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.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 >> > >
