4 ms·

Did he mention using a stellarator as oppose to a tokamak? Apparently computer modeling makes a stellarator more feasible and I was wondering if using supercond

• xorxornop 10y ago
  Stellarator designs already use superconducting electromagnets. The newer kind are just a lot more powerful and versatile.
• sgt101 10y ago
  He said that they were watching what was happening with the stellarator design in germany and if it proved out they'd use that rather than a tokamak.
• sgt101 10y ago
  He said that they were watching what was happening with the stellarator design in germany and if it proved out they'd use that rather than a tokamak.
• jdietrich 10y ago
  Stellarators have become easier to design, but they're still a complete pain in the arse to build. Wendelstein 7-X was nine years behind schedule and significantly over-budget, mainly due to unforeseen problems in assembling the coils. The National Compact Stellerator Experiment was abandoned in 2008, again due to construction delays. For stellerators to become viable, we need some major advances in manufacturing technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Compact_Stellarator_Experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Compact_Stellarator_E...
  • Roritharr 10y ago
    But isn't simpler coil assembly what Mr. Whyte proposes? New Superconductors allow for simpler and more powerful coils, allowing smaller, cheaper designs. That should translate to the Stellarator configuration equally well, or am I wrong?