Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Like gliding backwards through porridge.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


               

Nuclear Turbine

Use a fissile gas to drive a turbine
 
(+1, -1)
  [vote for,
against]

There is a lot of work going on at the moment into nuclear gas turbines (e.g. the PBMR & GT-MHR reactors). Both of these use fuel pellets to heat helium gas, which is then used to drive a turbine.

But how about using a highly enriched fissile gas, not only to drive the turbine but also to act as the fuel. UF6 would be ideal as it has a very high coefficient of volume expansion, boils at 56C and has a critical temp of 230C.

You could use a compressor to squeeze the gas through a narrow aperture (increasing it's density), surrounded by neutron reflectors (and maybe moderator & neutron injectors). As gas passes through this aperture it becomes critical and heats up. As a result the gas expands and is forced through the turbine, which is in turn linked to the compressor (very similar a turbojet) and of course a generator. In this way you get a continuous flow of gas though the reactor.

Ideally you could have down stream separation of the fission products after the gas has left the turbine. Add a little more fuel to replace what’s been used and return the remaining gaseous fuel to the compressor.

As there's no need to transfer the heat to some secondary medium, this should be a very efficient power plant.

The total inventory (amount of RA material) in this kind of plant would be quite small. Also this concept would continuously cycle the fuel and so get close to 100% consumption of the fissile materials (unlike current reactors) and so the volume of irradiate nuclear fuel (high level waste) being remove would be small.

And finally the reaction is only sustained by active input. So if anything goes wrong it can’t runaway (although I realize that this problem is pretty much solved in modern reactors).

vaccumac, Jul 16 2006

GT-MHR http://gt-mhr.ga.com
The US's contribution to nuclear gas turbines [vaccumac, Jul 16 2006]

PBMR http://www.pbmr.co.uk
And south africa's [vaccumac, Jul 16 2006]

Gas turbines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_turbine
Wiki's description of gas turbines [vaccumac, Jul 16 2006]

Non-conventional reactors http://gif.inel.gov...reactor_systems.pdf
See slides 10-12 for gaseous reactors [vaccumac, Jul 17 2006]

[link]






       It's "highly toxic, reacts violently with water and is corrosive to most metals"--not the best working fluid. (Most of the depleted uranium stored in the US is in this form, and there have been several accidental releases.)

An additional problem is that you'll be working at fairly low temperatures, so the thermal efficiency will also be low. Other problems: it breaks down with intense radiation, and it can solidify, blocking pipes and causing the pressure in the reactor to build up, possibly resulting in a runaway reaction.
ldischler, Jul 17 2006
  

       I knew it was a tricky substance to handle, but i didn't know it easily broke up in radiation fields (kinda puts a dampener on things). Anyone know of a stable fissile gas?   

       As for running at a low temperature, I kinda though the reverse would happen and if anything the temperature and pressures involved would be pushing boundaries. Why would it run at a low temperature?
vaccumac, Jul 17 2006
  

       Alright I found the answer to a stable gas UF4. Plus I also found that gaseous reactors have been studied before(though not quite a turbine). See link
vaccumac, Jul 17 2006
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle