Introduction to Fusion Energy Plasma Physics (K
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
L-Shell and Energy Dependence of Magnetic Mirror Point of Charged
Soni et al. Earth, Planets and Space (2020) 72:129 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-020-01264-5 FULL PAPER Open Access L-shell and energy dependence of magnetic mirror point of charged particles trapped in Earth’s magnetosphere Pankaj K. Soni* , Bharati Kakad and Amar Kakad Abstract In the Earth’s inner magnetosphere, there exist regions like plasmasphere, ring current, and radiation belts, where the population of charged particles trapped along the magnetic feld lines is more. These particles keep performing gyration, bounce and drift motions until they enter the loss cone and get precipitated to the neutral atmosphere. Theoretically, the mirror point latitude of a particle performing bounce motion is decided only by its equatorial pitch angle. This theoretical manifestation is based on the conservation of the frst adiabatic invariant, which assumes that the magnetic feld varies slowly relative to the gyro-period and gyro-radius. However, the efects of gyro-motion can- not be neglected when gyro-period and gyro-radius are large. In such a scenario, the theoretically estimated mirror point latitudes of electrons are likely to be in agreement with the actual trajectories due to their small gyro-radius. Nevertheless, for protons and other heavier charged particles like oxygen, the gyro-radius is relatively large, and the actual latitude of the mirror point may not be the same as estimated from the theory. In this context, we have carried out test particle simulations and found that the L-shell, energy, and gyro-phase of the particles do afect their mirror points. Our simulations demonstrate that the existing theoretical expression sometimes overestimates or underesti- mates the magnetic mirror point latitude depending on the value of L-shell, energy and gyro-phase due to underlying guiding centre approximation. -
Nicholas Christofilos and the Astron Project in America's Fusion Program
Elisheva Coleman May 4, 2004 Spring Junior Paper Advisor: Professor Mahoney Greek Fire: Nicholas Christofilos and the Astron Project in America’s Fusion Program This paper represents my own work in accordance with University regulations The author thanks the Program in Plasma Science and Technology and the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory for their support. Introduction The second largest building on the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s campus today stands essentially abandoned, used as a warehouse for odds and ends. Concrete, starkly rectangular and nondescript, Building 431 was home for over a decade to the Astron machine, the testing device for a controlled fusion reactor scheme devised by a virtually unknown engineer-turned-physicist named Nicholas C. Christofilos. Building 431 was originally constructed in the late 1940s before the Lawrence laboratory even existed, for the Materials Testing Accelerator (MTA), the first experiment performed at the Livermore site.1 By the time the MTA was retired in 1955, the Livermore lab had grown up around it, a huge, nationally funded institution devoted to four projects: magnetic fusion, diagnostic weapon experiments, the design of thermonuclear weapons, and a basic physics program.2 When the MTA shut down, its building was turned over to the lab’s controlled fusion department. A number of fusion experiments were conducted within its walls, but from the early sixties onward Astron predominated, and in 1968 a major extension was added to the building to accommodate a revamped and enlarged Astron accelerator. As did much material within the national lab infrastructure, the building continued to be recycled. After Astron’s termination in 1973 the extension housed the Experimental Test Accelerator (ETA), a prototype for a huge linear induction accelerator, the type of accelerator first developed for Astron. -
1 Looking Back at Half a Century of Fusion Research Association Euratom-CEA, Centre De
Looking Back at Half a Century of Fusion Research P. STOTT Association Euratom-CEA, Centre de Cadarache, 13108 Saint Paul lez Durance, France. This article gives a short overview of the origins of nuclear fusion and of its development as a potential source of terrestrial energy. 1 Introduction A hundred years ago, at the dawn of the twentieth century, physicists did not understand the source of the Sun‘s energy. Although classical physics had made major advances during the nineteenth century and many people thought that there was little of the physical sciences left to be discovered, they could not explain how the Sun could continue to radiate energy, apparently indefinitely. The law of energy conservation required that there must be an internal energy source equal to that radiated from the Sun‘s surface but the only substantial sources of energy known at that time were wood or coal. The mass of the Sun and the rate at which it radiated energy were known and it was easy to show that if the Sun had started off as a solid lump of coal it would have burnt out in a few thousand years. It was clear that this was much too shortœœthe Sun had to be older than the Earth and, although there was much controversy about the age of the Earth, it was clear that it had to be older than a few thousand years. The realization that the source of energy in the Sun and stars is due to nuclear fusion followed three main steps in the development of science. -
Anl-7807 Anl-7807 Survey of Thermonuclear-Reactor
ANL-7807 ANL-7807 SURVEY OF THERMONUCLEAR-REACTOR PARAMETERS P. J. Persiani, W. C. Lipinski, and A. J. Hatcli U of C-AUA-USAECB ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY, ARGONNE, ILLINOIS Prepared for the U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION under Contract W-31-109-Eng-38 The faciliUes of Argonne National Laboratory are owned by the "-'f •> S'^^f °°^^%'" ment. Under the terms of a contract (W-31-109-Eng-38) between the U. S. ""^^^^J^^'J/ Commission, Argonne Universities Association and The University of Chicago, the ""'J'"=">' employs the staff and operates the Laboratory in accordance with policies and programs formu- lated, approved and reviewed by the Association. MEMBERS OF ARGONNE UNIVERSITIES ASSOCIATION The Ohio State University The University of Arizona Kansas State University Carnegie-Mellon University The University of Kansas Ohio University Case Western Reserve University Loyola University The Pennsylvania State University The University of Chicago Marquette University Purdue University University o£ Cincinnati Michigan State University Saint Louis University Illinois Institute of Technology The University of Michigan Southern Illinois University University of Illinois University of Minnesota The University of Texas at Austin Indiana University University of Missouri Washington University Iowa State University Northwestern University Wayne State University The University of Iowa University of Notre Dame The University of Wisconsin NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Atomic Energy Commission, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontrac tors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately-owned rights. -
Simulation of a High Speed Counting System for Sic Neutron
Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Spring Meeting Jeju, Korea, May 17-18, 2018 Analysis of Technical Issues for Development of Fusion-Fission Hybrid Reactor (FFHR) Doo-Hee Chang Nuclear Fusion Technology Development Division, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, Daejeon 34057, Korea *Corresponding author: [email protected] 1. Introduction • ~100 tokamaks in the worldwide since 1957 • Physics performance parameters achieved at or near The nuclear fission reactors remain public concerns lower limit of reactor relevance about the safety, waste and decommissioning • Large, world‐wide physics and technology (afterwards) that they produce. The most optimistic programs supporting ITER (initial operation in assessment predicts that fusion technology will not be 2025, but possible delay again) able to produce electricity on a commercial scale for at • ITER will achieve reactor‐relevant physics and least another four decades. There is a third nuclear technology parameters simultaneously, produce option led to a resurgence of interest, which combines 500 MWth and investigate very long‐pulse the aspects of fission and fusion technologies in the operation form of the fusion-fission hybrid reactor (FFHR) [1]. An (b) Many other confinement concepts (e.g. mirror, FFHR is a fusion reactor surrounded by a fission bumpy torus) have fallen by the wayside or remain blanket, containing the thorium, uranium, and on the backburner transuranic (TRU) elements, to increase output power, (c) A few other confinement concepts (e.g. stellarator, to breed -
Effect of Quaslconflned Particles and I= 2 Stellarator Fields on the Negative Mass Lnstablllty in a Modified Betatron G
TABLE II. Coefficients a and b + r of log(ac,) vs log[2/( p 1/p0 +Pel ACKNOWLEDGMENTS p,)J. We thank Jeanette Nelson for a careful reading of the log(ac1 ) =a+ b log(2/( pc/p1 + p 1/p0 ) l when a = 10 manuscript and G. Pollarolo for useful discussions about the NAG FORTRAN LIBRARY. The numerical computations were 0.1 <Pi <Po< 10 carried out on the Vax 11/780 ofINFN Sezione di Torino. M = 100 M=30 M =IO a; b; r 0.44; 0.06; 0.99 0.33; 0.06; 0.98 0.42; 0.04; 0.98 1 where r0 is the Lorentz factor and spans between 1 and 10. A. E. Gill, Phys. Fluids 8, 1428 (1965). The presence of a shear in cylindrical symmetry has not 2 A. Ferrari, B. Trusooni, and L. Zaninetti, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 196, yet been considered and will presumably produce a cutoff in !OSI (1981). 3H. Cohn, Astrophys. J. 269, 500 (1983). the instabilities where a> 21'Id, with d (in jet radius units) 4 D. G. Payne and H. Cohn, Astrophys. J. 287, 29S (1984). the length characterizing the thickness of the shear. ' A. M. Anile, J.C. Miller, and S. Motta, Phys. Fluids 26, 14SO (1983). Effect of quaslconflned particles and I= 2 stellarator fields on the negative mass lnstablllty in a modified betatron G. Roberts and N. Rostoker Department ofPhy sics, University ofCalifomia, Irvine. California 92717 (Received 5 February 1985; accepted 10 October 1985) A sufficient stability condition for the negative mass instability is derived. -
Yol 2 7 Ns 1 0 Barc/1995/P/005 O O 5 Government of India 6 Atomic Energy Commission
TRN-IN9600313 S BARC/i995)!>/005 CO I> NUCLEAR PHYSICS DIVISION BIENNIAL REPORT 1993-1994 Edited by K. Kumar and S. K. Kataria 1995 YOL 2 7 NS 1 0 BARC/1995/P/005 O O 5 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA 6 ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION U 0! NUCLEAR PHYSICS DIVISION BIENNIAL REPORT 1993-1994 Edited by: K. Kumar and S.K. Kataria Nuclear Physics Division BHABHA ATOMIC RESEARCH CENTRE BOMBAY, INDIA 1995 BARC/1993/P/003 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION SHEET FOR TECHNICAL REPORT (as p»r IS t 9400 - 1980) 01 Security classification t Unclassified 02 Distribution : External 03 Report status t New 04 Series 3 BARC External 03 Report type : Progress Report 06 Report No. : BARC/1995/P/005 07 Part No. or Volume No. t 08 Contract No. s 10 Title and subtitle i Nuclear Physics Division biennial report 1993-1994 11 Collation t 93 p., figs., tabs. 13 Project No. : 2O Personal author (s) i K. Kumar; S.K. Kataria (eds.) 21 Affiliation of author (s) i Nuclear Physics Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Bombay 22 Corporate author(s) i Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Bombay-400 083 23 Originating unit s Nuclear Physics Division, BARC, Bombay 24 Sponsor(s) Name i Department of Atomic Energy Type i Government 30 Date of submission s August 1993 31 Publication/Issue date September 1995 ccntd...(ii> (ii) 40 Publisher/Distributor i Head, Library and Information Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Bombay 42 Form of distribution i Hard Copy 90 Language of text i English 91 Language of summary i English 92 No. -
Publ. Astron. Obs. Belgrade No. 99 (2020), 256 - 257 Invited Lecture
