EXCESS HEAT IN ELECTROLYSIS EXPERIMENTS AT

ENERGETICS TECHNOLOGIES

I. Dardik, T. Zilov, H. Branover, A. El-Boher, E. Greenspan,

B. Khachatorov, V. Krakov, S. Lesin, and M. Tsirlin
Energetics Technologies Ltd.
Omer, Israel
lesin@energetics.co.il

11th

Presented at the
International Conference on Cold Fusion, ICCF-11
Marseilles, France
November 1 - 6, 2004

CONTENTS
1. Presentation objective
2. SuperWaves used for driving the cell
3. Review of glow discharge experiments
4. Description of ET electrolytic cells
5. Pd Cathode and its pretreatment
6. Excess heat obtained
7. Excess tritium
8. Material analysis
2

PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES
1. Review of SuperWave principles
2. Review of Glow Discharge Experiments
3. Description of 3 ET electrolytic cell experiments
that resulted in significant excess heat generation:
Experiment #

56

64a

64b

Cycle
Loading time (s)
Excess heat (EH) (%)
Duration of EH (h)
Excess energy (EE) (MJ)
Specific* EH (W/g Pd)
Specific* EE (KeV/Pd atom)

4
80
80
300
3.1
11
13.5

1
5
2500
17
1.1
71
4.8

2
16
1500
80
4.6
62
20 (24.8)

* - pertaining to effective part of cathode ( 6 x 0.7 cm )

EC are driving by SuperWaves

Superwave form signal
generation using
LabView software

Parameters
Operator

Experimental
system

set up

Low
current

Current amplifier

SuperWaves formation principles

F0 (t ) = A0sin 2 (0 t)

F1 (t ) = A0sin 2 (0 t)(1 + A1 sin 2 (1t ))

(t) =

(t) =

sin

sin

t)[1

+ A

t)[1

+ A

sin

sin

t )( 1 + A

t )( 1 + A

sin

sin

t )( 1 + A

t ))]

sin

t )))]

Glow Discharge Cell

Cooling Water Input

Cooling Water
Output

Ground

Palladium Layer

Tungsten Wire
20 mm

D+ Plasma

Stainless
Steel Body

100 mm

Conceptual Design

Cell Assembly

Experimental Results with thin Palladium film (about

1 m) on Stainless Steel Body
ETG-1

ETG-1

80

4
3.5

60

50

2.5

Power, W

Energy,kJ

70

40
30

Waves

1.5

20

10

0.5

Waves

DC
Shut Down

10

12

14

Time,h

Ein

Eout

Ex ( Excess Energy = Eout - Ein )

10

12

Time, h
Pin

Pout

Maximum Excess Power = 3.7 x Input Power

Total Excess Energy = 6.7 x Input Energy
10

Experimental Results with thick Palladium foil (100 m)

ETG-2

ETG-2
280

1.8

260
240

1.6

220

1.4
1.2

160

Power, W

Energy,kJ

200
180
140
120
100

1
0.8

80
60

0.6

40

0.4

20
0
-20 10

0.2

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

Time,h

44

46

48

50

52

0
10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44

46

48

Time,h

Ein

Eout

Ex(Excess Energy=Eout-Ein)

Pin

Pout

Maximum Excess Power = 0.8 x Input Power

Total Excess Energy = 0.8 x Input Energy
11

50

52

Excess Heat Generation during 20 days

Glow Discharge Experiment Cell ETG-2-18
1.8

150

1.6
100
1.4
50

1
0
0.8
0.6

COPE, %

Power, W

1.2

-50

0.4
-100
0.2
0
0

-150
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460

Time, h

Pin

Pout

COPE=(Pout-Pin):Pin x 100%

12

Excess Energy during 20 days

Energy Production from Cell ETG-2-18

2500

Energy, kJ

2000

1500

1000

500

0
0

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460

Ein Time,h
Eout

Eex
13

Heat After Death

Energy Output after shutting down of GD Cell ETG-3-22
90

Eout

80
70

E, kJ

60
50
40
30
20

Thermal Energy Stored in GD Cell SS body (m*cp*T)

10
0

Time, hr

8
14

ET Electrolytic Cell
Teflon
Recombiner
Electrolyte

T4
T5

Aluminum
Alumina
0.1M LiOD in low tritium content D2O (230 ml)

