1 / 8

US Role in ITER Diagnostics and Comments on Port Task Force Activity David Johnson, PPPL

ITER Port Teleconference April 12, 2005. US Role in ITER Diagnostics and Comments on Port Task Force Activity David Johnson, PPPL US scope Why Port Task Force activities? Funding arrangements Goals for this meeting. 16% share of diagnostics effort.

nasim-randolph
Download Presentation

US Role in ITER Diagnostics and Comments on Port Task Force Activity David Johnson, PPPL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ITER Port Teleconference April 12, 2005 • US Role in ITER Diagnostics and Comments on Port Task Force Activity • David Johnson, PPPL • US scope • Why Port Task Force • activities? • Funding • arrangements • Goals for this meeting 16% share of diagnostics effort

  2. ITER Port-Based Diagnostic Packages • Status • Repackaging and party sharing has been provisionally approved • Details of new packages have not been renegotiated • Most systems have evolved since FDR toward more complication

  3. Diagnostic Port Packages Upper Ports (U5, U17) Equatorial Ports (E3, E9) Divertor Side Panels and Support Structures(L8)

  4. Numerous Systems Must Be Integrated Into Each Port • Design constraints • Intermingling of numerous labyrinths, many with precision optics • Provide access while limiting neutron streaming • Provide attachments and cooling to blanket shield modules • Example - Port E3 is a US responsibility • US will provide the MSE system as the ‘lead diagnostic’ • Edge MSE view in port E3 (US) and core view in port E1 (EU) • US is also responsible for integrating the following into port E3 • Visible/IR camera view (EU) • Two edge CXRS views (RF) • H arrays (RF)

  5. US ITER Project Diagnostic Packages

  6. Importance of Port Engineering Task Force • There are a number of high leverage issues still being addressed in the port designs that will impact diagnostic performance and cost. • gap filling port installation guide • blanket shield module attachment • feasibility of smaller demountable port sub-assemblies • port testing and delivery plan • ?? • Of the 6 ITER parties, the US has the third largest role in diagnostics, behind EU an JA. • Unlike EU and JA, the US is not responsible for other systems that interface strongly with the ports (eg. VV, BSM, cryostat), areas where configuration changes will affect ports and diagnostics. • It is in our interest to advance the maturity of the generic port designs to be well positioned in configuration change discussions. • The fact that EU and JA will be doing the detailed design of the port prototypes (U11 and E1) makes it more urgent for the US to see that diagnostic interests are represented in the design guidance documents which are generated by the port task force.

  7. Port Engineering Task Force Funding in FY05 What else should we be funding?

  8. Goals • At the end of May in Naka, the Port Engineering Task Force Meets for the last time. • US PTF delegates should be ready to indicate in which port engineering support activities the US has both the desire and the funding to participate. • Some of these activities will undoubtedly carry into FY06, and we should also prepare to seek funding for these. • Doug Loesser as a US secondee working on generic diagnostic port design with the central team. • Thus the US is well positioned, with an informed liason, to efficiently contribute to the port design effort.

More Related