posted 01-11-99 07:48 PM         

"Would you get this up on the meth board - this is why they are having doing the Fester Formula. Those damn dimmer switches don't knock voltage - just amps. Oh well, I always use a plating rectifier."

And now the text of his explanation:

"Let me help you out here. This is a simple and convenient process. It's also nowhere near so original as I claimed in the book. This is a well established field of science. Only the particular application is original. Engaging in hyperbole is half the fun of writing a book, ya know? Also I'm not experimenting along with you. My, work on this procedure was done 18 months ago, and I now consider this particular procedure to be obsolete and passe. However, to do the more advanced procedure, you have to be able to do the basic procedure correctly.

To start with, the mechanism 6f reduction is correct. It's called hydrogenolysis of benzyl esters. It's the same mechanism that occurs in standard hydrogenations of ephedrine in acetic acid solution. See Organic Reactions Volume 7 for a review, you'll find those ephedrine reductions in that article. For a quick read, go to Reductions in Organic Chemistry by Hudlicky pages 150-51, first edition.

Now for how to properly apply current to the cell. Page 23 of Advanced Techniques: "The best and most convenient DC electric power source is a rectifier such as those commonly used by electroplaters to do lab scale electroplating and testing. Such rectifiers cost $500-600 when new(much cheaper used, and cheap generic equivalents are available). Using such a device, the current flow is easily controlled by turning up or down the applied voltage output of the rectifier. The higher the applied voltage, the more current flows through the cell. E=IR."

I work in this field. I'm an electroplating chemist, and do this every day. One starts at zero applied voltage, then the voltage is ramped up a step at a time until the desired current flow is reached. Then your cathode will automatically set itself in the proper range of around -.6 to -.8 volts versus standard calomel electrode. This isn't adding something new to the procedure, the two measures are interchangable when this method of reaching desired current flow is used. See the graphs of current flow versus standard voltage of the cathode in the Krishnan articles cited in the book and at this website. References are cited for a reason - they contain useful information! There are lots more references for this procedure, but the ones cited are enough to teach the subject.

When one applies 12 ½ volts to the cell, the cathode will be around -5 to -6 volts versus standard calomel electrode, even if the current flow is pinched down to the proper range. This is far beyond any useful level. The most extreme standard voltage I've come across in the scientific lit is about 2 volts versus standard electrode. To generate hydrogen at palladium, nowhere near this level is required. One doesn't have to worry about being under voltage, the cell and solution will require enough voltage to push the current and generate hydrogen at cathode.

The guy who fixes rectifiers at the plant I work at tells me that my two fallback methods of getting DC current into this cell are losers. If you take a car battery as power source and wire in a dimmer knob, he tells me all I'm doing is lowering the current that flows, the voltage stays the same-12 volts. He also tells me that the typical toy train transformer delivers constant voltage, and turning the knob on one of those just turns up and down the current. I use a plating rectifier, and couldn't imagine actually using something else. If one wants to use batteries, one could anodize with a 6 volt lantern battery, and then run the reduction with two “D" cells in series to get 3 volts. That'll get you in the ballpark on voltage and current.

Anodizing is required, it's part of the standard procedure using in all-the articles in the scientific lit I've come across. It makes black palladium on the surface of the ingot. You can also achieve the same effect by flaming the metal surface.

I like that idea of adding a little Pd on C to the reduction solution to catch and make use of the hydrogen that gets fizzed off the cathode.

This more advanced procedure is found in the Krishnan articles. Since the late 170's, people have stopped using "mass electrodes"(an ingot) and have turned to plating thin layers of black palladium on graphite. To plate a 100 square cm graphite face, put .35 gr PdCl2 and 1.25 grams ammonium chloride in 300 ml of 3N hydrochloric. The graphite only needs to be clean and grease free. A rinse with acetone will remove grease. If one doesn't know how free of metallic contamination the graphite is, it can be soaked in 10% HC1, rinsed and dried. That's all the pre=plating prep that graphite needs.

On the opposite side of the container, use two layers of Kling Tite rubber, and fill them with 2-5,Yo sulfuric acid solution. This prevents chlorine generation at anode. Chlorine in the plating solution will mess it up. Apply 2-3 milliamps per square cm of face. This requires around two volts. The palladium plates as a black palladium that needs no anodizing. Plateout occurs within 3 hours. Then this more active cathode can be used just like an ingot. The anode is lead or graphite.

posted 01-11-99 09:37 PM         

How do day do dat??

posted 01-12-99 03:05 AM         

quote:

---

Oh well, I always use a plating rectifier."

