DOCSLIB.ORG

Magnetic Confinement Fusion Energy Systems on the Path to Commercialization Dan Brunner, Commonwealth Fusion Systems Thanks To: B

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Magnetic Confinement Fusion Energy Systems on the Path to Commercialization Dan Brunner, Commonwealth Fusion Systems Thanks To: B Magnetic Confinement Fusion Energy Systems on the Path to Commercialization Dan Brunner, Commonwealth Fusion Systems Thanks to: B. Bourque, S. Cohen, R. Dinan, M. Gryaznevich, D. Kingham, T. McGuire, M. Paluszek, J. Park, D. Sutherland, R. Volberg, and S. Woodruff 2018 IAEA Workshop on Fusion Enterprises, Santa Fe, New Mexico Overview • Extended look at: • Lighter look at: • Commonwealth Fusion Systems • Applied Fusion Systems • Lockheed Martin • CTFusion • TAE Technologies • Hypervelocity Rings • Tokamak Energy • EMC2 • Fusion One • Princeton Satellite Systems 2 Commonwealth Fusion Systems • Basic Concept: • Compact, high-field tokamak • Major Differentiation: • Utilize proven physics of tokamaks, the highest performance, most heavily studied and characterized fusion confinement device to date • Major risk to demonstrate Q>1 is technical development of magnets, minimal physics extrapolation • Major collaboration with established fusion lab (MIT PSFC), eventually extend to wider fusion community • Power Plant Vision: • Compact tokamak, low 100’s MWe (can readily scale larger as needed), D-T • Simple maintenance due to demountable magnets and liquid blanket • Economic models suggest competitive with other sources 3 Commonwealth Fusion Systems • Present Status: • Closing first round of financing, $50M Eni (Italian energy company) plus others • Ramping up business operations, hiring, magnet R&D, device design • Have research agreement with MIT, growing relationship with broader community • Major Challenges: • Engineering, building, and testing of high-field superconducting magnets • Scaling up superconductor production • Well-characterized tokamak challenges, but with clear paths to develop solutions (e.g., see ReNeW report). “Everyone’s jumping off a cliff, it’s just that your cliff is a very well- characterized one.” –CFS advisor • Near-Term Work: • Engineer high-field superconducting magnets in R&D collaboration with MIT • SPARC Q>1 tokamak physics basis with MIT, hopefully extended community • SPARC device engineering (coupled to previous two results) 4 Lockheed Martin • Basic Concept: • “Compact Fusion Reactor” - CFR • High-beta mirror/cusp hybrid • Diamagnetic sheath confinement • Major Differentiation: • Compact core • Non-magnetized bulk plasma • Good curvature stabilization • Power Plant Vision: • 100 MWe, D-T • Fusion core: • ~200-1,000 metric tons • ~15.5 m long x ~6.5 m OD 5 © 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Lockheed Martin • Present Status: • T4B plasma source testing: demonstrated stable cold plasma, benchmarked models • T5 commissioning • Examining plasma dynamics, confinement with PIC simulations • Major Challenges: • Not-yet experimentally demonstrated confinement regime • Large physics parameter extrapolation from present experiment to reactor • Internal superconducting coil shielding (radiation and plasma losses) T4B LaB6 Plasma Test, 3/23/2017 • Near-Term Work: • T5 Goals: • Show plasma heating and inflation, measure sheath losses • Demo high density plasma source, neutral beam confinement • Measure sheath size, cusp losses, and characterize instabilities T5 6 © 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Tokamak Energy • Basic Concept: • Spherical tokamak, with • High temperature superconducting magnets • Major Differentiation: • Ability of STs to achieve high beta and high bootstrap fraction at the same time • Power Plant Vision: • Compact, modular fusion power • 150 MW modules, D-T 7 Tokamak Energy • Present Status: • ST40 spherical tokamak operating successfully • Good progress with HTS magnet design • Major Challenges: • Reaching 100 million degrees plasma temperature in ST40 • Quench protection of HTS magnets • Extrapolation of ST confinement scaling to low collisionality • Near-Term Work: • Further development of ST40 spherical tokamak • Further progress with HTS magnet design and prototypes 8 TAE Technologies* • Basic Concept: • Colliding Beam Fusion Reactor (neutral beam heated field-reversed configuration) • p-11B aneutronic reaction • Major Differentiation: • Linear system, simple maintenance • Aneutronic reaction • Direct energy conversion • Power Plant Vision: • 200-500 MW 9 *TAE did not respond to request to fill out template TAE Technologies • Present Status: • Achieved “long enough” goal of 10 ms plasma lifetime on C-2U • Working on “hot enough” goal of 5-7 keV on Norman (right) • Major Challenges: • Achieving confinement needed for p-11B fusion • Thin margins on net energy for p-11B • Efficient direct energy conversion and heating • Side nuclear issues for p-11B • Near-Term Work: • Achieving “hot enough” in Norman • Spinning out neutral beam technology for boron neutron capture cancer therapy 10 Applied Fusion Systems UK LTD • Concept and Differentiation: • Computer simulation, design and manufacture of advanced, compact fusion devices for the purpose of energy production and propulsion • Present Status & Near-Term Work: • R&D of SMR’s and nuclear enhanced air- breathing rockets (NEAR technology) • The company has constructed to date and owns: • Ion and Hall thrusters • Compact tokamak and spherical tokamak devices • An advanced tokamak divertor system 11 CTFusion • Concept and Differentiation: • Steady-state, D-T spheromak plasma sustained with Imposed-dynamo current drive (IDCD) – the “Dynomak” fusion concept • Simply-connected topology with no externally applied toroidal magnetic field and power efficient plasma current drive • A sustained spheromak fusion core with optimal wall-loading and blanket thickness may enable low-cost fusion power plants • Present Status & Near-Term Work: • A small-scale Dynomak prototype (�" = 35 cm, � = 23 cm) is currently operating at the University of Washington (UW), funded by U.S. DOE • CTFusion has exclusive rights to relevant UW IP for the continued development of this fusion technology • CTFusion plans to build and operate a next-generation Dynomak prototype (�"= 50 cm, � = 33 cm) that will demonstrate our patented plasma driver technology sustaining higher temperature, longer pulse, spheromak plasmas • CTFusion has secured a Phase I SBIR to build an advanced feedback control system that will optimize spheromak performance in the current and next-generation Dynomak prototypes CTFusion Contact: Derek Sutherland, Co-founder and CEO, P.O. Box 45562, Seattle, WA, 98145, [email protected]. 12 Hypervelocity Rings • Concept and Differentiation: • Hypervelocity heating of fuel into spheromak, based on RACE at LLNL • Cylindrical, maintainable geometry • 60 MA, 20 Hz, R=4 m, 7 T max coils • Present Status & Near-Term Work: • Need new champion to push forward • Experiments to examine ramp up to burn dynamics, energy confinement time • Test magnetic field in injector to limit impurities Robert Bourque, retired LANL [email protected] 13 Energy Matter Conversion Corporation • Concept and Differentiation: • Polywell: Polyhedral magnets and electrostatic potential well • Simple, modular magnets, compact due to high fuel pressure • Gridless electron-beam heating for high efficiency heating with a potential for advanced fuels and direct energy conversion • Present Status & Near-Term Work: • Completed 20+ year R&D program, funding from DARPA, US Navy, and others (20 test devices, 4 issued and pending patents) • Demonstrated confinement of 7 keV electrons and developed 1st principles particle code for technology validation and optimization for confinement, heating, and fuel choice • Next phase (2-3 years) demonstrate reactor-scale performance: achieve steady-state operation with 1-10 keV particle confinement 14 Fusion One Corporation • Concept and Differentiation: • Magneto-electrostatic hybrid with aspects of Bussard’s Polywell and Lavrentiev’s Jupiter concepts • Cathode repeller system couples electrostatic and magnetic cusp confinement, reflects electrons to limit losses • Present Status & Near-Term Work: • Project cancelled • Self-consistent analytic power balance model revealed that power to maintain non-thermal ion distribution leads to poor efficiency: best Q was with D-T at Q ~ 3.5 (results apply to all electrostatic concepts) • Should be viewed as a successful approach: identify the highest risks and worked to retire them at the lowest cost in the quickest time 15 Princeton Satellite Systems, in collaboration with PPPL • Concept and Differentiation: • Field reversed configuration (FRC) in a mirror with solenoidal coils • Power Level 1-10 MW, 25 cm radius plasma, 5 m length, neutron wall load < 0.001 D-T Tokamak • Heat D-He3 plasma using odd-parity rotating magnetic fields (RMF0) • Flow additional gas through the scrape off layer to remove