journal article·2013-07

In-vessel dust and tritium control strategy in ITER

M. Shimada, R.A. Pitts, S. Ciattaglia, S. Carpentier, C.H. Choi, G. Dell Orco, T. Hirai, A. Kukushkin, S. Lisgo, J. Palmer, W. Shu, E. Veshchev

Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract A baseline strategy for dust and tritium-inventory control and recovery in ITER has been established and preparations are underway for its implementation. Limits on dust and tritium-inventory are an integral part of the ITER safety case and are fixed at 1 kg for tritium, 1000 kg for mobilisable dust and 11 kg (beryllium)/76 kg (tungsten) for dust on hot surfaces. Maximum average T-retention rates of ∼1 g/shot are estimated for baseline inductive operation at QDT = 10, suggesting that the in-vessel T-retention could reach the administrative limit of 640 g in as little as ∼2 months of operation. Baking is expected to remove a significant fraction of the T co-deposited on the divertor targets. Despite large uncertainties, dust quantities are expected to remain well below safety limits over the divertor cassette lifetime. In situ aspiration during divertor cassette exchange is foreseen as the main dust removal technique.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Fusion materials and technologies · Nuclear Materials and Properties · Nuclear reactor physics and engineering

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

References (38)

Show source-provided references
1. Carpentier · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · S16510.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.10.081 ↗
2. S. Lisgo et al., These proceedings.
3. Lisgo · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2005 · 337–339 · 25610.1016/j.jnucmat.2004.09.055 ↗
4. Reiter · Fusion. Sci. Technol. · 2005 · 47 · 17210.13182/FST47-172 ↗
5. A.S. Kukushkin et al., in: Proc. 35th European Conf. on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics, 2008 (paper P1.013). .
6. Pitts · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · S95710.1016/j.jnucmat.2011.01.114 ↗
7. Stangeby · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2003 · 313–316 · 88310.1016/S0022-3115(02)01470-8 ↗
8. Behrisch · 2007
9. Roth · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2009 · 390–391 · 110.1016/j.jnucmat.2009.01.037 ↗
10. De Temmerman · Nucl. Fusion · 2009 · 40 · 04200210.1088/0029-5515/49/4/042002 ↗
11. R.A. Pitts et al., These proceedings.
12. Pitts · JNM · 2011 · 415 · S95710.1016/j.jnucmat.2011.01.114 ↗
13. Rudakov · JNM · 2007 · 363-365 · 22710.1016/j.jnucmat.2007.01.013 ↗
14. Loarte · IAEA FEC · 2006
15. Mitteau · Phys. Scr. · 2011 · T145 · 01408110.1088/0031-8949/2011/T145/014081 ↗
16. Loarte · IAEA FEC · 2010
17. Loarte · JNM · 2005 · 337–339 · 81610.1016/j.jnucmat.2004.09.038 ↗
18. Bazylev · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2009 · 84 · 44110.1016/j.fusengdes.2008.12.123 ↗
19. Putvinski · IAEA FEC · 2010
20. V. Rohde et al., These proceedings.
21. Kim · Fusion Sci. Technol. · 2012 · 61 · 18510.13182/FST12-A13386 ↗
22. Counsell · Rev. Sci. Instrum. · 2006 · 77 · 09350110.1063/1.2338296 ↗
23. Skinner · Rev. Sci. Instrum. · 2004 · 75 · 421310.1063/1.1783600 ↗
24. Ribeiro · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2011 · 86 · 47110.1016/j.fusengdes.2011.01.138 ↗
25. Gauthier · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · S118210.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.11.014 ↗
26. T. Loarer et al., These proceedings.
27. Li · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · S3510.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.10.048 ↗
28. V. Philipps et al., .
29. Shimada · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · S101310.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.11.085 ↗
30. Baldwin · JNM · 2005 · 337–339 · 59010.1016/j.jnucmat.2004.09.043 ↗
31. Sugiyama · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · S73110.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.09.043 ↗
32. M. Baldwin et al., These proceedings.
33. Whyte · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2005 · 337–339 · 56010.1016/j.jnucmat.2004.10.134 ↗
34. Gibson · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2005 · 337–339 · 56510.1016/j.jnucmat.2004.10.128 ↗
35. J.H. Yu et al., These proceedings.
36. Tanabe · JNM · 2009 · 390–391 · 70510.1016/j.jnucmat.2009.01.194 ↗
37. D. Douai et al., These proceedings.
38. Douai · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 415 · S102110.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.11.083 ↗