DOCSLIB.ORG

Design Status of the DEMO-FNS Steady State Tokamak in RF B.V

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Design Status of the DEMO-FNS Steady State Tokamak in RF B.V NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER НАЦИОНАЛЬНЫЙ ИССЛЕДОВАТЕЛЬСКИЙ ЦЕНТР KURCHATOV INSTITUTE «КУРЧАТОВСКИЙ ИНСТИТУТ» Kurchatov Nuclear Technology Complex Moscow, 123182, Russia Design status of the DEMO-FNS Steady State Tokamak in RF B.V. Kuteev E.A. Azizov, P.N. Alexeev, S.S. Anan’ev, V.M.Chernov, B.K. Chukbar, A.S. Bykov, A.A. Frolov, A.A. Golikov, A.V. Golubeva, P.R. Goncharov, M.P. Gryaznevich, M.I. Gurevich, A.Yu. Dnestrovskij, A.A. Dudnikov, D.P. Ivanov, R.R. Khairutdinov, V.I. Khripunov, A.A. Klischenko, B.N. Kolbasov, А.I. Krylov, V.E. Lukash, V.V. Lukyanov, S.Yu. Medvedev, A.A. Morozov, A.A. Panasenkov, V.S. Petrov, P.V. Savrukhin, A.A. Sedov, V.Yu. Sergeev, E.V. Shestakov, A.B. Sivak, A.V. Spitsyn, S.A. Subbotin, A.L. Shimkevich, Yu.S. Shpanski, V.P. Tsibulskiy, A.V. Zhirkin e-mail: [email protected] Collaborators: Efremov Institute, Dollezhal Institute, AtomProject, Bochvar Institute, Polytechnic University, CTF-Centre B.V. Kuteev et al., IAEA SSO-8, 26-29 May 2015, Nara, Japan DEMO-FNS background • DEMO-FNS tokamak device is the key facility in the hybrid branch of the Russian fusion program. • The construction of DEMO-FNS is planned by 2023. This facility should provide the choice of steady state operation regimes, tests of materials and components, demonstration of tokamak enabling technologies and molten salt nuclear technologies of hybrid blanket and radiochemical plant for Pilot Hybrid Plant (PHP). • The PHP construction is planned by 2030. Design targets are 40 MW for the fusion power, 500 MW for the total thermal power and 200 MW for the electric power that should provide engineering Qeng ~ 1 (self- sufficiency). Strategy 2013 for Fusion‐Fission development in Russia E. Velikhov, IAEA FEC‐25, O‐3 Burning Plasma Physics B.Kuteev et al. NF, 55 (2015) accepted T-15 ITER DEMO PROTO Nuclear physics and technology DEMO‐ FNS PHP Test beds for enabling technologies Hybrid Fusion Nuclear Test beds for technologies of molten salt new generation technologies 2015 2030 2050 Major facilities on the path to Industrial Hybrid Plant SSO&MS Globus-M3 FNS-ST DEMO-FNS Steady State Technologies DT neutrons MS blankets • Magnetic system • Vacuum chamber • Divertor • Blanket • Remote handling • Heating and current drive • Fuelling and pumping • Diadnostics •Integration •Materials •Hybrid Tech • Safety • Molten salts Pilot Hybrid Plant construction by 2030 P=500 MWt, Qeng ~1 Industrial Hybrid Plant construction by 2040 P=3 GWt, Qeng ~6.5 P=1.3 GWe, P=1.1 GWn, MA=1t/a, FN=1.1 t/a Feasibility of Pilot Hybrid Reactor by 2030 PHP, DEMO‐FNS 1. Regimes with Q~1 are realized in tokamaks, low BPP impact 2. Electron temperature sufficient for DT beam driven fusion T = ~4 keV has been demonstrated in numerous experiments 3. Non‐inductive current drive was demonstrated in conventional tokamaks and is close to demonstration in spherical machines 4. Reduction of technical requirements on neutron loading in PHP to 0.2 MW/m2 and fluence value for operation time below 2 MWy/m2 allows to use commercially available materials 5. Economics of PHP is acceptable in case of total products selling : MA incineration, electricity production, tritium breeding, fuel FNS‐ST, Globus‐M3 breeding for U‐Pu and Th‐U nuclear fuel cycles. 6. System models and codes predict appropriate parameters of PHP Qbf~1 7. Russia has an appropriate cooperation of fusion and fission organizations and well qualified staff Construction Risks for Pilot Hybrid Plant 1. Low design level for Hybrid systems (conceptual or pre‐conceptual) 2. Enabling Technologies for tokamak Steady State Operation need substantial resource upgrade (from minutes to ~5000 hours) 3. Additional R@D are mandatory for fusion nuclear science and technology 4. Molten salt nuclear technology of hybrid blanket and radio‐chemical system require demonstration 5. Lack of information on tokamak operation under high plasma loadings, noninductive current drive and non‐equiliblium plasmas 6. Poor database on radiation damage of materials in 14 MeV neutron spectra 7. Challenging choice of materials and molten salt compositions is foreseen 8. Licensing delays and Atomic Energy Law update Structural and Functional Materials of the Hybrid Concept Structural materials: austenitic steels 12Х18Н10Т (SS316) ЧC‐68 ЭК‐164 Nickel alloys Hastelloy Vanadium alloys V-(4-9)Cr-(0.1-8)W-(1-2Zr) V-4Cr-4Ti Materials for Magnetic System Cu CuCrZr Nb3Sn NbTi MgB2 Insulators MgAl2O4 Functional materials Be Li4SiO4 T DEMO-FNS Features • DEMO-FNS has a superconducting magnetic system utilizing low temperature superconductors Nb3Sn and NbTi • The steady state operating device has the major radius R =2.5-2.7 m and the minor radius a =1 m, toroidal magnetic field B = 5 T, plasma current Ip = 5 MA, neutral beam heating and current drive system with the total power of 30 MW and 6 MW of gyrotron power at 170 GHz Parameters of R, m 2.7 DEMO-FNS R/a 2.7 2.1 δ 0.5 Ip, MA 5.0 BT, T 5.0 n, 1020m-3 1.0 2 Pn/S, MW/m 0.2 Eb, keV 500 Pb, MW 30 Angle NBI, deg 0 PEC, MW 6 H-factor 1.0 β <3 N Demonstration f 1.0 non-ind •Tritium breeding Pdiss, TF, MW 10 •MA incineration Pdiss, PF, MW 5.0 •Fissile nuclide production Swall, m2 188 •Destruction of long life Vpl, m3 113 radionuclides •Heat transfer FNS-ST, DEMO-FNS and ITER parameters FNS-ST DEMO-FNS ITER Major radius R, m 0.5 2.75 6.2 DT-fusion option Beam driven Beam driven Thermonuclear fusion and fusion thermonuclear fusion Heat transfer from alphas to plasma no yes small yes BPP valuable Divertor configuration DN DN SN Toroidal field at the VV center, T 1.5 5 5.3 Fusion power, MW 1 - 3 30 - 40 500 Auxiliary heating power PAUX, MW ~ 8 - 10 30 - 40 50 - 70 Fusion energy gain factor Q ~ 0.2 ~ 1 ~ 10 Shielding at high field side, m Без защиты ~ 50 cm 60 – 80cm Type of magnetic system CuCrZr LTS LTS 2 Neutron loading Гn, MW/m 0.2 0.2 0.5 Neutron fluence at lifetime, MWy/m2 ~ 2 (*) ~ 2 0.3 DEMO-FNS Map of physical parameters Zeff 1.5 0.6 li 1.3 0.7 Steady state current density profile j(r) Hy,2 ne /nGW 3 0.5 N, 6 0.5 fCD q 95 fBS Steady state profiles of ne(r) , Te(r) , Ti(r) , q(r) Physical assumptions are moderate DEMO-FNS Basic plasma configuration Steady State free boundary equilibrium magnetic configuration Breakdown in DEMO-FNS R, cm Z, cm R, Z, cm I, MA*t VNS-SC FIELD NULL cm 600 5 x 10 2 400 PF1_U 125 460 30 30 0.2 1 PF1_L 125 -460 30 30 0.2 Bz [G] Bz 0 200 PF2_U 175 480 35 35 0.34 -1 PF2_L 175 -480 35 35 0.34 0 200 400 0 R [cm] PF3_U 310 495 50 50 0.69 Z [cm] PF3_L 310 -495 50 50 0.69 15 PF4_U 400 445 30 30 0.96 -200 10 PF4_L 400 -445 30 30 0.96 5 psi [Vs] psi