1 / 15

ASIPP

ASIPP. In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7. Y. YANG*, and HT-7 team Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences 2006. ASIPP. In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7. Outline.

Download Presentation

ASIPP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Y. YANG*, and HT-7 team Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences 2006

  2. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Outline • Particle balance method for retention evaluation in HT-7 • System error of retention • Retention evaluation on HT-7 • H/D inventory in HT-7 • Conclusions

  3. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Particle balance equation for retention evaluation Wall retention is a critical topic for ITER. The long pulses of HT-7 provide good opportunity for the study. Particle balance equation is utilized for retention evaluation since 2004. Working gases: commonly D2, He for a short period. Conditioning : D2 and He during the experimental ran. Pumping: 4 cryo-pumps and 4 TMP station. Vacuum Diagnostics: Six ion gauges for vacuum vessel; One diaphragm gauge for fueling tank; One QMS RGA analyzer.

  4. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Main error sources of particle balance method For Vtank, volume of fueling tank, error could be limited lower than 3% (including that from the Gas Injection System). For Ptank, pressure of tank, error could be limited lower than <7%. Error of Qpuff could be limited lower than 10%. For Pvv, pressure of vacuum vessel, error could be <15% after calibration with pure gases. For S, pumping speed, which is obtained by measuring pumping quantity and pressure evolution, error could be suppressed <20%. Error of Qextract could be limited lower than 35%.

  5. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Other error sources of particle balance method (I) • Pressure distribution depends on pumping & puffing position, basically uniform when without plasma & @higher pressure (>1e-3Pa) within 300ms. Magenta: during discharge; Blue: after discharge. Shot 78800, puff from Loc5, pump from Loc3.

  6. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Other error sources of particle balance method (II) • Gas type QMS shows for pure D2, P2/P4~3% (right upper plot), similar to P1/P2 (~2%) for pure H2. Thus assume P2,P3,P4 represents H2,HD,D2 respectively, and bearing the same partial pressure sensitivity factor. A typical QMS plot is shown (right lower), illustrating that basically H isotopes occupy more than 95% of the residual gas. • Response time GIS puffs gas into vacuum vessel in tens of ms and distributes evenly in <300 ms. For long pulses, Qextract happens mainly within a few to 10 seconds after plasma termination. QMS samples every 1s, while gauge responses every tens to hundreds of ms.

  7. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Brief summary on error sources Retention ratio evaluation with particle balance method could be limited lower than 50% valueafter careful design of Gas Injection System and regular calibration of gauges on HT-7. • It’s extremely difficult to suppress error low than 40% value. Error of Qpuff could be limited lower than 7% (from DAQ). Error of Qextract could be lower than 10% (from QMS) Thus, retention could be compared relatively with the error of <20%. The evaluation is suited for long pulse discharges, which generate big pressure variation and provide long enough time for Residual Gas Analysis.

  8. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Retention evaluation on HT-7 (I) General Particle balance shows that about 60% of the fuelled gas is retained relatively permanently inside the chamber. With 3 TMP, pumping speed=843l/s. From QMS, H2/D2=2:3. Conversion factor of D2 for Pvv=2.4. Qpuff=342Pal ~9.2E19 molecules. Qextract=110Pal ~3.0E19 molecules. retention=68%±16%

  9. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Retention evaluation on HT-7 (II) Pulse duration Longer pulse tends to cause higher retention quantity. The majority of the dynamic inventory is released and pumped within a couple of seconds after the pulse termination.

  10. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Retention evaluation on HT-7 (III) Pumping speed In HT-7, effective pumping speed is very low during the discharge. Pumping speed effect on D retention: not distinguishable.

  11. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Retention evaluation on HT-7 (III) Disruption effect Disruption effect on D retention: disruption favors less retention.

  12. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 D inventory in HT-7 inner vacuum vessel All the gauges in the inner vacuum vessel show that pressure drops soon after the plasma is formed, keeps relatively steady in a very low value, and rises quickly to a very high value before decaying gradually. No position inside the chamber is observed to confine large amount of neutral particles during the discharge. Brown, before discharge; Red, during discharge; Blue, after discharge.

  13. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 H inventory in HT-7 inner vacuum vessel QMS shows that hydrogen in the released gas could be after discharge as high as 50% (even higher after boronization). QMS 78178-78218 (He plasma) By courtesy of M. SU Large amount of H release during the discharges. H/(H+D) ratio evolution By courtesy of J. HUANG

  14. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Possible mechanism D is trapped after being puffed into the chamber. When without plasma, it desorbed relatively easier; while with plasma, it’s trapped more firmly. The isotopic exchange leads to the release of H from the bores in graphite tiles. Effective pumping speed is very low during the discharge. Disruption could cause Twall rise in some areas, and suppress retention.

  15. ASIPP In-time retention evaluation by particle balance analysis on HT-7 Conclusion • Particle balance shows that about 60% of the fuelled gas is retained relatively permanently. • For relative evaluation error could be at 20%, providing a practical tool for retention study. • More retention happens in longer pulse. • Pumping speed has negligible effect on D retention. • Disruption helps to decrease D retention. • Recycled H ranges from 10% to 80% of the released gas after plasma termination,depending on the wall condition.

More Related