This title appears in the Scientific Report :
2021
Impact of plasma-wall interaction and exhaust on EU-DEMO design criteria
Impact of plasma-wall interaction and exhaust on EU-DEMO design criteria
Impact of plasma-wall interaction and exhaust on EU-DEMO design criteriaM. Siccinioa,b*, C. Bachmanna,W. Bielc, M. Cavedonb, E. Fableb, G. Federicia, V. Hauerd,I. Ivanova-Stanike, F.Jankyb, R. Kembletona,f,F. Mavigliaa,g, F. Militellof,F. Subbah,S.Varoutisd, C. Vorpahla,daEUROFusion Consortium, Garc...
Saved in:
Personal Name(s): | Siccinio, M. |
---|---|
Bachmann, C. / Biel, W. (Corresponding author) / Cavedon, M. / Fable, E. / Federici, G. / Hauer, V. / Ivanova-Stanik, I. / Janky, F / Kembleton, R. / Maviglia, F. / Militello, F. / Subba, F. / Vorpahl, C. / Varoutis, S. | |
Contributing Institute: |
Plasmaphysik; IEK-4 |
Imprint: |
2021
|
Conference: | 24th International Conference on Plasma Surface Interactions in Controlled Fusion Devices (PSI 2020), virtuell (virtuell), 2021-01-25 - 2021-01-29 |
Document Type: |
Conference Presentation |
Research Program: |
Plasma-Wand-Wechselwirkung |
Publikationsportal JuSER |
Impact of plasma-wall interaction and exhaust on EU-DEMO design criteriaM. Siccinioa,b*, C. Bachmanna,W. Bielc, M. Cavedonb, E. Fableb, G. Federicia, V. Hauerd,I. Ivanova-Stanike, F.Jankyb, R. Kembletona,f,F. Mavigliaa,g, F. Militellof,F. Subbah,S.Varoutisd, C. Vorpahla,daEUROFusion Consortium, Garching bei München, GermanybMax-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, Garching bei München, GermanycForschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, GermanydKarlsruhe Institut für Technologie (KIT), Karlsruhe, GermanyeInstitute of Plasma Physics and Laser Microfusion, Warsaw, PolandfCulham Centre for Fusion Energy, Abingdon, United KingdomgAssociazioneEURATOM-ENEA, Frascati, Rome, ItalyhNEMO Group, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy*Corresponding author: mattia.siccinio@euro-fusion.orgIn the present work,the role ofplasma facing componentsprotectionin driving the EU-DEMO design will be reviewed, focusing on steady-state and, especially, on transients. This work encompasses both the first wall (FW) as well as the divertor. In fact, while the ITER divertor heat removal technology has been adopted, the ITER FW concepthasbeen shown in the past yearsto be inadequate for EU-DEMO. This is dueto the higher foreseenirradiation damage level,which requiresstructural materials(like Eurofer)abletowithstand more than 5 dpa of neutron damage.Thissolution,however,limits the tolerablesteady-state heat flux to ~1 MW/m2, i.e. a factor 3-4 below the ITER specifications.For this reason,poloidally and toroidally discontinuous protection limiters are implementedin EU-DEMO. Their role consists in reducing the heat load on the FW due to charged particles, during steady state and, more importantly, during planned and off-normal plasma transients [1].Concerning the divertor configuration,EU-DEMO currently assumes an ITER-like, lower single null (LSN) divertor[2], with seeded impurities for the dissipationof the power. However, this concepthas been shown by numerous simulations in the past years to bemarginal during steady-state (where a detached divertorisnecessary to maintain the heat flux below the technological limit and to avoid excessive erosion) and unableto withstand some relevant transients, such as largeELMs and accidental loss of detachment. Various concepts, deviating from the ITERdesign, arecurrentlyunder investigation to mitigate such risks,for example in-vessel coilsfor strike point sweeping in case of reattachment, ordivertor configurations otherthanLSN. Key integration issues associated with these alternative configurations will be discussed. In parallel, a considerable effort has been spent on estimating the necessary pumping performanceto exhaust the He generated by the fusion reactions, as well asonevaluatingthe influence of theseededimpurities on thefusion power generation. This latter aspect has beenextensively investigated, for LSN,by means of coupled core/SOL modelling [3,4]. [1] Maviglia F. et al.,submitted to Fusion. Eng. and Design (ISFNT 2019)[2] Federici G. et al.,2019 Nucl. Fusion 59066013[3] Janky F. et al.,2017 Fusion Eng. and Design 123 555[4] ZagórskiR.et al.,2013 Nucl. Fusion 5307303 |