not sure if this has been posted "DPW" measurements?
-
fusornator
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 4:02 am
- Real name:
not sure if this has been posted "DPW" measurements?
http://edt.missouri.edu/Fall2007/Disser ... search.pdf
if so where can I find the the thread?
Cheers,
Shon.
-
Doug Coulter
- Posts: 1312
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:18 pm
- Real name: Doug Coulter
- Location: Floyd, VA, USA
- Contact:
Re: not sure if this has been posted "DPW" measurements?
I barely skimmed this paper but I note some interesting things about it.
One is that he's trying to take measurments vs sweeping other parameters -- I am very on board with that one, and doing it here has led us to make some good improvements, and increased our understanding of what's going on in a fusor.
On the other hand, he is doing some sloppy thinking here. Specifically, he's talking about "confinement" as if a fusor were a thermal-tokomak situation, rather than an attempt to make particles hit head on, dynamically while they are not in a thermalized state, and that seems to pervade the part I skimmed.
In other words, he regularly confuses concepts that are related to confining a plasma, as though we were dealing with something that could be called a compression ratio, with the beam on beam collisions and orbits a fusor really has -- nothing is just sitting still in there and to the extent we get thermalization and "confinement we are wasting input energy! We don't want ions that don't fuse to just sit there in the middle, hot, but to fly out back out and return for another try, with the energy directed, not thermal.
Since he's mixing metaphors, it kind of brings the rest into a bit of question, no doubt there is good stuff there, but you'd have to dig for it some.
One is that he's trying to take measurments vs sweeping other parameters -- I am very on board with that one, and doing it here has led us to make some good improvements, and increased our understanding of what's going on in a fusor.
On the other hand, he is doing some sloppy thinking here. Specifically, he's talking about "confinement" as if a fusor were a thermal-tokomak situation, rather than an attempt to make particles hit head on, dynamically while they are not in a thermalized state, and that seems to pervade the part I skimmed.
In other words, he regularly confuses concepts that are related to confining a plasma, as though we were dealing with something that could be called a compression ratio, with the beam on beam collisions and orbits a fusor really has -- nothing is just sitting still in there and to the extent we get thermalization and "confinement we are wasting input energy! We don't want ions that don't fuse to just sit there in the middle, hot, but to fly out back out and return for another try, with the energy directed, not thermal.
Since he's mixing metaphors, it kind of brings the rest into a bit of question, no doubt there is good stuff there, but you'd have to dig for it some.
Why guess when you can know? Measure!
-
fusornator
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 4:02 am
- Real name:
Re: not sure if this has been posted "DPW" measurements?
Thanks for that reply, my English is not that great and I hate writing long reports.
However if I had spent some ones money in doing so much research and then come out with such a small conclusion/summary I would be so fired. This makes me think I could get my PHD just as well
So while we are at it does anyone have any information on the possible none linear effects of a double or single potential well as it relates to IEC reactors?
Cheers,
Shon.
However if I had spent some ones money in doing so much research and then come out with such a small conclusion/summary I would be so fired. This makes me think I could get my PHD just as well
So while we are at it does anyone have any information on the possible none linear effects of a double or single potential well as it relates to IEC reactors?
Cheers,
Shon.