Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Safety Issues Related to Flibe/Ferritic Steel Blanket and Vacuum Vessel Placement Brad Merrill.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Japan-US Workshop on Fusion Power Plants and Related Advanced Technologies with participations from China and Korea February 26-28, 2013 at Kyoto University.
Advertisements

PhD studies report: "FUSION energy: basic principles, equipment and materials" Birutė Bobrovaitė; Supervisor dr. Liudas Pranevičius.
Nuclear Physics Year 13 Option 2006 Part 2 – Nuclear Fusion.
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Two Tube Failure Event for the Helium Cooled Blanket Lee Cadwallader and Brad Merrill INEEL Fusion.
Safety and Environment Thrusts - Extension of the Fusion Safety Standard and Design Integration Through Safety Harnessing Fusion Power: ReNeWS HFP Theme.
September 15-16, 2005/ARR 1 Status of ARIES-CS Power Core and Divertor Design and Structural Analysis A. René Raffray University of California, San Diego.
May 22nd & 23rd 2007 Stockholm EUROTRANS: WP 1.5 Task Containment Assessment IP-EUROTRANS DOMAIN 1 Design WP 1.5 Safety Assessment of the Transmutation.
Physics of fusion power Lecture 14: Anomalous transport / ITER.
SOL Vacuum Vessel FS Shield Gap Thickness (cm) FW Gap + Th. Insulator Winding Pack Plasma ≥  ≥ 149 cm | | Coil Case & Insulator Blanket.
FNSF Blanket Testing Mission and Strategy Summary of previous workshops 1 Conclusions Derived Primarily from Previous FNST Workshop, August 12-14, 2008.
1 LOCA/LOFA Analyses for LiPb/FS System Carl Martin, Jake Blanchard Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin - Madison ARIES-CS Project Meeting.
US TBM Meeting INL, August 10-12, 2005 B. J. Merrill and D. A. Petti Fusion Safety Program Safety and Tritium R&D.
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Beryllium-Steam Reaction in Ceramic Blanket Brad Merrill and Lee Cadwallader Fusion Safety Program.
September 3-4, 2003/ARR 1 Initial Assessment of Maintenance Scheme for 2- Field Period Configuration A. R. Raffray X. Wang University of California, San.
The Potential for Graphite Oxidation in Dry Wall ICF Chambers El S. Mogahed, I. N Sviatoslavsky, J. G. Murphy, H. Y. Khater, M. H. Anderson, and G. L.
ARIES Meeting General Atomics, February 25 th, 2005 Brad Merrill, Richard Moore Fusion Safety Program Pressurization Accidents in ARIES-CS.
Page 1 of 14 Reflections on the energy mission and goals of a fusion test reactor ARIES Design Brainstorming Workshop April 2005 M. S. Tillack.
ARIES Meeting April 22-23, 2002 U. Wisconsin, Madison Work performed under the auspices of the U. S. Department of Energy by University of California Lawrence.
Status of safety analysis for HCPB TBM Susana Reyes TBM Project meeting, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA May 10-11, 2006 Work performed under the auspices of the.
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Safety Related Design Issues Brad Merrill, Dave Petti, Lee Cadwallader Fusion Safety Program ARIES.
LOCA/LOFA Analyses for Blanket and Shield Only Regions – LiPb/FS/He System Carl Martin, Jake Blanchard Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin.
Safety Considerations for the EU DCLL DEMO Blanket Dario Carloni 2nd EU-US DCLL Workshop 14-15th November 2014 UCLA.
Oxidation of Graphite Walls: Preliminary Results from SOMBRERO Safety Analysis S. Reyes, J. F. Latkowski Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Laser IFE.
Tritium Safety Issues David Petti March 7, 2001 Tritium Town Meeting Livermore, CA.
Initial Activation Assessment for ARIES Compact Stellarator Power Plant L. El-Guebaly, P. Wilson, D. Paige and the ARIES Team Fusion Technology Institute.
ARIES Meeting University of Wisconsin, June 15 th, 2005 Brad Merrill, 1 Siegfried Malang 2 1 Fusion Safety Program 2 ARIES Consultant Tritium Permeation.
1 Lecture #24 Fusion ENGR 303I. 2 Outline Fusion →Definition →Atoms usually used Previous attempts at fusion Current attempts at fusion →International.
Accident assessment for DCLL DEMO design Susana Reyes TBM Project meeting, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA March 2-4, 2005 Work performed under the auspices of the.
ENERGY SOURCES. TYPES OF SOURCES RENEWABLE: CAN BE REGENERATED IN A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME OR IS BASICALLY UNLIMITED RENEWABLE: CAN BE REGENERATED IN A.
Seminar: Safety in Nuclear Fusion Plants - La Sapienza University (Rome) – 24 April 2015 Design Basis Accidents (DBA) M. T. Porfiri – ENEA UTFUS-TECN (Frascati)
Nuclear Plant Systems ACADs (08-006) Covered Keywords
 A nuclear reactor produces and controls the release of energy from splitting the atoms of certain elements. In a nuclear power reactor, the energy released.
FNSF Maintenance and Research Strategy Siegfried Malang and Mohamed Abdou FNST Meeting held at UCLA, August 3, 2010.
Overview of ARIES ACT-1 Study Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy Research UC San Diego and the.
IDS-NF Mercury System Overview Van Graves IDS-NF 5 th Plenary Meeting April 9, 2010.
R&D for Tritium and Safety Issues in Lead- Lithium Breeders Idaho National Laboratory, June 11 th, 2007 Brad Merrill, 1 Clement Wong 2 1 Fusion Safety.
23.4 Nuclear energy NUCLEARNUCLEAR POWERPOWER Millstone Station.
23.4 Nuclear energy NUCLEARNUCLEAR POWERPOWER Millstone Station.
TBM WG Meeting UCLA, March 2-4, 2005 Brad Merrill/Fusion Safety Program DCLL TBM Safety Update.
Radiological Aspects of ILC Hee-Seock Lee Pohang Accelerator Laboratory 2 nd Workshop of Korean ILC at PAL.
Chapter 12 Nuclear. PG&E Bill PG&E Website PG&E Website PG&E Website PG&E Website.
Nuclear Fusion Katharine Harrison. Why Are We Interested? There are great challenges that are associated with fusion, but there are also very large possible.
Vessel Vacuum Tritium Permeation & PbLi/Water Safety Issues Paul Humrickhouse INL Fusion Safety Program October 13 th -14 th, 2011 ARIES Meeting Gaithersburg,
Neutronics Parameters for Preferred Chamber Configuration with Magnetic Intervention Mohamed Sawan Ed Marriott, Carol Aplin UW Fusion Technology Inst.
LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Workshop: Petten February 2013 IRSN presentation on its document “ Overview of Generation IV (Gen-IV) reactor designs Safety.
Plasma Exhaust Processing Closing the Fuel Cycle 1 C. A. Gentile, 1 C. Priniski, 2 J. Sethian, 1 W. Blanchard, 1 L. Ciebiera, 1 F. Dahlgren, 1 G. Gettelfinger,
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Tritium Release Limits for Fusion Facilities David Petti INEEL Fusion Safety Program APEX/ITER.
Nuclear Thermal Hydraulic System Experiment
Tritium and Safety Issues for Power Plants Lee Cadwallader Fusion Safety Program ARIES Meeting Bethesda, MD April 4-5, 2011.
ITER and Fusion Safety Aspects H.-W. Bartels, ITER Prague, 13.November 2006.
Laser IFE Meeting November 13-14, 2001 Crowne Plaza Hotel, Pleasanton, CA Work performed under the auspices of the U. S. Department of Energy by University.
Magnet for ARIES-CS Magnet protection Cooling of magnet structure L. Bromberg J.H. Schultz MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center ARIES meeting UCSD January.
Characteristics of Transmutation Reactor Based on LAR Tokamak Neutron Source B.G. Hong Chonbuk National University.
Kick off meeting EFDA Task TW6-TSL-002 Garching 9th/10/2006 ENEA Overview of the task and coordination: refined description of the accident sequences,
Overview of the Safety and Tritium Applied Research (STAR) Facility Phil Sharpe Fusion Safety Program Idaho National Laboratory, USA HAPL Program Meeting.
The Neutronics of Heavy Ion Fusion Chambers Jeff Latkowski and Susana Reyes 15 th Heavy Ion Inertial Fusion Symposium Princeton, NJ June 9, 2004 Work performed.
Nuclear Power Plant How A Nuclear Reactor Works.
The mass of the nuclei produced is less than the mass of the original two nuclei The mass deficit is changed into energy We can calculate the energy released.
Nuclear fission Nuclear fission: heavy nuclei split into two smaller parts in order to become more stable proton neutron Kr-90 nucleus U-235 nucleus energy.
Nuclear Power Plant How A Nuclear Reactor Works. Pressurized Water Reactor - Nuclear Power Plant.
ARIES Meeting University of Wisconsin, April 27 th, 2006 Brad Merrill, Richard Moore Fusion Safety Program Update of Pressurization Accidents in ARIES-CS.
MAIN COMPONENTS  INTODUCTION  PRINCIPLE  CONSTRUCTIONAL DETAILS  PROCESS  ADVANTAGES  DISADVANTAGES  CONCLUSION.
MAGNETIC CONFINEMENT FUSION Zack Draper | Physics 485 November 23, 2015.
US Participation in the
MELCOR model development for ARIES Safety Analysis
Nuclear Fusion Katharine Harrison.
KAI ZHANG Nuclear Fusion Power KAI ZHANG Oct
ACT1 LOFA model updates and LOCA analyses
Preliminary Analysis of Loss of Vacuum Events in ARIES-RS
TRL tables: power conversion and lifetime
Presentation transcript:

