SHIRAKAWA Akira <[email protected]> wrote:
> According to Rossi's latest plans, the megawatt reactor is going to be made > of not 100, but 300 smaller units similar in size to those seen in photos . > . . Yup. But I started writing that text before I learned that. Besides a 10 x 10 array is easy to envision, whereas . . . 17 x 17? Personally I see this as a weak point and source of possible delays. I see it as a likely source of delays and perhaps a weakness at first. But with some experience, with second or third generation devices, the weaknesses would be minor. Many strange and unlikely technical solutions become workable over time. People learn to build things so well, we no longer notice that the design is a kludge. Classic examples are the manual transmission with a clutch, and Microsoft Windows. It's going to be a complex and expensive system. Maintenance is also going > to be a mess, assuming it's like that of an individual module, scaled 300x. > Can you imagine replacing the nickel charge to each modular unit every 6 > months? > I'll bet they soon last longer than 6 months. With the system I envisioned, you unbolt the top, lift it up, and then suction our the cells in the engine block. Or with a smaller unity, you tip the whole block sideways and shake it or blow it out. You need a large machine with an array of suction heads, or a robot that moves from one cell to the next. You wouldn't want to do it manually! Eventually, it would be only a little more complicated than changing the oil in an internal combustion engine. Less complicated than rebuilding the motor. There are fewer high precision parts. Another design I thought about would be something like a rack-mounted array of computer disks. Each individual Rossi cell would be mounted and bolted into the rack. The gas hose, electrical connections and cooling water hose connection would be made. The entire rack is surrounded with lead shielding. Months later, if the senors in one of the cells shows it is under-performing (or dead), that cell is removed and replaced during maintenance. Dead cells are sent back for re-manufacturing. That does not seem like a practical design for high temperature fluid such as you need to generate electricity. Maybe for space heating where the fluid is air. Seeing that 10 kW modules have the potential for more than 100 kW of thermal > power as reported by Levi during the February 18 hours test, personally I > would have tried to sort out reliability problems in order to limit their > total number in the megawatt plant to 25-30. That would be, in my opinion, > much more compact and manageable in many ways. > I would say forget the 1 MW device for a while and make 10 kW or 100 kW devices instead. Heck I would love to see 300 individual 4 kW units. - Jed
