Rick was busy in October...

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:15 pm

Well, we know why he didn't say anything here for 12-13 October...

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/iec2009/agenda

Use the document links, some are interesting.

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 3:45 am

Oh my. I think I'm drooling on my keyboard.

Eternal thanks for the link.

V. Modeling (Wisconsin, Kansai, TRIUMF, Sydney)
A. Atomic and molecular physics effects
B. Beam extraction
C. POLYWELL Particle‐In‐Cell Calculations

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 9:32 am

Very nice find!

Robthebob · Post by **Robthebob** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:34 pm

they are already talking about steady state. Insane, I thought we're long ways away from that. What ever happened to machines thermalizing and stuff?

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:52 pm

WB-5 was steady state I think. It was cooled, anyway.

As I understand it the physics are so fast you might as well run pulsed because it will look the same (i.e., thermalization is just as big a problem over the period a pulsed machine runs).

Roger · Post by **Roger** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 11:24 pm

Looks like they included the young Andy Seltzman and his flouro cooled grid project

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/iec2009/posters

But here

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/static/TALKS/1 ... viddon.ppt

We're talking about 50% of DD fusions occur within the cathode, this is news it seems to me, at least for the fusor.net guys.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 12:25 am

I seem to remember Chrismb arguing that the bulk occured outside.
Hmm.
I liked the way they set up the detectors. Slick thinking. I wonder if Rick is considering something similar to map out the polywell. It would not be a great leap to run some sort of polywell core in this rig and 3D map it.

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 2:19 am

A spatial resolution of 2cm is nice.

We know they bought:

3/13/2000 BGL031300
1" x 10" He3 proprtional counter, 6 ATM, SHV
connector $425.00 USN 00-3271 Kirkham Neutron counter #1, pallet #2 neutron counter

and

6/16/2000 OET061600 ORTECH model 1421J preamp $235.00 USN 00-3365 Kirkham Neutron counter #1, pallet #2 neutron counter
6/16/2000 OET061600 ORTEC model 590A Amp/TSCA $575.00 USN 00-3366 Kirkham Neutron counter #1, pallet #2 neutron counter
6/16/2000 OET061600 Tennelec Model TC534 counter/timer $475.00 USN 00-3367 Kirkham Neutron counter #1, pallet #2 neutron counter
6/16/2000 OET061600
12-slot standard NIM bin w/power supply (96
watt) $475.00 USN 00-3369 Kirkham Neutron counter #1, pallet #2 neutron counter

and

8/29/2000 OET082900 ORTECH Model 1421H preamp $245.00 USN 00-3431 Kirkham Neutron counter #2, pallet #2 neutron counter
8/29/2000 OET082900 Tennelec Model TC 534 Counter/Timer $475.00 USN 00-3432 Kirkham Neutron counter #2, pallet #2 neutron counter
8/29/2000 OET082900
ORTEC Model 456 High Voltage Bias Supply 0-
3 kV at 10mA $425.00 USN 00-3433 Kirkham Neutron counter #2, pallet #2 neutron counter
8/29/2000 OET082900
6-slot mini-NIM bin w/power supply, +/-12, +/-
24 (ORTEC 4001M or equivalent) $475.00 USN 00-3434 Kirkham Neutron counter #2, pallet #2 neutron counter
8/29/2000 PEI082900 ORTEC model 590A amplifier $1,250.00 USN 00-3435 Kirkham Neutron counter #2, pallet #2 neutron counter

and

10/10/2000 BGL101000 1"x10", 6 ATM, He3 tube with MHV connector $425.00 USN 00-3486 Kirkham Neutron counter, pallet #2 neutron counter
10/10/2000 BGL101000 1"x10", 6 ATM, He3 tube with MHV connector $425.00 USN 00-3487 Kirkham Neutron counter, pallet #2 neutron counter

and

6/5/2003
11016 - EO
Tech
Bertan Model 313A High Voltage Bias Supply
(0-3kV, to 10mA, 2W) *any equivalent HV bias
supply will work (10mA at up to 3kV) $475.00 USN 03-3968 Kirkham Neutron counter #1, pallet #2 neutron counter

and, less interestingly:

4/8/2008 CC Metal Cabinet for Neutron Counter $274.00 08-4079 Lab Metal Cabinet for Neutron Counter Lab

Don't know if those would suffice. Maybe Tom could say.

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:10 pm

These guy were looking at charged particles for the spacial resolution, weren't they? Or was I reading a different paper? There were many interesting ones in the group!

If it were charged particles, then their method wouldn't work on a Polywell which alters the flight path of the particles.

Roger · Post by **Roger** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 5:01 pm

Kiteman, do you mean the Donovan ppt?

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/static/TALKS/1 ... viddon.ppt

IIRC they measured time of flight for protons and tritons. Though I would be interested what Thorson used in the way of reactor/size/grids/tor/voltage/ion gunned and detectors. There are so many variables that might explain the difference in Thorson's results and the recent UW results written up by Donovan.

I'm betting Kulcinski is looking at building the best possible IEC before it becomes dated by Polywell successes, which may be why he brought in Andy Seltzman from Georgia Institute of Technology, Andy was in the middle of building a flouro cooled cathode grid fusor with an ion gun, and generally looking as if he(Andy) was really pushing the limits as to what a fusor can do.

Since Andy came to UW, the reactor @ UW (Homer) has received 6 ion guns and new diagnostics.

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:57 am

Roger wrote:Kiteman, do you mean the Donovan ppt?

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/static/TALKS/1 ... viddon.ppt

IIRC they measured time of flight for protons and tritons.

That sounds like it. I thought that was the set-up that gave the spacial resolution. Too many papers, not enough time!