inertial fusion energy materials under...

March 22, 2010 EFDA IFE KIT Meeting / Instituto Fusion Nuclear / ETSII / UPM / Madrid

Inertial Fusion Energy Materials under Irradiation

Technology watch workshop on IFE-KiT22 March, 2010 (11:30-18:30)

hosted by Instituto Fusion Nuclear Universidad Politecnica de Madrid (ETSII)

J. M. Perlado


Inertial Confinement Fusion: Reactor concepts and NIFMATERIALS assessment

– Structural Material :Steel SS304

Lifetime = that of the plant

Flibe: Coolant, T reproduction, and protection

HYLIFE-IINIF

MATERIALS

Target composition

(nanostructures)

First Wall, Optics

Structural, Coolant

Activation and Damage

Heat Deposition, T economy

Effects of:

Neutron

Debris

Shrapnel

X-rays; High T; High P

SOMBRERO

Type of Facility:

Ignition, Reactor/Protection

HiPER


MATERIALS FOR TARGETS


First results on shockwave generation and propagation on Ta: Pictures show the resulting crystal structure (5 millions of atoms) after 5ps MD. Shock propagates in direction [100].

”Piston” velocities were in the range from 180 Km/s to 720 Km/s. Sample compression reaches 1014 bars.

Advanced Materials

NANOCRYSTAL

METALLIC FOAMS

Advance Manufacturing Techniques in NanoMicrotechnology


CENTRAL IGNITIONDIRECT DRIVE – INDIRECT DRIVE

X- Rays Neutrons Ions

Energy

-Direct. Drive-Indirect Drive

1,5%18%

75%75%

23%7%

OPERATIONAL WINDOWS FOR DRY-WALL AND WETTED-WALL IFE CHAMBERS


Spectra for NRL

Spectra for HY DD

Spectra for ID

X‐ray spectra


We don’t have tables!!I asked John!

SHOCK IGNITION


1.00E-04

1.00E-03

1.00E-02

1.00E-01

1.00E+00

1.00E-11 1.00E-10 1.00E-09 1.00E-08 1.00E-07 1.00E-06 1.00E-05 1.00E-04 1.00E-03 1.00E-02 1.00E-01 1.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.00E+02

MeV

Prob

abili

ty

constant density in target

high and low density distinction

Neutron Spectra High gain capsule with

2x 1020 neutrons / pulse


Assuming 4 m Radius

Wall after protection = 1 cm of Fe

DAMAGE

RATEMonteCarlodetailed calculations


Designing systems by simulation of the timetime--dependentdependent neutron intensities and energy spectra is already well done with existing methodology. This is an example assuming first wall protection (which will be not needed for HiPER operation except experiments in mock-up testing cells could be approved)


NEUTRONICS 3D DETAILED CALCULATIONS USING CAD AND MCNPX. It is time to start to use in Inertial Fusion Reactors Concepts and Facilities to get consequences such as Activation /Damage …….defining structures and materials……………………


NEUTRON TRANSPORT CALCULATION

HYLIFE-IISpectrum, flux intensity, and average neutron energy in the FSW with 60 cm of Flibe thickness and2240 MW fusion power

1,0E+04

1,0E+05

1,0E+06

1,0E+07

1,0E+08

1,0E+09

1,0E+10

1,0E+11

1,0E+12

1,0E-05 1,0E-04 1,0E-03 1,0E-02 1,0E-01 1,0E+00 1,0E+01 1,0E+02

Energy (MeV)

Flux

Den

sity

(n*c

m-2

s-1 M

eV-1

)

-100

-75

-50

-25

0

25

50

75

100

%D

IF=

(TA

RT-

MC

NP)

/TA

RT*

100

Flux Density TART2000

%DIF ENDFB6.0

%DIF ENDFB6.8

%DIF JENDL3.2

%DIF JEFF3.1

TART2000 MCNP4c2 ENDF/B-VI.0 ENDF/B-VI.8 JENDL3.3 JEFF-3.1 φ (n cm-2 s-1) 5.30E+14 5.69E+14 5.71E+14 6.41E+14 6.18E+14 (MeV) 3.06E-01 3.68E-01 3.69E-01 4.16E-01 3.46E-01


Selection of Low Activation elementsin HYLIFE-II irradiation conditions

Limits in the concentration (weight fraction) for all natural elements

Acceptability of pure elements under Shallow Land Burial Criteria (SLB)

Elements with good engineering properties but not acceptable froElements with good engineering properties but not acceptable from activationm activationElements as impurities restricted to very severe limitsElements as impurities restricted to very severe limits

DOMINANTS NUCLIDES LIMIT CONCENTRATION RECYCLING RECYCLING

ELEMENT SLB REMOTE HANDS-ON SLB REMOTE HANDS-ONNB NB 94 (100.) NB 94 (100.) NB 94 (100.) 6,93E-07 1,91E-05 4,78E-08 TB H0166M (100.) H0166M (100.) H0166M (100.) 4,82E-06 1,43E-04 3,67E-07

ZN - CO 60 (100.) - NL 7,59E-01 NL

NO limit

100-1000 ppm

1-10%

1-10 ppm

0,1-1% 0,1-1 ppm10-100%

10-100 ppm


Energy Spectra

Average X-ray energy 8,8 keV

Particles go up to some MeVs

Burning hydrodynamic codes are used to calculate the energy spectra….IN THESE CALCULATONS: Shock target of 48 MJ (J. Perkins). SO CRITICAL TARGET COMPOSITION !!!

REQUIREMENTS FOR TARGET AREA REPETITIVE


Time distribution of fluence on wall (every 200 ns)

HOW X-RAYS AND IONS ARRIVE TO FIRST WALL TIME DEPENDENT

Physical - Nuclear (up to MJ) and electronic (MJ onwards). It can be studied with SRIM software. MUCH MORE FUNDAMENTAL WORK IS NEEDED!!! Chemical - Reactions on surface (not in Tungsten, very important in carbon containing walls)

Radiation enhanced sputtering – Diffusion of interstitial atoms that diffuse to the surface and sublimate (important in carbon)


Origin Clusters, Debris, Shrapnel•Produced during the ablation of the target, and ulterior re-emission processes from the chamber itself•Energy and size distribution not available (but for some experiments)

Particles in the nano-scale (clusters)•Sputtering of polyatomic species and clusters is one/two orders of magnitude higher.•No models available. Their effect has to be studied for every specific case.

Particles in the micro-scale (debris)•They appear as deposits/small particles/droplets•Damage up to some microns (crater/erosion)

Particles in the tens of micrometer-scale (Shrapnel)•They appear as “big” fragments•Damage of some hundreds of microns (crater/erosion)

Their effectcan be

modelled usingHypervelocity

Impactsimulations(Autodyn)


•Energy deposition•Simulation of the spatio-temporal deposition of energy – FLUKA, MCNPXFLUKA, MCNPX•Thermo-mechanical effects – ANSYSANSYS

(As first approx. we do not accept melting/evaporation of wall)WHEN PROTECTION OR PHASE TRANSITION: FLUENT, CFX FLUENT, CFX

•X-ray damage•A massive photoelectric effect on surface is expected. Damage?

(roughly 5% of X-rays will result in the emission of e-, i.e. 2 x 1016 e-.m-2)•Ion damage

•Sputtering – SRIMSRIM code. The design of target is critical(a 2 mm radius target with 35μm thick plastic surface contains about 2 orders of magnitude more atoms than a monolayer of the 5 m radius tungsten wall; sputtering efficiency of C atoms ≈1-10%)

•Defects resulting in modifications (hardness, corrosion, fracture...). Is there software to simulate those effects available?

•Debris/Shrapnel•Simulation of debris/shrapnel formation•Simulation of damage on wall (micrometeorite impact theory) – ANSYSANSYS

√


Thermomechanical simulation for the first wall In all the cases studied thermal stress is very far from yield stress, but temperature could be close to melting point (~3695 K) if Pulse energy is higher than 2 J/cm2.

Pulse Energy (J/cm2) Temperature(K) Stress (MPa)1 1800 1.42 3100 2.7

2.8 >4000 3.7


Ion Number of particles

Average energy (keV)

Sputtering (at/ion)Tungsten

Shots to remove monolayer(Tungsten 1,8E16 atoms/cm2)(5 m radius chamber)

H 1,18E19 143 0 --D 1,05E20 191,4 0 --T 9,45E19 235 0 --3He 1,9E17 296 1% 1e74He 1,7E19 1334 0 --12C 1,38E19 760 4% 2,7e413C 1,15E17 820 10% 1,3e6

In the case of Tungsten and for average kinetic energy particles


We have these inputs data, we could get responses with DEPENDENCE OF PROTECTION

Time (s)E

nerg

y (J

)

Time (s)

Tem

pera

ture

(eV

)


Incoming laser is first deflected and focused in the final opticsChamber wall positioned radially between target and optics with penetrations to allow the entry

High energy neutronsX-RaysChamber black body like

radiation Ion debris

Lens

Mirror

DisposableLens

Pinhole

16 m

8 m

8 m5 m


• Integrated energy deposition• Energy contributions orders of magnitude lower than the energy

coming from the laser (~2KJ)• Big uncertainties in photons but we can still get a taste• Local hot spots could appear


Identification of defects and production under irradiation with / without H.

It is absolutely clear that in both kind of defects, the number of defects, both without H atoms and with H atoms, increases withincreasing PKA energy.


MATERIALSMATERIALSCeramics (Windows/Optics): SiO2, Alumina, FCa

First Wall: Be, C, W, Ferritic Steels

Structural: Ferritic Steels (FeCr based), Vanadium Alloys, Composites based in SiC or C fibers.

Nanocrystal material for high T / high P conditions in target design, and through Oxide Dispersion Strength in FeCr Ferritic Steels.

Structural Materials under Irradiation (Neutrons) = FULL COOPERATIVE WORK IN MODELLING AND EXPERIMENTS BETWEEN EFDA AND IFE GROUPS


The Grand ChallengeThe Grand Challenge: predict strain localization and work

hardening in irradiated tensile tests

Stress-strain relation of tensile specimens of irradiated Cu (from: M. Victoria et al. 2001)

TEM weak beam

We now have a mesoscale computational tool to study these problems: Strain hardening beyond the formation of channels We will extract DD-based constitutive laws

for material models in FE calculations

Simulation of irradiated copper tensile specimen


SiC

J.M. Perlado, L. Malerba, T. Díaz de la Rubia, Fusion Technology, 34, no. 3, part 2 (1998) 840-

847Molecular Molecular DynamicsDynamics: : MacroscopicMacroscopic ApplicationApplicationDefiningDefining StressStress--StrainStrain curvecurve

• Materials:– Alloys prepared from 99,99 Fe and Cr by arc melting in a

pure Ar atmosphere. Nominal concentrations: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 12 y 15% at Cr.

– Effect of Cr content• Ion irradiation conditions

– Irradiations performed in the AIM facility of the Forschungszentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (FZD)*:• Fe+ 150 keV• Dose: 2x1018 ions/m2 (~0.8 dpa)• Flux: 2x1015 ions/m2 s• Temperatures: 140K and 300K

• TEM observation at RT– JEOL 200 keV

140 K

300 K

Irradiation time Observation time

IrradiationTemperature

Experimental methodology in FeCr for EFDA

Clusters > 100 defectos (≈>2 nm)Computational KMC model

The comparison with experiment is not still correct but is gping with less uncertainty to fox such results


Radiation Damage in Repetitive Systems Radiation Damage in Repetitive Systems …………There will be There will be consequences in behavior (?)consequences in behavior (?)

Microscopic simulation on defect generation at low doses. Good starting …. ….

