You have read what Ed Storms theories about how cracks are the source of LENR activity, but you haven’t applied this lessen to your experiments.
In order to produce crack, the area were nuclear active sites are formed, the metal used in the cathode needs to be pre-stressed enough to produce these surface cracks before the metal is used in your experiment. The way to do this to this metal is by subjecting it to mechanically created metal fatigue. Fatigue is the progressive and localized structural damage that occurs when a material is subjected to cyclic loading. Fatigue occurs when a material is subjected to repeated loading and unloading. If the loads are above a certain threshold, microscopic cracks will begin to form at the surface. Eventually a crack will reach a critical size were LENR activity will begin. The easiest way to fatigue metal for the LENR hobbyist is to subject a wire to repeated torsional stress. If you have a microscope available, verify that the surface of the cathode you plan to use in your experiments show cracks on its surface. Cheers: Axil On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:32 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > The temperature the bath reaches depends upon the input power you deliver > to the system as well as any excess heat that may be generated by the > electrodes and the ability of your system to trap heat. If you are > delivering 12 watts to your device and getting a temperature rise of 60 F > from ambient then you must have relatively low heat loss unless of course > you are seeing lots of heat being generated. > > The maximum temperature seen thus far with my present experimental setup > was 130 F with an ambient of 74 F. I had 28.7 watts of drive at that time. > I am using a large electrolyte bath that is open to the air and one > benefit is that I can dissipate a large amount of power before my > electrolyte reaches boiling. This allows me to increase the current > density significantly. It is currently within the bounds of the successful > level for the palladium deuterium systems. > > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jack Cole <jcol...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 10:00 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate > > It seems like from the experiments I've run that if you want heat, put > enough borax in so that it settles to the bottom. Then put your electrodes > down into the borax powder in the bottom. Eventually, the borax powder > disappears leaving yellowish nearly transparent crystals on the electrodes > and in the bottom of the cell. It is easy to get 120+F temps with an air > temperature of 60F using 12V @ 1amp. > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Paul Stout <paulst...@att.net> wrote: > >> My anode is a motor brush so its surface area is larger than that of >> the nickel coin. >> I have increased the current to 400 milliamps. With the active and >> control beakers in series, the power supply is at 30 volts to drive that >> current. >> - >> I was hoping to avoid the higher currents, which could mask any anomalous >> heat being generated. >> >> Paul >> >> >> >> >> On 10/3/2012 1:57 PM, Jack Cole wrote: >> >> I had a lot of heat, whether it is "anomalous" or not, I don't know. I >> think it is somehow resistance heating through the borax or chemistry with >> creating boric acid. Just a speculation. I had heat >130F (I say it this >> way because my thermometer was electroplated or something causing it to >> register 20F too high. It read 158 or so at the max). To get more heat, >> you need an anode with as much surface area as your nickel. I used 12V at >> 1 amp. >> >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Paul Stout <paulst...@att.net> wrote: >> >>> I have increased the current in my setup to 200 milliamps. It has been >>> running at that current level for more than 12 hours now and no anomalous >>> heat has shown up yet. >>> - >>> Has anybody been able to replicate Chuck Sites results? I have not seen >>> any claims to that yet. >>> - >>> Paul >>> >>> >> >> >
