Zeolites used to remove water may have unintended consequences. Including formation of ultra dense hydrogen or heat.
http://online.kitp.ucsb.edu/online/materials10/arita/pdf/Arita_MaterialDesign_KITP.pdf
Frank Gordon's "Lattice Energy Converter (LEC)"...replicators workshop
-
-
Gregory Byron Goble - this is unlikely to be a worry, zeolites are used fr gas drying (including H2) in many commercial systems. I use a drying tower with seceral kilos in - nothing strange seen yet, it gets hot, but that's because of the exothermic adsorption of H2O vapour.
-
Given the data provided so far from reported experiments I would think more and more in following direction:
A classic example of redox reactions between different metals is a galvanic cell as depicted below:
Source: Wikipedia
In the situation of a LEC the 'porous disc' and electrolyte seems to be replaced by a ionic hydrogen layer consisting of at least H+ and H- ions produced by the release of hydrogen from a metal lattice. Normally such ionic hydrogen layer would rapidly recombine to H2 but the galvanic potential in this case may be prevailing charge transport before recombination.
This might explain why the mechanism works with both voltage polarities.
This seems contradicting the experiments of can where a full surface mica layer has been applied. However we don't know how easy hydrogen ions might pass mica.
I think it would be useful to further look for confirmations that H+ and H- can be easily formed by release of hydrogen from a metal lattice under a (relative low) voltage potential present.
EDIT:
It is likely that a critical distance between electrodes is valid. This could be due to a critical electrostatic field strength limit where recombination of hydrogen ions prevail ionic transport and vice versa. In any case recombination occurs, but in the case recombination occurs before ions reach the counter electrode, no current will be measured (distance between electrode too large). The critical distance will be different for each type of metal combination due to the difference in galvani potentials. There will be other factors that determine this critical distance such as local humidity and composition of the gas between the electrodes.
-
Unfortunately I don't have flat enough ultra-clean pieces right now that I can put at less than 0.1mm distance.
This seems contradicting the experiments of can where a full surface mica layer has been applied. However we don't know how easy hydrogen ions might pass mica.
My mica surface had small gaps since I only have small rectangle sheets at disposal; electrolyte and/or moisture could have easily passed from there.
One possible point of concern in closed cells is if hydrogen will reduce at least some of the deposited/formed Fe oxide and form water. This water could make the dissimilar surfaces conduct and produce a voltage in this way. Water formation will be easier if the surface will have some sort of catalytic action.
-
This seems contradicting the experiments of can where a full surface mica layer has been applied. However we don't know how easy hydrogen ions might pass mica.
But both can and I have found that a relatively impermeable barrier of plastic sheet makes the voltage vanished.
If you like a puzzle, how about this? An isolated working electrode connected to earth shows zero voltage. A similarly isolated counter-electrode connected to earth also shows no voltage (and this is a very good instrumentation earth being a large copper plate buried in wet soil and not part of the grid supply). Put the two electrodes together with an insulating spacer like nylon mesh and you get a voltage, small at first, but steadily rising.
-
An isolated working electrode connected to earth shows zero voltage. A similarly isolated counter-electrode connected to earth also shows no voltage
This would introduce another galvani pair in series with the connected LEC electrode. Need to work out the details, but this may be the reason why earthed electrodes don't work as expected.
-
This would introduce another galvani pair in series with the connected LEC electrode
Not quite- the electrode is the source, the earth is a sink There is no circuit involved. Yet connect a multimeter between a positive battery terminal and earth and you will see a voltage - that's how earth-leak detectors work.
-
Only thoughts,
it reminds me of the Casimir effect mentioned often by Airbus and Rossi as well.
Casimir effect - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.orgBut both can and I have found that a relatively impermeable barrier of plastic sheet makes the voltage vanished.
If you like a puzzle, how about this? An isolated working electrode connected to earth shows zero voltage. A similarly isolated counter-electrode connected to earth also shows no voltage (and this is a very good instrumentation earth being a large copper plate buried in wet soil and not part of the grid supply). Put the two electrodes together with an insulating spacer like nylon mesh and you get a voltage, small at first, but steadily rising.
-
Unfortunately I don't have flat enough ultra-clean pieces right now that I can put at less than 0.1mm distance.
Ah well, shame. Perhaps Cydonia could try? Brass or copper, nylon mesh or thin open-weave tissue (single layer), aluminium and a multimeter. All clean, all dry.
-
i'm a very poor guy, no job, no labo.. only thoughts to try distraction.
You should ask rather Biberian, Ruer, and other french team members money went in this direction.
Ah well, shame. Perhaps Cydonia could try? Brass or copper, nylon mesh or thin open-weave tissue (single layer), aluminium and a multimeter. All clean, all dry.
-
Ah well, shame. Perhaps Cydonia could try? Brass or copper, nylon mesh or thin open-weave tissue (single layer), aluminium and a multimeter. All clean, all dry.
It didn't have to be flat. I could get a copper tube and aluminium sheet to work. If I wrap more tightly the Al sheet around the piece of tissue I get a higher voltage than displayed here.
However, I initially briefly electrolyzed one end of the copper tube in very diluted KOH to clean it up (I forgot I didn't have to; the shiny surface is partially visible). In the beginning voltage was in the order -500 mV (under a tighter wrap), then slowly started decreasing and is currently -8.7 mV.
The outer surface of the tube is definitely dry. I cleaned it with alcohol too, although I cannot rule out that conductive residues still remain and have an effect through the thin porous piece of tissue.
EDIT: if I manually hold the piece of aluminium with great pressure onto the Cu tube, voltage gets to 250–300 mV or so.
EDIT: holding the Cu tube with the other hand (with a nitrile glove) causes voltage to get more negative, so this could be also a matter of grounding and so on.
-
Not quite- the electrode is the source, the earth is a sink There is no circuit involved. Yet connect a multimeter between a positive battery terminal and earth and you will see a voltage - that's how earth-leak detectors work.
Can you also measure the voltage between the not earthed electrode and 'earth' when the other is connected to earth?
This should give you the 'disappeared' voltage.
-
Can you also measure the voltage between the not earthed electrode and 'earth' when the other is connected to earth?
This should give you the 'disappeared' voltage
No- effectively that is a short circuit. But I can tell you that earthing either of a stacked pair of electrodes producing (say) 250mV only lowers the voltage produced by about 20mV - this led us to check the earth was good- which it was.
-
I initially briefly electrolyzed one end of the copper tube in very diluted KOH to clean it up
Before conducting voltage measurement forming hydrogen at the copper surface or not?
-
Only thoughts,
it reminds me of the Casimir effect mentioned often by Airbus and Rossi as well.
Casimir effect relates to physical forces when distances are in the neighbourhood of nanometers.
Can you explain how you think that would relate to the LEC voltage effect?
-
Before conducting voltage measurement forming hydrogen at the copper surface or not?
Yes, before the measurements. I used 31V at about 1A and lots of gas was evolved at the Cu tube. This cleaned the surface nicely.
However,
I think the results I am observing mainly depend on grounding(EDIT: maybe not). If I touch the tube with both bare hands (one on the Al foil, another on the other end of the tube), voltage immediately increases to a few hundreds negative mV. -
I used 31V at about 1A and lots of gas was evolved at the Cu tube.
That means that some degree of hydrogen would be absorbed and released later onwards.
Copper is probably better able to absorb hydrogen than iron.
This grounding issue is something we need to analyze further. This is very puzzling at this stage.
-
I found this figure here. Hydrogen absorbs in its lattice less hydrogen than Fe (at least at the temperatures used in these tests):
-
An interesting article providing information on absorption of hydrogen by different metals is this one:
FUELS – HYDROGEN STORAGE | HydridesMany metals, intermetallic compounds, and alloys host hydrogen on interstitial lattice sites. The hydrogen molecules dissociate at the surface and hyd…doi.orgCopper forms covalent polymeric hydrides. For iron no hydrides are given.
-
Probably hydrogen is not that much related, and grounding was only a secondary issue. After touching the Cu tube and the Al sheet extensively I found that making a circuit between the partially insulated Al foil and the Cu tube with my hands appears to be enough.
It can be done with one hand by touching both the Al foil and the open Cu surface close to it, or with two hands by pinching the foil with the left hand and pinching the Cu tube with the right hand.
I'm not sure if this is exactly what Alan Smith asked, though.
