Looks like the bid must have been made by July 16th (p1). There are various requirements that "within X days of Y event, Z action must be performed" but I can't find anything about when the award/approval happens or what dates they expect to start/finsh.
This we knew:
3.1.2 The design shall use circular coils around each main face cusp axis. The device shall use emitter electron gun arrays and an ion beam drive. The machine will be operated in magnetic fields with pulsed currents. WB8 shall be operated at a magnetic field strength of approximately 0.8 Tesla, which represents an increase of 8 times the magnetic field strength of previous WB machines. Improvements over previous WB machines in WB confinement, ion energy and fusion reactivity are expected as a result of these changes to WB machine design.
... but I said "HOLY S**T!" when I read this:
3.2.1 Enhanced Ion Drive with PB11 (proton/boron 11): Based on the results of WB8 testing, and the availability of government funds the contractor shall develop a WB machine (WB8.1) which incorporates the knowledge and improvements gained in WB8. It is expected that higher ion drive capabilities will be added, and that a “PB11”
reaction will be demonstrated.
That's right: the follow-on option will burn p-B11! I don't know if anyone caught this before, but it was sure news to me.
3.3.1 The contractor shall develop an enhanced ion drive system that is compatible with Wiffleball 8.1 and projected future wiffleballs. The ion drive system shall be capable of injecting protons (ionized Hydrogen), and ionized Boron 11.
3.2.2 The contractor shall deliver a report detailing the results of the experimental testing of WB8.1. The report shall provide sufficient information to guide programmatic and design decisions about further, refined design efforts for similar devices. The report shall address the plasma dynamics of WB devices, and shall address the scaling laws that apply to polywell fusion, and the feasibility of the PB11 reaction. The report shall address the conceptual requirements for a polywell fusion reactor capable of generating approximately 100mW.
April 2010?
I don't see anything different from the previous WB-8 solicitation unless the boilerplate was changed.
dnavas wrote:Umm, isn't "shall develop" a step or two away from "are burning"?
Just saying maybe you want to tone that subject-line down a tad
Well, obviously it hasn't been built yet; it's an "are" in the sense of "are going to be," as is all the WB-8 stuff. To the best of my knowledge, though, this is the first time anyone has actually been funded to build something that burns p-b11, aside from some one-off experiments, so it's very exciting.
MSimon,
True, I hadn't looked at it closely before (been busy studying for OCP, passed with 98% last week). This really jumped out at me.
Did anyone think to save a copy of the June 16 pre-solicitation? I wish I had because I don't trust my memory - but I thought that the WB9 conceptual design was listed under the "If funds are available" optional work. If it was, they moved it. It is now part of the main contract.
3.1.6 The contractor shall deliver a conceptual design for a follow-on fusion demonstration device, WB-9.
Conceptual studies will focus on the feasibility of extending the WB-8 results to this device and determining the
suitability of this concept as a fusion reactor. This design will be delivered at the end of the contract.
Then paragraph 3.2 starts with the "if funds are available" options. This is encouraging. The design of the demonstration device, WB-9, is of course a "long lead" item for the actual construction of WB9, and by delivering said design under current funding shows that they are thinking about moving beyond the previous penny ante funding approach. Maybe we will see some real progress in the next few years.
Aero wrote:Did anyone think to save a copy of the June 16 pre-solicitation? I wish I had because I don't trust my memory - but I thought that the WB9 conceptual design was listed under the "If funds are available" optional work. If it was, they moved it. It is now part of the main contract.
3.1.6 The contractor shall deliver a conceptual design for a follow-on fusion demonstration device, WB-9.
Conceptual studies will focus on the feasibility of extending the WB-8 results to this device and determining the
suitability of this concept as a fusion reactor. This design will be delivered at the end of the contract.
Then paragraph 3.2 starts with the "if funds are available" options. This is encouraging. The design of the demonstration device, WB-9, is of course a "long lead" item for the actual construction of WB9, and by delivering said design under current funding shows that they are thinking about moving beyond the previous penny ante funding approach. Maybe we will see some real progress in the next few years.
3.1.6 The contractor shall deliver a conceptual design for a follow-on fusion demonstration device, WB-9. Conceptual studies will focus on the feasibility of extending the WB-8 results to this device and determining the suitability of this concept as a fusion reactor. This design will be delivered at the end of the contract.
3.2.1 Enhanced Ion Drive with PB11 (proton/boron 11): Based on the results of WB8 testing, and the availability of government funds the contractor shall develop a WB machine (WB8.1) which incorporates the knowledge and improvements gained in WB8. It is expected that higher ion drive capabilities will be added, and that a “PB11” reaction will be demonstrated. The contractor shall investigate and validate the plasma scaling laws with respect to B-field, voltage and reactor size. The contractor shall investigate the feasibility of a neutron-free fusion power reaction using a polywell WB machine. It is anticipated that improvements in WB confinement, ion energy, and fusion reactivity will be demonstrated in WB8.1. Improvements over the WB8 predictive, computational model are expected, which should yield a better understanding of the WB fusion reaction thus allowing optimization of the WB machine.
3.2.2 The contractor shall deliver a report detailing the results of the experimental testing of WB8.1. The report shall provide sufficient information to guide programmatic and design decisions about further, refined design efforts for similar devices. The report shall address the plasma dynamics of WB devices, and shall address the scaling laws that apply to polywell fusion, and the feasibility of the PB11 reaction. The report shall address the conceptual requirements for a polywell fusion reactor capable of generating approximately 100mW. (A0001)
3.2.3 Within 30 days of testing, the contractor shall update the predictive computer model of WB behavior created under paragraph 3.1.4 using the PB11 reaction and shall deliver the model within 30 days of completion of initial tests specified in paragraph 3.2.1.
The stuff above was taken from my www site which was contemporary (less than a day) after the original posting here.
And here is a link to the contemporary discussion:
jgarry wrote:Have I asked this question before? Can't remember. Anyway, the question is: has anyone ever successfully initiated a p-b11 fusion reaction?
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneutronic_fusion
"In 2005, a Russian team produced hydrogen-boron aneutronic fusions using a picosecond laser.[24] However, the number of the resulting a particles (around 103 per laser pulse) was extremely low."
I don't know how the fusion cross sections for P-B11 was determined. Theory, experiments?
Each FBO solicitation appear to be based on attainment of specific milestones from the previous solicitation. This means that the Navy is serious about developing a technology that they can use. This appears to be the proper approach to government funding of R&D.
jgarry wrote:Have I asked this question before? Can't remember. Anyway, the question is: has anyone ever successfully initiated a p-b11 fusion reaction?
I don't know how the fusion cross sections for P-B11 was determined. Theory, experiments?
Dan Tibbets
The data in the EXFOR database on the NNDC site lead me to this paper :
where they were looking for a different channel (p+b11->c12), but you can recover the p+b11->3a from that if you are clever. The actual numbers in the EXFOR come from a review (from a priv. comm. from Los Alamos in 1979) which might include some more data. I wouldn't think it would be a very hard experiment as far as nuclear experiments go. You could do it at TUNL or a bunch of other low energy proton facilities if they haven't been shut down yet.