fusion products to produce electricity or thrust for a rocket engine • Present Status & Near-Term Work: • Designing superconducting coil assembly • Designing high efficiency RMF0 system • Increasing the RF drive to 200 kW to demonstrate 1 keV ion heating 16 Present Experiment Space Propulsion Terrestrial Power Generation Proton Scientific, Inc. • Basic Concept: • Two-pulse, “Fast Ignition”-like electron beam fusion (EBF) of solid D-T ice target using pulsed power (without lasers) utilizing a proprietary electron-beam focusing method generating the e-beam of sub-100 micron diameter. • Currently working prototype Thunderbird demonstrates the beam focusing to 20 micron diameter. • Next phase, EBF prototype device supported by PIC and MHD models is being designed to demonstrate the fusion process resulting in a positive energy output applicable to commercialization. • Major Differentiation: Using pulsed power for both the compression and ignition pulses of the two-pulse fusion process (cf. Fast Ignition and MagLIF using lasers). • Power Plant Vision: EBF repetitive pulse (heat-generating) from 100 MW, scalable to GW power units, under $0.1/ KWh cost of electricity. W: http://protonscientific.com/ E: [email protected].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Overview of the SPARC Tokamak
    This is a repository copy of Overview of the SPARC tokamak. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/166980/ Version: Published Version Article: Creely, A. J., Greenwald, M. J., Ballinger, S. B. et al. (42 more authors) (2020) Overview of the SPARC tokamak. Journal of Plasma Physics. 865860502. ISSN 0022-3778 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022377820001257 Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ J. Plasma Phys. (2020), vol. 86, 865860502 © The Author(s), 2020. 1 Published by Cambridge University Press This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
    [Show full text]
  • TAE Technologies G Round Introduction July 2019
    TAE Technologies G Round Introduction July 2019 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 1 Contents TAE Technologies Overview 3 TAE Fusion 10 TAE Life Sciences 13 Disclaimer 17 Contact Information 18 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 2 TAE Technologies Overview PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 3 “I would like to see the development of fusion power to give an unlimited supply of clean energy and a switch to electric cars.” Stephen Hawking watch video online PRIVILEGEDPRIVILEGED AND AND CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL4 4 Vast fusion-incubated IP portfolio primed for commercialization Enables disruptive high-growth businesses Game-changing targeted radiation cancer therapy Revolutionary electric drivetrain platform for road, rail, air and sea Advanced particle accelerators for fusion, POWER GENERATION POWER DISTRIBUTION medicine and more • Fusion R&D • Microgrids • Confinement licensing • Energy storage/buffering • Plasma control • Power switching • Consulting services • Power factor correction PRIVILEGEDPRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 5 Investment Opportunity Synopsis TAE is commercializing its intellectual property portfolio • Inflection point in TAE’s evolution • After over 1,100 patents filed and 20 years of R&D – starting to commercialize our technologies and realize accelerated revenues • Multiple tiered opportunities that drive significant value creation around • Fusion power generation technology ($7 trillion cumulative market out to 2040) • Targeted radiation oncology ($30+ billion/yr market for head & neck tumors w/ 6% CAGR) • Mobility technology (e.g. $20+ billion/yr EV drivetrain market w/ 19% CAGR) • Power management technologies (e.g. $10+ billion/yr data center power market w/ 7% CAGR) PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 6 Board, management and investors well-matched to opportunity Drawing on leadership from industry, technology and finance Strong and engaged board including: • Former U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Aspects of Advanced Fuel FRC Fusion Reactors
    Aspects of Advanced Fuel FRC Fusion Reactors John F Santarius and Gerald L Kulcinski Fusion Technology Institute Engineering Physics Department CT2016 Irvine, California August 22-24, 2016 [email protected]; 608-692-4128 Laundry List of Fusion Reactor Development Issues • Plasma physics of fusion fuel cycles • Engineering issues unique or more ! Cross sections and Maxwellian reactivity important for DT fuel ! Beta and B-field utilization ! Tritium-breeding blanket design ! Plasma fusion power density ! Neutron damage to materials ! Plasma energy and particle confinement ! Radiological hazard (afterheat and waste disposal) ! Neutron production vs Ti for various fuel ion ratios • Safety • Geometry implications for engineering design • Environment ! Power flows • Licensing ! Direct energy conversion ! Magnet configuration • Economics ! Radiation shielding ! Maintenance in a highly radioactive environment • Nuclear non-proliferation ! Coolant piping accessibility • Non‑electric applications • Plasma‑surface interactions • 3He fuel supply JFS 2016 Fusion Technology Institute, University of Wisconsin 2 UW Developed and/or Participated in 40 MFE & 26 IFE Power Plant and Test Facility Studies in Past 46 years MFE-40 IFE-26 JFS 2016 Fusion Technology Institute, University of Wisconsin 3 Total Fusion Reactivities for Key Fusion Fuels Total Energy Production Rate st 1 generation fuels: MaxwellianTotal Reactivities -19 D + T → n (14.07 MeV) + 4He (3.52 MeV) 10 D + D → n (2.45 MeV) + 3He (0.82 MeV) → p (3.02 MeV) + T (1.01 MeV) -20 {50% each
    [Show full text]
  • Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusor Cody Boyd Virginia Commonwealth University
    Virginia Commonwealth University VCU Scholars Compass Capstone Design Expo Posters College of Engineering 2015 Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusor Cody Boyd Virginia Commonwealth University Brian Hortelano Virginia Commonwealth University Yonathan Kassaye Virginia Commonwealth University See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/capstone Part of the Engineering Commons © The Author(s) Downloaded from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/capstone/40 This Poster is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Engineering at VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Capstone Design Expo Posters by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Cody Boyd, Brian Hortelano, Yonathan Kassaye, Dimitris Killinger, Adam Stanfield, Jordan Stark, Thomas Veilleux, and Nick Reuter This poster is available at VCU Scholars Compass: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/capstone/40 Team Members: Cody Boyd, Brian Hortelano, Yonathan Kassaye, Dimitris Killinger, Adam Stanfield, Jordan Stark, Thomas Veilleux Inertial Electrostatic Faculty Advisor: Dr. Sama Bilbao Y Leon, Mr. James G. Miller Sponsor: Confinement Fusor Dominion Virginia Power What is Fusion? Shielding Computational Modeling Because the D-D fusion reaction One of the potential uses of the fusor will be to results in the production of neutrons irradiate materials and see how they behave after and X-rays, shielding is necessary to certain levels of both fast and thermal neutron protect users from the radiation exposure. To reduce the amount of time and produced by the fusor. A Monte Carlo resources spent testing, a computational model n-Particle (MCNP) model was using XOOPIC, a particle interaction software, developed to calculate the necessary was developed to model the fusor.
    [Show full text]
  • First Simulations of Turbulent Transport in the Field-Reversed Configuration C
    Lau DOI:10.1088/1741-4326/ab1578 EX/P6-37 First Simulations of Turbulent Transport in the Field-Reversed Configuration C. K. Lau1, D. P. Fulton1, J. Bao2, Z. Lin2, T. Tajima1,2, and L. Schmitz1,3 The TAE Team 1TAE Technologies, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA 92688, USA 2University of California Irvine, CA 92697, USA 3University of California Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA Corresponding Author: C. K. Lau, [email protected] Experimental progress by TAE Technologies has led to successful suppression of MHD insta- bilities in field-reversed configuration (FRC) plasmas using C-2U and C-2W devices. Resultant particle and energy confinement times are on the order of several milliseconds, governed by mi- croturbulence driven transport processes. Understanding these mechanisms is essential towards improved confinement and a viable FRC fusion reactor. Experimental measurements of low frequency density fluctuations in C-2 have shown that fluctuations of the FRC core and SOL exhibit distinct qualities. In the SOL, fluctuations are highest in amplitude at ion-scale lengths and exponentially decrease towards electron-scale lengths. In the core, fluctuations are overall lower in amplitude with a dip in the ion-scale lengths and a slight peak in electron-scale lengths. Using the Gyrokinetic Toroidal Code (GTC), local linear simulations of drift-wave instabilities have found qualitatively similar trends. The SOL is linearly unstable for a wide range of length scales and pressure gradients. On the other hand, the core is shown to be robustly stable due to the stabilizing FRC traits of short field-line connection lengths, radially increasing magnetic field strength, and the large finite Larmor radius (FLR) of ions.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Physics: Science, Technology and Applications