PF5_U 495 360 55 55 0.68 -400 0 PF5_L 495 -360 55 55 0.68 0 200 400 PF6_U 535 255 30 30 -0.5 -600 R [cm] 0 200 400 600 PF6_L 535 -255 30 30 -0.5 R [cm] CSU1 42.5 280 15 76 -13.7 CSU2 42.5 160 15 158 40.4 CS1 42.5 0 15 160 14.0 0 10 Vs CSL2 42.5 -160 15 158 40.4 BZ max 12 T CSL1 42.5 -280 15 76 -13.7 Current generation and fusion power in DEMO-FNS 8 100 total 7 P fn 6 d t maxwell I P 150 P 5 p fn fn MA MW 4 d t I (E =500 keV) P 500 NBCD d 10 fn 3 I BS 2 t d P 500 I (E =500 keV) fn NBCD t t d 1 P 150 fn 0 0,00,20,40,60,81,01,21,40,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4 -3 n , m-3 n , m 20 20 Current and its components versus Fusion power and components (beam plasma density plasma fusion + thermonuclear) versus plasma density System codes suggest reaching design parameters of DEMO-FNS and the neutron loading that is higher than 0.2 MW/m2 DEMO-FNS magnet system details • The magnetic coil system consists of 18 toroidal coils, 12 poloidal coils, 2 vertical control coils and 18 RMP correcting coils • The partitioned central solenoid (CS) has the flux storage of 8 Wb increased by poloidal coils up to 20 Wb that is sufficient for plasma formation and the current rump up to 5 MA during 2 seconds • Peripheral parts of the CS are used for shaping the magnetic configuration Toroidal field coils Number of toroidal field coils NTF = 18 Two loops Nb3Sn+NbTi Total TFC current ITF = 70 MA-turns TFC magnetic energy WTF = 6 GJ DEMO-FNS Poloidal magnetic system PF2 5 PF1 PF3 4 PF4 CS3 3 ACu PF5 2 CS2 PC1u 1 VV 0 CS1 -1 PC1l PF coils CS -2 ACl -3 -4 -5 0 2 4 6 DEMO-TIN cross section. Position of passive (PC1) and active (AC) control coils is shown. Two variants of passive stabilisation coils with 2 (left) and 24 (right) frames General layout of DEMO-FNS TF coil cross section Equatorial section of DEMO-FNS Radial structure of DEMO-FNS Vertical axis TF coil body Vacuum vessel Plasma First wall Vacuum vessel SOL First wall TF coil loops Blanket TF coil body T- TF coil body Central solenoid Shield TF coil body Plasma TF coil loops T-Shield Central solenoid TF coil loops First wall VV centre Vacuum vessel Blanket Plasma Blanket SOL First wall TF coil loops Vacuum vessel T-Shield TF coil body DEMO-FNS vacuum vessel details • The vacuum vessel (VV) is made of austenitic stainless steel (SS) with the shell thickness of 3 cm and the 2 cm bulkheads (ribs) • The volume of the VV is filled with 70% SS and 30 % water for neurton&gamma shielding • The VV thickness is 50 cm at the high field side (HFS) and 60 cm at the LFS and divertor regions • The VV acts as a radiation shield of the magnetic system reducing the radiation heating below 1 mW/cm-3 DEMO-FNS Vacuum vessel (VV) VV sector VV sector (inside) (outside) Blanket segmentation Shield between two shells of VV Electronic mockup of VV VV shell VV ribs VV shell under 40 bars of internal Distribution of EM pressure for upward disruption accident pressure VV cooling system Pump1 Heat exchanger 1 Circuit1 Neutron shield unit VV shell VV shell
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Russian-A(Merican) Bomb: the Role of Espionage in the Soviet Atomic Bomb Project
