RU2572804C2 - Sirota method of conducting explosive reaction, including nuclear or thermonuclear reaction - Google Patents

Abstract

FIELD: atomic physics.

SUBSTANCE: invention relates to a method of conducting an explosive reaction, including a nuclear or thermonuclear reaction. An explosive reaction is carried out in the disclosed method by periodically blowing up an explosive device (7) in a mass of molten metal (2) or heated steam inside a pressure-resistant housing (1), through which heat accumulated in the said mass of molten metal or heated steam is collected. The explosive device is fed into the said mass through a channel with valve devices (4, 5, 6) which open when the explosive device passes inside the mass and close after the passage thereof until the moment of explosion of the explosive device. In the present method, the material used in the mass which accumulates the heat energy of the periodic explosions of explosive devices can be any substance except a metal or heated steam, suitable for the necessary heating in a molten state or steam; an explosive device in the form of a projectile is fired into the mass of each type of the said material or a mixture of the said materials, while fixing the explosion thereof in the required zone of the inner space of the said mass.

EFFECT: high efficiency of accumulating heat energy released from an explosion.

2 cl, 13 dwg

Description

The invention relates to energy.

There is a known solution to the production of thermal energy according to the patent of Ukraine (No. 86306, method for the development of vibuhovo nuclear fusion reaction). The essence of this solution is that the method of carrying out a nuclear or thermonuclear reaction involves undermining a charge in the middle of a massive metal body placed inside a solid body, the energy of the explosion exceeds the energy of heat to melt the metal body, and the heat created by the explosion is disposed of through the durable body. In this case, as the body cools, the explosions in it are periodically repeated. Each subsequent explosion is carried out after its transition to a solid state.

The disadvantage of this method is the rather complicated technology of preparation of each next explosive device inside the massive metal body. In addition, the loss of time to cool its melt, for the transition of the body to a solid state, is a very significant negative in the overall technology of this solution.

More effective is the method according to the patent of Ukraine (No. 79846, the method of orphan for the development of vibuhova reaction, including nuclear or thermonuclear). Its peculiarity lies in the fact that the molten metal in a durable case does not translate into the solidification stage, thus eliminating the loss of time. That is, the procedure of periodic explosions is preserved, but it is carried out more dynamically with the required cooling of this melt, into which another explosive device is placed. As a result, there is a constant periodic injection of thermal energy into this melt. This decision was made as a prototype. But, the function of such a prototype can also be fulfilled by the decision according to the patent of Ukraine (No. 86307, for the construction of a fused thermonuclear fusion of orphans). This solution as a whole preserves the technological principle of Ukrainian patent 79846. But its feature is that instead of the metal melt inside the durable casing, water is used to fill this casing and turned into a vapor substance after the first explosion.

Thus, the prototype presented is a method of accumulating thermal energy generated as a result of periodically carried out explosions of explosive devices supplied inside an array of material placed inside a durable case. Therefore, the indicated mass of material in the form of a metal melt or in the form of heated water vapor, placed inside a durable case, transfers the heat accumulated in itself to the body, from which and through which the accumulated heat is utilized for the required needs.

But such a prototype, being the most appropriate and effective solution, including the solution of controlled thermonuclear fusion, has a number of factors, the elimination of which will significantly increase its feasibility and effectiveness.

In particular, first of all, we are talking about the following.

Inside the heated massif of material placed in a durable case, the temperature is very high, more than 1500 ÷ 2000 degrees Celsius. It is clear that all technological procedures for supplying an explosive device to such a high-temperature environment should be carried out in an extremely short and acceptable time. So that the required performance of the explosive device was not eliminated due to the destruction of this explosive device before it explodes. It is no less obvious that the known existing technological possibilities for solving this problem are either absent or unacceptable, due to the inability to provide the specified time parameter, as a result of which the task is impossible. Or its implementation is possible only at very low temperature parameters of the material array, inside of which explosions are periodically carried out, the thermal energy of which is accumulated by the indicated material array. That is, if this mass of material is heated within 500 ÷ 600 ° C, this means a multiple decrease in the power of the solution represented by the adopted prototype.

The second factor that reduces the feasibility and effectiveness of the prototype is the limitation of the nomenclature of materials from which an array of thermal energy accumulation is generated from periodic explosions of explosive devices. Moreover, as will be shown below, this circumstance is important not only (and not even so much), from the point of view of expanding the technological capabilities of the considered method of implementing such specific explosive processes. More important is the solution of many problems and consequences of this specificity, especially, bearing in mind nuclear and thermonuclear reactions.

The technical result of the invention is the elimination of these negatives of the prototype.

The problem is solved in that in a method for carrying out an explosive reaction, including a nuclear or thermonuclear one, by periodically blowing up an explosive device in a metal melt array or a heated water vapor array placed inside a durable housing, through which heat accumulated in the indicated metal melt arrays is taken or heated water vapor, while the explosive device is fed into these arrays through a channel with a shutter device that opens when the explosive device passes into the array and closes th after this pass, but before the onset of the explosion of an explosive device according to the invention, the array is fired to melt the explosive device in the form of a shell. In addition to the options for the device array of a melt of metal or an array of heated water vapor, this array can be made of glass or glass-like material

The essence of the proposed solution is illustrated by the drawing, presented in 13 figures. The image is schematic, to simplify the presentation of the main essence of the invention. Therefore, the scale and shape of the image are arbitrary, using minimal graphic means. The drawing shows two options for solving the problem, with the subsequent presentation in the description of the invention of all other possibilities for solving the same problem. In addition, the drawing shows a solution in a sequential presentation of the main points of implementation of the entire process of the proposed method.

The initial situation is shown in FIG. 1, where a solid body 1 is shown, inside of which there is a metal melt 2, in a strong body there is a channel 3 through which an explosive device (we will talk about it later) should fall into the mass of the melt 2. The internal space where the mass is located melt 2, as a special case in a simplified form, is shown in the form of a cube, although it can have any other desired shape - a ball, cylinder, etc., depending on the specific situation. In the channel 3, at its output, there is a shutter device 4 that closes and separates this channel from the mass of metal melt 2. Channel 3 also has an upper shutter device, not shown in this figure 1. That is, in the starting position, the absence of the upper shutter device (let's say about it in the following figures of the drawing) fixes the situation of readiness for the following preparatory procedures. In particular, figure 2 shows the result of this first preparatory procedure, which consists in the fact that a device consisting of a sleeve 6 with gunpowder inside it and, with a shell 7, pressed into this sleeve from its lower end is inserted into channel 3. That is, this is the most common variant in firearms, such as, for example, artillery guns. An ammunition of this kind is shown on a larger scale in Figure 3. The indicated preparatory procedure is completed by closing the channel 3 with the upper shutter 5. The next moment is shown in Figure 4, where the channel 3 is opened by the lower shutter device 4 (this device is not shown in this figure). Figure 5 shows the situation when the projectile 7 was fired, as a result of which the projectile 7 itself was in the right place inside the metal melt array 2. Moreover, after this shot, the lower shutter device 4 closes the channel, inside of which the sleeve 6 remains, and the upper shutter the device 5 still closes the channel 3. In figure 6, the situation is similar to that in figure 5, but it shows the moment of the explosion of the projectile 7 - the explosion itself is indicated by 8. In figure 7, the situation after the explosion 8, where the lower shutter device 4 remains in place, and the upperthe shutter device opened the channel 3, from which the sleeve 6 was removed. That is, figure 7 returns us to the starting position shown in figure 1, from which we began to consider the proposed solution. The first version with a metal melt 2 inside the reactor vessel 1 is presented in such a way that there is a gap between the upper level of the melt and the reactor vessel, the need for which is explained in the further text of the description of the invention when explaining its features.

Consider the following six figures, representing a variant of the proposed solution, which differs from the previous version by replacing an array of material inside of which periodic explosive blasting is performed. That is, everything remains unchanged, except that instead of melt 2 there is an array of heated water vapor inside the durable casing, indicated by position 9. Characterize what water vapor is, which is heated to a temperature of about 1500 ° C (if necessary, you can and more) we won’t, because this situation is completely transferred from the prototype (Ukrainian patent 86307), so anyone can clarify this issue on their own. All other positions are kept the same from the considered previous option, therefore, there is no need to repeat the already considered technological procedures, except for one factor, which we will specifically mention. And so that the clarity of perception of the presented option was provided in a sufficient way, we state the correspondence between the figures of the previous version and this. In particular, figure 1 corresponds to figure 8, figure 2 corresponds to figure 9, figure 4 corresponds to figure 10, figure 5 corresponds to figure 11, figure 6 corresponds to figure 12, figure 7 corresponds to figure 13, which returns to the starting position the situation shown in figure 8. That is, in general, we showed full compliance with the above features of the proposed method, in which the metal melt 2 is replaced with heated water vapor 9. In addition to the above-mentioned factor, we return to it by comparing figure 4 and figure 10. This refers to that in these two In situations, the difference is that, if after opening channel 3 with shutter 4, the level of molten metal 2 is maintained, then in the case of heated steam, when opening channel 4, steam fills the space of channel 3. However, this technological feature does not change the main essence of the proposed way, as we say in more detail.

What do we have?

First of all, it is necessary to properly understand the meaning of a significant technological factor - they fire an explosive device in the form of a shell.

It follows from the official interpretation of the concept of shot, firing, firing, fixed by explanatory dictionaries.

The meaning of the word Shot by Efremova: Shot - 1. Ejection of a projectile (bullets, mines, etc.) from the barrel of a firearm as a result of a charge explosion. //

Throwing out with the help of devices. // 2. The totality of ammunition required for firing a gun, mortar, grenade launcher (in military affairs).

The meaning of the word Shot by Ozhegov: Shot - An explosion of a charge in the barrel of a firearm, ejecting a bullet, a shell at a certain range

The meaning of the word Shot in the dictionary of Ushakov: Shot, shot, m. Release of a charge (bullet, shell) from a weapon or weapon by an explosion of gunpowder.

Meaning of the word Shoot Dahl's dictionary: Shoot shoot and sow. east shoot at what, shoot. launch an arrow from a bow; to shoot, throw bullets, cores from any arrow, throwing weapon;

Based on the foregoing, the illustrated embodiment of firing an explosive device in the form of a projectile is a special case of the entire possible variety of firing officially designated by the explanatory dictionaries. This means that the number of options for the required shooting can be practically unlimited, as are unlimited options for specific situations in which this problem is solved by the proposed method. But in all this unlimited space of possibilities, the indicated essential feature of our invention remains unshakable, providing the ability to deliver the projectile to the desired point in space within the shortest possible time inside the array of material periodically heated by the heat of explosions of such a charge. And the shortest time necessary for this technological procedure is dictated by the strict requirement to prevent the destruction of this charge from the action of a high temperature of the medium of the material array on it, which should be heated by the explosion of the charge inside it. For, if the device of a given charge collapses before it explodes, then the meaninglessness of the whole undertaking is quite understandable. Naturally, the device of the projectile itself must have a shell necessary and sufficient to maximize the preservation of charge to fulfill its purpose in the proposed method. The task of this shell is many aspect, ranging from withstanding dynamic loads when entering material 2 or 9 at high speed and protecting its internal volume from the high temperature of this array, while ensuring minimal manufacturing costs, both in relation to the metal used for this , and the complexity of manufacturing the shell. It is clear that this is only a designation of some of the most obvious problems, all of which will be identified in the process of specific design and construction of the proposed technology. But it can be argued that the entire possible complex of these problems and the problems arising from them is quite accessible and is strengthened by modern knowledge and accumulated experience in designing both explosive devices and using them for specific needs.

Returning to the noted variety of possible options for firing an explosive device, it is necessary to add the following. Technologically and constructively, this procedure can be represented by a variety of solutions that can hardly be outlined or limited. For throwing weapons (terminology according to the Dahl dictionary) has already been accumulated quite a lot, and there is no doubt that its development and improvement will not only continue, but also intensify - in the general process of scientific and engineering progress. However, we will name some possibilities of applying this technology in relation to our invention.

For example, the feasibility and effectiveness of using the principles of the so-called pump action weapon, where the projectile is fired not by powder gases, but by compressed air, is quite likely. This type of weapon appeared at the end of the 19th century and received a powerful development, resulting in not only a variety of small arms variations, but also in more serious types of weapons such as grenade launchers, providing a magazine store capacity of about 3-4, with an initial grenade speed of 100 meters per second (see grenade launcher GM-93/94). This example is enough to guarantee the possibility of creating a similar propelling device for the proposed method for carrying out an explosive reaction. For, unlike the specified weapon, we are not limited by the mass parameters of this device, creating its energy capacity of the required level.

It can not be said that, shown in the drawing or mentioned pump-action version of the throwing device, have a feature that is not quite desirable for the proposed method. In the case of the firearms variant shown in the drawing, with each shot, the powder gases together with the projectile 7 will fall into the reactor, which works according to our technology, for which there is naturally no need for these gases. Therefore, it becomes necessary to take certain measures to get rid of this negative, which in any case is a complicating factor. When using the pump version, the situation is somewhat simplified, since we are not talking about powder gases, but about air. However, this simplification does not completely solve the problem, while maintaining the main technological requirements for removing air from our reactor. Therefore, to eliminate these negatives, it is appropriate to recall the intensively developed and studied electric guns, which are a pulsed electrode accelerator that uses the Lorentz force to disperse the projectile. For our method, this type of gun, which we use for peaceful purposes, is an ideal device to provide maximum positivity, eliminating all the inconveniences of traditional throwing machines. Which, however, does not exclude the search and development of other devices that could no less effectively solve the task. In particular, firing a projectile at a desired point in our method can be carried out by a mechanical device, which can have different design and technological design options, where a preliminary accumulation of potential energy is discharged at the right time for projectile throwing. In this sense, first of all, the thought comes to the principle of a crossbow, providing an initial projectile throwing speed of more than 100 meters per second. Moreover, in our case, the crossbow principle implies many options that provide the required projectile throwing conditions, where the whole throwing device can be quite compact, bearing in mind the use of various types of springs instead of a mock. So, we touched only part of the most likely propelling devices for using them in the proposed method for carrying out an explosive reaction. Understanding that this topic exists, and will always remain open, in the sense of searching, developing and researching even more effective devices and methods of projectile throwing, as applied to our specific conditions.

As for the very specificity of these conditions, the following should be said about them.

Partially in general terms, we have already touched on this topic above. But we supplement it, in conjunction with considerations about the means of delivery of the explosive device to the desired point. In particular, based on the options presented in the drawing, the multifactorial nature of this task should link all the attributes involved in ensuring the goal. That is, the force impact on the projectile 7 must be such that after the shot, having overcome the resistance of the medium of the array 2 or 9, it stops at the desired point, where it should explode (see Fig. 6 and Fig. 12). Moreover, this procedure should be clearly linked to the operation of the shutter device 4. That is, it is the fulfillment in time and space of all circumstances ensuring the safe implementation of the proposed method, which after the above procedures should be completed by the preparation for the next cycle of similar technological operations - see FIG. 7 and FIG. 13.

It is necessary to add to the above about some possibilities of variation in the presented sequence of operations.

