Development and Application of System Analysis Program for Parameters Optimization and Economic Assessment of Fusion Reactor (SYSCODE)

Transcription

1

2 Development and Application of System Analysis Program for Parameters Optimization and Economic Assessment of Fusion Reactor (SYSCODE) Presented By Dehong Chen Contributed by FDS Team Key Laboratory of Neutronics and Radiation Safety Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology (INEST) Chinese Academy of Sciences 1st IAEA Technical Meeting on the Safety, Design and Technology of Fusion Power Plants Vienna, Austria, 3-5 May 2016

3 Content Background Functions Test and Benchmark Application Summary

4 Content Background Functions Test and Benchmark Application Summary

5 Plant Design Procedure Procedure of Design and System Analysis modification concept design geometry design simulated computation economic evaluation Mission of System Analysis and Economic Assessment System analysis and design of main parameters. Assess cost and economy of fusion power plant. Research key parameters of physics, engineering and economy. Optimize parameters of design in suitable confinements. System code aims to realize calculations and provide tools as assistant to find the design points.

6 Present Development Progress of SYSCODE SYSCODE3.0 Main function: 1. Plasma physics 2. Engineering and structure 3. Economic efficiency 4. Optimization 5. Analysis and visualization SYSCODE 1.0 Finished:2006 Main function: 1. Calculation of plasma parameters 2. Optimization of equilibrium 3. Calculation of economic parameters 4. Optimization of design parameters Improvement: 1. Universalized tokamak structure model 2. Upgraded cost account system 3. Improved economic estimation system 4. Extended the input for customization 5. Modularization SYSCODE 2.0 Finished:2007 Improvement: 1. VC language,integrated all models 2. Added interface, easy for input & output 3. Visualized reactor model 4. Built management of data and users

7 Progress and Plan Progress of Development SYSCODE3.0 has been developed and tested. Fusion reactor and fusion-fission hybrid reactor(tokamak) Upgrading physics, engineering, economic efficiency calculation system and the framework of program. Future Plan Fusion and Fusion-fission hybrid reactor(st/stellarator/mirror) Advanced Fission Reactor Symbiotic Nuclear Energy System FDS Team Characteristic Function Parameters Calculation (Physics & Engineering) Economic Assessment (Cost & Benefit) Sensibility and Uncertainty Analysis Parameters Optimize (Single/ Multi Objectives) Single/ Multi reactors fuel cycle economy Safety and Environment Assessments

8 Content Background Functions Test and Benchmark Application Summary

9 Calculation of Plasma Physics Parameters Plasma Profile: n r = n 0 n d T r = T 0 T d Radiation power loss : P RAD = P brem +P cycle +P line 1 r/a 2 α n + n d 1 r/a 2 α T + T d Confinement time scaling : τ scal c E = Hc 0 I I c P B B c n c T ne P P TOT R c c Rκ κ x ε c c εm M DT Particle Balance :η He = τ α τ E = Power Balance : E α P TOT P α β N I P B T a Parameters of plasma configuration Major radius R Minor radius a Plasma triangularity δ Plasma elongation κ Parameters of plasma physics Plasma current I P Toroidal magnet field B T Pressure ratio β Safety factors q Effective charges Z eff Density of plasma n Temperature of plasma T Volume of plasma V P Performance of plasma Energy gain Q Bootstrap current fraction f BS Energy confinement time τ E Confinement factor of α η He Volt seconds V s Power parameters Fusion power P fusion Ohmic heating power P OH Auxiliary heating power P AUX Radiation loss power P RAD L-H threshold power P LH Input Configuration, Profiles, Impurity, B T, q 95, f GW, β N, τ E scal,h Density and Temperature f BS, P CD, P OH, Δφ TOT P Fusion,, P α P RAD : P Brem, P cycl, P line Power Balance: τ E, P H Particle Balance: η He Output P TOT = P α + P AUX + P OH = P LOSS + P RAD Suitable for pulse or steady-state operation of tokamak

10 Calculation of Engineering Parameters Heat and neutron flux of PFC Average/peak heat/neutron load of first wall/divertor Radial thick of main components TF coils, CS coils PF coils Coordinate (R, Z), Current I, Cross section (D, H) Power flow Thermal power, electric power, net electric power FDS Team Give structure parameters for economic assessment Single NULL/ Double NULL, Variable vacuum vessel port

11 Calculation of Economic Parameters COE Cost COE BOE Benefit CAC TAX Breeding Transmutation CTC COP CDD Tritium Fission fuel Environment benefit Extra benefit CDC C I D C F I CF C O M C S C R COE = COE BOE Fusion fuel Fission fuel

12 Optimization Algorithm Genetic Algorithm Functions Optimization of Parameters Without confinement Single Objective With confinement Maximum, Minimum, Expectation Without confinement Multi Objectives With confinement Pareto-optimal solutions Optimized Scope Parameters of physics and engineering calculations Parameters of economic evaluation Variables:<10;Optimized Objectives: <10;Confinements: <10 Support any combinations of variables, objectives, confinements according to users requirements

13 Sensitivity analysis Sensitivity analysis of all kind of factors to economy efficiency. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of ARIES-AT typical case

14 Framework of SYSCODE3.0 SYSCODE3.0 Framework

15 Characteristics Self-consistent calculation and complete assessment System Modularization for easy maintenance and utilization Optimization and Sensitivity Analysis Visualized 2-D Profile of Reactor Descriptive parameters:~1000 Input parameters:~800

16 Content Background Functions Test and Benchmark Application Summary

17 Test and benchmark scheme Functions Examples Plasma Physics Module ITER Design (Inductive scenario 400MW) ARIES System Code (ACT1 example) Reactor Engineering and structure ITER Structure Design Cost and Economic ITER Cost Assessment ARIES System Code (ACT1 example) Integration Testing and Benchmark (with optimizer) IAEA International System Codes Benchmark (6 Codes including PROCESS and ASC ) (Reported in 2 nd IAEA Demo Workshop, by D. Ward, CCFE)

18 Module Testing Physics and Engineering ITER Inductive 400MW ITER Structure Design R=6.2, a=2, kappa=1.85, sigma=0.48, betan=1.6, q95=3, fgw=0.85, li=0.85 Based on the ITER design and ASC example. Agreed within 10%, even 1% R=5.5, a=1.375, kappa=2.2, sigma=0.7, betan=4.5, q95=4.4, fgw=0.95 ASC example ACT1 strong sensitive to otherssome Parameters are

19 Module Testing Economic Efficiency ASC (ACT1 example) CDD CF CSCR COM CAC COE Total Project Capital Cost Interest During Construction (IDC) Project Contingency Owner's Cost Field Office Engineering and Services Home Office Engineering and Services Construction Facil. Equip. and Serv. Total Direct Cost Special Materials Miscellaneous Plant Equipment Heat Rejection Equipment Electric Plant Equipment Turbine - Generator Equipment Power Core Equipment Structures and Site Facilities Land and Land Rights Single Blanket More replacement cost SYSCODE Structure ASC Structure Normalized Value

20 Module Testing Economic Efficiency ITER Cost Assessment Title ITER[85] (M$ 1989) ITER[85] (M$ 2009) SYSCODE (M$ 2009) Magnet Systems Vacuum Vessel Blanket System Divertor Machine Assembly Cryostat Thermal Shields Vacuum Pumping & Fueling System Machine Core, subtotal Auxiliaries Equipment, subtotal Heating and CD, subtotal Diagnostics Hardware and software Buildings Total Direct Cost Construction Facil., Equip.t and Serv Home Office Engineering and Services Field Office Engineering and Services Project Contingency Interest During Construction (IDC) Total Indirect Cost Grand Total Unknown of ITER cost evaluation database Total agreed within 10%

21 Background Integration Test and Benchmark Participants (Codes) PROCESS(EU) SYCOMORE(EU) ASC(US) GA SYS(US) TPC(JA) SPCTRE(IN) Hosted by Dr. David Ward from CCFE Purpose Investigate how comparable results are from different codes/approaches in different world regions. Start with a broadly defined problem. Approach A DEMO design with 1GWe of Pnet Broad definition and limitation: physics and engineering SYSCODE joined these in May, 2014

22 Benchmark Results Integration Test and Benchmark H taue(s) Prad(MW) gamma ne(1020m-3) Zeff Pcd(MW) fbs Min (Benchmark) Max (Benchmark) SYSCODE B(T) I(MA) Pfus(MW) a(m) R(m) Normalized Value

23 Module testing Analysis and Conclusion Most of the important required parameters have agreed within 10%, even 1% based on the ITER design and ASC example. The maximum errors are within 10% to 20% due to the strong sensitivity with forward calculation. IAEA International System Codes Benchmark It showed the a very broad definition of the problem to be solved leads to typical variation on key parameters of around 20%.(by D. Ward at 2nd IAEA DEMO Workshop). The results from SYSCODE are also agreed within in this. The international benchmark did not involving the costing. This has been planed in next step.

24 Content Background Functions Test and Benchmark Application Summary

25 Application of SYSCODE FDS-I Fusion-driven subcritical system FDS-II Fusion power plant system FDS-MFX Multi-fuction experimental reactor NTTR Negative Triangularity Tokamak Reactor Cost of electricity 48.36mill/kWh Benefit of electricity 1.48mill/kWh Net cost of electricity 46.88mill/kWh COE 95.59mill/kWh economic competitive Power core occupies the majority of total direct cost. (> 89.5%) Blanket cost covers a great part of power core equipment cost. (> 88%) Core plasma parameters calculation Radial structure building of reactor. ~3 GW fusion power

26 Application 1:Fusion-fission Hybrid Reactor Type Account Name & Account Code Computation result Total construction cost Direct cost Cost Cost of land C20 Space and building cost C21 Reactor devices cost C22 Turbine devices cost C23 Electric devices cost C24 Other devices cost C25 Heat rejection system cost C26 Specific material cost C FDS-I: Fusion-Driven Sub-critical System Cost of electricity Indirect cost Capital cost Running cost (year) Purify and decommission cost (year) 4.18 Environment tax mill/kwh Result: FDS-I has good economic competitiveness! S. Zhang et al, Fusion Engineering and Design.82(2007) Benefit Total benefit Benefit of electricity Net cost of electricity mill/kwh 1.48 COE (mill/kwh) Economic computation results of FDS-I typical plan

27 Application 2:Pure Fusion Reactor Type Account Name & Account Code Computation result Total construction cost Direct cost Cost Cost of land C20 Space and building cost C21 Reactor devices cost C22 Turbine devices cost C23 Electric devices cost C24 Other devices cost C25 Heat rejection system cost C26 Specific material cost C FDS-II: China Fusion Power Plant Cost of electricity Indirect cost Running cost (year) Purify and decommission cost (year) 5.32 Environment tax mill/kwh Result: The economic competitiveness of FDS-II is equivalent to advanced design of commercial plant Benefit Total benefit - Benefit of electricity Net cost of electricity mill/kwh - COE (mill/kwh) Economic computation results of FDS-II typical plan

28 Application 3:Negative Triangularity Tokamak Reactor Negative Triangularity Tokamak (NTT) Concept Based on TCV tokamak experimental results; Potential advantage in bridging the gap on power handling. NTT Reactor Concept Design with SYSCODE Parameters Sign Unit Value Major Radius R m 8.5 Minor Radius a m 2.4 Elongation (edge,95% flux) κ x,κ Triangularity (edge,95% flux) δ x,δ Plasma Current I P MA 17 Toroidal Magnetic field B T T 6.2 Greenwald Fraction f GW Pressure Ration β N Bootstrap current fraction f BS Line average density n e m Volume average temperature T e, T i kev 20.1, 20.2 Current driven power P CD MW 151 Fusion power P F MW 2965 Neutron flux at plasma surface Γ n MW m Core Plasma Parameters Structure Profile

29 Content Background Functions Test and Benchmark Application Summary

30 SYSCODE: System Analysis Program for Parameter Optimization and Economic Assessment of Fusion Reactor Main functions System Parameters Design Economical Assessment Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis Deign Optimization Characters Self-consistent methods for physics parameters of reactors Reliable economic evaluation system Accurate and effective parameter optimization Test and Benchmark ITER Design and ASC example ( ACT1) Physics, cost and economic assessment IAEA International System Codes Benchmark Integration test Application FDS-I, FDS-II, FDS-MFX, NTTR

31 Website: