Brainwave

It may be difficult to separate "theory" from "application," but let''s see if this helps facilitate the discussion.
Locked
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

I do not beleive a net energy magnetic confinement fusion device is possible at all.

The D-D or D-T reaction does not behave like the slow burning H-H reaction in the sun.

if the density of D-T or D-D is sufficent to release net energy it will always cause an explosion.
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Re: Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

It occurs to me that the octane rating of D-T and D-D are very low.
Jerry Biehler
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:08 am
Real name:
Location: Beaverton, OR

Re: Brainwave

Post by Jerry Biehler »

Tristan Beal wrote:It occurs to me that the octane rating of D-T and D-D are very low.
Thats probably because there is no octane in either.
User avatar
Andrew Robinson
Moderator
Posts: 688
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:54 am
Real name: Andrew Robinson
Location: Raleigh, North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Brainwave

Post by Andrew Robinson »

:)
I can wire anything directly into anything! I'm the professor!
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Re: Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

All fuels have an octane rating.
User avatar
Andrew Robinson
Moderator
Posts: 688
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:54 am
Real name: Andrew Robinson
Location: Raleigh, North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Brainwave

Post by Andrew Robinson »

You do understand what octane is right?...
I can wire anything directly into anything! I'm the professor!
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Re: Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

Octane rating is a measure of how smoothly a fuel burns. Hydrogen has a very high octane rating because it burns smoothly. H-H fusion would be similar to hydrogen combustion because it releases its energy gradually.

D-D fusion is nothing like this, the energy contained in the plasma is very grainy.
User avatar
Andrew Robinson
Moderator
Posts: 688
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:54 am
Real name: Andrew Robinson
Location: Raleigh, North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Brainwave

Post by Andrew Robinson »

Sigh... Does someone else want to take a crack at this?
I can wire anything directly into anything! I'm the professor!
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Re: Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

Any fuel no matter if its a fusion plasma or coal or petrol has an octane rating. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating.

Its a very simple engineering concept. Fuels like hydrogen and coal have high octane ratings, and burn smoothly because the energy density is spread evenly throughout the substance.

Fuels like diesel do not burn smoothly because the energy in them is much more grainy.
User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 3159
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
Real name: Dennis Brown

Re: Brainwave

Post by Dennis P Brown »

Best just to say this:"octane rating" is not a scientific term/unit: Engineer's in the petro-chemical and auto/aviation industries coined the term for a very specific application That all said, hydrogen FUSION is a NUCLEAR process and is called "burn" in only the most trivial sense of the word. There is no oxygen used in "burning" nuclear fuels. One needs to read up on subjects before posting - wiki is your friend. As far as wiki - you are correct that they discuse and give an octane rating for hydrogen but that is meaningless for thermo-nuclear fusion. That involves non-chemical processes.
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Re: Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

I am well aware of how fusion works tah.

This thread gets across my overall message even if some of the details are incorrect. D-D is an incredibly grainy energy source more so than any energy source we have ever used in the past.

So forcing it to release its energy gradually rather than in bursts is extremely energy inefficient.
Last edited by Tristan Beal on Mon Jul 27, 2015 12:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Andrew Seltzman
Posts: 815
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 8:02 pm
Real name: Andrew Seltzman
Contact:

Re: Brainwave

Post by Andrew Seltzman »

Yes, hydrogen has a research octane number, but it's irreverent for analyzing fuels for fusion use. The octane number, when used in internal combustion engine, determines the rated maximum compression ratio engine that a fuel can be used with before it will per-detonate during compression. This corresponds to the fuel's properties in a thermodynamic and chemical sense corresponding to the activation energy(temperature) required to spontaneously ignite.

In fusion uses, the reactions are entirely nuclear in origin with no hydrogen/hydrocarbon combustion (the term "burning plasma" is a euphemism for a self sustaining fusion reaction, it's not actually "burning" in the sense of reacting with oxygen). An equivalent figure of merit when analyzing a fusion fuel is it's cross section which determines it's reaction rate as a function of temperature (collision energy).

Look here under requirements:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion

Edit: Dennis seems to have beat me to a similar answer while I was typing...
Last edited by Andrew Seltzman on Mon Jul 27, 2015 12:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Andrew Seltzman
www.rtftechnologies.org
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Re: Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

Andrew Seltzman wrote:Yes, hydrogen has a research octane number, but it's irreverent for analyzing fuels for fusion use. The octane number, when used in internal combustion engine, determines the rated maximum compression ratio engine that a fuel can be used with before it will per-detonate during compression. This corresponds to the fuel's properties in a thermodynamic and chemical sense corresponding to the activation energy(temperature) required to spontaneously ignite.

In fusion uses, the reactions are entirely nuclear in origin with no hydrogen/hydrocarbon combustion (the term "burning plasma" is a euphemism for a self sustaining fusion reaction, it's not actually "burning" in the sense of reacting with oxygen). An equivalent figure of merit when analyzing a fusion fuel is it's cross section which determines it's reaction rate as a function of temperature (collision energy).

Look here under requirements:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion
^^
User avatar
Nick Peskosky
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:02 pm
Real name: Nicholas Peskosky
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Brainwave

Post by Nick Peskosky »

Dennis and Andrew beat me to de-muddying the waters between chemical and nuclear processes. You may understand Fusion Tristan, but your semantics within the scientific and engineering disciplines could use some refinement. Pulsed energy ("grainy" as you say) sources will always be difficult to capture and harness under the current power generation paradigm we use. Fusion energy has been in the research stages for over 60 years due to numerous physics and engineering challenges, not the least of which is a way to capture pulsed thermal/ion/neutron release in a way that translates to spinning a turbine connected to a generator (a square peg in a round hole). Ideally, we would like to release D-D fusion continuously but obviously in the near term scaling factors favor D-T reactors for this operation due to optimal cross section .
Nick Peskosky
NPeskosky@gmail.com

"The whole of science is nothing more than the refinement of everyday thinking." - Albert Einstein
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Re: Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

Robert Stienhaus has a pulsed fusion design he calls the Mini-Mike.

It basically uses a small ball of frozen D-T as the catalyst for D-D fusion. All of the tritium used can be recovered after the D-D fusion stage.
Because most off the energy is generated from D-D fusion you could use a 500MJ laser as the driver and it would still be profitable.

The pulsed design mean thats the D-D fusion can be done up agaist the walls of the reactor cavity because the high tempratures would only need to be maintained for a very short time period.

The pressure levels created during operation of the device would obviously be high but this is negated by having thick reactor walls and by setting off the D-T cryosphere in a vacuum.

The walls of the device could be cooled with either water or preferably molten salt to recover energy.
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Re: Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

How is recovering pulsed energy difficult? You could use a giant piston if you had to, thats the way we do it in engines.
User avatar
Andrew Robinson
Moderator
Posts: 688
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:54 am
Real name: Andrew Robinson
Location: Raleigh, North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Brainwave

Post by Andrew Robinson »

A Turbo Encabulator would work instead of a big piston.
I can wire anything directly into anything! I'm the professor!
Tristan Beal
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 11:32 am
Real name: Tristan

Re: Brainwave

Post by Tristan Beal »

Well you can make fusion simple and cheap or complicated and expensive, upto you but I know how capitilism will vote.
Frank Sanns
Site Admin
Posts: 2119
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 2:26 pm
Real name: Frank Sanns

Re: Brainwave

Post by Frank Sanns »

Mr. Beal, please follow the rules and introduce yourself in the Intro forum. This is required.

I am also closing this thread as it has not gone in a useful technical direction.
Achiever's madness; when enough is still not enough. ---FS
We have to stop looking at the world through our physical eyes. The universe is NOT what we see. It is the quantum world that is real. The rest is just an electron illusion. ---FS
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Brainwave

Post by Richard Hull »

I was in this one but am now out of it. Nothing mentioned here will actually happen and zero energy will come out of it that will ever make electricity. Just more "fusion wind" over the decks.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Locked

Return to “Fusor and/or General Fusion Theory (& FAQs)”