Meeting Location: 8.1-001
Zoom Raum 2: (ID: 948-1054-7070 / PW: 021741)
Dear colleagues,
thank you for the lively discussion and your constructive feedback. Below you will find my minutes as well as Amit’s notes. If anyone else took notes, please send them to me if not already included below. If it was important enough for you to write down, I want to make sure that it is taken into account and we don’t overlook any valid points. In particular I found the point “heat flux impact factor” which I can’t find any references to on google scholar. I forgot who mentioned this factor.
All slides and minutes are stored on indico as usual:
https://event.ipp-hgw.mpg.de/event/1425/
Minutes:
· Slide 3: Replace Boozer coordinates by toroidal coordinate system
· Slide 5: Title typo, Sink/Source diagram is W7-X specific and needs some explanation, generic diagram could improve accessability
· Slide 7: Our goal is to boil water at a market competitive price. Under this goal, a cost function should be added to the first principles. This function will be discussed in quality in the text of the paper, but not developed to a quantifiable level. This was triggered by principle 7 – survive. How long would a divertor need to survive?
· Slide 8: Mark X points with an actual X, and add O points. Sketch of targets or labeling of Core and divertor areas was disliked, as it would introduce assumptions at an too early fundamental state.
· Slide 10: Include 1 to 5 sigma lamda_n lines. Perhaps add sketch for a turbulent lamda_n line. Add “,…” after proportionality list. Add B dependency of D_perp
· Slide 12: Use T_i instead of T_e in P_rec,surf. Include MAD and dissociation as energy loss terms in diagram.
· Slide 14: Activated Carbon for cryo pump
· Slide 17: Add Be and Bn and Tungsten filament reinforced PFM.
· Slide 18: Difference q_max and q_critical? q_critical when boiling point of coolant is reached. Discuss with Joris. Better sketch for 3D print, add sketch for liquid metal targets. Generally we don’t want more Tungsten than necessary. Monoblocks are an order of magnitude more expensive than tile designs, generally we want the smallest thickness between plasma and coolant. At the same time a permeation of fuel into the coolant should be minimized. Mention wall treatment.
· Slide 19: Mention chemical sputtering for C, Li, Bn.
· Slide 21: Chaotification seems to be a better word than chaostization. I understand the problem of showing the pumpgap in this cross section and how that would be easier in a poloidal cross section. However I’d like to stay field aligned to the separatrix, as this enables to show the grazing angle alpha and instead of solving for a toroidal and poloidal angle, I only need to solve for one, simplifying the problem. This allows to highlight the other exterm on Slide 22 where the target is orientated normal to the separatrix, which is not feasible in a poloidal cross section. I have an idea on how to solve the imaging of the pumpgap by adding an additional cross section that looks down the field line. I’ll discuss the details with Antara and Amit.
Dieter:
WCrY Smart Alloy Research:
https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/872689/files/Masterthesis_Karen_De_Lannoye.pdf
Amits Minutes:
Slide 3: Replace boozer coordinates by Elementary toroidal coordinates. Can mention the mapping between real space and magnetic coordinates (eg. boozer) but they won't add much to that slide in my opinion
- Slide 4: can we think of a better definition of the SOL that 6 sigma particles? (something that is more applicable and relatable!)
- Slide 5: Typo in title
- Slide 8: Suggestion: Can you show an example of how "divertor diverting particles". Might be worth mentioning a metric such as pitch of field lines in the divertor toroid?
Best,
Thierry