Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Neutronics Analysis on a Compact Tokamak Fusion Reactor CREST Q. HUANG 1,2, S. ZHENG 2, L. Lu 2, R. HIWATARI 3, Y. ASAOKA 3, K. OKANO 3, Y. OGAWA 1 1 High.

Published by Modified over 9 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Neutronics Analysis on a Compact Tokamak Fusion Reactor CREST Q. HUANG 1,2, S. ZHENG 2, L. Lu 2, R. HIWATARI 3, Y. ASAOKA 3, K. OKANO 3, Y. OGAWA 1 1 High."— Presentation transcript:

1 Neutronics Analysis on a Compact Tokamak Fusion Reactor CREST Q. HUANG 1,2, S. ZHENG 2, L. Lu 2, R. HIWATARI 3, Y. ASAOKA 3, K. OKANO 3, Y. OGAWA 1 1 High Temperature Plasma Center, the University of Tokyo, JAPAN 2 Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, CHINA 3 Nuclear Technology Research Laboratory, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI), Tokyo, JAPAN

2 Contents Introduction of CREST Models  2D cylindrical model  3D model (1/14, 1/7) Codes & data libraries Results  TBR & Zr effect of the blanket  Wall loading  DPA on the FW  Nuclear heat in components  Damage to TF coil Conclusions

3 Introduction of CREST

4 CREST: Compact REversed Shear Tokamak Bird’s-eye view of the CREST

5 Basic characteristics of CREST high  plasma high thermal efficiency with water/steam cooled system (ODS-ferritic steel F82H, 350~900K) easy maintenance for high availability full sector removal large TF coils and large horizontal ports (14 in total) tritium self-sufficient (Li 2 ZrO 3 + Be pepple bed blanket) moderate aspect ratio and elongation (similar to ITER advanced mode plasma) competitive cost Zr shell In the high  reversed shear plasma configuration, the conducting wall near the plasma is required to avoid ideal MHD instabilities

6 R(m)5.4 a(m)1.59  2.0  0.5 NN 5.5 B max (T)12.5 P fu (GW)2.97 P net (GW)1.16 P w,aver (MW/m 2 )4.17 P w,max (MW/m 2 )6.30 Heat flux(MW/m 2 )1.2  th 41% Main parameters of CREST

7 Inboard + Outboard blanket (122 zones) CREST NoZoneInbord SideOutbord Side distancethicknessmaterialdistancethicknessmaterial 1Plasma381159void699159void 2SOL37011void71011void 3Structure369.60.4100%F82H710.40.4100%F82H 4Water Channel368.80.830%F82H+70%H2O711.20.830%F82H+70%H2O 5Structure368.50.3100%F82H711.50.3100%F82H 6Mixed Breeding Zone366.91.613.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be713.11.613.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 7Structure366.70.2100%F82H713.30.2100%F82H 8Steam Channel366.20.530%F82H+20%H2O713.80.530%F82H+20%H2O 9Structure3660.2100%F82H7140.2100%F82H 10Mixed Breeding Zone364.21.813.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be715.81.813.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 11Structure3640.2100%F82H7160.2100%F82H 12Steam Channel363.50.530%F82H+20%H2O716.50.530%F82H+20%H2O 13Structure363.30.2100%F82H716.70.2100%F82H 14Mixed Breeding Zone361.3213.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be718.7213.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 15Structure361.10.2100%F82H718.90.2100%F82H 16Steam Channel360.60.530%F82H+20%H2O719.40.530%F82H+20%H2O 17Structure360.40.2100%F82H719.60.2100%F82H 18Mixed Breeding Zone358.22.213.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be721.82.213.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 19Structure3580.2100%F82H7220.2100%F82H 20Steam Channel357.50.530%F82H+20%H2O722.50.530%F82H+20%H2O

