Exploring Magnetically Confined Burning Plasmas in the Laboratory AAAS Annual Meeting Ned Sauthoff February 18, 2005 “Yearn to burn” “Burn to learn” Marshall.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

ITER Organization, Cadarache, France

Advertisements

Fusion Power Associates Meeting, 5 December 2012 Slide 1/16 ITER Achieve 500 MW of fusion power. Demonstrate the scientific and technological feasibility.

Report from US ITER Fusion Power Associates December 15, 2011 Ned Sauthoff Project Manager.

Extension of IEA Implementing Agreement on Large Tokamak Facilities Presented to Committee on Energy Research Technologies October 18-19, 2005 Paris, France.

The PPPL Perspective on Ten Year Planning S. Prager Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory.

July 28, 2011 ITER Thomas J. Vanek Senior Policy Advisor Fusion Energy Sciences.

Burning Plasma Bringing a Star to Earth Final Report of the Burning Plasma Assessment Committee John F. Ahearne Sigma Xi, Duke University Raymond Fonck.

FES International Collaboration Program: Vision and Budget Steve Eckstrand International Program Manager Office of Fusion Energy Sciences U.S. Department.

EPICS Collaboration Meeting – Aix-en-Provence June 2010 Page 1 ITER welcomes EPICS WD Klotz ITER int. Organiztion That’s me.

EFDA Fusion Roadmap Status of implementation Francesco Romanelli EFDA Leader.

Physics of fusion power Lecture 14: Anomalous transport / ITER.

Overview of the ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego 8 th International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology Heidelberg, Germany 01–

Steps Toward a Compact Stellarator Reactor Hutch Neilson Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory ARIES Team Meeting October 3, 2002.

U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science Dr. Raymond Orbach February 25, 2003 Briefing for the Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee FY04 Budget.

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.

The shield block is a modular system made up of austenitic steel SS316 LN-IG whose main function is to provide thermal and nuclear shielding of outer components.

ARIES-General Page 1 Summary of Findings of Lehman Committee to Assess ITER Costing L. Waganer The Boeing Company 8-10 January 2003 ARIES Meeting at UCSD.

September 6-7, 2007/ARR 1 Power Management Technical Working Group: Status and Documentation A. René Raffray Mark Tillack University of California, San.

Overview of Advanced Design White Paper Farrokh Najmabadi Virtual Laboratory for Technology Meeting June 23, 1998 OFES Headquarters, Germantown.

Summary Report of the Energy Issues Working Group Organizer: Farrokh Najmabadi Covenors:Jeffrey Freidberg, Wayne Meier, Gerald Navaratil, Bill Nevins,

The main function of the divertor is minimizing the helium and impurity content in the plasma as well as exhausting part of the plasma thermal power. The.

Role of ITER in Fusion Development Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA FPA Annual Meeting September 27-28, 2006 Washington,

The current overall EU policy framework: Europe 2020 strategy, Innovation Union and Energy 2020 Strategy On March 2010, the Commission presented a Communication.

The Burning Plasma Experiment in Magnetic Fusion: What it is and how to do it S. C. Prager University of Wisconsin February, 2004.

School of Energy Engineering and Physics. Professor Reza Amrollahi Biyouki Dean.

ITER International Team 16th ANS Topical Meeting on Fusion Technology

Tokamak GOLEM (for fusion education) Tokamak GOLEM just in operation (plasma in the chamber) major radius R = 0.4 m plasma current < 10 kA toroidal magnetic.

Broader Approach Activities toward Fusion DEMO Reactors IT/E-2 IAEA 21 st Fusion Energy Conference (Chengdu 17 th October, 2006 ) Shinzaburo Matsuda Japan.

HEPAP and P5 Report DIET Federation Roundtable JSPS, Washington, DC; April 29, 2015 Andrew J. Lankford HEPAP Chair University of California, Irvine.

Report of the Burning Plasma Program Advisory Committee S.C. Prager November, 2003.

Partnerships and Broadening Participation Dr. Nathaniel G. Pitts Director, Office of Integrative Activities May 18, 2004 Center.

Kaname Ikeda, October Status of the ITER Project Status of the ITER Project Kaname Ikeda ITER Nominee Director-General October 2006.

