[MTd2]

I don’t think the code is wrong. Section 3.1, table I:

http://www.plasmafocus.net/IPFS/2010 Papers/saw&leeScalingIJER-doi=10.1002_er.pdf

Check the value for 34KJ. The configuration is somewhat close to the FoFu-1 solution inputed into Lee’s code and indeed the yield is 3,46*10E9, close to what I got here:

https://focusfusion.org/index.php/forums/viewreply/7567/

It seems neutron yields fits very well the actual devices presented, not only on this paper, but on other recent ones too.

So, here is what I think: FoFu-1 achieves much higher densities and ion energy than expected. My bet it is that since the discharge happens by synchrony of several and not by closing a single switch. So, when electrons are free to move from every bank, the speed of light did not send the information to the others to delay the discharge. So, it is like all of banks are firing individualy. By doing simulations, as only 1 bank were discharging individually, the value is about as only 0.25MA, all of them together going to 2MA, at around 6-7Torr.

If this is true, if all of 12 them fire together, the yield will be 50%-100% higher than using tritium-deuterium or the old formula.

[MTd2]

Lerner wrote: Try this: 18 nH, 113 microF, length 7cm, anode 2.8 cm, cathode 5 cm, 45 kV, 200 torr

For Deuterium – Tritium, it gives 1.49 * 10 13

[MTd2]

BTW, when I used T-D reaction, I got 4.18*10 11, with the data you gave me. It seems that, at least the new version, it give your yields, but with D-T instead of D-D.

[MTd2]

About 3,77*10 9 , 30 times less than your result. It didn`t change (well, just 10% more, 4,06*10 9) by modifying the length to 7cm.

Attached files

[MTd2]

I am at work now, so I cannot check this right now, but what is the correct length, 7 cm, as in your 1st post or 14cm, as the one above? I will give you an answer within 2 hours, anyway.

[MTd2]

I sent him an email when I started another thread, two weeks ago. He hasn’t answered yet. Maybe you sending now can be more successful.

BTW, are you sure the new formulas are wrong ? Testing it with 10-20Torr gave exactly the yields you’ve been getting, that is, around 10^10 neutrons.

[MTd2]

I think something is wrong here. Increasing the pressure means either increasing the temperature and/or the mass of the gas. I think these won’t lead to equivalent situations.

[MTd2]

I am always getting around 5*10 11 neutrons. It should be 15 times more at least… I changed the remaining parameters, but nothing changed much.

Attached files

[MTd2]

I downloaded the latest version here:

http://www.plasmafocus.net/IPFS/modelpackage/UPF.htm

I downloaded yesterday and with this version that I fired shots. I always let fill pressures for deuterium around 15Torr. I tried dozens of values, and never got anything above 0.2J. Would you mind giving your parameters?

I think you are actually talking about the scaling of current vs. yield, which what was actually talked about in news posts, but it is something inferred from his model and experiments. I am sure these are correct values given that they ultimately talk about compression waves.

[MTd2]

I spent a few hours (each simulation takes about 1 minute) playing with Lee`s model using values around those actually used in FoFu 1. There was a problem updating it to higher voltages, which it was that the capacitors had to have less capacity in order to keep the system under with 100KJ. The firings went below 1MA.

The best value I could get playing with values was about 0.2J going up to 100KV and trying to keep a total of 100KJ. It is clear that following Lee`s model makes it impossible to achieve more than 1% of the target value.

But there is a chance that FoFu – 1 does not follow. The reason is simple. FoFu is not a closed circuit, it is actually a superposition of 12 Lee`s models working at 10KJ and 45KV between cathode and anode, all of them firing simultaneously.So, using a sqr(12) smaller radius, and then multiplying the plasma current obtained, I easily get 7MA most of the times. This is likely an error, and probably there should be a sqr(12) smaller value, so that the value at the pinch is around 2.5-3 MA.

[MTd2]

Aeronaut wrote: I suspect Lee is finding what he expects to find, and testing other theory (not to mention fuels) could possibly disprove this remake of the ‘sound barrier’.

It seems Lee`s measurements were confirmed by all kinds of DPF so far, so I cannot see a reason why it should be different. As for fuels, I agree with you. Boron was not tested yet and I think the compression rates for Boron follows closely Lerner`s theory since there is suppression of the Bremsstrahlung since the relative beginning of the plasmoid compression.

[MTd2]

Regarding the 2.8MA, I don`t know if you read on the other thread but for deuterium, according to Sing Lee, independently of the configuration used, you cannot achieve a high fusion rate with less than, say 75KV. Sing Lee has been publishing on the saturation effect and he does insist that it begins with 1.5MA for lower voltages, that is, below 50KV. I am sorry to insist about this point, but I cannot find a breach for this rule one his latest papers…

[MTd2]

It seems the boron is a totally different beast. The tests with deuterium allows to know how much current arrives is available to the pinch and with how much energy. But everything is more confusing now to me. Reading Lerner`s objectives seems totally non sense now when it comes to multiply power. It doesn`t make sense. For example, giving 1.1 MA at 45KJ to the pinch with deuterium yields about 1Joule, whereas on table 3, it can be made roughly equivalent, to something above 2KJ, a 2000X enhancement.

[MTd2]

Several break – even scenarios? Really? Would you give me an example?

[MTd2]

Anyway, according to Lerner, on that article, Boron can make the pinch values of up to 24GG. So, both will be strongly suppressed. So, anyway, talking about 14.4GG actually is about talking about the use of decaborane!!!! :O

You know what`s fun? According to the table given by Lerner, 17GG is achieved with 1.1MA. Lerner could very well start using boron now and expect a nice demonstration of Boron with just 1.8MA fired by the cathode.

[Author]

Posts