Low-temperature fast-neutron radiation damage studies in superconducting materials

Brown, B.S.; Blewitt, T.H.; Scott, Terrance M.; Klank, A.C.

doi:10.1016/0022-3115(74)90169-x

Cited by 66 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The main focus will, therefore, be on work motivated by the LCT initiative, where copper stabilized NbTi conductors were concerned in most cases. Earlier and/or parallel work on aluminum as a stabilizing material 43,44 will not be discussed, since Cu is the only choice for fusion magnets.…”

Section: Resistivity Changes Of the Copper Stabilizermentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation Effects on Superconducting Fusion Magnet Components

Weber

2011

Int. J. Mod. Phys. E

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nuclear fusion devices based on the magnetic confinement principle heavily rely on the existence and performance of superconducting magnets and have always significantly contributed to advancing superconductor and magnet technology to their limits. In view of the presently ongoing construction of the tokamak device ITER and the stellerator device Wendelstein 7X and their record breaking parameters concerning size, complexity of design, stored energy, amperage, mechanical and magnetic forces, critical current densities and stability requirements, it is deemed timely to review another critical parameter that is practically unique to these devices, namely the radiation response of all magnet components to the lifetime fluence of fast neutrons and gamma rays produced by the fusion reactions of deuterium and tritium. I will review these radiation effects in turn for the currently employed standard "technical" low temperature superconductors NbTi and Nb 3 Sn, the stabilizing material (Cu) as well as the magnet insulation materials and conclude by discussing the potential of high temperature superconducting materials for future generations of fusion devices, such as DEMO.

show abstract

Section: Resistivity Changes Of the Copper Stabilizermentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation Effects on Superconducting Fusion Magnet Components

Weber

2011

Int. J. Mod. Phys. E

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Note that calculations with these potentials demonstrate a stable dumbbell configuration of interstitial atoms along the direction h1 1 0i in both materials [11], which agrees with experiments [18][19][20][21], however it is in contradiction with ab initio results for vanadium [22]. The model crystallites were cubes with a side of 30 nm and contained 2.3 million atoms.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 53%

Structural changes in elastically stressed crystallites under irradiation

Zolnikov

Korchuganov

Крыжевич

et al. 2015

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…all e £ht samples are given below In Table 3 In comparing the values at zero field obtained here to those determined by Klabunde ( Burger et al, 11 Horak and Blewitt, 12 and Brown et al, 13 produce oagnetoresistivlty values for them at 10.00 ± .01 T in the following states: before irradiation, efter the first irradiation, after the first irradiation-anneal cyc2e, and after the fifth irradiation-anneal cycle. These values are tabulated in Table 3.4.4, and they span the full range of values of zero-field resistivity encountered with these samples.…”

Section: Pre-irradlation Values Of the Resistivity As A Function Of Fmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…no studies available of magnetoresiBtance following neutron Irradiation. There were, however, the extensive magnetoresistance measurements of Pickett17 and a large body of data[10][11][12][13] from reactor Irradiations at 4-15 K. The various data available from reactor Irradiations gave values of the change of resistivity at zero field per displacement per atom (dpa} vhlch differed from each other by BE much as a factor of 2. Although codes for calculating neutron-induced displace ments were highly developed end the dpa calculations were probably accurate to within ±25%, the neutron spectra in most facilities were seriously In error as a result of flux and spectrum determinations based on much older neutron cross-section data.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%