WB-8 and WB-9

Discuss funding sources for polywell research, including the non-profit EMC2 Fusion Development Corporation, as well as any other relevant research efforts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

bobshipp
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:28 am
Contact:

WB-8 and WB-9

Postby bobshipp » Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:26 pm

The purpose of this topic is to speculate as to what WB-8 and WB-9 might actually look like and what it would take to fund each.

Lets start out with what Dr. Bussard had envisioned. WB-8 was to be a dodecahedron and together with WB-7 was to cost 2 million. WB-9 was to be a 100 mw power system using the superior design between WB-7 and WB-8 and costing 200 million. ( 1.12 hr of the Google tape.)

Now let us assume that the present testing of WB-7 gives positive results and the peer review is highly optimistic. The Navy then commits to building the 100 mw prototype costing 200 million and dubs it WB-8. WB-9 could then be a 100 mw commercial power plant costing 200 million.

Another scenario, probably more likely, is that the WB-7 test results are positive. The peer review is optimistic but raises substantial questions. The Navy opts to continue the program but not with full commitment and goes for the next small step.

MSimon indicates that this should be a "continuous operation machine, seconds. with a big honking power supply and costing 5 to 10 million". If successful, he feels it would be a confidence builder.

This would then be WB-8 and then WB-9 could be the 100 mw prototype or another small step.

Another scenario would have the Navy bowing out at this point for what ever reason and then the search is on again for financial backers.

The last scenario would be for the WB-7 results to turn out negative and the peer review to be scathing. The Navy then drops the program. Now the only hope maybe to make WB-8 a dodecahedron costing 1 million with some reason to believe it might provide the breakthrough.

Jboily
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:50 am

Postby Jboily » Mon Sep 01, 2008 3:14 pm

Looking at Dr. Nebel comments in the past few days, I am quite sure that there will be an other step. I would expect a small step, to establish scaling and configuration, and so on in a larger version of the WB-7. Maybe 1 or 1.5 meter, as Dr Nebel was suggesting. This would not be and do not have to be a continuous operation machine, a second of operation is quite long, even a fraction of a second would be plenty.

The size of the current vacuum chamber and the facility might be too small. The team will probably need more peoples to work on the design. The thing is, this next phase can still be done in quick and dirty shoestring mode, and be kept at very low budget level.

I have however some worry in term of safety. The radiation level coming out from the larger devices will be 10^4 larger. Dr. Bussard was saying this is quite safe as a system, and no nuclear explosion is possible. Yet, he was also saying that the these large devices need to be set in a remote location. I sense some inconsistency here. Anybody know what worries Dr.B. Had?

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Re: WB-8 and WB-9

Postby Roger » Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:39 am

bobshipp wrote:( 1.12 hr of the Google tape.)

to make WB-8 a dodecahedron costing 1 million


I haven't watched the google video in a while, I dont remember any of that. I remember 200 mill for a program that ends up with proof of concept.


A dodec the same overall size as WB-7 will cost way more than that.

Power supplies for MSimons LN2 cooled reactor will run the cost up past what your saying, unless he dropped his cost estimates recently.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:49 am

I'm still in the same ball park Roger $5 to $15 million depending.

Depending on what? Power, voltage.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

bobshipp
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:28 am
Contact:

Postby bobshipp » Wed Sep 03, 2008 1:51 pm

On August 21 2008, rnebel wrote to me " parts for a dodecahedron probably run in the $300k-$500k range that doesn't include people or diagnostics. ~$1000k would probably be a little light, but might be doable."

bobshipp
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:28 am
Contact:

Postby bobshipp » Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:53 am

At this point in time, there appears to be some reason to believe that there will be a next small step. The question is when and what? If that step needs to have a large power supply to drive and cool the magnets, then that might be the new major expense that needs to be funded.

The Navy may not have enough funds available in the short term to take that step now. However, there maybe another option available. The Navy could partner with an electric utility that has those power needs easily accessible, available, and the research funds necessary to interconnect.

I bring up this possibility because in my area a pulp mill has just ceased operation leaving a large generation facility and all the interconnections in place. We also have an aluminum smelter that has a pot line that is standing idle but all the power needs are in place.

