Posts by Ken

Quote from Alan Smith

In this case the cell was dismantled, the working electrode was heated and the cell reassembled.

ETA- with regard to the sulphate/citrate electrolyte, I found that it needs to be freshly made, for some reason I don't understand it still works as a plating system, but very soon becomes less effective as LEC making system.

Thanks Allan, I noticed some papers use much smaller concentrations of sulphate/citrate electrolyte in the solution than I used.

Today I made another cell with increased diameter to decrease the air gap from about 2.3 mm to 1 mm - Still no voltage measured at all.

Quote from Alan Smith

Ken

Welcome to LENR Forum. I agree with Stevenson 's theory (above) that this is a battery with a gaseous electrolyte.

I share your concerns about electrolytes under the plating, but if there is no contact between electrodes other than gas this is not really a major issue- also Frank Gordon and Harper Whitehouse have recently done an experiment where they heated an old 'dead' working electrode up to 300C and it started working again. I also ensure everything is dry - a vacuum generally takes care of that

Quote from Alan Smith

Ken

Welcome to LENR Forum. I agree with Stevenson 's theory (above) that this is a battery with a gaseous electrolyte.

I share your concerns about electrolytes under the plating, but if there is no contact between electrodes other than gas this is not really a major issue- also Frank Gordon and Harper Whitehouse have recently done an experiment where they heated an old 'dead' working electrode up to 300C and it started working again. I also ensure everything is dry - a vacuum generally takes care of that

Is the Gordon\Harper cell not sealed though?. If so this would retain the solution.

Quote from Stevenson

Hi Ken! Good to see another replication attempt!

Just a couple of notes, based on my experience:

• the CE (outer tube) you used is more or less the same material of the WE (the plated layers), so probably no voltage should be generated (the voltage depends on the metal pair used: try with a CE made of brass);

I intend to do another trial with copper\brass, finding the correct diameter material is difficult without machining. Ill probably use flat plates.

• the plating solution you used gives a very good looking result, but according to other replications it is probably less effective than chloride salts and probably a lower pH;

My PH was set to 9-10 by addition of ammonia. The ammonia is rather weak and has soap in it.

• the experiment with the drop is interesting, because an electrolytic solution between two metals gives more or less the same voltage of the LEC. My theory is that a ionized gas in the LEC behaves more or less as an electrolyte, so the same results are obtained, except for the current, that is about three to four orders of magnitude greater in case of the drop or accidental short;

Also the current reversal matches others observations.

• the current in the LEC is a key measurement, because it is directly related to the presence and magnitude of the effect and measuring it may avoid/discover artifacts. So, try to include current measurements if you repeat the experiment.

Using a load resistor allows for a simple calculation of current without the need for additional instrumentation

• the gap between electrodes you used is about 2.4 mm. Based on other replications, I think it is easier to observe the effect with a gap of about 1 mm or less.

I am aware of this limitation but simply moving the WE closer to the outer electrode while standing vertical without o rings showed no voltage either. I intend to test with flat plates when they arrive.

Thanks for the input.

Display More

Hi All,

My first post - I assembled a LEC to try to replicate a version of the Frank Gordon, Harper Whitehouse

experiment.

- WE 22.2 mm OD, 140mm long copper pipe, roughed up to a shine with medium steel wool

- plated in Ferrous Sulphate 125 gr, Sodium Citrate 125 gr, household ammonia cleaner 350 gr, 1.5 litre of tap water, heavy steel plate Anode with mill scale ground off

- ~200 mA for 6 hours formed a well adhered grey coat, a magnet is attracted to the iron coating

- Outer electrode was a black iron pipe nipple 27mm ID, mill scale on ID removed with brake cylinder hone to a shine

- WE insulated with o rings at each end to prevent shorting and thoroughly dried

- cell capacitance measured at 55.5 pf, cell resistance > 100 Megohm

- Voltage measured with Fluke model 83 multi meter 10 Megohm input resistance. Meter on mV range, .1 mV resolution

- 1 Megohm resistor across cell as a load

Observations: no voltage reading within +- .1 mV was observed during a 6 hour run

At this point on a hunch I placed one small drop of the electrolytic solution on the top o ring so that it bridged the WE and the outer electrode and immediately saw ~200 mV on the meter which was still present after one hour. In a later test, a droplet placed on the bottom of the cell showed a voltage (~25mV) and over 2 minutes the voltage swung slowly from positive to negative, perhaps as the droplet was moving from iron to copper scratches on the WE?

I wonder if some of the electrolyte solution could become entrapped in a heavy iron coating and be released later causing false positives in some experiments? I noticed some of the coatings from other attempts are heavy and flaky and show odd reddish craters.