    J. Undergrad. Sci. 3: 103-108 (Summer 1996) History of Science The Russian-A(merican) Bomb: The Role of Espionage in the Soviet Atomic Bomb Project MICHAEL I. SCHWARTZ physicists and project coordinators ought to be analyzed so as to achieve an understanding of the project itself, and given the circumstances and problems of the project, just how Introduction successful those scientists could have been. Third and fi- nally, the role that espionage played will be analyzed, in- There was no “Russian” atomic bomb. There only vestigating the various pieces of information handed over was an American one, masterfully discovered by by Soviet spies and its overall usefulness and contribution Soviet spies.”1 to the bomb project. This claim echoes a new theme in Russia regarding Soviet Nuclear Physics—Pre-World War II the Soviet atomic bomb project that has arisen since the democratic revolution of the 1990s. The release of the KGB As aforementioned, Paul Josephson believes that by (Commissariat for State Security) documents regarding the the eve of the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union, Soviet sci- role that espionage played in the Soviet atomic bomb project entists had the technical capability to embark upon an atom- has raised new questions about one of the most remark- ics weapons program. He cites the significant contributions able and rapid scientific developments in history. Despite made by Soviet physicists to the growing international study both the advanced state of Soviet nuclear physics in the of the nucleus, including the 1932 splitting of the lithium atom years leading up to World War II and reported scientific by proton bombardment,7 Igor Kurchatov’s 1935 discovery achievements of the actual Soviet atomic bomb project, of the isomerism of artificially radioactive atoms, and the strong evidence will be provided that suggests that the So- fact that L.
    [Show full text]
  • Stalin and the Atomic Bomb 51
    50 Stalin and the The beginning of the uranium problem Amongst physicists, and in many books on the Atomic Bomb history of atomic energy in the USSR, the code name Uran*, in Russian, chosen by Stalin in September 1942 as the specified designation of the Stalingrad counter-attack, is linked with the element uranium. They presume that Stalin, having at this time already approved the setting up of investigations into the uranium problem, found himself under the influence of the potential explosive force of the nuclear bomb. The physicists, however, are mistaken. The codename for the Stalingrad operation was Zhores A. Medvedev chosen by Stalin in honour of Uranus, the seventh planet of the solar system. The strategic battle following ‘Uranus’ – the encirclement and rout of the German armies in the region of Rostov on Don – was given the codename ‘Saturn’ by Stalin. The first mention in the Soviet press of the unusual explosive force of the atomic bomb appeared in Pravda on 13th October 1941. Publishing a report about an anti-fascist meeting of scholars in Moscow the previous day, the paper described to the astonished This article was published reader the testimony of academician Pyotr in Russia on the 120th Leonidovich Kapitsa. anniversary of Stalin’s birth ‘... Explosive materials are one of the basic on 21 December 1879. The weapons of war... But recent years have opened first Soviet atomic bomb up new possibilities – the use of atomic energy. was exploded on 29 August Theoretical calculations show that if a 1949. contemporary powerful bomb can, for example, destroy an entire quarter of a town, then an atomic bomb, even a fairly small one, if it is Zhores A.
