4.7 Article

Radiation shielding calculations for the vista spacecraft

期刊

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT
卷 46, 期 15-16, 页码 2345-2358

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2004.12.011

关键词

spacecraft; fusion propulsion; radiation shielding

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The VISTA spacecraft design concept has been proposed for manned or heavy cargo deep space missions beyond earth orbit with inertial fusion energy propulsion. Rocket propulsion is provided by fusion power deposited in the inertial confined fuel pellet debris and with the help of a magnetic nozzle. The calculations for the radiation shielding have been revised under the fact that the highest jet efficiency of the vehicle could be attained only if the propelling plasma would have a narrow temperature distribution. The shield mass could be reduced from 600 tons in the original design to 62 tons. Natural and enriched lithium were the principle shielding materials. The allowable nuclear heating in the superconducting magnet coils (up to 5 mW/cm(3)) is taken as the crucial criterion for dimensioning the radiation shielding structure of the spacecraft. The space craft mass is 6000 tons. Total peak nuclear power density in the coils is calculated as similar to 5.0 mW/cm(3) for a fusion power output of 17 500 MW. The peak neutron heating density is similar to 2.0 mW/cm(3), and the peak 7-ray heating density is similar to 3.0 mW/cm3 (on different points) using natural lithium in the shielding. However, the volume averaged heat generation in the coils is much lower, namely 0.21, 0.71 and 0.92 mW/cm(3) for the neutron, 7-ray and total nuclear heating, respectively. The coil heating will be slightly lower if highly enriched 6 Li (90%) is used instead of natural lithium. Peak values are then calculated as 2.05, 2.15 and 4.2 mW/cm for the neutron, 7-ray and total nuclear heating, respectively. The corresponding volume averaged heat 3 generation in the coils became 0.19, 0.58 and 0.77 mW/cm. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据