Publ. Astron. Obs. Belgrade No. 99 (2020), 256 - 257 Invited Lecture CHALLENGES AND PROGRESS ON THE PATH TOWARDS FUSION ELECTRICITY A. J. H. DONNÉ EUROfusion, Garching, Germany E-mail [email protected] Abstract. The European Roadmap to the Realisation of Fusion Energy1 breaks the quest for fusion energy into eight missions: 1. Plasma regimes of operation: Demonstrate plasma scenarios (based on the tokamak configuration) that increase the success margin of ITER and satisfy the requirements of DEMO. 2. Heat-exhaust systems: Demonstrate an integrated approach that can handle the large power leaving ITER and DEMO plasmas. 3. Neutron tolerant materials: Develop materials that withstand the large 14MeV neutron flux for long periods while retaining adequate physical properties. 4. Tritium self-sufficiency: Find an effective technological solution for the breeding blanket that also drives the generators. 5. Implementation of the intrinsic safety features of fusion: Ensure safety is integral to the design of DEMO using the experience gained with ITER. 6. Integrated DEMO design and system development: Bring together the plasma and all the systems coherently, resolving issues by targeted R&D activities 7. Competitive cost of electricity: Ensure the economic potential of fusion by minimising the DEMO capital and lifetime costs and developing long-term technologies to further reduce power plant costs. 8. Stellarator: Bring the stellarator line to maturity to determine the feasibility of a stellarator power plant. Now we are approaching the end of the 8th European Framework Programme (2014- 2020), it is a good moment to look back at the achievements since the establishment of EUROfusion in 2014, while at the same time have a peek into the future, to see which challenges lay ahead of us as well as the strategy to tackle them. -
Experimental Study of Equilibrium in a Bumpy Torus
x - .2. v 7 .d>. oml 0RNL/TM-9520 Experimental Study of Equilibrium in a Bumpy Torus S. Hiroe J. A. Cobble R. J. Colchin G. L. Chen K. A. Connor J. R. Goyer L. Solensten 5; ',•-•• i ' i P DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNUIftTTEB ORNL/TM—9520 DE86 014415 Pist. cH^W^O f,g Fusion Energy Division Experimental Study of Equilibrium in a Bumpy Torus S. Hiroe J. A. Cobble R. J. Colchin G. L. Chen Fusion Energy Division K. A. Connor, J. R. Goyer, L. Solensten Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, New York Date of Issue: June 1986 Prepared by the OAK RIDGE NATIONAL I-ABORAI OKY Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831 operated by <lkT_ MARTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC. for the U. S. DEPARTMENT OF KNKRGY under Contract No. DE-AC05-840R21400 OlSTRlBUT,0«0FTHlSD0CU^T^^ CONTENTS ABSTRACT v I. INTRODUCTION 1 n. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 3 m. DISCUSSION 15 A. Formation of closed potential contours 15 B. Inward displacement of potential contours 22 C. Electrostatic beta limit 26 D. Force balance 28 E. Explanation of potential deformation 33 TV. CONCLUSION 37 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 39 REFERENCES 41 iii ABSTRACT Plasma equilibrium in the ELMO Bumpy Torus (EBT)1 was studied experimentally by measurements of the electrostatic potential structure. Before an electron tail population is formed, the electric field is found, roughly speaking, to be in the vertical direction. The appearance of a high-energy electron tail signals the formation of a negative potential well, and the potential contours start to nest. The potential contours are shifted inward with respect to the center of the conducting wall. -
Energy Devices and Processes Generally Suppressed
Energy Devices and Processes Generally Suppressed Strategic Overview of Energy Technology Suppression Introduction Research shows that over the past 75 years a number of significant breakthroughs in energy generation and propulsion have occurred that have been systematically suppressed. Since the time of Tesla, T. Townsend Brown and others in the early and mid-twentieth century we have had the technological ability to replace fossil fuel, internal combustion and nuclear power generating systems with advanced non-polluting electromagnetic and electro-gravitic systems. The open literature is replete with well-documented technologies that have surfaced, only to later be illegally seized or suppressed through systematic abuses of the national security state, large corporate and financial interests or other shadowy concerns. Technologically, the hurdles to achieve what is called over- unity energy generation by accessing the teeming energy in the space around us are not insurmountable. Numerous inventors have done so for decades. What has been insurmountable are the barriers created through the collusion of vast financial, industrial, oil and rogue governmental interests. In short, the strategic barriers to the widespread adoption of these new electromagnetic energy-generating systems far exceed the technological ones. The proof of this is that, after many decades of innovation and promising inventions, none have made it through the maze of regulatory, patenting, rogue national security, financial, scientific and media barriers that confront the inventor or small company. Categories of Suppression Our review of now-obscure technological breakthroughs show that these inventions have been suppressed or seized by the following broad categories of actions: Acquisition of the technology by 'front' companies whose intent have been to 'shelve' the invention and prevent the device from coming to market. -
Observation of Nuclear Fusion Driven by a Pyroelectric Crystal
letters to nature 1900þ14. I. An interpretive study of BeppoSAX and Ulysses observations. Astrophys. J. 549, electrostatic field of the crystal is used to generate and accelerate 1021–1038 (2001). a deuteron beam (>100 keV and >4 nA), which, upon striking a 10. Gaensler, B. M. et al. Second-epoch VLA observations of SGR 1806220. GRB Circ. Network 2933 (2005). deuterated target, produces a neutron flux over 400 times the 11. Corbel, S. & Eikenberry, S. S. The connection between W31, SGR 1806220, and LBV 1806220: background level. The presence of neutrons from the reaction Distance, extinction, and structure. Astron. Astrophys. 419, 191–201 (2004). D 1 D ! 3He (820 keV) 1 n (2.45 MeV) within the target is 12. Kolpak, M. A., Jackson, J. M., Bania, T. M. & Dickey, J. M. The radial distribution of cold atomic hydrogen in the galaxy. Astrophys. J. 578, 868–876 (2002). confirmed by pulse shape analysis and proton recoil spectro- 13. Corbel, S. et al. The distance of the soft gamma repeater SGR 1806220. Astrophys. J. 478, 624–630 scopy. As further evidence for this fusion reaction, we use a novel (1997). time-of-flight technique to demonstrate the delayed coincidence 14. Hartmann, D. & Burton, W. B. Atlas of Galactic Neutral Hydrogen. Ch. 4, 169 (Cambridge Univ. Press, between the outgoing a-particle and the neutron. Although the Cambridge, 1997). 15. Garwood, R. W. & Dickey, J. M. Cold atomic gas in the inner Galaxy. Astrophys. J. 338, 841–861 (1989). reported fusion is not useful in the power-producing sense, we 16. Figer, D. -
Astron 104 Laboratory #7 Nuclear Fusion and Stars Chapter 12
Lab #7 Name: Date: Section: Astron 104 Laboratory #7 Nuclear Fusion and Stars Chapter 12 Introduction You are intimately linked to the nuclear fusion that occurs in stars. Life on Earth thrives on sunlight, which originates as energy produced at the center of the Sun as hydrogen is fused to form helium. Even the very atoms and molecules of your body | iron in your blood, calcium in your bones, phosphorous in your DNA | were forged in stars and dispersed to the interstellar medium in spectacular explosions. In this lab, you will explore the creation of heavy elements and release of energy through nuclear fusion in stars. Learning Objectives At the completion of this lab, you should be able to: 1. Describe the components of atomic nuclei and the properties of subatomic particles 2. Describe the force between two protons as a function of their separation distance 3. Describe the temperature required for nuclear fusion of hydrogen and heavier elements 4. Describe how nuclear fusion produces energy 5. Describe why iron is the heaviest element that can be made via nuclear fusion in stars Atomic Nuclei [5 pts each, 15 pts total] Atomic nuclear are made of combinations of sub-microscopic particles called protons and neutrons. The neutron is slight more massive than the proton, but for now we will ignore that difference and assume the neutron and proton each have a mass of 1 unit. Protons have a positive electrical charge (let's call it +1 unit) and neutrons have no electrical charge. Astron 104 Fall 2015 1 Lab #7 1.