10/no-heating-observed-while-electrolyzing.html Jeff On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: You might try to erode the copper extrusions that erupt from the center of the coin. These copper eruptions have been produced by repeated heating. Remove this copper by etching the heat treated nickel in acid. This etching should produce the micro holes that we are interested in. Cheers: Axil On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 10:54 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: Hi Jack, I am likewise interested in your results. The circulation pump might be an idea that I should incorporate since I am very carefully placing my temperature probe at the same location for readings. On occasions I get data that seems out of place by a couple of degrees C which might be due to the lack of mixing. Most of the time my data falls within a degree of the trend line using Excel. Today, I can definitely tell that I am not getting excess heat from my heat treated nickel. I substitute a fresh one as a control with the same current and placement. Today, the data from both samples are very close together within 1 watt out of 20 watts of heating. In my control run, the untreated nickel actually displays the slightly higher reading. My experimental setup consists of a medium sized salad container from Kroger food market surrounded by Styrofoam bottom and walls with the top open. The electrolyte is maintained at approximately one half the height of my sample nickels. I use small alligator clips and leads to connect to the supply which is a laboratory quality one that can output up to 60 volts DC if required. The sodium carbonate electrolyte typically allows me to drive 2 amps of current into the device with a voltage drop of 10 to 11 volts. My electrolyte bath is operating at 45 C at that current level. I generally make a calibration run by varying the current from 1 amp to 2.5 amps and accurately measuring the supply voltage. This gives me a range of temperatures versus power input points that form a curve. I can detect whether or not a point is out of line fairly easily by its deviation from the curve. When the calibration is acting up, I make several additional test runs of an hour each to determine the most likely value. I allow the setup to run for approximately 1 hour for each point to ensure that the system has stabilized. My plans are to continue to test the heat treated sample for a number of additional hours before I try an alternate technique to modify the surface of this nickel or others. One interesting observation is that my torched and quenched nickel now looks very much like a copper penny in appearance. The surface coloration can not be wiped off with vigorous rubbing of a paper towel. The raised letters have a shiny copper look that does not exhibit any of the standard nickel shine. You would think that this is a large sized weathered penny by appearance although the normal nickel features are intact. As always, my test nickel is connected with leads to the negative terminal of the supply. A second nickel acts as my positive supply electrode. This is the configuration that should expose the test nickel to hydrogen by electrolysis. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 13, 2012 8:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Hi Dave, I will be interested to know your results. This evening, I started an experiment using my repeatedly-treated nickels (8) on a small thoriated tungsten rod. I'm using a penny connected to a chrome plated alligator clip for my anode (+). My last few runs seemed to show excess heat, but like you, I'm hesitant to make that claim without better measures and further experimenting. I was estimating heat loss by taking heat measurements of the bath after removing the electrodes to get the rate that the temperature of the bath was dropping. My current setup involves submerging the electrolytic cell in 1 gallon of water in a styrofoam minnow bucket. I have another 1 gallon of water in an identical minnow bucket to test temperature changes due to heat loss/gain from the environment. I will be taking measurements of voltage, current, temp of the water bath
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Better results today, but still under-unity. I replaced the anode with 4 stainless steel washers soldered directly to the wire. Starting temp of the surrounding bath was 69.4F and last measure was 85.2F (for 1 gallon of water + 5 oz in the electrolytic cell). Average ambient temp 70.2F. Average input voltage is 12.1 and current is .69. Average COP .66 (low=.52 high=.80). Of course there is energy loss with power going into the electrolysis, which has not been included in the calculations. I'll keep it running and see how hot it can get or if anything changes. Jack On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: After running all night with my new setup, I observe no excess heat. The current dropped throughout the run. The COP values start at .43 and trail off to .12 at the end. Back to the drawing board. Thanks for your write-up Jeff. I have definitely seen significant heating in my experiments using a higher current level than you are using, but does not approach unity based on my last experiment. On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of us tried electrolysis with nickels in Borax today. No excess heat was observed. There are details here: http://pdxlenr.blogspot.com/2012/10/no-heating-observed-while-electrolyzing.html Jeff On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: You might try to erode the copper extrusions that erupt from the center of the coin. These copper eruptions have been produced by repeated heating. Remove this copper by etching the heat treated nickel in acid. This etching should produce the micro holes that we are interested in. Cheers: Axil On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 10:54 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: Hi Jack, I am likewise interested in your results. The circulation pump might be an idea that I should incorporate since I am very carefully placing my temperature probe at the same location for readings. On occasions I get data that seems out of place by a couple of