Information on Teller–Ulam hydrogen bomb design

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the Teller-Ulam hydrogen bomb design and its mechanisms, particularly focusing on the transition from uranium and plutonium bombs to hydrogen bombs. It explains that early bombs used simple designs with uranium and high explosives to achieve critical mass, while plutonium bombs required a hollow sphere and compression to avoid fizzling. The hydrogen bomb's operation involves a fission reaction creating extreme heat, which then triggers fusion through plasma generation. Questions arise about the current ICBM designs, specifically whether they still employ the implosion technique or use neutron generators, with some participants noting that details on modern designs remain classified. The conversation highlights the complexity of fitting these mechanisms into smaller MIRV designs while confirming that explosives are still essential for initiating fission reactions.
exet
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi there,

I have a question about the Teller–Ulam hydrogen bomb design. This will be a long post , but I hope someone can answer it for me.

When the first bombs were created, uranium device was simple enough to to figure out. Two sub critical masses of u-235 joined at... I think it was 3000 feet per second to create a critical mass. I think from what I read tungsten carbide was use as a neutron reflector to get the reaction going to achieve an explosion. Correct me if I am wrong.

The second bomb they dropped was a plutonium bomb. This gets a little complicated. From what I have read / watched, the plutonium was in a hollow sphere, because p-239 will fizzle if brought to critical mass. They then took high explosives and compressed the the sphere of plutonium to critical mass. Not sure if a tamper was needed. (correct me if I am wrong but I think a tamper is a neutron reflector)

Anyway the to designs worked, but along comes the hydrogen bomb. The way I think this works is as folllows: plutonium atom bomb goes off, which is very hot turning the polystyrene foam (basically styrofoam) into a plasma which in turn with the xrays given off sets the hydrogen fusion device to go off.

So basically I am just wondering with the ICBM MIRVS, do they still use the implosion technique, or do they use a neutron generator to set off the plutonium device, and if so do they use a tamper.

Thanks for taking a look at this. I am very tired and am going to go to bed now, but I hope someone can answer this. I cannot find any information in documentaries, or on google.

Thank you.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I would be surprised if the current ICBM designs weren't still classified...
 
Certain information about the W88 warhead was leaked to the press. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W88 has a graphic that should answer at least some of the questions in the OP.
 
Ahhhh so they still do use the explosives to start the fission reaction. Wonder how they fit that into a tiny MIRV.
 
bare sphere (unreflected) Pu critical mass is just about 6" dia. The oblate design is a little tighter about the middle.
 
exet said:
Ahhhh so they still do use the explosives to start the fission reaction. Wonder how they fit that into a tiny MIRV.

MIRV's aren't THAT small. And it doesn't take a huge amount of explosives to start the reaction. See here for a size comparison: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/W87_MIRV.jpg
 
Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information(power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.) for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...
Back
Top