News: 0173516862

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

Fusion Experiment Demonstrates Cheaper Stellerator Using Creative Magnet Workaround (pppl.gov)

(Sunday April 14, 2024 @04:33AM (EditorDavid) from the fun-with-fusion dept.)


[1] Popular Science reports that early last week, researchers at the U.S. Energy Department's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory revealed their new "MUSE" stellarator — "a unique fusion reactor that uses off-the-shelf and 3D-printed materials to contain its superheated plasma."

The researchers' announcement says the technique suggests "a [2]simple way to build future devices for less cost and allow researchers to test new concepts for future fusion power plants."

> Stellarators typically rely on complicated electromagnets that have complex shapes and create their magnetic fields through the flow of electricity. Those electromagnets must be built precisely with very little room for error, increasing their cost. However, permanent magnets, like the magnets that hold art to refrigerator doors, do not need electric currents to create their fields. They can also be ordered off the shelf from industrial suppliers and then embedded in a 3D-printed shell around the device's vacuum vessel, which holds the plasma.

>

> "MUSE is largely constructed with commercially available parts," said Michael Zarnstorff, a senior research physicist at PPPL. "By working with 3D-printing companies and magnet suppliers, we can shop around and buy the precision we need instead of making it ourselves." The original insight that permanent magnets could be the foundation for a new, more affordable stellarator variety came to Zarnstorff in 2014. "I realized that even if they were situated alongside other magnets, rare-earth permanent magnets could generate and maintain the magnetic fields necessary to confine the plasma so fusion reactions can occur," Zarnstorff said, "and that's the property that makes this technique work." [...]

>

> In addition to being an engineering breakthrough, MUSE also exhibits a theoretical property known as quasisymmetry to a higher degree than any other stellarator has before. It is also the first device completed anywhere in the world that was designed specifically to have a type of quasisymmetry known as quasiaxisymmetry. Conceived by physicist Allen Boozer at PPPL in the early 1980s, quasisymmetry means that although the shape of the magnetic field inside the stellarator may not be the same around the physical shape of the stellarator, the magnetic field's strength is uniform around the device, leading to good plasma confinement and higher likelihood that fusion reactions will occur. "In fact, MUSE's quasisymmetry optimization is at least 100 times better than any existing stellarator," Zarnstorff said.

>

> "The fact that we were able to design and build this stellarator is a real achievement," said Tony Qian, a graduate student in the Princeton Program in Plasma Physics, which is based at PPPL.

[3]Also covered by Gizmodo . Thanks to Slashdot reader [4]christoban for sharing the news.



[1] https://www.popsci.com/environment/stellarator-fusion-reactor/

[2] https://www.pppl.gov/news/2024/return-roots-pppl-builds-its-first-stellarator-decades-and-opens-door-research-new-plasma

[3] https://gizmodo.com/fusion-reactor-princeton-muse-experiment-magnets-plasma-1851387646

[4] https://www.slashdot.org/~christoban



Great news (Score:2)

by backslashdot ( 95548 )

I'm glad my fusion powered anti-gravity FTL flying car is still on schedule to arrive at now + 50 years.

Re: (Score:2)

by backslashdot ( 95548 )

The above comment was a joke btw. It's awesome so much progress is being made with our best minds working on it. Appreciate all the work being done to make it happen. Hope it gets done before its too late.

Re: (Score:2)

by christoban ( 3028573 )

But the marketing said 40 and the cup holder is still in beta!

Re: (Score:1)

by Tablizer ( 95088 )

When fusion creates a run-away explosion that scatters all Earth matter, you won't need flying cars. You'll be able to travel to the Fermi Award ceremony on your bootie alone.

Weird (Score:2)

by christoban ( 3028573 )

Huh, I submitted this same article a week ago, got an email that it was accepted, then it was immediately removed for Slashdot's front page. Now it's back under someone else's name.

Re: (Score:2)

by backslashdot ( 95548 )

You was robbed!! Demand your money back and call the police.

Re: (Score:2)

by zenlessyank ( 748553 )

You got AI'ed.

Re: (Score:2)

by az-saguaro ( 1231754 )

The two comments were put into a stellerator and fused. That's a new feature of AI powered Office 365.

Re: (Score:2)

by christoban ( 3028573 )

Whoops, this one is mine, I was looking at the /. editor's name. Not sure why it disappeared and reappeared... Don't mind me, I'm old and my eyes are near gone...

Re: (Score:3)

by backslashdot ( 95548 )

Fuck off. Fusion do not produce HLW (high level radioactive waste) -- so attempting to associate it with fission stigma is just a propaganda move not anything based on fact. Fusion plants structures when replaced would be considered LLW - low level waste "which usually does not require shielding during handling and transport. Most LLW is suitable for shallow land burial and is often compacted or incinerated before disposal to reduce its volume." Also tritium leakage is a non-issue given how little fuel is i

Re: (Score:2)

by DamnOregonian ( 963763 )

> Fusion do not produce HLW (high level radioactive waste)

Of course they don't, since those are by definition the waste produced in a fission reactor.

However, neutron activation is a reality, and one that will have to be come to grips with.

> Fusion plants structures when replaced would be considered LLW

Low-level radioactive waste (LLW) is defined as any radioactive waste not from the fission process itself.

It can still be highly radioactive.

> If there is a loss of power absolutely NOTHING will happen.

That is simply not true.

The amount of heat in the reactor at any moment in time is dependent upon the power capacity of the reactor.

You wouldn't want to be anywhere near a 100GW fusi

Re: (Score:1)

by angel'o'sphere ( 80593 )

The fusion reactions are happening basically in high vacuum.

The amount of fuel is extremely low.

It is unlikely we will ever have a fusion reactor, that is so big that a failure in the magnetic field, will have negative consequence s to the reactor.

Re: (Score:1)

by MacMann ( 7518492 )

Equating all nuclear fission power plants with Chernobyl is like equating all passenger jets with the 737 MAX. Only the Soviets were so uncaring for public safety to build a nuclear power plant like that, and once that accident happened all reactors like it were decommissioned or underwent considerable modifications. Nobody is going to build another power plant like Chernobyl so bringing it up shows ignorance on the matter. It is fear of most anything nuclear like you've demonstrated that causes me to be

Re: (Score:1)

by angel'o'sphere ( 80593 )

Depends on the kind of fusion process.

The neutron radiation will indeed everything around the reactor highly radioactive.

So your "waste handling idea" is complete nonsense.

However when the current questions how to properly fusion are answered, we likely jump to a process that produces a low amount of neutrons, which in turn can be used to breed tritium instead of killing gthe reactor walls :P

Re: (Score:2)

by christoban ( 3028573 )

Why are you lying??

Re: Do people realize this is nuclear energy? (Score:2)

by simlox ( 6576120 )

Neighbours don't want windfalls, nor solar power plants either.

Mother is far too clever to understand anything she does not like.
-- Arnold Bennett