8 21Shell356.51100%Zr(4.31E-02)723.51100%Zr(4.31E-02) 22Steam Channel3560.530%F82H+20%H2O7240.530%F82H+20%H2O 23Structure355.80.2100%F82H724.20.2100%F82H 24Mixed Breeding Zone353.22.613.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be726.82.613.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 25Structure3530.2100%F82H7270.2100%F82H 26Steam Channel352.50.530%F82H+20%H2O727.50.530%F82H+20%H2O 27Structure352.30.2100%F82H727.70.2100%F82H 28Mixed Breeding Zone349.52.813.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be730.52.813.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 29Structure349.30.2100%F82H730.70.2100%F82H 30Steam Channel348.80.530%F82H+20%H2O731.20.530%F82H+20%H2O 31Structure348.60.2100%F82H731.40.2100%F82H 32Mixed Breeding Zone345.6313.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be734.4313.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 33Structure345.40.2100%F82H734.60.2100%F82H 34Steam Channel344.70.730%F82H+20%H2O735.30.730%F82H+20%H2O 35Structure344.50.2100%F82H735.50.2100%F82H 36Mixed Breeding Zone341.33.213.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be738.73.213.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 37Structure341.10.2100%F82H738.90.2100%F82H 38Steam Channel340.40.730%F82H+20%H2O739.60.730%F82H+20%H2O 39Structure340.20.2100%F82H739.80.2100%F82H 40Mixed Breeding Zone336.43.813.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be743.63.813.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 41Structure336.20.2100%F82H743.80.2100%F82H 42Steam Channel335.50.730%F82H+20%H2O744.50.730%F82H+20%H2O 43Structure335.30.2100%F82H744.70.2100%F82H 44Mixed Breeding Zone331.14.213.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be748.94.213.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be

9 45Structure330.90.2 100%F82H 749.10.2 100%F82H 46Steam Channel330.10.8 30%F82H+20%H2O 749.90.8 30%F82H+20%H2O 47Structure329.90.2 100%F82H 750.10.2 100%F82H 48Mixed Breeding Zone324.55.4 13.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 755.55.4 13.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 49Structure324.30.2 100%F82H 755.70.2 100%F82H 50Steam Channel323.50.8 30%F82H+20%H2O 756.50.8 30%F82H+20%H2O 51Structure323.30.2 100%F82H 756.70.2 100%F82H 52Mixed Breeding Zone315.97.4 13.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 764.17.4 13.6%LiZrO3+57.6%9Be 53Structure315.70.2 100%F82H 764.30.2 100%F82H 54Steam Channel314.90.8 30%F82H+20%H2O 765.10.8 30%F82H+20%H2O 55Structure314.10.8 100%F82H 765.90.8 100%F82H 56void310.14 void 789.924 void 57Shield254.156 75%F82H+25%H2O 859.970 75%F82H+25%H2O 58void250.14 void 1059.9200 void 59Helium Can240.110 SS (Mo: 1.26e-3; Cr: 1.58e-2; Ni: 9.85e-3; Fe: 5.91e-2) 1069.910 SS (Mo: 1.26e-3; Cr: 1.58e-2; Ni: 9.85e-3; Fe: 5.91e-2) 60SCM160.180 55.2%SS+5.8%NbCd+11.8%Cu+ 6.3% Mo+5.4% Ti+1.9%B4C+ 13.6%4He 1149.980 55.2%SS+5.8%NbCd+11.8%Cu+ 6.3% Mo+5.4% Ti+1.9%B4C+ 13.6%4He 61Helium Can150.110 SS (Mo: 1.26e-3; Cr: 1.58e-2; Ni: 9.85e-3; Fe: 5.91e-2) 1159.910 SS (Mo: 1.26e-3; Cr: 1.58e-2; Ni: 9.85e-3; Fe: 5.91e-2) Thickness of the FW: 1.5cm Thickness of the blanket: 54.4cm Thickness of the inboard shield: 56cm Thickness of the outboard shield: 70cm There are 12 TB zones for i/b and o/b blankets respectively, between them are the steam channels and structures.

