FICS II Planning and construction

For posts specifically relating to fusor design, construction, and operation.
Post Reply
User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11367
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Richard Hull » Wed Aug 23, 2017 4:26 pm

True....When in Rome..... Serious science, in the presence of the properly annointed, must remain, on point, formal, and use SI units; even at formal wine and chesse parties. The talk of fusion has kind of wound down, however, as the shine is a bit off that apple. Political discussion is more in vogue currently.

Science plods along in its usual busy way, as always, once the formality fades. Folks do what they do in day-to-day science. Good science is above formalism, at its core. Formalism is for papers and proper recognition by one's peers when in the presence of other peers.

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.

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Wed Aug 23, 2017 11:30 pm

Dennis,

If you want to hide in the chambers of academia and get your papers published and patents granted without proven results you obscure the work with scientific jargon and a "flux capacitor" becomes "silica based plasma current restricting device" but what the heck, if it works no one will care what you called it.

That said, my FICS fusion machine isn't working too well, sure it makes some neutrons but at this stage I still can't compete with a well built fusor. The plasma in my FICS chamber seems unable to stay lit for any length of time. At some point I might swap out the double ended chamber with something more conventional. Other projects are taking priority at the moment.

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Mon Dec 25, 2017 8:09 am

CHRISTMAS GREETINGS
First of all a Merry Christmas to all you crazy fusioneers out there, who like me find the festive season to be the perfect time for an antisocial introvert escape into the world of experimental science :)

LONG STRING OF FAILURES
For those of you who are new to the forum I have the most impressive history of fusion failures, mainly because I refuse to build a proven 6" spherical fusor, instead I have tried a whole bunch of crazy designs all well documented on fusor.net over the last 12 years or so. I shouldn't say total failures, because most of the stuff I built actually produced some neutrons but were not the success I was looking for, however I see it as the challenging path I need to navigate to get to the holy grail of fusion.

BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AGAIN
The FICS versions described in this thread were disappointing, so I gave it a break for a few months while I tried to understand the problems (essentially a failure of the plasma to stay lit). I came up with an idea which involved replacing the 6" cathode with a much narrower 30mm disc with embedded neodymium ring magnet (see images).

Effectively this new cathode (D10) is designed to operate in conjunction with the adjoining dynodes (D9 andD11) as a low potential ion source. High voltage is connected to dynodes 9 and 11 either side of the cathode, while the cathode is connected to ground via a 50 kV zener diode. (Yes you read that correct 50 kV).

In operation the HV is set to around 55 kV thereby setting up a potential of around 5kV across (D9+D11) and D10, which is a gap of around 10 mm. At the right pressure of around 5 micron the plasma lights up and a 2 mA current of electrons ionise the deuterium gas at cathode potential, which is what I have been trying to achieve all this time. To understand why this is so important you have to read some of my old posts and try to understand my radical ideas about fusion.

FICS- - 3.jpg
F.I.C.S. chamber cracked open
Fortunately the Latex glue I use for these chambers is easy to take apart without breaking the glass. Latex dries into a soft rubber compound and can easily be peeled off without any residue sticking to the glass.
FICS- - 2.jpg
New cathode with magnet set in
This is the replacement cathode with embedded neodymium magnet. The magnet cost me around $100 online.
FICS- - 1.jpg
New cathode with magnet cover
A perfectly machined lid covers the magnet and has a centering ring to help align the disc.
FICS- - 4.jpg
New cathode assembled with Latex glue
This is the whole stack put back together with the new cathode, the latex glue can be seen squeezing out. This method requires at least 1 week to dry and preferably with a bit of heat.

EARLY EXPERIMENTS
Early results look promising, and I am making neutrons at super low current consumption. I am measuring the current consumption in a slightly unorthodox way, due to the zener diode arrangement. I calculate the current used as;

(input current) - (output current) = Differential Current

Where input current is the current draw of the PSU and the output current is the current going to ground through the Zener diode. Since the latter can be fully recovered I only consider the differential current * voltage to be the energy consumed.

Before conducting the fusion experiment I calibrate the input vs output current by connecting the HV directly to the zener, i.e. bypassing the chamber, and setting the PSU to 55 kV then zeroizing the differential current.

The data below was acquired from my second run on Christmas eve, and looks promising. If you look at the first 300 seconds my neutron output was in the order of 300,000 to 400,000 n/s isotropic with current draw around 0.5 mA. This is a Q of at least an order of magnitude better than a standard fusor at the same voltage.