NOT ENOUGH


Generation of Radiations and Beams by High Power laser

超高エネルギー密度プラズマの発生と精密計測

X-ray

γ ray

MeV 電子

MeV イオン

中性子

中間子

陽電子

ペタワットレーザー

実験計測

QuickTimeý Ç² êLí£ÉvÉçÉOÉâÉÄ

Ç™Ç±ÇÃÉsÉNÉ`ÉÉÇ¾å©ÇÈÇžÇ½Ç…ÇÕïKóvÇ-Ç�

Laser implosionD+D: 2.4 MeV neutronD+T: 14 MeV neutronD+ 3He: 14Mev Proton

Ultraintense short pulse laser

Neutron,ProtonsX-rays

Gas-cluster target Solid film target

Merit : low debris and high rep-ratesmall laser energy

Demerit: low efficiency

Merit: high efficiencyDemerit: debris

Merit: high efficiencyDemerit: high energy neutron

High energy laser

MeV ionNeutronMeV electronμ-onPositronHard X-ray


Neutron production Scaling depending on laser energy

Laser pulse energy (J)

Neu

tron

yield/ puls e

Fast ignition

FIREX NIF

１１B(p,n)１１C

100

104

106

108

1010

1012

1014

1016

1018

1020

0.1 1 10 100 1000 104 105 106 107

ImplosionClusterCD shellNuclear reaction Expected by laser fusion

7Li(p,n)7Be

Exploding pusher

E2.235 fsFalcon

100 fsJanUSP

VULCAN

LHART

Central ignitionQ=1 (DT

)

g-D2

natPb(p,xn)Bi


Various neutron production processes andenergy efficiency

Type of nuclearreactions

generation efficiencyNeutron/ particle

Energy cost MeV/neutron

235U(n,f) 1n/fission 180

DT fusion 1n/fusion -

D-Be (Ed = 15MeV) 1.2x 10-2 n/d 1,200

Electron beam(Ee=35MeV) 1.7x10-2n/e 2,000

Hg sparation(Ep = 3GeV) 75 n/p 35

P-Be ( Ep =5MeV) 10-4 n/p ? 50,000Li-P ( Ep = 3MeV) 10-4 n/p 30,000


Thanks for your attention

and…………….

coming to Madrid !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


IFE REACTORS DESIGNS

MAIN THREATS TO THE CHAMBER WALL-High temperatures -> evaporation-Ion implantation (in particular He)-Sputtering, ablation-Mechanical damage (roughening, embrittlement,…)-Neutrons


We have / will need to develop an updatedmethodology for IFE accident analyses• In order to maximize the S&E advantages of IFE,

accident consequences must be addressed realistically

• In early studies, safety analysis tools were not very refined which often resulted in overly conservative safety analyses and safety-important design details were not available to incorporate into the safety assessment

• We have adopted and adapted computer codes traditionally used by MFE, and integrated them in a set of state-of-the-art codes/libraries for IFE safety analyses

• These tools have provided the first self-consistent analysis to understand the integrated behavior of an IFE chamber under accident conditions

• We have applied this methodology to various IFE designs and a target fabrication facility, with the goal of demonstrating that fusion designs could meet the no-evacuation objective (1 rem)

HYLIFE-II

SOMBRERO


TART/MCNP input:model geometry,

materials

TARTCHECK:verification of

TART geometry

TART: photon/neutron transport

ENDL: cross-section

library

TARTREAD

ACAB input:irradiation history,

neutron flux, materials, output options

ACAB: activation calculations

Radioactive inventory, afterheat, etc

FENDL/A-2.0: cross-section

library

FENDL/D-2.0: decay library

TART input for γ-ray transport

Photon/neutron energy deposition,

path-lengths

CHEMCON: heat transfer

Time-temperature history

MELCOR input:geometry, radioactive

source term

Radioactivity release fraction

OFF-SITE DOSES

DCF library

MELCOR: thermal-hydraulics

CHEMCON input:geometry, energy

source term= input file

= FORTRAN code

= Data library

= Output data

SET OF COMPUTER CODES AND LIBRARIES

39

inertial fusion energy materials under...

Documents