F. Romanelli, D. Borba , G. Federici , L. Horton ,

F. Romanelli 14.4.2011 1

The role of EFDA activities in the European Fusion Roadmap

Input to the CCE-Fu Workshop on European fusion roadmap for FP8 and beyond

April 13-15 IPP Garching

F. Romanelli, D. Borba, G. Federici, L. Horton,


Which criteria for the roadmap?• Maintain the goal of the shortest path to DEMO

– Q=10 on ITER achieved by 2027– Ready to start DEMO construction by 2030– ITER Phase 2 (TBM test) physics basis ready at Q=10 milestone.– IFMIF test available by 2030 (at least at 40dpa level)

• Maintain a success-oriented approach but consider the risks in the roadmap and the risk mitigation strategies– What if Be retention or W accumulation on JET is too high?

• A full-W wall on ITER? Reconsider Carbon for the first DT Campaign?– What if IFMIF EVEDA is not successful?

• Test materials on DEMO? Rely on material modelling and existing sources? Impact on DEMO licensing? Role of CTF?

– What if physics R&D do not allow operation above Greenwald in tokamaks?• Develop high-field superconductors?


Consequences of the assumptions• Q=10 on ITER achieved by 2027

– All the ITER top risks properly mitigated (see below)

• Ready to start DEMO construction by 2030– CDA + EDA 13y (ITER 1988-2001) + 3y decision/site selection

• We must start now (including 3y pre-conceptual )!• DEMO EDA with the competence available at the end of ITER construction

– IFMIF EVEDA completed by 2016, 10years construction and commissioning + 3 years for first irradiation data (40dpa)

• IFMIF construction must start during FP8 (but peak cost in FP8+2/FP9). • Resources depend on organizational framework (150M€/y EU alone, ~60M€/y

EU as host (+15M€/y EU host country), ~ 30M€/y EU non host)

• ITER Phase 2 physics basis ready at Q=10 milestone– Long pulse scenario developed on the satellites in parallel to ITER

(satellites ready at the start of ITER operation)


Consequences of the assumptions• Questions for this Workshop

– Do we have a proper mitigation strategy of the top ITER risks? How do we ensure a full scientific return of Europe out of the investment made in ITER?

– Is our approach to DEMO design adequate? What is the best way to ensure industrial participation?

– Are we taking all the necessary steps to form the consensus on IFMIF among our international partners? Do we have a risk mitigation strategy in case we cannot construct IFMIF?

– Are we envisaging an adequate set of satellite experiments to prepare the physics basis of ITER Phase 2 and DEMO?

• In the following we discuss the potential contribution of EFDA activities to objectives of the roadmap


2.Secure ITER operation• Top risks (as from the ITER research plan) for the development

of robust regimes of operation– Disruption mitigation has limited effectiveness– H-mode threshold at the high range– ELM mitigation of limited effectiveness– Vertical stability control limited by excessive noise– Lack of reliable high-power heating during non-active phase– Acceptable divertor performance with W plasma facing components difficult to

establish– Level of TF ripple degrades plasma performance– Lack of plasma rotation degrades plasma performance– High level of T-retention requires frequent T-removal– Incompatibility of core plasma requirements for Q=10 with radiative divertor

operations– Inabilities to achieve densities near Greenwald value for Q=10– Inadequate particle control to retain high-Q scenarios

JET has a leading role in mitigating many of these risks thanks to the ITER-like wall, tritium capability, heating enhancements,

proximity to ITER (see ITER input to the JET Panel)


2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Launched Proposed

ConstructionITER

Phase 1

Construction

JET

JT60SA

Reference Scenario (2011-2015)

Under further discussion

Operation

SD SDSD Ph2

SD = Shut down

Ph2SD

Commissioning In Hydrogen

Ph3 DT

ITER-like wall exploitation and DT Campaign

Phase 1: full characterization of the ITER-like wallPhase 2: expansion of the ITER regime of operationPhase 3: DT experiment

Commissioning and Joint experiments

Strategy is success oriented. What if problems are found?

Test of full-W wall on AUG enough? Need a test on JET?