But as I said this is very early days and I am operating at the low end of efficiency. According to my calculations the optimal Zener value should be 62 kV which is an easy modification to do.

I see light at the end of the tunnel, is that Q1 I see on the horizon?

Steven
171224-Voltage.PNG
Data acquisition of voltage from Labview
171224-Pressure.PNG
Data acquisition of pressure from Labview
171224-Diffential_current.PNG
Data acquisition of current from Labview
171224-Neutrons.PNG
Data acquisition of neutrons from Labview
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 1704
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 2:46 pm
Real name: Dennis P Brown
Location: Glen Arm, MD

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Dennis P Brown » Mon Dec 25, 2017 11:16 am

As always, excellent presentation using data logging and design details using images of real devices.

When Richard say's to people about novel ideas, that they should build it - you certainly do! And very professional execution, as well.

I assume you feel this design, once optimized, will provide better neutron production by a few orders of magnitude greater still? While that will still fall far short of any goal for a Q = 1 (by still many more orders of magnitude), it would be impressive. So, best of luck and keep up the excellent work.

One thing you might want to look into to is how to create fusion at far higher working pressures in a fusor - some work recently by others here tend to indicate that this type of approach has potential.

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11367
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Richard Hull » Mon Dec 25, 2017 5:36 pm

Interesting piece of work and reporting.

Now, if you could just convince the power company to bill you based on the FICS differential power figures...That would be a net gain for you. The 99%+++ of true wasted energy is not being recovered by you, of course. I assume you are talking about a 99%+++ waste thermal recovery system at the one mega-watt input power level.

Dennis put it in perspective. Even with a real total input power of X the net fusion energy is 10e-9(X). No matter how you slice it or try and work the new math into the system, thermal losses remain at 99.999999 % give or take a gain/loss of +/- 0.000009% massive orders of magnitude losses will forever remain.

All the King's horses and all the King's men can't change that in this type of fusion system.

Merry Christmas and keep on pluggin'

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.

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Mon Dec 25, 2017 11:55 pm

Dennis and Richard,

Thanks for feedback, after all these years I have toughened up to Richards cynical outlook :)

I don't agree with Richards evaluation of the zener current, because it is useful electrical power and instead of bleeding it to ground through a resistor I could if I really wanted to, feed it back into the grid, no problem whatsoever.

I did another run this morning with similar results, the average current over 375 seconds was 0.65 mA and the average isotropic neutron emission was 230,000 n/s which puts the Q at 6.92E-9

Strangely I observed a downward trend in neutron output as the run went on, same as it did on the last run, neutron count starts off high and falls off over time. The only reason I can think of is that the zener diodes get hot, causing the zener voltage to increase, and from Labview I can't go higher than 60kV because the USB DAQ is limited to 5V output and my PSU input is 0-10 volts.

I won't post these results on the fusor Q list yet, as I wan't to do more runs and increase the confidence value.

Attaching screen shots of today's run.

Steven
Attachments
171226-Voltage.PNG
171226-Current.PNG
171226-Pressure.PNG
171226-neutron.PNG
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Tue Dec 26, 2017 12:33 am

Hi guys,

After letting the zener diode cool down, I gave it another short run and I observed an interesting event I thought I would share..

Look at what happens to the neutrons and the current at 136 seconds into the run.

Could this be Fusion Induced Charge Separation ?

Steven
171226-neutron-event.PNG
171226(B) Neutrons
171226-currentevent.PNG
171226(B) Current
171226-voltage-event.PNG
171226(B) Voltage
171226-pressure-event.PNG
171226(B) pressure
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 1704
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 2:46 pm
Real name: Dennis P Brown
Location: Glen Arm, MD

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Dennis P Brown » Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:48 am

Steve, a short term spike may be real or could be an artifact; interesting but one needs to properly explain the spike through experimental methods and more critically, consistently reproduce that effect.

I look forward to your achieving this next step showing that you can obtain that spike in neutron production in a repeatable manner.

Again, your approach is both interesting and demonstrates that you are a serious scientific investigator. Best of luck!

Aside: Steve, when you say
because it is useful electrical power and instead of bleeding it to ground through a resistor I could if I really wanted to, feed it back into the grid, no problem whatsoever
then you need to really prove this or your claims are simply not valid at all.

