A very interesting GB patent from 1989, It is for underwater plasma fusion, using light water or heavy water, they talk about Rydberg hydrogen, UV and particle emissions and give quite a lot of detail. One of the principal inventors, C.J.Davies lives not so far from me, but he was born in 1933 so possibly no longer available. The other's I haven't traced, but their names are not familiar as part of the usual crowd of LENR suspects.
Wet Plasma LENR UK Patent 1989.
-
-
You might need to revise some of the details above. The patent application (withdrawn) is from 1999 and the inventor is named Christopher Eccles. It reminds of Mizuno-type (or Mondaini in a simplified form) plasma electrolysis cells.
-
MIscellanea appended
Liquid waste, as AR, and with patent priority over IH. No "miracle tubes" up-to-date. Coincidences.
-
plasma fusion wet patent..pdf
This might be the reason why Mills has to deny any LENR/Fusion is happening as this patent covers everything he basically is doing...
But why did they give up ? Did they??
-
Another interesting, and incomplete LENR story, where the chapter about getting the independently validated product to market is missing. Anyone know what happened to Chris Eccles and his invention? He quit Ecowatts, and then seems to have disappeared. He was 75 in 2007, so if still around, is getting up there is age.
-
"Miracle tube" needs "secret catalyst" - stage performance BEFORE Bologna, Alma Mater, North Carolina, etc.
-
Even if Hydrinos aren't directly mentioned their theory in the patent applications seems to be based on BLP's so there's a chance they received cease&desist letters from the company.
It might also be that unexpected problems with input power measurements due to the high-frequency switching circuit got discovered later on and in the end the device did not perform as initially thought.
Despite them mentioning secret catalysts in an interview, similar power gains (or higher) have been claimed in their absence by other people who tried to replicate the general plasma electrolysis process. Here's Naudin with a 200% gain: https://web.archive.org/web/20…rs.com/cfr/html/cfr30.htm
-
... or no real power gains
-
I meant that people have often measured efficiencies greater or much greater than 100% with plasma electrolysis systems without using secret components or catalysts, but often neglecting accurate input power measurements. Even without deliberately using a fast switching circuit for driving the plasma reaction, it will be far from being a clean resistive load and so calculating power as V*I at a low rate won't work properly. Furthermore water can apparently get efficiently vaporized (atomized?) in the process without this being the result of heat/turning to steam.
-
I think that they had to dream up the idea of a 'secret catalyst' simply to keep actual or potential investors happy that they were buying into something that was 'uncopyable'. I suspect that it didn't exist.
-
Anyone know what happened to Chris Eccles and his invention?
I suspect he is the same Dr. Eccles who worked as an Oncology consultant and radiotherapy expert at a big London hospital - but if so he has a slim record of publications - just one that I think was partly his work, on the use of ultrasound along with radiotherapy for tumour treatment.
-
Not without interest
Christopher Robert Eccles - US6290836 - Electrodes
-
Good find Ahlfors. This part of the patent I found particularly interesting, since the method of electrode manufacture described results in something with a strong 'family resemblance' to a Mizuno electrode.
The Anode Process
The anode process differs from that of a conventional cell
10 electrolytic cell provided with such a cathode. The invention
also teaches a novel method of making such a cathode and
a novel method of releasing gaseous products from an SDV
cell.in that the oxygen over-voltage is rarely exceeded and the
reaction at the anode is one of the formation of a
(conductive) layer of a matrix of ferrous- and feroso-ferrous- 15
oxide over the plain steel electrode. There is some liberation,
albeit slowly, of gaseous oxygen at the anode but this is
small in comparison with the ejection of H2 from the
cathode, which occurs prolifically and often (as would be
expected given the pressure within the crystalline absorption 20
mechanism at work) with some minor violence when
observed under the microscope.
There is, obviously, some likely benefit in obtaining
hydrogen from such a process which is relatively free of
associated oxygen but, to date, the gaseous mix from experi- 25
mental SDV cells has not been such as to bring the O2 level
down below the LEL for hydrogen/oxygen mixture, and
such cells should not be regarded as being intrinsically safer
than conventional ones.
One method of creating an SDV electrode is described 30
below.
The invention discloses the provision of bi-metallic interfaces on the active, electrolyte-contacting surface of an
electrode which produces hitherto unobserved electrochemical phenomena. The use of dissimilar metallic materials on
the active surface facilitates lattice diffusion of gases within
the crystal structure of the electrode.
An SDV cell according to the invention acts as an
"over-unity" cell in respect of hydrogen gas production from
the cell. The cell operates at low voltages of no more than
1 volt, preferably no more than 0.8 volt and typically from
0.2 to 0.6 volts. However even lower operating voltages are
feasible.
What is claimed is:
1. An electrode having an active surface for contacting
and electrolyte comprising first and second metallic materials arranged to provide a plurality of first metallic material
to second metallic material interfaces at said active surface,
wherein said first metallic material comprises steel and said
second metallic material comprises nickel.
The electrode which is to become the cathode in an SDV
cell is made by taking a sheet of ordinary mild steel as the
substrate 2 and creating on its surface a series of
irregularities, in the form of trough regions 4 and raised
regions 5 (see FIG. 1), by etching the steel in a bath of
concentrated (50-55%) sulphuric acid. The natural impurity
2. An electrode according to claim 1, wherein said first
metallic material comprises a substrate of the electrode and
said second metallic material is an electroplated layer over
35 regions of the substrate.
3. An electrode According to claim 2, wherein said
substrate has an uneven surface with exposed, unplated
raised portions and trough portions plated with said second
metallic material, the unplated raised portions and plated
of most commonly available mild steel ensures that etching
will take place in a random and irregular manner. Mostly,
this is caused by the presence of finely divided granular
alpha-ferrite which appears to be preferentially attacked by
the acid.
40 second metallic material providing the said active surface.
4. An electrode according to claim 3, wherein the said
raised portions of the substrate have an average spacing
After inspection of the surface and the determination of distribution of from 0.03 mm to 0.05 mm.
the average size of the nodes or raised regions on the
roughened steel (optimally these should be at 0.03-0.05 mm 45
distribution), the surface is passivated in concentrated nitric
acid and further passivated in a chromic acid bath.
The roughened surface of the steel substrate 2 is then
given a 25-micron coating 6 of nickel by the "electroless"
process, also known as auto-catalytic chemical deposition 50
(see FIG. 2). This plating process provides accretion of
deposited nickel in the trough regions 4 and thinner deposits
of nickel on the raised regions 5.
After coating, the electrode is machined or ground, e.g.
using a linishing sander and 120 grit silicon carbide paper 55
belt, to remove the "peaks" of the plated raised regions 5 and
in particular to remove the plated nickel from these "peaks"
so as to expose the steel of the substrate 2 (see FIG. 3). In
this way a plurality of metal-to-metal interfaces are created
on the active surface of the cathode between the nickel 60
plated regions on the trough regions 4 of the substrate 2 and
the exposed steel surfaces of the substrate. Constant microscopic inspection is required to determine the existence of
the correct bi-metallic interfaces on the active surface of the
electrode. If the electrode is to be used with only one active 65
surface (SAS electrode), no treatment is given to the other
plated surface, which will remain electrochemically inactive
5. An electrode according to claim 1, wherein said first
metallic material comprises mild steel.
6. An electrode according to claim 1, wherein said second
metallic material comprises a matrix of nickel and chromlUm.
7. An electrode according to claim 1, wherein the electrode is generally fiat and has an active surface on each of
its opposite sides.
8. An electrolysis cell for obtaining the release of gaseous
products by electrolysis, comprising an electrolyte, an anode
and a cathode in the form of an electrode according to claim
1.
9. A cell according to claim 8, wherein the electrolyte
comprises dilute sulphuric acid.
10. A cell according to claim 8, wherein the electrolyte
comprises lithium sulphate monohydrate, nickel sulphate
hexahydrate, chromium sulphate or palladous chloride.
11. A method of obtaining release of gas from an electrolysis cell according to claim 8, comprising applying a
decomposition voltage of no more than 1 volt across the
anode and cathode of the electrolysis cell.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein the step of applying
the decomposition voltage comprises applying a decomposition voltage of no more than 0.8 volts.
-
Quote
Let us first consider a cell which liberates hydrogen gas by the electrolysis of water containing a standard electrolyte 55 such as H2S04 or Li2S04
Patterson's power cells did use lithium sulphate as well.. Between others he recommended to avoid any traces of sodium in electrolyte, as he claimed it kills the nuclear reaction and evolution of heat.
QuoteA cell according to claim 8, wherein the electrolyte comprises lithium sulphate monohydrate, nickel sulphate hexahydrate, chromium sulphate or palladous chloride.
Patterson also did use fluid bed cathode layered by nickel and palladium (a spill-off catalyst for nickel?). It seems that Eccles merely mirrored Patterson's electrolyser.
-
Not without interest 2
Christopher Robert Eccles - GB2324307A - Fracture cell apparatus
-
Not without interest 3
CA02590796 - Pulsed Electrolysis Apparatus and Method of Using Same
[Cold fusion in disguise - fracture cell apparatus with tritiated water]
-
Well, Stanley Meyer, eat your heart out. This guy is either a miracle worker or deluded.
I must admit btw, that i have been thinking about the production of hydrogen by electrophoresis...and this is effectively the same thing.
-
Quote
I must admit btw, that i have been thinking about the production of hydrogen by electrophoresis...and this is effectively the same thing.
Speaking of electrophoresis, this demonstration vested my interest before some time... It's main idea is, water molecules in narrow pores are subjected to DC EM field and forced to collide. Because they have nowhere to dodge, it may lead to separation of H-O bonds. Overunity effect is claimed during this.
BTW Does someone have recent info about Lipinski brothers and their Unified Gravity process? IMO it's the most reliable cold fusion arrangement and as such it disappeared from the web w/out trace in similar way, like reports about nuclear fission during WWW II.
-
Zephir_AWT - I remember you posting this - I wonder where they went? (And Lipinski too)-
-
(And Lipinski too)-
Lipinskis last statement was something like: "Unexpected physical behavior". May be as I explained - their COP is mot due to anisotropic radiation...
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.
CLICK HERE to contact us.