10 Radial build of the designed breeding blanket

11 Cross-section of the CREST outboard blanket

12 Codes & data library

13 MCNP/4C FENDL/2 MCAM developed by FDS team in ASIPP, China  to transfer 3D solid geometry into cell cards and surface cards for MCNP input file automatically  to show 3D geometry automatically by inputting the cell cards and surface cards, M cards and/or transforming cards from a input file of MCNP  windows interface

14 Models

15 2D model to consider the effect of the details in the blanket and FW details of the blanket are included as shown in above table 3D models (1/14, 1/7) to analyze the effect of the openings on TBR, TF coils etc FW Blanket (uniformed blanket, no detail regions as 2D calculations) Shield (different thickness for inboard & outboard) TF coil (cross-section: trapezia shape) PF & CS coils NBI port (in option, one of the openings, to consider its effect to neutronics issues ) (no detail design of the divertor, not included in the model) Geometry:

16 2D models uniformed volume source 3D models 5 layers in source description Probability in the 5 cells:  0.038 (cell 1)  0.070 (cell 2)  0.104 (cell 3)  0.296 (cell 4)  0.492 (cell 5) ------------ 1.000 Neutron source:

17 Materials: 2D models details of the blanket are included as shown in above table 3D models (1/14, 1/7) FW 63%F82H + 37%H 2 O (uniformed, there are 3 layers in 2D model) Blanket (50% 6 Li) 14.28%F82H; 10.02%Li 2 ZrO 3 ; 42.45% 9 Be; 2.92%H 2 O; 1.8%Zr (uniformed blanket ) Shield 75%F82H + 25%H 2 O He-can SS (Mo:1.26e-3; Cr:1.58e-2; Ni:9.85e-3; Fe:5.91e-2) SCM SC material (55.2%SS; 5.8%Nb 3 Sn; 11.8%Cu; 6.3%Mo; 5.4%Ti; 1.9%B 4 C; 13.6% 4 He) NBI port wall 75%F82H + 25%H 2 O

18 Detail 2D cylindrical model

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 Results

29 2D-cylinder model Detailed blanket with Zr shell Detailed blanket without Zr shell ContributionTBR% % Inboard blanket0.276 20.7 0.282 20.7 Outboard blanket1.055 79.3 1.078 79.3 6 Li1.321 99.3 1.349 99.2 7 Li0.010 0.7 0.011 0.8 Total TBR1.331.36 TBR:  total TBR = 1.33 for 2D model  Contribution of 6 Li and 7 Li: ~99%; ~1%  Contribution of the i/b and o/b blankets: ~20%; 80%  The effect of Zr shell to TBR is 0.03. Uniformed blanket gives a increasing of ~0.04 to total TBR replaced with tritium breeding material

30

31 1/14 modelUniformed blanket (with NBI) Uniformed blanket (without NBI) ContributionTBR% % inboard0.33326.30.33926.0 outboard0.93473.70.96574.0 6 Li 1.256 99.2 1.293 99.2 7 Li 0.010 0.8 0.010 0.8 Total TBR1.271.30 1/7 modelUniformed blanket (with NBI) ContributionTBR% inboard0.33626.3 outboard0.94273.7 6 Li1.26899.2 7 Li0.0100.8 Total TBR1.28 3D model  TBR = 1.28, 1.27 for 1/14 model, 1/7 model respectively (with NBI)  Reduction of TBR due to the NBI port is 0.03 (in the two models, the reduction of blanket volume due to opening of the NBI port are the same, percentage of the port volume in blanket are 2.8%, 1.4%) Comparing with 2D model:  Contribution of 6 Li and 7 Li: ~99%; ~1%  Contribution of the i/b and o/b blankets: ~25%; 75% (the same as 2D result)  reduction of TBR is ~0.05 (3D(1/7) model to 2D model) opening; uniformed/detail blk

