Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byErin Crawford Modified over 9 years ago
1
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 1/15 Prediction of wall fluxes and implications for ITER limiters Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik Arne Kallenbach, ASDEX Upgrade Team
2
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 2/15 Topics of this talk: guidelines on load specifications steady state particle main chamber fluxes from spectroscopy estimates of connected power fluxes and decay lengths contribution due to ELMs (enhancement factor)
3
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 3/15 Current ITER Guidelines (PID V3.0): Only radiation and CX load to first wall, 0.5 MW/m 2 diffusive transport between ELMs blobby transport between ELMs (radial outward convection) ELM SOL transport (like large blobs) - parallel drift towards high-field side - strong recycling around inner X-point additional players in particle transport: transport and drifts lead to parallel heat fluxes in far SOL
4
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 4/15 Main chamber spectroscopy at ASDEX Upgrade Ralph Dux
5
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 5/15 Innner and outer wall plasma-surface interaction in AUG from CII spectroscopy: very sensitive on in-out alignment inner heat shield major recycling region except plasma close to outer limiter lower inner wall flux dominated from inner divertor upper inner wall flux has radial e-folding length ~ 2-3 cm R lim 8 m 2 0.3 m 2
6
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 6/15 How to estimate the stationary power flows on the limiters 1)estimate the total radial ion outflux* 2)estimate the deposited energy per electron-ion pair 3)estimate the effective wetted area or peak load and decay length limiter power flux density average value from different models, be conservative and use upper end *IO calculates in terms of parallel power fluxes and decay lengths
7
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 7/15 AUG edge density profiles from Li-beam H-mode recycling rises Radial SOL particle flux in ITER ansatz with effective D: = D dn/dr D = 3 m 2 /s this value typical for SOL wing in many devices dn/dr = 2 10 19 m -3 / 0.05 m = 1.2 10 21 m -2 s -1 total main chamber ion influx: multiply with 1/3 of plasma surface area F ITER = 680 m 2 1/3 ~ 3 10 23 s -1 1) Total radial ion wall flux in ITER [i] scaling like diffusive transport Transport balloons around outer midplane: conservative, can be larger
8
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 8/15 3.2 10 23 s -1 1)Total radial ion wall flux in ITER [ii] some alternative ways of estimation a)Same flux density as in AUG discharge with high similar f Green, P/R, and absolute density, scaled with area b) Same flux density as in AUG discharge with high similar f Green, P/R 2 and absolute density, scaled with area 16 c) Same flux density as in JET discharge with high similar f Green, P/R 2 and absolute density, scaled with area ( best use 4 MA, 25 MW discharge) ITER: 100 MW/6 m, not possible in AUG, scale P 0.24 [NF 42 (2002) 1184] ITER: 100 MW/36 m 2, 7.5 MW in AUG, AUG # as above AUG 21015/17, 7.5 MW, n e =10 20 m -3, =2 10 22 1/s, dr XP =3 cm 4.4 10 23 s -1 JET 70054, 3.5 MA, 24 MW, 1e20, midplane H 20 72 m 2 main =7.2 10 22 s -1 2.9 10 23 s -1 Over all, 3(1-5) 10 23 s -1 seems reasonable estimate
9
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 9/15 100 eV per e-i pair 1.6 MW 2)Energy per electron ion pair T e in the SOL wing of a high density H-mode discharge is typically 5-10 eV, T i tends to be moderately higher We assume for ITER Te= 10 eV, Ti= 20 eV standard model for sheath power deposition (negl. secondary el. emission) P= e i (2T i + 3T e + E rec ) + e e 2T e 100 e per 1 10 23 part/s
10
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 10/15 ITER quick guess: 18 protruding ribs, height 5 m, 0.05 m wetted width 4.5 m 2 for HFS and LFS each (good alignment required !) 3) effective wetted area and resulting loads The wetted area depends on actual wall design ! wetted width depends on decay length in limiter shadow Of course, the upper X-point region takes more power and must be strengthened 3 10 23 ions/s 4.8 MW charge exchange is expected to increase this number by 10-20 % ELMs contribute to recycling fux by factor 1.5 radiation is expected to contribute < 0.2 MW/m 2 some contrib. by fast ion losses on LFS overall, expected peak loads about 1 MW/m 2 not problematic, but safely 1 MW/m 2 would allow to avoid active cooling
