Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:49:22.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Neutron damage and activation of the first wall of inertial confinement fusion reactors: Recycling and waste disposal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2009

J.M. Perlado
Affiliation:
Instituto de Fusión Nuclear, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, José Gutierrez Abascal, 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain
J. Sanz
Affiliation:
Instituto de Fusión Nuclear, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, José Gutierrez Abascal, 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain

Abstract

Even though general conclusions cannot be derived for all the protection schemes in inertial confinement fusion (ICF) reactors, the feasibility of the ferritic alloy HT-9 as the main component of the first structural wall (FSW) in ICF facilities using thin-film Li17Pb83 liquid protection, flowing through porous tubes (INPORT), can be demonstrated as a solution in terms of radiation damage. Swelling and shift in the ductile-brittle transition temperature (DBTT) can be analyzed using the results of experimental fast-fission reactors, which are demonstrated to be good experimental tools in that ICF range. The good performance of HT-9 is remarkable. The generation of new solid transmutants and the depletion of initial constituents need also be considered. Further, a reduced-activation HT-9 (niobium-free) has been studied using recycling and shallow land burial (SLB) criteria. The recycling using that HT-9 is shown to be not feasible, as is SLB waste disposal. The unexpected critical role of some short-lived isotopes is remarkable, and more research on their nuclear data must be performed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Badger, B. et al. 1985 Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Report KfK 3840, University of Wisconsin Fusion Design Memo, Report UWFDM-625.Google Scholar
Fetter, S. et al. 1990 Fusion Eng. 13, 234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelles, D.S. 1984 J. Nucl. Mater. 122/123, 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelles, D.S. 1987 J. Nucl. Mater. 149, 192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez-Caballero, J.J. 1984 Neutron Analysis of the blanket and first wall of an 1CF reactor. Masters thesis, Instituto de Fusion Nuclear, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid.Google Scholar
Perlado, J.M. et al. 1991 Fusion Tech. 19, 709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponti, C. 1988 Fusion Tech. 13, 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanz, J. & Perlado, J.M. 1989 IN Fusion Technology 1988, Ingen, A.M. vanNijsen-Vis, A., & Klippel, H.T., eds. (Elsevier, New York), Vol. II, 1002.Google Scholar
Sanz, J. & Perlado, J.M. 1990 IN Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fusion Reactor Materials (1CFRM-4), Kyoto.Google Scholar
Sanz, J. & Perlado, J.M. 1991 J. Nucl. Mater. 179181, 702.Google Scholar
Tobin, M. 1991 personal communication.Google Scholar
Velarde, G. et al. 1985 Fusion Tech. 8, 1850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar