Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nuclear fusion could power NASA spacecraft
New Scientist ^ | 10:29 23 January 03 | Duncan Graham-Rowe

Posted on 01/24/2003 8:01:30 AM PST by vannrox

Nuclear fusion could power NASA spacecraft

 
10:29 23 January 03

Duncan Graham-Rowe

 

The journey time from Earth orbit to Mars could be slashed from six months to less than six weeks if NASA's idea for a nuclear fusion-powered engine takes off.

The space-flight engine is being developed by a team led by Bill Emrich, an engineer at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. He predicts his fusion drive would be able to generate 300 times the thrust of any chemical rocket engine and use only a fraction of its fuel mass.

That means interplanetary missions would no longer need to wait for a "shortest journey" launch window. "You can launch when you want," Emrich says.

The principle is to sustain an on-board fusion reaction and fire some of the energy created out the back of the spacecraft, generating thrust. Of course, harnessing fusion is no easy task. Scientists have struggled to contain the super-hot plasmas of charged ions needed for fusion reactions.


Bare nuclei

To achieve fusion, scientists heat the hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium to at least 100 million kelvin. This strips electrons from the isotopes, creating a plasma of bare nuclei. If this plasma is hot and dense enough, the two types of nuclei fuse, giving off neutrons and huge amounts of energy.

 
Fusion jet

However, the plasma can only be contained by strong magnetic fields, and creating containment fields that do not leak has proved very difficult. What is more, no one has managed to generate a stable fusion reaction that passes the "break-even" point, where the reaction is generating more energy than it takes to sustain it.

Fortunately for Emrich, the reaction would not need to go far beyond the break-even point to generate thrust. And containment is less of a headache because you actually want some of the plasma to escape, he says. "That's where the thrust comes from."

The problem is 100 million kelvin is not hot enough to generate thrust. At that temperature, the fusion reaction only generates neutrons, which are uncharged and therefore cannot be steered and fired through a magnetic jet nozzle. To produce thrust, you need charged particles.


Bold solution

Emrich is proposing a bold solution. He wants to use microwaves to heat the plasma to 600 million kelvin, triggering a different kind of fusion reaction that generates not neutrons but charged alpha particles - helium nuclei. These can then be fired from a magnetic nozzle to push the craft along.

Emrich has tested the idea with a scaled-down version using an argon plasma. He found that he could get around many of the containment problems by using a long, cylindrical magnetic field with powerful magnets at each end (see graphic).

In a fusion drive, the fields at the end could easily be controlled to release the highly energetic alpha particles and propel the craft.

If fusion researchers can ever achieve stable, break-even fusion, Emrich believes a full-scale fusion drive - perhaps 100 metres long - could be ready and waiting within two decades. He will reveal his plan in full at a space technology forum in Albuquerque, New Mexico, next week.

 
10:29 23 January 03
 

Return to news story

  © Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.

 



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: explore; launch; mars; moon; nasa; nuclear; power; space; spacecraft; study; technology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
Very Cool.
1 posted on 01/24/2003 8:01:30 AM PST by vannrox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Of course, harnessing fusion is no easy task

No fooling....

2 posted on 01/24/2003 8:03:45 AM PST by freebilly (Why do Republicans play hardball like little girls...?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Looks like we are one ther verge of new golden era of Space Exploration.
3 posted on 01/24/2003 8:04:05 AM PST by KevinDavis (Marsward Ho!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freebilly
Controlled nuclear fusion was only a few years away in 1960. It still is.
4 posted on 01/24/2003 8:05:11 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (It is not possible to step in the same river even once.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Hmmm ... if they use a fission reactor for electrical power for the microwaves and onboard ship systems they wont have to worry too much about the energy return from the rocket itself.

Slightly controlled nuclear fusion might be the way to go with this.

5 posted on 01/24/2003 8:07:14 AM PST by Centurion2000 (The meek shall inherit the Earth. The stars belong to the bold.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
We could use Baghdad as the launch pad for the Orion, if we dust off the plans...
6 posted on 01/24/2003 8:07:53 AM PST by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow; Physicist; RadioAstronomer; Piltdown_Woman
Fusion drive ping.
7 posted on 01/24/2003 8:10:16 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Preserve the purity of your precious bodily fluids!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mhking
We could use Baghdad as a testing ground. Let's see, how long will that missile take to get there? Oops, already there !!


8 posted on 01/24/2003 8:10:37 AM PST by unixfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
If fusion researchers can ever achieve stable, break-even fusion, Emrich believes a full-scale fusion drive - perhaps 100 metres long - could be ready and waiting within two decades.

I'd say multiply both figures in this sentence(length and time) by 10 and you'll get the real deal.

9 posted on 01/24/2003 8:12:52 AM PST by adx (Will produce tag lines for beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: adx
I'd say multiply both figures in this sentence(length and time) by 10 and you'll get the real deal.

....and the costs by, oh, 1000 or better.
10 posted on 01/24/2003 8:15:13 AM PST by NukeMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

'We look for things that make us go' BUMP
11 posted on 01/24/2003 8:18:26 AM PST by new cruelty (name that quote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Sure fusion. Meanwhile americium 242m actually exists and is 100 times as powerful as plutonium. Plus, reactors could be built to produce it in large quantities with today's technology. Check out a search engine with "Two weeks to Mars" or americium 242m.
12 posted on 01/24/2003 8:19:19 AM PST by techcor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Nuclear fusion could power NASA spacecraft

Yeah, but not in our lifetimes.

13 posted on 01/24/2003 8:30:53 AM PST by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
No, we are not. If ANYONE but NASA was in charge of this I would be inclined to agree with you. But NASA (during the last 20 years) has the worlds worst record of making stuff work according to the spec and cost per launch numbers.


Please, please! give this project to someone other than NASA.
14 posted on 01/24/2003 8:48:13 AM PST by Karsus (TrueFacts=GOOD, GoodFacts=BAD))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: adx
It's been two decades out for the last 40 years.
15 posted on 01/24/2003 8:49:33 AM PST by mvpel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Fusion power has never been achieved on earth. NASA is spending real time, money and energy dreaming up fantasies of doing it in space? No wonder we haven't been back to the Moon in 30 years.
16 posted on 01/24/2003 8:58:41 AM PST by KellyAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox

17 posted on 01/24/2003 9:11:05 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
Controlled nuclear fusion was only a few years away in 1960. It still is.

Dateline 2465 AD-- NASA scientists have devised a space vehicle whose velocity approaches the speed of light by utilizing nuclear fusion. Of course, harnessing fusion is no easy task. Scientists have struggled to contain the super-hot plasmas of charged ions needed for fusion reactions.

18 posted on 01/24/2003 9:16:08 AM PST by freebilly (Why do Republicans play hardball like little girls...?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
The problem as I see it, is that we just don't have enough dilithium crystals.....
19 posted on 01/24/2003 9:17:14 AM PST by freebilly (Why do Republicans play hardball like little girls...?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
He wants to use microwaves to heat the plasma to 600 million kelvin

That would most certainly burn the roof of my mouth.

20 posted on 01/24/2003 9:21:49 AM PST by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson