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.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EU PWI TF- 7th General meeting –Frascati /10/2008 PWI aspects of the FAST (Fusion Advanced Studies Torus) project Presented by G. Maddaluno Outline.
Advertisements

Physics Basis of FIRE Next Step Burning Plasma Experiment Charles Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory U.S.-Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plant.
Introduction to Plasma-Surface Interactions Lecture 6 Divertors.
- 1 - Parameter Selection of Fusion DEMO Plant at JAERI M. Sato, S. Nishio, K. Tobita, K. Shinya 1), and Demo Plant Team Japan Atomic Energy research Institute,
Thermal Load Specifications from ITER C. Kessel ARIES Project Meeting, May 19, 2010 UCSD.
First Wall Heat Loads Mike Ulrickson November 15, 2014.
Who will save the tokamak – Harry Potter, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Shaquille O’Neal or Donald Trump? J. P. Freidberg, F. Mangiarotti, J. Minervini MIT Plasma.
The Reversed Field Pinch: on the path to fusion energy S.C. Prager September, 2006 FPA Symposium.
Conceptual design of a demonstration reactor for electric power generation Y. Asaoka 1), R. Hiwatari 1), K. Okano 1), Y. Ogawa 2), H. Ise 3), Y. Nomoto.
1 G.T. Hoang, 20th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference Euratom Turbulent Particle Transport in Tore Supra G.T. Hoang, J.F. Artaud, C. Bourdelle, X. Garbet and.
Physics of fusion power Lecture 14: Anomalous transport / ITER.
IAEA - FEC2004 // Vilamoura // // EX/4-5 // A. Staebler – 1 – A. Staebler, A.C.C Sips, M. Brambilla, R. Bilato, R. Dux, O. Gruber, J. Hobirk,
Optimization of Stellarator Power Plant Parameters J. F. Lyon, Oak Ridge National Lab. for the ARIES Team Workshop on Fusion Power Plants Tokyo, January.
2010 US-Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plants and Related Advanced Technologies at UCSD CA, US, Feb.23-24, Commissioning scenario including divertor.
Optimization of a Steady-State Tokamak-Based Power Plant Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA IEA Workshop 59 “Shape and.
Progress on Determining Heat Loads on Divertors and First Walls T.K. Mau UC-San Diego ARIES Pathways Project Meeting December 12-13, 2007 Atlanta, Georgia.
US-Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plants and Related Advanced Technologies High Temperature Plasma Center, the University of Tokyo Yuichi OGAWA, Takuya.
IPP Stellarator Reactor perspective T. Andreeva, C.D. Beidler, E. Harmeyer, F. Herrnegger, Yu. Igitkhanov J. Kisslinger, H. Wobig O U T L I N E Helias.
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.
Highlights of ARIES-AT Study Farrokh Najmabadi For the ARIES Team VLT Conference call July 12, 2000 ARIES Web Site:
IAEA 2004 ICRH Experiments on the Spherical Tokamak Globus-M V.K.Gusev 1, F.V.Chernyshev 1, V.V.Dyachenko 1, Yu.V.Petrov 1, N.V.Sakharov 1, O.N.Shcherbinin.
Role of ITER in Fusion Development Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA FPA Annual Meeting September 27-28, 2006 Washington,
Recent Results on Compact Stellarator Reactor Optimization J. F. Lyon, ORNL ARIES Meeting Sept. 3, 2003.
Simple Core-SOL-Divertor Model To Investigate Plasma Operation Space Joint Meeting of US-Japan JIFT Workshop on Theory-Based Modeling and Integrated Simulation.
D. Borba 1 21 st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu China 21 st October 2006 Excitation of Alfvén eigenmodes with sub-Alfvénic neutral beam ions in.
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.
Prof. F.Troyon“JET: A major scientific contribution...”25th JET Anniversary 20 May 2004 JET: A major scientific contribution to the conception and design.
1 ST workshop 2005 Numerical modeling and experimental study of ICR heating in the spherical tokamak Globus-M O.N.Shcherbinin, F.V.Chernyshev, V.V.Dyachenko,
1 Model of filaments in plasma Nobuhiro Nishino Graduate school of Engineering Hiroshima University 3rd IAEA TM and 11th IWS on ST Place: St.Petersburg.
Advanced Tokamak Plasmas and the Fusion Ignition Research Experiment Charles Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Spring APS, Philadelphia, 4/5/2003.
Status and Prospects of Nuclear Fusion Using Magnetic Confinement Hartmut Zohm Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, Garching, Germany Invited Talk given.
1 Modeling of EAST Divertor S. Zhu Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences.
The optimized stellarator as a candidate for a fusion power plant Thomas Klinger C. Beidler, J. Boscary, H.S. Bosch, A. Dinklage, P. Helander, H. Maaßberg.
Integrated Modeling and Simulations of ITER Burning Plasma Scenarios C. E. Kessel, R. V. Budny, K. Indireshkumar, D. Meade Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory.
