Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
US ITER TBM
Overview of DCLL R&D and Predictive Capability Activities
Compiled by Neil Morley of UCLA
2006 US-Japan Workshop on
Fusion High Power Density Components and System
Inn on the Alameda, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
November 15-17, 2006
US ITER TBM
Outline
R&D Strategy and Prioritization
Main DCLL R&D Categories
Introduction to Predictive Capabilities
Summary
US ITER TBM
R&D tasks directly contribute to satisfying design, qualification, safety, and operation requirements
R&D tasks have been reviewed based on:
– Forming basis for important design, material, and fabrication decisions
– addressing safety issues and reliability risks that must be resolved for qualification of the first TBMs
– planning, operating and analyzing US TBM experiments in ITER
ITER TBMAcceptance Requirements
TBMs must be Tested in H-H Phase
TBMs must be DEMORelevant
TBMs must not interfere withoperation, availability,
or safety
US ITER TBM
ITER & DEMO requirements and risks have a strong impact
on TBM design and R&D decisions
DEMO relevance: – Materials and fabrication techniques should extrapolate to radiation environment– TBM designs and loading should extrapolate to DEMO sizes and performance
needs
Qualification, safety, and reliability requirements:– Intense and early R&D on RAFS fabrication– Inclusion of prototype fabrication and several partially integrated mockup tests– Verified predictive capabilities will be required to establish allowable operating
points from safety perspective– TBM is an experiment, but must know a lot abut how it will behave
Testing TBMs in the ITER H-H phase:– H-H phase TBM should use prototypical D-T phase TBM materials, fabrications,
and designs– Predictive capability must extrapolate H-H operating conditions to D-T phase
TBM operation
US ITER TBM
R&D and Predictive Capabilities progress together - coordinated with design milestones
Basic Properties
Single/MultipleEffects Testing
Partially-Integrated Mockup Testing
Final DesignQualification
Integrated Simulation
Title3DesRevStartPrototype
June
FY2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
DetDesFinalRevSep
PrototypeDoneApril
FinDesChngDec
StartTBMfabJune
PrelDesRevJuly
BidPackAugust
FabRouteDec
Models and Theory
Simulation Codes
Integration and Benchmarking
US ITER TBM
1. US ITER Proj.
DCLL R&D Tasks are included under 3 main WBS elements
1.8 US ITER TBM
1.8.1 DCLL
1.8.1.1 Test Module
1.8.1.5 Design Integration
1.8.1.4 Tritium Systems
1. Thermofluid MHD 2. SiC FCI Fabrication and Properties 3. SiC/FS/PbLi Compatibility & Chemistry 4. FM Steel Fabrication & Materials Prop.5. Helium System Subcomponents Tests 6. PbLi/H2O Hydrogen Production 7. Be Joining to FS 8. Advanced Diagnostics 9. Partially Integrated Mockups Testing
1. Model Development and Testing2. Fate of Tritium in PbLi3. Tritium Extraction from PbLi4. Tritium Extraction from He
1. He and PbLi Pipe Joints2. VV Plug Bellows Design
DCLL R&D tasks vary considerably in cost and scope
US ITER TBM
DCLL Unit Cell
US ITER TBM
Key DCLL R&D Items
PbLi Thermal fluid MHDKey impacts on thermal and power extraction performance
SiC FCI development including irradiation low fluence effectsKey impacts on DCLL lifetime, thermal and power extraction performance
RAFS/PbLi/SiC compatibility & chemistry Impacts DCLL lifetime and thermal performance
Tritium extraction and controlCritical element for high temperature PbLi such as in DCLL
High temperature heat exchangerCritical element for high temperature DCLL
He system subcomponents analyses and tests, He distribution and 1-sided heat transfer enhancementKey impacts on DCLL thermal and power extraction performance
RAFS fabrication development and materials properties including low fluence effectsCredibility of the RAFS structural material and DCLL design
Integrated Mockup leading to Test Blanket Module testing in ITERCredibility of the RAFS structural material and DCLL design
US ITER TBM
RAFS Fabrication – determine detailed material and fabrication specification
Basic Properties
Single and Multiple Effects Testing
Partially-Integrated Mockup Testing
Final DesignFabricationQualification
• Material alloy specification • Fabrication procedures• Properties - base metal &
jointsNDE tests and test procedures
StartPrototypeJune
FY2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
FabRouteDec
Init R&DOct
Produce H-H TBM that meet design specifications schedule, qualification testing and safety requirements,
Irradiation effects
Mockup fabrication support
Coordinated byR. Kurtz andA. Rowcliffe
US ITER TBM
Fabrication discussions with US Industry have shown strong capabilities and interest
US ITER TBM
Partially-Integrated Testing is a key part of qualification of experimental components
Basic Properties
Single and Multiple Effects Testing
Partially-Integrated Mockup Testing
Final DesignFabrication
Qualification
• FW Heat Flux Tests • PbLi Flow and Heat
Transfer Tests• Pressurization and Internal
LOCA Tests
Testing needed to:• demonstrate performance • provide “practice” fabrications • support safety/qualification dossier • data to verify Predictive Capabilities
in complex geometry
Existing US Facilities used in plan and cost estimate
Title3DesRevStartPrototype
June
FY2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
DetDesFinalRevSeptember
PrototypeDoneApril
FinDesChngDecember
StartTBMfabJune
BidPackAugust
Coordinated byR. Nygren
US ITER TBM
FCI development and Thermofluid MHD are highly inter-related DCLL R&D efforts
Basic Properties
Single and Multiple Effects Testing
Partially-Integrated Mockup Testing
Final DesignFabrication
Qualification
FCI properties and fab.
FCI and MHD together determine :• PbLi flow conditions and blanket
temperatures / thermal loads• FCI required/achievable properties
Title3DesRevStartPrototype
June
FY2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
DetDesFinalRevSeptember
PrototypeDoneApril
FinDesChngDecember
StartTBMfabJune
PrelDesRevJuly
BidPackAugust
FabRouteDec
• Modeling Tools• Manifold experiments• FCI flow and HT experiments• FCI irradiation
Coordinated by Y. Katoh andS. Smolentsev
•Simulation•FCI mockup
US ITER TBM
SiC/SiC Flow Channel InsertDecoupling PbLi & FeElectric insulationThermal insulation
Low primary stressRobust to thermal stress - T ~200C
-30-25-20-15-10-5051000.00050.0010.00150.0020.00250.0030.00350.0041/T (1/K)Electrical Conductivity (S/m)
FCI/SiC Devel. & FabricationTailoring k and k(T), (T) Irradiation effect Fabrication issues
Thermofluid MHD Structural Analysis
FCI is the key element of DCLL – its performance and fabrication must be explored prior to ITER testing
Effectiveness of FCI as electric/thermal insulatorMHD pressure drop and flow distributionMHD flow and FCI property effects on T
FCI stressesFCI deformations
ITER DT
ITER DT: Max stress<45 MPa
ITER TBM
3D FCI features
MHD Experiments Manifolds
UCLA Manifold Flow distribution Experiment (~1m length)
US ITER TBM
FCI in DCLL Blanket Module
FCI is a key feature that:– Distinguishes DCLL blanket.– Makes DCLL concept attractive for DEMO and power reactors.
Two important FCI functions:– Thermally insulate Pb-Li so that the Pb-Li temperature can be considerably higher
than the maximum operation temperature for steel structures.– Electrically insulate Pb-Li flow from steel structures.
US ITER TBM
Key Requirements to FCI
1. Adequate tranverse thermal insulation– Kth = 2~5 W/m-K for US DCLL TBM (assuming 5 mm FCI)
2. Adequate transverse electrical insulation– el = 5~100 S/m for US DCLL TBM (assuming 5 mm FCI)
3. Chemical compatibility with Pb-Li1. Up to the highest possible temperatures, in a flow system with strong
temperature gradients, and contact with FS at lower temperature.4. Hermeticity
1. Pb-Li must not “soak” into cracks or pores in order to avoid increased electrical conductivity, high tritium retention, or explosively vaporized pockets.
2. In general, sealing layers are required on all surfaces of the inserts.5. Mechanical integrity
1. Primary and secondary stresses must not endanger integrity of FCI6. Maintain 1-5 in a practical operation environment
1. Neutron irradiation in D-T phase2. Developing flow conditions, temperature & field gradients3. Repeated mechanical loading upon VDE and disruption events
US ITER TBM
SiC/SiC as FCI Material
SiC/SiC has been identified to be the most promising material for FCI– Industrial maturity, radiation-resistance, chemical compatibility, etc.– Being qualified as the control rod material in US-DOE Next Generation Nuclear Power
program.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5Strain [%]
Tens
ile s
tres
s [M
Pa]
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Strain [%]
Tensile s
tress [
MPa]
Unirrad.600C, 2.5dpa750C, 15dpa
Tyranno-SA/PyC/FCVI
US ITER TBM
Why are Differential Swelling and Creep Important for FCIs?
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
200 600 1000 1400 1800
Irradiation temperature / K
Sw
elli
ng
/ %
Thorne (1967) Price (1969,1974) Blackstone (1971) Snead (1998) Snead (2001)Katoh, Si ion (2002)
~8x10-6 K-1
Low temperature swelling (S) in SiC– Occurs at < ~1000ºC– Negative correlation with temperature– Start at onset of irradiation– Saturate by ~1 dpa
Differential swelling (dS/dT·dT/dx)– ~twice more significant than CTE– Unconstrained strain reaches 0.1%,
typical unirradiated fracture strain for SiC, at T = 120K.
Irradiation creep may eliminate the secondary stress issues
– Transient irradiation creep strain exceeding 0.2% is reported for SiC.
– Strong swelling-creep coupling likely exists.
– No data available. Irradiation temperature-dependence of saturated swelling in SiC
US ITER TBM
Transverse electrical conductivity measurements in 2D composite
Data for in-plane of typical fusion grade 2D-SiC/SiC shows relatively high values ~500 S/m, likely due to highly conducting carbon inter-phase
New measurements on same material shows SIGNIFICANTLY lower in transverse direction – 2 to 3 orders lower at 500C
The low transverse apparently reflects the extreme anisotropy of the CVI-deposition process for SiC/SiC composite made with 2D-woven fabric layers.
Thermal conductivity still a challenge
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
101
102
103
0 200 400 600 800 1000
in-plane, pre C burn outin-plane, C burn outtransverse, 6-ply in argon+3% H2transverse, 8-ply in dry argonCVD-SiC Bar (Weber)CVD-SiC Bar (Hi-Purity)
Ele
ctr
ical C
on
du
cti
vit
y (
S/m
)
Temperature (oC)
20 S/m
50
0 oC
2D SiC composite,in-plane
Monolithic SiC
DCLL TBM Target
2D SiC composite,transverse
DC electrical conductivity measurements of 2D-Nic S/CVI-SiC composite. Measurements were made in both argon-3% H2 or dry argon. Vacuum-evaporated Au-electrodes on disc faces.
US ITER TBM
Approach & Potential Design Benefits of SiC Foam for flow channel inserts
Improved manufacturability and lower cost compared to SiC/SiC
High strength, stiffness, and thermal stress resistance
Lower thermal conductivity than SiC/SiC
Ultramet will fabricate a flow channel insert composed of an open-cell CVD SiC foam primary structure with thin, integrally bonded and impermeable CVD SiC facesheets.
ULTRAMET-DMS proposed Flow-Channel Insert configuration
CVD SiC closeout layers applied to SiC foam (5X)
US ITER TBM
Testing of foam samples in role as flow channel inserts
Disk samples (~70 mm diameter) held in contact with LM on both sides
100 C thermal gradient and variable electric current applied to the sample
Measurements of electrical and thermal conductivity as a function of thermal cycles
Looking for penetration of LM into SiC
Testing rig at UCLA
US ITER TBM
Summary of electrical and thermal conductivity measurements on SiC foam in contact with LM – no penetration observed in 100 h tests
Foam Sample Area (m2) Thickness (m) Average Electrical Conductivity (S/m)
Average Electrical Conductivity (W/m.k)
SiC #2 With Prewetting
3.79E-03 9.01E-03 2.16 6.25
SiC #2 W/O Prewetting
3.79E-03 9.01E-03 6.11 6.25
SiC #3 With Prewetting
3.67E-03 1.04E-02 1.72E-01 6.78
SiC #3 W/O Prewetting
3.67E-03 1.04E-02 1.84E-01 6.78
SiC #4 W/O Prewetting
3.54E-03 1.60E-02 2.79E-01 4.53
US ITER TBM
Compatibility of SiC With PbLi at 800 - 1200°C
17Li-Pb
Mo Capsule
Mo Wire Spacer
SiC Crucible & Lid
SiC Specimen Holder
Al2O3 Spacer
CVD SiC Specimen
Outer SS, Inconel or 602CA Capsule
Before/During Test
No significant mass gains after any capsule test. Si in PbLi only detected after highest temperature tests. Si could come from CVD SiC specimen or capsule. Results suggest maximum temperature is <~1100°C Research Needs:
• Testing in flowing LiPb environment.• Testing of SiC composites with sealing layers.
Static Capsule Tests
902580650<6018.55%800°C
5000 h
2007890102518515.99%1100°C
2000 h
45016620269037015.62%1200°C
9035501160<3016.27%1100°C
10040901850<3017.49%800°C
1000 h
<401270<170<40n.d.Starting
NOCSiLiTest
Concentrations in appm
US ITER TBM
Thermofluid/MHD issues of DCLL
Issues:o Impact of 3-D effects on pressure drop &
flow distribution Flows in the manifold region Flows in non-uniform, 3-component
ITER B-field Pressure equalization via slots (PES)
or holes (PEH) FCI overlap regions FCI property variations
o Coupled Flow and FCI property effects on heat transfer between the PbLi and He and and temperature field in the FCI and Fe structure
o Flow distribution, heat transfer, and EM loads in off-normal conditions
In the DCLL blanket, the PbLI flows and heat transfer are affected by a strong magnetic field
DCLL DEMO
B-field
US ITER TBM
Current DCLL design based on 2D fully developed Thermofluid MHD analysis
Characterization of the general MHD phenomena in the blanket
2D simulations showing:
Effectiveness of the FCI as electric/thermal insulator
Preferred pressure equalization slot location on FCI
Preliminary identification of SiC FCI properties ( and k)
Estimates of the MHD pressure drop in the system
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
S iC , S /m
0
200
400
600
800
R
N o openingsPES, side w allPES, H artm ann w all
MHD pressure drop reductionfor different slot locations
US ITER TBM
Current status of Thermofluid MHDR&D and PC (Cont’d.)
