Plasma–Material Interactions in Current Tokamaks and Their Implications for Next Step Fusion Reactors
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Plasma–material interactions in current tokamaks and their implications for next step fusion reactors G. Federicia ITER Garching Joint Work Site, Garching, Germany C.H. Skinnerb Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, USA J.N. Brooksc Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, USA J.P. Coad JET Joint Undertaking, Abingdon, United Kingdom C. Grisolia Tore Supra, CEA Cadarache, St.-Paul-lez-Durance, France A.A. Haaszd University of Toronto, Institute for Aerospace Studies, Toronto, Ontario, Canada A. Hassaneine Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, USA V. Philipps Institut f¨ur Plasmaphysik, Forschungzentrum J¨ulich, J¨ulich, Germany C.S. Pitcherf MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA J. Roth Max-Planck-Institut f¨ur Plasmaphysik, Garching, Germany W.R. Wamplerg Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA D.G. Whyteh University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 41, No. 12R c 2001, IAEA, Vienna 1967 Contents 1. Introduction/background ........................................................................1968 1.1. Introduction....................................................................................1968 1.2. Plasma edge parameters and plasma–material interactions . 1969 1.3. History of plasma facing materials . 1973 2. Plasma edge and plasma–material interaction issues in next step tokamaks . 1977 2.1. Introduction....................................................................................1977 2.2. Progress towards a next step fusion device. .1977 2.3. Most prominent plasma–material interaction issues for a next step fusion device . 1980 2.4. Selection criteria for plasma facing materials. .1995 2.5. Overview of design features of plasma facing components for next step tokamaks. .1998 3. Review of physical processes and underlying theory ..........................................2002 3.1. Introduction....................................................................................2002 3.2. Sputtering erosion/redeposition processes . .2002 3.3. Erosion by arcing . 2012 3.4. Erosion during off-normal plasma events . .2014 3.5. Hydrogen recycling and retention in plasma facing materials . 2016 4. Existing experimental database on plasma–material interactions in tokamaks . 2029 4.1. Introduction....................................................................................2029 4.2. Measurements of plasma–material interactions . 2029 4.3. Review of tokamak erosion/redeposition experience . 2033 4.4. Experimental evidence for arcing in tokamaks . 2043 4.5. Disruption erosion in simulation devices and tokamaks. .2044 4.6. Control of plasma–material interactions . 2051 4.7. Database on H isotope retention and removal . 2056 4.8. Dust and flake experience . 2076 5. Application of models and predictions for next step tokamaks . 2082 5.1. Introduction....................................................................................2082 5.2. Plasma edge modelling . 2084 5.3. Sputtering erosion and co-deposition modelling . 2088 5.4. Modelling of erosion during ELMs and off-normal events. .2094 5.5. Modelling of particle–wall recycling. .2097 5.6. Modelling of long term implanted tritium inventory/permeation . 2102 6. Conclusion and future R&D priorities .........................................................2104 6.1. Erosion and co-deposition effects . 2105 6.2. Tritium retention and control of the in-vessel tritium inventory .. 2107 6.3. Requirements for modelling and interpretation of tokamak data. .2108 6.4. Need for improved wall diagnostics . 2109 6.5. Dust effects....................................................................................2109 6.6. A next step fusion reactor without carbon plasma facing components . 2109 6.7. Concluding remarks............................................................................2110 7. Glossary of terms and acronyms ................................................................2110 G. Federici et al. Abstract. The major increase in discharge duration and plasma energy in a next step DT fusion reactor will give rise to important plasma–material effects that will critically influence its operation, safety and performance. Erosion will increase to a scale of several centimetres from being barely measurable at a micron scale in today’s tokamaks. Tritium co-deposited with carbon will strongly affect the operation of machines with carbon plasma facing components. Controlling plasma–wall interactions is critical to achieving high performance in present day tokamaks, and this is likely to continue to be the case in the approach to practical fusion reactors. Recognition of the important