DOCSLIB.ORG

NETS Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NETS Program Program Book NETS-2015Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space Sponsored by ANS Aerospace Nuclear Science and Technology Division Universities Space Research Association NASA 1 Full proceedings on jump drive/ memory stick Copyright © 2015 2 About this Meeting About the Meeting In February 2015, the Aerospace Nuclear Science and Technology Division (ANSTD) of the American Nuclear Society (ANS) will hold the 2015 Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space (NETS 2015) topical meeting at the Albuquerque Marriott in Albuquerque, NM. NETS 2015 is the premier conference for landed and in-space applications in 2015. With authors from universities, national laboratories, NASA facilities and industry, NETS 2015 will provide an excellent communication network and forum for infor- mation exchange. Topic Areas NASA is currently considering capabilities for robotic and crewed missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. Strategies that implement advanced power and propul- sion technologies, as well as radiation protection, will be important in accomplish- ing these missions in the future. NETS serves as a major communications network and forum for professionals and students working in the area of space nuclear technology. Every year it facilitates the exchange of information among research and management personnel from international government, industry, academia, and the national laboratory systems. To this end, the NETS 2015 meeting will address topics ranging from overviews of current programs to methods of meeting the challenges of future space endeavors. 3 Conference Organizers John Bess, Ph.D. Alice Caponiti Pete Worden, Ph.D. General Chair General Chair General Chair Idaho National Laboratory U.S. Department of Energy NASA Ames Research Center Tony Kim Wes Deason Technical Chair Technical Chair NASA Marshal Space Flight Center for Space Nuclear Center Research, USRA 4 Conference Organizers Nathan Jerred Blair Bromley Delisa Rogers Publications International Chair Conference Coordinator Center for Space Nuclear Atomic Energy for Canada Center for Space Nuclear Research, USRA Limited Research, USRA Margaret Marshall Chris Morrison Publications Chair Communications Chair Idaho National Laboratory Rensseleaer Polytechnic Institute 5 Organizing Committees Honorary Chairs Publications Chairs: David Schurr Nathan Jerred NASA HQ Center for Space Nuclear Research, Scott Seymour USRA Aerojet Rocketdyne [email protected] John Kelly, PhD, Margaret Marshall U.S. Department of Energy Idaho National Laboratory [email protected] Bill Gerstenmaier NASA HQ International Chair: General Chairs: Blair Bromley Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Pete Worden, PhD, NASA ARC [email protected] Alice Caponiti U.S. Department of Energy Communications Chair: [email protected] Christopher Morrison John Bess, PhD Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Idaho National Laboratory [email protected] [email protected] Finance and Exhibits Chair and Technical Chairs: Conference Coordinator: Wes Deason Delisa Rogers Center for Space Nuclear Research, Center for Space Nucelar Research, USRA USRA [email protected] [email protected] Tony Kim NASA MSFC [email protected] 6 Session Chairs and Reviewers Track I: Radioisotope Power Systems Track Chair: Kelly Lively, Idaho National Laboratory Dr. Richard Ambrosi University of Leicester Ms. Rebecca Onuschak DOE-Office of Nuclear Energy Dr. Stephen Johnson Idaho National Laboratory Ms. June Zakrajsek NASA-Glenn Research Center Ms. Young Lee Jet Propulsion Laboratory Mr. Dirk Cairns-Gallimore DOE-NE75 Dr. Robert Wham Oak Ridge National Laboratory Mr. Thomas Sutliff NASA-Glenn Research Center Dr. Jean-Pierre Fleurial Jet Propulsion Laboratory Dr. Daniel Kramer University of Dayton Research Institute Track II: Fission Power and Electric Propulsion Track Chair: Patrick McClure, Los Alamos National Laboratory Dr. D.V. Rao Los Alamos National Laboratory Dr. John Bess Idaho National Laboratory Dr. David Poston Los Alamos National Laboratory Mr. Don Palac NASA-Glenn Research Center Track III: Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Track Chair: Omar Mireles, NASA MSFC Dr. Omar Mireles NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center Mr. Jarvis Caffrey NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center Dr. Omar Mireles NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center Ms. Kelsa Benensky Penn State University Dr. Michael Houts NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center Dr. Omar Mireles NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center Mr. Wesley Deason Center for Space Nuclear Research Mr. Michael Eades Center for Space Nuclear Research Mr. Daniel Cavender NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center Mr. Leroy Hardin Nuclear Regulatory Commission Track IV: Advanced Concepts Track Chair: John Scott, NASA JSC Mr. Ardash Rajguru Center for Space Nuclear Research Mr. John Scott NASA-Johnson Space Center Mr. Matthew Lund University of Utah Mr. John Scott NASA-Johnson Space Center Dr. Alfonso Tarditi Electric Power Research Institute Mr. John Scott NASA-Johnson Space Center 7 Sponsors Aerojet Rocketdyne is a world-recognized aerospace and defense leader providing propulsion and energetics to the domestic and international space, missile defense and strategic systems, tactical systems and armaments areas, and transformation- al energy technology solutions to address the world’s energy needs. GenCorp is a diversified company providing innovative solutions to its customers in the aero- space and defense, energy and real estate markets. Additional information about Aerojet Rocketdyne and GenCorp can be obtained by visiting the companies’ websites at www.Rocket.com and www.GenCorp.com. The UK’s National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL) offers an unrivalled breadth of techni- cal products and services to our customers across the whole nuclear industry. Covering the complete nuclear fuel cycle from fuel manufacture and power genera- tion, through to reprocessing, waste treatment and disposal and including defence, new nuclear build and Homeland Security. NNL provides these services supported by an impressive range of facilities and links with international research organi- sations, academia and other national laboratories. NNL’s facilities are second to none. The Central Laboratory at Sellafield is the most modern nuclear research fa- cility in the world. The Windscale Laboratory provides Post-Irradiation Examination (PIE) and other services critical to plant life extension. At Workington NNL operates a non-radioactive test rig facility and at Preston NNL operates a uranium active chemistry laboratory. NNL also has staff at the Risley, Stonehouse and Harwell sites providing Head Office functions, graphite technology, radiation chemistry and modelling/simulation. Appointed by the European Space Agency (ESA), NNL’s role has been to find a sustainable power source in batteries to power future European space missions beyond Mars. After finding that americium was the ideal power source, NNL then started examining the logistical and chemical issues involved in the separation of americium from plutonium. NNL is now a key player in a European wide space programme. 8 NETS 2015 General Schedule Monday February 23, 2015 7:00 am - 8:00 am Registration Registration Desk Session Preparation Exhibitition Hall (Acoma) 8:00 am - 10:00 am Opening Plenary Pecos/Sandia Welcome and Q&A • David Schurr, NASA HQ • Scott Seymour, Aerojet Rocketdyne • John Kelly, DOE-NE 10:00 am - 10:30 am Refreshments Exhibition Hall (Acoma) 10:30 am - 12:30 pm Plenary Pecos/Sandia • Pete Worden, NASA ARC • Alice Caponiti, DOE-NE • John Bess, Idaho National Laboratory 12:30 pm - 1:30 pm Lunch Break On your own 1:30 pm - 4:00 pm Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 4:00 pm - 4:30 pm Refreshments Exhibition Hall 4:30 pm - 6:00 pm Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 6:00 pm - 9:00 pm Opening Tapas Reception National Museum of Nuclear Science & History Sponsored by National Nuclear Lab Tuesday February 24, 2015 8:00 am - 10:00 am Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 10:00 am - 10:30 am Refreshments Exhibition Hall 10:30 am - 12:30 pm Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 12:30 pm - 1:30 pm Lunch Break On your own 1:30 pm - 3:00 pm Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 3:00 pm - 3:30 pm Refreshments Exhibition Hall 3:30 pm - 5:00 pm Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 9 NETS 2015 General Schedule Evening Dinner On your own Wednesday February 25, 2015 8:00 am - 10:00 am Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 10:00 am - 10:30 am Refreshments Exhibition Hall 10:30 am - 12:30 pm Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 12:30 pm - 1:30 pm Lunch On your own 1:30 pm - 3:30 pm Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 3:30 pm - 4:00 pm Refreshments Exhibition Hall 4:00 pm - 6:00 pm Technical Sessions Salons A, B, C, D 7:00 pm - 9:00 pm Dinner Banquet Marriott Ballroom Sponsored by Aerojet-Rocketdyne Speaker: Bill Gerstenmaier, NASA HQ Thursday February 26, 2015 Morning Tour Sandia National Lab 10 NETS 201 Program Details Monday February 24, 2014 Track I: Radioisotope Power Systems Nuclear Power Assessment Studies The Nuclear Power Assessment Study, R.L. McNutt (John Hopkins University), S.M. Aleman (NASA HQ), M.J., Amato (NASA GFC), W. Carroll (DOE), L. Dudzinski (NASA HWQ, J. McKamy (DOE), C. Moore (NASA HQ), C. Reed (John Hopkins University), K.R. Reh ( Jet Propulsion Lab), J.A. Sholtis (Sholtis Engineering and Safety Consulting), R.A. Stephan (NASA HQ) The 2014 NASA Nuclear Power Assessment Study: Mission Study Results Investigating Advanced Radioisotope Systems and Fission Power Systems, Y.H. Young, B.K. Bairstow (JPL), R. Cataldo (NASA GRC), R. Anderson (Applied Physics Lab), S, Oleson (NASA GRC), S.G. Johnson (Idaho National Lab) The 2014 NASA Nuclear Power Assessment Study: Assembly, Test and Launch Operations Comparisons between Notional 1kWe Fission Power System and Conventional Radioisotope Power System, S. G. Johnson (Idaho National Lab), R. Cataldo (NASA GRC), S. Vernon (Applied Physics Lav), C. Tatro (NASA JSC), G. English, R. Cook (Idaho National Lab), R. Langevin (NASA JSC), Y.H. Young (Jet Salon A Propulsion Lab) 1:30 pm - 4:00 The 2014 NASA Nuclear Power Assessment Study: Safety, Environmental Impact, and Launch Approval Considerations and Findings, J.A.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nuclear Transmutation Strategies for Management of Long-Lived Fission
    PRAMANA c Indian Academy of Sciences Vol. 85, No. 3 — journal of September 2015 physics pp. 517–523 Nuclear transmutation strategies for management of long-lived fission products S KAILAS1,2,∗, M HEMALATHA2 and A SAXENA1 1Nuclear Physics Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai 400 085, India 2UM–DAE Centre for Excellence in Basic Sciences, Mumbai 400 098, India ∗Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] DOI: 10.1007/s12043-015-1063-z; ePublication: 27 August 2015 Abstract. Management of long-lived nuclear waste produced in a reactor is essential for long- term sustenance of nuclear energy programme. A number of strategies are being explored for the effective transmutation of long-lived nuclear waste in general, and long-lived fission products (LLFP), in particular. Some of the options available for the transmutation of LLFP are discussed. Keywords. Nuclear transmutation; long-lived fission products; (n, γ ) cross-section; EMPIRE. PACS Nos 28.41.Kw; 25.40.Fq; 24.60.Dr 1. Introduction It is recognized that for long-term energy security, nuclear energy is an inevitable option [1]. For a sustainable nuclear energy programme, the management of long-lived nuclear waste is very critical. Radioactive nuclei like Pu, minor actinides like Np, Am and Cm and long-lived fission products like 79Se, 93Zr, 99Tc, 107Pd, 126Sn, 129I and 135Cs constitute the main waste burden from a power reactor. In this paper, we shall discuss the management strategies for nuclear waste in general, and long-lived fission products, in particular. 2. Management of nuclear waste The radioactive nuclei which are produced in a power reactor and which remain in the spent fuel of the reactor form a major portion of nuclear waste.
    [Show full text]
  • Plasma–Material Interactions in Current Tokamaks and Their Implications for Next Step Fusion Reactors
    Plasma–material interactions in current tokamaks and their implications for next step fusion reactors G. Federicia ITER Garching Joint Work Site, Garching, Germany C.H. Skinnerb Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, USA J.N. Brooksc Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, USA J.P. Coad JET Joint Undertaking, Abingdon, United Kingdom C. Grisolia Tore Supra, CEA Cadarache, St.-Paul-lez-Durance, France A.A. Haaszd University of Toronto, Institute for Aerospace Studies, Toronto, Ontario, Canada A. Hassaneine Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, USA V. Philipps Institut f¨ur Plasmaphysik, Forschungzentrum J¨ulich, J¨ulich, Germany C.S. Pitcherf MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA J. Roth Max-Planck-Institut f¨ur Plasmaphysik, Garching, Germany W.R. Wamplerg Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA D.G. Whyteh University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 41, No. 12R c 2001, IAEA, Vienna 1967 Contents 1. Introduction/background ........................................................................1968 1.1. Introduction....................................................................................1968 1.2. Plasma edge parameters and plasma–material interactions . 1969 1.3. History of plasma facing materials . 1973 2. Plasma edge and plasma–material interaction issues in next step tokamaks . 1977 2.1. Introduction....................................................................................1977 2.2. Progress towards a next step fusion device. .1977 2.3. Most prominent plasma–material interaction issues for a next step fusion device . 1980 2.4. Selection criteria for plasma facing materials. .1995 2.5. Overview of design features of plasma facing components for next step tokamaks. .1998 3. Review of physical processes and underlying theory ..........................................2002 3.1. Introduction....................................................................................2002 3.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Fusion
    Copyright © 2016 by Gerald Black. Published by The Mars Society with permission NUCLEAR FUSION: THE SOLUTION TO THE ENERGY PROBLEM AND TO ADVANCED SPACE PROPULSION Gerald Black Aerospace Engineer (retired, 40+ year career); email: [email protected] Currently Chair of the Ohio Chapter of the Mars Society Presented at Mars Society Annual Convention, Washington DC, September 22, 2016 ABSTRACT Nuclear fusion has long been viewed as a potential solution to the world’s energy needs. However, the government sponsored megaprojects have been floundering. The two multi-billion- dollar flagship programs, the International Tokamak Experimental Reactor (ITER) and the National Ignition Facility (NIF), have both experienced years of delays and a several-fold increase in costs. The ITER tokamak design is so large and complex that, even if this approach succeeds, there is doubt that it would be economical. After years of testing at full power, the NIF facility is still far short of achieving its goal of fusion ignition. But hope is not lost. Several private companies have come up with smaller and simpler approaches that show promise. This talk highlights the progress made by one such private company, namely LPPFusion (formerly called Lawrenceville Plasma Physics). LPPFusion is developing focus fusion technology based on the dense plasma focus device and hydrogen-boron 11 fuel. This approach, if it works, would produce a fusion power generator small enough to fit in a truck. This device would produce no radioactivity, there would be no possibility of a meltdown or other safety issues, and it would be more economical than any other source of electricity.
