Meeting 4 Action Items

  • The next APEX meeting will be held during the period November 2-4, 1998, at UCLA.
  • No complete and detailed conceptual design is expected during Phase I of the APEX study but rather, effort should be focused on ideas and scientific basis for each proposed concept.
  • The key issues for each concept be identified and added to the Basic Information needed for each concept
  • The interim report on the scientific bases and preliminary analyses of the concepts under consideration is due March, 1999. Adequate analyses on each concept should be completed as early as of January, 1999. The Scientific Evaluation process is also scheduled March 1999.) It was raised that this date is too early. It was also suggested that the Evaluation Group include those individuals who will undertake the Scientific Evaluation. Abdou suggested that a community workshop could be held just after the Interim Report is issued and before the Scientific Evaluation is performed. One suggestion was to have the Interim Report out for distribution by July 1, 1999, and hold the community workshop after that date and have the Scientific Evaluation be performed by September-August, 1999. This is under discussion and will be finalized before or on the next APEX meeting.
  • People should be prepared to submit abstracts to the upcoming ISFNT-5 Symposium (headline July, 1999).
  • Changing the Spray Cooling FW concept to Evaporation Cooling FW concept. This concept is now termed Name the concept “EVOLVE” (EVaporation Of Lithium and Vapor Extraction).
  • Abdou indicated that the current Evaluation Group should develop the criteria for the Scientific Evaluation. He suggested that we start developing these criteria and send them to people for comments. He specifically indicated that the Scientific Evaluation should be based on: Potential of the concept in handling high power density, having high power conversion efficiency
           (b) Potential of concept with regard to (a) failure rate, (b) maintainability,
           (c) Defining the design margin for each concept,
           (d) Defining major technical issues and uncertainties.
  • Extensive failure analysis is not needed at this point but rather a qualitative guideline to mitigate failure is needed. Abdou suggested that INEL to help in developing these guidelines.
  • Add start-up as an issue under hydrodynamics issues
  • We should look into how the FW liquid responds to plasma changes and instabilities.
  • Analysis of dynamics and heat transfer properties of particulate flow in a vacuum and in heat exchangers should be emphasized in the Li2O particulate concept (couple of pages on this is needed – Mark will get a code that deal with this issue).
  • Dust generation from particulate and distribution is an issue that should be added to the Li2O particulate concept.
  • For the Materials Group, the following was decided:
            – Add fracture toughness to the list of issues
            – Add effect of transmutation on material properties
            – Include SS304 to material data bases
            – Add property data base for a preferred W allot
            – Look into making cost prediction based on “typical blanket” rather than $/kg
            – Add costs of coolants to database.
            – We need a reference FRC design. APEX will not develop a design. We have little funds to get from the FRC community a                       reference design (Abdou).
  • The level of effort and task distribution by organization shown in Table I and II (see also Appendix IX) received acceptance from the APEX study participants. However, it was emphasized that some changes in tasks/resources may take place subjected to the final funding level to the APEX study.