TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of the Process Systems Code with the SONIC Divertor Code
AU - Morris, J.
AU - Asakura, N.
AU - Homma, Y.
AU - Hoshino, K.
AU - Kovari, M.
N1 - Funding Information:
Manuscript received July 18, 2019; revised November 28, 2019; accepted January 7, 2020. Date of publication February 13, 2020; date of current version June 10, 2020. This work was supported by the Research Councils UK (RCUK) Energy Programme under Grant EP/T012250/1, in part by the Framework of the EUROfusion Consortium, in part by the Euratom Research and Training Programme 2014–2018 and 2019–2020 under Grant 633053, in part by the Framework of the Broader Approach DEMO Design Activity (DDA), in part by the Joint Special Design Team for Fusion DEMO in Japan, in part by the JFRS-1 Supercomputer System at the Computational Simulation Centre of the International Fusion Energy Research Centre (IFERC-CSC) in the Rokkasho Fusion Institute of QST (Aomori, Japan). The review of this article was arranged by Senior Editor G. H. Neilson. (Corresponding author: J. Morris.) J. Morris and M. Kovari are with the Culham Centre for Fusion Energy, Abingdon OX14 3DB, U.K. (e-mail: james.morris2@ukaea.uk).
Publisher Copyright:
© 1973-2012 IEEE.
PY - 2020/6
Y1 - 2020/6
N2 - In a demonstration (DEMO) reactor, mitigation of the large heat load on the divertor target to the below material and engineering limits is a key requirement for operation. Systems modeling is used to design entire fusion power plants and, therefore, has to be able to appropriately capture the divertor challenge. Therefore, it is important to validate these models against comprehensive SOL-divertor simulation codes and experiments. A 1-D divertor model in PROCESS was investigated, compared to the results of 2-D SONIC simulation under the detachment condition. The comparison shows how the 1-D divertor model handles the power loss mechanisms from the outboard mid-plane to the outer divertor target for a DEMO-like condition. The results show good agreement on the calculated value of the total power crossing the separatrix (<5% difference) and the total impurity radiation power P imp (<10% difference). However, the 1-D profiles show differences in density and temperature at the upstream of the target (<10 m of connection length to target, corresponding to 10 cm in the poloidal length). One reason for this difference is that the 2-D model calculates impurity transport, which produces a variable impurity fraction along the connection length in the divertor, while the 1-D model uses a single averaged value. The SONIC code also considers physical processes not covered in the 1-D model, such as radial transport in the SOL and divertor region. A scan of P sep values in PROCESS for a DEMO-sized machine show that above Psep = 200 MW, there is a stronger impact on cost and machine size for higher Psep.
AB - In a demonstration (DEMO) reactor, mitigation of the large heat load on the divertor target to the below material and engineering limits is a key requirement for operation. Systems modeling is used to design entire fusion power plants and, therefore, has to be able to appropriately capture the divertor challenge. Therefore, it is important to validate these models against comprehensive SOL-divertor simulation codes and experiments. A 1-D divertor model in PROCESS was investigated, compared to the results of 2-D SONIC simulation under the detachment condition. The comparison shows how the 1-D divertor model handles the power loss mechanisms from the outboard mid-plane to the outer divertor target for a DEMO-like condition. The results show good agreement on the calculated value of the total power crossing the separatrix (<5% difference) and the total impurity radiation power P imp (<10% difference). However, the 1-D profiles show differences in density and temperature at the upstream of the target (<10 m of connection length to target, corresponding to 10 cm in the poloidal length). One reason for this difference is that the 2-D model calculates impurity transport, which produces a variable impurity fraction along the connection length in the divertor, while the 1-D model uses a single averaged value. The SONIC code also considers physical processes not covered in the 1-D model, such as radial transport in the SOL and divertor region. A scan of P sep values in PROCESS for a DEMO-sized machine show that above Psep = 200 MW, there is a stronger impact on cost and machine size for higher Psep.
KW - Demonstration (DEMO)
KW - PROCESS
KW - SOL
KW - SONIC
KW - divertor
KW - nuclear fusion
KW - systems codes
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85087071809&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85087071809&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/TPS.2020.2967859
DO - 10.1109/TPS.2020.2967859
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85087071809
SN - 0093-3813
VL - 48
SP - 1799
EP - 1803
JO - IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science
JF - IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science
IS - 6
M1 - 8998560
ER -