What Are Cheaper Alternatives to Quartz Tubing for Containing Hot Plasma?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TESL@
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quartz Tube
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on alternatives to quartz tubing for containing hot plasma, specifically addressing cost and impurity concerns. Participants suggest using borosilicate glass with a "getter" coating, Vycor glass (96% fused silica), and ceramic materials as potential substitutes. Vycor is noted for its lower melting point compared to quartz, while ceramics are highlighted for their heat resistance and low cost, despite concerns about impurities. The ranking of material properties emphasizes heat resistance, low impurity levels, low cost, and ease of processing.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of plasma containment materials
  • Knowledge of thermal properties of materials
  • Familiarity with impurity effects in plasma environments
  • Basic concepts of radiation types and shielding
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties and applications of Vycor glass in high-temperature environments
  • Investigate the use of borosilicate glass with getter coatings for plasma containment
  • Explore the thermal and impurity characteristics of ceramic materials in plasma applications
  • Study the effects of low-intensity X-rays on different containment materials
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, engineers, and scientists involved in plasma physics, materials science, and those seeking cost-effective solutions for high-temperature containment systems.

TESL@
Messages
122
Reaction score
8
Hello,

I am doing a project which involves very hot confined plasma. The problem is, quartz tubing is way too expensive for me. I don't want to deal with impurities so I came to ask if you can suggest any cheaper alternatives. Here are my ideas:
  1. Borosilicate glass with "getter" coating. (I don't know what will happen with deuterium)
  2. Any material with quartz coating inside. (This sounds a bit impossible)
Thank you.

edit: http://phys.org/news184310039.html this seems interesting.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
TESL@ said:
Hello,

I am doing a project which involves very hot confined plasma. The problem is, quartz tubing is way too expensive for me. I don't want to deal with impurities so I came to ask if you can suggest any cheaper alternatives. Here are my ideas:
  1. Borosilicate glass with "getter" coating. (I don't know what will happen with deuterium)
  2. Any material with quartz coating inside. (This sounds a bit impossible)
Thank you.

edit: http://phys.org/news184310039.html this seems interesting.

Is Fused Silica (quartz) really that expensive for the project? http://www.quartz.com/quartz.html

Vycor is a glass that is mostly fused silica (96%). It's melting point is significantly lower that quartz. Pyrex melts at much lower temperatures (820 C).

I found a 7 cm diam. Vycor tube on e-bay for ca. $100 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Corning-Vycor-Glass-Tubing-No-7913-70mm-x-36-96-Silica-RARE-Glass/111529446335?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D28772%26meid%3De5b03af9b7684c9094d9a4a358565fa8%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D5%26rkt%3D6%26sd%3D111529451243&rt=nc

If you don't need a transparent system, you might take a look at some ceramic materials.
 
245.0 mm x 253.0 mm...... 0.216 ft...... 397.92 dollars (this is about my dimensions except the length, so it is my last choice considering the price)

I don't need a transparent system. Ceramic is actually very resistant to heat and cheap. However, I am concerned that ceramic will cause a lot of impurities when exposed to heat/radiation etc.

Here is something I found about past reactors:
https://books.google.com.tr/books?i...Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Aldermaston torus&f=false

It states that some pinch reactors actually used corrugated conductive materials for the vessel, which I didn't want to do because pulsed EMF can cause high eddy currents thus damage. Metal walls would be extremely easy to machine and experiment.

So ceramic, laminated metal or quartz regarding the properties in the following rank of importance:

  1. Heat resistance
  2. Low impurity levels
  3. Low cost
  4. Ease of processing
Thank you.
 
TESL@ said:
when exposed to heat/radiation etc.

What kinds of radiation? At what levels?
 
Mostly low intensity X-rays and longer wavelength blackbody radiation for a short duration. (miliseconds)
 
TESL@ said:
Mostly low intensity X-rays

AT what level? How do you plan on shielding this apparatus?
 
I am not planning to shield the device. If you are asking about the safety, the experiments will be made in a place far from people. If you are asking about the effects of X-ray intensity on the tube (which would be relevant to the thread) I have no idea since no tests are carried out.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K