US ITER Diagnostics ITPA10 Moscow April 13, 2006 Presented by David Johnson US ITER Project Activities –Near-term priorities and plans –US diagnostic packages –Ongoing neutronics work and plans US Burning Plasma Organization ITER-relevant diagnostic development on DIII-D (separate presentation prepared by R. Boivin) ITER-Relevant Diagnostic Activity in the US

US ITER Diagnostics ITPA10 Moscow April 13, 2006 US ITER Project Has Started In March, PPPL was been selected as the lead institution for diagnostic procurement and David Johnson was selected as Diagnostics Team Leader. Since then there have been extensive discussions with diagnostics experts at 4 locations in the US focused on defining the scope of short term studies. Will fund studies of 2-6 man-months each. Some will start in May. More extensive contracts for detailed design work will come later, hopefully next year, when US responsibilities are better defined and funding increases.

US ITER Diagnostics ITPA10 Moscow April 13, 2006 US ITER Project Diagnostic Packages

US ITER Diagnostics ITPA10 Moscow April 13, 2006 Near Term Priorities 1.Better definition of ‘front-end’ designs understand and optimize front-end designs examine trade-offs in expanded capability and alternate approaches support ‘Port Plug Engineering Taskforce’, particularly in areas that affect US systems 2.Develop needed infrastructure CATIA CAD models neutronics capability optical designs performance simulation codes 3.Development of R&D plans both in-vessel and ex-vessel components prototyping contribute to generic R&D work on 1st mirrors, shutters, and other “far- forward” assemblies

US ITER Diagnostics ITPA10 Moscow April 13, 2006 Near Term US Neutronics Plans Three ongoing approaches for neutronics analysis Efficient translation from CAD to format compatible with input to MCNP Raytheon - TOPACT  being pursued by LLNL (Jeff Latkowski) Will use US E3 port labyrinth as example New version of MCNP that “runs within CAD elements” MCNP-CGM  M. Sawan - Univ. of Wisconsin Ready to try on simplified port plug (E3) in mid-summer ATTILA discreet ordinates code (Transpire - US Company) Code “verification” plan developed by IT to be based on 3 experimental benchmarks US has agreed (Mahmoud Youssef - UCLA) to perform ATTILA benchmark runs To be reported at meeting organized by Gianfranco Federici at Madison, Wisconsin July ATTILA runs with simplified E3 plug also planned prior to this meeting as a design example (R. Feder - PPPL)

US ITER Diagnostics ITPA10 Moscow April 13, 2006 Intensive Neutronics effort is underway: Direct conversion of CAD to radiation transport grid LLNL has converted ITER CATIA CAD to Pro/E for local ease of use and to enable TopAct conversion CATIA-CAD Pro/E-CAD Step File TopAct- GRID Neutronics TopAct speeds the process in moving from CAD to neutronics Contract in place with Raytheon for them to complete the conversion from Pro/E to Monte Carlo LLNL will become beta test user in FY06 Complex step Well in hand MCNP/TART

US ITER Diagnostics ITPA10 Moscow April 13, 2006 We are applying TopAct Grid generator to the design of ITER's MSE diagnostic Creating the ability to rapidly assess the radiation transport effects of design changes will make significant contributions to ITER and other projects, a capability developed at LLNL. 06 Accomplishment- Neutronics calculations Monte Carlo models (both TART and MCNP) have been completed for much of the MSE diagnostic TopAct is beginning to deliver, and we now understand its limitations and the appropriate work-arounds

US ITER Diagnostics ITPA10 Moscow April 13,

US ITER Diagnostics ITPA10 Moscow April 13, 2006 USBPO Diagnostic Activities 1.Diagnostic Topical Group Coordinators recently named - Réjean Boivin, Steve Allen, Jim Terry 2.Leaders are discussing possible Task Groups that might support US project responsibilities: Microwave systems - ECE and Reflectometry IR/FIR systems - Toroidal and Divertor Interferometry Imaging systems - Upper Visible/IR Cameras Active spectroscopy- MSE 3.Possible Diagnostic Task Group Roles (Need to draft charter) Provide forum of ideas relating to US systems. Comment on physics goals and related measurement requirements. Organize workshops for presentation and critique of upcoming design studies. Eventually support internal review of detailed designs. Provide experts for ITER diagnostic design reviews. Address some types of ‘action items’ from USBPO or USIPO. Advise US ITER Project on diagnostic issues