Why do you or anyone focus on the nature of the mesh? The LENR reaction involves interaction between individual atoms. From an atom's point of view, a mesh does not exist. The mesh consists of regions were Pd can be deposited and regions were it can not be deposited, with no control over how much of each region exists in the material. Consequently, use of mesh creates a totally random and chaotic environment. What is the value in trying to reproduce something that simply cannot be duplicated? Mizuno used mesh only to allow better thermal contact with the wall, not because it would be expected to be a better material for producing LENR. His use came from his early work involving gas discharge during which Pd was transferred from the anode to the mesh. Absolutely no reason exists to expect a mesh would be beneficial when burnishing is used. In contrast, a sheet of Ni would provide a controlled active area, would provide a reproducible surface, and would allow better control of the burnishing process. Remember, you are trying to discover whether burnishing can cause LENR, not whether the Mizuno approach is required. Please look at the process from an atoms point of view. This is not an engineering problem that is related to the shape and size of the object being used.
Who is to say that the atoms can not be set into mesh, You believe that small nano cracks are the answer, loading , unloading the material is supposed to cause these. It's still a vacant area they are filling, mesh can act in the same way.
