Antony--
You are correct. It was intended that HEPlaR vented only plasma, and never
fusion byproducts. Plasma is plasma, and fusion does not take place in it.
You are also correct that you could hook up a HEPlaR to another power
source. Our assumption being that HEPlaR was a large umbrella technology
that had to do with harnessing a sufficiently energetic powerplant to heat
and accelerate hydrogen for thrust. As I wrote last night, in my mind, the
HEPlaR power and performance was directly related to the energetic
qualities of the plant it was hooked up to, which I think comes out in the
design sequence. I don't know that we ever put in a lower limit of what
you could hook up to one, but I think the power calculations sort of did
that for you, in that at lower power densitities what you were getting out
the back end was closer to high-pressure "steam" than plasma, cue the 1889
reference. And since you don't need that much G-performance in atmosphere
with contra-grav, you don't need as much HEPlaR performance.
Your Universe May Vary. Does not include taxes, titles, or delivery fees.
May cause swelling, bleeding, or sudden death. If a horn grows from your
forehead, contact your doctor.
> Itâs funny but I always thought that HePlar vented well plasma not
> fusion by products. Is there a bit missing in FF&S regarding HePlar in
> relation to what types of power plant it can be used with, as written you
> could attach a HePlar drive to any power plant (mental image of a steam
> engine powering a ships maneuver drive â Space 1889 variant)
>
>
>
> Antony
>
>
>
> From: []
> On Behalf Of Craige Cook
> Sent: Saturday, 14 July 2012 11:27 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Fusion Exhaust Radioactive or Not?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> David Nilsen wrote: HEPlaR is designed so that fusion products are not
> vented into the exhaust. That CAN be done, the same way that in a
> pressurized water nuclear reactor the steam that goes into the turbine is
> not radioactive.
> The primary coolant that goes through the core passes heat to the
> secondary coolant that goes into the turbines. That's the same premise
> with HEPlaR. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
> "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
>
> I donât agree with this premise.
>
> HEPlaR or High Efficiency Plasma Recombustion requires a heat exchanger
> recombustion chamber. Hydrogen is injected into the recombustion chamber
> and the power generated by the engine (fusion power plant) heats the
> hydrogen to a plasma state. The plasma is then released as a high velocity
> stream of reaction mass (FF&S Pg 70)
>
> Plasma is made and sent outside the ship to provide reaction mass and
> therefore thrust for the ship. SO how can you say that fusion products are
> not vented? The fusion product of plasma is vented and yes it is
> radioactive, though only for a short time.
>
>
>
> Enjoy!
>
> Craige
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2194 / Virus Database: 2437/5130 - Release Date: 07/13/12
>
>
You are correct. It was intended that HEPlaR vented only plasma, and never
fusion byproducts. Plasma is plasma, and fusion does not take place in it.
You are also correct that you could hook up a HEPlaR to another power
source. Our assumption being that HEPlaR was a large umbrella technology
that had to do with harnessing a sufficiently energetic powerplant to heat
and accelerate hydrogen for thrust. As I wrote last night, in my mind, the
HEPlaR power and performance was directly related to the energetic
qualities of the plant it was hooked up to, which I think comes out in the
design sequence. I don't know that we ever put in a lower limit of what
you could hook up to one, but I think the power calculations sort of did
that for you, in that at lower power densitities what you were getting out
the back end was closer to high-pressure "steam" than plasma, cue the 1889
reference. And since you don't need that much G-performance in atmosphere
with contra-grav, you don't need as much HEPlaR performance.
Your Universe May Vary. Does not include taxes, titles, or delivery fees.
May cause swelling, bleeding, or sudden death. If a horn grows from your
forehead, contact your doctor.
> Itâs funny but I always thought that HePlar vented well plasma not
> fusion by products. Is there a bit missing in FF&S regarding HePlar in
> relation to what types of power plant it can be used with, as written you
> could attach a HePlar drive to any power plant (mental image of a steam
> engine powering a ships maneuver drive â Space 1889 variant)
>
>
>
> Antony
>
>
>
> From: []
> On Behalf Of Craige Cook
> Sent: Saturday, 14 July 2012 11:27 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Fusion Exhaust Radioactive or Not?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> David Nilsen wrote: HEPlaR is designed so that fusion products are not
> vented into the exhaust. That CAN be done, the same way that in a
> pressurized water nuclear reactor the steam that goes into the turbine is
> not radioactive.
> The primary coolant that goes through the core passes heat to the
> secondary coolant that goes into the turbines. That's the same premise
> with HEPlaR. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
> "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
>
> I donât agree with this premise.
>
> HEPlaR or High Efficiency Plasma Recombustion requires a heat exchanger
> recombustion chamber. Hydrogen is injected into the recombustion chamber
> and the power generated by the engine (fusion power plant) heats the
> hydrogen to a plasma state. The plasma is then released as a high velocity
> stream of reaction mass (FF&S Pg 70)
>
> Plasma is made and sent outside the ship to provide reaction mass and
> therefore thrust for the ship. SO how can you say that fusion products are
> not vented? The fusion product of plasma is vented and yes it is
> radioactive, though only for a short time.
>
>
>
> Enjoy!
>
> Craige
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2194 / Virus Database: 2437/5130 - Release Date: 07/13/12
>
>