Single circuits generate nuclear reactions

[wavez]

Actually, I'm going forward with this aluminum foil idea. This was kind of on my mind... I almost suggested the ribbon coil yesterday but decided to just see what developed. What can I use for insulation?

The geiger counter is on it's way. Victoreen CDV-715 should work okay, yes? (use ebay ppl, it save you $$)

[Inventor81]

Actually, Sparks, I see some arrogance, which may be an artifact of your grasp of the English language - and perhaps not specifically intended - when responding to Aleks.

I'd suggest that you both tone it down a bit. In my third party view, it seems as though we have a bit of an ass being an ass, and catching some snide comments from another forum member who hasn't displayed a full grasp of the subject matter either.

To both of you: I did not participate in 4 hours of audio interview early in the morning, and bestow upon this forum my knowledge and efforts for a few folks to start turning things sour. If there is bad blood between you two, then please leave it off this thread. I'll be happy to take my ball and go home otherwise.

Now, insofar as the calculations I was laboring over earlier, and was continually interrupted by telephone calls - I would say this:

I have now calculated that @10 inches from the device, which is where most measurements have been made... we should see 200mSv/s during non-feedback operation.

This roughly corresponds, according to the definition of the Sv, rem, and roentgen, and all associated conversions between the three, to approximately .2E11 ions generated in one cubic centimeter of air.

Assuming this rather low interaction rate between beta radiation and the surrounding media also corresponds to metal (which would give a larger number of ions per CC) I have correlated this to a Gaussian surface with radius 10 inches (approximately 25cm) centered on the device. I have also assumed the finite carbon rod to be a point source of beta particles. This does not affect calculations of total Beta particle flux, but would affect how a collector is to be designed.

In any case, with these assumptions, one should expect, on a toroid of cross sectional surface area 18 square inches, normal to the beta radiation - that is, a ring surface 12 inches in circumference and 1.5 inches in width - one should see a total ion flux of approximately 18uA.

In non-feedback mode, we see much larger fluxes of both electrical energy and beta radiation exiting the device. We also see large amounts of beta radiation passing right through the toroid, however we do not see it passing through aluminum wrapped around the toroid, even with thin layers of shielding.

This has led me to continue my assumptions, since this is approximately the current taken from the device at normal running. If we integrate over the surface of a 10 inch radius sphere, we get a surface area of just over 1200 square inches, and a total current flux of 1.2mA. I am assuming that the beta flux can be treated as a point current source, dumping charge outward through the surface, such that we have a volume of current. The problem with this assumption is that the beta particles will generate approximately 1 million free electrons each, under ideal circumstances, in a metal such as aluminum or zinc. The previous assumption is based on the ions present in a 1 CC detector volume, presenting 2E11 ion pairs to the detector electrodes.

On one hand, metal is denser, and a more effective shield than air, thus we will have less depth of penetration, but as a result, in 1CC, at least for beta radiation, we will get 100% absorption. This means that along a 10 inch path in air, we get 1Sv/s when self-powered, but even at a few feet, we get 0% above background, yet with very high detectable levels of ozone (sniff test). With 7W of input power, we should not be getting equivalent levels of ozone to a tungsten arc welder running at 100A and a few dozen volts.

This, however, is not necessarily indicative of recoverable energy. It simply and qualitatively indicates the number of ionization interactions we are getting with minimal input power.

However, taking that same CC of air or metal, and normalizing to square centimeters of surface area, we can calculate the beta flux as current passing through our Gaussian surface.

Here is my final assumption. If we have an equivalent beta flux density of 2E11 beta particles per second per square centimeter, then this is 15483E11, or 15.5E14 beta particles per second, integrated over the whole surface area of our Gaussian surface @ 10 inches (25cm) from the device.

Please keep in mind that this is a lowball estimate, assuming that one beta particle is responsible for, and only responsible for, one ion pair. In general, this is not the case, as the 13MeV energy of the beta particle is typically dissipated over many many ions such that the final energy is roughly equal to the first ionization energy of the media.

Now, we have 15.5E14 beta particles per second. Converting to current gives us  6E18 electrons per coulomb, and with one coulomb per second being one amp, we are able to see that we are about a factor of 4E3 short of where we'd like to be for getting even a single ampere out of this thing as beta particles. However, this means that we're getting about 4mA out of the entire surface area.

In the form of 13.3MeV beta particles.

That's not half bad, when you consider that 15.5E14 beta particles at 2E-12 Joules per particle gives you about 31E2 Joules per second, or 3.1KW worth of discharge energy....


Then we should be able to have a 3.1 KW generator sitting on our desk. Worst case scenario. Assuming half the beta particles are getting "missed" by the detector, because in a CC of air, we wind up with about 99.99999% free space between the molecules, we can easily see how a very good capture mechanism could give us 6KW out of a toroid driven by a little bitty 6 or 7W input drive.

These numbers are confirmed by experiment, and as mentioned previously, capture is the only problem. Even snagging only a few tenths of a percent of the output power seems to run the device, with some energy left over to charge a battery in record time.

So, in conclusion - aleks and sparks - this is the kind of input I expect to see from others. Not bitching back and forth and one telling the other that he's a moron. I don't have the time or patience to allow myself to be irritated by those around me. Learn to control your feelings - only you can decide how to react to a stimulus - no other human can control your emotions, for better or worse.

I do not expect everyone to dump hours into this as I have, but if you have input, please make it as concise and constructive, and if you have questions, keep them professional, or constructive. There is a place for humor - just be sure it's not at anyone's expense.

Thank you for your consideration.

R3CUR5!<3

[starcruiser]

How about using an aluminum core for the torrid and wrap your tapping coil on this for beta collection/conversion? Then use the output of the torrid coil to drive a resonant L/C circuit and use a secondary coil wrapped on the resonant coil to tap the power to do work? I could be wrong if so please let me know.

[Feynman]

@waves

groundloop says the Al foil may be too thick for the spiral to work.  you might need to order very very thin foil. i might try winding one anyway for practice.  i am going to cut a strip say 3cm wide and 1m long, and then glue regtangular carboard spacers every few cm, then try winding it onto itself.


Well first off I want to say if anyone is measuring using an aluminum can or  other cylinder as collector, measure the potential difference and/or current between the inner and outer collector surface, not the potential from the collector can back to the carbon!

@R


Beta Deflection


Possible Beta Collector

"To extract energy from Beta particles it is not just enough to capture them. Clearly this will result in a current flow according to the capture rate, but current by itself is not power. The kinetic energy of the particle must be captured and this will result in potential difference or voltage. If a Beta particle enters a thin foil conductor normal to its surface and is captured, then the potential difference associated with giving up its kinetic energy can be expected to occur across the opposite faces of the foil. If however the Beta particle were turned so as to enter at a shallow grazing angle to the surface, not only would the probability of capture be increased (since the particle will travel further within the material) but the potential difference will occur along the length of the foil. Beta particles travelling even at relavistic velocities can be turned within short distances by relatively weak magnetic fields, so the concept shown in the following Figure suggests itself."

Thanks for the latest calcs.  Would you mind to comment on the foil spiral collector, and how this high surface area might interact with your assumptions for beta emission? Imagine we are biasing the carbon axially, so the magnetic flux runs through the rod  Then the nearest aluminum layer absorbs most of the beta rays, the next layer a bit less, the next layer a bit less until the beta 'flux' goes to zero because it has all been absorbed, scattered, or re-emitted by the foil spiral. The design quotes above says shallow angle entry is preferred to collect the potential along the length of the foil. Now it seems to me the aluminum foil spiral (in theory anyway, assuming 100% absorption, no breaking radiation , no Auger electrons, etc) is going to provide maximum theoretical current flux from the beta particles.   I am deliberately neglecting quantum energy effects, and instead am simplifying the problem to one of electrostatics.  Let's assume we magnetically bias the thing properly and the beta rays are hitting the foil at some angle below 90degrees.   To me seems that at any point in time during device operation, where C is coulombs electrical charge, C will be highest towards the center of the foil and lowest towards the periphery.  Your theoretical current flux will be approx equal to the number of absorbed beta rays converted to electrical charge, minus any losses due to the previously mentioned effects (Auger, re-radiation, etc).  So  in theory anyway, this device current output should scale proportional with the intensity of the beta rays. 

Anyway, your ideas would be very much appreciated.

[zerotensor]

Here are pics of what I made today:

It's really crude, but if it works, then I'll make something a lot nicer.



I guess the aluminum shielding is not suited for capturing the output. I'll make a coil with the wire I have and maybe get some of that ribbon wire ordered.

Are those magnets surrounding a carbon rod, wavez?   If so, the beta particles will be totally absorbed by the magnets, and the pop can will stand no chance of accumulating any decent charge.  You have to have a path between the emitter and the absorber with as little intervening matter as possible.  Even regular air will attenuate high-energy electrons.  That's why CRTs are vacuum tubes -- otherwise, the electron beam would lose too much energy on its way from the "electron gun" to the screen.