29 July 20101 Lane Carlson, Charles Kessel Mark Tillack, Farrokh Najmabadi ARIES-Pathways Project Meeting Washington, D.C. June 29-30, 2010 Exploring the.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

First Wall Heat Loads Mike Ulrickson November 15, 2014.

Advertisements

ASIPP Zhongwei Wang for CFETR Design Team Japan-US Workshop on Fusion Power Plants and Related Advanced Technologies February 26-28, 2013 at Kyoto University.

1 Lane Carlson ARIES Pathways Project Meeting Gaithersburg, MD, Oct 13-14, 2011 Substantiating the ASC & Implementing the DCLL Blanket.

January 8-10, 2003/ARR 1 Plan for Engineering Study of ARIES-CS Presented by A. R. Raffray University of California, San Diego ARIES Meeting UCSD San.

April 27-28, 2006/ARR 1 Finalizing ARIES-CS Power Core Engineering Presented by A. René Raffray University of California, San Diego ARIES Meeting UW, Madison.

Systems Code Status J. F. Lyon, ORNL ARIES Meeting June 14, 2006.

Summary and Closing Remarks Farrokh Najmabadi University of California San Diego Presentation to: ARIES Program Peer Review August 18, 2000 UC San Diego.

LPK Recent Progress in Configuration Development for Compact Stellarator Reactors L. P. Ku Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Aries E-Meeting,

June 14-15, 2007/ARR 1 Trade-Off Studies and Engineering Input to System Code Presented by A. René Raffray University of California, San Diego With contribution.

Contributions of Burning Plasma Physics Experiment to Fusion Energy Goals Farrokh Najmabadi Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. And Center for Energy Research.

Poloidal Distribution of ARIES-ACT Neutron Wall Loading L. El-Guebaly, A. Jaber, D. Henderson Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin-Madison.

1 Lane Carlson, Mark Tillack, Farrokh Najmabadi, Charles Kessel University of California, San Diego & Princeton Plasma Physics Lab US/Japan Workshop on.

Proposals for Next Year’s MFE Activities C. Kessel, PPPL ARIES Project Meeting, Sept. 24, 2000.

Development of the New ARIES Tokamak Systems Code Zoran Dragojlovic, Rene Raffray, Farrokh Najmabadi, Charles Kessel, Lester Waganer US-Japan Workshop.

Impact of Liquid Wall on Fusion Systems Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego NRC Fusion Science Assessment Committee November 17, 1999.

Optimization of a Steady-State Tokamak-Based Power Plant Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA IEA Workshop 59 “Shape and.

US-Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plants and Related Advanced Technologies High Temperature Plasma Center, the University of Tokyo Yuichi OGAWA, Takuya.

Progress on Engineering and Costing Algorithms for ARIES Systems Code Zoran Dragojlovic, Rene Raffray, Chuck Kessel and Leslie Bromberg ARIES Project Meeting.

Physics Issues and Trade-offs in Magnetic Fusion Power Plants Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA APS April 2002 Meeting.

26 Jan Lane Carlson, Charles Kessel Mark Tillack, Farrokh Najmabadi ARIES-Pathways Project Meeting San Diego, CA Jan 26-27, 2011 Needful Systems.

Highlights of ARIES-AT Study Farrokh Najmabadi For the ARIES Team VLT Conference call July 12, 2000 ARIES Web Site:

Role of ITER in Fusion Development Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA FPA Annual Meeting September 27-28, 2006 Washington,

ARIES Systems Studies: ARIES-I and ARIES-AT type operating points C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory ARIES Project Meeting, San Diego, December.

Recent Results on Compact Stellarator Reactor Optimization J. F. Lyon, ORNL ARIES Meeting Sept. 3, 2003.

Overview of ARIES ACT-1 Study Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy Research UC San Diego and the.

Re-Examination of Visions for Tokamak Power Plants – The ARIES-ACT Study Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center.

Overview of the ARIES Program Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego Presentation to ARIES Program Peer Review August 29, 2013, Washington, DC Mission: Perform.

Progress in ARIES-ACT Study Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego Japan/US Workshop on Power Plant Studies and Related Advanced Technologies 8-9 March 2012 US.

A new approach for exploration of tokamak power plant design space Farrokh Najmabadi, Lane Carlson, and the ARIES Team UC San Diego 4 th IAEA Technical.

DO NOW Dec 3 You have been asked by the school’s administration to build a new set of bleacher’s for the soccer field. Discuss how you would accomplish.

1 | Program Name or Ancillary Texteere.energy.gov Water Power Peer Review SubTask CH TD Day-ahead Scheduling and Real-time Operations Tool Conventional.

Page 1 of 11 An approach for the analysis of R&D needs and facilities for fusion energy ARIES “Next Step” Planning Meeting 3 April 2007 M. S. Tillack ?

Systems Analysis Development for ARIES Next Step C. E. Kessel 1, Z. Dragojlovic 2, and R. Raffrey 2 1 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory 2 University.

Integrated Development Environment (IDE)

ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi University of California San Diego ARIES brainstorming meeting UC San Diego April 3-4, 2007 Electronic copy:

1 Lane Carlson ARIES Pathways Project Meeting San Diego, CA Jan 23-24, 2012 Updating the SCLL Design & ASC Documentation.

Thoughts on Fusion Competitiveness Initiative Farrokh Najmabadi, George Tynan UC San Diego University Fusion Initiatives Meeting, MIT 14-15, February 2008.

ARIES-AT Physics Overview presented by S.C. Jardin with input from C. Kessel, T. K. Mau, R. Miller, and the ARIES team US/Japan Workshop on Fusion Power.

Systems Code – Hardwired Numbers for Review C. Kessel, PPPL ARIES Project Meeting, July 29-30, 2010.

1 Lane Carlson 1, Mark Tillack 1, Farrokh Najmabadi 1, Charles Kessel 2 1 University of California, San Diego & 2 Princeton Plasma Physics Lab US/Japan.

ARIES- ACT, 21-22May 2013, Germantown, MD Page 1 L. Waganer Consultant for ARIES Project / UCSD / DOE ARIES Project Meeting May 2013 Hampton Inn,

1 Lane Carlson ARIES-Pathways Project Meeting Gaithersburg, MD, July 27-28, 2011 Generalization and Blanket Updates to the ASC.

Stabilizing Shells in ARIES C. E. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory ARIES Project Meeting, 5/28-29/2008.

Fusion Nuclear Science - Pathway Assessment C. Kessel, PPPL ARIES Project Meeting, Bethesda, MD July 29, 2010.

European Fusion Power Plant Conceptual Study - Parameters For Near-term and Advanced Models David Ward Culham Science Centre (Presented by Ian Cook) This.

Progress of ARIES Systems Code Development Zoran Dragojlovic A. René Raffray Farrokh Najmabadi ARIES-“TNS” Project Meeting June 14 and 15, 2007 General.

Page 1 of 9 Power Management Technical Working Group Structure and Goals ARIES Project Meeting June 2007 M. S. Tillack and A. R. Raffray.

Systems Analysis Development for ARIES Next Step C. E. Kessel 1, Z. Dragojlovic 2, and R. Raffrey 2 1 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory 2 University.

Assessment of Fusion Development Path: Initial Results of the ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego ANS 18 th Topical Meeting on the.

Development and Scope of ARIES Systems Code Zoran Dragojlovic A. René Raffray Farrokh Najmabadi ARIES-“TNS” Project Meeting April 3 and 4, 2007 University.

M. Yoda, S. I. Abdel-Khalik, D. L. Sadowski, B. H. Mills and M. D. Hageman G. W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering Correlations for Divertor Thermal-Hydraulic.

Neutron Wall Loading Update L. El-Guebaly, A. Jaber, A. Robinson, D. Henderson Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin-Madison

1 Lane Carlson, Charles Kessel, Stephen Efthyvoulos ARIES-Pathways Project Meeting Bethesday, MD April 4-5, 2011 Finalized Systems Code Modifications &

Compact Stellarators as Reactors J. F. Lyon, ORNL NCSX PAC meeting June 4, 1999.