It is clear that to calculate all the necessary factors determining the explosion of the projectile 7 at the desired point, at the time of its stop at this point, this is a rather complicated task, based on the need to ensure absolute safety. Therefore, all other options should be explored. For example, a projectile 7 can be detonated without stopping it during its movement in an array of material 2 or 9. That is, having fallen into this medium, an explosion of a projectile 7 occurs in such a way as to not damage the upper part of the interior of the reactor, and however, do not approach beyond the permissible to the lower part of this reactor space. It is clear that the solution to such a problem can be many times more reliable and safer with reactors of significant size. With smaller parameters, it is necessary to take measures to additionally ensure the explosion of the projectile 7 in the desired location. For example, device solutions can be applied, hitting which, projectile 7 will explode only where it is required. You can continue to think further on this topic, but in all cases, there is not the slightest reason to believe that this task is not solvable, or even difficult to solve with a modern level of knowledge. Explosion engineering of all types and types operates with time parameters, many orders of magnitude greater than the smallness of time, which determines the guarantee of the required explosive process. But even if certain difficulties arise that make it difficult to guarantee the reliability and safety of the above technological process (we repeat, this is not excluded by reducing the parameters of the reactor, which is associated with the construction of reactors of low power, which we will say more specifically), this only means the need to create throwing device, which just when reducing the size of the reactor becomes absolutely reliable and safe. This refers to the device of a mechanical metal device, where the projectile 7, becoming an element of this device, will completely fall into the desired zone of the reactor and explode in this zone. We don’t set out the details of such a throwing device, because there can be many options, and besides, working on this topic, we solve the problem of its optimization in order to single out the most appropriate and effective ones, according to which the corresponding patent protection is being prepared. Although, one has to make sure that this optimization is unlikely to be reliable enough, because continuous scientific and engineering progress brings new opportunities in terms of using new materials in this throwing device, new recording and monitoring devices and accessories, new possibilities of influencing the explosive process itself, and many other things that today cannot be fully appreciated without special research.

An extremely important essential factor of the proposed solution is the material of the array that accumulates the thermal energy of explosive devices periodically exploded in it. In addition to the molten metal or heated water vapor shown in the drawing, there may be another substance suitable for the required heating in the state of its melt or even a mixture of several materials. As for metal, there may be different options. Based on the prototype (Ukrainian patent 79846), where lead is used, this option is very attractive for many reasons, including the radiation protection factor. No less interesting is the option of heated water vapor (Ukrainian patent 86307). Therefore, a specific solution requires comprehensive analysis and related research. But it should not be forgotten that these two materials do not limit, and, moreover, do not close the possibility of using other materials in the proposed method. Moreover, we repeat, studies and studies can determine the combination of several materials in one reactor. For, the mass of materials that accumulate the heat of explosions simultaneously fulfills the multidimensional function of protecting the reactor from radiation exposure if nuclear or thermonuclear explosive devices are used. Multidimensionality lies in the whole complex of radiation, from which it is necessary to protect the reactor, ensuring its proper safety and performance. But no less important is what will happen outside the reactor, bearing in mind that the mass of material in the reactor, which accumulates radioactivity in itself, will need to be periodically subjected to the corresponding effect of reducing this radioactivity. The following is meant.

One of the options for such an effect is the periodic release from the reactor of a part of the array of radiation-saturated material with the simultaneous replacement of it with a clean corresponding volume of the same material. Released material is subjected to the most appropriate and effective methods of processing or disposal. The solution to this problem depends on the type of material, believing that modern means of transmutation can provide the necessary safety for many materials. This is the task of optimizing the entire proposed technological complex, which in turn depends on specific conditions, where the main factors will be the parameters of the reactor itself, its location and the ability to transmute. Therefore, all options cannot even be foreseen without this specificity. But you can focus on some of the most important circumstances. Without repeating the features of the adopted prototypes, we pay particular attention to the use of an array of water vapor inside the reactor (Ukrainian patent 86307). Firstly, this solution provides complete protection against neutron radiation generated by both nuclear and thermonuclear explosive devices. But more importantly, with the periodic replacement of part of this array with pure material, the released volume of water becomes raw material for the extraction of deuterium from it. That is, when using deuterium-type explosive devices, the reactor itself produces deuterium for its subsequent use in explosive devices used in the same reactor. As for radiation purification of water, these technologies are known and quite fully and reliably worked out. However, the present invention not only creates favorable conditions for the use of well-known and well-established technologies for decontamination, but, just as importantly, provides even more effective and reliable radiation safety. It is understood that the material array used in the reactor, having fulfilled its protective function directly in the reactor, after being released from the reactor becomes the most effective guarantor for the disposal of this spent material mass if the most favorable conditions and circumstances exist for this. For example, if an array of material that stores heat energy is made of glass, turning it into a corresponding melt, then after being released from the reactor, such material, which incorporates radiation, after cooling, provides the most reliable possibility of isolating this radiation from the external environment, creating also the most convenient and effective methods of disposal of such material.

That is, we are talking about the well-known technology of vitrification of radioactive waste, which is the most reliable way to solve this problem (see Technologies April 26, 2012 1402 Application of glasses for immobilization of radioactive waste Topic: Storage of RW ¹³⁶ , Processing of RW ^108. Vitrification of RW ³¹ Source: Environmental Safety No. 1-2010: SNF Management - Century XX has found glass a completely different use - to isolate nuclear waste from the environment. What makes glass so attractive for immobilizing radioactive waste? This can lead to corrosion in aqueous media, strength, low susceptibility to radiation and, of course, universality to the composition of the waste, which means low sensitivity to changes in the chemical composition of immobilized materials, if for crystalline substances compliance with stoichiometry and restrictions on the size of replaced ions in the synthesized substances - a headache, and the slightest variation in the composition leads to the synthesis of unwanted by-products, the glass perfectly retains almost all the elements of the table Mendeleev. ... Glasses are stable and durable. For a million years, natural silicate glasses from the bottom of the oceans have corroded by only a tenth of a millimeter: it seems that nature itself suggests that to immobilize dangerous radionuclides from radioactive waste, it is hardly possible to find a more versatile and resistant material. ... Glass in these storages is an ideal material, which, due to its high corrosion resistance, practically does not pollute groundwater with either chemical or radioactive toxicants.).

So, the proposed method opens up completely unimaginable additional opportunities for expanding the applicability of vitrification technology, while increasing efficiency and its safety. It is the temperature regime of the proposed method of operation of the reactor in a cyclic explosive process (1500 ÷ 2000 degrees Celsius, it is possible and more) provides an unprecedented feasibility of vitrification technology. Understanding at the same time that the composition of the glass melt must receive all the necessary ingredients that increase the protective properties of its array, both for the reactor and for performing all procedures when removing the melt from the reactor for its further preparation for final disposal. In this sense, one of the most preferred is lead, which is quite affordable and almost endless in terms of maintaining its effectiveness and reliability.

The above example of vitrification, only one of the particularities above the noted materiality of the invention. Assuming that this distinctive materiality can be embodied in an almost unlimited number of options, how unlimited are the possibilities of combining different materials in different ratios in one melt that combines these types of materials. But the unlimited variety of variations on this subject requires appropriate study and research in order to optimize this process, identifying the most effective combinations for specific situations. All this, in turn, largely depends on the power and parameters of the reactor in which the proposed method is implemented. But from the very beginning it should be clear that the proposed technology involves mainly the creation of large heat generators inherent in modern heat power engineering. Although one thing does not exclude the opposite approach, which is also discussed ahead.