degrees C which might be due to the lack of mixing. Most of the time my data falls within a degree of the trend line using Excel. Today, I can definitely tell that I am not getting excess heat from my heat treated nickel. I substitute a fresh one as a control with the same current and placement. Today, the data from both samples are very close together within 1 watt out of 20 watts of heating. In my control run, the untreated nickel actually displays the slightly higher reading. My experimental setup consists of a medium sized salad container from Kroger food market surrounded by Styrofoam bottom and walls with the top open. The electrolyte is maintained at approximately one half the height of my sample nickels. I use small alligator clips and leads to connect to the supply which is a laboratory quality one that can output up to 60 volts DC if required. The sodium carbonate electrolyte typically allows me to drive 2 amps of current into the device with a voltage drop of 10 to 11 volts. My electrolyte bath is operating at 45 C at that current level. I generally make a calibration run by varying the current from 1 amp to 2.5 amps and accurately measuring the supply voltage. This gives me a range of temperatures versus power input points that form a curve. I can detect whether or not a point is out of line fairly easily by its deviation from the curve. When the calibration is acting up, I make several additional test runs of an hour each to determine the most likely value. I allow the setup to run for approximately 1 hour for each point to ensure that the system has stabilized. My plans are to continue to test the heat treated sample for a number of additional hours before I try an alternate technique to modify the surface of this nickel or others. One interesting observation is that my torched and quenched nickel now looks very much like a copper penny in appearance. The surface coloration can not be wiped off with vigorous rubbing of a paper towel. The raised letters have a shiny copper look that does not exhibit any of the standard nickel shine. You would think that this is a large sized weathered penny by appearance although the normal nickel features are intact. As always, my test nickel is connected with leads to the negative terminal of the supply. A second nickel acts as my positive supply electrode. This is the configuration that should expose the test nickel to hydrogen by electrolysis. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 13, 2012 8:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Hi Dave, I will be interested to know your results. This evening, I started an experiment using my repeatedly-treated nickels (8) on a small thoriated tungsten rod. I'm using a penny connected to a chrome plated alligator clip
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Hi Dave, I will be interested to know your results. This evening, I started an experiment using my repeatedly-treated nickels (8) on a small thoriated tungsten rod. I'm using a penny connected to a chrome plated alligator clip for my anode (+). My last few runs seemed to show excess heat, but like you, I'm hesitant to make that claim without better measures and further experimenting. I was estimating heat loss by taking heat measurements of the bath after removing the electrodes to get the rate that the temperature of the bath was dropping. My current setup involves submerging the electrolytic cell in 1 gallon of water in a styrofoam minnow bucket. I have another 1 gallon of water in an identical minnow bucket to test temperature changes due to heat loss/gain from the environment. I will be taking measurements of voltage, current, temp of the water bath surrounding the electrolytic cell, and control cell for the next couple of hours. Tomorrow, I'll run all day and see what it can do over a longer period. I'm using borax for the electrolyte, and tracking the data in excel. The nickels have been treated at low current for 3 days as the cathode (after repeated heating with a torch and multiple prior experiments with the same set of nickels/tungsten). Monday, I should have a small submersible pump that I'll try in future experiments to keep the water surrounding the cell circulating. Jack On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:02 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I have completed my electrolysis experiment using a standard issue nickel with a second one at the positive electrode. My electrolyte is sodium carbonate (Arm Hammer washing soda) which does not foul up the positive electrode as much as borax. For a short time it looked as though I was observing excess heat after my test nickel had been loaded with hydrogen for 40 plus hours. I performed a control and calibration run which seemed to indicate that I could not prove any excess heating. My test fixture does not appear to be capable of precise temperature measurement since it does not have a good stirring process and the control of the electrolyte level is difficult to maintain. A positive result would be too important of a determination for me to announce without better proof. For these reasons I decided to try another experiment. First, I took the 40 plus hour nickel and heated it to red heat with a gas torch. The nickel rapidly cooled off once the torch was removed so it was apparent that a lot of excess heat was not being generated as a result of elevated temperature. No flames appeared that could suggest that hydrogen was being released so I decided to begin another procedure. I took the test nickel and heated it to a red hot state and immediately dropped it into a water bath. This was repeated a total of 5 times in an effort to generate surface cracks due to the stress of rapid cooling. The main observation I noticed was that an oxide had formed upon the surface which could not be removed by wiping. One side seemed to have a thick brown oxide while the other exhibited less. I am not able to test for the actual materials present, but that does not prevent me from proceeded with my electrolysis of the nickel. The heat treated nickel is now undergoing electrolysis along with one that is not so treated acting as the positive supply electrode. My first observations are that the brown oxide deposits have flaked off to a degree, but not completely. This material is floating upon the bath and I also found that the resistance associated with this coating does not appear too large to prevent me from driving the current to 1 or 2 amps as desired. I was surprised that it did not exhibit much if any additional resistance as compared to the original sample. I did note that green flakes of material have shown up in the electrolyte that I have not seen before when using sodium carbonate. This is an interesting consequence of the heat treating as far as can be determined. The experiment has now been running for around 6 hours and the bath temperature has been recorded as well as the input power applied at several times. I have been registering the results within an Excel file and chart in an effort to reveal anything of interest. I have collected a fair amount of data associated with the other experimental procedure using a untreated set of nickels that is also charted. I will continue to run the experiment looking for any unusual behavior or heating. Dave
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Hi Jack, I am likewise interested in your results. The circulation pump might be an idea that I should incorporate since I am very carefully placing my temperature probe at the same location for readings. On occasions I get data that seems out of place by a couple of degrees C which might be due to the lack of mixing. Most of the time my data falls within a degree of the trend line using Excel. Today, I can definitely tell that I am not getting excess heat from my heat treated nickel. I substitute a fresh one as a control with the same current and placement. Today, the data from both samples are very close together within 1 watt out of 20 watts of heating. In my control run, the untreated nickel actually displays the slightly higher reading. My experimental setup consists of a medium sized salad container from Kroger food market surrounded by Styrofoam bottom and walls with the top open. The electrolyte is maintained at approximately one half the height of my sample nickels. I use small alligator clips and leads to connect to the supply which is a laboratory quality one that can output up to 60 volts DC if required. The sodium carbonate electrolyte typically allows me to drive 2 amps of current into the device with a voltage drop of 10 to 11 volts. My electrolyte bath is operating at 45 C at that current level. I generally make a calibration run by varying the current from 1 amp to 2.5 amps and accurately measuring the supply voltage. This gives me a range of temperatures versus power input points that form a curve. I can detect whether or not a point is out of line fairly easily by its deviation from the curve. When the calibration is acting up, I make several additional test runs of an hour each to determine the most likely value. I allow the setup to run for approximately 1 hour for each point to ensure that the system has stabilized. My plans are to continue to test the heat treated sample for a number of additional hours before I try an alternate technique to modify the surface of this nickel or others. One interesting observation is that my torched and quenched nickel now looks very much like a copper penny in appearance. The surface coloration can not be wiped off with vigorous rubbing of a paper towel. The raised letters have a shiny copper look that does not exhibit any of the standard nickel shine. You would think that this is a large sized weathered penny by appearance although the normal nickel features are intact. As always, my test nickel is connected with leads to the negative terminal of the supply. A second nickel acts as my positive supply electrode. This is the configuration that should expose the test nickel to hydrogen by electrolysis. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 13, 2012 8:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Hi Dave, I will be interested to know your results. This evening, I started an experiment using my repeatedly-treated nickels (8) on a small thoriated tungsten rod. I'm using a penny connected to a chrome plated alligator clip for my anode (+). My last few runs seemed to show excess heat, but like you, I'm hesitant to make that claim without better measures and further experimenting. I was estimating heat loss by taking heat measurements of the bath after removing the electrodes to get the rate that the temperature of the bath was dropping. My current setup involves submerging the electrolytic cell in 1 gallon of water in a styrofoam minnow bucket. I have another 1 gallon of water in an identical minnow bucket to test temperature changes due to heat loss/gain from the environment. I will be taking measurements of voltage, current, temp of the water bath surrounding the electrolytic cell, and control cell for the next couple of hours. Tomorrow, I'll run all day and see what it can do over a longer period. I'm using borax for the electrolyte, and tracking the data in excel. The nickels have been treated at low current for 3 days as the cathode (after repeated heating with a torch and multiple prior experiments with the same set of nickels/tungsten). Monday, I should have a small submersible pump that I'll try in future experiments to keep the water surrounding the cell circulating. Jack On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:02 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I have completed my electrolysis experiment using a standard issue nickel with a second one at the positive electrode. My electrolyte is sodium carbonate (Arm Hammer washing soda) which does not foul up the positive electrode as much as borax. For a short time it looked as though I was observing excess heat after my test nickel had been loaded with hydrogen for 40 plus hours. I performed a control and calibration run which seemed to indicate that I could not prove any excess heating. My test fixture does
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
