Fusione fredda Renzo Mondaini—trascrizione

Quote from can

The rate of cooling of the glowing hot sphere occasionally appears to slow down or almost briefly stop. Sometimes it even briefly heats up again. I think this is called "recalescence" and is a known effect with cooling metals, although I wasn't aware that copper could be affected as well.

Earlier today I tried with a 0.35 mm high-carbon steel wire, and it appeared to behave similarly, but less clearly so. It looks like a condition is heating the material above its melting point. In the animation below, visual temperature (with camera settings constant) appears to suddenly drop as power (plasma) is removed, briefly stop, then decrease again.

It could still be related to hydrogen as its solubility in metals generally increases at their melting point; perhaps it gets absorbed and then released upon cooling. See graph here for example. However, as mentioned earlier, the above reaction is not strictly related with the plasma electrolysis reaction (below the water level).

In the previous comment I mentioned that for the cathodic plasma electrolysis, having a high water temperature helps significantly. Another major factor—it turns out, at least in my case—was having graphite in the solution. I'm not entirely sure of the mechanism, but without speculating too much it's possible it could be as simple as increasing the resistance of the electrolyte. Unexpectedly, also adding alcohol-based detergent helps, but it decomposes quickly due to heat from the plasma.

Keeping the electrode itself or the solution moving also helps to a limited extent, which should make sense if bubbles (from heat or else) around the electrode promote voltage breakdown.

Since the experiments were getting messy with graphite I tried looking for a substitute for increasing the impedance of the electrolyte solution. I had some sepiolite clay (water absorbent) at disposal and placed it mostly near the anode.

It turned out (not unexpectedly, in retrospect) that cathodic plasma electrolysis easily occurs also through such hydrated clay, perhaps even better in some aspects (to be investigated further).

Only tap water was used here, but sepiolite clay contains Mg which would make the electrolyte conductive once dissolved/decomposed. Indeed, what appeared to be MgO deposited on the cathode (in the form of a white layer that would easily absorb water).

At times a very bright light was produced, which was probably from Mg ions or MgO. But Mg should already have been combusted.

Voltage was not measured, but the low-power HV power supply was used at maximum setting (+/- 390V). Voltage decreases automatically under load to keep sustained power and current within the manufacturer-specified 40W/0.2A limits (whichever comes first).

Video below:

• 00:00 First test. Comparison between water level and clay
• 00:30 Electrolyzing directly a clay particle
• 00:58 Starting electrolysis from the bulk of the clay
• 01:27 A more zoomed view

EDIT: If clay has the right amount of hydration, it is possible to stick the cathode on a spot on top of the bulk of the clay and make cathodic plasma operate on its own at a low, intermittent rate. Conduction will occur through the clay particles. Just add slight amounts of water to keep the reaction going. This one below was a very crude attempt using a copper wire cathode. It does not heat up very much in the process.

Today I received some 1.0mm-thick pure tungsten welding rods to attempt some plasma tests.

When solution conductivity is high plasma electrolysis does not start right away, and slower heating occurs on a very concentrated region on the tip of the rod. When this happens, a couple cm above the plasma region heat up considerably, but also rapidly oxidize, forming a thick oxide layer, which does not make me confident that the thin molybdenum wire will work well. The plasma region remains clean and shiny. The hot tip thins out in the process as well, becoming sharper. I think Paradigmnoia pointed out a similar effect in the past, but he reproduced it with a oxyhydrogen (?) torch.

The oxide particles falling from the rod after this heating appear to react with water or salts dissolved within it (Mg, Al, some Ca).

Once solution conductivity and temperature gets high enough, bringing the rod in contact with the water surface causes a small spark, which starts plasma electrolysis. However, since my HV power supply has limited power and current capability, I can only submerge the electrode for 2 mm at most.

Cathodic plasma electrolysis leaves that area quite clean, but somewhat pitted.

Here is a video of some of the tests:

• 0:00 Fist dip of a new W rod
• 1:05 W oxides reacting with the electrolyte solution
• 1:22 Cathodic plasma heating and electrolysis, alternated
• 3:38 Mainly plasma electrolysis occurs now
• 4:51 Clean W tip, 1.5mm long

I also tried reproducing the previously observed "copper eating steel" reaction with a 1.0 mm tungsten rod and atmospheric cathodic plasma heating, but the copper ball tends to get pushed aside once it reaches the rod, whereas with steel it appeared to form an alloy with it in an apparently exothermic reaction. I made several attempts using from 1 to 3 Cu filaments and/or repositioning the melted Cu ball, but couldn't make it work. It does not seem to react with tungsten oxide to any significant either. More tests required, but I am not confident of it working.

It turns out that copper and tungsten are not miscible together, see:

• https://www.quora.com/Is-coppe…ixture-composite-or-alloy
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper%E2%80%93tungsten

Video for this too:

I'm wondering if this mode of operation wouldn't actually be better. It wouldn't really be plasma electrolysis in aqueous solution, though.

Source: this video.

Curbina

The particles themselves are semi-solid though, so the principle of operation is slightly different, although the basics should be the same. For instance, there's no need to wait for the clay to heat up significantly like with water, before the discharge reaction can start. At low power (my high-voltage power supply is only capable of 40W and 0.2A max continuously) it seems much easier to cause discharges through these wetted particles than directly liquid water itself. Also, when the clay starts heating up somewhat, vapor flowing between the clay particles will promote voltage breakdown in other places.

Then, one could also speculate that if LENR supposedly occurs in this environment, it might also occur where such clays or similar porous materials are naturally present together with moderate voltage gradients.

Curbina

Interesting anecdote, thanks for reporting it here.

I don't have any expertise in environmental chemistry, and what I came up with was a more or less random finding made in an attempt to overcome the limitations of my HV power supply, with no particular preparation other than making the clay particles loose to highlight more the effect. I think similar porous materials should be able to work as in the test I posted, like for example zeolites, and the previous speculation should be valid also for the environments naturally containing them. Zeolites should also be more stable at high temperatures. They have also been sometimes used for LENR, but often with limited results (I'm not sure if they have also been used with HV excitation, however).

Just another brief test showing how the reaction starts within clay, under ideal conditions.

Anodic plasma has a lower current draw requirement, but higher voltage requirement. Under this mode of operation I could submerge the thin tungsten electrode for a few centimeters inside the highly hydrated clay (with 0.25M KOH solution) and make it start on its own.

Initially nothing apparently happens, but as gas (oxygen) builds from normal electrolysis, eventually (within seconds) a thick enough electrically insulating gas mantle forms around the electrode, allowing the power supply to provide more voltage until breakdown occurs (again, due to 40W/0.2A limitations). A discharge event starts the plasma reaction until power is removed or voltage decreased to a low level. If I had a powerful enough HV power supply or perhaps could use deliberately pulsed output, this could be seen also with a cathodic plasma.

With an initial setting of about 780V (open circuit voltage), it starts with normal electrolysis at about 120V (and presumably 0.2A), but as the plasma reaction begins, this rises to about 520–550V. Assuming 40W continuous, this would give 0.073A.

Interestingly, with the tungsten electrode as the anode, clay particles appear to stick to it, which should make sense since they should be negatively charged from O^2- ions.

It feels like in these tests with hydrated clay, heat is more efficiently retained within the jar.

So far the best method for achieving a more or less reliable continuous electrolytic plasma reaction has been enclosing the tungsten cathode in a small plastic tube, leaving only the very end sticking out for a fraction of a millimeter, in a standard electrolyte solution.

I found one which fit perfectly around the 1 mm W electrode, but depending on operating conditions the material will eventually degrade or begin failing to provide electric insulation from electric breakdown. Also, and large bubbles formed at the opening may prevent a reaction from occurring at a sufficient rate. The latter issue can partially be fixed by putting the cathode end almost in contact with a surface. In this way, large bubbles do not form or get quickly carried away. The former perhaps could be improved with PTFE heat-shrink tubing, which Mizuno et al have also used in their plasma electrolysis experiments in the past (for example here).

Here's a schematic view:

And a video of the process. When it ran, it seemed like it could continue for a long time despite the apparently high temperature. I probably got lucky for this run.

The electrolyte solution was 0.25M KOH and a plastic barrier was put between the anode and the cathode, which I find improves the reaction by limiting current. The electrolyte must be still conductive however: if conductivity is too low, gas bubbles around the electrode won't form in a large enough amount to start a reaction. Electrolyte temperature also affects this, and the reaction won't start at a too low temperature with my current-limited conditions.

This is for the most part due to limitations of my power supply. I guess I need something better. I have been provided some suggestions for a simplified pulsed HV power supply that I could build, but I'm not entirely convinced of safety and reliability aspects.

EDIT: Standard electric wire insulation (probably PVC) also seemed to perform ok despite the visually high temperature. Some thermal degradation did occur, from the smell. Actual voltage during the cathodic plasma reaction was about 500V, which should correspond to a current of 80 mA, assuming 40W power (maximum continuous output of the HV power supply). Due to the limited exposed electrode area, it still needs a surface to prevent large bubbles from forming and insulate the electrode tip too much.

