Overview of the FTU results

Pucella, G.; Alessi, E.; Amicucci, L.; Angelini, B.; Apicella, M. L.; Apruzzese, G.; Artaserse, G.; Barbato, Emanuele; Belli, F.; Bertocchi, A.; Bin, W.; Boncagni, L.; Botrugno, A.; Briguglio, S.; Bruschi, A.; Buratti, P.; Calabrò, G.; Cardinali, A.; Castaldo, C.; Causa, F.; Ceccuzzi, S.; Centioli, C.; Cesario, R.; Cianfarani, C.; Cocilovo, V.; Crisanti, F.; D'Arcangelo, O.; Angeli, M. De; Angelis, R. De; Troia, C. Di; Esposito, B.; Farina, D.; Figini, L.; Fogaccia, G.; Frigione, D.; Fusco, V.; Gabellieri, L.; Galperti, C.; Garavaglia, S.; Giovannozzi, E.; Granucci, G.; Iannone, F.; Lontano, M.; Maddaluno, G.; Marchetto, C.; Marinucci, M.; Marocco, D.; Mazzitelli, G.; Mazzotta, C.; Milovanov, Alexander V.; Minelli, D.; Mirizzi, F.; Moro, A.; Nowak, S.; Orsitto, F.; Pacella, D.; Panaccione, L.; Panella, M.; Pericoli‐Ridolfini, V.; Pizzuto, A.; Podda, S.; Ramogida, G.; Ravera, G.; Романо, А.; Sozzi, C.; Tuccillo, A. A.; Tudisco, O.; Viola, B.; Vitale, E.; Vlad, G.; Zanza, V.; Zerbini, M.; Zonca, F.; Aquilini, M.; Cefali, P.; Ferdinando, E. Di; Giovenale, S. Di; Giacomi, G.; Grosso, Andrea; Mellera, V.; Mezzacappa, Maria Aparecida; Pensa, A.; Petrolini, P.; Piergotti, V.; Raspante, B.; Rocchi, G.; Sibio, A.; Tilia, B.; Tulli, R.; Vellucci, M.; Zannetti, D.; Almaviva, S.; Canal, G. P.; Caneve, L.; Carnevale, D.; Cavinato, M.; Cirant, S.; Colao, F.; Crescenzi, F.; Duval, B. P.; Fantoni, R.; Federspiel, L.; Galeani, Sergio; Grosso, G.; Jakubowski, L.; Karpushov, A.; Kim, D.; Lazzaro, E.; Lyublinski, I.E.; Malinowski, K.; Martin-Solís, J.R.; Maviglia, F.; Mosconi, M.; Popović, Ž.; Rabiński, M.; Reale, Marco; Reimerdes, H.; Ricci, D.; Riva, M.; Roccella, S.; Rossel, J.; Sadowski, M.; Sassano, Mario; Sauter, O.; Testa, D.; Vertkov, А.V.; Wágner, D.; Zebrowski, J.

doi:10.1088/0029-5515/55/10/104005

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fields as high as 8-12 T were only tested in two series of tokamak experiments at the MIT and ENEA, culminated respectively in Alcator C-mod [4] and FTU [5]. For comparison, ITER has a field of 5.3 T on axis [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Minimization of magnetic forces on stellarator coils

Robin¹,

Volpe²

2022

Nucl. Fusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic confinement devices for nuclear fusion can be large and expensive. Compact stellarators are promising candidates for cost-reduction, but introduce new difficulties: confinement in smaller volumes requires higher magnetic field, which calls for higher coil-currents and ultimately causes higher Laplace forces on the coils - if everything else remains the same. This motivates the inclusion of force reduction in stellarator coil optimization. In the present paper we consider a coil winding surface, we prove that there is a natural and rigorous way to define the Laplace force (despite the magnetic field discontinuity across the current-sheet), we provide examples of cost associated (peak force, surface-integral of the force squared) and discuss easy generalizations to parallel and normal force-components, as these will be subject to different engineering constraints. Such costs can then be easily added to the figure of merit in any multi-objective stellarator coil optimization code. We demonstrate this for a generalization of the REGCOIL code [M. Landreman, Nucl. Fusion 57, 046003 (2017)], which we rewrote in python, and provide numerical examples for the NCSX (now QUASAR) design. We present results for various definitions of the cost function, including peak force reductions by up to 40 %, and outline future work for further reduction.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Modular coils for advanced stellarators, on the other hand, are the result of numerical optimization. The most common optimization criterion is to reproduce the target magnetic field to within one part in 10 4 or 10 5 . Typically this is solved on a 2D toroidal surface external to the plasma, called Coil Winding Surface (CWS).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimization of magnetic forces on stellarator coils

Robin¹,

Volpe²

2022

Nucl. Fusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Initial Exploration of High-Field Pulsed Stellarator Approach to Ignition Experiments

Queral¹,

Volpe

Spong

et al. 2018

J Fusion Energ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the framework of fusion energy research based on magnetic confinement, pulsed high-field tokamaks such as Alcator and FTU have made significant scientific contributions, while several others have been designed to reach ignition, but not built yet (IGNITOR, FIRE). Equivalent stellarator concepts, however, have barely been explored. The present study aims at filling this gap by: (1) performing an initial exploration of parameters relevant to ignition and of the difficulties for a highfield stellarator approach, and, (2) proposing a preliminary high-field stellarator concept for physics studies of burning plasmas and, possibly, ignition. To minimize costs, the device is pulsed, adopts resistive coils and has no blankets. Scaling laws are used to estimate the minimum field needed for ignition, fusion power and other plasma parameters. Analytical expressions and finite-element calculations are used to estimate approximate heat loads on the divertors, coil power consumption, and mechanical stresses as functions of the plasma volume, under wide-ranging parameters. Based on these studies, and on assumptions on the enhancement-factor of the energy confinement time and the achievable plasma beta, it is estimated that a stellarator of magnetic field B * 10 T and 30 m 3 plasma volume could approach or reach ignition, without encountering unsurmountable thermal or mechanical difficulties. The preliminary conceptual device is characterised by massive copper coils of variable cross-section, detachable periods, and a lithium wall and divertor.

show abstract

Static arrangement of a capillary porous system (CPS): Modelling

Pelekasis

Benos

2017

Fusion Engineering and Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Overview of the FTU results

Cited by 10 publications

References 24 publications

Minimization of magnetic forces on stellarator coils

Minimization of magnetic forces on stellarator coils

Initial Exploration of High-Field Pulsed Stellarator Approach to Ignition Experiments

Static arrangement of a capillary porous system (CPS): Modelling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About