“When the ITER experimental fusion reactor begins operation in the 2020s, over 40 diagnostic tools will provide essential data to researchers seeking to understand plasma behavior and optimize fusion performance. But before the ITER tokamak is built, researchers need to determine an efficient way of fitting all of these tools into a limited number of shielded ports that will protect the delicate diagnostic hardware and other parts of the machine from neutron flux and intense heat. A port plug integration proposal developed with the US ITER diagnostics team has helped the international ITER collaboration arrive at a clever solution for safely housing all of the tokamak diagnostic devices.
‘Before horizontal or vertical modules were proposed, diagnostic teams were not constrained to any particular design space. When we started working on this, we suggested that there be some type of modular approach,’ said Russ Feder, a US ITER diagnostics contributor and Senior Mechanical Engineer at Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory. ‘Originally, we proposed four horizontal drawers for each port plug. But then analysis of electromagnetic forces on these horizontal modules showed that forces were too high and the project switched to the three vertical modules.’”
The proposal has been formalized by two ITER procurement agreements in late 2012 between US ITER, based at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the ITER Organization; other ITER partners are expected to make similar agreements this year.”
PPPL’s Russell Feder, left, and David Johnson developed key features for a modular approach to housing the extensive diagnostic systems that will be installed on the ITER tokamak. (Photo credit: Elle Starkman/PPPL Office of Communications)
‘If we had a script, I couldn’t think of a better outcome.’ That’s how Ron Strykowsky, head of the NSTX Upgrade, described recent results for a critical stage of the project’s construction. Riding on the outcome were months of work on the first quadrant of toroidal field conductors for the tokamak’s new center stack, which forms the heart of the $94 million upgrade.
Mission accomplished: The completed first section of the NSTX-U center stack capped months of demanding preparations and close teamwork. (Photo credit: Elle Starkman, PPPL Office of Communications)
The crucial stage called for sealing and insulating the first quadrant through a volatile process known as vacuum pressure impregnation (VPI). Preparing the nine 20 foot-long, 350-pound copper conductors for this step required the coordinated efforts of engineers and some dozen skilled technicians. The multiple tasks included soldering cooling tubes into the conductors under the direction of Steve Jurczynski, and sandblasting, priming and wrapping the units with fiberglass tape in operations led by Mike Anderson.
The critical moment came when the process neared 100 degrees centigrade—the temperature at which water boils and the epoxy generates heat and turns solid in what is called an exothermic reaction. The danger was that a sudden runaway reaction could cause the epoxy to burn itself up and destroy the project. Adding uncertainty was the fact that PPPL had never before used this particular epoxy. ‘We held our breath and were on pins and needles,’ recalled engineer Steve Raftopolous.
This is an exciting moment in the world of Fusion research. See the full article here.
“Physicist Rajesh Maingi remembers nearly everything. Results of experiments he did 20 years ago play back instantly in his mind, as do his credit card and bank account numbers.
Rajesh Maingi. (Photo credit: Elle Starkman )
Maingi brings his expertise to the new position of manager of edge physics and plasma-facing components at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL). The recently created post calls for coordinating all Laboratory research on the volatile edge of the plasma, which must be carefully controlled for fusion to take place, and on the crucial boundary between the plasma and the interior surfaces of a tokamak.
Tokamak
At PPPL
The strategic position adds a new dimension to research at PPPL. ‘We’ve decided to pull all our activities in this area together and plan how to use them to make an impact in the fusion community and the world,’ said Michael Zarnstorff, deputy director for research at the Laboratory. ‘Rajesh is well-known around the world, particularly in tokamak physics. He has experience and perspective and strategic vision, and we see him as a great opportunity for the Lab.’”
“Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) and the National Institute for Fusion Science (NIFS) in Japan have developed a rapid method for meeting a key challenge for fusion science. The challenge has been to simulate the diagnostic measurement of plasmas produced by twisting, or 3D, magnetic fields in fusion facilities. While such fields characterize facilities called stellarators, otherwise symmetric, or 2D, facilities such as tokamaks also can benefit from 3D fields.
A cutaway view of the ITER Project Tokamak reactor.
Researchers led by PPPL physicist Sam Lazerson have now created a computer code that simulates the required diagnostics, and have validated the code on the Large Helical Device stellarator in Japan. Called ‘Diagno v2.0,’ the new program utilizes information from previous codes that simulate 3D plasmas without the diagnostic measurements. The addition of this new capability could, with further refinement, enable physicists to predict the outcome of 3D plasma experiments with a high degree of accuracy.
A simulated plasma in the Large Helical Device showing the thin blue saddle coils that researchers used to make diagnostic measurements with the new computer code. (Photo credit: Graphic by Sam Lazerson)
Lazerson and co-authors Satoru Sakakibara and Yasuhiro Suzuki of NIFS have published their paper online in the February issue of Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0741-3335/55/2/025014. The journal also is using a Lazerson graphic of a simulated plasma on the cover of its print edition. “
“Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) have launched a new effort to apply expertise in plasma to study and optimize the use of the hot, electrically charged gas as a tool for producing nanoparticles. This research aims to advance the understanding of plasma-based synthesis processes, and could lead to new methods for creating high-quality nanomaterials at relatively low cost.
Nanomaterials, which are measured in billionths of a meter, are prized for their use in everything from golf clubs and swimwear to microchips, paints and pharmaceutical products, thanks to their singular properties. These include exceptional strength and flexibility and high electrical conductivity. Carbon nanotubes, for example, are tens of thousands of times thinner than a human hair, yet are stronger than steel on an ounce-per-ounce basis.
Carbon nanotubes (NSF)
PPPL researchers have launched a nanotechnology laboratory that they envision as a step toward research capabilities that could serve as a resource for institutions and industries around the world. ‘It could be a test bed for new technologies and devices,’ said PPPL Deputy Director Adam Cohen. Users could include laboratories looking for small amounts of nanomaterial, ‘or companies interested in using plasmas in large-scale nanomanufacturing, or anyone in between.’”
Little is known about how low-temperature plasmas function as synthesizing material, said physicist Yevgeny Raitses, the principal investigator for nanoparticle research at PPPL. ‘We want to understand just what plasma does in order to use it in the best way possible, Raitses said.
Physicist Yevgeny Raitses, right, with Washington University undergraduate Mitchell Eagles in the PPPL nanolaboratory. (Photo credit: Elle Starkman/PPPL Office of Communications)
Discussions for the new PPPL laboratory began in 2009. ‘The question I always had,’ recalled Deputy Director Cohen, ‘is that if nanoparticles and nanotubes are going to be in everything from car cylinders to medical equipment to nano-robots, who’s going to ensure that these materials are made consistently with the highest quality? That seemed like an opportunity for us.’”
See the full February 13, 2013 article here. But see a fuller October 22, 2012 version AT DOE Pulse. Kinda makes one wonder who is minding the public image effort at PPPL.
“Three teams led by scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) have won major blocks of time on two of the world’s most powerful supercomputers. Two of the projects seek to advance the development of nuclear fusion as a clean and abundant source of energy by improving understanding of the superhot, electrically charged plasma gas that fuels fusion reactions. The third project seeks to extend understanding of a process called magnetic reconnection, which is widely believed to play a critical role in the explosive release of magnetic energy in phenomena like solar flares that can disrupt cell phone service and black out power grids.
‘This is great for the Laboratory,’ PPPL Director Stewart Prager said of the highly competitive, three-year awards. ‘Getting this kind of computing time allows the solution of complex equations and critical issues that wouldn’t be possible otherwise.’
The PPPL recipients:
A nationwide center headed by PPPL physicist C.S. Chang that is developing computer codes to simulate the dazzlingly complex conditions at the edge of magnetically confined plasmas in donut-shaped devices called tokamaks. Chang’s team, the Center for Edge Physics Simulation (EPSI), won 100 million core hours a year on Titan, a Cray XK7 machine that is housed at the DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory and has been proven to perform over 17 quadrillion—or million billion—calculations a second, making it the world’s fastest supercomputer, according to the November, 2012, TOP500 list.
