arXiv:2005.12849v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 23 May 2020 utiigfso,bign h eiet h ls fthe of class for the sufficient to temperature device overall There the bringing the heat. fusion, to either sustaining to leads thermalization: energy of heat kinetic outcomes the initial possible two thermalization the only to of are loss leads the causing quickly re- — elastically them, that dead- scatter between process that it energies cascading ion ions hit kinetic The another to their hitting fusion. distribute than cause elastically of to scatter chance on to greater enough much close a has shorter ion much a a target. at hitting the stopped of in be chance electrons will by a great ion distance traverse has an to it Such have before nucleus. will atoms layers ion the atomic average small between many an so target, distances is the squared cross-section in fusion the the to hitting Since beam compared ion target. energetic solid an consider a to usually is work these overcome to way a obstacles. propose equilib- fundamental be I nonther- could thermal Here power “Highly local fusion 2] of produced.”[1, proposed to amount significant relax reactor a up. would before beam rium al. set colliding et a Rostoker the by such like in systems, funda- mal gain certain preclude However, energy to believed kV. net are below hundreds volt- reviewed or obstacles modest mental requires tens only of which ages field, electric of to means yet has reaction. fusion that sustainable task controlled formidable a a in is result main- and plasma Confining hot ap- inside. the taining plasma spare hot to the high order from in The paratus electrostatic, or reactions. magnetic plasma, either the fusion ran- of confinement cause allow require involved to to temperatures as collisions so ion temperatures dom required the to plasma scale. hun- temperature equivalently, the or, in keV, K millions hundreds or or dreds tens energies: hntesz fa tm osqety h iei en- kinetic the Consequently, 10 is atom. required an ergy of size the 10 than to of order at them the other for of each enough distances approach large and energies repulsion Coulomb at overcome other each hit kind vni ofiuain ihn lcrn rsn,afast a present, electrons no with configurations in Even not do approaches kinematic why of example first The by ions the accelerate to is approach alternative An heat to attempt experiments fusion of majority A ula uinrato cuswe w oso certain of ions two when occurs reaction fusion Nuclear .BIFPOLMOVERVIEW PROBLEM BRIEF I. esblt fNtEeg ani ieai ula uinD Fusion Nuclear Kinematic in Gain Energy Net of Feasibility eoeteeeg sls oha.Dvc ofiuaint ach obtai is to gain configuration energy Device net of heat. estimate favorable to a re-cap lost on and is is proposed focus energy the the fusion, nuclear before acceler of electrostatically that on dwarfs section based devices fusion nuclear einpicpei ugse ooecm btce htp that obstacles overcome to suggested is principle design A 4 ie agrta yia chemical typical than larger times − 14 ,aot10 about m, 4 ie smaller times Dtd a 1 2020) 21, May (Dated: [email protected] ..Tsiper E.V. olso eed ntmn n uultaetre even elastic trajectories mutual an and of timing outcome on energy depends bil- the stationary collision summary, a In and hitting is ball stops ball. process billiard liard them The a of of energy. reverse the one exact twice the that with away manner flies a other the such in- speed for in same possible, the collide with is to balls This it billiard identical table: two energies. billiard for a stance, their on visualized re-distribute be still can may they tically re- them. and also between elastically they energy scatter a but their to have fusion, chance distribute cause greater They much and a center. other the have each the have hit reach wall to accel- they outer chance ions when the cold energy from ions Two center same of the fusion. energy towards undergo kinetic erated to average enough the the large towards center electro- wall is the by outer the In accelerated from are fly center. they device when fusor above. bias the static described in that The ions to for The channel [6]. similar fundamental in a thermalization, is contained energy IECs is being fusors devices for IEC reason well- A of therein). critique bibliography than known and rather [5] electrostatic, (see shielded field by plasma, magnetic, apparatus hot employs outside (IEC) still the that Confinement from one Electrostatic de- the rather — Inertial device is an it as here; scribed reviewed approaches fusion kinetic larger a magnitude [4]. in of produced power losses orders can fusion Energy five difficult the that are than The gain. reaction device energy fusion