I am somewhat concerned that all the attention to Rossi, Parkhomov style replications may have caused neglect of a far more detailed protocol for excess energy. That is the UGC Lipinski work described in well over one hundred pages of patent and patent application literature. Their work is highly professional and the real-time documentation and redundancy of documentation is the best I've seen. Here are the patent and application references, for those who may not have them. I include following that some references for proton sources, since that would seem to be the most challenging aspect of any do-it-yourself (DIY) replicators. Thanks, Longview
Lipinski UGC USPTO 2009 patent linked here:
And their WIPO publication dated 27 November 2014, International Application, corrected version linked here:
With the WIPO index of documents here:
Those UGC Lipinski disclosures are remarkably detailed and apparently very complete, showing what works, what works well, and what does not work. Readers may miss that this IS LENR, even though the inventors deny connection to LENR or CF. The very large COPs (well over one thousand under some conditions, one "Q' of 7433 reported from chart on p. 58 of WIPO application) are indisputable evidence of utility regardless of what it is called. Certainly it is not "hot fusion".
Aside for the required vacuum system and suitable chamber, the other challenge that may face replicators -- is how to generate protons of modest energy (say 200 to 2000 eV). I suspect this may be accomplished using a generator based on H2 flow through suitable PTFE (Teflon) tube passing directly in front of the waveguide port of a common microwave oven, perhaps in conjunction with an immediate downstream spin resolver based on one two pairs of strong permanent magnets transverse to the proton stream. Acceleration to the modest voltages shown to be necessary in the Lipinski UGC disclosures is easily accomplished by simple DC potential differences of the same magnitude (200 to 2000 volts). All the microwave based proton sources appear to use an "extraction" potential. It would seem simple to set the extraction potential as 200 to 2000 V to yield the desired energy in the proton beam.
For a completely do-it-yourself outline of proton generator suggestions see this:
The above reference is at the level of a DIY effort, but is not a complete guide. To understand the theory and see its application to much higher outputs, please see the following:
With powerful permanent magnets (NdFeB, SmCo) widely available today, there is no need for the power waste of electromagnets, for example see:
A permanent-Magnet Microwave Ion Source for a Compact High-yield Neutron Generator
O. Waldmann and B. Ludewigt linked at
To remove unwanted ions from the beam, one might follow the suggestion of using small amounts of water vapor (~1%) as described here:
Generation of High Purity Proton Beams from Microwave Driven Sources
David Spence and Keith R. Lykke
For a thorough review of the state of the art in 2013 see this CERN Yellow Report:
Celona, L. "Microwave Discharge Ion Sources" linked through arXiv.org here to a Cornell PDF link:
For the following, check your local University library, even though all this was funded publicly, the AIP wants to parasitize viewers of the information at over 3 times the US Federal minimum hourly wage for each article (i.e. $28):
"Development of an all-permanent-magnet microwaave ion source equipped with multi-cusp magnetic fields for high current proton beam production" Tanaka M, Hara S, Seki T, Iga, T
Review of Scientific Instruments 2008 Feb;79(2 Pt 2):02B317. doi: 10.1063/1.2821502.
"Imroved design of proton source and low energy beam transport line for European Spallation Source" Neri, L. et al..
Review of Scientific Instruments 2014 85, 02A723. doi: 10.1063/1.4832135.
"High intensity electron cyclotron resonance proton source for low energy high intensity proton accelerator" Roychowdhury P, and Chakravarty D.P. Review of Scientific Instruments 2009 80, 123305. doi: 10.1063/1/3772786
Any replicator of the UGC Lipinski work would have to acquire, assemble or fabricate quite an array of devices and instrumentation. Including a vacuum roughing pump, a turbomolecular pump, gas analysers, high voltage amplifier, multichannel analysers and so on. Not beyond the good folks here. But it won't happen if no one pays attention to the need, or that no one follows the path to such a replication. I suspect a lot of personal effort is being expended to follow the poorly documented work of Rossi, in lieu of the much more thoroughly documented work by the Lipinskis. And apparently the COPs at UGC are easily far higher than those in Rossi, Lugano, Parkhomov-- as worthy as those efforts may themselves be.