Advanced Tokamak Regimes in the Fusion Ignition Research Experiment (FIRE) 30th Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics St. Petersburg, Russia.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Physics Basis of FIRE Next Step Burning Plasma Experiment Charles Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory U.S.-Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plant.
Advertisements

ARIES-Advanced Tokamak Power Plant Study Physics Analysis and Issues Charles Kessel, for the ARIES Physics Team Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory U.S.-Japan.
Stability, Transport, and Conrol for the discussion Y. Miura IEA/LT Workshop (W59) combined with DOE/JAERI Technical Planning of Tokamak Experiments (FP1-2)
Who will save the tokamak – Harry Potter, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Shaquille O’Neal or Donald Trump? J. P. Freidberg, F. Mangiarotti, J. Minervini MIT Plasma.
FIRE Physics Basis C. Kessel for the FIRE Team Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory FIRE Physics Validation Review March 30-31, 2004 Germantown, MD AES,
Steps Toward a Compact Stellarator Reactor Hutch Neilson Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory ARIES Team Meeting October 3, 2002.
Physics Analysis for Equilibrium, Stability, and Divertors ARIES Power Plant Studies Charles Kessel, PPPL DOE Peer Review, UCSD August 17, 2000.
Contributions of Burning Plasma Physics Experiment to Fusion Energy Goals Farrokh Najmabadi Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. And Center for Energy Research.
Burning Plasma Gap Between ITER and DEMO Dale Meade Fusion Innovation Research and Energy US-Japan Workshop Fusion Power Plants and Related Advanced Technologies.
Optimization of a Steady-State Tokamak-Based Power Plant Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA IEA Workshop 59 “Shape and.
DEMO Parameters – Preliminary Considerations David Ward Culham Science Centre This work was jointly funded by the EPSRC and by EURATOM.
Use of Simple Analytic Expression in Tokamak Design Studies John Sheffield, July 29, 2010, ISSE, University of Tennessee, Knoxville Inspiration Needed.
Physics Issues and Trade-offs in Magnetic Fusion Power Plants Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA APS April 2002 Meeting.
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.
21st Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, October Critical Physics Issues for Tokamak Power Plants D J Campbell 1, F De Marco 2, G Giruzzi 3,
C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory For the NSTX National Team DOE Review of NSTX Five-Year Research Program Proposal June 30 – July 2, 2003.
Y. Sakamoto JAEA Japan-US Workshop on Fusion Power Plants and Related Technologies with participations from China and Korea February 26-28, 2013 at Kyoto.
MHD Issues and Control in FIRE C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Workshop on Active Control of MHD Stability Austin, TX 11/3-5/2003.
Prof. F.Troyon“JET: A major scientific contribution...”25th JET Anniversary 20 May 2004 JET: A major scientific contribution to the conception and design.
Advanced Tokamak Plasmas and the Fusion Ignition Research Experiment Charles Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Spring APS, Philadelphia, 4/5/2003.
Analysis and Simulations of the ITER Hybrid Scenario C. Kessel, R. Budny, K. Indireshkumar Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, USA ITPA Topical Group.
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.
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.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.
Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Stan Milora, ORNL Director Virtual Laboratory for Technology 20 th ANS Topical Meeting on the Technology.
Integrated Modeling and Simulations of ITER Burning Plasma Scenarios C. E. Kessel, R. V. Budny, K. Indireshkumar, D. Meade Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory.
Advanced Tokamak Plasmas and Their Control C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Columbia University, 4/4/03.
V. A. Soukhanovskii NSTX Team XP Review 31 January 2006 Princeton, NJ Supported by Office of Science Divertor heat flux reduction and detachment in lower.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.
Discussions and Summary for Session 1 ‘Transport and Confinement in Burning Plasmas’ Yukitoshi MIURA JAERI Naka IEA Large Tokamak Workshop (W60) Burning.
NSTX-U NSTX-U PAC-31 Response to Questions – Day 1 Summary of Answers Q: Maximum pulse length at 1MA, 0.75T, 1 st year parameters? –A1: Full 5 seconds.
