Fusor Grid

16 04 2009

I’ve set my sites on a fusor win. The heart of the fusor is it’s grid. It occurred  to me that a polywell shape might work as a shape for a fusor grid. So I started a new branch on github and modified the design to work as a fusor grid. Here is the result, there is no internal structure, just solid metal:

chassis

Advertisements

Actions

Information

12 responses

16 04 2009
theorbtwo

I feel silly for asking, but why do you think that? It seems the TeslaBoys managed with a *very* inexpensive pair of grids, so why go to the expense of having one custom, precision, machined?
I assume you have a reason that I just don’t see — I dont’t mean to be accusitory.

16 04 2009
theorbtwo

(Blast, didn’t check “notify me of followups”.)

17 04 2009
FAMULUS

That wouldn’t be that expensive to make at prometal. I’ll get a quote as soon as I get an STL out.

I asked TeslaBoys for the DXF files for his grid. He said he’ll give them to me when he gets back from a trip.

17 04 2009
A. McEvoy

The advantage of your design for the Polywell type approach of electron confinement is the magnetic field arrangement at the center of the device. For a fusor, you are simply accelerating ions (opposite bias by the way, hopefully your HVPS(s) are bipolar) inward. Recent research has shown that the mean free path of the ions is short enough (at P ~ mTorr) that spherically-radial convergence (i.e using a spherical grid) is probably not super critical for a working fusor, but there is certainly no advantage that I can see of using a Polywell type chassis for this application. In fact, the increased surface area of the Polywell type grids is most certainly detrimental to a fusor. Spherical grids offer the best compromise between surface area and electric field uniformity, and so
I would recommend using a significantly more transparent and cheaper spherical grid for the fusor and the full chassis design you have shown for the Polywell approach.

17 04 2009
FAMULUS

OK. I’ll use a spherical grid! I see what you mean by less surface area.

I may however have this part made, if only to have a physical model of the core to show people.

17 04 2009
DEEZ and TIM

SUP MARKY MARK IN THIS MOTHAFUCKAAAAA!!!!! Haven’t checked the site in a while BUT SHIT IZ LUKKIN DOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE!!! FREE ENERGY IN YO FACE BEYITCHES!!!!

17 04 2009
FAMULUS

Hummmminnnaaa Dooo it.

20 04 2009
Matt

Have you seen the discussion at talk-polywell about the chassis’ connecting nubs possibly being right in the middle of a lot of traffic? User KitemanSA (IIRC) has done a short study of it and come up with some alternative designs to account for this.
It’s also been noticed (or at least suggested) from the latest details out of the EMC2 R&D that they’re looking to alter their “nub” design. This might have been the precursor to KitemanSA’s study.. I don’t recall the specifics, sorry.

21 04 2009
FAMULUS

Matt: not aware of that discussion.

22 04 2009
22 04 2009
FAMULUS

Sorry Matt, that got caught in the spam filter.

23 04 2009
Matt

The PM I sent you at talk-polywell has a one extra bit of info.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: