Reference sketch

Discuss the technical details of an "open source" community-driven design of a polywell reactor.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

hanelyp
Posts: 2255
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Postby hanelyp » Sat Jun 09, 2012 11:10 pm

I'm unaware of an event horizon in a polywell.

The optimum fusion spot, according the the baseline model, is the center, where ions collide at maximum energy.

The energy of an ion at any given radius from the center is proportionate to its charge.

Towards the interior, ion energy is far too high to catch electrons. Towards the edge, electron energy is far too high to be caught.

"hte" several times, deliberate? Detracts from credibility.

wacker.popeln
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:38 pm

Postby wacker.popeln » Sun Jun 10, 2012 3:27 am

526 a.m. rather tshoermenie taim (hehe)

D Tibbets
Posts: 2775
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:52 am

Postby D Tibbets » Sun Jun 10, 2012 8:26 pm

wacker.popeln wrote:isnt this a
************************************************************
NUCLEI SQUEEZER machine that uses electrons to squeeze nuclei simply -

which has implications on how many electrons you need per nuclei amount - which has implications on the tesla field
**************************************************************
this is a complete new equation line
can be diagonal line or an exponential function

Image

http://s12.postimage.org/il2lumfwt/polywellquestion.png


I think the perspective of electrons "squeezing" ions is confusing and wrong. The Polywell is not a compression machine in the sense of a piston pump, or even an inertial confinement fusion machine (like a bomb or laser inertial confinement ). It might be more appropriate to consider a Polywell more like a gravity confinement, except that it uses an electric field instead of a gravitation field to confine the ions. The ion density comes from two considerations. A general density determined by the electron density. So long as the electrons are adequately confined magnetically, the ion concentration/ density will be very close to this (within ~ 1 part per million). For the ions to deviate much from this would result in huge increases in voltage- ie: you have to input lots of energy to allow for the deviation to occur. This is a general average density relationship within the Polywell. But, there can be larger deviations in local density, so long as the average relative densities in the machine total do not change.
The near spherical geometry is important as the net negative electrical field from the slightly excess electrons pulls any ions at a greater radii straight towards the center, just as a planet pulls (accelerates) a mass towards its center. This is conceptually different than an implosion or magnetic pinch which pushes ions/ mass towards a center. Considerations about various possible instabilities may be different as a result.

I have not worked out the details, but according to the EMC2 patent application, The electron pressure that is maintained by magnetic confinement, is not equivalent to the achievable ion pressure/ density. Apparently there is a large difference, at least when spherical core ion confluence is considered.

The average density scales as the square of the B field, and fusion can scale as the square of the density, so the relationship is strongly logarithmic even without considering confluence.

This relationship is widely accecpted and is the same for cuspless (Tolamaks) and cusped (Polywell) machines.
My understanding is that the losses in the Tokamak is from cross field transport while in the Polywell it is dominated by electron cusp losses. The results in the difference ns the baseline, but the relative changes in obtainable density with stronger B fields is the same. Of course the Tokamaks also suffer from macro instabilities which introduces a whole new can of worms. These macro instabilities apparently increase greatly as the Beta increases, so the maximum density/ B field reaches limiting conditions much faster. This is why (my understanding) the Polywell can achieve significantly higher densities.

Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.

D Tibbets
Posts: 2775
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:52 am

Postby D Tibbets » Sun Jun 10, 2012 8:26 pm

wacker.popeln wrote:isnt this a
************************************************************
NUCLEI SQUEEZER machine that uses electrons to squeeze nuclei simply -

which has implications on how many electrons you need per nuclei amount - which has implications on the tesla field
**************************************************************
this is a complete new equation line
can be diagonal line or an exponential function

Image

http://s12.postimage.org/il2lumfwt/polywellquestion.png


I think the perspective of electrons "squeezing" ions is confusing and wrong. The Polywell is not a compression machine in the sense of a piston pump, or even an inertial confinement fusion machine (like a bomb or laser inertial confinement ). It might be more appropriate to consider a Polywell more like a gravity confinement, except that it uses an electric field instead of a gravitation field to confine the ions. The ion density comes from two considerations. A general density determined by the electron density. So long as the electrons are adequately confined magnetically, the ion concentration/ density will be very close to this (within ~ 1 part per million). For the ions to deviate much from this would result in huge increases in voltage- ie: you have to input lots of energy to allow for the deviation to occur. This is a general average density relationship within the Polywell. But, there can be larger deviations in local density, so long as the average relative densities in the machine total do not change.
The near spherical geometry is important as the net negative electrical field from the slightly excess electrons pulls any ions at a greater radii straight towards the center, just as a planet pulls (accelerates) a mass towards its center. This is conceptually different than an implosion or magnetic pinch which pushes ions/ mass towards a center. Considerations about various possible instabilities may be different as a result.

I have not worked out the details, but according to the EMC2 patent application, The electron pressure that is maintained by magnetic confinement, is not equivalent to the achievable ion pressure/ density. Apparently there is a large difference, at least when spherical core ion confluence is considered.

The average density scales as the square of the B field, and fusion can scale as the square of the density, so the relationship is strongly logarithmic even without considering confluence.

This relationship is widely accepted and is the same for cuspless (Tolamaks) and cusped (Polywell) machines.
My understanding is that the normal losses in the Tokamak is from cross field transport while in the Polywell it is dominated by electron cusp losses. The results in the difference in the baseline, but the relative changes in obtainable density with stronger B fields is the same. Of course the Tokamaks also suffer from macro instabilities which introduces a whole new can of worms. These macro instabilities apparently increase greatly as the Beta increases, so the maximum density/ B field reaches limiting conditions much faster. This is why (my understanding) the Polywell can achieve significantly higher densities.

Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.


Return to “Design”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests