Water Arc Experiments

This forum is for other possible methods for fusion such as Sonolumenescense, Cold Fusion, CANR/LENR or accelerator fusion. It should contain all theory, discussions and even construction and URLs related to "other than fusor, fusion".
Post Reply
Richard Hester
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 12:07 am
Real name:

Water Arc Experiments

Post by Richard Hester »

I know some people in this forum have messed with water arcs before. Not really fusion (not even with heavy water), but high energy tweaking nonetheless. The attached link shows a technique for focusing the energy of underwater exploding wires so that a few kilojoules can go a long way

http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_editi ... pe=PTFAVES
kcdodd
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:29 am
Real name:

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by kcdodd »

10^5 K? That's 10eV. It wouldn't be water anymore.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14991
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Richard Hull »

Very interesting! This is a good piece of info. I was involved with the water arc work with Dr.s Graneau in the mid-ninties.

This is not a true water arc explosion, of course, which is a purely dielectric event. Here, we are exploding wires underwater and thus, metal ions are involved in supporting the arc.

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
User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 3159
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
Real name: Dennis Brown

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Dennis P Brown »

Very interesting experiment - if a small plastic sphere of deuterium enriched plastic was placed at the center, then a few neutrons might be created. If a small amount of deuterium was ionized at the center (as a bubble?) and then compressed by that shock wave, very high fusion rates might be possible. This would be identical, in basic approach, to the General Fusion system in Vancouver. This wire cage method in water would avoid a lot of issues that are currently stopping spinning liquid metal tank/shock wave implosion system method from working.

Very cleaver idea to produce the spherical wire shell and implode it to focus the shock energy all into a point. Might even produce real levels of fusion energy... assuming any number of troubling issues wouldn't defocus the shock wave ...still, an amazing idea. They should consider such an approach - I know the Z-machine (imploding wire system) has shown that this approach could achieve high levels of fusion energy. Their problem is that they depend on the magnetic field to remain stable in the collapse (which has not worked well at all due to instabilities)

This novel approach using water avoids that issue, as well.
Richard Hester
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 12:07 am
Real name:

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Richard Hester »

Look at the temperatures involved - I don't think so.
User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 3159
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
Real name: Dennis Brown

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Dennis P Brown »

Correct if that was the temperature that the compressed center would achieve in my second proposal. That is why I would think it needed to be ionized, first. Then the temperature is starting at 10^4 to 10^5 K before compression. So, starting at 10^5 with their system, then the temperature could go to 10^10 K. That is far hot enough to do fusion in a big way (not that it really would, but it is possible.) As for the first case (deuterated plastic at room temp), that is why I indicated it would only yield a few neutrons (as in tens at best.)
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Chris Bradley »

Dennis P Brown wrote:
> So, starting at 10^5 with their system, then the temperature could go to 10^10 K.

Richard Hester
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 12:07 am
Real name:

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Richard Hester »

So how do you do that? You're starting with water, after all. Are you thinking of exploding wires inside a plasma? May not work the same way. Keep in mind also that exploding wires are a one-shot proposition.

I'm sorry I even posted about this, as there's going to be even more frittering and useless speculation...
User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 3159
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
Real name: Dennis Brown

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Dennis P Brown »

Neither does fusion in big Tokamac's really work - so, not really saying the collapsing wire method will achieve worthwhile results nor temps anywhere that high but last I recalled in science, until shown by experiment, all is just speculation yet still possible - my point was not as far removed from experiment as Chris' "parking brakes" example relating to neutron ejection speed and the uncertainty principle (I guess its now my turn to use ‘LOL’ even if I do not necessarily feel his example was unreasonable.)

But exploding the wire sphere under water is an approach that has great merit due to its ability to apply highly uniform compression to its internal 'trapped media.' Chris is correct in that their system would most likely not scale as well as I outlined but 10^7 or 10^8 is reasonable speculation for achievable temperature for a pre-heat ed target - I was just pointing out that the system does multiply by 10^5 and temps well above required fusion temps are then possible.

Getting within the required time frame window between the two events would be trivial for big labs using standard trigger systems ($$$ but very simple, for them.)

As for one shot - ask the many multi-million dollar per year z-machine program (uses exploding wires! for fusion) at Los Alamos or ITER which is pretty much a one shot machine per run (which also could take days between shots); but my point was achieving significant levels of fusion energy during one shot. Not a viable power source - very different issue.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14991
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Richard Hull »

Richard, you should not wring your hands over the posting. It is interesting and the relative incompressibility of water makes for added interest in the process. I, too, hope this won't wind up with great belching speculation posts, but instead, if anyone thinks its "pretty" that they go off and do experiment and report back. Most here are incapable of doing creditable work here anyway, if fusion is the goal, due to lack of good pulsed neutron detection systems.

It is of some interest to me to determine if the chamber in the image shatters with each blast, (surely it must), as there would be radiating shock waves as well. Having some experience here, I know the forces generated in dielectric water based explosions of only 300-500 joules are fearsome.

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
User avatar
Doug Coulter
Posts: 1312
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:18 pm
Real name: Doug Coulter
Location: Floyd, VA, USA
Contact:

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Doug Coulter »

I actually have the stuff to try this, but I don't think I will. The idea of compressing neutral atoms with this forgets that:

Atoms are almost all empty space
They have electrons that keep them apart with a certain energy
The coloumb forces of stripped hi Z atoms are going to be even fiercer than what we have to deal with in a fusor. (I'm speaking to general fusion's idea).

Someone seems to be missing the scale factors here between strength of chemical bonds, and what it takes to jam D nuclei together. Off by quite a large scale factor. I'm not a believer that you can use what amounts to chemistry-level energies to do nuclear-level stuff. I don't think this is quite "supersonic" enough to get you there...by quite a distance. It's like comparing how fast an ICBM is to a particle in CERN's accelerator, almost. Sure, the first is impressive, but you gotta grab a sense of scale.

I'd think the pulse neutron detector would be quite simple, actually - activate some silver. If this worked at all, you'd get enough neutrons per pulse to see it that way, and no EMI issues.
Why guess when you can know? Measure!
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Chris Bradley »

Doug, the researchers do not appear to be 'missing' anything and do not appear to be claiming fusion capability. And nor would it get anywhere near it. It is a total non-starter for fusion. They are looking to access experimental high [energy] densities, not high energy particles.
User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 3159
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
Real name: Dennis Brown

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Dennis P Brown »

If memory serves, at Oak Ridge Labs, a researcher used sound induced luminescence in bubbles within heavy water to create significant numbers of neutrons. They felt that the sonic shock wave caused small bubbles to compress and these regions reached temperatures in the few 100,000 K range. This was proven by the intense UV production measured.

This experiment produces a significant flux of neutrons. So, even for normal conditions (the container is at room temp and can be cycled easily), neutron production does occur. They feel it was a type of 'cold' fusion (or a better term, low temp) but few believe this.

Now, this example does not prove that a wire cage method with a 'hot fuel' located at the center can ever yield 'energy plus' levels. But this most certainly does support the idea that the wire cage implosion method as modified, might just have merit. Here is related supporting empirical evidence for this approach.
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Chris Bradley »

Dennis P Brown wrote:
> Rather strange (considering the low temp), they got a large flux of neutrons from ... well, there is the question that has not as yet been answered. So, even for normal conditions, neutron production does occur.
Taleyarkhan made that claim. But a panel rule him guilty of research misconduct and falsification. No-one has been able to reproduce the results. Even Seth Putterman (world's lead on sonoluminescence) could not repeat the results! - He was given the chance by UK's Horizon programme in a funded experiment, but under the 'unreasonable pressure' of a few TV cameras the neutrons just didn't want to appear. Some quantum thing about 'being observed' I guess! - only works when no-one is watching Taleyarkhan seemed quite indignant when confronted with the results, and cited various 'differences' in the experimental setup.

Putterman had with him just about the biggest neutron detector you're ever gonna see - must be on youtube if you want to see the programme - if he didn't pick up any neutrons with that then there weren't any!

Sonoluminescence-induced fusion looks well busted.
User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 3159
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:46 am
Real name: Dennis Brown

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Dennis P Brown »

The neutron yield is, as you point out, a bust and is baseless (falsified). The temperature of the bubbles in collapse (10^4 K and some still claim 10^5; again, too low for fusion) has been reported by many others as measured by UV radiation. So, the basic idea of collapse heating still has merit with coupled with a hot fuel.
Derick T
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 4:04 am
Real name: Derick

Re: Water Arc Experiments

Post by Derick T »

Yes your correct in the explosion of the Sphere that this hole fusion process is taking place within but for everything imaginable in the universe has a positive and negative but there is a special place in the middle that we can make as a void were things can be made possible like the fusion process and only gas which is denser than The air we breathe deuterium gas is the sheild that is being forced in to create that bubble around the fusing of these particals that are going to combine and make so much heat and energy that you cant contain it or cool it. Let me just say that I was a person that one night while driving my semi truck down an old country road way out in the middle of nowhere there was a car ahead of me that made a right at the road I was supposed to turn on as I did and I started up a little incline I caught in my peripheral a light that came from out of the great dark and beyond and it actually lite the whole entire area that in my little world I was inhospitable so bright that I could actually see everything as if it was high noon. And to know in my mind and that what just caused this was no bigger than the size of a grain of sand now sit and rap hour brain around that . Now only if one could contain such a magnificent moment of time in my lifetime we could shoot ourselves anywhere in the universe. Sometimes I catch myself in a daze working my brains brainstorming and asking myself how or on earth could actually contain such energies ?
Post Reply

Return to “Other Forms of Fusion - Theory, Construction, Discussion, URLs”