    Prof. Kim Molvig April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) DDD-T--TT FusionFusion D +T → α + n +17.6 MeV 3.5MeV 14.1MeV • What is GOOD about this reaction? – Highest specific energy of ALL nuclear reactions – Lowest temperature for sizeable reaction rate • What is BAD about this reaction? – NEUTRONS => activation of confining vessel and resultant radioactivity – Neutron energy must be thermally converted (inefficiently) to electricity – Deuterium must be separated from seawater – Tritium must be bred April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) ConsiderConsider AnotherAnother NuclearNuclear ReactionReaction p+11B → 3α + 8.7 MeV • What is GOOD about this reaction? – Aneutronic (No neutrons => no radioactivity!) – Direct electrical conversion of output energy (reactants all charged particles) – Fuels ubiquitous in nature • What is BAD about this reaction? – High Temperatures required (why?) – Difficulty of confinement (technology immature relative to Tokamaks) April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) DTDT FusionFusion –– VisualVisualVisual PicturePicture Figure by MIT OCW. April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) EnergeticsEnergetics ofofof FusionFusion e2 V ≅ ≅ 400 KeV Coul R + R V D T QM “tunneling” required . Ekin r Empirical fit to data 2 −VNuc ≅ −50 MeV −2 A1 = 45.95, A2 = 50200, A3 =1.368×10 , A4 =1.076, A5 = 409 Coefficients for DT (E in KeV, σ in barns) April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) TunnelingTunneling FusionFusion CrossCross SectionSection andand ReactivityReactivity Gamow factor . Compare to DT . April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) ReactivityReactivity forfor DTDT FuelFuel 8 ] 6 c e s / 3 m c 6 1 - 0 4 1 x [ ) ν σ ( 2 0 0 50 100 150 200 T1 (KeV) April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) Figure by MIT OCW.
    [Show full text]
  • Spherical Tokamak) on the Path to Fusion Energy
    Spherical Torus (Spherical Tokamak) on the Path to Fusion Energy ST can support fast implementation of fusion Demo in unique, important ways 1) Opportunities to support the strategy of Demo after ITER 2) Important ways in which ST can do so 3) Component Test Facility for steady state integrated testing 4) Broad progress and the remaining CTF physics R&D needs Martin Peng, NSTX Program Director Fusion Power Associates Annual Meeting and Symposium Fusion: Pathway to the Future September 27-28, 2006, Washington D.C. EU-Japan plan of Broader Approach toward Demo introduces opportunities in physics and component EVEDA OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY S. Matsuda, SOFT 2006 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FPA Annual Mtg & Symp, 09/27-28/2006 2 Korean fusion energy development plan introduces opportunities in accelerating fusion technology R&D OAK RIDGEGS NATIONAL Lee, US LABORATORY2006 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FPA Annual Mtg & Symp, 09/27-28/2006 3 We propose that ST research addresses issues in support of this strategy • Support and benefit from USBPO-ITPA activities in preparation for burning plasma research in ITER using physics breadth provided by ST. • Complement and extend tokamak physics experiments, by maximizing synergy in investigating key scientific issues of tokamak fusion plasmas • Enable attractive integrated Component Test Facility (CTF) to support Demo, by NSTX establishing ST database and example leveraging the advancing tokamak database for ITER burning plasma operation and control. ST (All) USBPO- ITPA (~2/5) Tokamak (~3/4) OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FPA Annual Mtg & Symp, 09/27-28/2006 4 World Spherical Tokamak research has expanded to 22 experiments addressing key physics issues MAST (UK) NSTX (US) OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY U.
    [Show full text]
  • Formation of Hot, Stable, Long-Lived Field-Reversed Configuration Plasmas on the C-2W Device
    IOP Nuclear Fusion International Atomic Energy Agency Nuclear Fusion Nucl. Fusion Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112009 (16pp) https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/ab0be9 59 Formation of hot, stable, long-lived 2019 field-reversed configuration plasmas © 2019 IAEA, Vienna on the C-2W device NUFUAU H. Gota1 , M.W. Binderbauer1 , T. Tajima1, S. Putvinski1, M. Tuszewski1, 1 1 1 1 112009 B.H. Deng , S.A. Dettrick , D.K. Gupta , S. Korepanov , R.M. Magee1 , T. Roche1 , J.A. Romero1 , A. Smirnov1, V. Sokolov1, Y. Song1, L.C. Steinhauer1 , M.C. Thompson1 , E. Trask1 , A.D. Van H. Gota et al Drie1, X. Yang1, P. Yushmanov1, K. Zhai1 , I. Allfrey1, R. Andow1, E. Barraza1, M. Beall1 , N.G. Bolte1 , E. Bomgardner1, F. Ceccherini1, A. Chirumamilla1, R. Clary1, T. DeHaas1, J.D. Douglass1, A.M. DuBois1 , A. Dunaevsky1, D. Fallah1, P. Feng1, C. Finucane1, D.P. Fulton1, L. Galeotti1, K. Galvin1, E.M. Granstedt1 , M.E. Griswold1, U. Guerrero1, S. Gupta1, Printed in the UK K. Hubbard1, I. Isakov1, J.S. Kinley1, A. Korepanov1, S. Krause1, C.K. Lau1 , H. Leinweber1, J. Leuenberger1, D. Lieurance1, M. Madrid1, NF D. Madura1, T. Matsumoto1, V. Matvienko1, M. Meekins1, R. Mendoza1, R. Michel1, Y. Mok1, M. Morehouse1, M. Nations1 , A. Necas1, 1 1 1 1 1 10.1088/1741-4326/ab0be9 M. Onofri , D. Osin , A. Ottaviano , E. Parke , T.M. Schindler , J.H. Schroeder1, L. Sevier1, D. Sheftman1 , A. Sibley1, M. Signorelli1, R.J. Smith1 , M. Slepchenkov1, G. Snitchler1, J.B. Titus1, J. Ufnal1, Paper T. Valentine1, W. Waggoner1, J.K. Walters1, C.
    [Show full text]
  • NIAC 2011 Phase I Tarditti Aneutronic Fusion Spacecraft Architecture Final Report
    NASA-NIAC 2001 PHASE I RESEARCH GRANT on “Aneutronic Fusion Spacecraft Architecture” Final Research Activity Report (SEPTEMBER 2012) P.I.: Alfonso G. Tarditi1 Collaborators: John H. Scott2, George H. Miley3 1Dept. of Physics, University of Houston – Clear Lake, Houston, TX 2NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 3University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL Executive Summary - Motivation This study was developed because the recognized need of defining of a new spacecraft architecture suitable for aneutronic fusion and featuring game-changing space travel capabilities. The core of this architecture is the definition of a new kind of fusion-based space propulsion system. This research is not about exploring a new fusion energy concept, it actually assumes the availability of an aneutronic fusion energy reactor. The focus is on providing the best (most efficient) utilization of fusion energy for propulsion purposes. The rationale is that without a proper architecture design even the utilization of a fusion reactor as a prime energy source for spacecraft propulsion is not going to provide the required performances for achieving a substantial change of current space travel capabilities. - Highlights of Research Results This NIAC Phase I study provided led to several findings that provide the foundation for further research leading to a higher TRL: first a quantitative analysis of the intrinsic limitations of a propulsion system that utilizes aneutronic fusion products directly as the exhaust jet for achieving propulsion was carried on. Then, as a natural continuation, a new beam conditioning process for the fusion products was devised to produce an exhaust jet with the required characteristics (both thrust and specific impulse) for the optimal propulsion performances (in essence, an energy-to-thrust direct conversion).