EC is inside a Teflon beaker that is placed inside an isoperibolic calorimeter

15

Electrolytic Cell

Three cells are immersed in a

constant temperature water
bath of +2.50C 0.250C

16

Cathode & Pre-treatment

50 m Pd foil, prepared by

Dr. Vittorio Violante (ENEA Frascatti, Italy)

Annealed at 870oC in vacuum for 1h

Etched:
- in Nitric Acid 65-67%; 1 min

7 mm
60 mm

- in Aqua Regia 1:1 water solution; 1 min

Rinsed:
- D2O four times
- Ethanol 95% twice
- Ethanol Absolute once

Dried:
in vacuum at ambient temperature for 24 h
17

Power

Typical Calibration Curve for Electrolytic Cell Calorimeter

75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

Delta T

18

Block diagram
Cathode resistance

LCR

PC
Analyzing,
displaying, printout
Data Logger

Wave form
Current,
Voltage

Amplifier

Temperatures (5)

Measured Parameters:
- Input Current

Current Superwave
Temperature

- Input Voltage
- Wall Temperatures

Cell

Water bath

T4 and T5
- Resistance of cathode
for monitoring loading
(four probe AC method)
19

Study of Influence of Modulations on Loading

Changeable
parameters

1st level of modulation

Constant parameters

20

Study of Influence of Modulations on Loading

Changeable
parameters

2nd level of modulation

Constant parameters

21

Study of Influence of Modulations on Loading

Changeable
parameters

3rd level of modulation

Constant parameters
22

Study of Influence of Modulations on Loading

1.

1st level
of modulation

2nd level of
modulation
3rd level of
modulation

Of-line RR0 versus time for Foil

N056

(Dr.Violante)

23

Study of Influence of Modulations on Loading

2.

Of-line RR0 versus time for Foil

N056

(Dr.Violante)

24

Study of Influence of Modulations on Loading

3.

Of-line RR0 versus time for Foil N056 (Dr.Violante)

25

Study of Influence of Modulations on Loading

Diagram loading versus level of modulation
j

60
2

RR0

1.8

50

1.75

40
30

1.7

20
1.65

10

1.6

Current density, mA/cm

RR0

1.85

0
1

Level of modulation

Foil N056 (Dr.Violante)

26

Study of Influence of Modulations on Loading

Diagram loading versus level of modulation
100
j

90
80
70

1.9
RR0

60
50

1.85

40
1.8

30
20

1.75

1.95

RR0

Current density, mA/cm

10
1.7

0
1 2 3 3 2 1 1 2 3 3 2 1 2 3 2 1 2 3 3 3 3
Level of Modulation

Foil N051 (Dr.Violante)

27

Excess Power; Exp. # 56

300 h

Average Pout ~6.9 watts

Average Pinet ~3.9 watts

COPE=(Pout-Pinet):Pinet (6.9-3.9):3.9 0.8

Excess Power of up to ~3.5 watts; Average ~2.7 watts for ~300 h

28

Excess Energy; Exp. # 56

Excess energy of ~3.1 MJ

29

Excess Power; Exp. # 64a

17 h
COPE=(Pout-Pinet):Pinet (20-0.74):0.74 25

Average Pout ~20 watts

Pout=KT

Average
Pinet=Iin*Vin
PPinet
dis ~0.74 watts

Excess Power of up to 34 watts; Average ~20 watts for 17 h

30

Excess Energy; Exp. # 64a

Output Energy
Excess Energy

Input Energy~0.033MJ

Excess energy of ~1.1 MJ

31

Temperature Evolution, Exp. # 64a

T3
T2

T1

T4
T5

T4
T5

Tbath
32

Current & Voltage; EXP. # 64a

T=T4-T5

Average Current Density = 7.09 mA/cm2

Cell Voltage, V

33

R/Ro & Power; EXP. # 64a

Loading is relatively low (~0.8)

34

Excess Power; Exp. # 64b

COPE=(Pout-Pinet):Pinet (12-0.72):0.72 15
80 h

Average Pout ~12 watts

Average Pinet ~0.72 watts

Excess Power of up to 32 watts; Average ~12 watts for 80 h

35

Excess Energy; Exp. # 64b

Energy production from Cell ETE-4-64, second run
5.00E+06

Ein

4.50E+06

Eout

Ex=Eout-Ein

4.00E+06

Energy, Joule

3.50E+06
3.00E+06
2.50E+06
2.00E+06
1.50E+06
1.00E+06
5.00E+05
0.00E+00
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Time, h