fusor setting. net typical sustainable garage to through a device a itself make enough in feed to simple or is a home is task at fusor built a hard; be not is fusion has far. gain means so positive net by demonstrated no been reaction albeit fusion potentials, achieve electrostatic does of that successful. device are plest that ones any accel- few than very on fusion the spent at by be unsuccessful produced are to gain that has ions energy plasma the hot more erating very much a unless precluding formed, words, thereby other is In thermodynamics, fully gain. unrecoverable of energy is laws net heat the to to lost in due energy temperatures, the fusion case (ii) than which or lower are here), temperatures discussed the (not devices confinement plasma hntoprilso h aeeeg cte elas- scatter energy same the of particles two When of class the into fall not does device fusor typical A achieving of task the that underscore to crucial is It sim- the — [3] device fusor a is example second The tdin.SneCuobsatrn cross- scattering Coulomb Since ions. ated uigeeg featclysatrdions scattered elastically of energy turing ned. eetpstv e nryotu in output energy net positive revent eeeceteeg ecpuigis re-capturing energy efficient ieve evices 2 for identical particles with identical initial kinetic ener- ions can be made to hit the opposite cold ion injector, in gies. Energy re-distribution due to Coulomb scattering which case these ions can be either collected or allowed leads to thermalization. to return back to the chamber and be accelerated again The same fundamental obstacle applies to other con- for another try. figurations that attempt to achieve sustainable fusion via The great majority of the rest of the ions will be scat- accelerated ion beams, such as, for instance, in acceler- tered elastically in near-head-on collisions. These ions ated beam fusion reactors (ABFR). In addition to the will have a very narrow energy distribution and a certain usually-quoted problem with beam de-focusing due to distribution over scattering angles. These ions too will be internal electrostatic pressure, the same process causes decelerated by the positive electrode and return the bulk many more ions to be elastically scattered away, carrying of their energy to the circuit. Now, these scattered ions their energy with them, than the few that cause fusion, will have to be collected and removed from the chamber precluding net energy gain. by the evacuation system (the positive electrode will have Here I discuss a device configuration, which circum- to be made of a mesh). vents the above fundamental obstacle by allowing effi- It is imperative to not allow the ions scattered at angles cient recovery of the energy carried away by the elasti- greater than some value (say, of the order of α) to return cally scattered ions [7]. back to the chamber, as the next scattering event will not be head-on and will cause energy re-distribution. Thus, ignoring fusion reactions for the moment, the II. PREVENTING ENERGY REDISTRIBUTION steady state of the device will have a highly non- OF COLLIDING IONS thermal spatial and velocity distribution strongly en- hancing same-mass same-energy head-on collisions near Energy re-distribution is absent for two particles of the center of the chamber. the same mass and same but exactly opposite velocities. The concept design resembles an usual fusor device. Elastic scattering in such head-on collisions result in both However, the back energy transfer is made possible by particles changing the direction of their flight but not restricting the majority of the collisions to be head-on their energies. Scattered particles fly away in the oppo- collisions of same-mass, same-energy ions, whereby the site directions that can be at any angle to their initial energies of the scattered particles are known exactly to velocities, but their energies remain equal to their initial within narrow tolerances. Prior-art fusor designs lack energies. This property can be used, which is the focus this critical ability to retrieve the post-scattered ion en- of this work, to help recover the energies of the scattered ergy fully and to avoid thermalization. Therefore, the ions. operation of the present device differs significantly from Deviation of the collision angle from 180◦ quickly that of the prior-art fusor, with high-temperature plasma breaks down this property, allowing for energy redistri- in the central area replaced with a narrow, highly non- bution, thereby making the task of recovering the energy thermal phase space distribution. of the scattered particles much harder, if not impossible. Additionally, prior-art fusor devices suffer from energy Employing ion species with different masses, such