23.12.2014 Views

1. magnetic confinement - ENEA - Fusione

1. magnetic confinement - ENEA - Fusione

1. magnetic confinement - ENEA - Fusione

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

3. FUSION TECHNOLOGY 103<br />

3.12 Safety and Environment, Power<br />

Plant Studies and Socio-Economics<br />

800<br />

Neutron transport and materials activation<br />

Pressure (kPa)<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

ISAS pre-test<br />

Experiment<br />

ISAS post-test<br />

The code package updating, completed in November<br />

2000, was released to the OECD-NEA Data Bank.<br />

Validation of the ANITA-2000 code package continued<br />

[3.60, 3.61] by comparing calculations with the<br />

experiments performed at the Fusion Neutronics Source<br />

(FNS), JAERI, Tokai, Japan.<br />

0<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100<br />

Time (s)<br />

Fig. 3.44 – Plasma chamber pressure for ICE case<br />

7 (ISAS).<br />

The material samples were irradiated by a 14-MeV<br />

neutron flux in two series lasting 5 min and 7 h,<br />

respectively. The neutron energy spectrum and neutron<br />

source intensity of the experimental irradiation, as well as<br />

the sample compositions, were provided by JAERI. A 175<br />

energy-level neutron flux distribution was considered.<br />

[3.60] D.G. Cepraga, G.<br />

Cambi, M. Frisoni,<br />

ANITA-2000 activation<br />

code package. Part II :<br />

code validation, <strong>ENEA</strong><br />

FUS-TN-SA-SE-R-020<br />

(2001)<br />

[3.61] D.G. Cepraga et al.,<br />

Decay heat estimate for<br />

fusion relevant materials<br />

based on EAF-99 and<br />

FENDL/A-2 libraries in<br />

comparison with FNS-<br />

Jaeri experiments, EFF-<br />

DOC-797, EFF/EAF<br />

Monitoring Meeting,<br />

NEA-OECD (Paris 2001)<br />

The European Activation File EAF99, the Fusion Evaluated Nuclear Data Library<br />

FENDL/A-2) and the decay data library for fusion applications FENDL/D-2 were<br />

used.<br />

Tables 3.VI and 3.VII summarise the experiment-calculation comparison, by range of<br />

discrepancies, for the 5-m and the 7-h irradiation scenarios, respectively, and for both<br />

activation libraries.<br />

As a general conclusion, it can be observed that, for the experimental irradiation<br />

scenario analysed, EAF99 generally provides a better agreement with the experiment<br />

than FENDL/A-2.<br />

Table 3.VI - Summary of calculation-experiment comparison (C-E)/E for<br />

samples irradiated for 5 min.<br />

(C-E)/E EAF99 FENDL/A-2<br />

50 % B4C, BaCO 3 , Bi, Cr, Na 2 CO 3 , B4C, BaCO 3 , Bi, CaO, Cr,<br />

SiO 2 , Y2O 3 Na 2 CO 3 , SiO 2 , Ta, Y2O 3<br />

Table 3.VII - Summary of calculation-experiment comparison (C-E)/E for<br />

samples irradiated for 7 h<br />

(C-E)/E EAF99 FENDL/A-2<br />

< 10% Co,Mn, Nb, NiCr, Ni, Re, S, SrCO 3 , Co, Mn, Nb, NiCr, Ni, Re, S, SrCO 3 ,<br />

SS-304, Ti, Zr, Inconel, SS-316 SS-304, Ti, Zr, Inconel, SS-316<br />

10 to 50<br />

%<br />

BaCO 3 , CaO, Fe, Mo, Na 2 CO 3 ,<br />

SnO2, Ta, V,Y 2 O 3 , Cu<br />

BaCO 3 , CaO, Fe, Mo, Na 2 CO 3 ,<br />

SnO 2 , V, Y 2 O 3 , Cu<br />

> 50 % Al, Bi, Cr, K 2 CO 3 , Pb Al, Bi, Cr, K 2 CO 3 , Pb, Ta

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!