Helion Energy? Did they beat Tri Alpha? Scam?
Helion Energy? Did they beat Tri Alpha? Scam?
So I dont know whether I understand what they are saying.
If I read it correctly, they are saying that they beat Tri Alpha to a 1/3 scale version of a fusion reactor. No net energy yet, or at least not practically. Anyone got more on this?
People in the comments seem to think they are shady.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/04/helion ... clear.html
If I read it correctly, they are saying that they beat Tri Alpha to a 1/3 scale version of a fusion reactor. No net energy yet, or at least not practically. Anyone got more on this?
People in the comments seem to think they are shady.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/04/helion ... clear.html
Based on the limited information at the link, it seems thay have tested a ~1 Tesla and 1 KeV machine with D-T. Goal is a demo at ~ 10 Tesla and 5 KeV. From this I'm assumeing they are limiting thier efforts to making the D-T reaction work. Is it reasonable to assume that this is the pontential limiting capacity for reverse field pinch systems (like Tokamaks)? All other things being equal, if the Polywell concept works with D-D reactions it would have a large advantage in cost and complexity (no need for excess tritium production- lithium blankets, buryllium, etc.).
I could see both systems employed if the Polywell ends up being less compact than the RFS. D-D burning Polywells produces power for the grid and tritium as a byproduct. RCS systems uses that tritium in mobile applications like ships without the need to generate endogenous tritium. Tokamaks would be left out in the cold, as would laser confinement unless thay can greatly improve and economise the laser systems beyond the NIF level.
Dan Tibbets
I could see both systems employed if the Polywell ends up being less compact than the RFS. D-D burning Polywells produces power for the grid and tritium as a byproduct. RCS systems uses that tritium in mobile applications like ships without the need to generate endogenous tritium. Tokamaks would be left out in the cold, as would laser confinement unless thay can greatly improve and economise the laser systems beyond the NIF level.
Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.
-
- Posts: 794
- Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:56 am
- Location: Munich, Germany
Thanks for the tip. Please keep me informed if you learn any more. The info in the link is very meager. Perhaps suspiciously so. "Exclusivity – World‐wide license to core technology of fusion engine and improvements" sounds like they have a patent. If so, we should be able to dig it out. The idea itself is old, so the question is how they deal with the known difficulties. One of these is that FRCs, when scaled to reactor sizes, are supposed to be unstable. (Actually they are supposed to be unstable at laboratory size, which they are not, but it will probably get worse when scaling up.) For you tokamak haters: The topology of an FRC machine is linear, so it is much simpler than a (toroidal) tokamak, and it operates naturally at high beta, so the power density is 2 orders of magnitude higher than for a tokamak..
Re: Helion Energy? Did they beat Tri Alpha? Scam?
Did you see Homer Simpson standing near the plant in the PDF? I wonder if he has been trained in plant operation?Skipjack wrote:So I dont know whether I understand what they are saying.
If I read it correctly, they are saying that they beat Tri Alpha to a 1/3 scale version of a fusion reactor. No net energy yet, or at least not practically. Anyone got more on this?
People in the comments seem to think they are shady.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/04/helion ... clear.html
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Yeah, I saw that.Did you see Homer Simpson standing near the plant in the PDF? I wonder if he has been trained in plant operation?
This is not the first time I have seen Homer used to show the size of a machine of sorts. Still kinda odd choice. Maybe they wanted to emphasize that the machine is easy enough to operate, that you can even let a "genius" like Homer near it.
Re: Helion Energy? Did they beat Tri Alpha? Scam?
This is from the Pulsed High Density (PHD) Experiment.
More info here.
http://www.nifs.ac.jp/itc/itc16/content ... 8-Gota.pdf
http://www.physicsessays.com/doc/s2005/ ... -Final.pdf
http://hifweb.lbl.gov/ICC2000/Magnetize ... 1_Oral.pdf
More info here.
http://www.nifs.ac.jp/itc/itc16/content ... 8-Gota.pdf
http://www.physicsessays.com/doc/s2005/ ... -Final.pdf
http://hifweb.lbl.gov/ICC2000/Magnetize ... 1_Oral.pdf
There is a ream's worth of patents, look under Rostoker and/or Monkhorst. They've been pumping out what look like Uni-based [california/florida, viz.well-funded] patent applications for some considerable time, yet I've never been able to figure out what it is that they are claiming that is new. Perhaps this is why most remain patent applications (save for a neutral beam colliding scheme of Rostoker's dating back to 1990).Art Carlson wrote:"Exclusivity – World-wide license to core technology of fusion engine and improvements" sounds like they have a patent. If so, we should be able to dig it out. The idea itself is old..
