Fusion engineering device design description

Flanagan, C.A.; Steiner, D.; Ge, Smith

doi:10.2172/5257254

Cited by 18 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The plasma current used for these calculations is 6.1 MA and the magnetic field necessary to obtain the 5% 0 C is 3.51 T. Thus the plasma current and magnetic field are not consistent with ETF parameters [11]. However, we note that our plasma current and magnetic field are consistent with the recent FED upgraded parameters [12].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Beta limits for ETF

Helton¹,

Miller²

1982

Nucl. Fusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ETF (Engineering Test Facility) one-dimensional transport simulations indicate that a volume-average beta of 4% is required for ignition. It is therefore important that theoretical beta limits, determined by requiring equilibria to be stable to all ideal modes, exceed 4%. This paper documents an ideal MHD analysis wherein it is shown that, with appropriate plasma cross-sectional shape and current profile optimization, operation near 5% is possible. The critical beta value, however, depends on the functional form used for ff′, which suggests that higher critical betas could be achieved by directly optimizing the safety factor profile.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Beta limits for ETF

Helton¹,

Miller²

1982

Nucl. Fusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, we estimate costs on two different bases. If we consider current material costs and fabrication techniques [24] we find fairly expensive magnet costs; including wire and cable mechanlcal fatigue at large N a . We recall that hybrid burn cycle reduces the vertical field Bg F to about one-half the full field value, so stress variations are only approximately three-fourths of the variation experienced with the conventional OH cycle.…”

Section: Ohtnlc Heating Coilmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of pulsed and steady-state tokamak reactor burn cycles

Ehst¹,

Brooks²,

Cha³

et al. 1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thii report wu prepared ai an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United Stitet Government. Neither the United Statec Government flor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makei any warranty, expreu or implied, or auumei any legal liability or reiponsi-bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents thiil its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer-ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom-mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. 10 Fusion burn goals to equate cyclic and radiation life of first wall; sputtering is negligible. 25 11 Complete OHC winding cost ($1983) and approximate flux versus cyclic life; B 0H = 10.0 T, R o -8.0 m, 316 LN structure 29 12 EFC winding cost ($1983) versus cyclic life for full field swing (OH burn cycle) and half field swing (hybrid burn cycle); 8-m reactor, 316 LN structure. 30 13 Fracture mechanics limited stress, 316 LN (annealed) at 293°K 33 14 Structure cost for TFC vacuum cases and shear panels. 35 15 Volumetric average temperature response: 30-s dwell 38 16 RF capital cost modeling and data 41 17 Power supply system for a conventional OH cycle. 43 IS Energy transfer system cost for a conventional OH double-swing cycle as a function of cycle parameters for a water thermal storage system. 46 iv A COMPARATIVE STOUT OF PULSED AMD

show abstract

“…Options for the limiter configuration and location in a toroidal device have been extensively evaluated in past studies [1,2]. The advantages of the location shown are that it minimizes space required in the outboard wall for limiter removal and it permits the blade to be located in a region where the magnetic flux surfaces are spread out (relative to the mxdplane location), resulting in larger e-fold distances for particle and heat fluxes« A flat limiter surface with a single leading edge was selected for DCT-8 because it allows the fraction of particles pumped to be adjusted by moving the plasma inboard and outboard.…”

Section: Design Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

DCT-8 pumped limiter design considerations

Fuller

Cramer

Haines

1984

Journal of Nuclear Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disruption erosion drives the life of the DCT-8 pumped limiter. This result came from an evaluation of beryllium (Be), beryllium oxide (BeO), and silicon carbide (SiC) as candidate surface tile materials. Beryllium oxide was selected as the reference tile material because it has the longest life: 13 full power hours (2300 burns @ 20 s/burn) or 2.3 years of DCT-8 operaiton. The fabricability of any of the candidate materials and the ability to survive thermal shock conditions and electromagnetic loads imposed by disruptions are serious concerns. The most desirable materials from an engineering standpoint (graphite and high-Z, e.g., tantalum) were eliminated due to physics considerations.

show abstract

Fusion engineering device design description

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

Beta limits for ETF

Beta limits for ETF

Comparative study of pulsed and steady-state tokamak reactor burn cycles

DCT-8 pumped limiter design considerations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About