32 DPA & wall loading at the FW

33 DPA/FPY at the FW Inboard FW39.8 Outboard FW51.9 Life time~3yr average DPA/FPY: 38.1 max DPA/FPY at the mid-plane of the FW:

34 Wall loading average Pw: 4.17MW/m 2 Inboard FW4.29 Outboard FW6.30 max wall loading(MW/m 2 ) at the mid-plane:

35 Nuclear Heat Component W/cm 3 (average) MW%error FW 36.64 305.029.310.4% Blanket 8.58 2752.0684.040.3% Shield0.35216.446.616.2% Exhaust duct1.10E-021.190.047.3% PF coils6.56E-062.09E-036.38E-058.3% CS coils3.97E-061.66E-045.07E-069.3% TF coils2.59E-057.10E-032.17E-045.1% He-can of TF coils1.02E-041.86E-025.68E-043.4% Total3274.74 P fusion =2.97GW M=1.38 Nuclear heat in TF coils for ITER is limited to <17KW. the shield gives good protection to TF coils from this point of view.

36 Nuclear Heat in TF coil Cell no. mW/cm 3 error 1 st layer (15cm) 851 1.80 0.09 852 3.07 0.05 853 4.69 0.04 841 3.17 0.02 842 0.67 0.03 843 0.06 0.17 2 nd layer (25cm) 854 0.65 0.08 855 1.06 0.05 856 1.54 0.04 844 0.99 0.02 845 0.23 0.04 846 0.004 0.18 3 rd layer (40cm) 857 0.24 0.14 858 0.27 0.31 859 0.67 0.11 847 0.39 0.03 848 0.10 0.08 849 0.001 0.19

37  max nuclear heat density in TF coil: 4.7mW/cm3  Results in cell 86 (mid-plane cell) are in calculation in order to get the max nuclear heat density at the mid-plane for the TF coil.  Dose rate to insulator  Peak fast neutron fluence

38 Conclusion

39 necessary calculation on analysis on neutronics issues for CREST in 3D model are done max. wall loading(MW/m 2) 4.29(i/b); 6.30(o/b); 4.17(aver.) max DPA/FPY 51.9 (i/b); 39.8(o/b); 38.1(aver.) ~3yr tritium self-surficient (Total TBR >1) energy multiplication M ~1.4 Nuclear heat to TF coils is < ITER’s criteria max nuclear heat density in TF coil: 4.7mW/cm 3

40 TBR: Contribution of 6 Li and 7 Li: ~99%; ~1% Contribution of the i/b and o/b blankets: ~25%; 75% (the same for 2D and 3D results) Reduction of TBR due to the NBI port is 0.03 TBR = 1.27 for 3D 1/7 model reducing of TBR is ~0.05 (comparing the result of 3D(1/7) model with that of 2D model) The effect of Zr shell to TBR is 0.03 in 2D model.

41 results are reasonable consistent with some of 1D ANISN results done before analysis on damage to TF coil due to openings such as NBI port etc are underway

Download ppt "Neutronics Analysis on a Compact Tokamak Fusion Reactor CREST Q. HUANG 1,2, S. ZHENG 2, L. Lu 2, R. HIWATARI 3, Y. ASAOKA 3, K. OKANO 3, Y. OGAWA 1 1 High."

Similar presentations

PPPL ST-FNSF Engineering Design Details Tom Brown TOFE Conference November 10, 2014.

PPPL ST-FNSF Engineering Design Details Tom Brown TOFE Conference November 10, 2014.
SABR REACTOR CORE & TRITIUM BREEDING BLKT W. M. Stacey Georgia Tech September, 2009.

SABR REACTOR CORE & TRITIUM BREEDING BLKT W. M. Stacey Georgia Tech September, 2009.
- 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,

- 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,
First Wall Heat Loads Mike Ulrickson November 15, 2014.