You might try to erode the copper extrusions that erupt from the center of the coin. These copper eruptions have been produced by repeated heating. Remove this copper by etching the heat treated nickel in acid. This etching should produce the micro holes that we are interested in. Cheers: Axil On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 10:54 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Hi Jack, I am likewise interested in your results. The circulation pump might be an idea that I should incorporate since I am very carefully placing my temperature probe at the same location for readings. On occasions I get data that seems out of place by a couple of degrees C which might be due to the lack of mixing. Most of the time my data falls within a degree of the trend line using Excel. Today, I can definitely tell that I am not getting excess heat from my heat treated nickel. I substitute a fresh one as a control with the same current and placement. Today, the data from both samples are very close together within 1 watt out of 20 watts of heating. In my control run, the untreated nickel actually displays the slightly higher reading. My experimental setup consists of a medium sized salad container from Kroger food market surrounded by Styrofoam bottom and walls with the top open. The electrolyte is maintained at approximately one half the height of my sample nickels. I use small alligator clips and leads to connect to the supply which is a laboratory quality one that can output up to 60 volts DC if required. The sodium carbonate electrolyte typically allows me to drive 2 amps of current into the device with a voltage drop of 10 to 11 volts. My electrolyte bath is operating at 45 C at that current level. I generally make a calibration run by varying the current from 1 amp to 2.5 amps and accurately measuring the supply voltage. This gives me a range of temperatures versus power input points that form a curve. I can detect whether or not a point is out of line fairly easily by its deviation from the curve. When the calibration is acting up, I make several additional test runs of an hour each to determine the most likely value. I allow the setup to run for approximately 1 hour for each point to ensure that the system has stabilized. My plans are to continue to test the heat treated sample for a number of additional hours before I try an alternate technique to modify the surface of this nickel or others. One interesting observation is that my torched and quenched nickel now looks very much like a copper penny in appearance. The surface coloration can not be wiped off with vigorous rubbing of a paper towel. The raised letters have a shiny copper look that does not exhibit any of the standard nickel shine. You would think that this is a large sized weathered penny by appearance although the normal nickel features are intact. As always, my test nickel is connected with leads to the negative terminal of the supply. A second nickel acts as my positive supply electrode. This is the configuration that should expose the test nickel to hydrogen by electrolysis. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 13, 2012 8:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Hi Dave, I will be interested to know your results. This evening, I started an experiment using my repeatedly-treated nickels (8) on a small thoriated tungsten rod. I'm using a penny connected to a chrome plated alligator clip for my anode (+). My last few runs seemed to show excess heat, but like you, I'm hesitant to make that claim without better measures and further experimenting. I was estimating heat loss by taking heat measurements of the bath after removing the electrodes to get the rate that the temperature of the bath was dropping. My current setup involves submerging the electrolytic cell in 1 gallon of water in a styrofoam minnow bucket. I have another 1 gallon of water in an identical minnow bucket to test temperature changes due to heat loss/gain from the environment. I will be taking measurements of voltage, current, temp of the water bath surrounding the electrolytic cell, and control cell for the next couple of hours. Tomorrow, I'll run all day and see what it can do over a longer period. I'm using borax for the electrolyte, and tracking the data in excel. The nickels have been treated at low current for 3 days as the cathode (after repeated heating with a torch and multiple prior experiments with the same set of nickels/tungsten). Monday, I should have a small submersible pump that I'll try in future experiments to keep the water surrounding the cell circulating. Jack On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:02 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: I have completed my electrolysis experiment using a standard issue nickel with a second one at the positive electrode. My
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
A couple of us tried electrolysis with nickels in Borax today. No excess heat was observed. There are details here: http://pdxlenr.blogspot.com/2012/10/no-heating-observed-while-electrolyzing.html Jeff On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: You might try to erode the copper extrusions that erupt from the center of the coin. These copper eruptions have been produced by repeated heating. Remove this copper by etching the heat treated nickel in acid. This etching should produce the micro holes that we are interested in. Cheers: Axil On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 10:54 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: Hi Jack, I am likewise interested in your results. The circulation pump might be an idea that I should incorporate since I am very carefully placing my temperature probe at the same location for readings. On occasions I get data that seems out of place by a couple of degrees C which might be due to the lack of mixing. Most of the time my data falls within a degree of the trend line using Excel. Today, I can definitely tell that I am not getting excess heat from my heat treated nickel. I substitute a fresh one as a control with the same current and placement. Today, the data from both samples are very close together within 1 watt out of 20 watts of heating. In my control run, the untreated nickel actually displays the slightly higher reading. My experimental setup consists of a medium sized salad container from Kroger food market surrounded by Styrofoam bottom and walls with the top open. The electrolyte