Page 2 of 2

Re: First Fusion for Bob Reite

Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2014 12:56 pm
by Dennis P Brown
Impressive! That is a very high neutron flux.

Re: First Fusion for Bob Reite

Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2014 6:57 pm
by Richard Hull
Actually the word flux is not correct here. Flux is reserved for its true scientific meaning and that is the number of neutrons traversing a square centimeter of area in one second. All the numbers quoted by we fusioneers are the total isotropic (EMISSION), not flux, from the device and it fusion process per second. The total number of fusions per second is double the isotropic emission of neutrons per second.

Just trying to keep the verbage straight lest we appear a bit in the dark to more learned scientific minds reading our results. Scientific reporting needs to be precise and specific in the manner in which it is stated.

Richard Hull

Re: First Fusion for Bob Reite

Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:19 pm
by Rich Feldman
Hooray for Bob Reite!

Regarding Richard's most recent post, I am not one to shy away from arguments about semantic minutiae. So had to look up "neutron flux".

It would appear that Richard is right.
Yup, when the subject is free neutrons, they use the word "flux"
where most other disciplines say "flux density". ... -flux.html

So flux of neutrons is contrary to flux of, say, a magnetic field. Magnetic flux (in webers or maxwells) is the total amount of lines of force emerging from a pole, or passing through an aperture. When divided by the transverse area, you get magnetic flux density, measurable (in teslas or gausses) with a sensor at some point in space.

Another example is in photometry.
Luminous flux, measured in lumens, can be the total output of a light bulb. A detector at a distance can measure luminous flux density, in candelas (lm/m^2). Also known as illuminance.

Uh oh, maybe it's not so clear cut after all.
Heat flux seems to usually be a per-unit-area quantity, with units like Btu/h/ft^2, and watts/m^2. Wikipedia is unsurprisingly sloppy and inconsistent about it.

Lesson to take home: sometimes flux is a per-area term and sometimes not. (I think more often not.)

Re: First Fusion for Bob Reite

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:12 am
by Bob Reite
I was able to edit my last post to change "flux" to "emission", which does make more sense.

Re: First Fusion for Bob Reite

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:43 am
by Rich Feldman
The presumably isotropic neutron emission from Bob's fusor is sort of like the emission from a radioactive source.
How about claiming an emission rate in Run #3 of 577 kilobecquerels (15 microcuries) of electrically stimulated activity? :-)

Re: Archived - First Fusion for Bob Reite

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:11 am
by nicolas leboucher

I m on the way to build a fusion reactor, and i will post very soon a complete description of my project. For the time being I m still designing the key components, beginning with the deutérium générator. In france, you cannot buy deuterium, so i need to générate it.
I ve seen on an other post a picture of your generator. Can you please tell me what voltage and current you apply to the cell and which is the model of your mass flow controller ?