Nuclear fusion and bernouilli's principle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the potential application of Bernoulli's principle to nuclear fusion using funnel-shaped targets instead of traditional spherical ones. The proposal suggests that lasers could strike the wide ends of these funnels, directing deuterium into narrower sections to increase speed. However, a key counterpoint is raised that faster-moving deuterium results in lower pressure, which is counterproductive for fusion. Instead, high-pressure stagnant deuterium is necessary for effective fusion, as achieved through spherical implosion. Ultimately, the consensus leans against using Bernoulli's principle for this purpose.
Rothiemurchus
Messages
203
Reaction score
1
Could Bernouilli's principle be used to cause nuclear fusion.Instead of spherical targets for lasers to strike what if we had funnel shaped targets - lots of them - with their apices all meeting in roughly the same region of space.Lasers beams could strike the wide ends of the funnels and force deuterium into the narrower parts of the funnels where it would pick up speed. Or would there be too much back pressure?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Rothiemurchus said:
Could Bernouilli's principle be used to cause nuclear fusion.Instead of spherical targets for lasers to strike what if we had funnel shaped targets - lots of them - with their apices all meeting in roughly the same region of space.Lasers beams could strike the wide ends of the funnels and force deuterium into the narrower parts of the funnels where it would pick up speed. Or would there be too much back pressure?

Rothiemurchus,

You don't want to have the deuterium pick up speed. Recall Bernoulli's Principle states that
the faster the material moves - the LOWER the pressure. You don't want fast moving LOW
pressure deuterium.

You want to have HIGH pressure STAGNANT deuterium. That's what a spherical implosion
gives you. Forget Bernoulli.

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist
 
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...
Hi everyone, I'm a complete beginner with MCNP and trying to learn how to perform burnup calculations. Right now, I'm feeling a bit lost and not sure where to start. I found the OECD-NEA Burnup Credit Calculational Criticality Benchmark (Phase I-B) and was wondering if anyone has worked through this specific benchmark using MCNP6? If so, would you be willing to share your MCNP input file for it? Seeing an actual working example would be incredibly helpful for my learning. I'd be really...
Back
Top