% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Maviglia:897406,
author = {Maviglia, F. and Siccinio, M. and Bachmann, C. and Biel, W.
and Cavedon, M. and Fable, E. and Federici, G. and
Firdaouss, M. and Gerardin, J. and Hauer, V. and
Ivanova-Stanik, I. and Janky, F. and Kembleton, R. and
Militello, F. and Subba, F. and Varoutis, S. and Vorpahl,
C.},
title = {{I}mpact of plasma-wall interaction and exhaust on the
{EU}-{DEMO} design},
journal = {Nuclear materials and energy},
volume = {26},
issn = {2352-1791},
address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
publisher = {Elsevier},
reportid = {FZJ-2021-03772},
pages = {100897 -},
year = {2021},
abstract = {In the present work, the role of plasma facing components
protection in driving the EU-DEMO design will be reviewed,
focusing on steady-state and, especially, on transients.
This work encompasses both the first wall (FW) as well as
the divertor. In fact, while the ITER divertor heat removal
technology has been adopted, the ITER FW concept has been
shown in the past years to be inadequate for EU-DEMO. This
is due to the higher foreseen irradiation damage level,
which requires structural materials (like Eurofer) able to
withstand more than 5 dpa of neutron damage. This solution,
however, limits the tolerable steady-state heat flux to ~1
MW/m2, i.e. a factor 3–4 below the ITER specifications.
For this reason, poloidally and toroidally discontinuous
protection limiters are implemented in EU-DEMO. Their role
consists in reducing the heat load on the FW due to charged
particles, during steady state and, more importantly, during
planned and off-normal plasma transients. Concerning the
divertor configuration, EU-DEMO currently assumes an
ITER-like, lower single null (LSN) divertor, with seeded
impurities for the dissipation of the power. However, this
concept has been shown by numerous simulations in the past
years to be marginal during steady-state (where a detached
divertor is necessary to maintain the heat flux below the
technological limit and to avoid excessive erosion) and
unable to withstand some relevant transients, such as large
ELMs and accidental loss of detachment. Various concepts,
deviating from the ITER design, are currently under
investigation to mitigate such risks, for example in-vessel
coils for strike point sweeping in case of reattachment, as
well as alternative divertor configurations. Finally, a
broader discussion on the impact of divertor protection on
the overall machine design is presented.},
cin = {IEK-4},
ddc = {624},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-4-20101013},
pnm = {134 - Plasma-Wand-Wechselwirkung (POF4-134)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-134},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000628782500029},
doi = {10.1016/j.nme.2020.100897},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/897406},
}