After 18 hours the output has dropped to 20mV - no surprise considering corrosion and the absence of any ambient hydrogen.
But Argon is a non-corrosive atmosphere? Further, this data from R. K. Rout about anomalous emissions from table 1 Gas, Fogging Density : Air,0.23 ; Oxygen, 0.13 ; hydrogen, .03 ; Argon, 0. It seem corrosion is more like necessary.
I've started a live doc for my LEC project: https://tinyurl.com/69z7sn3e
Here's a first surprise:
EDX analysis showed no trace of Iron (Fe) on the cathode after plating. Tin (Sn) was seen at 5 to 8% over the colored surface area.The usual carbon from organic contaminants in the electrolyte was also seen.
It seems possible to me that selective migration of trace tin in the copper tubing occurred during electrolysis. The electrochemical potential between copper and tin is 220 mV, so the voltage applied to the cell in the third step (when the color appeared) would be sufficient for ionic separation.
Display MoreI've started a live doc for my LEC project: https://tinyurl.com/69z7sn3e
Here's a first surprise:
EDX analysis showed no trace of Iron (Fe) on the cathode after plating. Tin (Sn) was seen at 5 to 8% over the colored surface area.The usual carbon from organic contaminants in the electrolyte was also seen.
It seems possible to me that selective migration of trace tin in the copper tubing occurred during electrolysis. The electrochemical potential between copper and tin is 220 mV, so the voltage applied to the cell in the third step (when the color appeared) would be sufficient for ionic separation.
The Sn comes as contaminant I guess (and I hope) but why would only C and Sn be deposited in the Cu instead of Iron? This goes a long way to show how important is to look at these things at this scale.
Much thanks for being so thorough magicsound !!!!
Display MoreI've started a live doc for my LEC project: https://tinyurl.com/69z7sn3e
Here's a first surprise:
EDX analysis showed no trace of Iron (Fe) on the cathode after plating. Tin (Sn) was seen at 5 to 8% over the colored surface area.The usual carbon from organic contaminants in the electrolyte was also seen.
It seems possible to me that selective migration of trace tin in the copper tubing occurred during electrolysis. The electrochemical potential between copper and tin is 220 mV, so the voltage applied to the cell in the third step (when the color appeared) would be sufficient for ionic separation.
Years of lab experience and training may make this a surprise to you and many others here, but could you explain to the rest of us why it is a surprise, and what LENR significance it may have in the grand scheme of things?
Well, the Fe might be there but not detectable. I noticed at X10K magnification that the image appeared to be distorted by a distributed magnetic field with period of about 500 nm. Perhaps the deposited iron consists of nano-scale magnetized particles that deflect the Secondary Emission signal used by the EDX system to detect elements. More research is needed!
EDX analysis showed no trace of Iron (Fe) on the cathode after plating.
Hi Alan, good to hear you started the experiments!
I have to say that last week I also tryed to plate a small chip of Cu foil (1.5x1.5 cm) with the same procedure I used for the brass tube, but I also got an unexpected result: after many hours, no good plating was formed. Only a slighty gray very thin layer appeared. I thought I made some mistake, and I was planning to repeat the procedure, but it looks very similar to the result you got with Cu only substrate. Also, as I wrote, in my first replication I also noted some magnetic anomalies on the plated tube. This was really puzzling and quite amazing, but now it looks like it may be a meaningful detail...
Saturday I will try again to plate the copper chip by adding some (0.1M) FeCl2 to the solution.
Plating Iron onto Copper can be difficult. This recipe is supposed to give results, but I have not tested it yet.
A simple and reliable plating solution for plating hard iron onto copper soldering tips:
1 liter Ferrous (II) Chloride 0.86 Molar (11% conc),
240 grams Ferrous Sulphate heptahydrate FeSO4.7H20, and
150 grams Sodium Citrate Na3C6H507.
I noticed at X10K magnification that the image appeared to be distorted by a distributed magnetic field with period of about 500 nm.
The last time I used SEM was in 1980..maybe the technology has moved on since then..
There is some info. here..https://www.nature.com/articles/srep37265
"As mentioned in the last section, the magnetic contrast is mainly due to the deflection of secondary electrons that have escaped from the sample. For the mazy magnetic domains, such as those shown in Fig. 2a, the in-plane component (x-y component) of the stray magnetic field is maximised above the magnetic domain walls. This is confirmed by simulations of the stray magnetic field for a model specimen showing the mazy pattern in Supplementary Note 2. The complex stray magnetic field makes the angular distribution of secondary electron emissions asymmetric with reference to the optical axis and position-dependent in the x-y surface plane. For example, in a 300-nm-thick Co-Pt film shown in Supplementary Note 2, the in-plane component of the magnetic field is significant over a range of 10 μm from the sample surface, and thus the magnetic deflection is significant in this range. In contrast, because the secondary electrons are emitted from only a limited region close to the surface (e.g., <2 nm)17, the magnetic deflection of secondary electrons due to the inner magnetization is negligible (see Supplementary Note 2). Detection of the secondary electrons (deflected by the stray magnetic field) thus produces an SEM image that reveals the magnetic domain structure.
"
Maybe some one else has ideas... something happening with the secondary electrons
Tin is not magnetic.. but SnO2 can be ferromagnetic..
i don't understand why all debates to debate about the case of plating especially if we consider that a sputtering attempt should revolve the problem here.
As it's a way less polluted by undesirable additives quickly we should know if magicsound hypothesis was relevant or not.
No ?
Cydonia Yes, sputtering is a better controlled process but is also far more demanding of both skill and equipment. If I had a suitable system I would use it, but that is not the case. I will try FeCl3 solution next. But since Stevenson's report show some success, perhaps the transfer of substantial Fe to the plated surface is not relevant, rather the surface nano structure created by the plating process.
rather the surface nano structure created by the plating process.
And the co-deposition. Probably the most important aspect.
Here's another clue: the Fe anode has Cu deposited on it, around 3%. The area above the electrolyte is equal parts Fe and O (rusted), with no Cu present. So there appears to have been migration of a negatively charged copper ion species (Cu--) from the negative cathode to the positive anode.
A test with the plating polarity reversed may give further insight into what is happening.
Edit: Reversing the polarity resulted in generous deposits of copper on the Fe cathode plates. Most of it then fell off and collected on the bottom of the cell. The current had increased from 300 ma to 3 amperes after several hours. No colored deposit was visible on the copper, though the surface was deeply etched.
So there appears to have been migration of a negatively charged copper ion species (Cu--) from the negative cathode to the positive anode.
Yes, this is a spontaneous reaction: in the acidic solution Cu will plate Fe even with no voltage applied. This is the same process of the classical school experiment that involves dipping iron nails in a CuSO4 solution, and getting the nails Cu plated. This reverse potential prevent the opposite process (or a higher voltage should be needed, but this will generate to much H2). A far less acidic environment and the availability of Fe++ ions in the electrolyte (added by FeCl2) should fix this. The recipe given by Alan above goes in this direction and for sure will work with reference to the Fe plating. But I'm not sure it will provide enough hydrogen loading.
Interestingly enough, this problem is not present at all if brass is used instead of pure Cu.
https://www.qsl.net/n9zia/electrochemical.html...activity series?
l if brass is used instead of pure Cu.
Today I tryed to plate a chip of copper by using FeCl2 and only a few drops of HCl. This time an iron layer was formed on the Cu and it was considerably thicker than in my previous experiments (the current density was higher, also due to the small surface area). As expected there was a very little release of hydrogen at the cathode, compared to my previous experiments. I don't know if this can be a drawback, since it probably imply a reduced hydrogen codeposition or loading.
The plated chip this time didn't feature any sign of magnetization itself, but was heavily attracted by a magnet (confirming that the layer was Fe).
The oxidation rate was very fast when left in air, much more faster than the LEC replication. This was probably due to the greater thickness and rugosity of the layer (and the 70% humidity we have here these days... 
).
The plated chip was too small to try to measure a voltage by setting it close to another metal.
Generally speaking, hydrogen deposition is increased with overpotential - excessive voltage, which probably also results in a less coherent plated surface. The way to improve things might (possibly) be to dilute the electrolyte a lot, so raising the voltage you can use.
Why couldn't be in this way of thinking raising directly the voltage rather than dilute the electrolyte ?
Generally speaking, hydrogen deposition is increased with overpotential - excessive voltage, which probably also results in a less coherent plated surface. The way to improve things might (possibly) be to dilute the electrolyte a lot, so raising the voltage you can use.
If you raise the voltage with a strong electrolyte - in other words with a low cell resistance- the current and thus the rate of deposition of metal on the cathode increases too much, and you get very bad plating - more like powder. The 'happy point' is to have the cell resistance high enough for you to raise the voltage which favours electrolytic breakdown of the water and implantation of H at the cathode. while also obtaining a reasonable well adhered plating.
Thanks for explanation now at other side i saw even by this way ( because sputtering easily does) the capability to create dendrites according to some electrolytic tuning. Dendrites well involved in electrons surface clusters under IRs .
If you raise the voltage with a strong electrolyte - in other words with a low cell resistance- the current and thus the rate of deposition of metal on the cathode increases too much, and you get very bad plating - more like powder. The 'happy point' is to have the cell resistance high enough for you to raise the voltage which favours electrolytic breakdown of the water and implantation of H at the cathode. while also obtaining a reasonable well adhered plating.
Perhaps this helps from 2015, also refered as Strained 'lattice' ferromagnetism.
I wonder often astray... magnetics yes, also dendritic phase change layers, THz sensors, creation, control?
Lawrence Forsley - Research Fellow - The University of Texas at Austin | LinkedIn
Strained Layer Ferromagnetism in Transition Metals and its Impact Upon Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 17, pp. 1- 26 2015.
PDF) A Synopsis of Nuclear Reactions in Condensed Matter - ResearchGate
Feb 22, 2019 — Lawrence Forsley at University of Texas at Austin ... J. Condensed Mat Nuclear Sci 17 (2015e) Strained Lattice Ferromagnetism.