is maintained at approximately one half the height of my sample nickels. I use small alligator clips and leads to connect to the supply which is a laboratory quality one that can output up to 60 volts DC if required. The sodium carbonate electrolyte typically allows me to drive 2 amps of current into the device with a voltage drop of 10 to 11 volts. My electrolyte bath is operating at 45 C at that current level. I generally make a calibration run by varying the current from 1 amp to 2.5 amps and accurately measuring the supply voltage. This gives me a range of temperatures versus power input points that form a curve. I can detect whether or not a point is out of line fairly easily by its deviation from the curve. When the calibration is acting up, I make several additional test runs of an hour each to determine the most likely value. I allow the setup to run for approximately 1 hour for each point to ensure that the system has stabilized. My plans are to continue to test the heat treated sample for a number of additional hours before I try an alternate technique to modify the surface of this nickel or others. One interesting observation is that my torched and quenched nickel now looks very much like a copper penny in appearance. The surface coloration can not be wiped off with vigorous rubbing of a paper towel. The raised letters have a shiny copper look that does not exhibit any of the standard nickel shine. You would think that this is a large sized weathered penny by appearance although the normal nickel features are intact. As always, my test nickel is connected with leads to the negative terminal of the supply. A second nickel acts as my positive supply electrode. This is the configuration that should expose the test nickel to hydrogen by electrolysis. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 13, 2012 8:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started Hi Dave, I will be interested to know your results. This evening, I started an experiment using my repeatedly-treated nickels (8) on a small thoriated tungsten rod. I'm using a penny connected to a chrome plated alligator clip for my anode (+). My last few runs seemed to show excess heat, but like you, I'm hesitant to make that claim without better measures and further experimenting. I was estimating heat loss by taking heat measurements of the bath after removing the electrodes to get the rate that the temperature of the bath was dropping. My current setup involves submerging the electrolytic cell in 1 gallon of water in a styrofoam minnow bucket. I have another 1 gallon of water in an identical minnow bucket to test temperature changes due to heat loss/gain from the environment. I will be taking measurements of voltage, current, temp of the water bath surrounding the electrolytic cell, and control cell for the next couple of hours. Tomorrow, I'll run all day and see what it can do over a longer period. I'm using borax for the electrolyte, and tracking the data in excel. The nickels have been treated at low current for 3 days as the cathode (after repeated heating with a torch and multiple prior experiments with the same set of nickels/tungsten). Monday, I should have a small submersible pump that I'll try in future
[Vo]:New Experiment Started
I have completed my electrolysis experiment using a standard issue nickel with a second one at the positive electrode. My electrolyte is sodium carbonate (Arm Hammer washing soda) which does not foul up the positive electrode as much as borax. For a short time it looked as though I was observing excess heat after my test nickel had been loaded with hydrogen for 40 plus hours. I performed a control and calibration run which seemed to indicate that I could not prove any excess heating. My test fixture does not appear to be capable of precise temperature measurement since it does not have a good stirring process and the control of the electrolyte level is difficult to maintain. A positive result would be too important of a determination for me to announce without better proof. For these reasons I decided to try another experiment. First, I took the 40 plus hour nickel and heated it to red heat with a gas torch. The nickel rapidly cooled off once the torch was removed so it was apparent that a lot of excess heat was not being generated as a result of elevated temperature. No flames appeared that could suggest that hydrogen was being released so I decided to begin another procedure. I took the test nickel and heated it to a red hot state and immediately dropped it into a water bath. This was repeated a total of 5 times in an effort to generate surface cracks due to the stress of rapid cooling. The main observation I noticed was that an oxide had formed upon the surface which could not be removed by wiping. One side seemed to have a thick brown oxide while the other exhibited less. I am not able to test for the actual materials present, but that does not prevent me from proceeded with my electrolysis of the nickel. The heat treated nickel is now undergoing electrolysis along with one that is not so treated acting as the positive supply electrode. My first observations are that the brown oxide deposits have flaked off to a degree, but not completely. This material is floating upon the bath and I also found that the resistance associated with this coating does not appear too large to prevent me from driving the current to 1 or 2 amps as desired. I was surprised that it did not exhibit much if any additional resistance as compared to the original sample. I did note that green flakes of material have shown up in the electrolyte that I have not seen before when using sodium carbonate. This is an interesting consequence of the heat treating as far as can be determined. The experiment has now been running for around 6 hours and the bath temperature has been recorded as well as the input power applied at several times. I have been registering the results within an Excel file and chart in an effort to reveal anything of interest. I have collected a fair amount of data associated with the other experimental procedure using a untreated set of nickels that is also charted. I will continue to run the experiment looking for any unusual behavior or heating. Dave
