Starlite Conference Call Minutes

27 Sept. 1995

The call-in phone number is 314-232-7776 and the time is 10:30 PDT (11:30 MDT, 12:30 CDT, 13:30 EDT).

Participants:
Sze, Wong, Herring, Bathke, Waganer, Lee, Jardin, Steiner, Miller, Najmabadi, Mau, Tillack, El-Guebaly, Sviatoslavsky

Administrative

PROJECT ACTIVITIES Safety and Licensing - D. Steiner mentioned G. Hofer's report on tritium has been distributed and is awaiting comments. Don and C. Wong reviewed the availability of G. Cadwallader and T. Dunn to do the accidental safety analysis work. They may be available as consultants to do our analyses, but our project will continue to evaluate their availability and our needs. Other necessary safety analysis tasks are being reviewed by the safety group.

Physics - S. Jardin reviewed the results reported from the Physics Conference Call. C. Bathke reported code results from the latest physics including a lower heat flux to the divertor plates. D. Ehst has increased demands on his time and cannot devote the necessary effort to Starlite, thus T.K. Mau will pick up the current drive analyses. The differences between Ehst and Mau CD values have been resolved. T.K. Mau is to incorporate the Figure of Merit approach into his IEEE paper. The size (length) of the divertor is recommended to be 130 cm but B.J. Lee is being asked the feasibility of 60 cm. Tentatively, we are to use 100 cm. There was a length discussion about the ability to calculate the disruption loads for a Demo. We need the design and the analysis and both depend on each other. We also do not have the capability to do the analysis but would like to initiate the capability. A presentation of some existing codes/capabilities will be given at the Oct 26 Engr Group meeting.

In response to R. Miller's question, S. Jardin assured the group that the physics assumptions regarding the Reverse Shear regime is appropriate for Demo. It is a more aggressive and higher preformance set of assumptions than is being postulated for TPX and demonstrated on TFTR. Our data is matched for our plasma configuration. C. Wong was expressing the view that increased wall load would result in an improved plant, but it was emphasized that the physics and the systems code should arrive at the "optimal" solution.

Engineering - D-K Sze reported the results from the engineering subgroup meeting held at ANL on 6 Sept to develop the rationale and selection of the maintenance and structural aspects of the reactor core. D. Lee talked about some of his findings. These involved the placement and size of the PF coils, the intercoil structure and the size of the divertor slot. He has been working with L. Bromberg on the coil cap structure and the intercoil structure. C. Wong and others discussed the divertor slot dimensions and tentatively set the length as 100 cm. The general ITER divertor configuration will be used. The existing DSC code, A=4.5 run, was used to scale the dimensions that are being used.

I. Sviatoslavsky discussed his efforts to define an approach for the vacuum vessel and structure compatible with a rapid maintenance approach. He will present his ideas at the upcoming IEEE Engr Group meeting.

Dai-Kai Sze reviewed the need to establish a reference case for Demo including developing issues, configuration, and systems definition. He mentioned a possible journal article on the Demo blanket configuration. Laila El-Guebaly the impact of changing the dpa ratings for FS and vanadium on the lifetime (no change on blanket and shielding thicknesses).

C. Wong restated that G. Sager will be leaving the project and Ali Mahdavi will be picking up the divertor physics coordination effort. TK Mau noted that he is awaiting the decision on the aspect ratio before proceeding with further current drive definition.

System Studies - C. Bathke completed a new system strawman and posted it on the archive. It uses the lower fluence lifetime limits suggested. He reiterated the need to get engineering inputs by 10 Oct and physics inputs by 16 Oct. There was some discussion about the Low Aspect Ratio code results and the status of the engineering assumptions that went into those results.

Economics - R. Miller noted that he has included new costing methods and data into the economic analysis to better predict both the commercial and the demo plant economics. This will be incorporated in the upcoming IEEE paper.