UC San Diego
List of Attendees
1. To wrap-up the ARIES-ST study
2. To discuss the advanced physics and technology tasks to be addressed during FY99 3. Briefing on NSTX, FPA meeting, Snowmass meeting and US/Japan workshop in Kyoto.Farrokh Najmabadi started the meeeting by briefing the team on the latest news on the administrative side. He mentioned the on-going socio-economics studies being carried out at the University of Tennessee, PNL and the University of Wisconsin. Following a suggestion by Don Steiner, Farrokh mentioned that we should plan on inviting investigators from these studies to make presentations at a 'Town Meeting' in concert with the next project meeting.
Farrokh outlined the schedule for FE&D articles to
wrap-up the ARIES-ST study:
- papers should be completed and internally reviewed for consistency
by end of February.
- papers should then be sent to Farrokh (text in LaTeX form and
figures as postscript files)
- papers will be sent to publisher in March/April for publication
this summer
Authors should prepare a final presentation in each task area and send to Farrokh or Mark Tillack, together with an html version if possible.
Detailed information from the talks can be obtained from
copies of the individual presentations. Here, some major points are
summarized:
There is an inconsistency between the assumed PF coil
positioning and current and the resulting beta for ARIES-ST. The 60% beta
assumption results in very high current in particular in the divertor area
coils where space is limited. As an action item, Chuck Kessel will run a
few cases to verify whether pulling the other PF coils inside the TF coil
might alleviate this problem. Based on his results the logic behind the
write-up in this area will be developed.
The tasks in this area have been formulated and
presented by Steve Jardin and Chuck Kessel in three general categories:
I. Gain input from the Advanced Tokamak Community regarding ARIES-RS
parameters
II. Refine Advanced Tokamak analysis for ARIES-RS
III. Extend the ARIES analysis with new insights
Detailed of the different subtasks presented and adopted for further study can be found in copies of the presentation.
I. Use of HT SC
Leslie Bromberg presented some new and exciting possibilities in this
area, including a specimen of freshly baked HT SC material and will proceed
with this activity.
II. Ferromagnetism
Ferritic steels are considered as leading structural material
candidates internationally but there is still some discussion regarding
their compatibility with tokamak operation. Their effect can be grouped in
three general categories: plasma interface; engineering interactions; and
diagnostic interactions.
It is proposed to carry out a literature survey and to ascertain whether
potential show stopper(s) exist. A strategy and R&D plan could then be
evolved to address key issues.
III. SiC
It is proposed to initiate a mini study to evaluate the possibility of
a SiC blanket operating at high temperature to maximize the Brayton cycle
efficiency. Curently an ~45% efficiency can be obtained from the Brayton
cycle as confirmed by D. K. Sze's presentation. The possibility of
operating with He at ~900oC would significantly increase the
efficiency and correspondingly decrease the COE.
IV. Reliability
The discussion revolved on how to push the field beyond 'weld-counting'
and better quantify reliability for fusion reactors. Avenues to explore
include looking at the experience in other fields in order to generate
reliability curves both for a family of machines and for a single machine.
The availability histories of the large Tokamak machines when needed to
operate would also help in forging an overall picture.
An effort in this area would help project a more positive view of the potential reliability of fusion reactors. It will also be timely as a Snowmass session on reliability has been planned and will be chaired by Mark. There will be also an IEA meeting on reliability in March.
Laila El-Guebaly agreed to consider preparing a presentation for the next project meeting on 'low-end' neutron source applications, particularly medical therapy neutron and proton sources.
Is it cheap? (COE)
Is it clean? (low activation materials, safety)
Is it real? (credible technology and physics basis, reliability)
To help in obtaining consistent numbers, a question for the Snowmass meeting would be: Can the fusion community arrive at a common way of costing different reactors?
- In general prior to submission to a conference, authors should send abstracts to Farrokh for coordination.
US/Japan workshop: March 24-26, 1999 (list of participants from ARIES to be confirmed)
Project Meeting: May 3-4 in Chicago or Madison
Thursday, January 28
ARIES Project Meeting
January 28-29, 1999
UCSD
479 EBU-II
| 8:30 AM | ||
| Welcome and agenda review | Tillack | |
| Opening remarks | Najmabadi, Dove | |
| . | ||
| 8:45 AM - Session 1. ARIES-ST wrap-up | ||
| 8:45 Boundary shape studies | Kessel | |
| 9:00 Materials issues | Billone | |
| 9:20 Power conversion issues | Sze | |
| 9:40 Final strawman and economic modeling | Miller | |
| . | ||
| 10:00 AM -- coffee break | ||
| . | ||
| 10:30 AM -- Session 2. Community Interactions | ||
| 10:30 Latest progress in the construction of NSTX | Peng | |
| 10:50 FPA meeting summary | Miller | |
| 11:10 Snowmass plans | Najmabadi | |
| 11:40 US/Japan Workshop in Kyoto | Najmabadi | |
| . | ||
| 12:00 Noon -- Lunch | ||
| . | ||
| 1:30 -- Session 3. Discussions on Planning for FY99 | ||
| 1:30 Advanced tokamak physics issues | Jardin | |
| 2:15 Advanced power plant engineering issues | Raffray | |
| 3:00 Use of HT SC in fusion | Bromberg | |
| 3:20 IEA reliability activities | Petti | |
| 3:40 Plans for ARIES neutron source studies | Najmabadi | |
| 4:00 Actinide transmutation using fusion neutrons | Cheng | |
| 4:20 Open discussion | ||
Friday, January 29
| 8:30 -- Closing Session | ||
| . | ||
| Discussions on Planning for FY99, continued (if needed) | ||
| . | ||
| Administrative items | ||
| Meeting, conference call and e-meeting schedule | ||
| Town meetings | ||
| . | ||
| ARIES-ST Final Report, review session | ||
| 1. Status | Najmabadi | |
| 2. Break-out sessions for review | ||
| . | ||
| Adjourn at Noon | ||