    [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]
  • MATTHEW P. DANIELS Office of the Secretary Of
    MATTHEW P. DANIELS Office of the Secretary of Defense, Washington, DC National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Washington, DC [email protected] Current Positions and Affiliations Advisor, Office of the Secretary of Defense Senior Technical Advisor, Office of the NASA Administrator Affiliate, MIT and Stanford Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University Education Ph.D. Stanford University, Management Science & Engineering, 2015 Dissertation: Optimization of Spacecraft Architectures for Earth-Orbit Satellite Projects Committee: M. Elisabeth Paté-Cornell (advisor), Ronald Howard, S. Pete Worden, Sigrid Close M.S. Stanford University, Aeronautics & Astronautics, 2010 B.A. Cornell University, Physics, 2007 Academic Appointments Research Affiliate, MIT Media Lab Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (2018-) Adjunct Professor, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service Georgetown University, Washington, DC (2016-) Affiliate, Stanford Center for International Security and Cooperation Stanford University, Stanford, CA (2015-) Predoctoral Science Fellow, Center for International Security and Cooperation Stanford University, Stanford, CA (2013-2014) Predoctoral Science Fellow, Center for International Security and Cooperation Stanford University, Stanford, CA (2012-2013) 1 Relevant Professional Experience Advisor, Office of the Secretary of Defense (2015-present) Principal areas of focus include U.S. space programs, deep space exploration, and artificial intelligence. Create and analyze strategies for space programs at the whole-enterprise level of the U.S. Department of Defense. Manage teams of researchers and independent scholars. Assess long-term trends relevant to space technology, commercial and entrepreneurial aerospace ventures, information technology, and international security. Provide analysis and alternative strategies to the office of the Secretary of Defense and the office of the NASA Administrator. Host strategy seminars with government leaders, technology investors, and private executives.
    [Show full text]
  • Retarding Field Analyzer (RFA) for Use on EAST
    Magnetic Confinement Fusion C. Xiao and STOR-M team Plasma Physics Laboratory University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Canada \ Outline Magnetic Confinement scheme Progress in the world Tokamak Research at the University of Saskatchewan 2 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Magnetic Confinement Scheme 3 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Charged particle motion in straight magnetic field A charged particle circulates around the magnetic field lines (e.g., produced in a solenoid) Cross-field motion is restricted within Larmor radius 푚푣 푟 = 퐿 푞퐵 Motion along the field lines is still free End loss to the chamber wall Chamber Wall 4 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Toriodal geometry is the solution However, plasma in simple toroidal field drifts to outboard on the wall 5 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Tokamak Bend solenoid to form closed magnetic field lines circular field line without ends no end-loss. Transformer action produces a huge current in the chamber Generate poloidal field Heats the plasma Tokamak: abbreviation of Russian words for toroidal magnetic chamber 6 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Stellarator • The magnetic field are generated by complicated external coils • No plasma current, no disruptions • Engineering is challenge 7 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Wendelstein 7-X, Greifswald, Germany • Completed in October 2015 • Superconducting coils • High density and high temperature have been achieved 8 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Reversed Field Pinch • Toroidal field reverses direction at the edge • The magnetic field are generated by current in plasma • Toroidal filed and poloidal field are of similar strength.
    [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]
  • High Eyes in The
    AIR Y U SIT NI V ER Higher Eyes in the Sky The Feasibility of Moving AWACS and JSTARS Functions into Space KIMBERLY M. CORCORAN, Major, USAF School of Advanced Airpower Studies THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE SCHOOL OF ADVANCED AIRPOWER STUDIES, MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE, ALABAMA, FOR COMPLETION OF GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS, ACADEMIC YEAR 1997–98. Air University Press Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama October 1999 Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the author, and do not necessar ily represent the vie ws of Air University, the United States Air F orce, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency. Cleared for public release: dis­ tribution unlimited. ii Contents Chapter Page DISCLAIMER . ii ABSTRACT . v ABOUT THE AUTHOR . vii 1 INTRODUCTION . 1 Notes . 3 2 THE EVOLUTION OF MOVING TARGET INDICATOR RADAR SYSTEMS . 5 Notes . 11 3 THE MECHANICS OF SPACE OPERATIONS . 13 Notes . 23 4 UNITED STATES SPACE ORGANIZATIONS THAT MAY AFFECT SPACE-BASED SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT . 27 Notes . 34 5 TECHNOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT AIRBORNE MOVING TARGET INDICATOR SYSTEMS AND PROPOSED SPACE-BASED SYSTEMS . 35 Notes . 42 6 ISSUES TO CONSIDER FOR SPACE-BASED MOVING TARGET INDICATOR PLANNING . 45 Notes . 53 7 CONCLUSIONS . 55 Illustrations Figure 1 Orbital Terms . 14 2 Geosynchronous Ground Tracks . 15 3 Satellite Ground Tracks . 16 4 Air Force Space Command Organization Chart . 28 iii Abstract During the past few years, United States Air Force (USAF) leaders have begun to emphasize space operations. Global Engagement: A Vision for the 21st Century Air Force states that we will eventually transition fr om an air and space for ce into a space and air for ce and various leaders have opined that that air and space are seamless.
    [Show full text]
  • Fission and Fusion Can Yield Energy
    Nuclear Energy Nuclear energy can also be separated into 2 separate forms: nuclear fission and nuclear fusion. Nuclear fusion is the splitting of large atomic nuclei into smaller elements releasing energy, and nuclear fusion is the joining of two small atomic nuclei into a larger element and in the process releasing energy. The mass of a nucleus is always less than the sum of the individual masses of the protons and neutrons which constitute it. The difference is a measure of the nuclear binding energy which holds the nucleus together (Figure 1). As figures 1 and 2 below show, the energy yield from nuclear fusion is much greater than nuclear fission. Figure 1 2 Nuclear binding energy = ∆mc For the alpha particle ∆m= 0.0304 u which gives a binding energy of 28.3 MeV. (Figure from: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/nucbin.html ) Fission and fusion can yield energy Figure 2 (Figure from: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/nucbin.html) Nuclear fission When a neutron is fired at a uranium-235 nucleus, the nucleus captures the neutron. It then splits into two lighter elements and throws off two or three new neutrons (the number of ejected neutrons depends on how the U-235 atom happens to split). The two new atoms then emit gamma radiation as they settle into their new states. (John R. Huizenga, "Nuclear fission", in AccessScience@McGraw-Hill, http://proxy.library.upenn.edu:3725) There are three things about this induced fission process that make it especially interesting: 1) The probability of a U-235 atom capturing a neutron as it passes by is fairly high.
    [Show full text]
  • Episode 527: Nuclear Transmutation
    9/28/2018 Episode 527: Nuclear transmutation Institute of Physics Search Home Electricity Mechanics Vibrations and waves Fields Atoms and nuclei Energy Astronomy You are here > Atoms and nuclei > Nuclear fission > Episode 527: Nuclear transmutation Nuclear fission Episode 527: Nuclear transmutation Episode 526: Preparation for nuclear fission topic Students need to move beyond the idea that nuclear changes are represented solely by alpha, beta and gamma decay. There are other decay processes, and there are other events that occur when a nucleus absorbs a particle and becomes unstable. Episode 527: Nuclear transmutation Episode 528: Controlling fission Summary Discussion: Transmutation of elements (15 minutes) Student questions: Balancing equations (30 minutes) Discussion: Induced fission (10 minutes) Demonstration: The nucleus as a liquid drop (10 minutes) Discussion: Fission products and radioactive waste (10 minutes) Worked example: A fission reaction (10 minutes) Discussion and demonstrations: Controlled chain reactions (15 minutes) Discussion: The possibility of fission (10 minutes) Student questions: Fission calculations (20 minutes) Discussion: Transmutation of elements Start by rehearsing some assumed knowledge. What is the nucleus made of? (Protons and neutrons, collectively know as nucleons.) What two natural processes change one element into another? (a and b decay). This is transmutation. Using a Periodic Table, explain that a decay moves two places down the periodic table. What about b- decay? (Moves one place up the periodic table.) Introduce the idea of b+ decay. (Moves one place down the periodic table.) Write general equations for these processes. There is another way in which an element may be transmuted; for example, the production of radioactive 14C used in radio- carbon dating in the atmosphere by the neutrons in cosmic rays.