    [Show full text]
  • La Universidad Nacional De Investigación Nuclear “Instituto De Ingeniería Física De Moscú”
    la Universidad Nacional de Investigación Nuclear “Instituto de Ingeniería Física de Moscú” Año de fundaciónón: 1942 Total de estudiantes: 7 064 / Estudiantes extranjeros: 1 249 Facultades: 12 / Departamentos: 76 Profesores: 1 503 Profesor Docentes Doctor en ciencias Candidatos de las ciencias Profesores extranjeros 512 649 461 759 223 Principales programas de educación para los extranjeros: 177 Licenciatura Maestría Especialista Formación del personal altamente calificado 55 68 23 31 Programas educativos adicionales para los extranjeros: 13 Programa de preparación El estudio de la lengua rusa Programas cortos preuniversitaria como extranjera Otros programas 11 1 1 The history of the National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute) began with the foundation in 1942 of the Moscow Mechanical Institute of Ammunition. The leading Russian nuclear university MEPhI was later established there and top Soviet scientists, including the head of the Soviet atomic project Igor Kurchatov, played a part in its development and formation. Six Nobel Prize winners have worked at MEPhI over the course of its history – Nikolay Basov, Andrei Sakharov, Nikolay Semenov, Igor Tamm, Ilya Frank and Pavel Cherenkov. Today, MEPhI is one of the leading research universities of Russia, training engineers and scientists in more than 200 fields. The most promising areas of study include: Nanomaterials and nanotechnologies; Radiation and beam technologies; Medical physics and nuclear medicine; Superconductivity and controlled thermonuclear fusion; Ecology and biophysics; Information security. In addition, future managers, experts and analysts in the fields of management, engineering economics, nuclear law and international scientific and technological cooperation study at MEPhI. Programmes at MEPhI: 1 Meet international standards for quality of education.
    [Show full text]
  • State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom
    STATE ATOMIC ENERGY CORPORATION ROSATOM. STATE ATOMIC ENERGY CORPORATION ROSATOM. PERFORMANCE IN 2019 PERFORMANCE IN 2019 PERFORMANCE OF STATE ATOMIC ENERGY CORPORATION ROSATOM IN 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Report Profile 4 CHAPTER 7. DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTHERN SEA ROUTE 122 7.1. Escorting Vessels and Handling Cargo Traffic along the Northern Sea Route 127 CHAPTER 1. OUR ACHIEVEMENTS 6 7.2. Construction of New Icebreakers 128 History of the Russian Nuclear Industry 8 7.3. New Products 128 ROSATOM Today 10 7.4. Digitization of Operations 128 Key Results in 2019 14 7.5. Activities of FSUE Hydrographic Enterprise 129 Key Events in 2019 15 7.6. Plans for 2020 and for the Medium Term 130 Address by the Chairman of the Supervisory Board 16 Address by the Director General 17 CHAPTER 8. EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES 132 Address by a Stakeholder Representative 18 8.1. Corporate Governance 135 Financial and Economic Results 20 8.2. Risk Management 141 8.3. Performance of Government Functions 155 CHAPTER 2. STRATEGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE 22 8.4. Financial and Investment Management 158 2.1. Business Strategy until 2030 24 8.5. ROSATOM Production System 164 2.2. Sustainable Development Management 28 8.6. Procurement Management 168 2.3. Value Creation and Business Model 34 8.7. Internal Control System 172 8.8. Prevention of Corruption and Other Offences 174 CHAPTER 3. CONTRIBUTION TO GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT 40 3.1. Markets Served by ROSATOM 42 CHAPTER 9. DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN POTENTIAL 176 3.2. International Cooperation 55 AND INFRASTRUCTURE 3.3. International Business 63 9.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Weapons 19671A
    _NA_ru_R_Ev_o_L._319_9_JA_Nu_A_RY_1_9s6____ CQRRESPQNDENCE----------- 93 within the accuracy of the Babylonian observations. Sakharov's scientific legacy C. Leroy Ellenberger, no longer a con­ S1R-Erast B. Gliner is right to say that When asked about Sakharov's fate, vinced Velikovskian, has pointed out to Sakharov's contribution to science' should some Soviet officials (including Anatoly me that I might nevertheless have even be emphasized in the campaign to end his Alexandrov, president of the Academy of better cited the uniformity of Greenland exile and to save his life. However, Glin­ Sciences of the USSR) normally answer ice core Dye 3 as a way in which science er's statement that Sakharov "is not consi­ that Sakharov is restricted to Gorky be­ could actually demonstrate that Velikovs­ dered as a head of some scientific school cause he is in the possession of important ky's scenario did not happen. This 2,000- inside of the Soviet Union or abroad" is military secrets and that this exile is made metre sample is continuous and datable not entirely correct. Sakharov's pioneer­ in strict observance of Soviet laws. Neith­ for the past 10,000 years and shows no ing work on the problem of a controlled er reason is correct. Sakharov was exiled dust or acid layers that would signal the thermonuclear reaction, which began the to Gorky on the basis of an "individual" sort of universal catastrophe predicted by well known tokamak project, was the decree signed by the late President Leonid Velikovsky. main reason for his election as a full mem­ Brezhnev in 1980 as a reprisal for Sakhar­ OwEN GINGERICH ber of the Academy of Sciences of the ov's protest over the Soviet invasion of Harvard-Smithsonian Center for USSR in 1953, together with his co-author Afghanistan.