One of the amazing things about this web site is the number of people it reaches. I am sure there are others who know of similar circumstances and maybe even in the backyard of the present site. They could post what they know about and that would allow the powers that be to contact them.

I just recently counted the new members for one day and got 61 incredible.

One last thought on the Navy partnering. I am familiar with the arrangement in the late 50's and early 60's between the Navy and the University Of Washington's Fishery department for classified underwater research. It worked well. Another partnership in our area between the Navy and a utility with a little local publicity might pique the interest of Bill Gates or Paul Allen. Enough said.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:11 am

bob s,

Where are you located?
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

bobshipp
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:28 am
Contact:

Postby bobshipp » Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:51 pm

Bellingham, Washington 98226 The utilities would be Puget Sound Energy and BPA. In the 1980's I negotiated two power sales agreements with PSE and they were very supportive and saw the benefits of being on the cutting edge of what might be coming.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Sep 23, 2008 5:04 pm

bobshipp wrote:Bellingham, Washington 98226 The utilities would be Puget Sound Energy and BPA. In the 1980's I negotiated two power sales agreements with PSE and they were very supportive and saw the benefits of being on the cutting edge of what might be coming.


At least for initial experiments power will not be a problem:

Even if requirements are in the range of 20 MW experiments could be done at night when there is plenty of excess power.

Initial experiments will require runs of at most minutes to hours.

Under those circumstances the best place to do the experimental work would be near the brains. U Wisconsin Madison and U Illinois Champaign.

And if start up power can't be ramped up then some kind of flywheel storage for pulse power may be in order.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

bobshipp
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:28 am
Contact:

Postby bobshipp » Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:29 pm

The best place for experimental work may come down to a choice between where the brains are and where the money is.

drmike
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:54 pm
Contact:

Postby drmike » Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:06 pm

If there is enough money, the place won't matter. You can move people and things anywhere you want. If you want to be conservative about your resources, then the place will matter - you need power, machine tools and nice living space. The concept of "nice" depends on the person, but obviously food, water and air need to be there.

There are a lot of places that have the required infrastructure. If there is enough money, it makes sense to have several experiments going in different places so they can all compete and learn from each other. Not only is it more fun for the participants, the outcome gets to save humanity sooner.

bobshipp
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:28 am
Contact:

Postby bobshipp » Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:14 pm

Agreed, If there is enough money. But the Navy may not have enough money now. So a partnership with a Utility and/or a University might be in order to get the money now. Thus saving humanity sooner.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:34 pm

bobshipp wrote:On August 21 2008, rnebel wrote to me " parts for a dodecahedron probably run in the $300k-$500k range that doesn't include people or diagnostics. ~$1000k would probably be a little light, but might be doable."


Couldn't the parts of the WB-7 be re-used as half the WB-8?

bobshipp
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:28 am
Contact:

Postby bobshipp » Tue Dec 23, 2008 4:59 pm

Faced with the task of writing a proposal for the Google Project 10 to the 100th Contest, I needed to name what I was proposing. I finally settled on having EMC2 build a "Duodecahedron Polywell Whiffle Ball Boron Fusor."

Recently, Joe Strout pointed out that a polywell is not a fusor, so I had to rethink what this scenario should be called.

It came to mind that ITER has its Tokamak. So, why shouldn't IEC have a similar type name? What would be more appropriate than to call it a Bussard after the late Dr. Bussard?

So, now if my proposal is selected as one of the 100 finalists to be voted on by the public starting on January 27th, then for press release purposes the proposal would be for EMC2 to build WB-8 as a "Duodecahedron Boron Bussard." A Bussard would be explained to be a whiffle ball polywell that uses inertial electrostatic confinement to produce power.

I would appreciate any other suggestions or comments.
Last edited by bobshipp on Tue Dec 23, 2008 6:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

b2f
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 11:31 pm
Location: Lehigh Valley PA

Postby b2f » Tue Dec 23, 2008 6:28 pm

Just remimder everyone to vote..........
Science is hard, Physics is harder, Engineering is the hardest (they have to make it work)


Return to “Fund-Raising”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests