journal article·2015-08Open access

ELM induced tungsten melting and its impact on tokamak operation

J.W. Coenen, G. Arnoux, B. Bazylev, G.F. Matthews, S. Jachmich, I. Balboa, M. Clever, R. Dejarnac, I. Coffey, Y. Corre, S. Devaux, L. Frassinetti, E. Gauthier, J. Horacek, M. Knaup, M. Komm, K. Krieger, S. Marsen, A. Meigs, Ph. Mertens, R.A. Pitts, T. Puetterich, M. Rack, M. Stamp, G. Sergienko, P. Tamain, V. Thompson

Abstract

In JET-ILW dedicated melt exposures were performed using a sequence of 3MA/2.9T H-Mode JET pulses with an input power of P IN = 23 MW, a stored energy of ∼6 MJ and regular type I ELMs at Δ W ELM = 0.3 MJ and f ELM ∼ 30 Hz. In order to assess the risk of starting ITER operations with a full W divertor, one of the task was to measure the consequences of W transients melting due to ELMs. JET is the only tokamak able to produce transients/ ELMs large enough (>300 kJ per ELM) to facilitate melting of tungsten. Such ELMs are comparable to mitigated ELMs expected in ITER. By moving the outer strike point (OSP) onto a dedicated leading edge the base temperature was raised within ∼1 s to allow transient ELM-driven melting during the subsequent 0.5 s. Almost 1 mm (∼6 mm 3) of W was moved by ∼ 150 ELMs within 5 subsequent discharges. Significant material losses in terms of ejections into the plasma were not observed. There is indirect evidence that some small droplets ( ∼ 80 μ m ) were ejected. The impact on the main plasma parameters is minor and no disruptions occurred. The W-melt gradually moved along the lamella edge towards the high field side, driven by j × B forces. The evaporation rate determined is 100 times less than expected from steady state melting and thus only consistent with transient melting during individual ELMs. IR data, spectroscopy, as well as melt modeling point to transient melting. Although the type of damage studied in these JET experiments is unlikely to be experienced in ITER, the results do strongly support the design strategy to avoid exposed edges in the ITER divertor. The JET experiments required a surface at normal incidence and considerable pre-heating to produce tungsten melting. They provide unique experimental evidence for the absence of significant melt splashing at events resembling mitigated ELMs on ITER and establish a unique experimental benchmark for the simulations being used to study transient shallow melting on ITER W divertor PFUs.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Magnetic confinement fusion research · Fusion materials and technologies · Laser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (33)

Show source-provided references
1. Coenen · Nucl. Fusion · 2011 · 51 · 08300810.1088/0029-5515/51/8/083008 ↗
2. Krieger · Phys. Scr. · 2011 · T145 · 01406710.1088/0031-8949/2011/T145/014067 ↗
3. Lipschultz · Nucl. Fusion · 2012 · 52 · 12300210.1088/0029-5515/52/12/123002 ↗
4. Pitts · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415
5. Matthews · Phys. Scripta · 2007 · 2007 · 13710.1088/0031-8949/2007/T128/027 ↗
6. Mertens · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · s94310.1016/j.jnucmat.2011.01.113 ↗
7. P. Mertens, et al., Proc. 24th IAEA Fusion Energy Conf. (FEC2012), San Diego, USA, EX/PS-24, 2012.
8. Arnoux · Rev. Sci. Instrum. · 2012 · 83 · 10D72710.1063/1.4738742 ↗
9. Balboa · Rev. Sci. Instrum. · 2012 · 83 · 10D53010.1063/1.4740523 ↗
10. Eich · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · S85610.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.11.079 ↗
11. STF-8300M. .
12. van Rooij · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2013 · 438 · S4210.1016/j.jnucmat.2013.01.007 ↗
13. Tanabe · At. Plasma–Mater. Int. Data Fusion · 1994 · 5 · 129
14. Arnoux, et al., G. PSI 2014 – J. Nucl. Mater. (2014) (submitted for publication).
15. Sieglin · Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion · 2013 · 55 · 12403910.1088/0741-3335/55/12/124039 ↗
16. Coenen · Fusion Sci. And Technol. · 2012 · 61 · 12910.13182/FST12-A13378 ↗
17. Coenen · Phys. Scr. · 2011 · T145 · 01406610.1088/0031-8949/2011/T145/014066 ↗
18. Coenen · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · 7810.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.09.046 ↗
19. Bazylev · Phys. Scr. · 2011 · T145 · 01405410.1088/0031-8949/2011/T145/014054 ↗
20. Bazylev · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2008 · 83 · 107710.1016/j.fusengdes.2008.05.044 ↗
21. Bazylev · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2007 · 363–365 · 101110.1016/j.jnucmat.2007.01.157 ↗
22. B. Bazylev, et al., PSI 2014 – J. Nucl. Mater. (2014) (submitted for publication).
23. R. Dejarnac, et al., Nucl. Fusion (2014) (accepted for publication).
24. Dejarnac · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · S97710.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.09.042 ↗
25. Coffey · Rev. Sci. Instrum. · 2004 · 75 · 373710.1063/1.1781756 ↗
26. Wolf, R. C. et al. JET IOP Preprint, (1995). JET-P(95)34.10.1115/1.2822330 ↗
27. Puetterich · Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion · 2013 · 55 · 12403610.1088/0741-3335/55/12/124036 ↗
28. Puetterich · Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion · 2008 · 50 · 08501610.1088/0741-3335/50/8/085016 ↗
29. Coenen · Nucl. Fusion · 2013 · 53 · 07304310.1088/0029-5515/53/7/073043 ↗
30. Sertoli · Phys. Scripta · 2013 · 2014 · 014014
31. M. Sertoli, et al. PSI 2014 – J. Nucl. Mater. (2014) (submitted for publication).
32. Krieger · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 451 · 211
33. R.D. Smirnov, et al. An Impact of w Dust on the Edge Plasma in Iter. Priv. Comm.