First Wall Heat Loads Mike Ulrickson November 15, 2014.
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.

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.
Scoping Neutronics Analysis in Support of FDF Design Evolution Mohamed Sawan University of Wisconsin-Madison With input from R. Stambaugh, C. Wong, S.

Scoping Neutronics Analysis in Support of FDF Design Evolution Mohamed Sawan University of Wisconsin-Madison With input from R. Stambaugh, C. Wong, S.
PhD studies report: FUSION energy: basic principles, equipment and materials Birutė Bobrovaitė; Supervisor dr. Liudas Pranevičius.

PhD studies report: "FUSION energy: basic principles, equipment and materials" Birutė Bobrovaitė; Supervisor dr. Liudas Pranevičius.
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.

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.
09 FNST meeting Preliminary Neutronics Analysis for IB Shielding Design on FNSF (Standard Aspect Ratio) Haibo Liu Robert Reed Fusion Science and Technology.

09 FNST meeting Preliminary Neutronics Analysis for IB Shielding Design on FNSF (Standard Aspect Ratio) Haibo Liu Robert Reed Fusion Science and Technology.
Introduction condition of a tokamak fusion power plant as an advanced technology in world energy scenario ○ R.Hiwatari, K.Tokimatsu, Y.Asaoka, K.Okano,

Introduction condition of a tokamak fusion power plant as an advanced technology in world energy scenario ○ R.Hiwatari, K.Tokimatsu, Y.Asaoka, K.Okano,
P ROGRESS ON THE O VERALL P OWER C ORE C ONFIGURATION OF THE ARIES-ACT X.R. Wang 1, M. S. Tillack 1, S. Malang 2 1 University of California, San Diego,

P ROGRESS ON THE O VERALL P OWER C ORE C ONFIGURATION OF THE ARIES-ACT X.R. Wang 1, M. S. Tillack 1, S. Malang 2 1 University of California, San Diego,
Progress on the Configuration Design of the Fusion Power Core for the ACT (Draft) X.R. Wang M.S. Tillack S. Malang Sept. 29, 2011.

Progress on the Configuration Design of the Fusion Power Core for the ACT (Draft) X.R. Wang M.S. Tillack S. Malang Sept. 29, 2011.
Views on Neutronics and Activation Issues Facing Liquid-Protected IFE Chambers L. El-Guebaly and the ARIES Team Fusion Technology Institute University.

Views on Neutronics and Activation Issues Facing Liquid-Protected IFE Chambers L. El-Guebaly and the ARIES Team Fusion Technology Institute University.
First Wall Thermal Hydraulics Analysis El-Sayed Mogahed Fusion Technology Institute The University of Wisconsin With input from S. Malang, M. Sawan, I.

First Wall Thermal Hydraulics Analysis El-Sayed Mogahed Fusion Technology Institute The University of Wisconsin With input from S. Malang, M. Sawan, I.
Optimization of Stellarator Power Plant Parameters J. F. Lyon, Oak Ridge National Lab. for the ARIES Team Workshop on Fusion Power Plants Tokyo, January.

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, 2010 1 Commissioning scenario including divertor.

2010 US-Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plants and Related Advanced Technologies at UCSD CA, US, Feb.23-24, Commissioning scenario including divertor.
Development Scenario of Tokamak Reactor for Early Demonstration of Electric Power Generation US/Japan Workshop on Power Plant Studies and Related Advanced.

Development Scenario of Tokamak Reactor for Early Demonstration of Electric Power Generation US/Japan Workshop on Power Plant Studies and Related Advanced.
Poloidal Distribution of ARIES-ACT Neutron Wall Loading L. El-Guebaly, A. Jaber, D. Henderson Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Poloidal Distribution of ARIES-ACT Neutron Wall Loading L. El-Guebaly, A. Jaber, D. Henderson Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Optimization of a Steady-State Tokamak-Based Power Plant Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA IEA Workshop 59 “Shape and.

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

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.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google