第16回 若手科学者によるプラズマ研究会 JAEA
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.
Divertor Design Considerations for CFETR
OPERATIONAL SCENARIO of KTM Dokuka V.N., Khayrutdinov R.R. TRINITI, Russia O u t l i n e Goal of the work The DINA code capabilities Formulation of the.
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.
Simulation and Analysis of the Hybrid Operating Mode in ITER C. Kessel, R. Budny, and K. Indireshkumar Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Symposium On.
OPERATIONAL SCENARIO of KTM Dokuka V.N., Khayrutdinov R.R. TRINITI, Russia O u t l i n e Goal of the work The DINA code capabilities Formulation of the.
A Fission-Fusion Hybrid Reactor in Steady-State L-Mode Tokamak Configuration with Natural Uranium Mark Reed FUNFI Varenna, Italy September 13 th, 2011.
HIGH ENERGY DENSITY PHYSICS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS WITH Z PINCHES N. Rostoker, P. Ney, H. U. Rahman, and F. J. Wessel Department of Physics and Astronomy.
Compact Stellarator Approach to DEMO J.F. Lyon for the US stellarator community FESAC Subcommittee Aug. 7, 2007.
O-36, p 1(10) G. Arnoux 18 th PSI, Toledo, 26-30/05/2008 Divertor heat load in ITER-like advanced tokamak scenarios on JET G.Arnoux 1,(3), P.Andrew 1,
ITER STEADY-STATE OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS A.R. Polevoi for ITER IT and HT contributors ITER-SS 1.
Characteristics of Transmutation Reactor Based on LAR Tokamak Neutron Source B.G. Hong Chonbuk National University.
European Fusion Power Plant Conceptual Study - Parameters For Near-term and Advanced Models David Ward Culham Science Centre (Presented by Ian Cook) This.
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.
Work with TSC Yong Guo. Introduction Non-inductive current for NSTX TSC model for EAST Simulation for EAST experiment Voltage second consumption for different.
Improved performance in long-pulse ELMy H-mode plasmas with internal transport barrier in JT-60U N. Oyama, A. Isayama, T. Suzuki, Y. Koide, H. Takenaga,
Integrated Simulation of ELM Energy Loss Determined by Pedestal MHD and SOL Transport N. Hayashi, T. Takizuka, T. Ozeki, N. Aiba, N. Oyama JAEA Naka TH/4-2.
045-05/rs PERSISTENT SURVEILLANCE FOR PIPELINE PROTECTION AND THREAT INTERDICTION Taming The Physics For Commercial Fusion Power Plants ARIES Team Meeting.
1 SIMULATION OF ANOMALOUS PINCH EFFECT ON IMPURITY ACCUMULATION IN ITER.
Advanced Tokamak Modeling for FIRE C. Kessel, PPPL NSO/PAC Meeting, University of Wisconsin, July 10-11, 2001.
1 Nuclear Fusion Class : Nuclear Physics K.-U.Choi.
A.Yu. Chirkov1), S.V. Ryzhkov1), P.A. Bagryansky2), A.V. Anikeev2)
Presented by Yuji NAKAMURA at US-Japan JIFT Workshop “Theory-Based Modeling and Integrated Simulation of Burning Plasmas” and 21COE Workshop “Plasma Theory”
BACKGROUND Design Point Studies for Future Spherical Torus Devices Design Point Studies for Future Spherical Torus Devices C. Neumeyer, C. Kessel, P. Rutherford,
Long Pulse High Performance Plasma Scenario Development for NSTX C. Kessel and S. Kaye - providing TRANSP runs of specific discharges S.
NIMROD Simulations of a DIII-D Plasma Disruption S. Kruger, D. Schnack (SAIC) April 27, 2004 Sherwood Fusion Theory Meeting, Missoula, MT.
Construction and Status of Versatile Experiment Spherical Torus at SNU
Numerical investigation of H-mode threshold power by using LH transition models 8th Meeting of the ITPA Confinement Database & Modeling Topical Group.
Major aims of IPP-NIFS collaboration on divertor physics
The GDT device at the Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics is an experimental facility for studies on the main issues of development of fusion systems based.
Modelling of pulsed and steady-state DEMO scenarios G. Giruzzi et al
ACT-1 design point definition
Beam Ion Performance and Power Loads in the ITER Pre-Fusion Power Operating Scenarios (PFPO) with Reduced Field and Current We have used ASCOT to simulate.
