New record for fusion

Commonwealth Fusion Systems made the news for funding a couple of months ago. Here is a general write up about what their goal is and how they are going to produce nuclear fusion in their (+MIT) SPARC reactor.

What sets SPARC apart from ITER, JET, and other previous fusion tokamaks will be its use of a new type of high-temperature superconductor (HTS), yttrium barium copper oxide (YBCO). Current-carrying tapes made from YBCO remain superconducting at considerably higher magnetic fields than is possible with older superconductors. This is valuable because higher magnetic fields improve the thermal insulation of the plasma and thus allow for considerable improvement over the performance of previous tokamaks.

YBCO superconductors have existed for a number of years, but they have only recently become commercially available in the quantity and quality required for fusion devices. By using this new superconductor to develop high-field magnets – capable of producing fields of 12 T at the centre of the plasma, compared to 5 T in ITER – CFS and MIT hope to drastically accelerate the timetable to fusion energy and achieve net energy gain in a device that is roughly 2% the size of ITER. To make a comparison, we believe that YBCO superconductors will be an enabling technology for fusion in the same way that lightweight internal combustion engines were an enabling technology for powered flight.

The prototype HTS coil will demonstrate the operation of the magnet system and test the integrated cryogenic coolant system used to cool the superconductors to 20 K – the operating temperature required to generate the high magnetic fields in SPARC. Maintaining this temperature in SPARC will be challenging, since the compact nature of SPARC leads to higher power density and thus high heat fluxes generated by the fusion reactions in the core of the machine. Additionally, the properties of the mechanical structure around the conductor in the magnet depend strongly on the temperature of the materials, and therefore this structure must be kept cold in order to withstand the stresses generated in the magnet. The model HTS coil will therefore experimentally validate the heat removal capabilities in HTS magnet systems, and the lessons we learn from it will be critical in moving the SPARC project forward.

physicsworld.com, Aug. 5, 2019 - A commercial path to fusion.

There a few more details at the article. Mostly how they need to manage the HTC heating up during operation creating a possibility for "quench" (loss of the magnetic field).

It is nice to see details, HTS at 20K, generating 12 T field. Seems reasonable as NatMagLab made a 45 T coil, they should be able to realize the smaller field. The design of SPARC is modular, so building one coil will be copied for the other coils.

Speaking of HTS, there are manufacturing "defects" into the lattice structure using helium ion microscope to create kagome patterns to anchor fluxons at 70nm... which sounds crazy but we are getting to the point of atom construction of materials, so, hey, why not?!
natureworldnews.com, Aug. 5, 2019 - From Japanese Basket Weaving Art to Nanotechnology with Ion Beams.

Hum. More self-similar patterns at the quantum level producing "real world" effects! But the darn article does not say if this improved the Tc or strength or density of field!

The stellarator in Germany, Wendelstein 7-X, is under going upgrades and testing. They should be starting back up this month or next.

In New Jersey, NSTX-U is still undergoing personnel changes after the accident that shut it down in 1997. They are running simulations on their computers (many of the fusion devices use the same basic components so the code is re-used among several institutions. This also means when one researcher nails something, the code can be sent out and all fusion devices around the world will have access to the new code base). As far as I know, they have done the RCA and the repair to the device itself (root cause analysis). The reset is presenting a team with proper leadership to prevent any further mishaps. I expect something this fall as the new semester starts up.

General Atomics in San Diego has received more funding and continues to investigate their new heating scheme (the cyclotrons are coming in at an angle and heating a specific area mathematically calculated to provide maximum heating of the ion plasma). The new set-up has them on the verge of what the device can handle! They are also exploring materials for the inside of reactor vessels to prevent, or at least mitigate, embrittlement.

That is a brief overview of what I have found out over the last month. It has rather been slow. (The stories are at the main sites, ppl.gov, and ga.com)

I did find a paper on the arXiv about W7-X. They have created a stable, steady state, where there is little heat loss to the containment vessel and they can slowly remove impurities from the plasma (they aim the plasma at diverter plates that heat up and the heat wants to dissipate so it flows around the corner where turbo pumps remove excess material and impurities. When say long, it is all of 28 seconds! The have been able to demonstrate this at operating pressure and goes a long way towards proving steady state operation as planned (the highlights from the summary in the last sentence).
arxiv.org, Jan 8, 2020: 2001.02067v2, Heat and particle flux detachment with stable particle conditions in the Wendelstein 7-X stellarator fusion experiment.

And still Lockheed is silent. They should have the T-5 constructed by now although I thought they said they would fire a plasma at the end of 2019. I guess we will find out when the The Drive publishes an article as always!

Yet things may be looking up for the lab. After years of DOE reviews, PPPL researchers expect to start to rebuild NSTX in April. And a year ago, a report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) urged the United States not only to stick with ITER—which is hugely overbudget and behind schedule—but also to prepare to build the machine after it. This would be a prototype power plant, smaller and cheaper than ITER, and PPPL would likely play a leading role in building it.

At PPPL, job No. 1 is to get NSTX running again. To do that, Cowley brought in John Galayda, an accelerator physicist who led construction of the world’s first hard x-ray laser, the Linac Coherent Light Source at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, which in 2009 worked on the first attempt. PPPL researchers have begun to fabricate new parts and aim to have NSTX running in summer 2021. For Jessica Guttenfelder, a mechanical engineer who started at PPPL weeks before the machine conked out, it feels like a rebirth. “Everything you’re exposed to is so unique,” says Guttenfelder, who is in charge of a device that shoots hydrogen atoms into NSTX’s plasma to help it spin.

Science (sciencemag.org), Feb. 5, 2020 - After decades of decline, the U.S. national fusion lab seeks a rebirth.
(Long article but worth the read. Details the start of nuclear fusion research, PPPL's hay day, the reactor break down, funding decline, and why people are smiling again at the lab. There is a very nice diagram that shows you how the fusion reactor works, the lines of magnetic flow, where it broke, and several other reactor designs)

Finally! Definitive plans on NSTX-U at Princeton Plasma Physics Lab!

The real work was re-establishing leadership and aligning objectives and managing expectations. There was real concern from the DOE about the root cause of the coil breaking. Then there was a period of being named director, of building team morale back. I ventured to guess they would start back working on the reactor at the end of this year when school started back up in the fall but they are starting in April!

As quoted above, there is fabrication to be done. They are looking at running at temperature in the fusion regime range. The divertors will take a beating. They will also be using liquid lithium limiters in an attempt to keep the heat load on the divertors (the trap doors that they steer plasma containing impurities out of the reactor vessel) to a manageable level.

The article is very well written. It explains nuclear fusion reactors without saying things like, "star in a jar" or "wibbly wobbley" and other such terms... it treats you as an educated adult who can figure things out from context, remember something from several paragraphs before, all while telling a "feel good" story!

If you have the time, enjoy nuclear fusion, and end feeling excited about the future, this article is for you!

It has been a while since there was an entry here as W7-X is being upgraded, ITER steals all the stories but is still under construction, and the whole Covid thing brings everything else to a screeching halt, comes some news from South Korea.

They have a tokamak that has done some peak operations and back in the Normal Era, it would be a record until another research team would beat it.

Part of making a fusion reactor work is keeping the heated gas at operating regimes (100 million degrees Celsius, and constant pressure while the plasma whips around the reactor at some 100 km/sec).

South Korea’s National Fusion Research Institute (NFRI) on 24 November announced that the KSTAR fusion reactor had managed to operate the plasma at 100,000,000 degrees Celsius for 20 seconds...

Nuclear Engineering, 3 Dec 2020 - Another plasma record for Korea plasma researchers.

They beat their own record from 2019 of ten seconds (iirc, W7-X published a week later that they hit their milestone of 18 seconds negating KSTAR’s record).

This all theirs for a while!!

And an important step as humanity moves to the next phase of development and stop the current energy policy destroying the planet!

Anyhoo, there is a laser fusion device that is approaching “burning plasma” regimes (where the reaction ignites and is self sustaining as long as you add fuel).

This is nerdy news that makes me enthusiastic about the future (even if I am not along for the ride), this is exciting!!

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

New Plasma Propulsion System generates a helluva lot of thrust

source:

www.thedebrief.org...

a reply to: Erno86

Yeah, she has graced this thread before!

When magnetic fields in a fusion reactor are stretched, spread out, or, are created due to the rotation of the plasma itself (something ridiculous like 30 Km/sec!), they will “snap” back together. That is “reconnection”. They are easily seen as solar flares on the sun. Huge arcs falling back to the surface; or, strands breaking and flinging plasma off the surface: Corona Mass Ejection.

That is her idea. Nobody has published this idea and actually is a nuclear fusion engineer working on real reactors so this not “a kid in his mom’s basement”!

Armed with real simulation data (from the reactors she’s worked with), her idea works. The article I read ended with her saying, “time to build a prototype” [or close to].

I this idea is what the world needs: hope.

ETA: Since the OP record was beaten by SK’s K-STAR where a tokamak kept a plasma at close to the fusion regime for 20 seconds! I have been toying with doing a whole fusion thread all over and try to explain why I am so hyped over this technology with a bit less tech quotes with temps, parts per million, links to scholarly papers, etc., that is the whole post of this thread but another that is a bit less demanding for the science capable!

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Hi! Just discovered your awesome thread and am very interested in this subject. Unfortunately my physics is probably the same as an 8th graders

I was interested to find out the potential speeds a ship could travel if this new propulsion theory works?

Many thanks, glad you came back to this thread

originally posted by: FinallyAwake
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Hi! Just discovered your awesome thread and am very interested in this subject. Unfortunately my physics is probably the same as an 8th graders

I was interested to find out the potential speeds a ship could travel if this new propulsion theory works?

Many thanks, glad you came back to this thread

What the linked article says is this:

New Plasma Propulsion System
"her thruster concept produced exhaust velocities that are ten times greater than a traditional ion propulsion system". That's an impressive improvement over a traditional ion propulsion system, but, traditional ion propulsion systems produce so little thrust, as far as I know they are incapable of launching a rocket from Earth's surface like the chemical rockets we use:

NASA’s New Ion Thruster Breaks Records, Could Take Humans to Mars

Compared to chemical rockets, the ionic alternative is capable of a very small amount of thrust.

Whether Dr. Fatima Ebrahimi's proposed design could launch rockets off the ground or not, I don't know, but even if it can't, we could still use chemical rocket engines to get off the earth, then ignite the ion drive or the more powerful plasma drive. To make up for the fact their thrust is lower than chemical rockets, you just run the engines longer.

Decades ago the fastest propulsion system I've heard of was developed for something called project orion, but it may never be used. They say that could get up to 10% the speed of light, which it probably could, but the problem is such high speeds might be lethal to humans due to radiation, and as we've seen trying to use robots at the Fukushima nuclear disaster site, even non-human machines can be shut down by enough radiation. So not only is the speed of light still a speed limit, but the survivable speed limit is much lower than that because of the radiation issue described here:

Super-Fast Space Travel Would Kill You in Minutes

there's a natural speed limit imposed by safe levels of radiation due to hydrogen, which means humans couldn't travel faster than half the speed of light unless they were willing to die almost immediately.

That implies traveling half the speed of light would be ok, but I'm not sure that's really true, since you would be bombarded with hydrogen atoms coming at you at half the speed of light. Maybe the 10% of light speed proposed by Project Orion would be ok.

Later studies indicate that the top cruise velocity that can theoretically be achieved are a few percent of the speed of light (0.08–0.1c).

(0.08–0.1c) means 8% to 10% the speed of light.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Most of the descriptions of near light speed which is not what is really being discussed.

Ion engines convert electricity to a plasma ejected out the end. The process is lossy compared to the fusion rocket design which ejects plasma from magnetic reconnection. When the plasma is squeezed in the rocket, the high energy particles are directed out the back. Most of the fuel will be converted instead of the slower ion engine that shoots out “ions” instead of “plasma”, each at different velocities. The he magnetic reconnection is the difference.

You still have the issue of mass (Bedlam said, “g is a b!tch”!) so unless those Navy patents are real, you will always be dealing with mass.

But these engines are very interesting because they are a tad more efficient and faster than any current tech.

And yes, in outer space, not launched from earth.

But that would be cool. Launched from earth without chemicals...

originally posted by: FinallyAwake
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Hi! Just discovered your awesome thread and am very interested in this subject. Unfortunately my physics is probably the same as an 8th graders

I was interested to find out the potential speeds a ship could travel if this new propulsion theory works?

Many thanks, glad you came back to this thread

IMHO:

With a starship that has the capability of constant acceleration? Easily up to the speed of light barrier, and beyond into the superluminal realm --- With the survivability of craft and crew possible, by the use of a magnetic field that surrounds the starship.

Here's one of my favorite YouTube videos:

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
You still have the issue of mass (Bedlam said, “g is a b!tch”!) so unless those Navy patents are real, you will always be dealing with mass.

They are real patents, and maybe they hope the Chinese or the Russians will waste resources researching them, but you could just as easily patent a turbo encabulator. No working model is required for a US patent unless it's for a perpetual motion machine. That doesn't mean the turbo encabulator will actually do anything the patent claims when you actually try to build a working model, unworkable patents are not rare.

originally posted by: Erno86
With a starship that has the capability of constant acceleration? Easily up to the speed of light barrier, and beyond into the superluminal realm --- With the survivability of craft and crew possible, by the use of a magnetic field that surrounds the starship.

Magnetic fields can divert charged particles, and some of the interstellar medium is ionic. But some is not ionic so a magnetic shield wouldn't work on neutral particles.

Even with charged particles, if you're going say 99% the speed of light, do some calculations on how strong the magnetic field would have to be and you may find that humans can't survive it. For example, it's generally accepted that humans could not survive in the strong magnetic field of a magnetar, but research in much weaker fields as low as 2 Tesla show mutation in Fruit flies

That doesn't mean shielding is out of the question, just that magnetic shielding is problematic. This article discusses shields that would work whether the particles are ionized (charged) or not, such as shields made from titanium or water, but, it doesn't propose using such shields anywhere near the speed of light:

Puzzling Out Shielding Options

Semyonov plots the radiation involved from encountering interstellar gas versus velocity and finds that at speeds much above a comparatively sedate 0.1 c, an astronaut could not be outside the hull without layers of shielding. Shielding the entire ship is problematic. A radiation-absorbing windscreen installed in front of the vehicle is possible, a titanium shield of 1-2 cm workable up to 0.3 c but becoming ‘dramatically thicker with acceleration.’

Water? It’s not a bad idea because the crew needs water anyway:

So they are talking about 0.3c which is only 30% the speed of light and about how much dramatically thicker the shields would have to get to go much above that.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Many thanks for responding...but what about the results reported in the Stern-Gerlach experiment? --- Where "net neutral particles with magnetic moments can also affected, though less effectively."

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Erno86
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Many thanks for responding...but what about the results reported in the Stern-Gerlach experiment? --- Where "net neutral particles with magnetic moments can also affected, though less effectively."

To repeat what I already said:

"Even with charged particles, if you're going say 99% the speed of light, do some calculations on how strong the magnetic field would have to be and you may find that humans can't survive it. For example, it's generally accepted that humans could not survive in the strong magnetic field of a magnetar, but research in much weaker fields as low as 2 Tesla show mutation in Fruit flies"

Have you done the math for charged particles on how strong the magnetic field would have to be to deflect those going 99% the speed of light? Now you're asking what about net neutral particles, which your own source says the same magnetic field is far less effective in deflecting. You already quoted "can also affected, though less effectively." So if magnetic shielding is a problem with charged particles, I don't get where you're going with asking about neutral particles where it's less effective.

Edelstein and Edelstein have done the math, see section 9 here, which refers to table 4:

Speed kills: Highly relativistic spaceflight would be fatal for passengers and instruments

Table 4:

Note that 6 km is not too different from the LHC proton beam curvature (radius 4.3 km). Protons in the LHC have gamma = 7440

So they are comparing their calculated figures in Table 4 to the LHC where the protons have gamma of 7440 and the LHC radius is 4.3 km. If you want your space ship to go a bit faster, then gamma would be 10,000 and the curvature radius for deflecting charged particles would be 6270 meters. If you want to figure out the radius for deflecting neutral particles, be my guest but I don't see why you would waste your time, it will be much, much larger than the already huge 6270 meters.

Besides, Edelstein and Edelstein have a much better idea than trying to ineffectively deflect neutral particles Stern-Gerlach style, their idea is:

H atoms must be separated into protons and electrons before they can be affected by electric or magnetic fields. The H could be ionized by positioning a thin sheet shield ahead of the ship to intercept the incoming H atom flux. The separated protons and electrons would then proceed forward as charged particles.

One way to get the deflection radius down is to increase the magnetic field strength but they are already using a 5T magnetic field in their calculations, where even a 2T magnetic field has been shown to cause mutation in fruit flies.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Three authors discuss the physics behind shielding spacecraft from solar and cosmic radiation

"The magnetic field is the starting point, maybe, but the 'active ingredient' in the creation of a magnetospheric barrier is the plasma."

source:

academic.oup.com...

In the buildup to the big demo, ITER, in France, scientists will have a turn at running tritium in a tokamak reactor in England (JET).

The setup will be same as ITER. And they started the run in December. They run a reaction between 3 - 10 seconds, 3 - 14 times a day (source, article linked below); they will also vary the mixture of fuels to get as much data as possible.

The reactor will become radioactive and will be a “no go zone for 18 months” (same source)

They mentioned that this is the first time since 1997 that a fusion reactor has used tritium in a “significant amount”

Nature, Feb 22, 2021 - Fuel for world’s largest fusion reactor ITER is set for test run.

This is kind of nerd excitement at its highest point!

JET finished the last run with a tritium pellet and hit a Q = 0.67 which is an indication of of the quality of the reaction. When Q = 1.0, you are at break even and the energy you get out is equal to what you put in.

Nice to see some real fusion experiments happening!!

There have been several news releases about new clear fusion reactors. One, is GA is getting a new spherical tokamak reactor. The news release (San Diego paper?? I lost the link) said they were moving towards longer shots instead of pulses. The manager said something like, “... and maybe even steady state”!

There is some news!! A steady state tokamak!!

Here is another plasma/reactor story about stabilizing the reactions while protecting the side walls...

phys.org...

The title is “Researchers confirm ingredient in household cleaner could improve fusion reactions”

In addition to the tungsten vessel’s walls, they treat it with other substances to keep the walls from peeling and/or getting damaged (that is my whole point about lithium! Add it to the plasma, what is not used, most, gets splattered against the walls. It pools at the bottom of the reactor. Just drain, clean, and reuse!). Apparently boron is often used. Again, the team at GA have directly injected boron (mainly found in salt form... borax!) into the reactor and found it lined the walls as good as the current treatment method.

The real conspiracy is: Borax, what can’t this stuff do??!!

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

About GA, their new reactor design is called “Compact Advanced Tokamak (CAT)”.

They took data from D-II and D-III, reactors, revisited designs, ran simulations at Oak Ridge (they have a new, b1tching, super computer, and the previous bad@as sits there! Both are being scheduled to various organizations), and found that they can create a higher pressure which means that they don’t have to have such a high internal plasma current (which whips the plasma around causing instabilities and hot/cold islands). That means that the whole reactor shrinks in scale (I was thinking that they would find stronger superconducting magnets which also shrinks the reactor size.) And of course,?size means money.

All this posted at World Nuclear News: US scientists introduce new fusion reactor concept.

Published on April 1, 2021, I hope that this not an April Fools joke! (No fear! The main article was published March 18) But like I said, the scale shrinks when pressure increases. And that can still be done! (Real reactors run at about 3T magnetic field strength. Current HTS hit 5T. Lockheed’s CFR calls for 10T for the large model and 15T for the low boy (bed of the truck comment) and the strongest, steady magnet is HTS wrapped around a LTS, that generates 50T).

There is still room to shrink reactor size!!



ETA: Watching Final Four, lost train of thought! The whole steady state tokamak!! That is super cool!!

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Popular Mechanics has more, with numbers (8m wide, 200MW reactor), and the mention that a real reactor is 10 or more years away, CAT will be further out than that.

Which is contradictory to their article’s title!

PM, April 5, 2021 - This Is the First Fusion Power Plant to Generate Net Electricity.

Hum?!?

Well, the Chinese have a tokamak called EAST. They had been chasing reactor news so some reactor, like W7-X, would claim a new record, the Chinese government would release a news statement about EAST doing the same thing. Big problem was nobody could validate the statements!

Now, the data is released with the claims. This is a new record as EAST reached 120 million C and held it for 101 seconds!

www.sciencealert.com...

That is a huge step! This means that it is possible as most tokamaks are pulsed and 100 seconds is a good amount of time. One thing the story doesn’t mention is the fuel they are using (real deal, tritium, is difficult to work with and is regulated as that is what turns a nuclear bomb into a hydrogen bomb!). That matters on how hot the reactor needs to reach and maintain. Density also matters. No mention of what they are studying with these shots.

With what General Atomics is doing with steady state reactors then we are setting up for some new record for fusion in the not too distant future!!

Hello all, just thought i would drop by. I was a bit disappointed when ITER were popping champagne because they had achieved 120 seconds of fusion, it seems. This was released via the Royal Academy, yes the same peeps who kicked out professor Laithwaite as being a 'heretic', and Cambridge University, a bit of a shame since i got my O and A levels from them.

So what was the big revelation and excuse for a party, at taxpayers expense?
Yes they probably actually achieved what i call 'a fusion event' since i have recorded many.
Well they put 14 Mw into it, and they got 11Kw out. And they consider that a 'breakthrough'
No it isn't.
What we would call either a 'breakthrough' or an 'accident' is when they fired up the first fusion reactor in a bunker, probably at Aldermaston. It promptly went into overdrive, and vaporised the entire room. People, equipment, all gone, in less than a second.
They filled that bunker with concrete and forgot about it.
But i am still here, and can tell you that this does happen in the real world. And that is why i plan to buy an underground bunker soon, and re-create that experiment, only this time using telemetry etc.
An uncontrolled fusion reactor (even a small one) can generate some 12 GW of power in a second, just think about that.
Hi to everybody, keep safe, see ya later.