Movatterモバイル変換

[0]ホーム
URL:

Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
Thehttps:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log inShow account info
Access keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain Navigation
pubmed logo
Advanced Clipboard
User Guide

Full text links

Silverchair Information Systems full text link Silverchair Information Systems Free PMC article
Full text links

Actions

.2019 Mar 25;377(2141):20170440.
doi: 10.1098/rsta.2017.0440.

Compact steady-state tokamak performance dependence on magnet and core physics limits

Affiliations

Compact steady-state tokamak performance dependence on magnet and core physics limits

J E Menard. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci..

Abstract

Compact tokamak fusion reactors using advanced high-temperature superconducting magnets for the toroidal field coils have received considerable recent attention due to the promise of more compact devices and more economical fusion energy development. Facilities with combined fusion nuclear science and Pilot Plant missions to provide both the nuclear environment needed to develop fusion materials and components while also potentially achieving sufficient fusion performance to generate modest net electrical power are considered. The performance of the tokamak fusion system is assessed using a range of core physics and toroidal field magnet performance constraints to better understand which parameters most strongly influence the achievable fusion performance. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Fusion energy using tokamaks: can development be accelerated?'.

Keywords: high temperature superconductors; magnetic fusion; pilot plant; tokamak.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

I declare I have no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
(a) Inboard breeding blanket and shield thickness and outboard breeding blanket thickness versus aspect ratioA, (b) normalized betaβN(A) and double-null plasma boundary elongationκ(A). (Online version in colour.)
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
(a) Fusion gainQDT, (b) fusion powerPfusion and (c) net electrical power forR0 = 3 m HTS ST/AT pilot plants with effective inboard shielding thickness = 0.6 m versus aspect ratioA for different assumptions forβN(A) andκ(A). (Online version in colour.)
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
(a) Maximum toroidal magnetic field at magnet, (b) vacuum toroidal magnetic field at plasma geometric centre versus aspect ratio for various toroidal field coil maximum field and winding pack current density assumptions. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
(a) Fusion gain, (b) engineering gain versus aspect ratio for various toroidal field coil maximum field and winding pack current density assumptions. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
(a) Fusion power, (b) net electric power versus aspect ratio for various toroidal field coil maximum field and winding pack current density assumptions. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
(a) Bootstrap current fraction, (b) toroidal beta and (c) kink safety factor versus aspect ratio for various winding pack current density assumptions at fixed toroidal field coil maximum magnetic field of 19 T. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 7.
Figure 7.
Normalized confinement enhancement factors for (a) ITER 98y2, (b) Petty08, (c) NSTX and (d) hybrid NSTX-Petty08 energy confinement scalings versus aspect ratio for various winding pack current density assumptions at fixed toroidal field coil maximum magnetic field of 19 T. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 8.
Figure 8.
(a) Maximum toroidal magnetic field at magnet, (b) vacuum toroidal magnetic field at plasma geometric centre versus aspect ratio for various toroidal field coil maximum field and winding pack current density assumptions. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 9.
Figure 9.
(a) Fusion gain, (b) engineering gain versus aspect ratio for various toroidal field coil maximum field and winding pack current density assumptions. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 10.
Figure 10.
(a) Flat-top plasma current, (b) ramp-up plasma current for double-swing ohmic heating (OH) solenoid and (c) ramp-up plasma current fraction (relative to flat-top plasma current) for double-swing OH solenoid versus aspect ratio for various toroidal field coil maximum field and winding pack current density assumptions. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 11.
Figure 11.
Normalized confinement enhancement factors for (a) ITER 98y2, (b) Petty08, (c) NSTX and (d) hybrid NSTX-Petty08 energy confinement scalings versus aspect ratio for various toroidal field coil maximum field and winding pack current density assumptions. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 12.
Figure 12.
(a) Fusion gain, (b) engineering gain versus aspect ratio and totalβN scaled relative to the no-wall limitβN(A) from figure 1b forBmax=19 T andJWP = 70 MAm−2. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 13.
Figure 13.
(a) Fusion power, (b) net electric power versus aspect ratio and totalβN scaled relative to the no-wall limitβN(A) from figure 1b forBmax=19 T andJWP = 70 MAm−2. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 14.
Figure 14.
(a) Surface-average power exhaust flux, (b) surface-average neutron wall loading and (c) peak outboard neutron wall loading (all measured at the plasma surface) versus aspect ratio and totalβN scaled relative to the no-wall limitβN(A) from figure 1b forBmax=19 T andJWP = 70 MAm−2. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 15.
Figure 15.
(a) Plasma current, (b) total normalized beta and (c) toroidal beta versus aspect ratio and totalβN scaled relative to the no-wall limitβN(A) from figure 1b forBmax=19 T andJWP = 70 MAm−2. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 16.
Figure 16.
(a) Bootstrap fraction, (b) kink safety factor versus aspect ratio and totalβN scaled relative to the no-wall limitβN(A) from figure 1b forBmax=19 T andJWP = 70 MAm−2. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 17.
Figure 17.
Normalized confinement enhancement factors for (a) ITER 98y2, (b) Petty08 and (c) hybrid NSTX-Petty08 energy confinement scalings versus aspect ratio and totalβN scaled relative to the no-wall limitβN(A) from figure 1b forBmax=19 T andJWP = 70 MAm−2. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 18.
Figure 18.
(a) Confinement multiplier, (b) total normalized beta and (c) fusion gain versus aspect ratio for a range of NSTX-Petty08 confinement model andβN scaling assumptions forBmax=19 T andJWP = 70 MAm−2. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 19.
Figure 19.
(a) Fusion gainQDT, (b) net electrical power versus aspect ratioA for different assumptions forβN(A) andκ(A) atBmax=19 T andJWP = 70 MAm−2. (Online version in colour.)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Peng YKM.et al. 2005. A component test facility based on the spherical tokamak. Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 47, B263–B283. ( 10.1088/0741-3335/47/12B/S20) - DOI
    1. Peng Y.et al. 2009. Remote handling and plasma conditions to enable fusion nuclear science R&D using a component testing facility. Fusion Sci. Technol. 56, 957–964. ( 10.13182/FST09-A9034) - DOI
    1. Voss G.et al. 2008. Conceptual design of a component test facility based on the spherical tokamak. Fusion Eng. Des. 83, 1648–1653. ( 10.1016/j.fusengdes.2008.05.002) - DOI
    1. Kotschenreuther M, Valanju P, Mahajan S, Schneider E. 2009. Fusion-fission transmutation scheme-efficient destruction of nuclear waste. Fusion Eng. Des. 84, 83–88. ( 10.1016/j.fusengdes.2008.11.019) - DOI
    1. Kuteev B.et al. 2011. Steady-state operation in compact tokamaks with copper coils. Nucl. Fusion 51, 073013 ( 10.1088/0029-5515/51/7/073013) - DOI

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
Silverchair Information Systems full text link Silverchair Information Systems Free PMC article
Cite
Send To

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSHPMCBookshelfDisclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

[8]ページ先頭
©2009-2026 Movatter.jp