11
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 11/15 ELM contributions to average particle influxes: small for D, C, dominnat for W Outer limiter ELM-cycle averaged, D and C fluxes increased by ~ 1.5 but: 70 % of the W influx due to ELMs (increased yield) R. Dux
12
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 12/15 Decay length depends on connection length to limiters measurements in AUG limiter shadow by H.W. Müller Increasing the number of limiters can reduce the power load. However: the decay length shortens with reduced connection length and more precise alignment will be required
13
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 13/15 ITER expects negligible loads on inner wall - does the existence of a 2nd sep. shield the inner wall ? No ! further investigations needed on inner wall load close DN dRXP= 3 mm
14
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 14/15 Comparison to previous estimate based on JET-AUG Recycling scaling (Tarragona meeting, July 2005) new insight: predominantly HFS recycling multiply with S/4 only: R tot = 10 24 s - 1 (n e,sol = 4.7 10 19) Strong dependence of total recycling on n e,line-av (power 4) If pellets are needed to reach 10 20 m -3 in ITER, this number comes down: If ITER produces n e = 7.5 10 19 by recycling only, R tot = 3 10 23, n e,sol = 2.6 10 19
15
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 15/15 Conclusions Main chamber recycling occurs predominantly on the high field side and on wall structures touching the innermost flux surfaces Effect supposed to be connected to strong drifts towards HFS Strong plasma wall interaction with the inner wall close to DN operation is not understood: fluxes close to the separatrix or ExB drifts around upper X-point ? Expected total particle fluxes 3 2 10 23 part/s, power fluxes ~ 5 MW How will the ITER FW will look like ?
16
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 16/15 ELMs: Simple size scaling and effect to wall materials Size scaling based on empirical findings: natural type-I ELM size ~ 10 % of pedestal energy, 3.5 % of plasma energy ELMs carry 30 % of the power flux simple algebra: P ELM = 0.3 P loss = 0.3 W tot / E = 0.035 f ELM W tot = f ELM W ELM f ELM = 8.6/ E ITER Sc. 1: W tot = 353 MJ, E =3.4 s AUG typ.: 0.8 MJ, 0.1 s f ELM = 2.5 Hz, W ELM = 12 MJ 80 Hz, 28 kJ controlled ELMs: if f ELM is changed, W ELM scales ~ 1/f ELM ITER PID: uncontrolled ELMs f ELM = 1 Hz, W ELM = 15-20 MJ controlled ELMs f ELM = 5 Hz, W ELM = 3-4 MJ o.k.
17
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 17/15 ELMs: Simple size scaling and effect to wall materials Divertor peak power load: ITER PID assumed effective wetted divertor area of 7.5 m 2 ( w= 0.1 m along targets) resulting maximum loads were 2.7 MJ/m 2 (uncontr.), 0.5 MJ/m 2 (contr.) Material properties: melting/ablation limits: Be 20, W 60, CFC 60-70 [MJ m -2 s -0.5 ] example: ELM 1 MJ/m 2, 0.5 ms duration 45 MJ m -2 s -0.5 recent lab exps. (Russian-EU collab.) suggest limit below 0.7 MJ/m 2 both for W and CFC (fatigue, crack formation) reduce peak load by factor 0.5 1556 K 3683 K 3640 K (subl.) the maximum allowed ELM was controlled to 4 MJ latest changes: no ELM power broadening p 5 mm (fact 2/3) in-out asymmetry 2:1 – (fact ¾), recover factor 2 safety margin 0.5 0.25 MJ/m 2 ? maximum “ELM” ~ 1 MJ too pessimistic – ignores large p inner div
18
10th ITPA meeting on SOL & divertor physics, Avila, Spain, Jan 7-10, 2008 Arne Kallenbach 18/15 Open points = possible AUG contributions 1) midplane inter-ELM power width midplane T e decay length scales ~ machine size A. Kallenbach et al., ITPA SOL&Div Topical Group, PSI 2004 expected power width 2/7 Te considerably broader widths observed in divertor (mapped to omp) good topic for future AUG / inter-machine exps (L. Horton) AUG: 1.3 mm omp
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.