ITER Standard H-mode, Hybrid and Steady State WDB Submissions R. Budny, C. Kessel PPPL ITPA Modeling Topical Working Group Session on ITER Simulations.
FIRE Activities with Emphasis on Technology Needs VLT PAC Meeting MIT September 4, 2003 AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT,
Current Drive for FIRE AT-Mode T.K. Mau University of California, San Diego Workshop on Physics Issues for FIRE May 1-3, 2000 Princeton Plasma Physics.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc NSO Collaboration FIRE.
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.
Global Stability Issues for a Next Step Burning Plasma Experiment UFA Burning Plasma Workshop Austin, Texas December 11, 2000 S. C. Jardin with input from.
Fusion Fire Powers the Sun Can we make Fusion Fire on earth? National FIRE Collaboration AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT,
Simulation and Analysis of the Hybrid Operating Mode in ITER C. Kessel, R. Budny, and K. Indireshkumar Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Symposium On.
1 Fusion Fire Powers the Sun Can we make Fusion Fire on earth?
Current holes at ASDEX Upgrade Presented by O. Gruber for D. Merkl, J. Hobirk, P.J. McCarthy, E. Strumberger, ASDEX Upgrade Team - hardware upgrades for.
Compact Stellarator Approach to DEMO J.F. Lyon for the US stellarator community FESAC Subcommittee Aug. 7, 2007.
EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Task Force S1 J.Ongena 19th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Lyon Towards the realization on JET of an.
Fusion Nuclear Science - Pathway Assessment C. Kessel, PPPL ARIES Project Meeting, Bethesda, MD July 29, 2010.
EJD IAEA H-mode WS,, September 28, Overview Introduction — steady-state performance requirements -Global DIII-D and NSTX progress Plasma control.
ITER STEADY-STATE OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS A.R. Polevoi for ITER IT and HT contributors ITER-SS 1.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc NSO Collaboration Implications.
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.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration High-
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc NSO Collaboration Thoughts.
Steady State Discharge Modeling for KSTAR C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory US-Korea Workshop - KSTAR Collaborations, 5/19-20/2004.
Physics Analysis and Flexibility Issues for FIRE NSO PAC-2 Meeting January 17-18, 2001 S. C. Jardin with input from C.Kessel, J.Mandrekas, D.Meade, and.
Approach for a High Performance Fusion Power Source Pathway Dale Meade Fusion Innovation Research and Energy ARIES Team Meeting March 3-4, 2008 UCSD, San.
Confinement & Transport Plan Classical theory of confinement and transport. o Diffusion equation Particle diffusion in a magnetic field.
045-05/rs PERSISTENT SURVEILLANCE FOR PIPELINE PROTECTION AND THREAT INTERDICTION Taming The Physics For Commercial Fusion Power Plants ARIES Team Meeting.
Optimization of a High-  Steady-State Tokamak Burning Plasma Experiment Based on a High-  Steady-State Tokamak Power Plant D. M. Meade, C. Kessel, S.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.
MHD Issues and Control in FIRE C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Workshop on Active Control of MHD Stability Austin, TX 11/3-5/2003.
20th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, 2004 Naka Fusion Research Establishment, Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute Stationary high confinement plasmas.
MCZ MCZ NCSX Mission Acquire the physics data needed to assess the attractiveness of compact stellarators; advance understanding.
1 SIMULATION OF ANOMALOUS PINCH EFFECT ON IMPURITY ACCUMULATION IN ITER.
FIRE Advanced Tokamak Progress C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory NSO PAC 2/27-28/2003, General Atomics 1.0D Operating Space 2.PF Coils 3.Equilibrium/Stability.
Advanced Tokamak Modeling for FIRE C. Kessel, PPPL NSO/PAC Meeting, University of Wisconsin, July 10-11, 2001.
ZHENG Guo-yao, FENG Kai-ming, SHENG Guang-zhao 1) Southwestern Institute of Physics, Chengdu Simulation of plasma parameters for HCSB-DEMO by 1.5D plasma.
1 AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration
4 th General Scientific Assembly of Asia Plasma and Fusion Association (APFA) Hangzhou, China, October , 2003 AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD,
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.
Long Pulse High Performance Plasma Scenario Development for NSTX C. Kessel and S. Kaye - providing TRANSP runs of specific discharges S.
Presentation transcript:

