There is a pretty good video on the playlist of OU.com currently. Looks very simple to replicate. The water temp apparently rises more than it should. Anyone know of replications that either worked or failed? Seems like all you need is a tungsten welding rod, lye, water, thermometer, multimeter, 80v, and an insulated cup
Have you been able to find the original Link to the Vid ?
it would be good to read his questions and answers too ?
Thx
Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 12, 2016, 07:32:49 AM
Have you been able to find the original Link to the Vid ?
it would be good to read his questions and answers too ?
Thx
Chet
I can't with my phone.
[size=78%]I'd like to replicate this with my equipment. I can do a full element scan of the tungsten and solution down to ppm levels. Apparently some transmutation occurs as well. [/size]
I have looked a bit prior to asking you . some of us have played here with small results.
would be a good experiment to check ,however it would be good to read a bit more of the back and forth
conversations on the original Vid.
and even try some other things in the soup ![yes transmutation would be good to check ...also Peter [ae]
at OUR has some thoughts on welding Rods and transmutation you should touch base with him for some other suggestions ?
have you heard back from the lab on your other thing yet ?
Still waiting. Shouldn't be too long now.
Quote from: ramset on March 12, 2016, 07:32:49 AM
Have you been able to find the original Link to the Vid ?
it would be good to read his questions and answers too ?
Thx
Chet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wENFciq1-Q
Cheers for the link Gyula.
I need to figure out how to do this with no errors in calculations.
Initially heat loss to the environment from the solution at 60c needs to be measured. Call this Eloss.
Then we work out the heat supplied by the arc. Earc
The temp is allowed to raise by say 5 degrees. We work out the heat required. E1.
According to the video E1>Eloss+Earc.
So already there is OU.
Then there is the problem of the missing water. Really the apparatus needs to trap any mist coming off. This is not boiled off water but nebulized droplets. To avoid other calculations the process needs to be done at constant volume, enclosed. In that case all heat of evaporation is returned as heat of condensation and there is no pdV work from any gas/vapour. The heat from the plasma should burn any hydrogen formed at the cathode, keeping the pressure stable and avoiding the electrolysis calculation.
In essence, all electric input should have gone into heating the liquid. I need to double check the thermodynamics of this but let me know if anyone sees any flaw with this .
I have trouble with videos. What are the numbers for heat in and out?
Quote from: pomodoro on March 12, 2016, 06:19:07 AM
There is a pretty good video on the playlist of OU.com currently. Looks very simple to replicate. The water temp apparently rises more than it should. Anyone know of replications that either worked or failed? Seems like all you need is a tungsten welding rod, lye, water, thermometer, multimeter, 80v, and an insulated cup
Dissolving Sodium Hydroxide in water is an exothermic reaction. If he had just stuck NAoH and H20 in a thermos and closed the lid the water temperature would have gone up 2 to 3 degrees without all the theatrics. Just another OU Scam video.
I posted about this here. http://overunity.com/12281/open-source-cold-fusion-replication-plans-now-available/msg476480/#msg476480
Nick it doesn't matter if NaOH dissolved in water is exothermic. The temp rise is measured afterwards, only from the time the plasma is started. Once dissolved it will not keep heating the water, only the electrical power in can do that, or any exothermic chemical reactions, such as the tungsten reacting. Hot W will react with water to form WO2 and H2, which should burn. Need to check the enthalpy for the above reaction.
This link has a pretty good paper from Japan. They only took heating of the water into consideration.
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTproduction.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiGwNjEt7zLAhWlxqYKHQJhDVMQFggdMAE&usg=AFQjCNHd-P28pPQg1zmaIKaLAZZPZB7RuA
Nink
will you do that simple Control with the coffee thermos and report back ?
.
Quote from: ramset on March 13, 2016, 06:25:28 AM
Nink
will you do that simple Control with the coffee thermos and report back ?
I would not drink the coffee after the experiment.
Bill
nah
cleans it out good !!
If Nink doesn't do the control ,I will
will just take me a few days to get to it.[haven't watched the Vid yet ]
Quote from: ramset on March 15, 2016, 07:25:48 PM
nah
cleans it out good !!
If Nink doesn't do the control ,I will
will just take me a few days to get to it.[haven't watched the Vid yet ]
I thought about this and you are right you really need a control to verify if the reaction had stopped and if more power came out of this then went in. There are dozens of videos on youtube of Sodium Hydoxide and water creating exothermic reaction https://youtu.be/AsVegL2jJkU?t=43 but that doesn't really tell us the total reaction time temperature variation by quantity of NAoH etc.