    [Show full text]
  • Revamping Fusion Research Robert L. Hirsch
    Revamping Fusion Research Robert L. Hirsch Journal of Fusion Energy ISSN 0164-0313 Volume 35 Number 2 J Fusion Energ (2016) 35:135-141 DOI 10.1007/s10894-015-0053-y 1 23 Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer Science +Business Media New York. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be self- archived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”. 1 23 Author's personal copy J Fusion Energ (2016) 35:135–141 DOI 10.1007/s10894-015-0053-y POLICY Revamping Fusion Research Robert L. Hirsch1 Published online: 28 January 2016 Ó Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016 Abstract A fundamental revamping of magnetic plasma Introduction fusion research is needed, because the current focus of world fusion research—the ITER-tokamak concept—is A practical fusion power system must be economical, virtually certain to be a commercial failure. Towards that publically acceptable, and as simple as possible from a end, a number of technological considerations are descri- regulatory standpoint. In a preceding paper [1] the ITER- bed, believed important to successful fusion research.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Fusion Enhances Cancer Cell Killing Efficacy in a Protontherapy Model
    Nuclear fusion enhances cancer cell killing efficacy in a protontherapy model GAP Cirrone*, L Manti, D Margarone, L Giuffrida, A. Picciotto, G. Cuttone, G. Korn, V. Marchese, G. Milluzzo, G. Petringa, F. Perozziello, F. Romano, V. Scuderi * Corresponding author Abstract Protontherapy is hadrontherapy’s fastest-growing modality and a pillar in the battle against cancer. Hadrontherapy’s superiority lies in its inverted depth-dose profile, hence tumour-confined irradiation. Protons, however, lack distinct radiobiological advantages over photons or electrons. Higher LET (Linear Energy Transfer) 12C-ions can overcome cancer radioresistance: DNA lesion complexity increases with LET, resulting in efficient cell killing, i.e. higher Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE). However, economic and radiobiological issues hamper 12C-ion clinical amenability. Thus, enhancing proton RBE is desirable. To this end, we exploited the p + 11Bà3a reaction to generate high-LET alpha particles with a clinical proton beam. To maximize the reaction rate, we used sodium borocaptate (BSH) with natural boron content. Boron-Neutron Capture Therapy (BNCT) uses 10B-enriched BSH for neutron irradiation-triggered alpha-particles. We recorded significantly increased cellular lethality and chromosome aberration complexity. A strategy combining protontherapy’s ballistic precision with the higher RBE promised by BNCT and 12C-ion therapy is thus demonstrated. 1 The urgent need for radical radiotherapy research to achieve improved tumour control in the context of reducing the risk of normal tissue toxicity and late-occurring sequelae, has driven the fast- growing development of cancer treatment by accelerated beams of charged particles (hadrontherapy) in recent decades (1). This appears to be particularly true for protontherapy, which has emerged as the most-rapidly expanding hadrontherapy approach, totalling over 100,000 patients treated thus far worldwide (2).
    [Show full text]
  • MHD in the Spherical Tokamak
    21 st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 2006 MHD in the Spherical Tokamak MAST authors: SD Pinches , I Chapman, MP Gryaznevich, DF Howell, SE Sharapov, RJ Akers, LC Appel, RJ Buttery, NJ Conway, G Cunningham, TC Hender, GTA Huysmans, EX/7-2Ra R Martin and the MAST and NBI Teams NSTX authors: A.C. Sontag, S.A. Sabbagh, W. Zhu, J.E. Menard, R.E. Bell, J.M. Bialek, M.G. Bell, D.A. Gates, A.H. Glasser, B.P. Leblanc, F.M. Levinton, K.C. Shaing, D. Stutman, K.L. Tritz, H. Yu, and the NSTX Research Team EX/7-2Rb Office of Supported by Science This work was jointly funded by the UK Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council and Euratom MHD physics understanding to reduce performance risks in ITER and a CTF – Error field studies – RWM stability in high beta plasmas – Effects of rotation upon sawteeth – Alfvén cascades in reversed shear EX/7-2Ra EX/7-2Rb Error field studies in MAST EX/7-2Ra Error fields: slow rotation, induce instabilities, terminate discharge Mega Ampere Spherical Tokamak R = 0.85m, R/a ~ 1.3 Four ex-vessel (ITER-like) error field correction coils wired to produce odd-n spectrum, Imax = 15 kA·turns (3 turns) Locked mode scaling in MAST EX/7-2Ra Error fields contribute to βN limit: n=1 kink B21 is the m = 2, n = 1 field component normal to q = 2 surface: • Similar density scaling observed on NSTX • Extrapolating to a Spherical Tokamak Power Plant / Component Test Facility gives locked mode thresholds ≈ intrinsic error ⇒ prudent to include EFCCs [Howell et al .
    [Show full text]