---

Can I make a just simple all around life suggestion? Question authority, but, keep in mind here we are all working together, where you see problems in anything offer a solution for discussion if you can, it comes across a lot easier for everyone to take and will possibly get more ears turned in your direction.

posted 01-12-99 04:24 AM         

Also, absolute used silver as apposed to palladium, clever aussie! The electrolytic route still looks like a lot of work for the ammounts produced? But still, I'm no expert.

posted 01-12-99 05:45 PM         

UF alleges to be an electroplating chemist: certainly he knows that a variable resistor such as a dimmer switch does in fact constitute a voltage drop , and therefore as a result reduces the voltage and consequently the current. If E=IR as he correcly alleges, then would it not follow that I=E/R?? If we increase the subtrahend, will not the result be lessened??

Although my original comment "How do it do dat?" seems to have been too harsh, for which I apologize to anyone offended, it is not without a sense of the humerous that I read and derive value from the many posts, particularly those from assumed or projected authority figures.

UF refers to my description of him as being "an all knowing font of knowledge", whereas the descriptive was (approximately) "an all knowing font of ESOTERIC knowledge," the differentiation being key to it's intent and derivative of the reference to humor above.

In ancient times, as well as modern, "hidden" or esoteric knowledge was often communicated in such a way as to provide "blinds" or mis-information so that the "un-initiated" could not travel the paths, or replicate the experiments. Some of this "deception" was for the good of the traveller, particularly, for example, Kundalini studies, the energy of which could cause insanity or perversion if not appropriately channelled.

Frequently, initiates would get great humor in inserting ludicrous or wrong information into their mystical writings, and you can be sure that such a phenomenon takes place in these hallowed halls also.

UF says " Engaging in hyperbole is half the fun of writing a book, ya know?" I'm sure he was laughing greatly.

Want some more hyperbole?

I PERSONALLY have made this process work using flamed silver, Pd/C granules, and 92 PSI H2 @ 6 to 10 MA/Cm^2 in a totally sealed system running 11.5 volts across a three cell lambskin/pottery/ membrane structure; with 80 to 90% efficiency. Further, the whole set up cost < $30, except for the power supply and Pd/C.

Some of the people who post for others have styles that are different: but I believe that they have intimate knowledge of each other, particularly when they shave. Another laugh for me: I hope for you too!

In closing I offer only an admonition to anyone who needs it to use discretion in what you belive that is posted here. The whole thing is a hoot: to be taken like MYST or other similar games: clues are here, everything that is needed is here or referred to, and there IS the goal that can be attained.

On the other hand, it is good to be at least a little circumspect, since the reference above to the Kundalini danger is appropriate here also.

One does not bypass Michael, to get to the Tree, without taking on huge responsibilities to his or her own well being. Therefore tread carefully, and prepare well.

All Paths lead to the same place.

For those who have ears to hear; and those who see pearls across the mud: good luck and God bless.

posted 01-13-99 12:45 PM         

Not in the same league as Eulysis by any stretch of imagination in chemistry: 3rd semester Organic caused me to switch my major from chemistry!! (to physics)

I'm really a generalist and happy to have this forum for discussion, since alt and rec NG's are wastelands by comparison.

Out of curiosity, does UF's consideration of the techniqe under discussion as obsolete arise from experience with a pressurized system??

posted 01-14-99 12:00 AM         

So

you need a legitimate power supply to give you the DC voltage and sufficient current to do the electrochemical cell requirements.

A variac is not a phase control device. It doesn't distort the sine wave except by amplitute - doesn't chop it up to achieve the "dimmimg effect".

Get one of these in the 10 amp rance put the output into a full wave bridge diode array and then filter capacitors and then through a variable solid state regulator. Cheap at RAdio Shack. With schemtics . Some time you just gotta have the ritght stuff.

posted 01-15-99 10:24 PM         

What I find helpful is to look for the "gems in the threads", like needles in the haystack. (Not QUITE that bad) For instance, after the confusion on amperage/voltage etcetera in another thread, and my post to Wizard (if I recall), I wondered if it would be possible to have an Under Voltage situation: my concern and strategy arising from an intent to minimize the current to some small fraction of what was elsewhere described as the theoretical maximum. Also, inasmuch as a standard voltage reference source measurement of the
cathode potential was going to be very difficult in my sealed system, without major re-fabrication, I needed to know if I just "made hydrogen", could I do so without worrying about NOT accomplishing the goal.

If I recall my question was (more or less)"If you are generating H2, can you be in an under voltage situation?" That was almost 2 weeks ago, if I recall.

THAT remained unanswered until Strike posted UF's memo which was the beginning of THIS thread, and lo and behold, there like a shining little "pearl", in paragraph 5, line 5, is "One doesn't have to worry about being under voltage,..."

By that time I had empirically discovered the truth of that statement, but it still just brings tears to my eyes, dontchaknow!

This whole thing has been a ton of fun since the first posting using lead core sinker line and mercury last year in alt.drugs.whatever. Some things strike your fancy, and you just have to pursue them: this process produces fine honey that does not bite back: pharmaceutical grade, even!

And, it is environmentally safe, pretty easy, and does not make unsavory smells.

NOW: electrolytic fentanyl?? Who knows!

Thanks, UF!

posted 02-08-99 03:20 PM         

So you are saying that even if I didn't do it correctly I would still have good results??

Extract, filter, don't worry about drying and re-dissolving in glacial with H2SO4: just add enough dilute H2SO4 electrolyte and go for it??

If this is true, you just saved a hell of a lot of time for a lot of people.

You specified ephedrine HCl. Would this also be true of PPA?

posted 02-16-99 06:28 PM         

Went to another and got it no problem: and thus found for $30 bucks probably a couple of years worth of reductive material.

Some people have reported difficulty in getting the original gizmo to work: I have only been encouraged by others who know a hell of a lot more than I do about catalysts and reductions, and pressure. I do not know why a mizzable 100 PSI makes a lot of difference in entrainment of hydrogen in catalytic matrices, or frankly why such entrainment enhances the process.

A reference would be appreciated. I think I followed a train to a website of the "Italian Electrochemistry" site, somehow connected to Wizard, but I haven't been there yet enough to see if it is a help.

UF recommends reducing the voltage through reducing the input to the rectifiers: I recommend reducing the current flow through the series circuit including the potentiometer by turning the resistance in the little sucker up or down, therefore raising or reducing the voltage drop across it and therefore reducing or raising current through it, which of course is the same current through the cell, being as how they are in series.

My CURRENT (snort, guffaw![ugh!]) understanding of your post is that you recommend a parallel circuit which will make the voltage across the cell the same as the voltage across the variable resistor, and control the current flowing through the cell by using the variable resistor as a shunt.

It would seem to me that the WATTAGE capacity of the variable resistor, at least in my setup, would have to be around 300. Big sucker: real big. I've seen resistors that could handle that, but they were wrapped around ceramic cores and glowed in the dark. (and weren't variable.) (And, wired in this way the voltage will stay constant across the reaction vessel, but current will vary through it. Well, you will get a voltage drop out of a real world situation as the power supply approaches a dead short adcross the output, but theoretically)

UF also stated that you could not be under voltage if you were making hydrogen: the voltage it takes across the whole shebang is immaterial. That's why I really liked your amperage controlled power supply idea, although I have not followed up on it because of being otherwise occupied.

Anyway, thanks for the reference to the textbooks. I'll take you up on it this evening.

posted 02-16-99 07:31 PM         

http://www.xmission.com/~gastown/chemistry/dde1.htm

This site has access to the following. I hope to spend some time there getting educated: perhaps a faint possibility, but I'll see.

Electrochemistry in the World

A good starting point for a travel in the World of Electrochemistry

University of Torino
The Electrochemistry Gateway

The Electrochemistry Group @ University of Liverpool

The International Society of Electrochemistry

Electrochemical Science and Technology Information Resource (ESTIR)

Society of Chemical Industry - Electrochemical Technology Group

posted 02-19-99 11:40 AM         

ZAKKER:

Well bite my butt.

I guess i was just lucky that 6 volts did the job: perhaps with the pot in the mix.

You've complicated my job: just bought the whole set of crap from radio shack to build the voltage variable LM317 power supply: the whole set of 42 parts cost approx $100: looks like an all day job to build.

Instructions are in part # 62-1337 "Building Power Supplies" also a radio shack.

Did not bet you, thank god.

do not have to add personal experiences to thread in "General Discussion" on "Got MIlk?" [GAG]

posted 02-19-99 08:22 PM         

book 7.99
mntg hrdwre 1.39
heat sink .99
4 AGC fuses 1.29
power cord 1.49
5K control pot 1.49
5K control 1.49
LN317 T volt reg 1.99
1 ohm 10 w r's .99
1.5 amp 100 V bridge 1.19
LED indicator light 2.19
2 10 ohmers .99
0-15V pnl meter 4.97
binding posts 2.59
knobs 1.29
fuse holder 1.59
RH screw?? 1.49
pckg nuts 1.49
heat shrink wrap 1.99
RH screw 1.49
pkg2 50 ohm 10 w .99
50V diode .99
4.7 MFD cap 35V .49
insulated stand offs 2.19
2200MFD 50VDC cap3.49
DPDT switch 4.89
transformer 9.99
DPDT miniature 3.49
IC board 3.99
project box that sucks I'm taking it back
5.89
8 oz fine solder 7.99 (man has that stuff gone up!!)
little baby cushion feeties 1.79
8 packages miscellaneous resistors @ .49=4.00
subtotal 88.50
taxes for the WOD 6.86
grand Fing total 95.36

OK OK so take out the book Prob'ly closer to $85.00

posted 02-20-99 05:34 PM         

Thanks fer the tip, 'Zakker:

Tell the truth, I just found the circuit in the book with the parts list, handed it to de dweeb and said "get 'em"! Hell, I KNEW they'de be about maybe $30,$35 bucks, 'cause I'd READ that's how much they were 'cause (guess who) had SAID so!!

Well, I'm just having fun here: you had never said what I had assumed: you had said something about the cost assuming an existing 12 volt source or something.

WELL, to make a longer story short (too late) was I surprised at the cash register to see the check out price, and seeing as how the dweeb had taken about 25 minutes to gather all the parts (inefficiently, but whatever), I just didn't have the heart, or guts to say "TOO F'IN' MUCH! and boogie out the side door.

BUT having just gone by an electronics store and having purchased a COMPLETED power supply INCLUDING amp and voltmeter, zero to 15 DC V, and up to 2.5 A, for FAR LESS MONEY, you can be sure that my NEXT STOP is the SAME R.S., where I'm goin' to PISS OFF a dweebe with a MASSIVE RESTOCK opportunity.

Oh well, he prob'ly ain't doin' shit anyway!!

Jeeze, this is fun!

I'll keep my lips lubed, but don't get yer hopes up!

posted 02-21-99 03:35 AM         

Please describe this ready made power supply you bought. I admit it I 'm as lazy as the next sack of shit.

posted 07-27-99 01:16 AM         

Dwarfer,
Any comments on your early work here?

------------------
'Cuda65

posted 07-27-99 12:31 PM         

Much has been elucidated about the mechanism, mostly by Wizard x:

I've been thru my own knotholes about the topic, and have tried a bunch of things: some with reasonable results: mostly not.

My present predilictions are back to the pressurized route and direct reductions ala hints from Lone Ranger from 1988 and Masterhand.

The ZnCl2 route works, but yields suck and quality is not what I am aiming for.

D-VII, to be launched as Fedro-Dwarfer, in recognition of Worlocks first identification of the water filter housing as a candidate for the bomb housing, and including features of D-V, using water pressure and side stream vapor entrainment, should be available within 30 days.

This will make experiments under pressure easy, and visible and avoid the onerous sealing problems associated with the 3" ABS pipe which was so off-putting.

I think the question about the power supply was addressed by me in a thread about a month ago--"Cheap power supply" or something like that.

Also, I am waiting for verification of the worlds easiest 100% effective (almost?) extraction technique. told Worlockian about it and I think he's doing independent trials.

One thing I have noticed about myself, and I think I am not the only one subject to this malady,

is the presumptious optomistic EUREKA share-it-with-the-world success immediately after having one: then later thinking "geeze, that was premature: this is not a world beater after all".

so I am trying to be a little more constrained in my old age.

best regards,

posted 07-28-99 01:08 PM         

you using plastic pipe or what?? I'm always interested in new designs.

You are using one gm as a test? Probably smart, but it is easy to screw away one gram: but you probably aren't sloppy like me.

Is the overpressure device tested? My understanding is that anything over 65 PSI or so is not needed. (I have yet to have anyone tell me why this is so.)

You do not need to pre anodize that long: just a minute or so, if at all for AG.

Given the equilibrium concerns of ester-alcohol, and the yields (at least for me) of the ZnCl2 technique, it appears to me that the next pressurized tests for me will be exploration of direct reduction of interesting stuff via ??20%?? <Wish I knew for sure!> sulf over Pd/C.

Let us know how you built your unit: I've not sen any 4" pipe match ups with the next larger sized pots.

I like the Monsters// FMAN??

What monsters be they to whom you refer??

Gimmee the site.

You disagree with the posting about eph and pseudo > preciousness equally?

You think the microcellulose might make it thru evaporation and re-condensation?

How about posting the site to which you refer.

Here's a good source for some basic training:

http://genchem/wisc.edu/labdocs/

Barracuda, in reviewing this thread, I would say that my only corrections (other than my mistake about the V drop across th variable resistor: it was I drop only){Bozakium was right: I was wrong)

is that the first success was at 13.8 V. Interestingly, (stupidly), I became susequently convinced that lower voltages were the way to go, and did not return to the higher V's until Sky did his famous hot wire and silver dollar routine.

Then, Wizard X clarified the matter with his posting on electro reductive products @ differing voltages.

For me, the two that have worked are the high V routine, and the ZnCl2 technique: never had a damn bit of luck with Ester.

Until my Burning MAn experiences are replicated with super- clean easy -on -you product I will continue on a quest for the perfect technique commensurate with ecological sensitivity.