Plasma and Fusion Research

Volume 12, 1405023 (2017)

Regular Articles

Progress of Divertor Study on DEMO Design
Kazuo HOSHINO, Nobuyuki ASAKURA1), Shinsuke TOKUNAGA1), Katsuhiro SHIMIZU, Yuki HOMMA1), Youji SOMEYA1), Hiroyasu UTOH1), Yoshiteru SAKAMOTO1), Kenji TOBITA1) and The Joint Special Design Team for fusion DEMO
National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Naka, Ibaraki 311-0195, Japan
1)
National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Rokkasho, Aomori 223-2189, Japan
(Received 4 July 2016 / Accepted 3 April 2017 / Published 16 May 2017)

Abstract

Recent progress of the physics and engineering design study for the 8 m-sized DEMO is reported. Parametric study for the divertor of the compact DEMO (a machine size ∼ 5.5 m) by using the SONIC code shows that the target heat load less than 10 MW/m2 around the fusion power of ∼1.5 GW and the impurity radiation fraction of more than 80 %. In the 8 m sized DEMO with these parameters, the partial detachment is obtained at the outer divertor, even in the low SOL density, due to the large impurity radiation in the SOL and divertor region. The SONIC simulation shows the peak of the target heat load is 7 MW/m2. However, the peak of the ion temperature at the target is considerably high, which causes significant erosion of the target. The divertor power handling and decrease in the ion temperature have to be proceeded by the scenario development of the divertor plasma operation as well as the core plasma design and the engineering design. In the engineering study side, the tungsten monoblock target with the water cooling and the Cu-alloy cooling tube is designed. The MCNP-5 neutronics analysis shows applicability of the Cu-alloy cooling tube for the divertor unit on the high heat flux region. Also the divertor cassette with a heat removability of peak heat load of 10 MW/m2 is studied. The heat transport analysis shows the maximum temperature of 1021 °C at the tungsten surface and 331 °C at the Cu-alloy pipe, which are acceptable level for mechanical toughness and thermal fatigue.

Keywords

fusion DEMO reactor, divertor, physics design, engineering design

DOI: 10.1585/pfr.12.1405023

Full Text

PDF format (1.0Mbytes) PDF Download

References

  • [1] K. Tobita et al., Nucl. Fusion 47, 892 (2007).
  • [2] K. Tobita et al., Nucl. Fusion 49, 075029 (2009).
  • [3] H. Kawashima et al., Nucl. Fusion 49, 065007 (2009).
  • [4] N. Asakura et al., J. Plasma Fusion Res. SERIES 9, 136 (2010).
  • [5] N. Asakura et al., Nucl. Fusion 53, 123013 (2013).
  • [6] K. Hoshino et al., Contrib. Plasma Phys. 52, 550 (2012).
  • [7] N. Asakura et al., Fusion Sci. Technol. 63, No.1T, 70 (2013).
  • [8] Y. Sakamoto et al., 25th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, FIP/3-4Rb, St Petersburg, Russian Federation, 2014.
  • [9] K. Kawashima et al., Plasma Fusion Res. 1, 031 (2006).
  • [10] K. Shimizu et al., Nucl. Fusion 49, 065028 (2009).
  • [11] K. Hoshino et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 463, 573 (2015).
  • [12] K. Hoshino et al., Contrib. Plasma Phys. 56, 657 (2016).
  • [13] S. Tokunaga et al., the 22th International Conference on Plasma Surface Interactions in Controlled Fusion Devices, P.3.105, Rome, Italy, 2016.
  • [14] K. Hoshino et al., 25th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, FIP/P8-11, St Petersburg, Russian Federation, 2014.
  • [15] H.D. Pacher et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 415, S492 (2011).
  • [16] A.S. Kukushkin et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 438, S203 (2013).
  • [17] K. Hoshino et al., Contrib. Plasma Phys. 54, 404 (2014).
  • [18] S.A. Fabritsiev et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 233-237, 127 (1996).
  • [19] G.M. Kalinin et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 307-311, 668 (2002).