66. SLAMMING BOOK (MULTIIMPACT FUSION) PRINCIPLE OF PLASMA SUPERCOMPRESSION FOR THE SPACE PROPULSION Valentine A.

Belokogne Russian Academia Cosmonautica, Academy of Future Assessment, RANS. Permanent address: Moscow 119234, Poste Restante, Russia. e-mail: valentine_belokogne @ mtu-net.ru
Abstract. The very first (1961) realistic proposal to miniaturize the prominent project Orion (1956-61, Yield 1012 Joules) to new inertial fusion space propulsion of the Nuckolls class (Y 109J) means the revolution in design of swiftrun interplanetary spacecraft. In the meantime, Dr. Edward Teller stated (1973) about the (high tech. risk) ICF flying machines as coming before the (low technological risk) industry ICF-plants. Our scheme consists essentially in shooting out fragments of the fusion target by the multiround railgun (or plasmagun and similar device like invented for SDI etc programs with the efficiency superior to the high power advanced laser). The first fragment is the slowest. The each next one is swifter than the previous one to produce s i m u l t a n e o u s mutual collision, with the subsequent selfsupercompression behind the back (open nozzle) of the ICF-spaceship. The last shoot may consist, for instance, in the hypervelocity tiny pellet to reach the scenario like fast ignition (Tabak 1995, Caruso 1996).

1. Thermonuclear synthesis of Helium-4 promises real specific output around 1011 Joules per gram of fusion fuel i.e. fusion rocket exhaust (with the passive admixture) of order 1001000km/sec. Then we obtain tenfold economy of spacetravel timespan in favour of cosmonauts and astronauts, and not only this. To miniaturize the fusion explosion, it is necessary to compress the fuel (Lindl 1998 and refs in it; Belokogne 2001): 109 Joules Ymin 10x/
2

<dV/dpxx>=dV/dpxx= V/ pxx=-(V/u)2=-(Vo/D)2= =-(1/ oD)2=const* E= Q(1/2)( V/ pxx) pxx(p1xx+poxx)= = Q(p1xx+poxx)(1/2) V. Therefore, for the single-component flow, and equipartition local conditions for the molecular degree of freedom f=const. we have internal energy E=fpV/2 (f/2)p/ a2/ ( -1), where p = hydrostatic component of pxx and a = adiabatic sound velocity. Now E (f/2)( pV)= Q(1/2)(p1xx+poxx) V. As soon as for the strong shock we have Msh >> f or >> f1/2 etc**, then (fp/pxx)1+12( Q)/(pxxV)1=Vo/V1 xx 1/ o=(fp/p )1(1- Q/E1) +1 (for adiabatic shock at Q = 0). The simplest case of pxx=p means Rankine relations as followings: ) at Msh=1 (D=ao); at Msh=f 2/( -1); at Msh= . Typical range for (dense and superdense plasma) averaged calculation is =1.2 (for ionization process), 4/3 (radiated), 5/3 (ideal plasma) and =3 (rather cold condensed state),
1/ o=(po/p1+f+1)/(1+(f+1)po/p1)=(f+1)/(1+f/Msh 2

(g/cm3),

where, for configuration near the uniform sphere: x ( 50 106K+D+T=4He+neutron+3.39 1011J/g) 13; x ( 30 107K+3He+3He=4He+21H+ 2 1011J/g) 15. Therefore the supercompression to 100 1000g/cm3 is fundamentally necessary for the miniaturization. 2. Compression by single shock front is limited strongly enough. To derive this property, let remember the first law of thermodynamics (here for one-dimensional motion): dE dQ+dW=dQpxxdV dQ(dV/dpxx)pxxdpxx E Q+ W Q-<dV/dpxx>(1/2)(p1xx-poxx)(p1xx+poxx).

f1(p/pxx)1+1

=1 =f = f+1

Then the momentum and mass flow conservation means (here for the stationary ( / t 0) hydrodynamics) across the shock wave (at uo=Dshock D Mshao):

* So called Rayleigh line commonly known also as

Michelsons was really discovered by Earnshaw earlier.

** Strong in general means insensitivity to the initial

heat parameters, i.e. influence only of the initial matter density and flow or shock velocity: p1 >> po for V1<Vo. E1>>Eo p1V1>>poVo (at f const)

369

therefore degree of freedom index f=1,,2 (magnetic field immersed), 3 (ideal), 6 (photons domination) etc. Thereby, the single (adiabatic, plane) shock is able to compress a media up to tenfold of the initial density, not more. Some chance is given by Q < 0 3. Theoretical fundament for cylindrical, spherical and other shock induced and shock-free supercompression by implosion was developed by such persons as Busemann, Bechert, Guderley, Fuchs, Ulam, Nuckolls, Kidder, Lindl, Zababakhin, Simonenko, Svalov, Basko The implosion fusion capsule (target) requires extremely high power drivers ( 1014W for 1013-15W/cm2) with inherently poor efficiency ( 10% of laser) and a nonefficient mechanisms of driving. A long - base impact fusion drivers are more efficient( 20-40 %; 1011 W...). Alas, the old-fashioned impact fusion schemes are deficient on supercompression. Fortunately, the ultrahigh compression is achievable with plane multishock reverberation. The proposed here supercompression process is realizable, in the principle, for any media by the simultaneous multiple collision between planefaced (hockey-puck-like, even cylindrical) fragments. Theoretically, a similar compression is generated by the special motion of absolutely rigid piston... The rigourous analytical solution is found (author, 1973) both for such nonstationary Backward Big Bang and for the stationary hypersonic (inlet) analogue (first publications: 1974-1983). Here exists the potential to revolutionize the impact fusion way. The pioneering theoretical approach for the simplest planar supercompression - was attained by Riemann and Hugoniot in XIX century, and then by Oswatitsch (1944: shocks sequence optimization), F.Evans and C.Evans (LASL 19531956). Our solution imply, enough surprising, the direct nonisentropical generalization of the prominent riemannian invariants: the game of reverberating shock one corresponds to new invariants evolved to the classical riemannian during supercompression: uflow 2Dshock/( -1) u fD u 2asound/( -1) u fa.

by a sophisticated numerical analysis of the real shock reverberation in ferrum, carbon and some other substances, where cp/cv const (cf. Fig.6). As far as pure theoretical results, one unique is peculiar abstractly, while certain cosmological consequences are not excluded. At =cp/cv=3, i.e. f=1, the simultaneous collision of N identical layers (like pages in a book) gives a minimum thickness of one initial layer even for infinite collision velocity: the book is invariably shutting to the quantum of space selfcompressed to the single page for any N at Mach number of the first shocks Mshinitial >> f 2/( -1) = const = 1.

4. Lets start the next piece of theory from the turned Hugoniot formulae (1887) for the given act of the shock reflection transforming k-1 state ahead the incident shock into k state behind this shock state ahead the reflected shock, transforming k state into k+1 state, which is precede next incident, or reflected shock etc (cf. figures). All mentioned states are uniform and locally in equilibrium:
k+1/ k={(

+1) k/( -1) k-1-1}/{ k/ k-1+(3- )/( -1)} {(f+1) k/ k-1-1}/{ k/ k-1)+(f-1)}=(1- u/Dk)-1

for two subsequent shocks with the same variation u ( u=const) of the media (i.e. hydrodynamical particle) velocity we have the shift of the local velocity of shock front as follows: D DkDk-1= u{1/(1- k/ k+1)1/(1- k-1/ k)}= = u{[1+f/(1- k-1/ k)]/f1/(1- k-1/ k)}= u/f | u|/f D/ u= 1/f ( -1)/2 uk 2Dk/( -1)=uk fDk=const F(k) !!! Therefore, Riemannian Invariants are valid for this class of the obviously nonisentropic flow rigourously! The isentropic Riemannian Invariants is here certain asymptotics of reverberation: u 2D/( -1)=const ( ) u 2a/( -1) at D a(kin/kfin

0).

