Top Banner
F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations Mark Boaz, David N. Ruzic, Ning Li, Jeff Norman and Jean-Paul Allain Department of Nuclear, Plasma, and Radiological Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign
23

F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Jan 07, 2016

Download

Documents

questa

F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations. Mark Boaz, David N. Ruzic , Ning Li, Jeff Norman and Jean-Paul Allain Department of Nuclear, Plasma, and Radiological Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

F L I R EFlowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention

ExperimentCritical Design Considerations

Mark Boaz, David N. Ruzic, Ning Li,

Jeff Norman and Jean-Paul Allain

Department of Nuclear, Plasma, and Radiological Engineering

University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

October 25, 2000 APS DPP Meeting

Page 2: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Outline

Motivation FLIRE Concept Experiment to Address Critical

Concern Results Conclusion Acknowledgements

Page 3: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Motivation

Flowing Liquid Metal Walls High heat flux capability Disruption resistant Low Z possible May have new plasma operating regimes

Can helium be removed ? What is the retention of He in liquid

metals?

Page 4: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Proposed Experiment

Flow Li down a ramp into a second vacuum system inside the large vacuum system

Have Li flow provide vacuum isolation

Aim He ion beam at flowing Li Look for He in inner chamber with a

He leak detector

Page 5: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations
Page 6: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations
Page 7: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations
Page 8: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations
Page 9: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Detectability Limits He leak detectors can see 2.7 x 109 s-1

Ion beam at 1 mA has 1.6 x 1016 s-1

(seven-orders-of-magnitude !)

Flow velocity = 1 m/s Fusion system will have same time in

chamber, 0.01 sec. If 1 ppm is seen, (six-orders-of-magnitude)

minimum observable retention time constant = 25 sec.

Page 10: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Critical Questions

Will surface layer with the implanted ions smoothly flow into the inner vacuum chamber or will the liquid metal pool at the opening?

If it does not pool, will a vacuum seal be maintained?

Is having two ramps sufficient to ensure this?

Page 11: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Prototype Design

Key is to have flow maintain contact with ramps.

Equation of motion for free flow: y(x) = x - bx2

Measure flow speed, find “b”, cut plywood.

Length of ramp determined by co-joining angle. Experiment, choose 25 degrees.

Page 12: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

slotted holes in plywood allowed for adjustment of exit size

Page 13: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

gap from reservoir controlled by teflon insert

Page 14: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Exit

width

is

3 mm

Page 15: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Assembled FLIRE prototype

Page 16: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Note brightness of exit when open

Page 17: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

5 mm gap from reservoirs is too big !

Page 18: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

4 mm gap still pools, but then settles down nicely

Page 19: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

3 mm gap is just right

Page 20: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

2 mm gap is okay, but some Cu is showing

Page 21: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

3 mm gap again, different view

Page 22: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Conclusion

Through careful design, uniform “folding” flow can be achieved.

FLIRE experiment could determine critical parameters for the ALPS/ APEX programs

Page 23: F L I R E Flowing Liquid-Surface Illinois Retention Experiment Critical Design Considerations

Acknowledgements

DOE ALPS program Undergraduate Research

Assistants Hussain Nomanbhai Shadi Beidas