E-Cat World Collaborative Project: To Create Instruction Document on How to Replicate Parkhomov (Update)

UPDATE: We’re making some progress on this project! Anyone who would like to get involved in the collaboration is welcome to join.

We actually have two documents going on right now. We added a second document called the Reactor Detail Focus, which is just focusing on the design of the Parkhomov reactor itself (March 2015 edition). Here’s the link to the document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1baY5NrY28pABG-HihGRnlnIN1GMWvCFvS1r9wPIU_kg/edit Anyone who would like to have access to edit this document can submit a request via the document, or email me ([email protected])

There’s also an email discussion group we have set up for people involved in the project. If you’d like to join it you can request to subscribe at this link: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/parkhomov-instruction-project

The original document we started with is for other aspects of the Parkhomov experiment, such as testing protocols and safety procedures. It can be accessed here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Uix-Jd3kI2lPx-3ODEotFnIXPvLtFLpv8m7RFdmwVrU/edit?usp=sharing

As has been mentioned many times now, if we could see multiple successful replications of the Parkhomov experiment it would help in raising the profile of the Rossi Effect, and LENR in general, and bring it greater mainstream acceptance.

There has been some discussion here and elsewhere about whether it is possible to write a set of instruction on how a replicator can make an Alexander Parkhomov-style reactor, and run the same experiments he has done.

There is quite a lot of information out there in various places and formats on Parkhomov’s reactor, but it would be nice it it were possible to put together a set of fairly concise instructions that someone could give to a replicator, or take to a university science department or a laboratory, which they could follow to attempt a Parkhomov replication.

Since there are many knowledgeable people from all around the world carefully following LENR happenings, I thought it might be interesting to try a collaborative project and see if it would be possible for interested persons to participate in the creation of a document that could be used to guide researchers trying to replicate Parkhomov’s work.

Open source activities are often by their nature somewhat disorganized, with everyone working as volunteers, so it will be interesting to see how successful this attempt might be, and if something useful will be produced. I will try make it as easy as I can for people to contribute to the recipe document.

Here are some of my proposed my parameters for this project:

Instructions for this project should be how to build a copy of the reactor described in the March 26 report 

This is an obvious choice since it has lasted longer than any of Parkhomov’s designs so far. We will try and keep as close as we can to his published design, and the procedures he used. These instructions should not be to build a ‘newer improved version’ of the reactor.

Variations of the Reactor

By all means, these instructions can be adapted for other versions of reactors, but different designs should be put in separate documents and would fall outside the scope of the initial project. If this model of collaboration works, it could be repeated for other instructions.

How to contribute to the collaborative document:

I have created a Google document here that I will give access to anyone who wants it. To edit it, you will need access to it, and I will give access to anyone who makes a request through the document, or sends me an email address (send an email to [email protected] and put ‘Replication Instructions’ in the subject line)

If you don’t want to access the document, but you want to contribute content, you can put your suggestions in the comments below this thread, or in the permanent thread that will be created if the project takes off.

Project Leadership

I hope the group can work via consensus for the most part, but the project will need to have some kind of team leader — someone who makes final decisions about what gets in and what gets left out. If someone wants to volunteer for that role, please let me know of your interest.  If no one wants to, then I suppose I will by default be the chief editor, although I’m sure I’m not the most qualified in terms of science and technology.

Communication among Collaborators

As we carry out this project it will be most helpful to be able to discuss it with others. The Google doc system allows for comments between collaborators, so that could be very useful.

We also have a group set up on LENRConnect called Replication Cookbook, and there is a forum in there that can be used for discussion. You can join the group here: http://ecwconnect.ning.com/group/replication-cookbook (you’ll have to create an LENRConnect account if you don’t already have one)

We can also have a Skype group where collaborators can communicate via instant message. If you would like to be a part of this group, please let me know in an email ([email protected],com), and send me your skype ID. I will need to have you as a contact in order to add you to the Skype group.

There may be other modes of communication between collaborators that would work.

Purpose of the Document

Remember, the purpose of the document is to give instructions to someone on how to build the reactor, therefore the document should be clear, concise and well organized.

It may be necessary to provide a ‘best guess’ about a particular part or material used, if there is some uncertainty, and if we are making best guesses, that should be made clear in the document.

These instructions should not include theoretical speculations, critiques of the reactor, or suggestions for improvements to this particular design. If you want to provide instructions for a different design, by all means do so, but create a different document.

Permanent Thread on E-Cat World

If this project gets enough support, I will put a permanent thread on E-Cat World (below the Always Open thread) for the duration of this project where people can view the work in progress and comment.

Reference Sources

Information about this version of the reactor can be gleaned from a number of sources. Here are some key documents and videos that can be consulted for reference:

Results of Long-Term Testing of the New Variant of the Rossi Thermogenerator Model By Alexander Georgevich Parkhomov (English translation by Bob Higgins with Google Translate) Original document in Russian here. Peter Gluck’s translation here.

Alexander Parkhomov Presents at People’s Friendship University, March 26 (YouTube, Russian)

Transcription of Dr. Parkhomov’s Presentation on March (machine translated) 26 (www.unconv-science.org — original Russian transcription here)


There should be a strong disclaimer that goes along with these instructions. Anyone who attempts to build this reactor (or any other kind)  should take ALL NECESSARY SAFETY PRECAUTIONS when working with the materials described. These instructions are provided for educational purposes only, and anyone attempting to follow these instructions is responsible for ensuring they follow proper safety procedures. If you do not have the facilities, equipment, or skills to safely follow the instructions, you should not attempt to follow the instructions.

Anyway, I put this idea out there for people to consider. If you are interested, get in touch and let’s see if we can do this. If we don’t get enough contribution, the project will probably fail. It might be a useful effort; and I think it might be worth a try.

  • Matt Sevrens

    Thanks for taking the time to write this up! I hope we can all rally around this 🙂

  • radvar

    (Frank if this is too much please delete, I’ll save a copy for the google docs)

    An initial breakdown can include several key elements (tentative names):
    (following Bob Higgins’ translation of A. Parkhomov’s 3/26 presentation)
    – Reactor
    – Fuel
    – Heater Power Source
    – Temperature Output Measurement Devices

    – Tube
    – Filler
    – Sealant
    – Heater
    – Fuel Container
    – Thermocouple
    – Manometer

    Reactor Elements:
    – Precise dimensions?
    – What is it made of?
    – How to acquire?
    – Precise dimensions?
    – What is it made of? (“Ceramic” – what type?)
    – How to acquire?
    – Approximate quantity
    – What is it made of? (“Epoxy” – what type?)
    – How to acquire?
    – Sub-Components
    – – Tube?
    – – – Layers of Tubes?
    – – – Or “plaster” over wiring around tube?
    – – – What dimensions?
    – – – What composition of tube(s)? (What is it made of?)
    – – – If multiple tubes, how are inner and outer tube combined?
    – – – How to acquire tube(s)?
    – – – If “plaster” over wiring:
    – – – – What composition?
    – – – – Approximate completed thickness?
    – – – – Mixing directions?
    – – – – How to acquire?
    – – Wiring
    – – – What type? (“Kanthal A1” – what gauge?)
    – – – How to acquire?
    – – – – option: http://www.lightningvapes.com/products/kanthal-a1-resistance-wire
    – – – How many windings?
    – – – What terminations to connect to power source?
    Fuel Container
    – What composition (“Stainless steel” What quality?)
    – What dimensions?
    – How to acquire?
    – – What model?
    – – How to acquire?
    – – How attached?
    – – How configured to lead out of reactor?
    – – What terminations to connect to meter?
    – – What model?
    – – How to acquire?
    – – What terminations inside reactor?

    Reactor Assembly Sequence

    • Mats002

      Structure is very important, looks promising, evolve as you go!

    • TomR

      Thank you again Radvar.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Love it!

  • Kim

    Need 3d views of All related parts and their working positions. Each part needs specifications, Bill of Material
    and The best and most economical way or place to purchase.

    The we need operational parameters, size, volume, frequency, mass,balance, timing ect…

    From what I can see everything exists but must be compiled into a E-cat/LENR for Dummies with
    great attention to dangers and safety…


    • Kim

      And the information should be editable like Wiki…
      Collaborated upon in every aspect of design so
      that that the design grows with time and latest
      and greatest possibility of success.

      The easiest, most economical 1 time design that is
      continually being updated.

      Until replication becomes absolute

      It must be accessible to all of us in the most easily usable
      file formats available ect…


      • deleo77

        I agree, to do it right you would want to develop a full wiki that would include docs for instructions, trouble shooting tips, a dedicated forum etc. Of course Github has great wikis for their code repositories, but I am not sure if a Parkhomov Replication Wiki belongs on Github or not. It would be kind of cool if people could modify the instructions to improve upon them, kind of like open source software:


    • Owen Geiger

      Detailed 3D drawings may not be needed if people can buy stock parts off the shelf. Need to provide website address and part number for each item. It looks Parkhomov and MFMP are buying stock parts.

  • georgehants

    True community effort and sharing as everything should and could be in a fair and honest World.
    Warms the cockles of one’s heart.

    • Mats002

      With thanks to the Internet.

      • georgehants

        Mats, O yes and the good people on page, all with no profit.

  • Sanjeev

    I suggest inviting Parkhomov himself to add to the doc.
    May be he is busy, but no harm in asking. He may agree, seeing that this can lead to hundreds of replications around the world.

    • Ecat

      Excellent Idea!!!

      • ecatworld

        Great idea. I have invited him to participate.

  • Sanjeev

    Hows it blind leading blind?
    Its merely a matter of copying what is already in the reports and presenting in a pretty format. Perhaps some additional info, like links to online shops and safety protocols.

  • Gerard McEk

    Excellent initiative Frank!

  • Matt Sevrens

    Has Parkhomov responded yet to the graph doctoring allegations? I know people were claiming “compression artifacts” but I thoroughly explored that and was unable to recreate the effect.

  • Owen Geiger

    It would be helpful if the team leader wrote a draft outline that lists the key items needed. Most of the detailed information is buried within online documents. Once volunteers know what’s needed and where to put that information within the document then they can track it down and insert it in the final doc.

    Another suggestion: keep it simple. Think of this as a working draft. Most likely the design will change somewhat month to month, so I’d focus on getting the key facts together first and adding ‘extras’ later.

    • ecatworld

      Thanks for the good suggestions, Owen.

    • Owen Geiger

      Radvar already has a draft outline below. Way to go. That’s an excellent start.

  • Obvious

    Good luck with your new computer.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Yes, safety.
    Have some sand near by when working with lithium aluminum hydride to smother any fires if you can’t get a class D fire extinguisher (conventional ABC or BC fire extinguishers can intensify a fire involving LAH and should never be used). http://web.princeton.edu/sites/ehs/labsafetymanual/cheminfo/lah.htm
    I don’t plan on doing this replication but if I did I would not buy large amounts of LAH. Not just because it can ignite in moist air but it can also decompose upon standing if it is not stored properly (and your
    reaction won’t work). Therefore, I’d buy fresh LAH as I needed it and store it in a desiccator.

    • Agaricus

      Small quibble – abbreviating ‘lithium aluminium hydride’ to ‘LAH’ is a little confusing, as its chemical formula is actually LiAlH4.

      • Zack Iszard

        Much in chemistry nomenclature can be confusing. LAH is the common abbreviation used by chemists, as LAH is a frequently used and versatile reagent for reduction reactions of all kinds, and LAH is half as many characters in a lab notebook as LiAlH4.

