Here is described what I think is a protocol which is improved over
the Galileo protocol:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBosscharacteri.pdf
Some key points:
"CR-39 detectors (Fukuvi), rectangular in shape with dimensions of 1
cm °— 2 cm °— 1 mm, were obtained from Landauer and used as
received. Prior to using the CR-39 detector in an experiment, one
corner of the detector was exposed to an 241Am source. This is used
as an internal standard to account for variability in the CR-39
detectors. By having an internal standard on the same detector used
in an experiment assures that both sets of tracks experience
identical experimental and etching conditions."
I would add here that doing the calibration exposure to the Cr-39
with a 241AM source would be a significant value added for the
student or amateur with no legal access to such a source, and who
might not be able to achieve an standardized exposure in any case.
"The rectangular cells (Ridout Plastics) were made of butyrate. A
laser was used to cut a square hole in one side of the rectangular
cell. A silicone based cement was used to epoxy a 6 μm thick Mylar
film over the hole. Figure 1b is a schematic of the cathode. A
square hole is cut inside a polyethylene support. The square hole of
the polyethylene support lines up with the hole in the cell. A Pt
wire and Au wire were mounted on the polyethylene support in such a
manner that, when the cathode is placed in the cell, the Au and Pt
wires are in direct contact with the Mylar film. Polyethylene heat
shrink is used to provide a pressure contact between the Au and Pt
wires. The anode consisted of platinum wire mounted on a polyethylene
support..."
Note that use of the Mylar film did not eliminate the tracks: "By
placing a 6 μm thick Mylar film between the cathode and the detector,
it was observed that ∼90% of the energetic particles are blocked.
Using LET curves, a 6 μm thick Mylar film cuts off <0.45 MeV protons,
<0.55 MeV tritons, <1.40 MeV 3He, and <1.45 MeV alphas. However, this
is the energy of the particle when it reaches
the CR-39 detector. It does not take into account the water layer the
particle needs to traverse before it reaches the Mylar film. The Pd
deposit exhibits a cauliflower like structure. Because of this
structure, the particles need to traverse a water layer of varying
thickness. Assuming water thicknesses varying between 0 and 10 μm, it
is estimated that the majority of the particles formed as a result of
Pd/D co-deposition are <0.45–0.97 MeV protons, <0.55–1.25 MeV
tritons, <1.40–3.15 MeV 3He, and <1.45–3.30 MeV alphas.
I think pre-etching CR-39 is a very bad idea, because it changes the
CR-39. It is important to have a standard plastic that has undergone
a standard curing cycle, and which is operated in a controlled and
measure temperature range at all times prior to etching. See "Cure
Cycle" here for example:
http://corporateportal.ppg.com/NR/rdonlyres/
3161A365-5C86-484F-97B6-74059920D2B6/0/CR39.pdf
http://tinyurl.com/yp6ld5
Otherwise there is no ready determination of what the tracks
represent. Consider, for example, the Kowalsk-SPAWAR debate in the
literature:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBossreplytocom.pdf
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/KowalskiLnuclearorn.pdf
and some background:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBossuseofcrinp.pdf
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/KowalskiLcommentson.pdf
I think there is a lot more of this stuff on Kowalski's site:
http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/index.html
It is also true the etching cycle itself has to be well controlled.
Just using a hot plate, in whatever ambient temperature happens to
exist, to achieve the etching, is going to produce highly variable
results. Disposable etching containers of some kind might be a good
idea too, and fresh made NOH too, because radioactive contamination
of the etching fluid (e.g. with Rn) is a real possibility, as well as
concentration changes with repeated use. (These are real problems,
not just my imagination.)
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
