They should get in contact with Avalanche fusion and discuss about using their feedthrough technology.
They could than expand their working parameters space to a degree where practical tests would make more sense than investing into simulations.
ZAP Energy News
Re: ZAP Energy News
A society of dogmas is a dead society.
Re: ZAP Energy News
They are doing both, but I assume that they want to get simulations in line with the practical results to have a more solid theoretical base.
Re: ZAP Energy News
https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.155101
Anyone have access to the full article? They mention they have a "basis" for scaling laws now, curious to know their scaling laws for Zap.
Anyone have access to the full article? They mention they have a "basis" for scaling laws now, curious to know their scaling laws for Zap.
Re: ZAP Energy News
I do not have the paper and I could not find it so far, but the Fusion power was expected to scale to the 11th power of the pinch current.bennmann wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 2:15 pmhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.155101
Anyone have access to the full article? They mention they have a "basis" for scaling laws now, curious to know their scaling laws for Zap.
If they got confirmation on that is indeed pretty interesting.
I will try to look more deep for someone that has a copy to share.
A society of dogmas is a dead society.
Re: ZAP Energy News
I saw that their scaling laws were indeed confirmed at the > 11th power. The 11th power is what their simulations predict. Their experiments show a somewhat higher scaling, actually, which is interesting in itself (and a reason why they keep working on their simulations).Giorgio wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 7:17 pmI do not have the paper and I could not find it so far, but the Fusion power was expected to scale to the 11th power of the pinch current.bennmann wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 2:15 pmhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.155101
Anyone have access to the full article? They mention they have a "basis" for scaling laws now, curious to know their scaling laws for Zap.
If they got confirmation on that is indeed pretty interesting.
I will try to look more deep for someone that has a copy to share.
Re: ZAP Energy News
True, I remember seeing a paper where they actually was speaking of scaling to the 12th power.Skipjack wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2024 6:03 amI saw that their scaling laws were indeed confirmed at the > 11th power. The 11th power is what their simulations predict. Their experiments show a somewhat higher scaling, actually, which is interesting in itself (and a reason why they keep working on their simulations).
A society of dogmas is a dead society.
Re: ZAP Energy News
Wonderful new paper:
(use the pdf link to read this paper)
We had seen earlier models of the Z pinch that talked about the m=0 instability, but the m=1 instability (kink) was not really dealt with. In this paper on their modeling, the inclusion of the m=1 instability is brought in to explain & close the gap between projected results & experimental results. Sheared flow is key for both m=0 & m=1 instabilities, so in the end it all boils down to creation & optimizing that flow profile. To that end I have yet to see any discussion as to how the profile is achieved, the ('secret sauce?' ), but I suppose that would be proprietary.
There has been higher current experiments that I had thought should have led to breakeven Q, some thoughts that there is some 'effective' current vs total current, but I would suggest based on this paper on modeling that the issue is the m=1 kink stability that needs to be introduced that reduces yield. The paper says that once 3-D modeling is used the m=1 instability will show up and not require model hand waving.
I must admit that ZAP Energy is an exciting fusion approach, but I wonder if apparent simplicity will evaporate quickly as current is raised, after all, the radius must shrink dramatically, yet the shear profile must be maintained to avoid instabilities from killing results (at least that is my doubt).
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1 ... 326/ad3fcbWhole device modeling of the fuze sheared-flow-stabilized Z pinch
(use the pdf link to read this paper)
We had seen earlier models of the Z pinch that talked about the m=0 instability, but the m=1 instability (kink) was not really dealt with. In this paper on their modeling, the inclusion of the m=1 instability is brought in to explain & close the gap between projected results & experimental results. Sheared flow is key for both m=0 & m=1 instabilities, so in the end it all boils down to creation & optimizing that flow profile. To that end I have yet to see any discussion as to how the profile is achieved, the ('secret sauce?' ), but I suppose that would be proprietary.
There has been higher current experiments that I had thought should have led to breakeven Q, some thoughts that there is some 'effective' current vs total current, but I would suggest based on this paper on modeling that the issue is the m=1 kink stability that needs to be introduced that reduces yield. The paper says that once 3-D modeling is used the m=1 instability will show up and not require model hand waving.
I must admit that ZAP Energy is an exciting fusion approach, but I wonder if apparent simplicity will evaporate quickly as current is raised, after all, the radius must shrink dramatically, yet the shear profile must be maintained to avoid instabilities from killing results (at least that is my doubt).
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.