Homepage Forums Lawrenceville Plasma Physics Experiment (LPPX) FF1 sets new personal record

This topic contains 5 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by Avatar asymmetric_implosion 7 years, 4 months ago.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1254
    Avatar
    AaronB
    Member
    #10891
    Avatar
    zapkitty
    Member

    Thanks for the update! 🙂

    #10892
    Avatar
    benf
    Participant

    That’s great news. A very large increase in scaling… Thanks for the progress report!

    #10895
    Avatar
    Matt M
    Member

    I am not a theoretical physicist, but it seems to me that the central issue with this machine is
    whether the results will scale up, and it they will scale up in a linear or logarithmic manner.
    Critics has said that this approach will always require more energy than it produces. Proponents
    has maintained the output will increase at a greater rate than the inputs.

    No one is sure because no one has ever gone down this road or gotten these kinds of results before.

    But so far, it is looking good for the home team.

    #10906
    Avatar
    Impaler
    Member

    Interesting, scaling is certainly key but I’m having a having a hard time meshing these last few updates into a picture of how much progress has been made. Is their some way in which the results can be graphed along side earlier results and with comparisons to other projects (ITER & NIF) along with a ‘goal’ point to give a more visual sense of the progress?

    #10969

    Impaler wrote: Is their some way in which the results can be graphed along side earlier results and with comparisons to other projects (ITER & NIF) along with a ‘goal’ point to give a more visual sense of the progress?

    The typical relationship is a ratio of fusion energy to energy required to drive the fusion events. Based upon the statement by LPP, eight 9 microfarad capacitors were used at a charge voltage of 40 kV or 57.6 kJ. The D-D fusion yield would be ~1 J with a D-D yield of about 1E12 neutrons. This means the conversion efficiency from the cap bank to fusion is 0.001%. JET has reported a physics conversion ratio of 70%. However, this neglects the pumps, magnets and other auxiliary systems that are necessary for fusion to take place. It only takes into account the energy to heat the plasma. In reality, I would guess 25% is a better number but don’t hold me to that. NIF on the other hand is likely to show gain, i.e. conversion greater than 100% in the next few months. However, it will never be a fusion power system. NIF has one purpose despite the advertising and it is NOT to make electricity.

    This is a reasonable comparison, but one has to ask about goals. My personal opinion is 3MA is too small to demonstrate a fusion gain. However, the critical physics of a fusion burn in a pulse power system with p-11B might be demonstrated. One should not underestimate the value of this information. It would be a huge advance for fusion in general.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.