[Henning]

These laser sinterers only work with one type of material. But maybe they can be adapted to vacuum clean the dust of type one (after sinter), apply dust of type two on the same layer, sinter, vacuum clean, apply washable dust (type three), sinter, clean. And repeat that for each layer.

So essentially add another in water-, alcohol-, or whatever-, dissoluble dust like NaCl to that process, that’s good for holes. And then wash it out afterwards.

But those machines are not available yet.

And maybe we don’t want water for washing – it possibly corrodes the material.

[Henning]

Hm, about manufacturing the onion with rapid prototyping, I don’t think that’s feasible, because that would repeat the process 2000 times for 1000 layers of conducting foil. It already takes a few hours for each process, even with speeding it up it’s unrealistic. Possibly just build the onion’s skeletal features, it’s cooling coils, and then apply the foil layers by hand. Or spray them onto it. Or more likely spray the insulator, and layer the conductor.

[Henning]

Oh, that “I still don’t get” thing sounds like “I still don’t get what the hell you’re saying”. Wasn’t intended as such, I really appreciate your input, Aeronaut.

[Henning]

I still don’t get why you want to fit heat pipes made out of Titanium into the anode. Or do you mean actually manufacture the anode out of Titanium? Beryllium itself is quite a good heat conductor, even better than Lithium, just that Lithium melts at a lower temperature and thus is able to transport heat as a liquid.

[Henning]

Uh-Oh, didn’t think about electrically conductance. The more mass you’re charging, the worse it gets. So you’ll probably even get sparks outside the vacuum chamber at the cooling plates. So either use a non-conducting coolant (as in the patent), or insulate the cooling mechanism properly, and hope that the additionally mass that needs to be charged by the capacitors doesn’t affect the current rise time.

Some interesting data like “Coefficient of thermal expansion” on Beryllium and Lithium, including prices for research quantities, (we’ll pretty much need those Beryllium flakes at EUR 1518 per 100g, but in dust form).

Some more info about Beryllium dust: it’s toxic (like asbestos), and explosive with nitrogen or oxygen.

[Henning]

And here is a promotional video linked how it’s done: http://www.eos.info/en/applications/tooling.html

[Henning]

As I’ve seen on your drawing, you suggest to “snug fit” the cooling pipes into the anode. Don’t snug any pipes into the anode, the anode is the pipe itself. Same thing, drilled holes from bottom to top with the cap on (the coolant shouldn’t spill into the vacuum chamber).

Actually not drilled at all, because you can’t drill a hole that turns in the end. Much better for that is laser sintering. The Wikipedia article doesn’t mention Beryllium as commonly used material, so that needs to be developed. Maybe it needs to be sintered in a protective atmosphere (N, He, or whatever).

So some info about materials they’re using currently: http://www.eos.info/en/products/materials/materials-for-metal-systems.html
And a turbine as a result: http://www.eos.info/en/applications/aerospace.html

Oh, and I just read Beryllium melts at 1287°C, so that’s below the boiling point of Lithium of 1342°C.

[Henning]

Silicon and Silicone are completely different stuffs. One’s the element, the other one is the rubber. And I don’t remember reading anything in the patent application about them as coolants. They are both not useful here anyway. Both consisting of Si (Silicon) with an atomic number of 14, so pretty opaque to x-rays.

Lithium on the other hand melts at 180° and boils at 1342°C. With Decaborane melting at 99°C and boiling at 213°C, that makes Lithium a pretty good candidate. Also with its 3 protons, that’s pretty much invisible to x-rays – even better than the surrounding Beryllium.

[Henning]

Rezwan wrote: After we get fusion up and running, grasslands will be my next environmental pursuit. Restoring the Middle East dustbowls. So much to do.

Yepp. And my taking is, before colonizing Mars, finish colonizing Sahara first. I don’t care if Mars gets settled 1000 years from now, way after my lifespan.

Mars is fine for robotic exploration (with computers outperforming human brain in twenty years anyway, like a recent survey of experts say – or let’s say in fifty years). There is no need for humans on extraterrestical planets, what couldn’t do robots better – giving one or two decades that are required to build stuff for a human expedition.

And no high risk space elevator (yes Aero, that means you).

Start with something useful, i.e. watering Sahara and surroundings.

[Henning]

Same thing as discussed here: https://focusfusion.org/index.php/forums/viewthread/450/

[Henning]

So this is basically a fusor? Not even a polywell?

And I remember Dr. Miles being involved with DPF research.

Seems (sadly) that he abandoned DPFs in favor of fusors.

[Henning]

Well Brian, it isn’t funny anymore.

[Henning]

It seems to be a colliding beam reactor, and I found something dating back to 1997: http://news.ufl.edu/1997/11/20/fusion/
The NZ Herald article does not give any details like names of the researchers or a reference to a publication.
Most likely it’s just news popping up and resouped.

[Henning]

Pete, that’s all just and well for the serial production. But here we just have an experimental device.

You’re an electrochemical engineer (or something like that), but LPP are all physicists. They can screw things together and set up measuring devices, but I doubt anyone can weld. Wolfgang the mechanic down the road does the milling and turning. (Isn’t there a better word in English? Something like “fräsen” and “drechseln” in German?) But I doubt he knows much about any kind of electrolysis. Probably just the basics, how you get a nice goldenly finish (I might be wrong here).

I would like to ask you for a favor: Could you maybe instruct Wolfgang what kind of finish is appropriate, and how to achieve it? Or maybe even do the electrolysis in your company’s workshop as a pet project (side project – or whatever it’s called), or as an official order by LPP?

I feel like you’re having heaps of great ideas, but Eric seems to be silent because he doesn’t have the means of bringing those ideas into reality (or maybe he’s just on holiday now). That’s why I’m asking you to step forward with a plan and a commitment to actually do the coating (I hope I don’t ask for too much). So the next time they’re unscrewing the switches and week worth of waiting they get a 50% performance increased switch.

If you’re able to do that, also contact Eric directly by e-mail through the forums, and ask him whether that’s actually desirable. I’m not writing on behalf of LPP, so ask them directly.

Cheers (and a great thank you),

Henning

[Henning]

You mean like molecular hydrogen (H2)? Liquid hydrogen? Solid hydrogen? Molecular hydrogen which is stored in a tank, like those in a hydrogen powered car? Those tanks contain a resolvent (or whatever) that bounds to hydrogen, and the mass of the resolvant exceeds that of hydrogen a few times.

Otherwise you have to cool the hydrogen to a liquid, or have a very high pressure.

The easiest resolvent (or whatever, well not quite) for that is oxygen, which makes it H2O, water. But then it’s not molecular hydrogen anymore. But it stays liquid up to 100°C.

For methane and -40°C you get more hydrogen atoms per mol or per kg than with water, and it’s solid.

So cool the shielding to 100°C with water or -40°C with methane.

Or longer strands of hydrocarbonates. But that makes it more explosive again. Maybe some plastics? More hydrogen atoms per mol, but you can’t replace them when they get shot out of their molecular bindings. Water just changes to OH when it looses an hydrogen atom.

Thinking of it, a liquid is preferable to a solid, so you can replace the modified molecules (H2O -> OH + H). And a gaseous substance doesn’t comes near to a density of a liquid.

[Author]

Posts