I guess you need 4 experiments as the claim is more energy coming out than going in.
1) NAoH and H2O heat to 60 C and put in thermos
2) NAoH and H2O heat to 60 C with Tungsten Welding Rod and 80 to 100v DC
3) NAoH and H2O and metal plates to create HHO with same watts as 1 and 2 and collect hydrogen, Use Hydrogen to heat water. No idea how we collect the Sodium that is created and combust this as a fuel source so Hydrogen is best we have.
4) a kettle and forget everything else and see if you can raise the temperature of NAoH and Water after reaction finished by a couple of degrees with same watts :-)
I have some Lye (Sodium Hydroxide) somewhere around I used to make Sodium Silicate for a graphene binder I was using on some super caps and I guess I could buy a welding rod but I lack the proper test equipment, all I have is some basic meters and some digital scales but I don't have an Oscilloscope anymore or a decent power supply, you need thermometers, some thermoses, ....
This Man starts the Vid with a preface about it being a translation ?
is there an original untranslated version ?
there may already be a forum or other persons working on replicating this ..with their comments attached ?
@Nink
I was reffering to the simple water and chemical control ,it has not been my experience that such a small percentage has this big a temp rise .[however there are many variables ]
only one way to check that ,but all you really need is the thermometer at this point, if the chemical reaction does all this work then no need to go any further ?
Quote from: Nink on March 16, 2016, 12:52:43 AM
I thought about this and you are right you really need a control to verify if the reaction had stopped and if more power came out of this then went in. There are dozens of videos on youtube of Sodium Hydoxide and water creating exothermic reaction https://youtu.be/AsVegL2jJkU?t=43 but that doesn't really tell us the total reaction time temperature variation by quantity of NAoH etc.
I guess you need 4 experiments as the claim is more energy coming out than going in.
1) NAoH and H2O heat to 60 C and put in thermos
2) NAoH and H2O heat to 60 C with Tungsten Welding Rod and 80 to 100v DC
3) NAoH and H2O and metal plates to create HHO with same watts as 1 and 2 and collect hydrogen, Use Hydrogen to heat water. No idea how we collect the Sodium that is created and combust this as a fuel source so Hydrogen is best we have.
4) a kettle and forget everything else and see if you can raise the temperature of NAoH and Water after reaction finished by a couple of degrees with same watts :-)
I have some Lye (Sodium Hydroxide) somewhere around I used to make Sodium Silicate for a graphene binder I was using on some super caps and I guess I could buy a welding rod but I lack the proper test equipment, all I have is some basic meters and some digital scales but I don't have an Oscilloscope anymore or a decent power supply, you need thermometers, some thermoses, ....
Too hard Nick, there is a much simpler way to do the measurements and accurately . I'm building some of the equipment and will disclose when its ready to go. Forget the sodium BTW, it never sees the light of day at the cathode. Check the standard reduction potential of Na vs H2O in alkaline solution.
Here is one of the better bids I've seen.
https://youtu.be/TEceEHgaXoU
Its very well made, but at the end of the video he talks of using a spectrum analyzer to determine the elements. I've never heard of this method as atoms have characteristic lines in the visible/UV range. He doesn't elaborate on that topic, I wish he did as it doesn't seem right. Anyway video is a must for anyone into this stuff.
I'm only new at this, but already some weird phenomena were observed. With both electrodes made of tungsten, there was a particular voltage/current window before the plasma where there was evolution of gases at the cathode (negative) but absolutely none at the anode. This is using a warm NaOH solution. This seems absurd as current is supposedly only able to flow when electrons are exchanged at the electrodes and oxidation and reductions occur. There was very little, if any, visible oxidation of the tungsten, which would have explained the lack of oxygen evolution as it formed oxides on the surface. Another weird event happens when the plasma is made on the anode.
Usually the cathode is made to have the plasma but when you deliberately cause it on the anode, it is more stable. But if you touch glass with the tip look out. First there is a white intense glow and then an exlplosion that can throw out much of the solution.
I was looking out for corrosion of tungsten but only found some when the cathode is made to glow white hot. Only then is some tungsten able to react with water at a rate quick enough to notice.
Too early to tell if anything is OU, but it good fun.
In the 'real' world this type of electrolysis is called Contact Glow Discharge Electrolysis aka CGDE.