as D– losses due to the hot ions striking the central accelerating T or p–11B, also leads to energy re-distribution. This electrode [4], whereas the current design eliminates this narrows down the present approach essentially to D–D, second critical energy loss channel, because the 1D path T–T or the aneutronic 3He–3He fusion reactions. of the ions does not cross the ring-shaped accelerating electrode. The operation of the present device may have some III. WORKED EXAMPLE semblance with the “star mode” of the usual fusor device, but with the star being only two-pronged. As an illustration of the concept, consider a vacuum- evacuated chamber containing two cold ion injection openings of small angular size 2α placed opposite to each A. Deviation from Head-on Collisions other and a coaxial ring-shaped accelerating electrode in the center, negatively-biased with respect to the cham- Whereas ideally the post-scattered ions all have the ber. If necessary, the paths of the opposite ion beams same energy, finite injector size and other technological can be controlled by small deflecting magnetic fields. If imperfections lead to a (narrow) distribution of energies. the paths are made to collide head-on near the center of The energy recovery electrode surrounding the reaction the accelerating electrode, the ions will have a chance to chamber must be under-biased in order to disallow return undergo a fusion reaction, provided the bias voltage is of low-energy post-scattered ions to the reaction cham- large enough. ber. The majority of the ions will not scatter or undergo Deviation from the head-on collision by an angle δ fusion, but will de-celerate as they reach the opposite side leads to the post-scattered ions having energy slightly of the chamber, returning their energy back to the cirquit. above and slightly below the initial energy. The worst- In the simplest basic design the path of these un-scattered case scenario (the largest energy deviation dE) occurs for 3 the ions scattered at right angle, in which case the veloc- as mentioned. A very crude estimate can use dE(90◦) ≈ ity component normal to the main axis is either added or 2E0 sin(α), which in our case amounts to abour 3.3% of subtracted from the post-scattered velocity. In this case E0. ◦ the energy excess/deficiency is dE(90 ) = 2E0 sin(δ), However, this energy loss can be reduced further by where E0 is the accelerating electrode bias. Absent ad- realizing that the greatest fraction of the ions that do ditional beam focusing elements, the angle δ can be esti- scatter are scattered to small angles for which dE is much mated as δ ∼ α, half the angular size of the ion injection smaller. The energy of ions scattered at an arbitrary opening, as seen from the center of the device. The en- angle χ lies between E0 − dE(χ) and E0 + dE(χ) where ergy deficiency dE may not be fully recovered and thus contributes to losses. Since the great majority of Coulomb scattering events dE(χ) = 2 sin α sin χ E0. (2) occur to small scattering angles, the areas of the energy ◦ recovery electrode near the axis may be biased closer to The highest energy defect, dE(90 ), is observed for the E0 in order to limit the losses. The energy recovery elec- ions scattered at the right angle, but the fraction of these trode may be made segmented to achieve this goal. ions is very small compared to the fraction of the ions scattered to small angles. For the ions scattered at χ =1◦ the energy defect is only about 0.06% of E0. B. Net Energy Gain Feasibility Estimate The weighted average dE over all scattering angles χ> α is about 0.13% of E0, assuming the energy recovery Formally, the long-range nature of Coulomb force in electrode is made segmented, each segment at angle χ vacuum makes every ion scatter, albeit to a small angle. being biased with the bias defect of dE(χ). For the technical purpose of this description I call “un- Assuming efficiency η of the fusion energy recovery, the scattered” the ions that, upon passing the reaction zone, energy balance has, on the gain side, ησF (EF +2E0) per scatter at angles less than α. ion pair vs. 0.0013E0σC per ion on the loss side. The In the simplest concept design these ions are permit- Gain/Loss ratio is, therefore, ted to be reflected back and to accelerate again towards the center making multiple attempts at the fusion reac- ησF (EF +2E0) tion, until they scatter away from the head-on collision G/L = ≈ 2.8η, (3) 2σC dE trajectory (most likely), leading to some energy loss, or undergo fusion. attesting to technical feasibility of the overall scheme. I estimate the gain/loss balance assuming a 5 mm ion Granted, it is still not a trivial task to achieve G/L > 1 injection opening diameter in a 30 cm diameter reaction in a practical device; however, the proposed approach chamber and the bias voltage of 500 kV for D–D reaction. replaces the fundamental obstacle with an engineering Thus, “un-scattered” ions are those ions that scatter at ◦ challenge. angles less than α ≈ 1 . Higher practical η values are facilitated for D–D reac- The ions that scatter at angles greater than α have the tion by the fact that 63% of the fusion yield is carried Coulomb scattering cross-section away by charged particles (vs. only 20% for D–T), allow- ing direct energy conversion. 2 2 G/L grows with E0 due to decreasing σC . The 500 kV π e cot α/2 σC = = 235 barns (1) bias seems to be within the bounds imposed by electrical 16  4πǫ0E0  vacuum breakdown [8], as is the electric field ∼ 2 · 107 This large number is to be compared against the DD fu- V/m at the central electrode (6cm diameter assumed). If sion cross-section σF of only 0.19 barn — the dramatic necessary, the field parameters can be relaxed by scaling mismatch, which exemplifies the hurdles of the kinematic up the linear dimensions of the device. fusion devices, and which the present design is attempt- ing to overcome. In other words, for every ion pair undergoing fusion C. Beam Defocusing Estimate reaction, the number σC /σF = 1200 pairs are scattered elastically away from the head-on trajectory without un- 1. Defocusing due to the initial ion temperature. dergoing fusion. The kinetic energy of these ions needs to be recovered as fully as possible to achieve net energy Assuming the cold ion injector at temperature T , the gain. normal component of the thermal motion of ions is of the On the positive side of the net energy balance is the order vn ∼ kBT/m, where m is the ion mass. In the energy EF = 3.61 MeV released by a successful fusion simplest conceptp design under consideration, absent ad- reaction. ditional beam focusing devices, this velocity component Now I estimate the residual energy loss dE per ion contributes to beam defocusing and consequent deviation due to deviations from head-on collision and the need to from head-on collision via the time-of-flight for the ions. under-bias the energy recovery electrode by this amount, Depending on the device parameters and dimensions, the 4 cold ion injector may need to be kept at cryogenic tem- be limited by this and other considerations. The goal peratures to limit thermal defocusing. here is only to design a device with net-positive energy The time-of-flight to the center is output, albeit possibly small. On the other hand, Coulomb defocusing limitations can be alleviated or relaxed by including beam focusing R2 π R2 t ≈ × , (4) elements (conveniently made easier by the 1-dimensional v0 2 rR1 sptial distribution) or employing more involved designs, including e.g. separating ion injectors and ion collectors where R2 is the radius of the reaction chamber, R1 is the via deflecting magnetic fields, replacing fusor design with radius of the accelerating electrode, and v0 = 2E0/m beam storage rings as in Ruggiero [11], employing a single is the hot ion velocity. For R1 = 3cm this leadsp to ther- mal defocusing of less than 0.1 mm for injector at room 8-shaped self-crossing ring etc. temperature (0.2 mm contributed to the beam diameter). Any such design needs to implement the basic design principle to (i) strongly enhance same-energy head-on collisions in the reaction zone, (ii) efficiently evacuate the 2. Internal Coulomb defocusing ions scattered to angles inconsistent with the 1D phase space distribution maintained and (iii) to efficiently col- The usual critique of accelerated beam fusion reactors lect the kinetic energy of such post-scattered ions and conclude that the beam densities necessary to achieve return it back to the electric circuit before thermaliza- certain energy output lead to beam self-defocusing be- tion occurs. cause of internal Coulomb repulsion [9, 10]. Here I do I would like to thank V.M. Belyaev for helpful discus- not make any claim of large energy output, which may sions.

[1] W.M. Nevins et al, Science 281, 307, 1998. [7] Patent pending. [2] W.M. Nevins, Phys. Plasmas 2, 3804, 1995. [8] I.N. Slivkov, V.I. Mikhailov et al., Electrical Breakdown [3] P.T. Farnsworth, US Patent 3,258,402, 1966. and Discharge in Vacuum, Atomizdat, Moscow, 1966. [4] J.H. Hedditch, R. Bowden-Reid, J. Khachan, Phys. Plas- [9] K.-F. Liu and A.W. Chao, Nucl. Fusion 57, 084002, 2017. mas 22, 102705, 2015. [10] M. Sands, Conf. Proc. C 6906161 257, 1969. [5] D. Bhattacharjee, arXiv:2002.05941 [physics.plasm-ph], [11] A.G. Ruggiero, 2000 Proc. of ICONE 8, 8th Int. Conf. 2020. on Nuclear Engineering (Baltimore, MD, USA, 26 April [6] T.H. Rider, MIT Thesis, 1994. 2000).