    [Show full text]
  • Fusion Public Meeting Slides-03302021-FINAL
    TitleDeveloping Lorem a Regulatory Ipsum Framework for Fusion Energy Systems March 30, 2021 Agenda Time Topic Speaker(s) 12:30-12:40pm Introduction/Opening Remarks NRC Discussion on NAS Report “Key Goals and Innovations Needed for a U.S. Fusion Jennifer Uhle (NEI) 12:40-1:10pm Pilot Plant” Rich Hawryluk (PPPL) Social License and Ethical Review of Fusion: Methods to Achieve Social Seth Hoedl (PRF) 1:10-1:40pm Acceptance Developers Perspectives on Potential Hazards, Consequences, and Regulatory Frameworks for Commercial Deployment: • Fusion Industry Association - Industry Remarks Andrew Holland (FIA) 1:40-2:40pm • TAE – Regulatory Insights Michl Binderbauer (TAE) • Commonwealth Fusion Systems – Fusion Technology and Radiological Bob Mumgaard (CFS) Hazards 2:40-2:50pm Break 2:50-3:10pm Licensing and Regulating Byproduct Materials by the NRC and Agreement States NRC Discussions of Possible Frameworks for Licensing/Regulating Commercial Fusion • NRC Perspectives – Byproduct Approach NRC/OAS 3:10-4:10pm • NRC Perspectives – Hybrid Approach NRC • Industry Perspectives - Hybrid Approach Sachin Desai (Hogan Lovells) 4:10-4:30pm Next Steps/Questions All Public Meeting Format The Commission recently revised its policy statement on how the agency conducts public meetings (ADAMS No.: ML21050A046). NRC Public Website - Fusion https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/advanced/fusion-energy.html NAS Report “Key Goals and Innovations Needed for a U.S. Fusion Pilot Plant” Bringing Fusion to the U.S. Grid R. J. Hawryluk J. Uhle D. Roop D. Whyte March 30, 2021 Committee Composition Richard J. Brenda L. Garcia-Diaz Gerald L. Kathryn A. Per F. Peterson (NAE) Jeffrey P. Hawryluk (Chair) Savannah River National Kulcinski (NAE) McCarthy (NAE) University of California, Quintenz Princeton Plasma Laboratory University of Oak Ridge National Berkeley/ Kairos Power TechSource, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2002.12686V1 [Physics.Pop-Ph] 28 Feb 2020 SOI Sphere of Influence VEV Variable Ejection Velocity
    Achieving the required mobility in the solar system through Direct Fusion Drive Giancarlo Genta1 and Roman Ya. Kezerashvili2;3;4, 1Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy 2Physics Department, New York City College of Technology, The City University of New York, Brooklyn, NY, USA 3The Graduate School and University Center, The City University of New York, New York, NY, USA 4Samara National Research University, Samara, Russian Federation (Dated: March 2, 2020) To develop a spacefaring civilization, humankind must develop technologies which enable safe, affordable and repeatable mobility through the solar system. One such technology is nuclear fusion propulsion which is at present under study mostly as a breakthrough toward the first interstellar probes. The aim of the present paper is to show that fusion drive is even more important in human planetary exploration and constitutes the natural solution to the problem of exploring and colonizing the solar system. Nomenclature Is specific impulse m mass mi initial mass ml mass of payload mp mass of propellant ms structural mass mt mass of the thruster mtank mass of tanks t time td departure time ve ejection velocity F thrust J cost function P power of the jet α specific mass of the generator γ optimization parameter ∆V velocity increment DFD Direct Fusion Drive IMLEO Initial Mass in Low Earth Orbit LEO Low Earth Orbit LMO Low Mars Orbit NEP Nuclear Electric Propulsion NTP Nuclear Thermal Propulsion SEP Solar Electric Propulsion arXiv:2002.12686v1 [physics.pop-ph] 28 Feb 2020 SOI Sphere of Influence VEV Variable Ejection Velocity I.
    [Show full text]