Frank Gordon's "Lattice Energy Converter (LEC)"...replicators workshop

  • Iron oxide in various forms can chemisorb significant amounts of water which cannot really just be dried with a towel or removed with mild temperatures. That the voltage effect shows up with the (easily oxidized) iron deposition layer but not without one does not really rule out, on its own, that water is not involved.


    EDIT: by the way, on a related note:

    Why not just use 240 V AC mains? Two Fe plate electrodes etc? For LENR reactors all we need is Holmlid's catalysts and a large chunk of reactor ingredients rather than going down to nanoscales. Thin wires etc etc.will not build up sufficient reactant protons or neutrons for creating a critical mass.. I despair of the ignorance here in basic nuclear physics.

    Speaking of those iron oxide catalysts, in this open access paper the reduction of iron oxide (+potassium in some form) under hydrogen at a few mbar and increasing temperatures was studied: Reducibility of potassium-promoted iron oxide under hydrogen conditions (iastate.edu)


    It was found that a weight reduction in the material upon heating observed up to 300–550 °C was mainly due to loss of surface hydroxyls, i.e. chemisorbed water as –OH groups. While this is for hematite for which this effect will be strong, water chemisorption will also occur with other iron oxide types, e.g. FeO. Here is one of the first hits on a web search just as a starting point: Water adsorption on an iron oxide surface - ScienceDirect .

  • Iron oxide in various forms can chemisorb significant amounts of water which cannot really just be dried with a towel or removed with mild temperatures. That the voltage effect shows up with the (easily oxidized) iron deposition layer but not without one does not really rule out, on its own, that water is not involved.

    No doubt that the rought iron [oxide] layer will keep a significant amount of water. The point is that it is not sufficient to produce the effect. I specifically tested in the past to just wet the expired WE, and yesterday to electrolytically reload it (the ferrous deposition was still in place). No "vital signs" were visible. BTW, I suspect the moisture/humidity can even be harful to the effect, especially when in the gas, because it could limit the ionization.

  • Stevenson

    Not completely related to the water adsorption properties of iron oxide (although I was more suggesting possible moisture-inducing artifacts as I observed in my own crude tests), but among your tests have you also tried to deliberately form a thick oxide layer on the active electrode and then loading it with hydrogen in the cell?


    Iron oxide has known catalytic properties. The deposited iron will start oxidizing almost immediately especially if the deposition done with chloride solution, and probably even faster if it's rough, so there's a chance that what one might actually want for the effect is an iron oxide deposition layer with hydrogen diffusing through it.

  • Alan Smith

    But some of the remaining fine iron will no doubt oxidize, and washing off wasn't even mentioned by Frank Gordon with the Fe-on-Fe procedure (using FeCl2 plating solution), which could be assumed it promotes further oxidation also inside the cell from the residual oxygen and moisture.



    Quote

    Regarding the question about treatment to apply to the working electrode after plating with Fe? I just tap it on a paper towel to knock some of the water off or lightly touch it with a paper towel and at most, let it dry for a couple minutes before inserting it into a larger pipe. I didn't want to wait too long because of oxidation on the iron. The codeposition protocol seems to be flexible. I used 0.1 M FeCl2 4H20 in distilled H2O. I would start with a current of approximately 50 µA/cm2 for 30 minutes. Then increase it to approximately 100 µA/cm2 for an additional approximately 30 minutes. The current was then increased to approximately 2 mA/cm2 for times ranging from 4 hours to one day or more. One of the electrodes actually worked after 4 hours but I codeposited some more iron just in case.

  • can


    Good thinking but Frank has often run his plates hot, and they still work, in a hydrogen atmosphere punctuated by spells under vacuum -and he washes the electrolyte off and dries them too. I don't think water vapour would survive in that environment for very long.


    Using the alkaline system you see very little corrosion, no surprise since pure iron is very resistant to oxidation -there is an English expression 'old iron never rusts' which refers to iron items made before the Bessemer process made low carbon steel cheap enough for everyday use.


    If you have doubts , try again, be more patient with the electrolysis, and if you have no suitable plates why not try a 50 €c coin - it has some zinc content which might be useful if you use an acid electrolyte. They are made of “Nordic gold”, which is in fact an alloy consisting of copper, aluminium, zinc and tin. This alloy gives the coin its characteristic rich gold colour.

  • Alan Smith

    To clarify, the catalytic iron oxide idea is separate from the one that involving moisture.