2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Launched Proposed

ConstructionITER

Phase 1

Construction

JET

JT60SA

Alternative Scenario (2011-2018/20)

Ph3 DT

Operation

SD SDSD Ph2

SD = Shut down

Ph2SD ITER preparation with tritium plasmas

Start of Enhancement ProjectsECRH

Two further enhancements have been studied:Electron Cyclotron Heating System (ECRH)Resonant Magnetic Perturbation (RMP) coils


Interleaved deuterium, full tritium, trace tritium and high neutron yield DT Campaigns


ITER preparation with all the control tools foreseen in ITER



2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Launched Proposed

ConstructionITER

Phase 1

Construction

JET

JT60SA

Alternative Scenario (2011-2018/20)

Ph3 DT

Operation

SD SD *SD Ph2

SD = Shut down

Ph2SD

* Exact duration to be quantified

Ph3 DTITER preparation with tritium plasmas

Start of Enhancement Projects RMP


Interleaved deuterium, full tritium, trace tritium and high neutron yield DT Campaigns


Two further enhancements have been studied:Electron Cyclotron Heating System (ECRH)Resonant Magnetic Perturbation (RMP) coils

ITER preparation with all the control tools foreseen in ITER


JET exploitation beyond 2015The main input from a JET/JT60-class device for a decision on

the H&CD upgrades on ITER, to be taken in the early 20s.Early development of the ITER Phase 2/DEMO physics in

preparation of JT60 SA and other satellites.To avoid excessive delay of DT phase a decision on possible

upgrades has to be taken soon!


2. Secure ITER operation - EFDA• Important risk-mitigation activities especially in the area of

basic understanding carried out by other EU devices – Material migration, mixed material formation– MHD instability control– Fuel retention and removal– Plasma rotation– Core electron transport an multi-scale physics– ELM mitigation/suppression– Disruption prediction, avoidance, mitigation and consequences.– Pedestal and H-mode physics– Fast particles– Particle transport, fuelling and inner fuel cycle modelling

Part of these activities supported under the EFDA ITER Physics programme

More focus around specific research projects starting from 2012


2. Secure ITER operation - EFDA• Modelling

– ITM tools progressing towards the delivery of whole device modelling capability including comprehensive core-edge coupling and first principles elements.

– Large amount of resources in principle available in the Associations

– Time to further strengthen EU effort and to ensure continuity and committment.

– Strong role of experimental validation and especially of JET data analysis.


2. Secure ITER operation - EFDA• Satellite preparation

– JT60 SA full exploitation in parallel with ITER operations• Will mostly impact on ITER Phase 2 and DEMO• Need a progressive preparation and the development of a sense of

ownership by the EU scientists• Limited resources in FP8 (besides BA) for exploitation preparation.

– EU Satellite. • Considered as serious possibility by several Associations but needs a clear

shared mission (especially in the presence of JT60 SA, EAST and KSTAR, in addition to ITER)

• Will impact on ITER Phase 2 and DEMO• Needs to fill a gap (see later how EFDA is addressing this)• Investments need to be started in FP8.


Associates participation in Experiments

JET is the only fusion machine to have such a diverse contribution from different Institutions (350 scientists

from EFDA Associates and 150 International Collaborators).

To integrate the various contributions into a coherent

programme is prototypical to ITER exploitation.

Large contribution from the smaller Associations without an internal experiment.

Campaigns

3. Prepare generation ITER - EFDA


3. Prepare generation ITER - EFDA• Cultivate Leaders of the ITER programme

– JET is the leading device during the ITER construction phase. Use of JET put EU in a privileged position.

• Machine operators and analysts– JET unique environment to prepare initial ITER operators.– Training of engineers/operators on specific plants.– Training on enhancements (QA, Remote Handling, etc.) – Possible contributions from International Collaborators on the basis of the use of

JET as training facility?

• Training of students– The amount of students in the programme is going to be at a level of 134 PhD/y,

158 Master/y. Original EFDA GOT goal was 40 PhD/Post-doc per year and 10 Post-doc fellowship (~40% of PhD).


4. Lay the foundation for DEMO• DEMO physics questions.

– DEMO physics is strongly interlinked to ITER Phase 2 physics on scenario development issues

• Present basis for long-pulse Advanced Tokamak (AT) regimes insufficient (e.g. no confinement scaling law available). Reproducible high density, high radiation, high confinement operation still to be developed.

• AT regimes need a large number of control tools with severe limitations on the diagnostic capability. Specific R&D and integrated tests are necessary. LH system for ITER awaits test of a PAM launcher on an ELMy tokamak.

