Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:59:24.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Particle-in-cell methods in predicting materials behavior during high power deposition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2014

Filippo Genco  and
Ahmed Hassanein
Filippo Genco*
Affiliation:
Center for Materials under Extreme Environment, School of Nuclear Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
Ahmed Hassanein
Affiliation:
Center for Materials under Extreme Environment, School of Nuclear Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: F. Genco, Center for Materials under Extreme Environment, School of Nuclear Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Large energy fluxes and energy deposition are often found during off normal events in fusion reactors both magnetic and inertial confinement. Great temperature excursions can be found in the plasma facing components materials resulting in melting, evaporation, and expansion of the target material vapor cloud and successive plasma interaction. A general methodology for the computational solution of this very complex problem is proposed in this paper using a novel approach of the Particle-in-Cell method. This novel approach preserves many of the original Particle-in-Cell methodology proposed by Harlow's but introduces several changes to the method, which makes it particularly suitable in plasma dynamics applications as Tokamaks devices. Benchmarking is done using results from the very well-known and benchmarked HEIGHTS computer package and using available results from the MK200 plasma gun experiments. The general scheme is explained in detail and results and discussion related to the main computational aspects are presented. In particular, the critical importance of the starting computational mesh versus the aimed accuracy is studied and explained. The methodology is different from any other presented in literature because the dynamics of the physical problem dictates that as enough energy is being dumped on the target plate, melting and evaporation of the material takes place. As time progresses, new sample particles are introduced in the system making this boundary a dynamic one along time. Computer time is discussed in relation to the initial sample particle loading, aimed accuracy and importance of the time used for solving the radiation transport at each time step.

Keywords

HEIGHTSParticle-in-CellTokamak divertor erosionRadiation transport solutionTokamak edge localized modes and disruptions
Type
Research Article
Information
Laser and Particle Beams , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , June 2014 , pp. 217 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arkhipov, N.I., Bakhtin, V.P., Vasenin, S.G., Zhitlukhin, A.M., Kurkin, S.M., Safronov, V.M. & Toporkov, D.A. (1999). Formation of shielding layer near a solid target under the action of high-power plasma flow. Plasma Phys. Rpt. 25, 236–245.Google Scholar
Arkhipov, N.I., Bakhtin, V.P., Vasenin, S.G., Zhitlukhin, A.M., Kurkin, S.M., Safronov, V.M. & Toporkov, D.A. (2002). Energy balance in the interaction of intense High-Temperature Plasma Flows with solid Targets. Plasma Phys. Rpt. 28, 432–443.Google Scholar
Arkhipov, N.I., Bakthin, V.P., Kurkin, S.M., Pestchanyi, S.E., Safronov, V.M., Toporkov, D.A., Vasenin, S.G., Wuerz, H. & Zhitlukhin, A.M. (1996 a). Study of plasma target interactions with plasma streams of power density of 40 MW cm−2. Fusion Technol. 507–510.Google Scholar
Arkhipov, N.I., Bakthin, V.P., Kurkin, S.M., Safronov, V.M., Toporkov, D.A., Vasenin, S.G., Wuerz, H. & Zhitlukhin, A.M. (1996 b). Study of structure and dynamics of shielding layer for inclined incidence of plasma stream at MK-200 facility. J. Nucl. Mat. 233–237, 767–770.Google Scholar
Arkhipov, N.I., Bakthin, V.P., Safronov, V.M., Dtoporkov, D.A., Vasenin, S.G., Wuerz, H. & Zhitlukhin, A.M. (1994). Plasma-material interaction under simulated disruption conditions Fusion Techn. 1, 463–466.Google Scholar
Aymar, R. (2001). ITER R&D: Executive summary: Design overview. Fusion Engin. Des. 55, 107–118.Google Scholar
Buneman, O. (1959). Dissipation of currents in ionized media. Phys. Rev. 115, 503–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courant, R., Friedrichs, K. & Lewy, H. (1928). Über die partiellen differenzengleichungen der mathematischen physik. Math. Annalen (in German) 100, 32–74.Google Scholar
Dawson, J. & Oberman, C. (1962). High-frequency conductivity and the emission and absorption coefficients of a fully ionized plasma. Phys. Fluids 5, 517–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genco, F. & Hassanein, A. (2011). Modeling of damage and lifetime analysis of plasma facing components during plasma instabilities in tokamaks. Fusion Sci. Techn. 60, 339–343.Google Scholar
Harlow, F.H. (1955). Machine calculation method for hydrodynamics problems. Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory Report LAMS-1956.Google Scholar
Harlow, F.H. (1963). The Particle-in-cell method for numerical solution of problems in fluid dynamics. Proc. Symposia Appl. Math. 15, 269–288.Google Scholar
Hassanein, A. & Konkashbaev, I. (2003). Comprehensive modeling of ELMs and their effect on plasma-facing surfaces during normal tokamak operation. J. Nucl. Mat. 313, 664–669.Google Scholar
Hassanein, A. & Konkashbaev, I. (1994). Modeling plasma material interactions during a tokamak disruption. ANL/FPP/TM-271.Google Scholar
Hassanein, A. & Sizyuk, T. (2008). Comprehensive simulation of vertical plasma instability events and their serious damage to ITER plasma facing components. J. Nucl. Fusion 48, 115008.Google Scholar
Hassanein, A. (1984). Simulation of plasma disruption induced melting and vaporization by ion or electron beam. J. Nucl. Mat. 122 & 123, 1453.Google Scholar
Hassanein, A., Kulcinski, G.L. & Wolfer, W.G. (1981). Vaporization and melting of materials in fusion devices. J. Nucl. Mat. 103 & 104, 321–326.Google Scholar
Hassanein, A., Kulcinski, G.L. & Wolfer, W.G. (1982). Dynamics of melting, evaporation, and resolidification of materials exposed to plasma disruptions. J. Nucl. Mat. 111 & 112, 554–559.Google Scholar
Hassanein, A., Sizyuk, T. & Miloshevsky, G.V. (2010). Impact of various plasma instabilities on reliability and performance of tokamak fusion devices. Fusion Eng. Des. 85, 1331–1335.Google Scholar
Hassanein, A., Tsizyuk, T. & Konkashbaev, I. (2009). Integrated simulation of plasma surface interaction during edge localized modes and disruptions: Self-consistent approach. J. Nucl. Mat. 390–91, 777–780.Google Scholar
Evans, M.W. & Harlow, F.H. (1957). The Particle-in-Cell Method for hydrodynamic calculations. Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, LA-2139.Google Scholar
Morozov, V., Tolkach, V. & Hassanein, A. (2004). Calculation of Tin atomic data and plasma properties. Argonne National Lab Report, ANL-ET-04/24, Argonne, Illinois.Google Scholar
Pestchanyi, S., Bazylev, B. & Landman, I. (2004). Radiation losses from ITER SOL due to divertor material plasma. EPS Conference on Plasma Physics, London.Google Scholar
Safronov, V.M., Arkhipov, N.I., Landman, I.S., Pestchanyi, S.E., Toporkov, D.A. & Zhitlukhin, A.M. (2009). Evaporation and vapor shielding of CFC targets exposed to plasma heat fluxes relevant to ITER ELMs. J. Nucl. Mat. 386–388, 744–746.Google Scholar
Sizyuk, V. & Hassanein, A. (2010). Damage to nearby divertor components of ITER-like devices during giant ELMs and disruptions. J. Nucl. Fusion 50, 115004.Google Scholar
Wurz, H., Pestchanyi, S., Landman, I., Bazylev, B. & Kappler, F. (2001). Damage and Evaluation of Vertical targets and first walls during ITER-FEAT off-normal events. FZKA 6582, Karlsruhe, Germany.Google Scholar