    Basically I was saying that if it isn't a moisture/electrolyte residue-caused electrolytic artifact (which is what I saw with my tests), there's a chance that iron oxide in some form could be involved, since it will be easily formed under certain plating conditions and it's a known catalyst also used by other researchers. So, I was asking Stevenson if among his numerous tests he's also tried using a thick iron oxide layer directly for the working electrode instead of one spontaneously (accidentally) formed.


    I haven't tried an alkaline plating solution yet, but iron deposition layers formed with citric acid did not seem to rust. I haven't made other tests recently mainly because I cannot discern a real LEC effect from an electrolytic artifact with the experimental conditions I've been employing. I would need a proper testing setup and environment, but since Frank Gordon reported a succesful test with Fe-on-Fe I assumed that a steel baseplate (instead of brass) could also be used, which would simplify things up.



    Somewhat unrelated: metallic iron/steel oxidizes quickly by wetting with a moderately concentrated caustic solution (NaOH or KOH) and heating to 250-300 °C or somewhat more until it is dry.

  • The only thing I can suggest is reading Leif Holmlid's papers again.

    The only thing in common with these LEC experiments that I can think of, besides the possibility that iron oxide is involved, is that the iron oxide catalysts he has used emit with heating potassium ions and easily ionizable excited potassium atoms, and occasionally these have been observed as a current using a small accelerating voltage (using a "surface ionization detector"). However, this is in a very good vacuum and with currents in the order of nanoamperes at several hundred °C and I think relatively very large gaps.


    I don't recall reading if this has ever been done for H atoms, but when hydrogen is adsorbed, the excitation state of the K atoms would be transferred to H atoms and molecules in desorption.

  • but among your tests have you also tried to deliberately form a thick oxide layer on the active electrode and then loading it with hydrogen in the cell?

    Yes, some post-expiring experiments that I run where done with an iron oxide layer formed (not "thick" though) and hydrogen, either wet and dry. The experiment I run yesterday was done with the iron/iron oxide layer in place, and it was for sure loaded to some extent with hydrogen.


    The only thing I can suggest is reading Leif Holmlid's papers again.

    In my opinion Holmid's papers and patents do not provide sufficient details to allow a replication (not even to understand an apply the basic concepts, frankly speaking). This is the reason why nobody has ever replicated his findings. BTW also Mills' work always suffered from the same problem.

  • Stevenson

    With thick oxide layer I mean one deliberately formed and of thickness of about the same level of that obtained by effective electrodeposition, though if you already tried without any change, there's nothing relevant to this thread that I think I can add.

  • Here's another data point:

    9 October 2021 Test Cell #7

    The brass cathode tube from test #5 was lathe-turned, removing the previously plated iron layer and about 0.1 mm of the brass, to present a clean surface for plating. No solvent or other cleaning was applied. The tube was plated with the electrolyte from test #6 diluted 40%. After plating at 1.28 V 90 mA for 48 hours, a smooth layer of iron about 0.2 mm thick was seen. Evolution of hydrogen during the plating was shown by a thin layer of foam at the surface of the electrolyte, and confirmed by a sensitive combustible gas detector.

    -3dHvGmhrFXg2dBDjb75K1TMOs-VJdkeFglHgK8leAk9czfZWPD3P96iE0h_FlMIWjrmtX-ILvIeQt8YDQSdT1zjZH88bmS-EYLDChFnrp5XV_cMwjfZp34uBt3CD1lw7E-Iy7zY=s0


    After plating the tube was rinsed in tap water and dried with compressed air, but no heat was used. Surface rust began to appear after about five minutes. The cell was immediately assembled and installed in the test chamber, which was then flushed with hydrogen at 1 bar. Initial voltage was 166 mV at 10 megohms, the background level from DAQ input bias current. The cell voltage was unchanged after 12 hours.

  • I see apparently a lot of difficulties by chemical way to trap hydrogen inside a metal.

    Why don't fill a metal when highly heated ( above 700°) as well as hydrogen will be able easily to cross across it, then making a quick cooling (in ambiant water) to keep the trap ?

    Austenitic steels should be very good for that.

    Maybe the Hydrogen filling rate should be lower than the current method, i don't know.

  • Cydonia

    I think that could be possibly easily accomplished with plasma electrolysis and pulsed currents, although large pieces will require very large currents. Below is a test from several months ago done with a steel cutter blade. Temperatures were definitely above 700 °C.



    EDIT: In the test depicted here I used about 72V and 8–10A in moderately concentrated K2CO3 and the steel blade was 9 mm wide and 0.5 mm thick. A brief video from which these images were taken is available.

  • A general useful read pertaining to hydrogen in steel in practical environments. Some information could be applicable to LEC replications: Hydrogen in Steels – IspatGuru


    In particular, perhaps what is suggested in this excerpt could be taken advantage of for increasing hydrogen absorption in the co-deposition step:


    Quote

    [...] Steel in solid state can also absorb H through the action of electrochemical reactions taking place on the surface of the steel. The most common examples for of this phenomena are pickling, electroplating, cathodic protection, and corrosion. H liberated during electrochemical reactions, is partly absorbed by the surface of steel before it recombines to harmless hydrogen bubbles. Presence of sulfides, arsenides, phosphides, and selenides in the electrolyte assists the absorption of H in the steels because of inhibiting nature of these compounds for the recombination reaction of H.

  • Well, after a night of thinking in fact i thought not so relevant the idea of hydrogen trapped inside an hot lattice then cooled.

    If we use a chemical way, indeed, the host metal lattice will trap both an hydrogen atom not especially an H2.

    So, we could imagine in this case that maintly H monoatomic could be trapped, it couldn't be the case in my previous hypothesis by which we should except full H recombination.

    So in this case of chemical deposit, all H monoatomic could be well separated from each others and could become relatively "stable" i expect ( against recombination) .

    Even if with time it will migrate finally however this should need a relatively long time i think.

    In this way i could imagine this highly reactive H mono could react with an host atom then both should transmute to produce X rays in the end.

    In this way, a better choice ( isotopes ) of host metal should be considered to improve the effect, i propose.

  • As far as I am aware of, H usually penetrates into the metallic lattice in atomic form, unless it recombines to molecular H2 inside large enough cavities in the material. Recombination of atomic to the molecular form inside the metal is the main cause of blistering in steels and other metals permeable to hydrogen, and as the link above suggests, it may cause large internal stresses that may exceed the yield strength (YS) of the material:


    Quote

    [...] Normally, problems of H in steels are related to the formation of flakes, the occurrence of break-outs during in continuous casting and to H embrittlement. The detrimental effect of H is due to its solubility behaviour. The solubility of H in liquid steel is considerably higher than in solid steel. Due to it diatomic H is formed during cooling and solidification of the steel. The H gas creates pressure sites in the steel matrix, which may give rise to failure or surface defects.


    H remaining after steel making migrates to internal defects where it recombines to form gaseous H2. The pressures exerted by this precipitated H can be substantial. As an example, if liquid steel contains H at a level of around 10 ppm, pressures exceeding the YS are generated before the steel is cooled to room temperature. This results into the formation of flakes. Ni bearing steels are particularly susceptible to flaking, but in general H contents below 2.5 ml/100 gm are considered safe.


    Perhaps this could make a case for not having a too smooth deposition layer. If some larger cavities remain, H may recombine there and increase stresses and pressure (it seems desirable for LENR purposes?).

  • As far as I am aware of, H usually penetrates into the metallic lattice in atomic form, unless it recombines to molecular H2 inside large enough cavities in the material.

    That's my understanding.

    If some larger cavities remain, H may recombine there and increase stresses and pressure (it seems desirable for LENR purposes?)

    Perhaps it would form the stress cracks on the surface that Ed Storms thinks are needed . . . but I doubt it. Ed says such cavities are too large for his model, and I think the cracks that form around them are also too big. I think he wants stress, but not that much stress. Maybe he can tell us. I will send him a link to this comment.

  • i think it remains the key...


    3 options:


    1- H mono penetrated become "amas condensed" H2 ( beta phasis)

    2- H mono penetrated become "well separated" H2 ( alpha phasis).

    3- H mono penetrated remains "well separated" H mono.

    In this last option i expect that codeposition process should do amorphous lattice more able to stabilize H monos..

    At other side, by a perfect and regular cristal lattice H mono loaded should move more easily helping the recombination.

  • Perhaps it would form the stress cracks on the surface that Ed Storms thinks are needed . . . but I doubt it. Ed says such cavities are too large for his model, and I think the cracks that form around them are also too big.

    Yup. Ed confirmed this.


    In my own words:


    A gap large enough to hold recombined D2 gas inside the lattice is too big for his model. It has to be smaller than that. He wants individual deuterons lining up in a row, not D2 molecules. (Deuterons or "H mono" as Cydonia calls them above.) The cracks forming around a large gap would also be too big.