AUG JET

ITER

AUGAUG JETJET

ITER

Not for AT regimes

AT scenario qualification likely to require data from several machines of different size (similarly to H-mode

qualification) provided appropriate control tools are installed (in addition to proper magnetic configuration)


4. Lay the foundation for DEMO - EFDA• JT60 SA

– Crucial for AT qualification. EU should make the best use of it!

• JET– Limited pulse duration at the highest performance but ITER

relevant wall materials and DT capability. – Only machine of its class available until JT60 SA starts. May

provide relevant input for the ITER H&CD upgrade.– Needs substantial enhancements (that have to be decided soon)

and extension beyond 2015.


4. Lay the foundation for DEMO - EFDA• DEMO design

– Phase 0 (Pre-conceptual) 2011-2013• System code / physics input assessment• Explore different design options (e.g. pulsed/steady state)• Broad review of the R&D needs following DEMO WG recommendations.• Definition of the strategy on divertor R&D• Assessment of engineering material data base.

– Phase 1 (Conceptual) (2014-2019)• Design concept selection• Launch of selected R&D activities in technologies and materials• DEMO conceptual design finalization• NET 1983-1992 30M€/y design and R&D Industry + Associations

– Phase 2 (Engineering) (2020 onwards)• Engineering Design and prototype construction using the expertise of the

ITER construction (professional staff and industry)


• Interplay between plasma regimes and wall (divertor) components probably the main gap to DEMO involving both physics and technology.• E.g. Model D reactor, same size of ITER but 5x fusion power has

50MW/m2 on the divertor @ same radiated fraction!

• Three possible strategies• Conventional PFCs. Need reduced heat loads on DEMO achievable

only via highly radiative regimes. Model-A DEMO.• Advanced PFCs (e.g. liquid metals). Need test on a dedicated device in

advance of a test on ITER (and probably specific experiments in medium size tokamaks).

• Innovative divertor geometries.

4. Lay the foundation for DEMO - EFDA

Can we test these strategies in one device operating as EU satellite? Do we need separate devices?


4. Lay the foundation for DEMO• Interaction with industry

– For DEMO significant engineering developments are necessary where industry must be involved from the very beginning. This will require appropriate contractual mechanisms.

– Early early involvement of industry with its culture of ‘design for buildabilty, operability, reliability and maintainability’, as complement to the expertise of the Associations.

– Assistance by industry is required in system integration, technology developments and technology transfer in some specific areas (e.g., RH, HTS, etc.). Opportunities for innovation.

– In the near term (2011-12) Industry (FIIF) asked to provide support in particular to advise on the maturity of selected Engineering solutions for DEMO.


4. Lay the foundation for DEMO• Stellarator potential as a reactor

– Exploitation of W7X should be a priority in the programme (inside or outside EFDA)

– Possible risk mitigation strategy for DEMO– Promising long-term solution for a reactor

• No disruptions• Intrinsically steady state• No Greenwald limit


Towards a roadmap• Programme needs goal orientation (in EFDA) but also broad scientific/technological

basis (in the CoA) to put forward innovative ideas.• Exploit fully JET for ITER risk mitigation and training of the ITER team. Maintain

sufficient flexibility to cope with adverse R&D results.• Strengthen EU coordinated effort in modelling and ensure continuity and

committment.• Prepare EU scientists to a full use of JT60 SA (limited resources needed in FP8

besides BA). Launch a coordinated effort for qualification of AT regimes (involving JET-class and smaller tokamaks) to be achieved by 2027.

• Complete the DEMO pre-conceptual design activity in FP7+2. Launch the conceptual design activity in FP8 with adequate resources in selected R&D activities.

• Assess the feasibility of a facility for the test of integrated plasma-wall solutions.• Prepare the political ground for construction of IFMIF as an international project

and a back-up strategy in case IFMIF is not built (e.g. DEMO test, CTF, modelling).• Ensure the exploitation of W7X and assess the reactor perspective of stellarators


Tentative Resources2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

JET 55 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 0

ITER P. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

JT60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10?

3PT 2 2 5 10 20 20 30 30 30

Train. 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

Others 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Mob. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

IFMIF 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 30 30

CoA 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Total 130 135 138 143 153 153 193 193 143

2011 valueJET = EC + Joint fund no EP3, no refurbishments, 0.8£/€, flat cost after 2015

F. Romanelli, D. Borba , G. Federici , L. Horton ,

Documents

Transcript of F. Romanelli, D. Borba , G. Federici , L. Horton ,