Titan at ORNL
A PPPL-led international team that is studying the rapid loss of plasma confinement caused by growing turbulence as fusion facilities become larger and more powerful. Such losses can significantly decrease the power output of fusion systems but have been shown to level off when facilities reach a certain size—a development that bodes well for future tokamaks. ‘This is very good news for ITER,’ said project leader William Tang, a PPPL physicist and Princeton University lecturer with the rank of professor in the Department of Astrophysical Sciences.
Tang’s project, called ‘Kinetic Simulations of Fusion Energy Dynamics at the Extreme Scale,’ won 40 million core hours on Mira, an IBM Blue Gene/Q supercomputer at the DOE’s Argonne National Laboratory. Mira can calculate 10 million billion times a second, a speed that will be needed to simulate the complex processes that cause the turbulence to grow to a certain level as the plasma size increases, only to stop growing when the dimensions of the system increase further. ‘The question is a very basic one,’ said Tang. ‘What’s the physics behind this favorable trend that is expected to occur in large plasmas such as ITER? No one can presently answer this question, which will require the efficient engagement of computing at the extreme scale to properly address.’
IBM Blue Gene/Q at Argonne
Researchers investigating magnetic reconnection, an astrophysical phenomenon that gives rise to the northern lights, solar flares and geomagnetic storms. A team led by Amitava Bhattacharjee, head of the Theory Department at PPPL and a professor of astrophysical sciences at Princeton University, won 35 million core hours on the Titan supercomputer at Oak Ridge.
Reconnection takes place when the magnetic field lines in merging plasmas snap apart and explosively reconnect, a process seen throughout the universe and in disruptions of plasma during fusion experiments. New insight into reconnection could lead to better predictions of geomagnetic storms and other space weather, and to greater control of experimental fusion reactions.”
It is really wonderful to see this lab and its people thriving in this time of great questions about the future of scientific research.
“The U.S. Department of Energy’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) has joined forces with researchers in South Korea to develop a conceptual design for a pioneering fusion facility in that Asian nation. The proposed device, called K-DEMO, could be completed in the mid-to-late 2030s as the final step before construction of a commercial fusion power plant that would produce clean and abundant energy for generating electricity.
Schematic sketch of the proposed K-DEMO fusion facility.(Photo credit: Courtesy of South Korea’s National Fusion Research Institute.)
South Korea’s National Fusion Research Institute (NFRI) will fund PPPL’s initial collaboration, which will run for six months, beginning in January, and could be extended.
PPPL will explore cutting-edge designs and technologies that could benefit the U.S. fusion program, and South Korea will gain access to the Laboratory’s deep experience in designing and engineering fusion facilities. These include the National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX), PPPL’s leading fusion experiment, which is undergoing a major upgrade.
NSTX at PPPL
K-DEMO will be comparable in size to ITER, a seven-story tokamak that the European Union, the United States, South Korea and four other nations are building in Cadarache, France. ITER is to produce 500 million watts of fusion power for 500 seconds by the late 2020s to showcase the feasibility of fusion energy. K-DEMO, by contrast, is to produce some 1 billion watts of power for several weeks on end. “K-DEMO should be just a small step away from a commercial plant in technology and performance,” said Neilson.
Tokamak
Iter paints a bigger picture, but K-Demo has a much larger goal.
“The latest advances in plasma physics were the focus of more than 1,000 scientists from around the world who gathered in Providence, R.I., from Oct. 29 through Nov. 2 for the 54th Annual Meeting of the American Physical Society’s Division of Plasma Physics (APS-DPP). Papers, posters and presentations ranged from fusion plasma discoveries applicable to ITER, to research on 3D magnetic fields and antimatter. In all, more than 1,800 papers were discussed during the week-long event.
