ARIES Program
Public Information Site
 
 
 
 

ARIES Documents -- Meetings Archive

ARIES Conference Call, 31 October 2000

Documented by L. Waganer


Participants:
(ANL) Sze
(Boeing) Waganer
(DOE) -
(FPA) -
(GA) Goodin, Petzoldt
(INEEL) Petti
(LANL) Gobby
(LBL) Yu
(LLNL) Latkowski, Meier
(MIT) -
(NRL) Sethian
(PPPL) -
(RPI) Steiner
(TSI) -
(UCSD) Mau, Miller, Najmabadi, Raffray, Tillack
(UW) El-Guebaly, Peterson, Sviatoslavsky

Administrative

The date for the next ARIES meeting will be 5-7 December 2000 at UCSD. The meeting will commence at 1:00 on Tuesday, 5 December and conclude around 11:00 on Thursday, 7 December. Any subgroup meetings can be scheduled for Tuesday morning, if necessary. Allisa Becker will be responsible for the meeting arrangements. Due to the proximity of the next meeting, no conference call is scheduled before the December meeting.

Les Waganer mentioned the final ARIES September meeting minutes have been distributed and are being installed on the ARIES web.

Farrokh Najmabadi informed the group that no official information is available regarding the 2001 Design Studies budget. There was some discussion that the Social Economics group is likely to have a budget increase, but the effect on the ARIES IFE and MFE budgets are unknown. Hopefully, the budget allocations will be resolved shortly.

Farrokh recommended all ARIES-AT authors for the FED papers forward him their recommended titles and list of co-authors. Les Waganer asked if he could add a paper describing the ARIES power core design approach and Farrokh agreed he could.

ARIES-AT Study

Plasma Physics

TK Mau noted that Steve Jardin is reviewing the draft of the Physics Groupís ARIES-AT Physics Assessment paper for the FED Journal.

TK said that he had received four equilibrium cases from Chuck Kessel with a Zeff of 1.9 to determine a more valid current drive efficiency. He has parametrically analyzed these cases to obtain a better modeling algorithm to be sent to Ron Miller for input into the ARIES Systems Code. TK said that the revised algorithm would only be a minor change from the prior version. Ron noted that he now has the capability to do graphics with POPCON inputs.

Systems Assessment

Les Waganer issued a memo to the team affirming the ARIES-AT recommended availability of 87.8% to be used in all baseline results in the final ARIES-AT assessments and documentation. He and Ron Miller said that they would confer on the implementation of this data.

Ron Miller reiterated the receipt of Mau current drive algorithms. He also discussed his plans to parametrically assess the effect of plant availability.

Engineering

Rene Raffray reported that he is working on finalizing two papers on the ARIES-AT subjects he presented at the ANS meeting in Park City, namely blanket development and advance thermal conversion power cycles. These would also form the basis for the FED papers. Les Waganer asked if his papers would also cover the coolant routing and Rene said that it would include coolant routing and other topics. The oral technical presentations were too short to cover all topics contained in the papers.

Dai Kai Sze said that he had sent out an e-mail for comment to the Engineering Group containing data on the production of polonium. Laila El-Guebaly mentioned that Paul Wilson generated data on the production of mercury, polonium, and bismuth in the ARIES-AT lithium-lead coolant.

Mark Tillack asked Les Waganer if he intends to define the reactor building. Les said that he had only defined the radius of the corridor surrounding the power core. Laila El-Guebaly had defined the thickness of this outer wall to be 2.6 meters. Xueren Wang probably should define the remainder of the building as required.

Safety and Environmental Impact

Dave Petti had no safety or environmental impact effort for ARIES-AT to report.

ARIES-IFE Study

Drivers

Simon Yu said that he did not have any new information concerning heavy ion (HI) drivers. Wayne Meier said that he and Grant Logan are working on the cost basis for near term HI drivers. This data would be formatted parametrically for inclusion in the IFE cost code.

