Advanced tokamak reactors based on the spherical torus (ATR/ST). Preliminary design considerations

Miller, R.L.; Krakowski, R.A.; Bathke, C.G.; Copenhaver, C.; Schnurr, N.M.; Engelhardt, A.; Seed, T.J.; Zubrin, Robert

doi:10.2172/5677294

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The outpnt parameters for the nine reactors, each producing 1200-MW(e) net, are shown in Tables VI and VII for superconducting and normal magnets, respectively. The plasma parameters resulting from the systems code are very close to those obtained by other investigators for ST [21], ET [22], and normal magnet tokamaks operating in the first stability regime [23]. The major radius of the ET devices is 3.12 m vs a reported 2.93 (constant year dollars) "Input variables.…”

Section: Ivb Output Parameterssupporting

confidence: 72%

Economic Considerations of Commercial Tokamak Options

Dabiri

1987

Fusion Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systems studies have been performed to assess commercial tokamak options. Super conducting, as well as normal, magnet coils in either first or second stability regimes have been considered. A spherical torus (ST), as well as an elongated tokamak (ET), is included in the study. The cost of electricity (COE) is selected as the figure of merit, and beta and first-wall neutron wall loads are selected to represent the physics and technology charac teristics of various options. The results indicate that an economical optimum for tokamaks is predicted to require a beta of around 10%, as predicted to be achieved in the second sta bility regime, and a wall load of about 5 MW/m 2 , which is assumed to be optimum tech nologically. This tokamak h expected to be competitive with fission plants if efficient, noninductive current drive is developed. However, if this regime cannot be attained, all other tokamaks operating in the first stability regime, including spherical torus and elongated tokamak and assuming a limiting wall load of 5 MW/m 2 , will compete with one another with a COE of about SO mill/kWh. This is 40% higher than the COE for the optimum reactor in the second stability regime with fast-wave current drive. The above conclusions pertain to a 1200-MW(e) net electric power plant. A comparison was also made between ST, ET, and superconducting magnets in the second stability regime with fast-wave current drive at 60C MW(e). The result indicates that the COE of an ET or ST device operating with the same technology requirement (wall load) as a superconducting magnet tokamak is about the same as the COE of a superconducting magnet tokamak in the second stability regime. Therefore, a device like ST or ET appears to look more attrac tive in lower ratings than 1200 MW(e).

show abstract

Section: Ivb Output Parameterssupporting

confidence: 72%

Economic Considerations of Commercial Tokamak Options

Dabiri

1987

Fusion Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A previous, comprehensive study [4] of this concept assumed physics and current-drive (CD) characteristics prior to the availability of the emerging database.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

ARIES-ST design point selection

Miller

2003

Fusion Engineering and Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The physics issues and the impact on reactor performance can be divided Economy-of-scale curves for the CSR (this study) compared to the reversed-field pinch (RFP), 25 medium-and best-experience pressurized-water reactors (PWR), 94 fossil-fuelled (coal) plants, 34 and a range of new-era modular fission reactors 24 (PRISM, SAFR, LSPB). Also shown is a projection made by a recent generic fission reactor study 15 (GENEROMAK).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…21 ' 22 The major components of the total direct cost are conveniently divided into two major cost categories: Reactor For fusion power plants invoking more-or-less conventional BOPs (i.e., steambased conversion systems with gross conversion efficiencies of f^ = 0.35-0.40), the RPE for the early fusion power plant designs 1 " 10 alone represented > 50% of the total direct cost, with the FPC requiring 25-30% of all direct expenditures; these percentages compare to ~ 30% and < 5%, respectively, for identical accounts in a typical light-water fission reactor (LWR). 25 Table 1.1.-I summarizes the major costs for a number of earlier fusion power-plant designs, as well as recently improved designs based either on innovative approaches to the tokamak 24 or extensions from non-tokamak concepts 25 " 27 ; a normalized comparison to the pressurized-water fission reactor, PWR 23 , is also included.…”

Section: Background and Rationale For Compact Fusion Reactorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The spheromak as a compact fusion reactor

Hagenson¹,

Krakowski²

1987

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After summarizing the economic and utility-based rationale for compact, higher-power-density fusion reactors, the gun-sustained spheromak concept is explored as one of a number of poloidal-field-dominated confinement configurations that might improve the prospects for economically attractive and operationally simplified fusion power plants. Using a comprehensive physics/engineering/cos ting model for the spheromak, guided by realistic engineering constraints and physics extrapolation, a range of cost-optimized reactor design points is presented, and the sensitivity of cost to key physics, engineering, and operational variables is reported. The results presented herein provide the basis for conceptual engineering designs of key fusion-power-core (FPC) subsystems and more detailed plasma modeling of this promising, high mass-power-density concept, which stresses single-piece FPC maintenance, steady-state current drive through electrostatic magnetic helicity injection, a simplified co-axial electrode-divertor, and efficient resistive-coil equilibrium-field coils. The optimal FPC size and cost estimates project a system that competes aggressively with the best offered by alternative energy sources while simplifying considerably the complexity that has generally been associated with most approaches to magnetic fusion energy. PROJECT CONTINGENCY COST OF MONEY, CONSTRUCTION TIMEETC.

show abstract

Advanced tokamak reactors based on the spherical torus (ATR/ST). Preliminary design considerations

Cited by 10 publications

References 18 publications

Economic Considerations of Commercial Tokamak Options

Economic Considerations of Commercial Tokamak Options

ARIES-ST design point selection

The spheromak as a compact fusion reactor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About