Advanced Tokamak Regimes in the Fusion Ignition Research Experiment (FIRE) 30th Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics St. Petersburg, Russia July 10, 2003 AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc, FIRE Collaboration Dale Meade for the FIRE Collaboration

Topics to be Discussed Vision for Magnetic Fusion Power Plant Conventional Mode Operation in FIRE Advanced Mode Operation in FIRE O-D Systems analysis 1.5-D Tokamak Code Simulation RWM Stabilization Concept Issues Needing R&D Concluding Remarks

High Power Density ~ 6 MW -3 ~10 atm High Power Gain Q ~ n  E T ~ 6x10 21 m -3 skeV P  /P heat = f  ≈ 90% Steady-State ~ 90% Bootstrap ARIES Economic Studies have Defined Requirements for an Attractive Fusion Power Plant Plasma Exhaust P heat /R x ~ 100MW/m Helium Pumping Tritium Retention Plasma Control Fueling Current Drive RWM Stabilization Significant advances (> 10) are needed in each area. In addition, the plasma phenomena are non-linearly coupled.

Reactor studies ARIES and SSTR/CREST have determined requirements for a reactor. ITER would expand region  to  N ≈ 3 and f bs ≈ 50% at moderate magnetic field. FIRE would expand region to  N ≈ 4 and f bs ≈ 80% at reactor-like magnetic field. Existing experiments, KSTAR and JT-SC would expand high  N region at low field. Attractive Reactor Regime is a Big Step From Today

Fusion Ignition Research Experiment (FIRE) R = 2.14 m, a = m B = 10 T, (~ 6.5 T, AT) I p = 7.7 MA, (~ 5 MA, AT) P ICRF = 20 MW P LHCD ≤ 30 MW (Upgrade) P fusion ~ 150 MW Q ≈ 10, (5, AT) Burn time ≈ 20s (2  CR -Hmode) ≈ 40s (< 5  CR -AT) Tokamak Cost = $350M (FY02) Total Project Cost = $1.2B (FY02) 1,400 tonne Mission: to attain, explore, understand and optimize magnetically-confined fusion-dominated plasmas

Characteristics of FIRE 40% scale of ARIES plasma xsection All metal PFCs Actively cooled W divertor Be tile FW, cooled between shots T inventory ~ TFTR LN cooled BeCu/OFHC TF no neutron shield, small a 3,000 full pulses 30,000 2/3 pulses X3 repetition rate since SNMS Site needs comparable to previous DT tokamaks.

FIRE Plasma Regimes Operating Modes Elmy H-Mode Improved H-Mode Reversed Shear AT - OH assisted - “steady-state” (100% NI) H-ModeAT(ss)ARIES-RS/AT R/a B (T) I p (MA) n/n G H(y,2) –  N 1.8≤ f bs,% Burn/  CR steady H-mode facilitated by  x = 0.7,  x = 2, n/n G = 0.7, DN reduction of Elms. AT mode facilitated by strong shaping, close fitting wall and RWM coils.

FIRE Plasma Systems are Similar to ARIES-AT  x = 2.0,  x = 0.7 Double null divertor Very low ripple 0.3% (0.02%) NTM stability: LH current profile modification (  ’) at 10T 180 GHz, B o = 6.6T No ext plasma rotation source Vertical and kink passive stability: tungsten structures in blanket, feedback coils behind shield n=1 RWM feedback control with coils - close coupled 80 (90%) bootstrap current 30 MW LHCD and 5 MW (25 MW capable) ICRF/FW for external current drive/heating Tungsten divertors allow high heat flux Plasma edge and divertor solution: balancing of radiating mantle and radiating divertor, with Ar impurity n/n Greenwald ≈ 0.9, H(y,2) = 1.4 (ARIES-AT) High field side pellet launch allows fueling to core, and  P * /  E = 5 (10) allows sufficiently low dilution

0-D Power/Particle Balance Identifies Operating Space for FIRE - AT Heating/CD Powers –ICRF/FW, ≤ 30 MW –LHCD, ≤30 MW Using CD efficiencies –  (FW)=0.20 A/W-m 2 –  (LH)=0.16 A/W-m 2 P(FW) and P(LH) determined at r/a=0 and r/a=0.75 I(FW)=0.2 MA I(LH)=I p (1-f bs ) Scanning B t, q 95, n(0)/, T(0)/, n/n Gr,  N, f Be, f Ar Q=5 Constraints: –  flattop /  CR determined by VV nuclear heat (4875 MW-s) or TF coil (20s at 10T, 50s at 6.5T) –P(LH) and P(FW) ≤ max installed powers –P(LH) + P(FW) ≤ P aux –Q(first wall) < 1.0 MWm -2 with peaking of 2.0 –P(SOL) - P div (rad) < 28 MW –Q div (rad) < 8 MWm -2 Generate large database and then screen for viable points

FIRE’s Q = 5 AT Operating Space Access to higher  flat /  j decreases at higher  N, higher B t, and higher Q, since  flat is set by VV nuclear heating Access to higher radiated power fractions in the divertor enlarges operating space significantly

FIRE’s AT Operating Space Q = accessible  N = accessible f bs = accessible  flat /  CR = accessible If we can access….. H98(y,2) = P div (rad) = P(SOL) Z eff = n/n Gr = n(0)/ =

“Steady-State” High-  Advanced Tokamak Discharge on FIRE time,(current redistributions)

q Profile is Steady-State During Flattop, t= s ~ 3.2  CR , s i (3)= Profile Overlaid every 5 s

R&D Needed for Advanced Tokamak Burning Plasma Scaling of energy and particle confinement needed for projections of performance and ash accumulation. Benchmark codes using systematic scans versus density, triangularity, etc. Continue RWM experiments to test theory and determine hardware requirements. Determine feasibility of RWM coils in a burning plasma environment. Improve understanding of off-axis LHCD and ECCD including effects of particle trapping, reverse CD lobe on edge bootstrap current and Ohkawa CD. Development of a self-consistent edge-plasma-divertor model for W divertor targets, and incorporation of this model into core transport model. Determine effect of high triangularity and double null on confinement,  -limits, Elms, and disruptions.

FIRE is able to access quasi-stationary burning plasma conditions. In addition, an interesting “steady-state” advanced tokamak mode appears to be feasible on FIRE. There are a number of high leverage physics R&D items to be worked on for operation in the conventional mode and the advanced mode. There needs to be an increased emphasis on physics R&D for aggressive advanced modes. The U.S. Administration has shown an interest in fusion and has approved joining the ITER negotiations. Congress has also shown interest with Authorization bills that support ITER if it goes ahead, and support FIRE if ITER does not go ahead. This is consistent with the consensus in the U.S. fusion community. Concluding Remarks