Target and Chamber Physics

Bob Peterson relayed that Don Haines has completed a scan of the target chamber response for different wall temperatures and gas densities. He found that the wall temperature was not a significant factor because the latent heat was larger than the sensible heat. The output spectra used in the analysis was the spectra presented at the recent APS meeting. Mohamed Sawan presented some of these results at the Park City ANS conference.

Bob Peterson said that he had received the John Perkinsí output spectra (in paper chart form) to be used in the ARIES-IFE study. Wayne Meyer volunteered to obtain the spectra data in electronic form for Bob.

Chamber Wall Engineering

Rene Raffray told the group that he would ask Mike Billone to conduct a preliminary assessment of the chamber wall armor and structural materials with recommended materials and design guidelines. Rene suggested Mike assess the feasibility of carbon/carbon as a wall material. Rene mentioned both options of flat (planar) and engineered (non-planar or multidimensional) walls. The engineered walls might be designed to better attenuate ions and neutrons within the depth of the wall to help mitigate surface or near-surface thermal stresses. He stressed the need for a cooler first wall to minimize or negate wall erosion. Mark Tillack mentioned porous walls, carbon velvet, and brush tungsten as high heat flux walls. However, several of these approaches increase the surface area and may increase the retention of tritium in the wall.

Chamber Nuclear Analysis

Laila El-Guebaly will provide the volumetric nuclear heating in the FW for the SiC/LiPb blanket option. She discussed the need to scan the FW thickness from 0.5 cm to 2 cm and determine the fraction of heating deposited in the FW. She is also planning to assess the impact of the implantation of the target materials on the activation level of the chamber using the neutron spectrum provided by John Perkins.

Chamber Clearing

No action reported.

Final Optics

Mark Tillack mentioned that TK Mau is supporting Mark in the reflective optic analyses on the grazing incidence mirror multi-layer reflectance. Contamination on the surface can be a problem. Mark inquired if the laser groups know of any ray tracing software package that would be appropriate and useful in this analysis. Mark will also be assessing the swelling of the mirror from both thermal and neutron effects.

Target Fabrication, Injection, and Tracking

Dan Goodin has been working on the target tracking system. He presented his approach at the Park City ANS conference. He reported the design approach was reasonably achievable with no major technical obstacles. Assessment of the target fabrication process including mass production of coatings is proceeding with the fluidized bed experiment being constructed. Tolerances of the target components are a critical factor.

Dan mentioned the experimental and analytical work in modeling of the thin gold layer reflectance has proven to be difficult. He noted test samples are pending analysis. UCSD is supporting Dan on this reflectance analysis.

Pete Gobby said that LANL is working with metal-doped foams for both low-z and high-z materials. Aluminum foam is being fabricated for the indirect target. He also mentioned the concern of high tritium inventory due the current filling process. Permeation of the polymer shells is being investigated along with alternate methods of filling the spheres. At present, it is thought the indirect drive target would need Ĺ kg of tritium whereas the direct drive targets would be around two kilograms.

Safety and Environmental Analysis

Dave Petti discussed the new tritium facility at INEEL after the closure of the LANL facility.

A safety assessment for the ARIES-IFE will be conducted with a tradeoff between the amounts of facility segmentation versus the risk of accidental release. He will concentrate first on the dry wall concept and the nuclear envelope.

System Analysis

Ron Miller has been considering the uncertainty analysis and how to parametrically conduct the analysis. He has been working with Don Steiner on this subject. Don had mentioned that there is a subgroup that is addressing uncertainty and consequence of off-nominal target, laser, and chamber events.

Ron has also been considering the cost benefits of using multiple units of a nominal size co-located at a common site, e.g., the AP600 plants. Les Waganer suggested that Ron also investigate the use of multiple target chambers with common heat transport, thermal conversion, and BOP systems, which would also lower the COE of the combined plants.

Top of the page.