Engineering models in the ARIES system code, Part II M. S. Tillack, X. R. Wang, et al. ARIES Project Meeting January 2011.

Improvements to power flow modeling in the ARIES system code

Trade-Off Studies and Engineering Input to System Code

University of California in San Diego

Progress on Systems Code Application to CS Reactors

Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering

Near-term plan for the current ARIES project

Status of the ARIES Program

Review of Project Goals

Development of a Visualization Tool for the ARIES Systems Code

Update of ARIES ACT-1 systems analysis

Systems analysis of ACT2 design space

TWG goals, approach and outputs

Analysis of Technical and Programmatic Tradeoffs with Systems Code

ACT-1 design point definition

University of California, San Diego

Presentation transcript:

29 July Lane Carlson, Charles Kessel Mark Tillack, Farrokh Najmabadi ARIES-Pathways Project Meeting Washington, D.C. June 29-30, 2010 Exploring the Parameter Space with the Visual ARIES Systems Scanning Tool

29 July The four corners of the parameter space have been defined ARIES-AT physics ( β N = ) DCLL blanket ARIES-I physics ( β N = 0.03) DCLL blanket Aggressive in technology Aggressive in physics ARIES-AT physics ( β N = ) SiC blanket ARIES-I physics ( β N = 0.03) SiC blanket Scans have been performed to span the 4 corners of the parameter space A grouping of lowest COE points have been isolated at each corner. C.Kessel to present specifics

29 July Some systems code scanning parameters: Preliminary filtering: 1.Pnelec = 1000 MW ± 15 MW 2.Divertor (in/outboard) limit < 15 MW/m 2 3.B T max = T 4.COE real RangeResolution R (m) B T (T) BetaN Q gain n/n Gr P aux … Now we can load this database of viable operating points and visualize 

29 July We have explored the four corners with the VASST GUI as a visualization tool VASST - Visual ARIES Systems Scanning Tool Working to visualize the broad parameter space to extract meaningful data and uncover new relationships Graphical user interface (GUI) permits color 2D plots of any parameter Purpose: to give the user more visual interaction and explorative power to extract meaningful relationships

29 July VASST GUI v.2 Pull-down menus for common parameters Blanket database used Number of points in database Constraint parameter can restrict database Auto-labeling Correlation coefficient Save plot as TIFF, JPEG, BMP, PNG… Color bar scale Edit plotting properties (Visual ARIES Systems Scanning Tool) Turn on ARIES-AT point design for reference new “Thickened” database Note: All costing in this presentation is 2009$

29 July Constraint example #1: Aggr physics / aggr tech R vs fGW, CC COE Secondary constraints to apply for practical purposes: - fGW < H98 < 1.7

29 July Constraint example #1: Aggr physics / aggr tech R vs fGW, CC COE Const: fGW < 1.0

29 July Constraint example #1: Aggr physics / aggr tech R vs fGW, CC COE Const: fGW < 1.0 Const: H98 < 1.7

29 July Constraint example #2: Aggr physics / aggr tech R vs H98, CC COE

29 July Constraint example #2: Aggr physics / aggr tech R vs H98, CC COE Const: fGW < 1.0

29 July Constraint example #2: Aggr physics / aggr tech R vs H98, CC COE Const: fGW < 1.0 Const: H98 < 1.7

29 July Constraint example #3: Aggr physics / aggr tech BetaN vs H98, CC COE

29 July Constraint example #3: Aggr physics / aggr tech BetaN vs H98, CC COE Const: H98 < 1.7

29 July Constraint example #3: Aggr physics / aggr tech BetaN vs H98, CC COE Const: H98 < 1.7 Const: fGW < 1.0

29 July Example #4: Aggr physics / aggr tech Reiterating C. Kessel’s points, trends, observations with visualizations COE vs BetaN shows relatively weak dependence “Knee in the curve” at BetaN = 0.03