Researchers from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) reported on experiments and computer simulations related to tokamak confinement and a variety of other research interests. These included specialized areas such as laboratory and astrophysical plasmas, where PPPL physicist Hantao Ji was prominent as a topic chair and speaker at a tutorial session.
Inside of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory tokamak
Members of the Laboratory’s National Spherical Torus Experiment Upgrade (NSTX-U) team gave a tutorial and three invited talks. Physicist Dennis Mueller presented the tutorial on Physics of Tokamak Plasma Start-up.
NSTX at PPPL
The Laboratory sent 135 physicists, science educators and graduate students to the meeting and saw some of its research highlighted in news releases on the APS-DPP website. Of the 14 papers highlighted in this manner, seven came from PPPL.”
July 10, 2012 (posted by PPPL 11.30.12)
John Greenwald
“Engineers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) have designed and delivered a crucial barn-door size component for a major device for developing fusion power. The component, called a ‘trim coil,’ marks the initial installment of one of the largest hardware collaborations that PPPL has conducted with an international partner.
The 2,400-pound trim coil is the first of five coils that PPPL is producing for the Wendelstein 7-X stellarator, or W7-X, that the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (IPP) is building in Greifswald, Germany. The powerful coils will fine-tune the shape of the superhot, charged gas called plasma that the W7-X will use to study conditions required for fusion when the machine begins operating in 2015.”
Stewart C. Prager, the director of the Department of Energy’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory and a professor of astrophysical sciences at Princeton University, here offers a fresh defense of continued substantial support for research on extracting usable energy from nuclear fusion.
“The Way Forward with Magnetic Fusion Energy
As budget negotiations heat up, so does the debate over the balance between investments in the long-term future and short-term necessities. Fusion is a long-term opportunity that will transform how we energize our society. The fact that ignition in a large American experimental inertial confinement fusion facility did not occur as hoped by Sept. 30 has sadly raised questions about the scientific legitimacy of that pursuit. That the scientists did not meet their goal by that day probably has little bearing on that field’s ultimate success. Importantly, this non-event should not bear any relation to the fate of other vital work centering on an entirely different approach known as magnetic fusion.
We need to keep our eyes on fusion as a transformative source of energy for the world. There are many powerful reasons why we need to forge ahead.
The magnificent lasers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’sNational Ignition Facility are aimed to compress a pellet of fusion fuel such that it “ignites” – converts the energy of the lasers that bombard the pellet into fusion energy. The lasers work spectacularly well but the problem of fusion ignition is scientifically rich and complex. So far at least, the pellets have not yet behaved as expected and the milestone of ignition has not yet been achieved. This, of course, should not dull interest in the American inertial confinement fusion program: Not achieving a major scientific result by a pre-determined and artificial deadline is far from a failure.
Further, the fact that conquering this complex problem in laser fusion has not been ‘on schedule’ has nothing to say about progress in magnetic fusion – it has been and continues to be remarkable.
Those with a long memory will recall the very early optimism about fusion energy that existed in the late 1950s and 1960s. On the heels of the quick success in moving fission energy forward, it was thought practical fusion would follow closely behind. Instead, the world’s scientists ran into an unexpected barrier — the immense physics complexity and seeming impossibility of taming fusion plasmas.
The ensuing decades have seen an intense scientific focus on what is truly a grand scientific challenge. Scientists now are teasing out the secrets of complex multi-scaled layers of turbulence in plasmas, the movement of particles through those plasmas, their interaction with magnetic fields, and numerous other phenomena that impact the plasma’s ability to be harnessed as an energy source. This focus in magnetic fusion has driven the development of a new scientific field, plasma physics, with huge benefits for science in general – from understanding cosmic plasmas to employing these hot, ionized gases for computer chip manufacturing.
On the energy front, we have advanced from fusion energy production of milliwatts in the 1970s to 16 megawatts (for a duration of 1 second) in the 1990s. With our existing underpowered machines, magnetic fusion scientists are producing and producing close to fusion energy-grade plasmas around the world on a daily basis. We are confident that abundant fusion energy can be produced on a very large scale and are now focused on the remaining physics and engineering challenges to make it practical and attractive.
The next major experimental step in magnetic fusion is ITER – the international experiment that will generate 500 megawatts of fusion power, at a physical scale of a power plant. Under construction in France, ITER will begin operation within ten years. It involves participation of the entire developed world, with the ITER partners representing the governments of half the world’s population. The scientific basis for ITER was separately scrutinized and approved by scientific panels in each of these nations. ITER is large, complex, and full of challenges. But, the likelihood of scientific success is high.
Most nations involved in ITER have robust fusion research programs that are essential to tackle other key scientific and technical issues. With these accompanying programs, we would be ready to operate a demonstration fusion power plant following ITER about 25 years from today.
The charge by some that both inertial and magnetic fusion have been beset with failure is unwarranted. These include remarks in a commentary by Dr. Burton Richter in the Oct. 18 Dot Earth blog: “Both approaches have gone from failure to ever larger failure, but each time a great deal has been learned…”
In fairness, the comment is preceded by brief, informative technical capsules. As a fusion-knowledgeable scientist who does not work in fusion energy research, Dr. Richter includes some supportive comments for the fusion program, tempered by discerning skepticism. But, for fusion scientists, Dr. Richter’s comments on failure are difficult to understand. We are unaware of any major project failures in magnetic fusion research. Quite the opposite: One of the key reasons that ITER was funded across the world is that a series of ever larger experiments have been so successful as to provide confidence that the yet larger ITER will be similarly successful.
Other commentary has appeared, offering incorrect information. In a separate Dot Earth commentary concerning magnetic fusion on Oct. 19, Dr. Robert Hirsch, an administrator of the fusion energy program at the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission in the 1970s, offers views reflecting the state of the field at the time of his departure from the AEC some 35 years ago. His view is framed by stating that fusion must be made practical, which means economically and technologically attractive. This is certainly correct and indeed, the criteria for such practicality have provided significant guidance to fusion research for decades. Dr. Hirsch cites a series of challenges that he thinks are roadblocks, but are not. He worries that the energy stored by superconducting magnets poses a serious threat and regulatory burden. This is not so. ITER has proven otherwise. France’s strict nuclear regulatory authorities have concluded the magnets pose no radiological safety concerns for the public. Dr. Hirsch states that the radioactive materials of a fusion reactor will be a major problem. This also is not so. The amount and toxicity is orders of magnitude less than for fission. Dr. Hirsch would be interested to learn that the rigorous French licensing regime is very successfully nearing completion. Licensing, although requiring significant efforts, will not be a barrier to fusion.
Some, like Dr Hirsch, have suggested that fusion machines are so large and complex that they will never be cost competitive. No one knows the ultimate costs, but our best engineering analyses indicate that, with some luck, fusion can indeed be cost- competitive. As an alternative to the mainline approaches to fusion energy, Dr. Hirsch puts forth his research idea from the 1970s of inertial electrostatic confinement (IEC). I agree that the fusion program very much needs to pursue multiple approaches, even within magnetic fusion. But extensive peer review has found IEC far more difficult to achieve than the ITER and related approaches in magnetic fusion.
Fusion is a nearly ideal energy source – essentially inexhaustible, clean, safe, and likely available to all nations. When proven practical, it will transform our energy future. At this moment, research investment by the rest of the world – China, Korea, the EU – is surging in magnetic fusion, while the U.S. investment is stagnating. The U.S. is at a turning point. We either maintain our long-developed leadership position in this energy and science frontier, or slip behind as other nations take the fruit of decades of scientific research – much of it from the U.S. – and convert it into a practical energy source for powering the world.”
This is the full essay, I have taken that liberty because this subject is so important, but it can be found along with the videos here. I have dressed up the essay with some bolds, italics, links, whatever I cvould think of to entice the reader. I urge you to watch the videos. also, please see my older post From The New York Times: The Beginning of the End of Big Science?
