Reply To: NIMBY FUD

[asymmetric_implosion]

Francisl wrote:

That is some impressive work. I hope it gets published.
Can you use this model to predict the limits of your sampled machines?

Thanks. I think the reviewer and I agree on the big picture stuff but there seems to be some details that we can’t come to terms on. I think the last revision will be enough middle ground to get published in Physics of Plasmas. If not, there are other journals. I have a back up in mind already.

The goal of the model is predictive capability for future experiments and future machine designs. I’d like to include more than 8 machines but this is all the data people were willing to share. The part I’m still working on in a follow paper is the electrode geometry requirements. The model as is does not recognize when the electrode geometry becomes impractical. This is a trade off depending upon the application. If you are doing a one shot and done application like Z at Sandia you can tolerate electrodes that will mechanically fail on each shot. If you are working at repetition rate, you need to the electrodes to survive for long periods. This model might play a role in making those decisions. The dI/dt traces (shown in Fig 5 of last post) can be predicted using pretty basic models that take the computational power of Excel.