KSTAR recent result and breakeven

  • Thread starter Thread starter jimgraber
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the fusion results from the KSTAR experiment, specifically questioning whether ordinary hydrogen was used instead of deuterium or tritium. The press release mentions continuous plasma operation at high temperatures but lacks clarity on the plasma composition. There is speculation that H2 was utilized, but the exact ion density remains uncertain, with estimates suggesting values between 10^13 and 10^14 cm^-3. The relationship between plasma pressure and magnetic field pressure is noted as a potential method for estimating plasma density. Overall, the lack of detailed information in the press release raises concerns about the clarity of the findings.
jimgraber
Gold Member
Messages
247
Reaction score
18
TL;DR Summary
How close is Kstar to breakeven now?
Here is link to recent result: https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-12/nrco-kas122420.php (20 seconds at 100,000 C)
I have googled but can't find triple product or anything similar. TIA if you can.
I assume this result was from a run with ordinary hydrogen, no deuterium or tritium.
But I think the equivalent DT values are frequently calculated. Is this possible here?
TIA again
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
Eurekalert news release wasn't clear. It mentions hydrogen once, "To re-create fusion reactions that occur in the sun on Earth, hydrogen isotopes must be placed inside a fusion device like KSTAR to create a plasma state where ions and electrons are separated, and ions must be heated and maintained at high temperatures." That is not helpful. They don't explicitly mention the plasma composition.

The press release states, "it succeeded in continuous operation of plasma for 20 seconds with an ion-temperature higher than 100 million degrees, which is one of the core conditions of nuclear fusion in the 2020 KSTAR Plasma Campaign." Well, OK, yeah, but . . . .

https://www.kfe.re.kr/eng/pageView/103 - indicates H, D-D, which doesn't clarify the matter, but I would suspect that they used H2.

https://www.kfe.re.kr/eng/post/paper_eng - page lists paper lead authors and titles, but not linked to pdfs. Disappointing! I found one paper in Journal of Nuclear Materials by typing in lead author's name and title.

OK, so we have 20 sec at 1E08 K (~8.6 keV), but don't know the ion density.
 
  • Informative
Likes berkeman
Thanks for the references
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
I saw a number in a paper that was 1019 m-3 (or 1013 cm-3) for ion density, but that's more or less a ball park figure. A number between 1013 and 1014 cm-3 would be typical, that latter being 10 times the pressure at the same temperature. Usually, as the temperature increases, the ion and electron densities decrease, as the system is limited by pressure, which is limited by the maximum magnetic field strength.

One could possibly estimate the plasma density by equating the plasma pressure with the magnetic field pressure (force), which is proportional to B2, and use the toroidal field magnetic flux density, Bθ, as an approximation.
 
Last edited:
Hello, I'm currently trying to compare theoretical results with an MCNP simulation. I'm using two discrete sets of data, intensity (probability) and linear attenuation coefficient, both functions of energy, to produce an attenuated energy spectrum after x-rays have passed through a thin layer of lead. I've been running through the calculations and I'm getting a higher average attenuated energy (~74 keV) than initial average energy (~33 keV). My guess is I'm doing something wrong somewhere...
Back
Top