consequences of these phenomena stimulated an internationally co-ordinated effort in the field of plasma–surface interactions supporting the Engineering Design Activities of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor project (ITER), and sig- nificant progress has been made in better understanding these issues. The paper reviews the underlying physical processes and the existing experimental database of plasma–material inter- actions both in tokamaks and laboratory simulation facilities for conditions of direct relevance to next step fusion reactors. Two main topical groups of interaction are considered: (i) ero- sion/redeposition from plasma sputtering and disruptions, including dust and flake generation and (ii) tritium retention and removal. The use of modelling tools to interpret the experimental results and make projections for conditions expected in future devices is explained. Outstanding technical issues and specific recommendations on potential R&D avenues for their resolution are presented. a Corresponding author: e-mail: [email protected], tel. +49-89-32994228; fax. +49-89-32994110. b Supported by the United States Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC02-76CH03073. c Supported by the United States Department of Energy under Contract W-31-109-Eng-38. d Supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and ITER Canada. e Supported by the United States Department of Energy under Contract W-31-109-Eng-38. f Supported by the United States Department of Energy under Contract DE-FC02-99ER54512. g Supported by the United States Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. h Supported by the United States Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG03-95ER54301. 1. Introduction/background of plasma–material interactions (PMIs) are required to realize a commercially attractive fusion reactor. 1.1. Introduction The edge plasma needs to provide good thermal insu- lation and prevent impurity influx from poisoning Fusion power is a promising long term candidate the burning core plasma (see glossary). The wall has to supply the energy needs of humanity [1]. Substan- to withstand the intense heat load and particle flux tial fusion power has been produced in two large from the core plasma, over months or years of opera- magnetic confinement devices: TFTR (10.7 MW) tion, with little or no maintenance. The wall surface and JET (16 MW). An International Thermonu- plays an important role in the recycling of hydro- clear Experimental Reactor (ITER) to generate gen isotopes, and in plasma fuelling. The approach 1500 MW has been successfully designed, but the to practical fusion reactors inevitably leads to an high cost of construction has led to work on a reduced increase in plasma energy content, pulse duration scale option (see glossary). In magnetic confinement and cumulative run time. Plasma physics effects and devices the edge plasma (see glossary) and surround- PMIs that are only partially observed or accessible ing material surfaces provide a buffer zone between in present day experiments will become important. the ‘astrophysical’, high temperature conditions in Higher heat loads, more intense transient heating the plasma core and the normal ‘terrestrial’ environ- events (i.e. edge localized modes (ELMs) and dis- ment. The interaction between the edge plasma and ruptions (see glossary)), and the predicted magni- the surrounding surfaces profoundly influences the tude of plasma facing component (PFC) damage by conditions in the core plasma (see glossary) and is melting and evaporation are critical issues [2] (Sec- a key engineering issue. Robust solutions to issues tion 2.3.2). The orders of magnitude increase of the 1968 Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 41, No. 12R (2001) Review: Plasma–material interactions in current tokamaks duty cycle (see glossary) in a next step device will ing liquid walls are presented in Ref. [12]; these may lead to centimetre scale erosion of PFCs. This rep- offer the potential for attractive fusion energy sys- resents a three to four orders of magnitude increase tems if a number of challenging engineering science from present tokamaks, a change that is much larger issues can be solved. A comprehensive review of the than the change in any of the core physics parameters technical basis for the design of ITER is available; needed for ignition (see glossary). Erosion of carbon it focuses on the plasma physics database provided in deuterium–tritium fuelled tokamaks will lead to by the present generation of tokamaks and on the co-deposition with tritium, and tritium retention will methodologies used to predict ITER performance constrain operations [3, 4] (Section 2.3.3). Dust gen- [13]. erated by erosion must be controlled (Section 2.3.4). Our knowledge of PMI processes has greatly expanded during the