Like the theory by Riemann, our solution (Figs.1-5,7) assumed permanency of cp/cv , while the real supercompression corresponds to something like =3 5/3 4/3, i.e. f = 1 3 6.

Here, also (with the number N of the layers = kfin+1 at ko 0): Dk/ak Mk=1/{11/[1/(1-1/Min2)+k/(f+1)]}1/2 1 at k/f
k/ 2 k+1=11/{(1+1/f)/(1-1/Min )+k/f}

1 at k/f

etc.

max

I am grateful very much to Dr. M.Basko, and to mrs E. Barysheva for the unique assistance

initial=(kin+N)(kin+N1+f)/(kin+1)(kin+f) Nf/(f!) max(k,N,f)

370

Fig.1. Simplified (by the use of N [fragments of a fusion capsule] =5, and = 3 at f=1) illustration of the shooting, docking, selfcompression and microexplosion behind a stern of a spaceship (it is the reference system here). This simultaneous multiimpact fusion scenario corresponds to a fast ignition scheme.

Fig.2. Simplified (N=7, =3) illustration of the old fashioned central selfignition scheme, corresponding to the scenario of Fig.1, but the reference system central layer here.(The importance of a cohesion energy is ignored).

371

Fig.3. The degree of compression as a function of maximum dimensionless velocity of flying together of two etc... N fragments for the abstract =3 (Bechert-Alfven media).

but this became exact for (f=1) = (kin+N)/(kin+1) N at Min because of the property: kin=(f+1)/(Min21) 0 at Min>>1. The most energetically effective supercompression is obtained here by the moderate initial shock, when the pack of layers is dense enough: N>>umax/ain and u<<ain. Then max / in(k>>f) (k/kin)f (umax/fain+1)f=( max/ in) s=0, while isotherm-isentrope ( =1 at f= ) means

/ in=exp(umax/ain). The opposite case of the immense first shock demonstrates inhibition compression by the entropy production: max max ( S=0)/Minf, i.e. for the classic perfect gas EOS we have max max ( S=0)/exp( S/Nk), and for FermiDirac EOS, when the entropy S/Nk 2T/5TF, and Min 2 (for the maintaining the degeneration) 2 2 max max ( S=0){1-(5/2 ) (S/Nk) }. The total path of the discontinuous shock between the piston

max

372

Fig.4. The supercompression as a function of flying together velocity (Mach number of the flight) for the ideal plasma (EOS = 3) of two etc... N fragments.

and the wall in Hugoniot problem is limited from above when f>1, becoming infinite as ln(k) when f=1 as the collisionless path of a single molecule there! The distinct feature of the N-fold multiimpact compression the sharp (almost Nfold!) shortening of a compression time gap resulting in a more brief thermal energy leakage (say, by the radiation) i. e. (potentially) both the

lower heat (and, possibly, a magnetic field!) leakage (important for the selfignition!), and the higher level of the leakage power (important for the indirect drive designs see Lindl 1998). Incidentally, the Bechert value cp/cv=3 (f=1) corresponds to the Alfven one-dimensional plasma magnetized with the inhibition of two degrees of freedom {magnetic field (f=3) = (f=1)}.

373

Fig.5. The dimensionless pressure dependence for the multiimpact case of Fig.4.

