Diagnostic mirrors for ITER: A material choice and the impact of erosion and deposition on their performance
Source abstract
Abstract
Metal mirrors will be implemented in about half of the ITER diagnostics. Mirrors in ITER will have to withstand radiation loads, erosion by charge-exchange neutrals, deposition of impurities, particle implantation and neutron irradiation. It is believed that the optical properties of diagnostic mirrors will be primarily influenced by erosion and deposition. A solution is needed for optimal performance of mirrors in ITER throughout the entire lifetime of the machine. A multi-machine research on diagnostic mirrors is currently underway in fusion facilities at several institutions and laboratories worldwide. Among others, dedicated investigations of ITER-candidate mirror materials are ongoing in Tore-Supra, TEXTOR, DIII-D, TCV, T-10 and JET. Laboratory studies are underway at IPP Kharkov (Ukraine), Kurchatov Institute (Russia) and the University of Basel (Switzerland). An overview of current research on diagnostic mirrors along with an outlook on future investigations is the subject of this paper.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Fusion materials and technologies · Nuclear materials and radiation effects · Nuclear Materials and Properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (23)
Show source-provided references
1. Lipa · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2006 · 81 · 22110.1016/j.fusengdes.2005.07.017 ↗
2. Wienhold · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2006 · 337–339 · 1116
3. Rudakov · Rev. Sci. Instrum. · 2006 · 77 · 10F12610.1063/1.2336465 ↗
4. G. De Temmerman et al., in: Proceeding of the 32nd EPS Conference on Plasma Physics, Tarragona, Spain, ECA Vol. 29C (2005) P1.076.
5. Vukolov · Plasma Device Oper. · 2004 · 12 · 19310.1080/1051999042000238040 ↗
6. Voitsenya · Rev. Sci. Instrum. · 2005 · 76 · 08350210.1063/1.2001627 ↗
7. Costley · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2001 · 55 · 33110.1016/S0920-3796(01)00200-9 ↗
8. Behrisch · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2003 · 313–316 · 38810.1016/S0022-3115(02)01580-5 ↗
9. W. Eckstein et al., Techn. Report IPP MPI, IPP 9/82 (1993).
10. Voitsenya · J. Nucl. Mater · 2001 · 290–293 · 33610.1016/S0022-3115(00)00634-6 ↗
11. Huber · Plasma Phys. Control Fus., · 2000 · 42 · 56910.1088/0741-3335/42/5/307 ↗
12. Litnovsky · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2007 · 82 · 12310.1016/j.fusengdes.2006.07.095 ↗
13. 1985
14. M. Lipa et al., EFDA ref. TW2-TPDS-DIADEV-D02, Fin. report (2005).10.1126/stke.2652005tw2 ↗
15. D. Reiter et al., Tech. Report of Forschungszentrum Jülich, Juel 2590 (1992).
16. Wong · J. Nucl. Mater. · 1998 · 258–263 · 43310.1016/S0022-3115(98)00407-3 ↗
17. Nucl. Fusion No. 39, vol. 12 (1999) 2471.
18. A. Costley, in: Proceeding of the12th Symposium on Laser-Aided Plasma Diagnostics, Snowbird, USA (2005).
19. Vietzke · Fus. Technol · 1989 · 15 · 10810.13182/FST89-A25333 ↗
20. Davis · J. Nucl. Mater. · 1988 · 155–157 · 23410.1016/0022-3115(88)90246-2 ↗
21. A. Kreter et al., in: Proceeding of the 32nd EPS Conference on Plasma Physics, ECA 29C (2005) P-1.014.
22. Möller · Comput. Phys. Commun. · 1988 · 51 · 35510.1016/0010-4655(88)90148-8 ↗
23. G. De Temmerman et al., J. Nucl. Mater., these Proceedings, doi:10.1016/j.jnucmat.2007.01.024.10.1016/j.jnucmat.2007.01.024 ↗