Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Reflections on fusion history, current events, and predictions for the 'fusion powered future.
Post Reply
User avatar
Mike Beauford
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 2:24 pm
Real name:
Location: Morton Grove, IL

Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Mike Beauford »

I'm wondering if Lockheed is going after this to get a piece of the fusion pie so to speak. It sure sounds like what EMC2 was up to ... http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/ ... EM20141015. Funny how they don't mention exactly the method though they are using.
Mike Beauford
User avatar
Jim Kovalchick
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:00 pm
Real name:

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Jim Kovalchick »

Here is a better write up on the concept

http://aviationweek.com/technology/skun ... or-details
User avatar
Mike Beauford
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 2:24 pm
Real name:
Location: Morton Grove, IL

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Mike Beauford »

Ah, I got it wrong. This is a Tokamak concept, not a fusor.
Mike Beauford
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Chris Bradley »

McGuire's thesis looked to me to be riddled with one assumption after another.

Looking at this machine, he appears to have jumped to the conclusion that folks doing mirror-machine fusion for years didn't know what they were doing, so he'll have a go, because that's all I see in these pictures.
Will Caruana
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 6:44 pm
Real name: Will Caruana
Location: Wilbraham MA

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Will Caruana »

Back in March there was a post about Lockheed/Skunk Works doing fusion on the forums viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9222&p=62520

It referenced articles that where at least a year old. Lockheed/Skunk Works said last year that in 5 years they would have a 100MW prototype and in 10 years a 100MW power system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAsRFVbcyUY#t=728 This again was back in 2013. It doesn't seem like much has changed though they are still moving forward and a say again they are only 5 years away from a prototype. I really do hope the succeed but this makes me think of the quote "Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be"

-Will
Tom McCarthy
Posts: 405
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 3:36 pm
Real name: Tom McCarthy
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Tom McCarthy »

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/clean-te ... clear-fusi

Sent by a friend, was about to ale a new post when I realised somebody had got to it already.

Tom
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Chris Bradley »

Yet another 'fluff' report of the same regurgitated material, or non-material if you prefer.

Virtually every sentence is a fantasy stretch of the imagination with no substantiating information on any of it.

Reflecting the seriousness of the piece, it ends with a comparison with the 'e-cat'. Whether an intentional sleight, or clever journalism, the Lockheed effort appears to have been inadvertently compared with its true peers.
Dan Knapp
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:34 am
Real name: Dan Knapp

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Dan Knapp »

The Lockheed patent applications were just published (October 9). To see them, search Google Patents for
US20140301517, US20140301518, US20140301519. The inventor name is Thomas John McGuire.
Hopefully, the skeptics will read them before they spew forth venom. Skeptics would be well advised to use discretion in selecting the names they apply to these researchers. Lockheed is probably likely to be less tolerant of libel than university professors.
Last edited by Dan Knapp on Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Chris Bradley
Posts: 2930
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 am
Real name:

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Chris Bradley »

You seem to be missing a number. US patent applications consist of a year number followed by 7 digits.
Dan Knapp
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:34 am
Real name: Dan Knapp

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Dan Knapp »

Sorry, transcription error. Correct numbers are:
US20140301517, US20140301518, US20140301519.
Thanks for catching this.
Dan Knapp
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:34 am
Real name: Dan Knapp

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Dan Knapp »

Original post of patent numbers has been corrected.
For some reason the Google Patent search function is having trouble pulling these up.
The direct links are:
http://www.google.com/patents/US20140301517,
http://www.google.com/patents/US20140301518,
http://www.google.com/patents/US20140301519
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Richard Hull »

Give 'em a break it is only 5 years and it's a done deal.......Real soon now........Heard that loud and clear. We can wait for fusion. We are good at that.

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
ZackaryMiller
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 11:46 pm
Real name: Zackary Miller
Location: Torrance C.A.

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by ZackaryMiller »

This reminds me of a statement by Hyman G. Rickover on the nature of (fission) reactor design.
An academic reactor or reactor plant almost always has the following basic characteristics: (1) It is simple. (2) It is small. (3) It is cheap. (4) It is light. (5) It can be built very quickly. (6) It is very flexible in purpose. (7) Very little development will be required. It will use off-the-shelf components. (8) The reactor is in the study phase. It is not being built now.
On the other hand a practical reactor can be distinguished by the following characteristics: (1) It is being built now. (2) It is behind schedule. (3) It requires an immense amount of development on apparently trivial items. (4) It is very expensive. (5) It takes a long time to build because of its engineering development problems. (6) It is large. (7) It is heavy. (8) It is complicated.
-Hyman G. Rickover

I belive that this design falls entirely into the former category and, after more development I belive that it shall either cease to exist or be brought into the realm of reality beyond paper and be far closer to what Rickover called a "practical reactor" with all of it's problems.

That being said I also hope I am wrong and it does become real to their original specifications; however, that seems unlikely as there will be significant technical hurdles and the reactor will need it's own systems designed custom, and I do not see that forthcoming in such a short time frame.
Paper Reactors, Real Reactors- a short paper by Hyman G. Rickover

No endeavor that is worthwhile is simple in prospect; if it is right, it will be simple in retrospect.
-Edward Teller
Dan Tibbets
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 1:29 am
Real name:

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Dan Tibbets »

The Lockheed Skunkworks approach is not a Tokamak,or a Polywell or a FRC. It is reported to draw from these other approaches. I think it may most closely resemble a Polywell, except it apparently does not use electrostatic confinement of ions with an electrostatic potential well. Heating has to be by other means like neutral beam injection and microwaves. There appears to be some effort to reduce cusp losses and for viability a high Beta condition near one is needed, like in the Polywell. Still, I have the impression that cusp losses will be considerable and recirculation- ions and electrons looping around to another cusp for reentry is paramount. B field geometry may lead to edge instabilities in areas, and ExB ion cross field diffusion would seem to be a problem, but both areas have been addressed and solutions presented (I'm in no position to judge the viability).

They have apparently done some experiments. What experimental data has been obtained and its significance to the computer modeling is unknown.

Dan Tibbets
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 14992
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Richard Hull »

Where's th' beef! I know..."real soon now" ...."these guys are finally on the right track"...."this is the way forward"....
Fusion is the energy of the future and it always will be.

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
Jeroen Vriesman
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 4:08 pm
Real name: Jeroen Vriesman
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Is this part of EMC2 research finally coming to light?

Post by Jeroen Vriesman »

https://cdnapisec.kaltura.com/html5/htm ... p9Jfavwg==

A more recent video, with more technical details (after about 20 minutes of general propaganda)
Post Reply

Return to “Fusion --- Past, Present, and Future”