Compact Fusion Reactor: High Potential Difference Effects

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential effects of applying high potential difference to a mixture of deuterium and tritium gases within a superconducting tube, exploring the feasibility of achieving fusion under such conditions. Participants examine various concepts related to compact fusion reactors, including the use of electrostatic fields and neutron generation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that applying high potential difference could lead to fusion, while others emphasize the need for precision in thought experiments.
  • There are mentions of existing technologies like particle accelerators that apply electrical fields to gases but do not achieve break-even energy output.
  • One participant proposes a compact system that could be charged from a domestic DC source, suggesting that electricity could be produced through a thermoelectric generator.
  • Another participant discusses neutron generators that use electrostatic fields to accelerate deuterons, noting that energy losses typically exceed the energy produced by fusion.
  • The concept of the fusor is presented as a relatively compact system for neutron generation, though concerns are raised about its practicality for energy production due to inherent energy losses.
  • One participant suggests using a neutron absorbent material to transform energy into heat, which could then be converted into electricity, acknowledging the technical challenges involved.
  • There is a suggestion to dope water with boron for use in steam turbines, which could serve as both a neutron absorber and a working medium.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the feasibility of achieving breakeven energy output with current technologies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the feasibility of achieving fusion with high potential difference and the practicality of various systems like the fusor. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of these approaches or the potential for energy production.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to energy losses in existing systems and the challenges of achieving practical energy output. The discussion includes references to specific technologies and theoretical concepts, but no definitive conclusions are reached.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring compact fusion technologies, neutron generation methods, and the application of electrostatic fields in fusion research.

digital ranger
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
What would happen if we applied high potential difference to a mixture of deuterium and tritium gases in a superconducting tube?:confused:
Would the electric discharge give suffecient energy and conditions for fusion to occur??:rolleyes:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
what>?

Superconducting tube?

You need to be more precise in you thought experiments.

Certainly there are a myriad of particle accelerators that merely apply an electrical field to gases and definitely produce fusion, just not in "break even" quantities
 
Well I was trying to say (compact) ..:cry:
I mean something in the size of a car baterry can be charged from a domestic DC source and cause discharging once by means of capacitance.:rolleyes:
So electricity can be produced by thermoelectric generator .
 
There are neutron generators or 'howitzers' which use an electrostatic field to accelerate deutrons into tritated targets to create 14.1 MeV neutrons. However, the deuteron current is so low and the scattering so great that more energy is put in than developed by fusion. The objective however in this system is neutron generation.

A relatively compact system using electostatic fields is the fusor -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_electrostatic_confinement (article may contain unverified claims - reader beware)

I don't believe that a practical fusor for energy production has been developed.

In Tokamak, neutral particle beams are injected into the plasma. The NPBs use electrostatic fields to accelerate deuterons into the plasma chamber.

The problem is the scattering and the acceleration of nuclei/ions and electrons causes energy loss due to cyclotron and brehmsstrahlung radiation. Because of high temperatures in the plasma, magnetic confinement is essential for most fusion reactor concepts, with the exception of inertial confinement systems.
 
power output

well, I read the article of the fusor and it seems that the main problem is energy output.
I think steam generators and turbines won't be useful on a small scale.
Instead we can use a neutron absorbent material as a target for neutrons then it transforms the majority of energy into heat.
the heat is absorbed by a lasing active medium generating photons which can be absorbed by photoelectric cells to generate electricity.
I know that it's difficult from technichal and geometrical point of view.:approve:
so I need suggestions...
 
I think that the fusor is an excellent choice for compact nuetron generation.

It is simple and elegant
 
digital ranger
Can you elaborate on your idea it seems similar to an idea of mine. By the way if you dope the water for the steam turbine with boron it can act as both a neutron absorber and as a working medium
 
digital ranger said:
well, I read the article of the fusor and it seems that the main problem is energy output.
I think steam generators and turbines won't be useful on a small scale.
Instead we can use a neutron absorbent material as a target for neutrons then it transforms the majority of energy into heat.
the heat is absorbed by a lasing active medium generating photons which can be absorbed by photoelectric cells to generate electricity.
I know that it's difficult from technichal and geometrical point of view.:approve:
so I need suggestions...

The issue with the Fusor is not getting power out of it. It is that no matter how much you input, the losses because of the grids are simply too great to ever allow breakeven and power generation.
 
68658 said:
digital ranger
Can you elaborate on your idea it seems similar to an idea of mine. By the way if you dope the water for the steam turbine with boron it can act as both a neutron absorber and as a working medium

I don't think digital ranger is going to reply... He last visited the forums in 2006, around the time of this thread. :wink:
 
  • #10
Thread necro's strike again!
 
  • #11
Astronuc said:
There are neutron generators or 'howitzers' which use an electrostatic field to accelerate deutrons into tritated targets to create 14.1 MeV neutrons. However, the deuteron current is so low and the scattering so great that more energy is put in than developed by fusion. The objective however in this system is neutron generation.

A relatively compact system using electostatic fields is the fusor -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_electrostatic_confinement (article may contain unverified claims - reader beware)

I don't believe that a practical fusor for energy production has been developed.In Tokamak, neutral particle beams are injected into the plasma. The NPBs use electrostatic fields to accelerate deuterons into the plasma chamber.

The problem is the scattering and the acceleration of nuclei/ions and electrons causes energy loss due to cyclotron and brehmsstrahlung radiation. Because of high temperatures in the plasma, magnetic confinement is essential for most fusion reactor concepts, with the exception of inertial confinement systems.
So you think they are on the wrong track at Lawrence Livermore-Sandia?

-The Mystical Potato Head Groove Thing, also by Satch
 
  • #12
quasi44 said:
So you think they are on the wrong track at Lawrence Livermore-Sandia?

-The Mystical Potato Head Groove Thing, also by Satch

What do you mean?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K