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Safety Issues Related to Flibe/Ferritic Steel Blanket and Vacuum Vessel Placement Brad Merrill Fusion Safety Program ARIES Project Meeting, ARIES Project Meeting, Wednesday, May 7 th, 2003

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Presentation Outline  Safety requirements  ITER Confinement strategies  ITER Confinement bypass accident scenarios  ARIES Compact Stellarator Bypass Accident Initiators  APEX radioactive inventories  APEX releases during a bypass accident and resulting site boundary doses  APEX waste disposal ratings  Summary

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Safety Requirements  The DOE Fusion Safety Standard enumerates the safety requirements for magnetic fusion facilities, two primary requirements The need for an off-site evacuation plan shall be avoided, which translates into a dose limit of 10 mSv at the site boundary during worst-case accident scenarios (frequency < per year) Wastes, especially high-level radioactive wastes, shall be minimized, implying that all radioactive waste should meet Class C, or low level, radioactive waste burial requirements  To demonstrate that the no-evacuation requirement has been met, accidents that challenge the radiological confinement boundaries (e.g., confinement bypass accidents) must be examined.

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Schematic of ITER Confinement Barriers  Confinement of radioactive inventories by multiple barriers (defense in depth), primary boundary, secondary boundary  Vacuum vessel (VV) is part of primary confinement boundary Radius (m)

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Bypass accident initiators considered by ITER  Plasma Disruption Disruption forces on VV fail a diagnostic duct that leads to a non-nuclear room, plus runaway electrons fail FW  Ex-vessel loss-of-cooling accident (LOCA) Plasma continues to burn and FW fails by melting  Unmitigated Toroidal Field Coil Quench Sensors fail to activate dump resistors Quenched conductor melts by 20 s Internal arcs form depositing ~10 MW per arc 10’s of GJ of energy associated with magnetic field (44 GJ available) resistively dissipates in failed coil before arc leaves the magnet by way of magnet busbars Arc travels along busbars and fails cryostat (hole > 2 m 2 ) Magnet melt is at high pressure(~120 bar) Molten metal jet from the arcs create a hole in VV (~ 1 m 2 )

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory  Unmitigated toroidal field coil quench (cont) (ITER FEAT calculations by N. Mitchell) Bypass accident initiators considered by ITER (cont.)