MHD processes are involved here in followings: plasma assisted acceleration of the fusion target fragments which are magnetized occasionally or/and intentionally; during supercompression and explosion with the inherent peculiarities; spontaneous, or designed to attain the effective symmetry or asymmetry of the target explosion; the process of plasma explosion energy and power MHD-conversion (by the magnetic

nozzle pulse architecture) for the driver and auxiliary systems feeding. The stimulating attention, and the direct support in my efforts (mainly since 1975) to develop an idea of ICF flying machine was provided by such figures as V.P. Gloushko, I.P. Volk, Ju.N. Babaev, S.M. Jeger, A.M. Lyulka, A.A. Mikulin, A.D. Charomsky, L.P. Feoktistov, V.S. Avduevsky, B.V. Raushenbach, L.I. Sedov, E.K. Moshkin, A.A. Logunov, N.S. Lidorenko, Kh.A. Rakhmatulin, O.A. Chembrovsky, A.A. Aleksandrov, V.A. Bityrin, S.S. Grigorian, E.I. Ruzitsky, V.V. Beliaev, V.V. Sychev, A.M.

374

Fig.6. The supercompression and heating for the simultaneous multiimpact of the N Ferrum layers as the function of Mach number corresponding to the flying together. EOS and the numerical data by Mihail Basko.

Prokhorov... Meantime, some respectable and influential persons opposed, even actively, to the mentioned developments. As regard the recent stage of this efforts, the essential innovation consists in the unique onedirectional mode of drive thrust generating microexplosions, and also some thrust at the expense of certain recoil during the acceleration of target fragments by the onboard railgun (or like device).

In our recent case of consideration, the ICF spacecraft generates regularly (for 1/10 of second) set of 30-50 fragments of microfusion target, containing mainly (or purely) the best fuel 3 He (for the final design of the development, preferably). Other details will be published at the next meetings.

375

Fig.7. Space-time scenario for the multiimpacting N layer of the exotic ( =1 and f

) media.

References W.Rankine: Phil. Trans. Roy-Soc. No.160 (1870), London. 2. H.Hugoniot: J.Ecole polytech. No.57 (1887), 58 (1889), Paris. 3. K.Oswatitsch: Forschungen und entwicklingen des Heereswaffenamtes, Bericht Nr. 1005. Gttingen, January 1944. (Also in Supersonic Inlet Diffusers by R.Hermann, Minneapolis 1956; 1960). 4. R.von Mises: Mathem. Theory of Compressible Flow, NY 1958: 1961. 5. F.Evans, C.Evans: J. Flu. Mech. No.1, 1956. 6. PROJECT ORION papers, LASL, LLL 195661, USA. 7. John Nuckolls: LLL pap. on ICF space propulsion 1961, 72. 8. LLL papers on ICF and its aerospace applications 1972-1979. 9. Edvard Teller: Speech on ICF perspectives, LLL 1973. 10. Valentine A.Belokogne: On supercompression Sov. Physics Doklady v.20, (1975), v.28 (1983); pap. for conference in Venice, Italy 1978 (Perg. Press NY 1983). 1.

11. V.Belokogne, A.Zabrodin, Ja. Kazdan, A. Svalov, R. Khokhlov: preprint of Inst. Appl. Math. Sov. Akad. Sci. April 19, 1978. 12. A.Bond et al: Project DAEDALUS, London, JBIS 1978 Supplement; 1979 p 283. 13. R. Hyde: Interplanetary Fusion Rocket, LLNL 1983. 14. Valentine A.Belokogne: pap. on ICF space propulsion, Ciolkovsky meeting, Kalouga 1984, and at some the next meetings, as at Lomonossov readings (Moscow University 2001). 15. Ch. Orth et al (LLNL, NASA), VISTA papers 1986-90. 16. FUSION ENERGY IN SPACE PROPULSION, AIAA 1996 (some papers are bluff). 17. A.Caruso, V.Pais: Nuclear Fusion, June 1996. 18. John Lindl: Inertial Confinement Fusion, NY 1998 (and refs there). 19. Valentine A. Belokogne: papers on II, III workshops on magneto-plasma aerodynamics for aerospace applications, Moscow 2000, 2001 (and refs there). 20. Michail Basko, Meyer-ter-Vehn: Phys. Rev. Letters 2002 (and refs there).

376