Since the resistance drop during loading seems to be correlated with real hydrogen absorption, we wondered how difficult that was to recreate. To explore that, we decided to make our own wire to fit into a LENR stick test cell and test for resistance drop when heated in hydrogen.
Starting with Block Constantan - 200 micron diameter with a black, oxide coating, we treated this particular wire with 2160 cycles.
- Approx 21 V, and 3 amps
- 5 seconds on, 5 seconds off (not exactly as described in this paper http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CelaniFexperiment.pdf)
Similar treatments had produced wires that kink, which is similar to the way the Celani wire behaved. We have not looked at it with SEM, yet, as our microscope is tripping out too easy.
Length:40 cm long
Sample of wire saved for SEM analysis
R0= 7.9 ohms (multi-meter)
This will be a simple test of loading, but done in the calorimeter, just to see what happens.
It is in test FC0407 - LENR Stick: HUG Made Wire in data.hugnetlab.com
And in Calorimeter CTC#3, just above that.
We have more documentation in our Evernote notebook for this experiment here: First Homemade Celani Wire
Comments
Also pull off some of the surface of a Celani wire and do atomic composition with EDS and composition of raw wire and home made wire.
You might get university help by saying you are studying hydrogen storage in nickel and nickel/copper alloys. This is a safe topic very green energy for the hydrogen economy...
- Direct power stimulation (this can be done with the wires in place)
- High temperature oxidation cycles under air -> high temperature (500+ °C) oxide reduction under hydrogen
- Nitric Acid etching
- Liquid nitrogen heat shock treatment (this will create loads of micro cracks. However the right balance to not have very brittle wires would have to be found)
We are trying to come up with a new idea for our home made wire. Any ideas?
I think we've demonstrated loading on a joule heated wire, but what's next for it?
Do we try a new wire? Do we continue to load? Do we try power through the active wire?
Looking interesting.
In this paper by Celani et al.
iiste.org/.../...
Whilst an old paper, he discusses the use of HNO3 in section 2(f) after after correct (not too high) current driven, thermal cycling and there is an SEM image of the skeletal result (figure 10 on page 43). We have discussed internally the capability of HNO3 solutions to dissolve things at different rates.
The combination of processes - the boiling off of copper, the oxidisation, the HNO3 treatment and lastly reduction in the H2 atmosphere could all be part of developing the critical surface morphology that could be a skeletal open pore structure with nano wires/cracks with non-linear surface binding forces and desirable crystal sub-structure all supported on good conductor.
In 6 1) - he notes that a wire achieved a resistivity drop of 18% - in the EU test right now - even when powered, we have seen 29% and around 18% for the 2 wires in the active cell. Though Celani has seen wires of this level of loading.
An apparatus and recipe would meet the goals of the MFMP 100% but if you can fill in pieces of the "eco-system" of understanding like this graph that is bonus points/ gravy/ a good thing.
Now the question is if you etch out the Cu, CuO, CuO2 with acid and heat again how much more will you get? How much deeper into the wire will the segregation/oxi dation go?
Then there is the big question, will this wire make excess heat as is at 7%?
We are seeing loading (resistance decreasing). We will try temperature cycling to see how far it will load.
The adjustment was done before I started the script. One of the thermistors broke out of the solder, so that was necessary to fix. I won't adjust them if it is not necessary :)
I'm thinking we will keep increasing it. The goal is to see the wire load, which it is doing now. We will stick on this 15 watt step to see how far it drops. After that we will increase the power again.
@ Ecco
Nothing looks wrong physically, I did adjust the active insulation yesterday, but that shouldn't have taken the cell this far out of calibration, if at all. I will say that this calorimeter has the same position and magnitude effects. As much as we try to get the cell in exactly the same position, we can't get it perfect. Just keep those effects in mind while looking at the data.
The data should be back now. There was server downtime last night.
I just noticed the active insulation on CTC#3 was not working properly. I fixed it and am starting a sweep of 0 to 15 watts in steps of 1 watt and at 1 hour each.
Looks like all experiments are off line as of last night???
a watched pot never boils, a watched pot never boils, .....
it is starting to boil thanks.
EDIT: by the way, a proper sweep run from low power after each input power increase run (sorry, not sure how to call exactly the 15 minute, 0.1W step run from the last highest input step achieved) as I suggested would be a good thing to do in order to check whether loading indeed affects excess power, after the wire/active material has been installed in the cell. To date, I don't remember direct evidence of this happening.
EDIT2: some more indirect analysis of the potential problem in the data. In addition of output power starting at negative values, it appears that the anomaly might not be increasing with input power, quite the opposite in fact:
i.imgur.com/yGFMTS9.png
i.imgur.com/qQienYH.png
(I hand picked the Y values for the parallel lines, and haven't been as accurate as I wanted, but I think it's clear that the apparent excess increased more between 6W and 9W than it did between 9 and 12W).
RSS feed for comments to this post