I'm not sure where you are going. The topic is the stored energy in a superconducting magnet and the consequences of a sudden release of this energy. This has nothing to do with your above comments about the performance gains thus far achieved. Just like the LHC there are thoughtful safegards in place or planed. The point is that these planed for safeguards and construction details are not necessarily appropriate. This is very apparent from what happened at the Japanese power plants after the earthquake and tsunami. They thought, or at least claimed that all the safegaurds were adiquate. As I mentioned I suspect the consequences of a major failure does not have the consequences of a fission nuclear reactor meltdown , but neither is it trivial. If nothing else it could lead to a multibillion dollar damage to a very expensive and big Tokamak plant.Joseph Chikva wrote:So, you are not answering on question. I know about threat. But it's solvable and solved. TOKAMAK as concept has less problems with magnetic field. TOKAMAK unlike to all other approaches has reached already Lawson criterion. But triple product has not been reached and very unlikely that ITER with his claimed 3keV from ohmic heating 20MW RF source and 1MeV NBI injector will reach desired 15keV temperature. That is a problem. Also problem is in joining of NBI injector with vacuum chamber. You are searching problems in wrong place.D Tibbets wrote:I couldn't find the Battleship explosion I mentioned, so it cannot be confirmed.
Alternately, a small quench in an MRI machine
And an apparent submarine steam explosion (sort of). The effects are surprising, especially when the resultant tidal wave reaches the ship!
I don't know which Tokamak experimental reactors have used superconductors, but the biggest so far (?) did not- JET.