    [Show full text]
  • German Scientists in the Soviet Atomic Project
    PAVEL V. OLEYNIKOV German Scientists in the Soviet Atomic Project PAVEL V. OLEYNIKOV1 Pavel Oleynikov has been a group leader at the Institute of Technical Physics of the Russian Federal Nuclear Center in Snezhinsk (Chelyabinsk-70), Russia. He can be reached by e-mail at <[email protected]>. he fact that after World War II the Soviet Union This article first addresses what the Soviets knew at took German scientists to work on new defense the end of World War II about the German bomb pro- Tprojects in that country has been fairly well docu- gram and then discusses their efforts to collect German mented.2 However, the role of German scientists in the technology, scientists, and raw materials, particularly advancement of the Soviet atomic weapons program is uranium, after the war. Next, it reviews the Soviets’ use controversial. In the United States in the 1950s, Russians of German uranium and scientists in particular labora- were portrayed as “retarded folk who depended mainly tories working on different aspects of atomic weapons on a few captured German scientists for their achieve- development. It discusses the contributions and careers ments, if any.”3 Russians, for their part, vehemently deny of several German scientists and their possible motiva- all claims of the German origins of the Soviet bomb and tions for participating in the Soviet bomb program. The wield in their defense the statement of Max Steenbeck importance of the Germans’ contributions was reflected (a German theorist who pioneered supercritical centri- in the awards and other acknowledgments they fuges for uranium enrichment in the USSR) 4 that “all received from the Soviet government, including numer- talk that Germans have designed the bomb for the Sovi- ous Stalin Prizes in the late 1940s and early 1950s.
    [Show full text]
  • Stalin and the Hydrogen Bomb 49 a Bomb Seemed Completely Unreal
    48 The Short Millennium? Stalin and the The hydrogen bomb: the beginning of the project Hydrogen The atomic bomb was the artificial creation of Bomb man. Plutonium does not exist in nature, and uranium-235 does not accumulate anywhere in the quantities which produce the chain reaction of its almost instant fission. The idea of the hydrogen bomb was based on the physical phenomenon which is most widespread in the universe: nuclear synthesis, the formation of nuclear atoms of the heavier elements at the expense of the fusion of the nuclei of light elements. Almost all the elements of the earth’s Zhores A. Medvedev crust arose in this way. At high temperatures, of the order of hundreds of millions of degrees, the kinetic energy of the atoms of the light elements becomes so high that, colliding with themselves, they are able to ‘fuse’, forming In our last issue, in his nuclei of heavier elements. Hundreds of article entitled ‘Stalin and thousands times more energy is released at the the atomic bomb’, Zhores nuclear synthesis than at the fission of the Medvedev shed new light heavy atoms. Interest in the problem of nuclear on the beginnings of the fusion arose in the 1930s, especially after Hans nuclear era in the Soviet A. Bethe, the German physicist who, in 1934, Union. Now, he turns to the emigrated to the United States, developed the race to build the Soviet theory of the production of energy of the stars, Union’s thermonuclear or including the sun. According to this theory, hydrogen bomb. This article which was sufficiently well confirmed at the also contains much new time, the energy of the stars arose in the basic information.
