Fusion Claim - Jackson Oswalt

For posts specifically relating to fusor design, construction, and operation.
User avatar
Richard Hull
Site Admin
Posts: 10934
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Fusion Claim - Jackson Oswalt

Post by Richard Hull » Fri Feb 02, 2018 7:47 am

Jackson could you have someone take a photo of you by your gear and post it in the Image Du Jour forum. Please title it "youngest fusioneer - 12 years old. Give a bit of history on your project. Obviously, you had financial support. I assume your parents? What grade are you in? put all of this in the text with the image.

You have replaced Taylor Wilson as the youngest fusioneer.

Thanks.

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.

Jerry Biehler
Posts: 831
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:08 am
Real name:
Location: Beaverton, OR

Re: Fusion Claim - Jackson Oswalt

Post by Jerry Biehler » Fri Feb 02, 2018 8:38 am

Ian, the chance of getting suck back on a modern rotary pump are negligible. Probably even less of a chance of you losing power during a run or a pump randomly failing.

ian_krase
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:48 am
Real name: Ian Krase

Re: Fusion Claim - Jackson Oswalt

Post by ian_krase » Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:26 am

It happened to me though!

User avatar
Dennis P Brown
Posts: 1539
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 2:46 pm
Real name: Dennis P Brown
Location: Glen Arm, MD

Re: Fusion Claim - Jackson Oswalt

Post by Dennis P Brown » Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:33 am

Congratulations and well done Jackson on both fusion and being the youngest to date!

I agree with Richard - after the controlled experiments I did a few weeks ago I confirmed that a significantly smaller effective chamber does do more fusion than a larger chamber for the same voltage/current but this smaller chamber had less ionized deuterium! This was done by way of installing a anode grid in the larger chamber: effectively creating a smaller effective volume in the original chamber.

Critically, this is due solely from the higher pressure - not from more ionized deuterium in the chamber as I showed in the experiment. In fact, I had about 1/3 the ionized deuterium gas volume in the effective smaller volume chamber than the larger chamber (where the small anode grid grid was removed.) Flow rates were nearly identical in both experiments as well (I use a very precise feed micrometer valve. Also, both used the same sized cathode.) All aspects were the same except gas density.

See post: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=12048

Some years ago I have read about solid deuterium (yes pure D2 ice, and around 3 K!) that showed significant fusion when a high voltage and current ran through (acted as a Z-pinch.) I considered this interesting then.

Yet, these current fusor experiments and my controlled experiments do tend to indicate that density matters a great deal and does increase the probability that tunneling will occur for fusion - that is, tunneling numbers increase more readily at higher densities. Remember, my smaller "effective" chamber volume had less ionized deuterium but did exhibited a higher density - the only manner my fusion rate could increase over the larger chamber that had significantly more deuterium gas (at lower density) would be if the probability of fusion increased and that can only be due to the tunneling probability increased.

Aside: I did build an actually smaller chamber and reran the test using the same power levels in deuterium with the bubble detector and obtained the three bubbles in a similar time period. The operating pressure was closer to 25 microns, however this smaller chamber did require a significantly smaller cathode, as well. While this effort was primarily done to look into how physically smaller chambers behave compared to my original larger chamber - I was concerned about issues like high voltage flash over/shorting - this small chamber behaved very well. As Richard pointed out, far faster/easier to evacuate compared to large chambers. Another advantage to smaller chambers.

Jackson Oswalt
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2017 1:10 pm
Real name: Jackson Oswalt

Re: Fusion Claim - Jackson Oswalt

Post by Jackson Oswalt » Sat Feb 03, 2018 2:01 pm

Just finished my Images Du Jour post: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=12120.

User avatar
Jim Kovalchick
Posts: 312
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:00 am
Real name:

Re: Fusion Claim - Jackson Oswalt

Post by Jim Kovalchick » Sat Feb 03, 2018 3:15 pm

Congrats Jackson!

You have a fine system. What are your plans for it? I recommend some activation. With a small fusor you can get in close with your samples. Silver is an easy starter.

Post Reply