Useful laboratory technique

    Quote from scuromio

    Here is a useful laboratory technique: do NOT use monazite as a means of activating the LENR reactor. Monazites vary a lot in their content, but almost all of them contain an impurity that will transmute to something you really don't want to have around your delicate biological body.


    If you want to use alpha particle activation, it would be safer to use thoriated tungsten welding rods. They are available in up to 2% Th. If that turns out to be relevant to igniting your reactor, withdraw the thoriated rod after ignition. Thorium and tungsten also create nasty transmutation products. That is why I'm including a control rod tube into my shielding design. I'm just going to drill a 1/2" hole in the shield outer wall, weld in a 1/2 steel tube of sufficient length to reach the center reactor core, then insert a 5/16" rod for mechanical control of anything.


    Your process might benefit from a fuel pre-processing step using spark discharge.


    Mizuno has shown that he gets results by using a spark to pre-treat his nickel and palladium with a spark to produce a pitted surface.


    Rossi also uses a fuel pre-treatment step. His patent says that he starts with 5 micron nickel powder and sinteres it until he gets a particle mix of between 1 to 100 microns. This reshaped powder is covered with lithium.


    The fuel analysis from the Lugano test shows that the nickel powder in the fuel had rare earths and a range of other heavy elements welded onto the surface of the fuel particles. This may have been caused by using a rare earth doped tungsten electron to sinter the fuel during pre-treatment.


    As a key to get Rossi's process to work, this pre-treatment step increases the porosity of the nickel powder.

    Quote from scuromio

    If you want to use alpha particle activation, it would be safer to use thoriated tungsten welding rods. They are available in up to 2% Th. If that turns out to be relevant to igniting your reactor, withdraw the thoriated rod after ignition. Thorium and tungsten also create nasty transmutation products. That is why I'm including a control rod tube into my shielding design. I'm just going to drill a 1/2" hole in the shield outer wall, weld in a 1/2 steel tube of sufficient length to reach the center reactor core, then insert a 5/16" rod for mechanical control of anything.


    @scuromio, am I correct in understanding that you'll be running current through thoriated tungsten rods for the live runs in an experiment? I've been waiting for a long time for someone to report out on use of even one of these materials; it's great (although more complex) that you're using both.


    If you're interested in some basic (hobby) science, you might attempt to characterize the rate of alpha emission from the thoriated tungsten in a simple experiment, with and without current, entirely apart from any considerations of excess heat, nickel fuel, etc. Presumably a small amount of current would not be very interesting.

    My comment above was directed at the danger of using unpurified monazite. Monazite is a phosphate of of several things, including principly Thorium. It is an additional, often present, contaminant that I view as the danger when transmuted by neutrons. Although I might use thoriated tungsten in some experiments, me356 experiments portend danger in doing so. I will probably cover the electrode feedthroughs with a nickel cap and later titanium and last of all thorium. Niobium looks interesting since it has the highest hydrogen permeability of all the metals. Aluminum has one of the lowest permeabilities to hydrogen.


    Thorium has other additional utility in additional to its nuclear properties. Thorium oxide is highly temperature resistant. Even more important, the oxide is a prolific emitter of electrons. Thoriated tungsten filaments for vacuum tubes are in wide use. Probably most magnetrons use them. The reason that dielectrics (such as thorium oxide) are such prolific electron emitters is that the absence of a highly conducting metal surface means that there is no induced "mirror charge" in the metal as the electron tries to leave. This means that energy required to leave the surface, called the "work function", is considerably lower than for a metal. The electron current that leaves is exponentially dependent upon the temperature divided by the work function. That exponential dependence means that oxide electron emitters can emit vastly more electron current. Reference: http://rspa.royalsocietypublis…prsa/119/781/173.full.pdf


    As for alpha emission, it has such a low penetrating ability, that only the top few thousands of an inch of an electrode actually contribute to the observed spontaneous radioactivity. All deeper alpha emissions are absorbed by the tungsten itself. Note that the alpha emission is a different thing than the electron emission (which is prolific).


    Most of this you learn in undergraduate physics, with more learned in graduate studies.

    Quote from axil

    Rossi also uses a fuel pre-treatment step. His patent says that he starts with 5 micron nickel powder and sinteres it until he gets a particle mix of between 1 to 100 microns. This reshaped powder is covered with lithium.


    The fuel analysis from the Lugano test shows that the nickel powder in the fuel had rare earths and a range of other heavy elements welded onto the surface of the fuel particles. This may have been caused by using a rare earth doped tungsten electron to sinter the fuel during pre-treatment.


    The first (spring 2011) fuel analysis showed no 7Li whatsoever in the fuel.

    Yes, Prof. Ekstrom. It is also possible that me356 dangerous experience with high neutron flux was caused by thorium content of a tungsten welding rod. Welding rods are available in 0%, 1/2%, 1% and 2% Thorium. It is entirely possible that the neutron flux in the me 356 experiment could be avoided by using a W rod with no Th .


    BTW, monazite frequently contains rare earths.

    Paradigmnoia, it is widely believed that it is transition metals that are LENR active due to the partially empty electron shell interior to the atom. That limits choices of nuclear mass.


    I have always assumed that the entire H atom inserts itself into the empty shell. If so, it would be closer to the nucleus and more available for a nuclear reaction.


    Nonetheless, there is (to me) a mystery here. It is established by experiments that an entire atom can experience quantum wave interference in a classic double slit experiment. Therefore the atom is acting like a quantum integral whole. Nonethess, it is also often thought that an entire atom such as a transiton metal simply treats "foreign" electrons as one of its own assembly without distinction between its native electrons and a newly induced electron. Thus we end up with a conundrum: if an H atom is actually inserted into an empty shell, is it behaving as a quantum whole for the individual atom, or is its identity dissolved into its individual electron-proton components.


    I don't know the answer to this, but, it obviously has a profound effect upon the theory of LENR.

    I was suggesting an idea towards two things at once.


    Possibly safety, in that nasty fission products are more abundant or likely with higher Z elements, especially when radioactive things are stuck in or around a reactor to begin with.
    Spewing things that are already known to be radioactive around in an accident is also a possibility.


    That for accounting purposes, keeping fission products as energy consumers, and fusion products as energy releasers, that the overall energy balance might be easier to work out. Maybe not. But keeping things simpler might help.


    Just something to consider. Discard the idea if you prefer. (I'm not going to argue here for it or anything).

    This thread is about laboratory techniques of all kinds. I have observed by actual practice that silver soldering goes far easier if the surfaces to be joined are first rubbed with a piece of silver. I think what happens is that the silver penetrates any oxide coating and adheres as a monomolecular layer on the brass, copper, or stainless steel etc. Anyway, it works. It is necessary to rub fairly hard in order to penetrate the oxide coating. Then apply flux, heat and silver solder alloy.

    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    It seems to me that the Kullander materials were called "new" and "old", rather than "fuel" and "ash".


    Although that may be a purely semantic distinction, it might instead be a more accurate distinction.


    The bottles are labelled "new" and "after 2.5 months of operation in Leonardo's reactor"

    Quote from scuromio

    Yes, Prof. Ekstrom. It is also possible that me356 dangerous experience with
    high neutron flux was caused by thorium content of a tungsten welding
    rod. Welding rods are available in 0%, 1/2%, 1% and 2% Thorium. It is
    entirely possible that the neutron flux in the me 356 experiment could
    be avoided by using a W rod with no Th .


    I don't understand. Do they really put radioactive material in W rods?
    Anyway, if he sees more neutrons that the normal background they come
    from nuclear reactions. There are no isotopes of Th decaying by
    significant spontaneous fission:
    http://nucleardata.nuclear.lu.se/toi/listnuc.asp?sql=&Z=90

    Quote from scuromio

    Yes, Thorium is in fact optionally included in W welding electrodes. It does in fact undergo radioactive decay. I have measured the radioactivity myself with a geiger counter held close to the W + Th rod.


    It is of course 232Th. It alpha decays, but there are some gammas that can escape to a detector. Don't give it to a kid to lick on!

    Now that John Strong has passed away, I am reminded of his wonderful "Procedures in Experimental Physics" . Reprints of this old but classic book for physicists is available. The electronics mentioned in it are from the vacuum tube era, but all the rest of the stuff is as useful today as a century ago. I have spent many an hour purusing his many hints and tips. All professionals and amateurs should have a copy.


    http://www.amazon.com/Procedures-Experimental-Physics-John-Strong/dp/0917914562?ie=UTF8&keywords=book procedures in experimental physics&qid=1463538448&ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8-1


    One of his more interesting tips is the use of clay and borax mixture that is easily heated to make a tight seal. That is something that LENR enthusiasts should welcome. Any borax mixture will glassify and melt at a relatively low temperature. About 10 to 15 percent borax is about right. The melting temperature can be considerably raised by mixing in calcium oxide and sodium carbonate.


    I suggest mixing 2 parts borax with 1 part lime and maybe a bit of sodium bicarbonate. Calcine the each component separately at high temperature to drive off the extra CO2, then mix it with the borax and clay. I haven't tried it the mixture, but, it should work well since it is the basic formula for glass. To form the mixed clay and borax mixture into a shape you want, just add water, shape it, then let it dry before heating. Remember that glass melts and runs. Graphite molds might be helpful.


    The clay you can dig. Let it dry then powder it before mixing with the aforementioned witches brew. As you powder it, shake it and the larger particles will rise and and be removed for crushing and then added back in.


    Turning to a totally different matter, it is often useful to have tiny vials around your laboratory for specimens or for small storage of laboratory chemicals. Always attach labels of the contents with a date. Here is one of many sources:


    For small quantities try searching around Amazon. Various sizes are available. Try http://www.amazon.com/Glass-Vials-Dram-Pack-12/dp/B008IRT7SI/ref=lp_318111011_1_12?s=industrial&ie=UTF8&qid=1463539131&sr=1-12


    I usually buy them a gross (144) at a time because they are much cheaper that way. Try http://www.premiumvials.com/4-…IypqvzM4swCFVhZhgodlxoC4Q


    Anyone doing extensive experimentation needs to store and preserve what they did. Don't forget to buy labels.

    Quote from Peter Ekstrom

    Welding rods are available in 0%, 1/2%, 1% and 2% Thorium.


    Let's calculate the activity of 1g of rod material with 2% 232Th.


    Amount 232Th 1*0.02 = 0.02 g = 0.02/232 mole = ( 20*10^(-5)/2.32)*6.022*10^23 = ( 20/2.32)*6.022*10^18 = 52*10^18 atoms = N


    Half-life T1/2 = 1.40510^10 y = 1.40510^10 *365.24*24*60*60 s = 4.4*10^17 s


    Decay constant lambda = log(2)/T1/2 = 0.693/(4.4*10^17) = 0.157*10^-17 /s


    Activity = N*lambda = 52*10^18 *0.157*10^-17 = 52*10*0.157 Bq = 82 Bq


    which is a very low activity. Very few alpha particles would escape from the rod, but there are some low-energy gammas that will:
    http://nucleardata.nuclear.lu.se/toi/nuclide.asp?iZA=900232


    The activity is, however, way over the limit 300 Bq/kg for foodstuff, especially taking account the increased danger with alpha-particles.


    Anyway, there is no need to worry about neutrons from spontaneous fission.

    Very interesting information, sir.


    I'm particularly interested in the table that links out near the third line from the end of your post above.


    I see what i take to be a possible mixed decimal convention there. Picking on the most prevalent of the "x-rays" I see "12,339 keV at 2.39%" and another most prevalent at "15,236 keV at 2.37%" .


    Since they are designated x-ray lines, I assume those data normalized to a "point" style decimal convention would be 12.339 keV and 15.236 keV (Is that correct, to your knowledge, experience or opinion?)


    The two "gammas" that are given are in the "point" rather than "comma" decimal style, it appears. That is "63.83 keV at 0.263%" and "140.86 keV at 0.021%"


    Am I interpreting these correctly?


    By the way, a few years back I took a brief TIG (tungsten inert gas) welding course in order to aid in inexpensively fabricating scientific apparatus. There was need to occasionally sharpen the electrode tips with a grinder. We were briefly warned about the grinding dust from the electrodes. It did not seem to be a large issue at the time. While more perceived risk might arise from inhaling the nano dust from the vapors of iron, chromium and nickel when welding stainless, or aluminum and its oxide when joining aluminum. But in retrospect, it might be worth some concern to consider the lung as a target tissue for the tiny amount thorium nano particles from the eroded tips. My exposures were brief, but the occupational risk would likely be thousands of times greater.


    I believe the thoriated rods are becoming less used, as new electronically controlled "strike on lift-off" TIG welding machines become affordable and commonplace.

    Quote from Longview

    I see what i take to be a possible mixed decimal convention there.


    I don't know what you mean. The scientific convention is to use . and not , (as in Swedish). Intensities are given per 100 decays of the parent, i.e. %. Anyway your interpretation is correct. What can be trickier is to interpret the errors.


    E(gamma) 63.83 2 means +-0.02 keV I(gamma) 0.263 13 means +-0.013


    The data are from
    http://nucleardata.nuclear.lu.se/toi/
    where you will find all decays, old Table of Isotopes data but enough for most purposes.


    Q-values, masses are available here:
    http://nuclear.lu.se/database/masses/

    Re: thoriated rods.
    The thoriated rods are being phased out, and are banned in some jurisdictions. For the most part they are just being inventory depleted and no longer being made.


    Lanthanated and ceriated rods have taken their place, and generally have better performance than the thoriated rods.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.