Preliminary 3-D heat transfer analysis for DEMO, ITER HH and DT blanket modules
Coupling between: - Thermofluid/MHD Structural Analysis
- Thermofluid/MHD He Thermofluid
Good start on 3-D parallel MHD software (HIMAG) and a number of research codes addressing specific MHD/heat transfer issues
Temperature. ITER DT
High Ha number flow computationDEMO: Ha=15,000; Re=84,000; =100 S/m
US ITER TBM
US strategy for DCLL Thermofluid MHD R&D
Two goals:1. To address specific 1st ITER TBM issues via experiments and modeling2. To develop a verified PC, enabling design and performance predictions for
all ITER TBMs and DEMO blanket
Two lines of activity:1. Experimental database. Obtain experimental data on key MHD flows
affecting operation and performance of the blanket for which there is little/no data available.• Flow distribution in manifolds• FCI effectiveness and 3D flow issues• Coupled heat transfer / velocity field issues
2. Modeling tools. Develop 2D and 3D codes and models for PbLi flows and heat transfer in specific TBM/DEMO conditions. Benchmark against existing and new analytical solutions, experimental data and other numerical computations. • HIMAG – arbitrary geometry 3D fully viscous and inertial parallel MHD
solver• 2D models and codes for specific physics issues – MHD turbulence
and natural convection
US ITER TBM
3D HIMAG Benchmark Case against Experimental Pipe Flow Data at Ha = 6600
Case-1Bmax = 2.08 THa = 6640N = 11061Re = 3986U = 0.07 m/s
Case-2Bmax = 1.103 THa = 3500N = 770Re = 15909.1U = 0.2794 m/s
mmt
csm
kg
m
ma
w
w
w
/1039.1
,1001.3
,027.0
,102175.8
,/1086.2
,0541.0
,kg/m865
6
3
4
6
3
a = 0.0541mt = 0.00301 m
x = -20a
x = 15a
xy
z
B
( C.B.Reed et al, 1987)
US ITER TBM
Velocity profiles along the channel
US ITER TBM
Flow Streamlines with electric potential contours
Pressure drop comparison to experimental data
US ITER TBM
X
0
50
100
150
200
Y
-40-20
020
40
Z
01020
Application of HIMAG to Manifold Problem
3D complex geometry and strongMHD interaction – what isthe flow distribution?
US ITER TBM
MHD effects control the flow distribution due to M-shaped velocity profile formation
Y
-40
-20
0
20
40
Z
0
10
20
Ha = 1000Re = 1000N = 1000
US ITER TBM
Center channel has larger flow
center channel+11.8%
side channels-5.9%
Dependence on Ha, Reand geometry must be studied – Likely to be more imbalanced at higher Ha
u
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
Y
-40
-20
0
20
40
Z
0
5
10
15
20
X Y
Z
Ha = 1000Re = 1000N = 1000
US ITER TBM
MTOR Laboratory at UCLA
JUPITER 2 MHD Heat Transfer Exp. in UCLA FLIHY Electrolyte Loop
BOB magnet
QTOR magnet and LM flow
loop
US ITER TBM
MHD Manifold Flow Distribution Experiment
~1 m in length Fits into BOB magnet with in-situ MHD pumping sections Potential and pressure taps for measuring flow
distribution and pressure drop Potentially part of Jupiter III collaboration with Japan
US ITER TBMz
x
yB
Inflow
Outflow
FCI
1.4
m
1.6
6 m
0.3 m 0.139 m
120 mm
RAFS wall 4 mm thick
SiC wall 5 mm thick
139 mm
z
y
2 mm gap
5 mm
DCLL Geometry (not to scale) for HIMAG Simulations
US ITER TBM
2D models for turbulence and mixed convection
Effects important for flows with strong temperature gradients, velocity jets and poorly conducting walls
Motions tend to become 2D at such high interaction parameter
High Ha number flow computationDEMO: Ha=15,000; Re=84,000; =100 S/m
US ITER TBM
A verified predictive capability is considered a top level deliverable for a TBM program
A ultimate goal of R&D and ITER testing is to provide a verified Predictive Capability (PC) that can:
– Meet ITER QA verification requirements– Perform the analysis required
for the design and qualification of any TBM in ITER, and
– Enable interpretation and extrapolation of experimental results from laboratory experiments and from ITER TBMs.