    [Show full text]
  • Cold War and Proliferation
    Cold War and Proliferation After Trinity, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki and the defeat of Germany, the US believed to be in the absolute lead in nuclear weapon technology, US even supported Baruch plan for a short period of six months. But proliferation had started even before the Trinity test and developed rapidly to a whole set of Nuclear Powers over the following decades Spies and Proliferation At Potsdam conference 1945 Stalin was informed about US bomb project. Efficient Russian spy system in US had been established based on US communist cells and emigrant sympathies and worries about single dominant political and military power. Klaus Fuchs, German born British physicist, part of the British Collaboration at the Manhattan project passed information about Manhattan project and bomb development and design Plans to Russia. Arrested in 1949 in Britain and convicted to 14 years of prison. He served 9 years - returned to East Germany as Director of the Rossendorf Nuclear Research center. Fuchs case cause panic and enhanced security in US in times of cold war, fired by McCarthy propaganda. Numerous subsequent arrests and trials culminating in Rosenberg case! The second race for the bomb Start of soviet weapons program Program was ordered by Stalin in 1943 after being informed about US efforts. The administrative head of the program was Lavrenti Beria. Scientific director was Igor Kurchatov, Who headed the Russian nuclear research program and built the first Russian cyclotron in 1934. Lavrenty Pavlovich Beria (1899-1953), Soviet politician and police chief, is remembered chiefly as the executor of Stalin’s Great Purge of the 1930s His period of greatest power was during and after WW-II.
    [Show full text]
  • Cold War and Proliferation
    Cold War and Proliferation After Trinity, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki and the defeat of Germany, the US believed to be in the absolute lead in nuclear weapon technology, US even supported Baruch plan for a short period of six months. But proliferation had started even before the Trinity test and developed rapidly to a whole set of Nuclear Powers over the following decades Spies and Proliferation At Potsdam conference 1945 Stalin was informed about US bomb project. Efficient Russian spy system in US had been established based on US communist cells and emigrant sympathies and worries about single dominant political and military power. Klaus Fuchs, German born British physicist, part of the British Collaboration at the Manhattan project passed information about Manhattan project and bomb development and design Plans to Russia. Arrested in 1949 in Britain and convicted to 14 years of prison. He served 9 years - returned to East Germany as Director of the Rossendorf Nuclear Research center. Fuchs case caused panic and enhanced security in US. Fear of communist take-over was fired by McCarthy propaganda. Numerous subsequent arrests and trials culminating in Rosenberg case! The Spy Story Fat Man Design Copied by Klaus Fuchs and forwarded to Russian courier person (Harry Gold). Spy Scare Value of Spy Work, Information on trends not detail of design It is unknown whether Fuchs' fission information had a substantial impact. Considering that the pace of the Soviet program was set primarily by the amount of uranium they could procure, it is hard for scholars to accurately judge how much "time" this saved the Soviets.
    [Show full text]
  • Contingencies of the Early Nuclear Arms Race Michael Gordin: Red Cloud at Dawn: Truman, Stalin, and the End of the Atomic Monopoly
    Metascience DOI 10.1007/s11016-010-9495-z BOOK SYMPOSIUM Contingencies of the early nuclear arms race Michael Gordin: Red cloud at dawn: Truman, Stalin, and the end of the atomic monopoly. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009, 416pp, US$28 HB S. S. Schweber • Alex Wellerstein • Ethan Pollock • Barton J. Bernstein • Michael D. Gordin Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011 S. S. Schweber and Alex Wellerstein On July 16, 1945, the United States detonated a plutonium-core nuclear weapon in the desert of New Mexico. The test—‘‘Trinity’’—was secret, but the Soviet Union was well informed of it through espionage. In August 1945, the United States exploded two nuclear weapons above cities in Japan. On August 29, 1949, the Soviet Union detonated a plutonium-core nuclear weapon on the steppes of Kazakhstan. The test was secret. Five days later (on September 3), an American B-29 weather plane, on its daily flight between Japan and Alaska to expose radioactive-sensitive filter papers to the air, recorded higher- than-usual levels of radioactivity. This in turn triggered additional probes. By September 19, a group of top-level nuclear scientists had concluded that the detected particles were undoubtedly the traces of an atomic bomb explosion, later S. S. Schweber (&) Á A. Wellerstein Department of the History of Science, Harvard University, Science Center 371, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA e-mail: [email protected] A. Wellerstein e-mail: [email protected] E. Pollock Department of History, Box N, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, USA e-mail: [email protected] B.