29 July Example #5: Aggr physics / aggr tech fGW Too aggressive Smaller device

29 July Example #5: Aggr physics / aggr tech H98 > 1.65 Too aggressive Smaller device

29 July Example #5: Aggr physics / aggr tech Aggressive physics BetaN > 0.045

29 July Example #5: Aggr physics / aggr tech Aggressive physics BetaN > COE 50 COE 60 COE 70

29 July Example #6: Cons physics / aggr tech B T = for cons physics (BetaN ~ 0.03)

29 July Example #6: Cons physics / aggr tech B T vs COE, CC BetaN Low BetaN regime

29 July Example #6: Cons physics / aggr tech B T vs COE, CC BetaN Const: BetaN < 0.035

29 July Example #6: Cons physics / aggr tech B T vs COE, CC BetaN Const: BetaN < 0.030

29 July Example #7: Aggr physics / cons tech Rise in B T as aggressiveness decreases (BetaN) Now DCLL blanket

29 July Example #7: Aggr physics / cons tech Still weak COE effect of BetaN

29 July Example #7: Aggr physics / cons tech nGW > 1.3 and H98 > 1.4 are too aggressive

29 July Example #8: Cons physics / cons tech Device is large with B T = T at low BetaN

29 July SC magnet current reduction SC magnet algorithm may be too optimistic Re-examined lower B-fields for possible solutions 1.5x reduction might represent an ITER-type TF coil Original magnetic coil algorithm 3x reduction (~ ITER TF coil) 10x reduction (exaggeration) ! Builds are not finalized but show TF coil growth trend !

29 July Extra: Pnelec (unrestricted) vs COE, CC: COE SiC blanket Possible attractive power plant designs in the 500 MW range

29 July Is a small (< 500 MW Pnelec) plant feasible? Must be careful when drawing comparisons from 1,000 MW ARIES power plant to a small pilot plant ARIES is 10th-of-a-kind costing, difficult to pin down 1st-of-a-kind ARIES magnets are SC Differs from current project scope

29 July The database chronicle is growing as resolution is added What input parameters were used? What version of the systems code was used? (Subversion control) What blanket was implemented? What were the assumptions applied in the code? What filters were implemented? (Pnetel, Qdiv, B, etc.) What costing algorithms were used, year$ ?  Every result/picture/graph should be backed up with specifics of its origin

29 July Background check on systems code History of code is being investigated and documented. What exactly is in the different modules? Assumptions and approx used? This is an ongoing effort to document every specific of the code rather than rely on “corporate memory.” 1.Physics Module a)Toroidal magnetic fields b)Heat flux to divertor c)Neutron wall load d)Net electric power 2.Engineering Module a)Blanket (DCLL, SiC) b)Power flow c)Magnets d)Geometry 3.Costing Module a)Detailed costing accounts Documentation spreadsheet started

29 July Summary Large system scans have been done and thickening in areas of interest. The second version of the VASST GUI has looked at parameter correlations at the four corners. Continuing chronicle and documentation of details and specifics of the systems code.

29 July Future work  Define strawmen for four corners.  Continue to thicken and refine the database in relevant areas once aggr/cons parameters are nailed down.  Re-examine/scan the TF and PF coil j vs. B relationships.  Potentially consider smaller pilot plant machines. Live VASST demo?

29 July Extra Slides

29 July ARIES systems code consists of modular building blocks 1.Blankets 2.Geometry 3.Magnets 4.Power flow 5.Costing 1. PHYSICS Plasmas that satisfy power and particle balance 2. ENGINEERING FILTERS APPLIED Systems Code Analysis Flow 3. ENGINEERING & COSTING DETAILS Power core, power flow, magnets, costing, COE Modules include: Systems code integrates physics, engineering, design, and costing. 1.Toroidal magnetic fields 2.Heat flux to divertor 3.Neutron wall load 4.Net electric power Filters include: DCLL SiC ARIES-AT

29 July Goals of Dec ARIES research proposal Scope of new study is to re-evaluate the ARIES design while considering current PMI knowledge and issues.