PC Analogy: The TBM can be considered the hardware, and the Predicative Capability the software necessary to exploit the hardware
Basic Properties
Single/MultipleEffects Testing
Partially-Integrated Mockup Testing
- Final Design- Qualification- Integrated Simulation
Models & Theory
Simulation Codes
Integration and Benchmarking
US ITER TBM
PC is included as a main branch of the WBS – similar to EU and other parties
1. US ITER 1.8 TBM Project
1.8.1 DCLL TBM
1.8.2 HCCB TBM
1.8.3 Predictive Capability
1.8.1.1Test Module
1.8.1.2He Loops
1.8.1.3 PbLi Loop
1.8.1.4 Tritium Processing
1.8.1.5Design Integration
1.8.2.1Test Sub-module
1.8.2.2Ancillary Equipment
1.8.2.3Design Integration
1.8.3.1Models and Codes
1.8.3.2 Databases
1.8.3.3Data/Code Integration
1.8.4 Project Support
1.8.4.1Administration
1.8.4.2 TBWG/Parties
Interface
1.8.4.3Safety and Licensing
1.8.4.4QA Officer
US ITER TBM
“Models and codes” includes simulation codes and complex physical and solid models
1.8.3.1 Models and Codes
1.8.3.1.1 MHD Thermofluid
1.8.3.1.2 Solid breeder thermomechanics
1.8.3.1.3 Tritium Permeation
1.8.3.1.4 CAD
1.8.3.1.5 Neutronics
1.8.3.1.6 Structural/Stress
1.8.3.1.7 Thermal-hydraulics
...both simulation codes, and sophisticated input and models for existing codes are included
DCLL solid model showing manifold region geometry in 1.8.1.1.3.1
Turbulent fluctuations in DCLL flow channel in 1.8.1.1.2.1.1
US ITER TBM
Predictive Capabilities tasks are linked to associated R&D and Engineering Analysis activities
Sample from PC Schedule: showing references to linked R&D tasks
Predictive capability sufficient for design and qualification are important R&D tasks – as well as an important deliverable needed for TBM experiment operations
US ITER TBM
Data/Code Integration, or Virtual TBM, is key for planning and interpreting ITER TBM experiments
Integration of the various PC tools and data into an effective, coupled suite of capabilities that:
exchange data in a seamless and
error-free manner, are compatible with modern
clusters and parallel execution allow coupled simulation of the
TBM experiments, including phenomena that are usually considered and modeled separately
1.8.3.3 Data/Codes Integration
1.8.3.3.1 Integrated Strategy Development
1.8.3.3.2 Executive Routines and Data Structure
1.8.3.3.3 Integration of Simulation Capabilities and Associated Data
1.8.3.3.4 Integrated Code Benchmarking and Application
– Complex designs, CAD– neutronics, – coolant flow and heat transfer– structural response,– tritium breeding, permeation and
extraction
US ITER TBM
Selection Phase
• Choosing analysis types (selection of codes)
• Choosing CAD files for different analysis
• Establish analysis hierarchy
Preprocessor Phase
CAD inputs
• Starting preprocessing modules for selected codes
• Setting up different meshes, input files
Interaction control
• Setting up code interaction parameters and timing controls (How often to write load file, coordinate time steps between different codes)
• Choosing between tandem run or sequential run between codes (preserving the analysis hierarchy)
Solution Phase Grid mapping / Data Ex• The required interpolation
routines should start when mapping is required
Post processing • Starting post processing modules for the different software. All results file at the same time level should be analyzed together
• Some analysis parameters should be able to be changed at this stage and the solution recomputed from the current level to observe the change
Example Virtual TBM flow chart
US ITER TBM
Activity Schedule for Data/Codes Integration
US ITER TBM
Summary of the US TBM R&D / PC Activities and Technical Plan
The US TBM R&D plan is designed to provide the basis for important design, fabrication and qualification decisions.– R&D is needed to insure against risks to whole machine ($10B), not just
this component - must be conservative!– If building one blanket module, or blankets for the whole machine, R&D
is the essentially the same – subsequent TBM projects will be lower cost
A verified predictive capability is considered a top level deliverable
Main DCLL R&D activities include– RAFS fabrication and Partially-integrated Mockup Testing and
prototypes make up >50% of projected costs– FCI development, and thermofluid MHD database and simulation tools– Other smaller activities in diagnostics, He thermofluid, PbLi compatibility
and reactivity, and tritium