Particular attention should be paid to the type of explosive device used in the present invention, the projectile shown is projectile 7. First of all, we do not claim any innovation in this matter (we mean the description of this invention), fully accepting all possible developments in explosion technology provided by the prototype we have adopted. Therefore, there is no need to repeat the considerations in this regard, cited in Ukrainian patents 79846 and 86307. However, the peculiarity of our solution is that it is extremely important to return to this topic, worked out and studied at the previous stage of the considered area of heat power, called EXPLOSIVE DETERIC ENERGY (VDE) . This is a powerful development of the world's largest nuclear center (now RFNC-VNIITF named after academician E.I. Zababakhin, Snezhinsk, Chelyabinsk region), which was the starting point for our prototype. This development was embodied in the well-known concept of EXPLOSIVE COMBUSTION BOILER (FAC), which caused serious alarm among specialists and scientists involved in nuclear and thermonuclear energy. The alarm is that in the cyclical construction of the PIC (parameters in height and in plan are measured in many hundreds of meters) it is suggested to periodically (in half an hour) detonate thermonuclear explosive devices with a capacity of 10 kt, 50 kt and even 100 kt in TNT equivalent. Despite the almost fabulous indicators of the production of thermal energy for generating electricity, the scientific and engineering community was alarmed, or rather, scared, by the radicalism of this direction, named VDE. It is this circumstance that laid the basis for the need to develop patents of the Russian Federation 2496158 and Ukraine 79846 and 86307. But, one cannot ignore the fact that with all the grandeur of the critical perception of Snezhinsky VDE, it is impossible not to see, and not to understand, the absolutely clear and indisputable superiority of VDE over all the combined developments and studies of the so-called peaceful, controlled thermonuclear fusion. This global epic, which has been embodied in a concentrated manner in the ITER international project, has been going on without results for almost seven decades. And there is no end to this, although the initiators and inspirers of this misunderstanding continue to promise to make the world happy in 30–40 years, and even then, they are just the first experimental success, which knowledgeable people call bluffing, which continues to squander enormous material and financial resources, in addition to it is already pointless spent hundreds of billions of dollars.

All of the above, in order to realize the significance of the invention, which allows the uniqueness of the Snezhinsky PIC to be freed from the horror inspired by them, and the obvious negatives that caused this intimidation. The following is meant.

Considering the invention, it is necessary to realize that the previously created solutions of our patents, taken as a prototype, as already noted, eliminate the frightening negatives of the Snezhinsky PIC. But this elimination, insufficiently expressed, and most importantly, to some extent limited, due to the unresolved technological problems of supplying charges to the reactor properly. It is this flaw that is solved by the present invention, which opens up the VDE through Snezhinsky PIC prospects, about which the developers of this unique direction did not even dare to think. In order to fully experience and realize the significance of this statement, we show what can be created from the Snezhinsky PIC.

First, let us recall that the lower level of the power of a thermonuclear explosion in this kind of reactor was supposed to be 10 kt in TNT, carried out every half hour. This is the basic version called KVS-10. In order to perceive thermodynamic shocks of such power, the reactor is carried out in a cyclopean conical shape, with an average diameter of 110 meters and a height of 140 meters, with a thickness of reinforced concrete walls of 30 meters, internally lined with steel 20 cm thick (see Internet, Selection of materials on explosive deuterium energy. Far from completing the story of one crazy idea, p. 13). In addition, everything is covered with a powerful layer of soil, significantly increasing the giganticness of this monster. We are silent about the entire technological complex of the FAC, which excited the scientific and engineering community, and is characterized by a dream of reason. With the current information capabilities, everyone can feel it on their own. But we are obliged to report on the developments of the Snezhinsky Nuclear Center regarding deuterium thermonuclear explosive devices. In particular, we are talking about the fact that the nomenclature of such charges contains not only an increase of more than 10 kt of TNT equivalent, i.e., the indicated 50 kt and 100 kt. Developed and in the opposite direction. Gennady Alekseevich Ivanov, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, project manager for creating a FAC power station, says - See SCIENCE AND LIFE No. 7, 2002. EXPLOSIVE ENERGY INSTEAD OF CONTROLLED THERMONUCLEAR SYNTHESIS V. PARAFONOV (Snezhinsk - Moscow).

- Why is the idea of FAC attractive?

- There are no fundamental problems in its implementation. Most of what is needed to create an experimental pic is already done. They have long learned how to produce thermonuclear explosions of deuterium with a capacity of tens of tons and even one kiloton. The problem of creating ultrahigh temperatures and pressures necessary for “controlled” explosions with a tonnage of TNT equivalent is removed, since the burning of deuterium is initiated by a small explosion of a charge consisting of uranium-233. It does not occur in nature; it is obtained from thorium, which is quite common in nature. Moreover, thorium and uranium for explosive energy are required thousands of times less than for the operation of nuclear power plants of the same capacity. Accordingly, the amount of radioactive waste is reduced hundreds of times, and there are practically no chemical pollution.

But, after such a statement by the head of the PIC project, a natural question arises - why did the developers of this direction not go towards decreasing the power of deuterium thermonuclear charges, continuing frightening gigantomania? The answer is possible in the only obvious way - the developers of Snezhinsky PIC did not reach the solution we proposed, both in the patent of the Russian Federation 2496158 and Ukraine 79846 and 86307, and even more so in the invention represented by this description. Without these solutions, it was pointless to reduce the one-time power of thermonuclear charges, since the main advantages of the FAC were eliminated, with a multiple increase in technological difficulties associated with the utilization of thermal energy released during thermonuclear explosions. The validity of this statement is confirmed by the tendency of the FAC developers to increase the one-time power of thermonuclear charges. For KVS-10 is only a starting point, followed by KVS-50 and KVS-100. Which naturally instigated people's instinctive fear of this power, which was not conceivable without horror, not only from information sources, but also already realized twice in kind, with the killing of many hundreds of thousands of people. And no, seemingly convincing refutations of this fear, did not give the slightest chance to shake the rejection of the Snezhinsky PIC (see PIC - energy for sustainable development G.A. Ivanov PhD, laureate of the State Prize).

Moreover, there is a sufficiently substantiated criticism of the technological negatives of FAC - see, for example. German Lukashin NEPROFESSIONALISM as a qualifying systemic attribute of suitability.

(full and enlarged version of the article) The article was abridged in the April 2005 issue of Atomic Strategy - XXI magazine, which can also be found on the website: http://www.proatom.ru/

However, the technological breakthrough of Snezhnev’s is impossible to discredit. For the most severe critical approaches, as a rule (exceptions only strengthen this rule), deprive the ability to look beyond the outlined framework of understanding of the object being criticized. But we showed a desire and ability to go beyond the limits of such criticism, and found an opportunity not only to revive the unique idea of the VDE through the Snezhinsky FAC, but also to give this breakthrough direction the power that devalues all, taken together, unsuccessful and futile attempts to solve the use of thermonuclear energy for peaceful purposes . Which naturally cannot and should not eliminate further searches for a solution to this problem in other directions and options, but without meaningless decades of stomping in deadlock traps, not only uselessly burning huge material and financial resources, but also as a result, through the highest power structures that actually block a reasonable variety of areas of research and research. Now, we dare to assert that the proposed invention fixes the solution of the long-sought peaceful thermonuclear fusion that solves the energy problem of the world economy. Whether an even more effective solution will be found, life will show. But so far, at least in the foreseeable future, there is no alternative to the Snezhinsky PIC carried out by our method. The significance of this statement is illustrated by the most general and brief numerical analysis. But first, we note the following circumstance, which is an extremely important positive of the invention.

It is understood that this solution makes it possible to repeatedly increase the frequency of the supply of explosive devices to the reactor. That is, with any possible version of this solution, its inherent principle of firing a charge provides the ability to minimize the time between shots. This means that, unlike all the known previous methods for carrying out an explosive reaction inside the reactor, it is possible to reduce the power of each explosion when the frequency of explosions inside the reactor increases. But at the same time, which is especially important and positive, but technologically unexpected, by decreasing the power of the explosive charge, the reactor power can not only not be reduced, but also multiplied. And this is an absolutely extraordinary advantage over all known methods for the implementation of controlled thermonuclear fusion. For, on the one hand, without abandoning explosive technology, we maintain its power and can even increase it by repeatedly reducing the parameters of the reactor. This is achieved by increasing the uniformity of the explosive impact on the reactor by distributing this effect over time. As for the constructive and technical design of this process, we repeat, the set of possible options can hardly be limited, and this task comes down to development and research, which is an optimization that allows us to identify the most appropriate and effective ones for specific situations, which can also be a significant number. This is a natural process of creating everything new, and we cannot avoid it.

But the unprecedented advantage of the present invention can already be demonstrated today by the following considerations with a number of numerical parameters.

For an analogue, we take the Snezhinsky KVS-10 mentioned above, where it is planned to carry out two thermonuclear explosions of 10 kt each within an hour, that is, with a total power of 20 kt in TNT equivalent. Let us return to the above message from the project manager for the creation of a FAC power station, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics Gennady Alekseevich Ivanov that thermonuclear charges of much lower power, from tens of tons of TNT equivalent, have long been developed in the Snezhinsk nuclear center. So, based on previous considerations, in our method we can use this opportunity, and as an example of the proposed illustration we take the power of a single blast of a projectile 7 equal to 0.1 ct of TNT equivalent. It follows that in the case of the use of lead melt 2 (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 4, Fig. 5) with a temperature of 1500 degrees Celsius, which performs the function of accumulating thermal energy from explosions of the projectile 7, so the volume of such an array Lead melt 2 should be 172 cubic meters - a cube with a side of the face 5.55 meters, or a ball with a diameter of about 7 meters. It is clear that the injection of heat into the lead melt array must be balanced with the removal of this heat from the given array, in accordance with the frequency of shells 7. It follows from this, in turn, that an increase in the rate of shell explosions 7 should directly increase the heat removal from a reactor into which the heat of explosions is pumped. For example, if we set the frequency of explosions to 10 seconds, the heat removal from the reactor should be equal to the amount of heat that is generated in this reactor during the next explosion of projectile 7. And this is not a lot, not a little - the heat from the explosion is 100 tons of TNT. The task is not simple, in the sense that heat removal must be performed from a rather compact object. But, outside the melt array 2, there is a solid reactor vessel equipped with a heat sink system, which significantly increases the heat removal area. The level of knowledge and the richest experience in the field of heat engineering are quite sufficient to calculate and design everything with the necessary degree of reliability and safety, using the required materials and technologies for the proper removal of heat from the reactor. But if, due to any particular situation, problems or difficulties arise for performing this task, the volume of the lead array 2 and the parameters of the durable casing 1 can be increased accordingly. And suppose we doubled the indicated volume of the mass of lead melt 2, that is, we accept not 172, but 344 cubic meters. What follows from this?

Within an hour, the total power of thermonuclear explosions produced inside the reactor is 36 kt in TNT equivalent, providing 36 million kilowatts of electric power and 72 million kilowatts of thermal power. Immediately, for comparison - Snezhinsky KVS-10 gives only 20 million kilowatts of electric power and 40 - thermal. But at the same time, Snezhinsky KVS-10 has an internal reactor volume of 1.35 million m ³ , against our 344 m. As you can see, the difference is stunning. Considering also that our technology is completely eliminated not only the explosive horrors of the Snezhinsky PIC, but also relieves the VDE of the technological nightmare associated with the use of hundreds of thousands of tons of liquid sodium inside the PIC, which protects the giant reactor shell from thermonuclear explosions and acts as a coolant that frightens specialists and scientists no less than a lot of deciliter and even hundred-kiloton thermonuclear explosions. To cope with such a 550-degree mass of liquid metal, and even constantly saturated with radiation, is a task of unimaginable complexity and danger. The present invention allows our previous solutions, without losing the fabulous positives of the FAC, to repeatedly strengthen the potential of VDE, completely eliminating its negatives, and turning into reality the dream of thermonuclear energy abundance.

In order to further experience the power of this technological breakthrough, let us recall the decades that have been going on and the further torment planned for no less time with tokamaks internationally concentrated on the ongoing ITER project. Without repeating the many doubts of the leading scientists and experts who know their job, regarding the successful ending of this at least a hundred-year-old epic, if it does not break off earlier, then, even if the hopes and aspirations of the initiators and apologists of this venture, which has no analogy in scientific research, are realized , even in this case, we must clarify what’s what and what’s what.

Recall the official interpretation of this event.

** ITER (originally abbreviated as International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor - International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) is an international research and engineering project in the field of plasma physics and controlled thermonuclear fusion. The goal of the project is the long-awaited transition from experimental installations for plasma confinement to a full-scale source of electricity based on the thermonuclear reaction.

The city of Cadarache in the south of France was chosen as the site for the implementation of the project. The project is under active construction. The project is financed by seven participating countries: the European Union, India, Japan, China, Russia, South Korea and the USA. The contribution of the European Union as a major participant is 45%, along with 9% from other member states. The design output thermonuclear power is 500 megawatts, with 50 megawatts of input power.

Construction of the installation began in 2007, the first plasma is expected by 2019. At the time of its launch, ITER will be the largest thermonuclear installation with the magnetic principle of plasma confinement. The duration of the plasma discharge is 1000 s., The volume of the toroidal vacuum chamber is 840 m ³ , the cost of the entire project is 15 billion euros.

Even the minimally presented official information allows us to draw very serious conclusions, comparing it with what is shown above according to our invention.

Let's start with the volume of the toroidal vacuum chamber of 840 m ³ .

In our reactor, the internal volume of the reactor was 344 m ³ .

But when the internal volume of the reactor is reduced by almost 2.5 times in comparison with a tokomak, we give a total power (electric plus thermal) of 108,000 Met, and a tokomak of only 500 Met, of which 50 Met should be subtracted, because they are consumed for the tokomak to work. We are silent about all the other technological difficulties, many of which have not been overcome to this day - in the hope of Russian AVOS (and this is in the center of Europe), they say that they will somehow manage to get out (see Internet Thermonuclear the day after tomorrow 08/14/13 09:46 AM ) We, by definition, do not have these difficulties and cannot have them. Even if ITER, after all the decades ahead of many decades of torment and suffering, increases its efficiency several times (let's say the energy output is not 1:10, but 1; 20 and even 1:30, which is actually from the realm of fantasy), then in this case, the tokamak ideology remains a scientific and engineering squalor in comparison with the VDE of the Snezhinsky PIC, modernized by our invention.

Wretchedness, for initially this is a dead end, contrary to the genius of Nature. After all, contriving to snatch thermonuclear energy from Nature, tokamos, in case of success they desire, will turn this success into a Pyrrhic victory. Where every watt of energy produced will be given such costs that no normal economy can stand it. Why all this highly scientific, super-complex, almost inoperative and fabulously expensive trash? Still neither a stake, nor a yard, but in all seriousness, the scientist blind men with the cleverest appearance not only ponder, but also spend a lot of money and effort to create robots for repairing the inside of a reactor destroyed by powerful neutron fluxes. And this is only one example in the breakthrough of problems, in essence properly not only not posed, but also not realized. Today, in the heat of the passions and the struggle of the great craftsmen of science for extorting material and financial resources for ITER, practically no one even tries to reflect on this topic. The topic of future over heavy costs for the future Tokamak. Criticism, which we casually ascertained, created before us and without us, without stopping appearing in harsher terms. And it is possible that the problem of the indicated costs of self-eating tokamak power will finally receive due attention. In the meantime, the ITER epic, unique in its senselessness, confirms the statement of Daniil Granin especially vividly and vividly - Oddly enough, many scientists suffer from the disease of thoughtlessness. The organ that makes them think is atrophied. Moreover, thoughtlessness does not interfere with their scientific indicators.

At the same time, it should become public knowledge that the explosive deuterium energy of the Snezhinsky FAC - in our statement, is in maximum agreement with Nature, demonstrating HER principle is ALL GENIUS SIMPLY. It is this approach that maximizes the genius of nature, inheriting it in the main principle - the creation of an energy core inside an array of matter, with the spread of energy to the outer periphery of this array. All the rest, not only ITER, but also other attempts, including the type of thermonuclear firing of a two-millimeter pea by the Americans, is nothing less than the highly scientific pride of the human mind’s own significance, resulting in its shame and insignificance of the results. The Americans, with their thermonuclear pea, are copying the highly scientific meaninglessness of the ITER project one by one, making loud and disgraceful loud declarations of conquering controlled thermonuclear fusion in the coming decades.

So we declare both.

Why then suffer for several decades, throwing fabulous material and financial resources under the tail of a mare?

If, taking the Snezhinsky FAC, in the formulation of this invention, it is completely realistic to immediately begin the development of peaceful thermonuclear fusion in global energy.

We repeat again, because this is required by this archival business.

Gennady Alekseevich Ivanov, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, project manager for creating a FAC power station, reports 2002. See SCIENCE AND LIFE No. 7 of 2002. EXPLOSIVE ENERGY INSTEAD OF CONTROLLED THERMONUCLEAR SYNTHESIS V. PARAFONOV (Snezhinsk - Moscow).

- Why is the idea of FAC attractive?

- There are no fundamental problems in its implementation. Most of what is needed to create an experimental pic is already done. They have long learned how to produce thermonuclear explosions of deuterium with a capacity of tens of tons and even one kiloton.

The problem of creating ultrahigh temperatures and pressures necessary for “controlled” explosions with a tonnage of TNT equivalent is removed, since the burning of deuterium is initiated by a small explosion of a charge consisting of uranium-233. It does not occur in nature; it is obtained from thorium, which is quite common in nature. Moreover, thorium and uranium for explosive energy are required thousands of times less than for the operation of nuclear power plants of the same capacity. Accordingly, the amount of radioactive waste is reduced hundreds of times, and there are practically no chemical pollution.

Twelve years have passed since the statement of Gennady Alekseevich Ivanov. Has the problem of controlled fusion (in the real sense, not empty declarative promises) moved forward in the ITER international project and in the American NIF project ???

Statement by G.A. Ivanov was made not under the cover of a fig leaf of the highly scientific bluffs of ITER and NIF, but on the basis of the results of real and serious studies in the largest and most competitive nuclear center in the world (we add below). Today, this statement takes the form of a demand on the global community. Requirements - to immediately begin the development of explosive deuterium energy, to curtail, and ultimately, stop the hydrocarbon energy, the criminal senselessness of which was branded D.I. 150 years ago. Mendeleev. This requirement strengthens our invention, presented by this description, which sums up the principal result of almost a century of searches for the peaceful use of thermonuclear fusion. Fundamental in the sense of clearly and unambiguously expressed:

“- Why is the idea of FAC attractive?

- There are no fundamental problems in its implementation. Most of what is needed to create an experimental pic is already done. ”

Our invention brings this meaning to the absolute, stating - not “Most of what is needed to create an experimental pic is already done.”, But EVERYTHING that is needed to create an experimental pic is already done.

In this regard, the following should be emphasized.

At the current level of knowledge and technological capabilities, proven and proven by enormous practice, the creation of experimental PICs should from the very beginning provide for the entire range of heat generation facilities - from relatively small needs, such as a separate building, to the most powerful consumers, both industrial and social sphere. The deuterium thermonuclear charges developed at the Snezhinsky Nuclear Center, starting from a low power of several tons of TNT equivalent, in our formulation of the implementation of the PIC completely provide such a formulation of the question that the coverage of the energy needs of all life activity is almost one hundred percent. It should not be forgotten that the leading nuclear centers are conducting intensive searches and studies of small thermonuclear explosive devices, which will become expedient not only because of the availability for any, the smallest consumers of thermal energy, but, in addition to everything, they will literally get the word the status of absolutely pure - with respect to the absence of radioactive contamination Given this circumstance, the PIC provided by our invention become pervasive in all spheres of life. At the same time, the transport sector should be highlighted, bearing in mind primarily sea and river vessels, the intensity of development and the increasing role of which is increasing. And it is possible that it is through this mode of transport that the mass development of explosive deuterium energy (VDE) will begin. Moreover, psychologically, in our formulation and solution of thermonuclear energy, the frightening term EXPLOSIVE should undergo a certain correction. That is, the authors and initiators of the Snezhinsky PIC have already touched on this topic in the sense that, in essence, literally all energy is explosive, starting from the explosion of individual atoms or nuclei, or the explosive process in chemical reactions of fuel combustion in automobile cylinders, and all other ICE.

So, our invention provides the conversion of the Snezhinsky PIC into this familiar, long-awaiting mode of energy devices that allows it to be completely legitimate - instead of VDE (explosive deuterium energy), the term DE (deuterium energy) is used. We repeat as much as necessary - the most important technical result of this invention is the ability to distribute explosive energy in time with the required degree of its gradation. Indeed, the same idea was used in the nuclear reactor of a nuclear power plant, but in a completely different setting, as a result of which an instant explosion of a nuclear device is distributed in time by many tiny explosions of nuclei that are safe for the environment. Our gradation of explosions is immeasurably larger than in a nuclear reactor, but the method of implementing our solution is such that it provides the required safety for the explosive reaction in the elimination of all traditional negatives, both nuclear and thermonuclear technologies. Next, we touch on the gradation of the explosive process, not inferior to a nuclear reactor. But for now let us ask ourselves a question - what, and what positive does this turn out to be with the option already considered? The answer is given in the above numerical analysis, where we transform Snezhinsky KVS-10 from a cyclopean monster into an object whose geometric parameters are reduced by almost four thousand times. This is not easy to believe on the fly, but an indisputable fact, which, moreover, in the construction, reduced to implausibility against the Snezhinsky KVS, almost doubles the production of thermal energy in comparison with the (monstrous) energy of the giant KVS-10 colossus. You should get used to this, because the numerical analysis does not exhaust the even more striking advantages of the proposed method, which will be revealed in the process of the indicated G.A. Ivanov experimental developments FAC. Developments designed to become the research process of optimizing the proposed technology. And when, in the next decade, the most probable result of the primary breakthrough of deuterium energy becomes a massive marine and river fleet with this thermonuclear potential, witnesses of this phenomenon will be unaware why the world elite of nuclear physicists for such a long time not only did not see this opportunity, but also did not she wanted to know nothing of the kind, remaining captive to the delusions of ITER and NIF.

Regarding the rate of fire of the proposed method, you must add the following.

This parameter in the above example is accepted - the frequency of shots is ten seconds. It is clear that increasing the rate of fire allows correspondingly reducing the power of the projectile 7. This, in turn, increases the uniformity of the transfer of explosive energy to the melt array 2 that accumulates this energy, and accordingly reduces the dynamic load on the reactor vessel 1. But to what extent can this increase uniformity? The answer will be given by experimental developments and studies indicated by G.A. Ivanov. The answer will also depend on the minimum one-time explosive power of thermonuclear explosive devices. It is clear that, having the aforementioned general considerations on this subject of the Snezhinsk developers, we don’t know everything. As for the guaranteed development of devices that shoot 7 shells, while ensuring the required rate of fire, this problem should not arise at all, having more than a century of rich experience in the creation and use of rapid-fire weapons, including artillery. Even if, for some specific reasons, our method has its difficulties in this regard. After all, the mass of the shell 7 (given the need for its guaranteed protection from high temperature) may in some cases turn out to be quite small. So this circumstance to ensure the required rate of fire in our method is also not essential, due to the fact that the number of trunks for shooting can be as many as required, assuming naturally that the sequence of use of these trunks is properly distributed not only in space but also in time . So, in this regard, the practical feasibility of the proposed method has no contraindications, requiring only competent design and implementation of this solution.

It is not difficult to see that the proposed method, in addition to injecting thermal energy from the explosion of shells 7 into the storage array 2 or 9 (there may be other options for materials for melt this array, which is a significant distinguishing feature that increases the possibility of implementing this invention), these explosions create the accumulation of the material of which the protective structure of the projectile 7 consists, i.e., it is mainly the material of the protective shell inside which the explosive device is placed directly. So, the accumulating material of all these protective devices will naturally go into the molten state after the explosion of the projectile. If we are talking about the option where the storage mass of the arrays is lead melt 2, then it is most likely that the material of the protective devices for the projectile (for example, some steel is high strength) - so steel has a density less than the density of lead. Therefore, the molten steel will float on the surface of the lead melt 2. That is why the drawing in figures 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 shows the gap between the upper level of the melt 2 and the reactor, i.e., in this space it is possible accumulation of the melt from the remains of the protective shell of the projectile 7. From which it follows that as this melt accumulates in excess of a certain allowable amount, it can be discharged from the reactor by a pouring method, as is widely used in metallurgy. In the case of the option where the storage array 9 is water vapor, it is clear that the steel melt will not float, but sink to the bottom of the reactor. So, if you need to remove it from the reactor, you can do the same with lead, similar to the previous version, but arranging the discharge of the steel melt in the lower part of the reactor, forming for it a corresponding collection-depression, from which the molten steel is poured out of the reactor. In all other cases, when using other materials to create an array of storage melt from them, the situation may be one of the two presented above, depending on the ratio of the densities of the protective materials for the projectile 7 and the density of the array of heat storage material.