        IMO, “LAH” is pretty tame of a chemical reference. Compare to these: http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/sillymolecules/sillymols.htm

    • Alan DeAngelis

      And can you be sure that the lithium aluminum hydride you have is still lithium aluminum hydride?
      I’d take just a tiny amount of it (the very tip of a spatula), safely put it into a test tube (don’t hold the tube. Clamp the tube.) that contains a little water and see if there is gas (hydrogen) evolution. This way if the reactor fails, you know that it is not due to having expired lithium aluminum hydride.
      LiAlH4 + 4 H2O → LiOH + Al(OH)3 + 4 H2

  • Chain Reaction (1996 movie) is now available for free on YouTube. They did a pretty good job of uploading the film with good HD quality. It stars Keanu Reeves, Morgan Freeman, and Rachel Weisz. It is not that great a movie (too many chase scenes), but the subject matter is very relevant to this forum and this thread in particular. Who know how long it will be available as movies often disappear quickly on YouTube due to copyright claims. Right now it’s free to see.


    • Mats002

      I did not know SHT had such a rough day. Things move more slowly here at ECW.

      • Alain Samoun

        LOL Yes,it is an SH.T. movie

    • Ivone

      There’s also The Saint starring Val Kilmer, Elizabeth Shue and a boiling cold fusion bottle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2D9nQW95oCQ

  • Stephen

    As well as building the device would it include procedures to operate the device? Or would this be in a seperate operations document or user manual? If so Procedures should include:
    1: preparation
    2: switch on (including the step wise power up)
    3: monitoring
    4: active control
    5: switch off
    6: clean up

    Also contingency procedures incase of anomaly. Including anything from emergency switch off. To power adjustment in case it is getting too hot or too cool etc.

    Maybe other procedures to Handel the material and safety mentioned by PMKD would also be a good idea.

    Identifying parameter limits could alert possible anomalies so a yellow warning or red anomally can be sent to allow time for safe contingency action.

    Also useful could be a report template in an appendix where data for the test could be voluntarily provided by the user in an easy to read and process format. This could include such information as the source of the used fuel and nickel as well as parameter data from the test such as duration of the test maximimum power and temperature and pressure etc and allow attachment of the raw data or a PDF report.

    Another template could contain an anomaly form to feed back problems and anomalies so that the community can analyse them for patterns and provide useful feed back.

    Regarding the parts maybe a part list would be good to maintain so that their reliability can be monitored.

    • ecatworld

      Thank you — great suggestions. An Operations section has been added to the table of contents.

      • Omega Z

        Would not MFMP & Bob Greenyer be the best source to begi this process. Followed by Parkhomov’s advice if he would.

        Then followed by input from others to be finally approved by MFMP, Bob Greenyer & Parkhomov. Possibly Bob Greenyer could edit some of his video footage from his trip to be included if it contains any helpful footage. We know that not everything gets put into words that may be noticed in the video…

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Indeed, no. 5 (“switch off”) should not be underestimated – some readers might remember Goethe’s „Zauberlehrling“. Apparently, even Rossi had at times problems to shut his E-Cats down. It has been spread that once during a runaway he had to phone Focardi (“The Master”) who advised him to pour nitrogen into the reactor, which he did – whereupon the reaction finally stopped.

      • Mr. Moho

        That’s what happened with Piantelli.


        Piantelli has an exciting story to tell of another experiment that,
        for few hours, was out of control. It was sometime around September
        1993, before Piantelli-Focardi group’s first published paper on the
        subject. Around 7 in the evening, he looked at the monitor for the
        experiment. Something didn’t look right. The temperature was increasing
        rapidly. He wasn’t sure what to do. Should he kill the experiment, and
        if so, how would he stop it?

