Converting drive voltage into collision energy.

It may be difficult to separate "theory" from "application," but let''s see if this helps facilitate the discussion.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Site Admin
Posts: 10510
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Converting drive voltage into collision energy.

Post by Richard Hull » Tue Nov 10, 2015 5:43 am

Head on kinetic collision energy for P-B11 ions could easily be 5 eV or any actual kinetic energy imagined.. For fusion it is another matter and that is purely one of collision cross sectional energies only. A head on collision of any ion pair happens constantly in air! The result is some simply mechanical process of field interactions. Fully ionized B11 would demand an energy input to the molecule of perhaps a thousand eV or more just to strip all the electrons.

There is no hard surfaces for head on collisions of ions, only field interactions. To do something other than simply kinetic ricochett reactions in a "head on" to the ions, (a few eV to thosands of eV), you would have to do quantum tunneling, (fusion - collisonal cross section chart - hundreds of thousnads of eV), or stripping reactions, (millions of eV).

As you can see "head-on" ion collisions can do three totally different things based on kinetic energy be it lab frame, center of mass or whatever.

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
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

Dan Tibbets
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:29 am
Real name:

Re: Converting drive voltage into collision energy.

Post by Dan Tibbets » Tue Nov 10, 2015 5:45 am

The KE needed for good P-B11 fusion cross section optimization depends on several assumptions.
400 KeV is often given as the target. This is not the cross section peak but it is where the curve is leveling out and pushing further becomes counter productive (mostly due to Bremsstyruhlung considerations). this assumes beam - target or beam - background collisions. One particle is at 400KeV and the other is at 0 KeV in the lab reference frame. If there is beam - beam fusion collisions, each participant is traveling with 200 KeV energies relative to the lab reference and they collide head on. This requires minimization of any low energy background particles like neutral particles for the beam - beam collisions to dominate. The advantages are obvious, Only one half of the accelerating voltage is needed. Bremsstruhlung radiation will also be ~ 4 times less. Some graphs also show a resonant peak in the P-B11 fusion cross section at ~ 123 KeV. This comes close to the cross section value at 400 KeV, but it is narrow and non thermalized plasma is required to take advantage of this. In my imagination this is the solution. Only 123 KeV is needed, or rather ~ 60 KeV with beam - beam fusion. This would produce nearly as much fusion as the 400 KeV goal, and the Bremsstruhlung would be about 40 times less, or about 10 times less if the beam- beam 200 KeV comparison was used.
Rider's conclusions, which arguably discounted the usefulness of P-B11 fusion become much less significant with these perhaps fanciful assumptions. Note that even without these assumptions there are theoretical methods to make the Bremsstruhlung losses tolerable. This includes diluting the boron relative to the protons, and in the Polywell's case, having an energy distribution of the electrons with low energy in the central core where interacting ion concentrations are greatest.

D Tibbets

giorgos giorgakis
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 5:02 pm
Real name: giorgos giorgakis

Re: Converting drive voltage into collision energy.

Post by giorgos giorgakis » Tue Nov 10, 2015 3:09 pm

Thanks for the replies guys , in a perfect world you would be able to put 2 ions on rails and launch them so that they hit each other without taking the cross section into consideration or the wave nature of particles hence no statistics would be needed. I found this link here http://www.thepolywellblog.com/2010/01/ ... spark.html it's a good read and says that D-T fusion only takes 10 keV.
This CF fusion device page http://www.crossfirefusion.com/nuclear- ... actor.html says that this CF machine can accelerate neutral particles with it's moving standing waves so why hasn't it worked then?

If there were a vector field k*r^n similar to the coulomb force without any point charge needed wouldn't a spherical cloud of ions hit each other at the center and would these ions fuse if they had enough kinetic energy?

User avatar
Richard Hull
Site Admin
Posts: 10510
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Converting drive voltage into collision energy.

Post by Richard Hull » Tue Nov 10, 2015 7:11 pm

It must be always kept in mind that........

1. Doing nuclear fusion is abysmally easy and inexpensive
2. Losses in doing all known fusion processes always predominate over energy production.
3. Doing fusion by any method currently under study to produce significantly distributable electrical energy for consumption at a price slightly above, near or below the current rates of distrubuted power is absolutely impossible.

We can talk and theorize and calculate forever, but as of this moment we cannot do over unity, economically feasible nuclear fusion, just like we always have and will be into the distant future.

In short, nothing works in fusion to produce even one millionth of one watt of fusion energy that is over unity which can or has been converted to 24-7-365 reliable electrical energy. No one millionth of one watt!

Fusion in reactors, to-date, have had terawatts of impulse energy input and done fusion. Others have used hundreds of thousands of watts continuously when on and done fusion. Not one of these monsters has actually produced one millionth of one watt of demonstrable electricity or lit so much as a single flashlight bulb due solely to nuclear fusion.

Fission based electricity was demo'd in the thousand watt delivered class only 4 years after the first atom bomb was dropped. 61 years after first H bomb, not one millionth of one watt of fusion based electricity has ever flowed in a closed electrical circuit.

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
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

giorgos giorgakis
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 5:02 pm
Real name: giorgos giorgakis

Re: Converting drive voltage into collision energy.

Post by giorgos giorgakis » Tue Nov 10, 2015 9:57 pm

Still I think that it's not impossible, it just hasn't happened yet. If we find the weaknesses of all fusion devices then we can try to eliminate them, let's say the fusor has a physical electrode at the center which many ions collide with and even if they pass they will be decelerated for as much as the electrode radius, the polywell and many IEC devices loose most of their energy as radiation because of their magnetic confinement configurations that use the gyrating movement of charges(there are ways to eliminate this). If you could make a fusor but without the physical electrode wouldn't this be better? What would be the minimum speed needed for fusion to happen then? A way to get the energy out would be the same way as in the polywell , with a spherical electrode charged at megavolts surrounding the hypothetical fusor that is the positive electrode of a capacitor. http://polywellnuclearfusion.com/Polywe ... lectr.html




Have you guys used any 3d simulator? I plan on using blender for a rough simulation of a fusion device but I haven't got the grips of it yet.

giorgos giorgakis
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 5:02 pm
Real name: giorgos giorgakis

Re: Converting drive voltage into collision energy.

Post by giorgos giorgakis » Sun Nov 15, 2015 11:51 pm

Has anybody worked with simulator programs that let you type in the formula for the field yourself? Blender doesn't.
Attachments
TESTBL.png

Post Reply