EDIT2: I added a couple milliliters of saturated NaHCO₃ solution that I prepared earlier on, but the reaction became unmanageable. Lots of gas produced and loud sharp explosions at the cathode tip made it uncomfortable to run, as well as less consistent in terms of applied power. Furthermore, peak operating voltage decreased to about 250–300V. I'm not sure about the nature of the explosions; if from sudden discharges or if from detonation of the gases evolved.

EDIT3: I tried starting from scratch but it turned out I couldn't reproduce the above reaction until I added some "debris" to the electrolyte solution. Previously it had residues from the graphite anode and some fine clay residues (from the photos above it can be seen that the electrolyte solution looks dark; this is mainly from fine graphite from the decomposing anode). The cathode would make large bubbles and run inconsistently. I guess the fine particles can also in part act as a "surface" to prevent the formation of large blocking bubbles as discussed above.

It also appears that the sealing of the the plastic tube for enclosing the plasma region is important. Initially (new tube) the reaction is rather vigorous, but after a short while it decreases significantly. At the same time electrolyte solution and gas bubbles can be seen diffusing from the top, above the water surface.

While still waiting for molybdenum wire, I got some Ni200 0.30 mm wire as the cathode in a 0.0125M KOH solution to trigger plasma electrolysis.

Despite the melting point of about 1450 °C, the wire melts easily when submerged from above the water level, but the process seems more controllable if instead it emerges from a deeper depth. Reaction intensity is inversely proportional to how much the electrode is submerged, but due to power supply limitations (40W and 0.2A) the relationship is non-linear in my case.

Plasma color appears to be blue-pink at shallow depths, and becomes yellow (and unstable) when the electrode is submerged deeper. Cathode temperature also affects the reaction in several ways and to keep the plasma stable occasionally the electrode has to be brought to a shallow depth to increase it again.

Eventually I failed to control the process properly and the wire partially melted into a thicker ball. Still, the reaction could be kept going at least for a while.

Below is another animation of "dot patterns" appearing on the cathode while applying plasma electrolysis, at 1/8 speed, using a 0.3 mm Ni200 wire. I was thinking that if these plasma dots (which seem relatively hot) were fixed in place, perhaps they would form visible "burn" marks on the cold electrode, which sometimes have been suggested to be due to LENR, EVO or other related phenomena.

Incidentally, from the slow-mo video I noticed that the reaction did not seem to always stop at once the same time on the entire surface (which occurs when the cathode is submerged too much), but this could have been partially affected by me holding the cathode against the jar wall to make it visible in the dark, debris-filled background. Again, such debris (here in the form of clay particles and graphite/carbon dust) seems to make the reaction easier to manage, although as for why exactly, I can't say for certain.

The photo below shows a detail of the nickel wire tip. With continued usage under varying conditions it seems to have thinned out to about 0.2 mm. The tip has become rounded presumably from partial melting. I think the tests are showing that very thin wires, provided that they can resist high temperatures, are quite convenient for low-power experiments like mine. With thicker wires or rods (e.g. the 1.0 mm tungsten rods I recently got) it's very difficult to obtain a good reaction along significant lengths.

Curbina

Thanks. I'm looking forward to seeing results with the 0.10 mm molybdenum wire which I should receive within this or next week if I'm lucky. Then, depending on the outcome I might get more expensive thin tungsten wire (other than that, thin carbon filaments might be a possibility, but they could be very fragile or burn easily). However, taking good photos and videos will be difficult with very thin wires; I might have to use a bigger camera for the photos but I'm not sure if it can do good macro photos. Maybe I should get an affordable microscope with camera attachment, or something similar.

By the way, my technique so far for taking extreme close-ups has been setting the manual focus to the nearest distance possible and then adjusting camera distance as a second step. Unfortunately I can't adjust focus manually with slow-motion videos.

Rob Woudenberg

The vessel is a standard soda glass jar with a wide opening to the atmosphere, although I think the pressure in the plasma region will be probably higher than that. When the plasma discharge starts, a gas+vapor+plasma layer surrounds the electrode and water does not make contact with the electrode in liquid form.

I have sometimes thought that a lower pressure will probably make the electrolyte solution vaporize faster and thus make the reaction easier to start, but a vacuum chamber would be needed to test this (or testing at a high altitude be performed).

It is also possible to perform plasma electrolysis with an ethanol solution. Here it was roughly 0.05M KOH with slight (liberal) amounts of ethanol. The cathode was a 0.30 mm nickel wire with a spherical protuberance at the tip (from previous melting).

There appears to be temperature-activated transition point where the plasma surrounding the cathode probably switches to mainly ethanol decomposition products. When this happens, temperature, resistance (and by extension, voltage, due to power supply limitation) increase, and it is possible to submerge the cathode to a greater depth, which is actually necessary to avoid overheating.

The plasma surrounding the cathode then becomes blue-pink, which is reminiscent of a pure hydrogen plasma. What look like hydrogen flames can occasionally be observed on the top of the electrolyte surface.

Here is a 1/8 speed slow-motion of the process:

This mode of operation produces a very clean-looking cathode.

And here a gif animation of the 1/8 slow-motion for those who prefer them.

EDIT: For what it's worth, after a brief test it appears that following the above transition, RF noise increases significantly and becomes proportional to how bright and noisy the cathode is. It becomes larger than during the unstable yellow plasma phase that I showed more in details in other posts/videos.

Here is an animation at 1/16 speed of the plasma reaction in water-ethanol solution with KOH (+ other impurities from the anode) when it shuts off due to unsustainable load, using a straight and new 0.30mm Ni200 wire. It can be seen that the previously observed "dot pattern" briefly reappears in the process, probably when ethanol stops getting decomposed by the plasma.

Under the conditions of the test, voltage is about 150–200V with the yellow-dotted plasma, but it increases to about 275-400V when it transitions to the other red-blue homogeneous form (although a large contributor to the color will likely be cathode temperature, which increases significantly). These values depend on temperature, electrode depth, HV supply load (which can only be 0.2A and 40W max continuous) and it's assumed that they reaction here has been mostly observed at an average current of about 0.20–0.25A (not measured yet).

This time (as opposed to the animation showed a few posts ago) there was no significant debris in the solution, but the reaction still appeared to not shut off homogeneously along the entire wire length.

After a period of testing, much of the ethanol decomposes; the reaction is not as strong as initially and flames are no longer observed easily occurring on the top of the cathode, but the two-steps behavior (and the characteristic smell) remains. I'm considering using some % of acetone instead, which is also miscible in water. Due to the lower boiling point, it might make the reaction start faster, but other factors might be more important (autoignition temperature?). Unfortunately I didn't have some for a few quick tests.

I tried about 5% weight acetone in 0.017M aqueous KOH solution but at least initially it seemed a too high concentration. A large amount of flammable (but non-explosive) gas is produced. Diluting to about 3.5% weight seemed somewhat better; even less might still be useful. A large portion of this is formed in the initial brief normal electrolysis period at high voltage, before plasma electrolysis occurs. When it begins, much of the gas produced burns on the spot.

In the process, depending on conditions, a blue-violet flame engulfs the wire (Ni200) and keeps it hot for a considerable distance above the electrolyte level. It appears to melt easily below the surface, unfortunately. This might be expected as acetone flames have a temperature in air of about 2000 °C (source).

No strong smell is produced in the process, for what it's worth. Acetone seems to burn cleanly.

EDIT: the reaction tends to be unstable. Sometimes it starts blinking from the varying current, which my HV boost converter will tend to limit to 0.2A. Here I used two 0.30 mm Ni wires because one melted too easily. At this point I think most of the acetone evaporated or decomposed, but the typical smell remains and the general behavior still seems different than usual.

I finally received 0.10mm Molybdenum wire, but it proved to be very difficult to work with. It's very rigid, difficult to twist into multi-wire bundles and combusts too easily, producing relatively dim brightness when it does, similar to copper filaments. A quick check on Wikipedia shows that indeed the melting point of Mo oxides tends to be low (MoO3 melts at 802°C; MoO2 melts at 1100 °C).

Since it's quite thin I expected to be able to start the plasma with the wire already submerged, but it turns out that my small HV power supply will not give enough power for this. The only way is still progressively submerging the wire, but then it often quickly combusts from atmospheric oxygen, forming a ball of molten material (likely some low-melting point oxide) that eats significant wire length.

When a large enough (but not too much) Mo/Mo oxide ball forms, the plasma can be started more easily (probably due to thermal inertia preventing fast combustion), but the reaction does not seem that impressive. The relatively poor electrical contact with the long tungsten rod used to hold it (due to the Mo wire being rigid) might also be a factor.

No much progress until I manage to obtain a better power supply, I guess.