    [Show full text]
  • Moments with Yakov Borisovich Zeldovich
    Moments with Yakov Borisovich Zeldovich Remo Ruffini1 ICRANet, p.le della Repubblica, 10 - 65122 Pescara, Italy and ICRA and University of Rome “Sapienza”, p. Aldo Moro 5, I-00185, Rome, Italy and ICRANet, University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis, 28 avenue de Valrose, 06103 Nice Cedex 2, France Abstract. A recollection of special moments spent with Yakov Borisovich Zeldovich and with the scientists of Soviet Union and abroad. The first impression upon meeting a person is the one ing about these methods and commenting appropriately which characterizes all subsequent interactions. also about Sakharov’s recent opinions as presented in the I met Yakov Borisovich Zeldovich for the first time New York Times and asking ourselves about the fate of in 1968 at the GR5 meeting in Tbilisi. I had known Sakharov after his open statements. The plane was sup- his name from his two classic papers on relativistic posed to be a direct flight to Tbilisi of approximately astrophysics in Physics Uspekhi coauthored with Igor seven hours. After approximately three hours of flight, Novikov [1, 2]. There had been a strong impulse to boy- without any announcement, the plane abruptly started to cott the GR5 meeting due to the tense relations over hu- descend quite rapidly and landed in a town called Min- man rights between the Soviet Union and the USA at that eralnye Vody. After landing there was a lot of confu- time. Finally a small group around Johnny Wheeler de- sion, there were additional planes and finally it was dis- cided to participate. Among them were Arthur Komar, closed that, as a common practice in the Soviet Union Bruce Partridge, Abe Taub and myself.
    [Show full text]
  • CONTENTS Back to Contents
    NEWSLETTER #6 (230) MAY 2020 CONTENTS Back to contents ROSATOM NEWS TRENDS Energy from waste FNPP in operation Good deeds against coronavirus ROSATOM ANNIVERSARIES Fast neutron science NEWSLETTER #6 (230) MAY 2020 ROSATOM NEWS Back to contents Представители ТВЭЛ, ENUSA, ENSA и IDOM подписывают меморандум That was the second shipment sent to the Energy from Waste energy recovery plant in Riverside under the contract signed in early 2020. The first batch Atomenergomash (Rosatom’s of machinery and equipment was shipped mechanical engineering division) in March. ZiO-Podolsk will manufacture a participates in the Riverside Resource total of eight items — six third-stage and Recovery Facility project, which is a two fourth-stage superheaters to replace waste to energy plant constructed in similar components. The Riverside Resource the United Kingdom. The project is part Recovery Facility was built in 2010 and is of a broader cooperation with Swiss- undergoing a major upgrade. Japanese Hitachi Zosen Inova under Russia’s national Environment project. The contract provides for the first shipment of Russian-made equipment for a waste-to- In May, ZiO-Podolsk (part of Rosatom’s energy plant engineered by Hitachi Zosen mechanical engineering division Inova. Atomenergomash) manufactured and shipped a third-stage superheater and two “We worked closely with the customer and fourth-stage superheaters to the United technology partner at the preliminary stage Kingdom. With each steam superheater being of the project. The resulting production nearly 9 meters long, 4 meters wide and 3.5 facility built at ZiO-Podolsk meets all meters high, the total shipment weighed 100 Russian and international standards.
    [Show full text]