Excess energy of ~4.6 MJ

36

Temperature Evolution, Exp. # 64b

T3
T2

T1

T4
T5

T4
T5

Tbath
37

T, Current Density & Voltage ; EXP. # 64b

T=T4-T5

Average Current Density = 8.37 mA/cm2

Cell Voltage, V

38

R/Ro & Power; Exp. # 64b

Loading relatively low (~0.8)

39

Excess Tritium in # 64

Tritium concentration measured at end of #64 analysis ~ 250% of

reference
~625 cm3 of D2O has been added to make-up for evaporation; initial
inventory was 230 cm3
Assuming TDO/D2O evaporation rate ~ 1.0
Estimated T effective concentration ~ 750%
This amount of tritium corresponds to <1J negligible as compared
with the 5.7MJ excess energy generated.

40

Material Analysis

Diagnostics:
Auger Electron Spectrometry
Scanning Electron Microscopy-Energy Dispersive
Spectrometry SEM-EDS
Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM)
Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry (SIMS)

41

Material Analysis

# 64 vs. 63; SEM-EDS

Surface of Pd foil after rolling and annealing at 8700C:

sample #64

sample #63

42

View of Typical Black Spot on # 64 and its composition

SEM-EDS

Element
Wt %
At %
____________________________
C
35.77
52.48
O
26.19
28.84
Na
4.92
3.77
Al
0.43
0.28
Si
1.05
0.66
Pt
0.39
0.04
S
1.44
0.79
Cl
10.68
5.31
Pd
2.55
0.42
K
11.07
4.99
Ca
5.52
2.43
Total
100.00
100.00
_____________________________

43

AES profiles of Pd, C, O and Cl of Pd foils #63 and # 64

1.0
Pd-63

At. parts

0.8

Pd-64

0.6
0.4

C-63
C-64

0.2

O-63

0.0

Cl-64

Cl-63
0

20

40
0
Depth, A

60

After etching in Aqua Regia

80

44

Sample 64. SIMS depth profiling.

Total
5

10

Pt
S

H
C

10
Counts

CNO

Pd

10

10

100

200

300

400
0

Depth, A

500

600

45

Spatial distribution of selected isotopes measured by SIMS in #64

a D, b - 32S, c - total isotopes content, d - 195Pt.
Scale bar - 30 m.

46

The dislocations in Pd foils after annealing.

TEM

Dislocation density #64

#63
3x1010, cm-2
6x1010, cm-2

47

Plastic deformation of Pd foil caused by D2 absorption.

Planes of sliding (111) are visible.
Sample #64

48

The area that is shown in the previous picture by an arrow.

49

Sample #56

Contact area

Working area
50

Brittle destruction of Pt Wire Sample #64

51

Summary of Material Analysis

Pd surface is covered at least with two types of impurities. The first
one is a lubricant used at a rolling process with Pd during plastic
deformation of the metal. The second one is a result of adsorption of
air components by Pd surface.
The lubricant stains are of various sizes and configurations and
present on surface of all samples before and after the electrolysis.
Annealing at 8500 does not fully remove the lubricant's components
from Pd surface.
The density of dislocations and the average size of grains in sample #
64 are twice higher, than in the reference sample.
Nuclear reaction product can not be detected on surface zone due to
high concentration of impurities. No He measurement has been
attempted.
52

SUMMARY

Significant amount of excess heat has been generated in 3 experiments

using 2 Pd foils.

Dardiks modified SuperWaves have been used for current drive in all the
three experiments.

The average current density was relatively low: < 10 mA/cm2

The maximum excess power was 2500%. This range of excess power is
suitable for commercial applications (although the operating temperatures
were too low for such applications).

The maximum excess energy generated with a single Pd foil is 5.7 MJ.

This corresponds to a specific energy of 24.8 KeV per Pd atom.

The highest average power density obtained is ~70 W/g Pd (versus 20 to 50

W/g U in commercial fission reactors).
53

SUMMARY (cont.)

Significant increase in the tritium concentration in the electrolyte has been

observed. However, the amount of tritium produced is negligible as
compared with the excess energy generated.

No measurement of He has been attempted.

The Pd cathode surface was contaminated by what appears to be lubricant

from the roller used for pre-treatment as well as impurities adsorbed from
the air.

54