Hi Dave, I will be interested to know your results. This evening, I started an experiment using my repeatedly-treated nickels (8) on a small thoriated tungsten rod. I'm using a penny connected to a chrome plated alligator clip for my anode (+). My last few runs seemed to show excess heat, but like you, I'm hesitant to make that claim without better measures and further experimenting. I was estimating heat loss by taking heat measurements of the bath after removing the electrodes to get the rate that the temperature of the bath was dropping.
My current setup involves submerging the electrolytic cell in 1 gallon of water in a styrofoam minnow bucket. I have another 1 gallon of water in an identical minnow bucket to test temperature changes due to heat loss/gain from the environment. I will be taking measurements of voltage, current, temp of the water bath surrounding the electrolytic cell, and control cell for the next couple of hours. Tomorrow, I'll run all day and see what it can do over a longer period. I'm using borax for the electrolyte, and tracking the data in excel. The nickels have been treated at low current for 3 days as the cathode (after repeated heating with a torch and multiple prior experiments with the same set of nickels/tungsten). Monday, I should have a small submersible pump that I'll try in future experiments to keep the water surrounding the cell circulating. Jack On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:02 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > I have completed my electrolysis experiment using a standard issue nickel > with a second one at the positive electrode. My electrolyte is sodium > carbonate (Arm & Hammer washing soda) which does not foul up the positive > electrode as much as borax. For a short time it looked as though I was > observing excess heat after my test nickel had been loaded with hydrogen > for 40 plus hours. I performed a control and calibration run which seemed > to indicate that I could not prove any excess heating. > > My test fixture does not appear to be capable of precise temperature > measurement since it does not have a good stirring process and the control > of the electrolyte level is difficult to maintain. A positive result would > be too important of a determination for me to announce without better proof. > > For these reasons I decided to try another experiment. First, I took > the 40 plus hour nickel and heated it to red heat with a gas torch. The > nickel rapidly cooled off once the torch was removed so it was apparent > that a lot of excess heat was not being generated as a result of elevated > temperature. No flames appeared that could suggest that hydrogen was being > released so I decided to begin another procedure. > > I took the test nickel and heated it to a red hot state and immediately > dropped it into a water bath. This was repeated a total of 5 times in an > effort to generate surface cracks due to the stress of rapid cooling. The > main observation I noticed was that an oxide had formed upon the surface > which could not be removed by wiping. One side seemed to have a thick > brown oxide while the other exhibited less. I am not able to test for the > actual materials present, but that does not prevent me from proceeded with > my electrolysis of the nickel. > > The heat treated nickel is now undergoing electrolysis along with one > that is not so treated acting as the positive supply electrode. > > My first observations are that the brown oxide deposits have flaked off > to a degree, but not completely. This material is floating upon the bath > and I also found that the resistance associated with this coating does not > appear too large to prevent me from driving the current to 1 or 2 amps as > desired. I was surprised that it did not exhibit much if any additional > resistance as compared to the original sample. > > I did note that green flakes of material have shown up in the > electrolyte that I have not seen before when using sodium carbonate. This > is an interesting consequence of the heat treating as far as can be > determined. > > The experiment has now been running for around 6 hours and the bath > temperature has been recorded as well as the input power applied at several > times. I have been registering the results within an Excel file and chart > in an effort to reveal anything of interest. I have collected a fair > amount of data associated with the other experimental procedure using a > untreated set of nickels that is also charted. > > I will continue to run the experiment looking for any unusual behavior > or heating. > > Dave >