        A rapidly increasing temperature in an enclosed steel container could
        be a big, big problem. He was afraid. He wondered whether he should
        leave the building. Instead he called Focardi in Milano—at 2 in the
        morning—and asked, “What should I do?” This was before Piantelli knew
        about the poisoning effect of deuterium. But Focardi came up with a
        workable idea: introduce nitrogen. And it worked. It stopped the
        uncontrolled temperature rise and killed the experiment.

        Piantelli didn’t know how hot the experiment had gotten before he
        killed it because the monitor eventually blacked out. However, the metal
        thermocouples inside the cell melted. This told him that the
        temperature exceeded 1450 C. Understandably, he was angry because these
        experiments take a long time to run and he had to abandon it
        “It’s not good when they run too hot,” Piantelli said. “400 C is a much better range.”

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Thanks for the correction. I apologize to Rossi.

  • ecatworld

    Thanks very much — good ideas. A safety section has been added to the table of contents.

  • ecatworld

    Hi John, sorry I must have missed that email somehow.

    Could you resend — [email protected], and also request access to this document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Uix-Jd3kI2lPx-3ODEotFnIXPvLtFLpv8m7RFdmwVrU/edit?usp=sharing

  • jgreenhall

    If anyone in the San Diego region is interested in attempting to *use* the document to replicate the findings – I’d be happy to fund the effort. And to contribute back any learnings to the document.

  • Obvious

    Handy link for thermocouple values. The link is for type K, but others can be found on the site.

    Note the maximum temperature range – the problem is the thermocouple wire insulation failing if cheap ones are used, not so much the wire itself.
    If the thermocouple wire shorts to itself in a colder area, then that is the temperature it will read.
    If a thermocouple wire shorts to an operating heater coil, you can probably kiss your meter or data logger goodbye. Maybe even yourself if you grab it to see what is happening.


    (No comment on the company, good or bad, implied.)

  • Owen Geiger

    Excellent story. Same thing applies to what we’re dealing with here. A 10-15 minute video of Parkhomov carefully showing how he built his reactor and ran the experiment would make it far easier to reproduce. It’s the old “a picture is worth a thousand words”.

  • I did a quick Google search for 99.999% pure nickel and found two possibilities in 2 minutes. Spend an hour looking and you could probably find allot more. (Excuse the double post, but I thought this was important. You cannot make a good cake without the right ingredients.)

    Nickel from China


    Pure nickel from Ohio

    They claim they have 99.999% pure nickel and are custom work suppliers.


    Get allot and then resell to E-Cat experimenters.

  • I just spoke on the phone with GFS Chemicals, Inc. of Columbus, Ohio. They said they sell 99.998% pure nickel powder for $166.60 for 50 grams. He said they do not test for grain size so he could not tell me how big the grains are. I do not know if the grains have sufficient surface protrusions. I told the company representative about Rossi, E-Cat World, etc, and how companies all over the world are interested in replicating the Rossi effect.

  • Bernie777

    Good Job Frank!!!

  • Rical

    The efficiency of the réaction is very bigger in a little range of temperature, inside 50°C around 1050°C. When the reactor is inside, the temperature increase fast, then the temperature falls and this cycle continue. Rossi said in 2011 that this is one of the ways to secure the reactor, too heat it to stop the reaction. Rossi found a way to regulate this in the Lugano 2014 test, but on a temperature cycle of 4 minutes probably to reduce the COP. Also after that MFMP publish “around 1050°C”, Rossi publish a progress in the efficiency of the COP. The regulation must learn the efficiency for each temperature, modelize the process and accurately adjust the input heating to maximize the COP, in a system that is very not linear and slowly changing along the days.

    • Mats002

      I think what you say is very important, do you have a reference to your sources (link, paragraph etc)?

  • Obvious

    Re: ceramic tubes.
    Check out these bad boys.
    Expensive, but check the specifications out. Maybe non-wetting doesn’t help the reaction, but it would help getting the stuff out.

  • Obvious

    The Parkhomov Watt meter.
    I posted this earlier, but it got lost down the page.

    Instruction manuals available on the site.