-
- Posts: 794
- Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:56 am
- Location: Munich, Germany
Re: Helion Energy? Did they beat Tri Alpha? Scam?
It looks like they are using some of the same graphics, and the Seattle area code of the CEO matches the UW, so there is probably more than a coincidental relationship here. That's good. John Slough is an old buddy of mine. He was running the experiment I did my Ph.D. work on. Definitely serious. Keep your eye on this one (but watch your pocketbook).Torulf2 wrote:This is from the Pulsed High Density (PHD) Experiment.
More info here.
http://www.nifs.ac.jp/itc/itc16/content ... 8-Gota.pdf
http://www.physicsessays.com/doc/s2005/ ... -Final.pdf
http://hifweb.lbl.gov/ICC2000/Magnetize ... 1_Oral.pdf
There are a lot of interesting things to say about this concept. For example, direct conversion: You can magnetically compress the configuration till it starts burning, then let it expand against the field. If you are lucky, you get more electrical energy out than you put in to begin with. This is the most attractive direct conversion scheme I know of. Another thing, wall loading: Since this thing is zipping down a tube, it you decide the heat and/or neutron flux to the wall is too large at your design point, you can simply make your tube a bit longer and send the plasma down it a bit faster. Can I proselytize anyone to convert from polywell to FRC?
Re: Helion Energy? Did they beat Tri Alpha? Scam?
Interesting. I was the one who commented about them being shady in the "NextBigFuture". I was noting the lack of technical detail in their website and presentation. I was not aware that UofW was a hotbed of FRC research.Art Carlson wrote: It looks like they are using some of the same graphics, and the Seattle area code of the CEO matches the UW, so there is probably more than a coincidental relationship here. That's good. John Slough is an old buddy of mine. He was running the experiment I did my Ph.D. work on. Definitely serious. Keep your eye on this one (but watch your pocketbook).
There are a lot of interesting things to say about this concept. For example, direct conversion: You can magnetically compress the configuration till it starts burning, then let it expand against the field. If you are lucky, you get more electrical energy out than you put in to begin with. This is the most attractive direct conversion scheme I know of. Another thing, wall loading: Since this thing is zipping down a tube, it you decide the heat and/or neutron flux to the wall is too large at your design point, you can simply make your tube a bit longer and send the plasma down it a bit faster. Can I proselytize anyone to convert from polywell to FRC?
Sure, you can try to "convert" us from polywell to FRC. I'll be happy if any of these fusion concepts lead to commercial power generation. I don't care which one it is.
I believe Norman Rostoker's idea (Tri-Alpha) is also an FRC or some variant of it. I notice that Norman is also in his 80's. Hopefully, his partner, Hendrick Monkhorst, is as much the driver behind this as Norman Rostoker.
-
- Posts: 794
- Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:56 am
- Location: Munich, Germany
But, from http://www.physicsessays.com/doc/s2005/ ... -Final.pdf:Art Carlson wrote:The idea itself is old, so the question is how they deal with the known difficulties. One of these is that FRCs, when scaled to reactor sizes, are supposed to be unstable. (Actually they are supposed to be unstable at laboratory size, which they are not, but it will probably get worse when scaling up.)
andMost importantly, the FRC remains in a stable regime with regard to MHD modes such as the tilt from formation through burn.
Other tit/tid/teat bits from http://hifweb.lbl.gov/ICC2000/Magnetize ... 1_Oral.pdf:Finally, in the reactor scenario outlined for PHD, the FRC at no time exceeds the empirical regime where stability and good confinement has been observed throughout the entire formation process through burn.
andGiven the observed scaling with size and density, the required radius at a density of 1024 m-3 for a DT fusion burn with a gain > 1 is found to be ~ 1 cm.
The PHD fusion envisioned also provides for a simple direct conversion of the plasma into directed thrust. Of all fusion reactor embodiments, only the magnetically confined plasma in the Field Reversed Configuration (FRC) has the linear geometry, low confining field, and high plasma pressure required for the direct conversion of fusion energy into high specific impulse and thrust, and would thus have direct applicability to deep space flight.
Skipjack wrote:Yeah, I saw that.Did you see Homer Simpson standing near the plant in the PDF? I wonder if he has been trained in plant operation?
This is not the first time I have seen Homer used to show the size of a machine of sorts. Still kinda odd choice. Maybe they wanted to emphasize that the machine is easy enough to operate, that you can even let a "genius" like Homer near it.
Homer Simpson may be a simpleton, but remember that he prevented what would have been the greatest nuclear accident in Springfield's history!
Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.
-
- Posts: 794
- Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:56 am
- Location: Munich, Germany
I post an ilustration of it in an old tread.
I have to remake it I think.
viewtopic.php?t=487&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15
I have to remake it I think.
viewtopic.php?t=487&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15