Thus, we examined all the main technological and design features of the invention, which allows us to state the guaranteed possibility of its implementation. That is, there are more than enough reasons to confirm the need to reorient global energy from hydrocarbon to deuterium. There seems to be no need to supplement the already stated positives of our decision. But nevertheless, this topic must be completed by considerations that should become the basis for scientific and engineering ideology, which is obliged to clear the clogged consciousness of not only high science, but also all people who are able to think. To do this, we use the information in the article EXPLOSIVE DEuterium Energy, L.I. Shibarshov, N.P. Voloshin, A.S. Ganeev, G.A. Ivanov, F.P. Krupin. S.Yu. Kuzminykh, B.V. Liteinoe, A.I. Svalukhin. RFNC-VNIITF them. Acad. E.I. Zababakhina PO Box 245, Snezhinsk, Chelyabinsk Region, 456770, 2006 Scientik Technical Center "TATA". This information contains repetitions of a number of the above considerations. But this is that repetition, which is MOTHER OF TEACHING.

To this we add a few of our considerations.

What is VDE?

As already mentioned, real thermonuclear energy cannot be built on the use of tritium (however, hardly anyone doubts). And since the synthesis of pure deuterium proceeds 100 times slower than the synthesis of its mixture with tritium, in the TCB on the way from tritium to deuterium there is an insurmountable chasm. At least. If based on any principal decisions that are visible today (TOKOMAK, LTS, ion beams, etc.). Maybe someday there will be a discovery that will radically change for the better the situation with TCB? To bet on such luck in the face of a serious threat to humanity would be reckless.

A much more realistic way of building thermonuclear energy is to obtain energy in thermonuclear explosions of deuterium on a scale of 10-100 kilotons, we are inclined to the scale of the explosion of 100 kt. However, “explosive” does not mean “uncontrollable”.

It is very important that in order to create an VDE, it is not necessary to solve the problem of overcoming the physical breakeven threshold. It was fundamentally solved long ago by testing industrial deuterium charges with a high “thermonuclear coefficient” (CT is the ratio of the energy released in thermonuclear reactions to the energy of a nuclear fuse), and the solution to the problem of reliable containment of an explosion can seem at first glance unbearable. In principle, this is similar to the combustion of a combustible mixture in an engine cylinder, the only difference is in the scale that scares some people, like nuclear explosions in general, although they have long been used for peaceful purposes.

To control the explosion of a deuterium energy charge, it must be carried out in the PIC, “explosive combustion boiler”. This is an underground cavity with a diameter of 100-150 m, lined with a steel shell. For the largest PICs withstanding explosions of a scale of 100 kt, it is necessary to arrange a cavity with a volume of about 10 million m ³ and spend the same amount of concrete. This is a lot, but the scale of construction, the cost of materials, the cost of generated electricity will not be higher than that of hydropower plants of the same electric capacity - in the range of 10-100 GW (if there were corresponding rivers).

PICs do not have close prototypes proven by practice, but in theoretical terms their approximate appearance was determined by computational studies based on extensive experience in conducting underground nuclear tests and peaceful nuclear explosions.

The idea of direct use of the energy of nuclear / thermonuclear explosions is not new, it was expressed in the 1950s by scientists of the VNIIEF (Sarov), and later it was openly published both in our country and in other countries. For example, in 1977 an article by A.D. Sakharov, in which such a proposal was mentioned by Yu.N Babaev, Yu.A. Trutneva A.V. Pevnitsky, made 15 years earlier.

But if we are talking about a radical solution to the energy problem of both the near and distant future, then deuterium charges should be used.

Energy Charges for VDE

A thermonuclear explosion of deuterium is initiated using a “fuse”, i.e. low energy release in chain fission reactions of fissile material (DM), for example, uranium-233 or plutonium-239. The spent DM will be reproduced again due to the absorption of thermonuclear neutrons in raw materials (thorium for uranium-233 or uranium for plutonium-239). For each spent DM core, 10 ² -10 ³ neutrons are formed, depending on the CT, so that in the explosion the theoretical reproduction coefficient of DM is up to several hundred. Large CT allows you to spend on energy production a relatively small amount of DM and ultimately the raw material.

Pic

PIC is a large underground cavity lined with a steel shell and filled with an inert gas. The shell serves to seal and softens the impact on the thick concrete layer between the cavity and the ground. In turn, it is protected by a curtain of fountains of liquid sodium from neutrons and the direct action of the radiation of a fireball formed during an explosion; the veil also softens the blow. The energy of the explosion goes to heating sodium, which later plays the role of the primary coolant. According to calculations. The quasistatic pressure inside the chamber after the explosion will amount to only a few tens of atmospheres and will decrease to about 1 atm as sodium evaporates.

The temperature of sodium before the explosion is approximately 500 ° C. After the explosion, it circulates in the 1st circuit of the heat exchange system of the nuclear power plant (approximately as it is now happening at the Beloyarsk nuclear power plant), cooling to the next explosion. It is assumed that the PIC will withstand a large margin of holding many explosions. Their thermal power is the product of the energy of explosions at their frequency; in one pic, it is supposed to produce explosions of energy charges several times a day.

The operation of the FAC is ensured by its special technical equipment: gateways for lowering the next energy charge into the cavity, devices for continuous and periodic sodium purification, sodium supply channels (including fountains), sodium output channels and cleaning the bottom of the chamber of solid residues.

Radiation and seismic safety. Environmental issues

Explosive technology will be carried out in the PIC under even stricter control than during tunneling or nuclear explosions for industrial purposes (1965-1988).

The issues of radiation hazard were considered taking into account the experience gained in hundreds of underground nuclear tests. In this case, the PIC sealing shell excludes the possibility of even those emergency abnormal releases of radioactivity into the atmosphere that were observed in several cases, but did not pose a real danger to the population, since the amount of curies released was many orders of magnitude lower than in the case of Chernobyl.

A sufficiently serious accident may be a violation of the tightness of the steel shell. For example, due to the appearance of a crack as a result of accumulated metal fatigue under the influence of numerous repetitions of shock loads. Then the release of radioactivity into the atmosphere, if it happens, will be of little significance. Here not only the underground location of the PIC, but also a relatively small amount of radioactivity inside the chamber, on average 3-4 orders of magnitude lower than in the reactor of a nuclear power plant, saves. This is due to the short periods of purification of the PAC from radioactive products and to the CT-100, due to which 100 times less hazardous radioactive substances are generated in the PBC per unit of energy generated than at nuclear power plants.

A separate issue is seismic safety in the area adjacent to the pic. In this regard, a huge advantage is given by conducting explosions in a large cavity and the damping effect of sodium fountains. Which greatly reduces the movement of soil beyond the FAC compared with explosions in the soil during nuclear tests. The drastic quenching of the seismic effect associated with the cavity is well known and has the special name “decoupling” in the literature. Estimates show that even a few kilometers from the PIC there will not be the slightest jolts associated with the explosions.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Issues

Nuclear energy should not be available to terrorists.

A significant reduction in the risk of theft should be facilitated by the underground location of the substation plant for the production of energy charges and ways to transport them to the PIC. Besides. Energy charges are supposed to be collected in a form that prevents the abduction along existing routes, as well as the most unsuitable for carrying out terrorist attacks or as a weapon.

So that terrorists could not steal DM energy and use it for a nuclear explosive device, it is supposed to endow it with extremely high radioactivity. This will not only prevent the handling of DM without special equipment, but also exclude the possibility of being near a nuclear explosive device after it is “refueling” DM without receiving a lethal dose of radiation. Moreover, such nuclear explosives should be detected at very large distances.

Finally, energy charges are intended to be used immediately after assembly and not stored.

VDE, Public Opinion and the CTBT

Already for the construction and operation of the experimental pic, it will be necessary to prepare the public of both our country and the whole world.

The generally negative attitude of most people towards nuclear power is known. Caused by a series of well-known events, although if a global energy crisis sets in, its consequences will be incomparably more deplorable. The future crisis worries almost no one. It is difficult to convince people that if decisive action is not taken literally today, then it will not only not be possible to avoid, but at least sufficiently mitigated, due to the enormous inertia of global energy.

It seems to everyone that it will somehow manage, since it has still managed, there is still a lot of time ahead, scientists will have time to come up with something salvation. However, nothing else can be used for energy, except for the artificial temperature difference (chemical or nuclear fuel with known reserves) and the natural difference (known renewable sources). In addition to deuterium energy, all of them are limited either in resources or in power.

Of course, the human mind does not stand still, and a revolutionary discovery cannot be completely ruled out. Radically changing the situation, for example, a breakthrough in the TCB, when physicists accidentally stumble upon some ideal way to stabilize magnetized plasma. But it’s better to “lay the straw” in advance with the development of the VDE project, than recklessly rely only on luck and watch how the precious reserves of oil and gas are inevitably melting.

Nuclear experiments in the PIC can only be started after the conclusion of the relevant international treaty. While they are not allowed by the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), signed by most countries. But one of its points allows 10 years after its ratification by all participating countries to begin negotiations on the resolution of peaceful nuclear explosions. Under the terms of the Agreement, such permission will need to be adopted by consensus, and this is far from simple. Only an awareness of the seriousness of the energy problem, and therefore of survival, for the most part of humanity, can contribute to its solution.

Bibliography

1. G.A. Ivanov, N.P. Voloshin, A.S. Taneev, F.P. Krupin, S.Yu. Kuzminykh, B.V. Liteinoe, A.I. Svalukhin, L.I. Shibarshov. Explosive deuterium energy (second edition). // Ed. RFNC-VNIITF, Snezhinsk. 2004 year

The above information not only confirms and strengthens the above considerations regarding the proposed invention, which determines, as was said, the fundamental solution of controlled thermonuclear fusion, which ensures the need for a global transition from hydrocarbon to deuterium energy. The scientific and engineering basis of this deuterium energy is Snezhinsky PIC in the formulation of our invention. This allows you to literally eliminate all the negatives of the FAC, turning them into generators of thermal energy with positive properties, which apologists ITER and NIF do not dare to dream of, even if their projects are carried out in the quality they desire. But until this lust, few living nowadays will be able to survive, and those living and not fooled by scientists and specialists of the highest level who really understand the essence of the problem of thermonuclear fusion, unequivocally argue that ITER and NIF are highly scientific trash, the collapse of which is inevitable for our common misfortune. Even if something comes out of this impasse, it will ultimately be a well-known situation, defined by three words: THE SHOPPING SHOP IS NOT WORTH.

But our concept, with all the unprecedented and extremely high efficiency and expediency noted, retains the most serious factor of deterrence and counteraction not only to its implementation, but even to raise the question about it. About this Snezhintsy assert without any embellishment, not only in this, but in many other publications. Although in our production, this circumstance turns into a formality that could and should be attributed to the manifestation of a dialectic that excludes the appearance of the new without the resistance and inhibition of the old, which has outlived itself. Therefore, competently and systematically delivered work, in part (as was noted) of purifying the consciousness of not only big science, but also all thinking people, turns the factor of the sharpness of antinuclear proliferation into, of course, not a simple formality, but still - into a completely and properly global feasible, compulsory educational procedure for all people living on Earth. Just as every literate person should know the purpose of the Sun, which provides life on Earth.

Ultimately, these are the necessary costs of overcoming highly scientific obscurantism, always an annoying attribute of progress. But even if highly-scientific obscurantist thermonuclear scientists all over the world possessed insurmountable and irresistible tools to defend their error, the situation today is exactly the same - high science, coupled with the authority of the supreme all over the world, do whatever they see fit, trampling, or noticing anything besides its whim, and so, even in this case, this impregnable fortress of obscurantism is an empty place against the power of intelligence. Intelligence, which does not need to not only spend effort, but even look in the direction of this emptiness without reason.

The following is meant.

It has already been noted above that leading nuclear laboratories are intensively searching and researching solutions for absolutely clean thermonuclear explosive devices. Moreover, preference is given to low-power charges. So, it is possible that if successful, these charges may not fall into the gradation due to the ban on the CTBT. Although, the masters of the world, who patronize big science, can instantly orient themselves and impose the required prohibitions for them. But this assumption, despite its absolute legitimacy, nevertheless, like all other possibilities of the powers and finances of those who have it, remains a major trifle in comparison with the mentioned power of intelligence. For it has already been said that our stunning superiority over all other known methods of solving the problem of controlled thermonuclear fusion consists in the fact that we can infinitely crush a deuterium charge, both in space and in time. But not just crushing, but providing the total power of the explosions as we need. No one in the world has guessed this. And if the American NIF also seems to be, it’s an ugly distortion of this technological principle, having only an external, very distorted semblance, from which the United States, like ITER in its error, will not be selected, at least in 21- m century.

Following this decision, taking it as a prototype, we are preparing the following invention, where the indicated technological principle is brought to perfection, which in the foreseeable future is unlikely to be surpassed by anyone. And it’s not even our, in general natural author’s aplomb, or self-confidence. Our decision is dictated by the general development trend of nuclear physics, which highly scientific thoughtlessness (in the terminology of Daniil Granin) does not want to see. So, in our DE it is provided not just pure, but the purest thermonuclear poison, which falls in power of the deuterium charge much less than the energy of the American thermonuclear pea. And what in this case may be the claims and prohibitions laid down in the CTBT ??? Moreover, if our thermonuclear shells are neither theoretically, nor practically general, rudimentary, not only for terrorists of all stripes, but also for any living person.

Therefore, we express absolute confidence - at least in the next decade, the proposed technology of peaceful thermonuclear fusion will become a massive global phenomenon that closes the criminal era of hydrocarbon energy, which has plowed the Earth and destroys forever many species of flora and fauna. And highly-scientific international current-detectors and American NIFists, who intend to practice 30–40 years more in research, TRANSFUSION FROM EMPTY TO EMPTY, we need to find out that, our next one decade, is a temporary parameter much larger in every sense, when compared with previous technological breakthroughs in nuclear and thermonuclear physics. When grandiose and complex tasks and problems were solved in a much smaller number of years. Everything is more serious and important for mankind. So the coming decade is a gigantic term that will be saturated and filled with work that does not have anything like this in the history of mankind.

Therefore, we are sure that the energy of intelligence that determined the proposed results will overcome any difficulties, including highly scientific and imperiously financial obscurantism, which is perched on a log on the path of progress.

Claims (2)

1. A method for carrying out an explosive reaction, including a nuclear or thermonuclear one, by periodically blowing up an explosive device in a metal melt array or an array of heated water vapor placed inside a durable housing, through which heat accumulated in these arrays of molten metal or heated water vapor is sampled wherein an explosive device is fed into said arrays through a channel with a shutter that opens when the explosive device passes into the array and closes after this passage, n before the explosion of the explosive device, characterized in that the array is fired to melt the explosive device in the form of a shell. 2. The method according to p. 1, characterized in that in addition to device options for a melt array of metal or an array of heated water vapor, this array can be made of glass or glass-like material.

Images