Overview of U.S. Preparations for ITER Ned Sauthoff Fusion Power Associates Washington, DC November 19, 2003 Positioning the US to achieve its Burning.

Progress in Confinement & Heating Increasing laser energy nn Confinement Parameter & Temperature.

From ITER to Demo -- Technology Towards Fusion Power Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy Research.

Systems Studies Program Peer Review Meeting Albert L. Opdenaker III DOE Program Manager Holiday Inn Express Germantown, Maryland August 29, 2013.

AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.

Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Stan Milora, ORNL Director Virtual Laboratory for Technology 20 th ANS Topical Meeting on the Technology.

US ITER UFA Meeting APS-DPP Savannah, GA Ned Sauthoff (presented by Dale Meade) November 15, 2004 US In-kind Contributions and Starting Burning Plasma.

Building a low-carbon economy The UK’s innovation challenge 19 th July

AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.

EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 16th TOFE Madison, Sept , EUROPEAN TECHNOLOGICAL EFFORT IN PREPARATION OF ITER CONSTRUCTION ROBERTO.

ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi University of California San Diego ARIES brainstorming meeting UC San Diego April 3-4, 2007 Electronic copy:

U.S. Industry Interests in ITER Presented at the FPA Annual Meeting 19 November 2003 Bob Iotti.

1 1 by Dr. John Parmentola Senior Vice President Energy and Advanced Concepts Presented at the American Security Project Fusion Event June 5, 2012 The.

Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy Raymond L. Orbach Director Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy Presentation to BESAC December 6, 2004.

U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science 20 th Meeting of the IEA Large Tokamak ExCo, May th Meeting of the IEA Poloidal Divertor ExCo, May.

Fusion Fire Powers the Sun Can we make Fusion Fire on earth? National FIRE Collaboration AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT,

Fusion Energy Sciences Program Department of Energy Perspective February 23, E xcellent S cience in S upport of A ttractive.

Report on Developing Industrial Cost Estimates for ITER Systems of Possible Interest to the US For Discussion with FESAC Gaithersburg, MD March 5, 2003.

Programmatic issues to be studied in advance for the DEMO planning Date: February 2013 Place:Uji-campus, Kyoto Univ. Shinzaburo MATSUDA Kyoto Univ.

Charles C. Baker Virtual Laboratory for Technology presented at the U.S. ITER Forum University of Maryland, College Park May 8, 2003 US ITER Technology.

Conceptual Design Requirements for FIRE John A. Schmidt FIRE PVR March 31, 2004.

ITER Project Status Ned Sauthoff Project Manager U.S. ITER Project Office FESAC 7/27/04 “preparing for an efficient start of ITER construction”

Overview of the Physics R&D Roadmap for Innovative Confinement Concepts S. Woodruff 14th July 2005 Presenting at the PSI-Center Kick-Off Meeting.

ITPA12 Diagnostics - PPPL - 3/26-30/07 1 US ITER Project Plans David Johnson Diagnostics Team Leader March 26, 2007 ITPA12 Design Basis US Scope Port Plugs.

US ITER Project Activities Ned Sauthoff, Project Manager U.S. ITER Project Office 16th ANS TOFE 9/16/04 Partnering on ITER for studies of burning plasma.

Robert Aymar’s 75th birthday celebration colloquium at CERN A. Grosman 1/ 25 1 Tore Supra : Physics, Technology… and Strategy André Grosman Institut de.

FIRE Engineering John A. Schmidt NSO PAC Meeting February 27, 2003.

ITER-China Project Huo YuPing PT Leader, ITER-China Chief scientist.

Future Direction of the U.S. Fusion Materials Program Dr. Pete Pappano US Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Fusion Power Associates Annual Meeting.

Department of Energy Office of Science  FY 2007 Request for Office of Science is 14% above FY 2006 Appropriation  FY 2007 Request for HEP is 8% above.

Charles C. Baker Deputy US ITER Planning Officer presented at the Fusion Power Associates Annual Meeting and Symposium Washington, DC November, 2003.

Comments on Fusion Development Strategy for the US S. Prager Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory FPA Symposium.

Fusion: The Energy Source for the XXI Century Mohamed Abdou Distinguished Professor, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department Director, Center for.

US Participation in the

JET Programme in preparation of ITER

National Quantum Initiative

Fusion for Energy & ITER Contribution to EU Added Value

Stage Gate Process Template

Presentation transcript:

Exploring Magnetically Confined Burning Plasmas in the Laboratory AAAS Annual Meeting Ned Sauthoff February 18, 2005 “Yearn to burn” “Burn to learn” Marshall N. Rosenbluth

Roadmap… Promise: Scientific Benefits and Energy Potential Prognosis: Scientific and Technological Readiness Process: Approaches to the Study of Burning Plasmas Prospects: Technical and Organizational Outlooks Promise: Scientific Benefits and Energy Potential

Plasma self-heating D + + T +  4 He ++ (3.5 MeV) + n 0 (14.1 MeV) Key Science Topics of Burning Plasmas: –Self-heating and self- organization –Energetic Particles –Size-scaling 3.5 MeV 14.1 MeV

Roadmap… Promise: Scientific Benefits and Energy Potential Prognosis: Scientific and Technological Readiness Process: Approaches to the Study of Burning Plasmas Prospects: Technical and Organizational Outlooks

Snowmass Summer Study 7/2002 Earlier work FESAC Burning Plasma Panel 9/2001 The path to the US decision on Burning Plasmas and participation in ITER negotiations

Snowmass identified issues and assessed burning plasma experiments Physics-focus now; Integration later FIRE IGNITOR Early sci/tech integration ITER BP contributions to ICCs Physics Experimental Approach and Objectives Technology Argue for scientific and technological benefits of approaches Identify key scientific, technological, and path issues Determine assessment criteria Perform uniform assessments of approaches Assess benefits of a tokamak BPX to ICC path

The overwhelming consensus: burning plasmas are opportunities ripe for exploration and discovery tokamaks are ready to proceed to the burning plasma stage the commonality of physics and technology would allow other toroidal configurations to benefit from a burning tokamak plasma

The Tokamak is Ready for a Burning Plasma Test

Roadmap… Promise: Scientific Benefits and Energy Potential Prognosis: Scientific and Technological Readiness Process: Approaches to the Study of Burning Plasmas Prospects: Technical and Organizational Outlooks

Assessment of contributions of the options IGNITOR, FIRE, and ITER would enable studies of the physics of burning plasma, advance fusion technology, and contribute to the development of fusion energy. The contributions of the three approaches would differ considerably.

The path to the US decision on Burning Plasmas and participation in ITER negotiations Snowmass Summer Study 7/2002 FESAC 2/ /2002 NRC 12/ Earlier work FESAC Burning Plasma Panel 9/2001

NRC: “Burning Plasma: Bringing a Star to Earth” “The United States should participate in ITER. If an international agreement to build ITER is reached, fulfilling the U.S. commitment should be the top priority in a balanced fusion science program.” “The United States should pursue an appropriate level of involvement in ITER, which at a minimum would guarantee access to all data from ITER, the right to propose and carry out experiments, and a role in producing the high-technology components of the facility consistent with the size of the U.S. contribution to the program.”

Snowmass Summer Study 7/2002 FESAC 2/ /2002 NRC 12/ DOE OMB OSTP Earlier work FESAC Burning Plasma Panel 9/2001 DOE/SC Cost Assessment 11/2002 White House 1/2003 Congress The path to the US decision on Burning Plasmas and participation in ITER negotiations

US decision on joining ITER Negotiations (1/30/03 ) “Now is the time to expand our scope and embrace international efforts to realize the promise of fusion energy. Now it is time to take the next step on the way to having fusion deliver electricity to the grid. The President has decided to take that step. Therefore, I am pleased to announce today, that President Bush has decided that the United States will join the international negotiations on ITER.” (Energy Secretary Abraham at PPPL)

International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Mission: To Demonstrate the Scientific and Technological Feasibility of Fusion Energy

ITER integrates science and long-pulse technology for the study of sustained burning plasmas Central Solenoid Toroidal Field Coil Poloidal Field Coil Blanket Module Port Plug Cryostat Divertor Vacuum Vessel

Central Solenoid Model Coil Radius 3.5 m Height 2.8m B max =13 T W = 640 MJ 0.6 T/sec

H. Tsuji et al. /Fusion Engineering and Design 55 (2001) Insert / Outer Module Inner Module Insert Coil 13.6 tons6.6 tons4.2 tons0.8 tons JAEUUSRF Winding Cabling Strand Jacketing Reacting Testing International Fabrication of the Central Solenoid Model Coil

Toroidal Field Model Coil Height 4 m Width 3 m B max =7.8 T I max = 80kA

Vacuum Vessel and Shield/Blanket Modules

Blanket Module HIP Joining Tech Size : 1.6 m x 0.93 m x 0.35 m

Remote Maintenance of Blanket 4 t Blanket Sector Attachment Tolerance ± 0.25 mm

Divertor Cassette

Remote Maintenance of Divertor Cassette

Vacuum Vessel Sector

Heat Flux >15 MW/m 2, CFC/W R&D Activities completed by July REMOTE MAINTENANCE OF DIVERTOR CASSETTE Attachment Tolerance ± 2 mm DIVERTOR CASSETTE 4 t Blanket Sector Attachment Tolerance ± 0.25 mm REMOTE MAINTENANCE OF BLANKET HIP Joining Tech Size : 1.6 m x 0.93 m x 0.35 m BLANKET MODULE Double-Wall, Tolerance ±5 mm VACUUM VESSEL SECTOR Height 4 m Width 3 m B max =7.8 T I max = 80kA TOROIDAL FIELD MODEL COIL CENTRAL SOLENOID MODEL COIL Radius 3.5 m Height 2.8m B max =13 T W = 640 MJ 0.6 T/sec ITER Technology was developed during the EDA

Instrumentation is key to science on ITER

Roadmap… Promise: Scientific Benefits and Energy Potential Prognosis: Scientific and Technological Readiness Process: Approaches to the Study of Burning Plasmas Prospects: Technical and Organizational Outlooks

Allocation of responsibilities for in-kind contributions was achieved 44% of ICRH antenna + all transmission lines, RF-sources, and power supplies Start-up gyrotrons, all transmission lines and power supplies 15% of port-based diagnostic packages 4 of 7 Central Solenoid Modules Steady-state power supplies Cooling for divertor, vacuum vessel, … Baffle (Module 18) pellet injector Tokamak exhaust processing system Roughing pumps, standard components

Site Selection Sequence/Schedule Canada (Clarington) Japan (Rokkasho) France (Cadarache) Spain (Vandellòs) EU site (Cadarache) Nov 26, 2003 withdrew

Scientific and technological work continues Despite the lack of site-decision, technical work continues –completing R&D and design on in-kind contributions –Manufacturing studies and vendor qualification The International Tokamak Physics Activity is identifying and addressing key scientific questions that relate to the performance of burning plasmas –Supporting the design activity –Leading to more effective research on ITER by Improving understanding Discovering new integrated scenarios to exploit understanding Building integrated tools and simulations Developing a strong work-force Integrating international topical teams as precursors for ITER’s research operations

Following the site-decision, innovative arrangements will be needed Procurement systems, including in-kind contributions and change management Resource management, with most funds remaining in the parties Staffing by secondees, direct employees of the international organization, and contracts Engaging the world’s industrial base for roles in management, fabrication, assembly/installation, and operations Engaging the worldwide fusion research community to see ITER as an opportunity Effective distributed project management the integrates the activities of the parties

Conceptual Management Structure Supporting Services Support for Project Management, Computer Network Technical works, etc. ILE Central Team Field Team Council Science and Technology Advisory Committee Management Advisory Committee Director-General (DG) Auditors ILE Staff (professionals + support staff) Domestic Agency Domestic Agency Domestic Agency Contracts for construction phase Host country

The Bottom Line…. Scientific and technological assessments have affirmed –the significance of burning plasma science –the readiness of the tokamak as a vehicle for the study of toroidal magnetically- confined self-heated plasmas. The world fusion community is striving to start the construction to enable burning plasma research. The continuing development of organizational arrangements is challenging and may be useful to other areas of science.