It has been studied quite well since 1950, although it was first reported in 1844! The best journal article to read is by Susanta K Sen Gupta in 'plasma sources sci. Technology (24) 2015. , A summary of all the research published (188 papers). Under some conditions Non faradaic processes give rise to 80-2000 times the expected faradaic yield of hydrogen.
I finished making a small, simple calorimeter today and it is surprisingly accurate even at temperatures close to boiling. The rate of heat loss is only 4W between 80-90c, but its all taken into consideration in the calcs.
The liquid is stirred with a magnetic stirrer and the temp is logged to a PC.
I can now look back at the guy's video and see that his measurements are not going to be accurate. He has a reading on the mA meter with nothing connected, the resolution of the scales is only to one gram, he used a large cylinder to make measurements and only allows the temp to go up by two degrees. Lots of assumptions are also made. If an error analysis were to be made, adding all the +/- percent errors you would be very surprised how massive the error in the final calculations would be. I have not tried LENR reactions in the calorimeter as yet.
here is a good site for LENR news
http://www.e-catworld.com/
and Looking for heat is a new start up which has some test beds in line with Parkomov's kitchen work [which grew from Rossi's claims]
http://www.lookingforheat.com/research_notes/
Thanks for the links, I had a good read and the material is excellent. Do you know of any accurate measurements done on tungsten rod plasma electrolysis? I have the data from Mazumi who electrolyzed Potassium Carbonate found excess heat and managed to get it published. Apart from that there are some replications by Eugene Mallove and from JLN labs.
http://quanthomme.free.fr/jlnlabs/cfr/html/cfrdatas.htm
I'm hoping to replicate these by carrying out the reaction in a dewer and comparing the temp rise against input from a precision resistor and voltage across it instead of assuming heat capacities of solutions/dewar/stirrer etc. The calorimeter is all done and works well, now I need to stabilize the arc for a more consistent current. You can't trust averaging the current when it looks like it does in the JLN labs plots. I think he used a power meter which is a very weak link in the accuracy of the readings. With bubbles interrupting the current and regions of negative resistance oscillating in the MHz range, one has to very cautious of accepting the displayed values of the current blindly.
I've just tried out the 10% NaOH and it produces a good stable cathodic arc, just like in the video. It also allows a good anodic arc, unlike the potassium carbonate. I managed to melt alumina and quartz under the NaOH solution with the anodic arc. As mentioned earlier, simply touching a spot of glass, quartz, alumina produced a huge increase in current , mA become 3-5A, and there is an immense white arc.
It seems like a spot much less than 1sqmm carries 300Vx5A, approx 1500W, and gets white hot.
Having gone through the video, he unfortunately did not have enough resolution on the balance to weigh the water loss properly. How can you weigh 1g when there is an error of +/- 2g minimum? He also uses a big plastic measuring cylinder to try to measure this loss, introducing other errors, since a lot of the fluid remains in the flask. The video is well made, its just unfortunate that at the critical part he did not take more care with the measurements. This one gram of water loss is incredibly vital to the calculation being OU or not. Another big factor is that a lot of the water loss could be from the fog generated by the splattering of the arc, and must be kept in the flask and not allowed to escape by designing the arc to be struck deep in the solution and making the 'fog' and steam recombine with the cooler bulk solution. Then, heat is kept in the flask and can be measured directly by a rise in temperature, so long as the bulk is less than the b.p..
Here is the screenshot his calculated results,the red circle are the calcs which are likely to be out by a very large factor, because (1) the resolution of the balance is 1g. Even 0.1g resolution still gives a 20% error! and (2) only the mass of boiled or electrolyzed water can be used in the calcs. The apparatus must block all exit of mist generated by mechanical means at the arc.
Quantum Hydrogen Energy:
1000 MegaJoules of heat from 1 gram of hydrogen!
https://www.cleanplanet.co.jp/en/science/ (https://www.cleanplanet.co.jp/en/science/)
Patent US10641525B2 "Heat generating system "
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10641525B2/en?oq=10641525 (https://patents.google.com/patent/RU2740834C1/ru?oq=2740834)
NASA "Frontiers of Space Power and Energy" Page 14:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20210016143/...10016143final.pdf (https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20210016143/downloads/NASA-TM-20210016143final.pdf)
https://www.cleanplanet.co.jp/en/pr/ (https://www.cleanplanet.co.jp/en/pr/)