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory ARIES Compact Stellarator Bypass Accident Initiators  For ITER, the plasma disruption initiated bypass scenario produced the largest off-site dose  ARIES-CS could potentially experience all three scenarios, with plasma disruption replaced by a rapid plasma bootstrap current quench possibly caused by FW failure and Flibe injection into plasma  If field coils are placed inside of the VV, then the unmitigated quench bypass accident will probably become the more severe accident because of multiple barrier failures Magnet arcing/molten melt could fail blankets producing an in-vessel Flibe LOCA Arc traveling along busbars could fail VV where busbars penetrate VV, releasing VV cooling water into plasma chamber and into cryostat Water/Flibe interactions could result in steam vapor explosions and the mobilization of Flibe activation products Busbar arc will eventually fail cryostat leading to a pathway for VV inventories to be released into the magnet power supply room (a non- nuclear room)

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory APEX AFS/Flibe Blanket Radioactive Inventories  Inventories of concern Advanced ferritic steel (AFS) activation products Specific dose varies with time, maximum of 10.6 mSv/kg with Mn-54 at 26 %, Ca-45 at 15%, and at Ti-45 14% Tritium HTO specific dose is 77 mSv/kg Flibe activation products Specific dose mSv/kg with 99% F-18  Mechanisms that can mobilize these inventories AFS activation products by oxidation FW high temperatures in air or water environment Tritium by permeation into vacuum vessel Evaporation of Flibe after a LOCA

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory  Problem is that tritium solubility & diffusivity are low in Flibe and high in AFS  Tritium Inventory AFS primary loop ~ 82 g, with 62 g in blankets. Flibe & helium ~ 1.1 g and 5.5 g, respectively Neutron reactions with beryllium multiplier produces up to 2.1 kg over blanket lifetime  Tritium control & recovery Helium purification systems Cool pipe and pressure boundary walls Aluminum pipes in Brayton cycle coolers Beryllium tritium inventory reduced by bake-out, however tritium release temperature is initially ~850 C but will decrease to ~700 C after a fluence of 1.0 x10 26 n/m 2 APEX Tritium Inventory & Permeation Issues

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory MELCOR FW Temperature during LOCA and LOFA Flibe provides thermal inertia during LOFA and VV natural convection appears to be able to remove decay heat (~3.6 MW max load), and low FW temperatures reduce oxidation Time (d) Temperature (C) LOCA without VV cooling LOCA VV cooling LOFA without VV cooling LOFA with VV cooling

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Dose at Site Boundary from Bypass Accident  Total dose after one week is 0.93 mSv (< 10 mSv no-evacuation plan limit) if release is stacked, must isolate within one week for a ground release  If Be bakeouts are successful, the blanket tritium inventory is 660 g. When this tritium is included with AFS inventories, the dose exceeds 10 mSv in six days for a stacked release, two days for a ground release Mass released to environmentSite boundary dose Time (d) Mass released (kg) Flibe AFS Tritium Time (d) Dose (mSv) Flibe AFS Tritium

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory  AFS can meet Class C limit AFS structure WDR is with Fetter limits, dominated by Tc-99 produced from Mo; reduce Mo content from 0.02% to <0.01% Flibe WDR is with 10CFR61 limits, major contributor is C-14 from neutron reactions with F APEX Waste Disposal Ratings

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Summary  Placing the field coils inside of the VV could lead to a severe bypass accident  APEX worst case bypass accident analysis shows that this low vapor pressure molten salt/low oxidation ferritic steel design has many safety advantages Dose at site boundary is only 0.93 mSv after one week (< 10 mSv limit) for stacked release, facility must be isolated by one week for ground release Ample time to manually operate plant remediation and isolation systems Blanket and coolant will likely meet low level waste burial criterion