So, add some device in place of your resistor that does useful work (an electric motor driving a known load) and consumes 99.99% of your zener diode output current (that you have claimed is available to do useful work.) If your neutron rate stays about the same I will start to accept your claim that your massive losses are not a serious issue for your system - remember, as the saying goes: extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Otherwise, your method will need many, many orders of magnitude improvement in neutron production at no increase in power just to begin to make your idea about getting close to real power production even remotely believable.

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Tue Dec 26, 2017 9:48 pm

Dennis P Brown wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:48 am
Steve, a short term spike may be real or could be an artifact; interesting but one needs to properly explain the spike through experimental methods and more critically, consistently reproduce that effect.
Dennis, I have been in this game for long enough, and I agree it needs more investigating, but keep in mind I was there at the controls when it happened, the clicks from both neutron detectors went crazy and the event lasted for more than 10 seconds. There was no evidence of high voltage arcing, else we would have seen a voltage drop at the same time.
Dennis P Brown wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:48 am
So, add some device in place of your resistor that does useful work (an electric motor driving a known load) and consumes 99.99% of your zener diode output current (that you have claimed is available to do useful work.) If your neutron rate stays about the same I will start to accept your claim that your massive losses are not a serious issue for your system - remember, as the saying goes: extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Otherwise, your method will need many, many orders of magnitude improvement in neutron production at no increase in power just to begin to make your idea about getting close to real power production even remotely believable.
Frankly this is not a kindergarten, I don't need more proof of current than ohms law, I have a 1k 1% wire wound resistor between the zener and ground and I log the voltage across this resistor as my output current.

Unlike a tea kettle fusor I don't have a glowing hot grid streaming electrons to ground, instead my plasma is generated between the dynodes 9 and 11 and a passive cathode in the centre, so no electrons are lost to ground.

When a fusion reaction takes place, the electron goes to ground through the zener and the proton goes to ground against the electrical potential of the accelerator, it can do this because of its high kinetic energy, once it is stopped at ground potential it regains it's electron, thereby completing the circuit.

Most people probably have to think for a moment to understand how my design actually generates electric current, because it's the inverse of a battery, instead of having a current of electrons I have a small current of protons carrying the charge in my device.

Circuit diagram here;
download/file.php?id=10111&mode=view

Steven
Attachments
Zener.JPG
Zener diode filled with oil
Wiring.JPG
Wiring of the reactor
LoadResistor.JPG
Load resistor
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 1704
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 2:46 pm
Real name: Dennis P Brown
Location: Glen Arm, MD

Re: FICS II Planning and construction

Post by Dennis P Brown » Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:09 pm

Steve, neither your experience nor experimental accuracy are being question by me - you have proven yourself time again in your excellent experiments. Further, your current work IS impressive but does not necessarily demonstrate significant progress compared to the average fusor operating at 60 kV (i.e. what neutron count can a 55 or 60 kV, 0.65 ma device normally produce? Getting those numbers and comparing would provide context for your experiment. I do think believe that what you have done is a very nice improvement - getting over 200+ K neutrons using just 35 watts (or less) but I know zero on what people have done using those voltages, currents and neutron yields.)

As for Ohm's law and useful work (talk of kindergarten level knowledge is rather strange unless you think that is appropriate for this forum; I consider it rather unprofessional), completely different topics and frankly, Ohm's law alone has really nothing to do with extractable work relative to usable heat where temperature/heat and exhaust temperature are controlling factors; further, unless one knows the work the Zeners are doing (you say they are getting hot) then statements on the available energy is not straight forward. So, what is the voltage drop across your 1 K-ohm resistor? That and your current will give a rough idea of the power available in that circuit (but not necessarily the exactable work), would it not? Those should be a rather easy set of parameters to measure. Your differential current plot isn't clear to me nor that methodology - your plot indicates both positive and negative currents measured so you might want to explain what you are doing to get those values and method. Also, in the last plot, I assume it is still milli-amp?

Again, extraordinary claims do require serious and definitive proof.

Of course, even if your neutron rate is 200+ K/sec and your power is just 0.3 watts, your still not producing significant power at all compared to the input power. However, your current progress is still very impressive results and well worth reporting; still, bottom-line: that is only a few magnitudes improvement over a typical fusor - so, still rather insignificant to getting any real power from the device.

Post Reply