(1) Date for Next Meeting
The next meeting is scheduled to be held at UCLA during the period January 12 - 14, 1998. It will start at 1:00 PM, Monday, January 12, and adjourn at Noon, January 14.
(2) Eight (8) groups have been formed.
The relationship between APEX Tasks and these groups is outlined in Table I. Proposed organizations/individuals lead and support to undertake APEX Tasks is outlined in Appendix III.
(3) Several questions were raised at the meeting for which acting responses were issued. They are:
A. Failure modes/rates and maintainability considerations should be incorporated early
1) Add availability (reliability and maintainability) as an additional important role for the mechanical design group
• re-think the mechanical configuration from the edge of the plasma to the interior of the magnet (including vacuum boundary). "Invent" new configuration(s) for enhancing maintainability.
B. Stronger coupling with Physicists and Greater Accounting for plasma interface
1) Strengthen Group 5 Physics Interface
• design concepts that are more tolerant of a wider range of plasma operating conditions (e.g. accommodating a number of disruptions) should get credit in evaluation
3) Remember: It is still very useful to find out what the technology limits are. These provide boundary conditions for physics research (It is a two-way street)
C. Alternate confinement concepts may have different requirements on FPT concept
1) Form a new group (Group 7: Alternate confinement concepts) to summarize the main configuration features and general range of parameters (wall load, surface heat flux, etc.) for alternate confinement concepts and to contrast them to Tokamaks
• Invite Dale Meade (PPPL) to co-chair/help/advise
D. Thickness of first wall: people have different viewpoints regarding minimum thickness
Avoid the temptation to solve the problem by simply hypothesizing a very thin wall. This is not consistent with the APEX spirit of providing large design margin. If the feasibility of a concept depends on whether the thickness is 2 mm instead of 3 mm, this concept has to be questioned.
1) The Mechanical Design/Availability Group is requested to examine the issue of minimum thickness consideration. Report findings ASAP and present them during the next meeting.
2) Designers (concepts advocates) have the burden of making and reporting sufficiently detailed analysis to justify their choice of first wall thickness
(4) The Design Conceptualization and Analysis Group has the core effort of APEX: For concepts proposed in the kick-off meeting the proposed/assigned organizations/individuals will pursue and present by next meeting (January 12) the following:
b) basic layout/configuration of the concept
c) self-consistent performance parameters based on Actual ANALYSIS (not all guesses)
• thermal-hydraulics analysis (temperature distribution)
• fluid mechanics analysis
• electromagnetic analysis where essential
• other key parameters
Note: Design Groups can call on Mechanical Design Group for support
Back to top