Presentation transcript:

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 transport code PS th International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology Sept. 30-Oct. 5, 2007, Heidelberg, Germany SWIP Abstract The main goals of the paper are aimed at simulating core plasma parameters of HCSB-DEMO (Helium-cooled Solid Breeder, HCSB) by 1.5D plasma transport code. The study content included: the operation scenarios; the temperature and density profiles of the ion and electron; fusion and radiation power; the distribution of current density and safety factor; sensitivity analyses for some of the input parameters and physical models parameters, finally, there is a primary estimate of the load of the divertor’s target. The fusion reactor parameters are as following: a major radius of 7.2m, aspect ratio of 3.4, elongation of 1.85, triangularity of 0.45, plasma current of 14.8MA, normalized beta of 4.4, maximum field of 13T, electron density of 1.5×10 20 /m 3, average electron temperature of 14.5keV, fusion power of 2.55GW and neutron wall loading of 2.3 MW/m 2 1. Introduction It was assumed that DEMO is a next step after ITER machine. Therefore, China DEMO studies are the important aspects of long-term national program to evaluate the technology, materials, economics, safety, environment and waste processing, for the possible magnetic fusion applications. The basic features of DEMO are: 1). Fusion power in a range of 2500~3000 MW with an average neutron wall loading of 2.0~3.0 MW/m 2 ; 2). Long burning time with inductive operation or steady-state operation with reverse shear plasma modes; 3). NBI and RF system for current drive; 4). Detached or semi-detached divertor operation modes; 2. The simulation of plasma Under different plasma limited conditions, the fusion power, neutron wall loading, burn time and fusion gain in the fusion reactor with different sizes are calculated. The reactor which fit our requirements is selected for plasma operation contour analyses. The major radius is 7.2m, aspect ratio of 3.4, elongation of 1.85, triangularity of 0.45, plasma current of 14.8MA. Scaling of thermal energy confinement time used in calculated is ITERH-98P(y,2). In 1.5D transport simulation, the current is flat-up at t=50s, 33 MW of NB heating is used at t=55s, 2MW of RF is used at beginning and increase to 22MW and 41 MW at t=100s and t=120s respectively. Time evolution of plasma and the profile of main plasma parameters are shown from Fig. 1 to Fig Time evolution of plasma Fig. 1 shows time evolution of electron density profile. Fig.2 shows time evolution of average particle temperature. Fig.3 shows time evolution of fusion power and radiate power. 2.2 plasma profile at t=400s Fig. 4 shows electron and ion temperature profile at t=400s. Fig.5 shows electron and ion density profile at t=400s. Fig.6 shows total pressure and alpha pressure profile at t=400s. Fig.7 shows safety factor profile at t=400s. 3. The main plasma parameters The final parameters simulated by the 1.5D transport code for Inductive Operation Scenarios is showed at table 1, total Troyon factor is 4.4, average electron density is 1. 5 χ10 20 ·m -3,average electron temperature is 15.4keV, average ion temperature is 15.8keV, bootstrap fraction is 80%, fusion power is 2550MW, total radiate power in the core is 211MW, about 36%, and 373MW across the separatrix. average neutron wall load is 2.3MW m -2, Fusion gain is Sensitivity analyses As there are some uncertain of some input parameters and the physical model, so after the simulation, it is necessary to do some sensitivity analyses about the uncertain parameters and models to see what influence will be about the fusion power. Fig.8 shows the electron density profile with different pinch factor. Figure.9 shows Fusion power relation with different pinch factor. Figure. 10 shows Fusion power relation with t*/t E. Figure.11 shows Fusion power relation with the fraction of Ar.Figure.12 shows Fusion power relation with different χ i / χ e 5. Divertor heating load As mention above, about 373MW heating power will get across the separatrix. If do not radiate any power in the SOL, those power will damage the divertor target as heating load is over its load limited. If one third of heating power is radiated in the SOL, the inner divertor heating load is about 2.4MW/m 2, the outer divertor heating load is 4.2 MW/m Conclusion As mention above, the plasma parameters selected for HCSB-DEMO can satisfy its design requirement from the fusion power to the divertor heating load. In the sensitivity analyses, it can be found that there is some conservative estimate here. If some of the parameter (such as electron profile) is changed, that will produce more fusion power, so it is easy to make the fusion power over 3000MW. Table.1 main plasma parameters Figure.1 Time evolution of electron density profile Figure.2 Time evolution of average particle temperature Figure.3 Time evolution of fusion power and radiate power Figure.4 Temperature profile at t=400s Figure.5 Density profile at t=400s Figure.6 Pressure profile at t=400s Figure.7 Safety factor profile at t=400s Figure.8 Electron density profile with different pinch factor Figure.9 Fusion power relation with different pinch factor Figure.10 Fusion power relation with t*/t E Figure.11 Fusion power relation with the fraction of Ar Figure.12 Fusion power relation with different χ i / χ e Parameter Major radiusR/m7.2Average ion temperature /keV15.8 Minor radiusa/m2.1TroyonβNβN 4.4 Aspect ratioA3.4H H (IPB98y2)H1.35 Elongationk1.8Current drive powerP aux /MW74 Triangularityδ0.45Fusion powerP fus /MW2550 Plasma currentIpIp 14.8Radiation powerP rad MW211 TF on axisBtBt 6.86Neutron wall loadP n /MW m Safety factorq (95%) 4.6Z eff 1.85 Average ele density /10 20 · m Fusion gainQ35 Average ele temperature /keV15.4