1 overview of the myrrha accelerator presentation of the max project jean-luc biarrotte cnrs-in2p3...

1J-Luc Biarrotte, 1st Int. MYRRHA accelerator design review, Brussels, November 12th, 2012

Overview of the MYRRHA accelerator & presentation of the MAX project

Jean-Luc BIARROTTE CNRS-IN2P3 / IPN Orsay, France

EURATOM FP7 MAX project coordinator


1.Background

2. The MYRRHA accelerator concept3. Review of the MYRRHA linac design

3

The MYRRHA project

MYRRHA Project Multi-purpose hYbrid Research Reactor for High-tech Applications

At Mol (Belgium)

Development, construction & commissioning of a new large fast neutron research infrastructure

to be operational in 2023

ADS demonstrator Fast neutron irradiation facility Pilot plant for LFR technology

J-Luc Biarrotte, 1st Int. MYRRHA accelerator design review, Brussels, November 12th, 2012

See Introduction talk by H. Aït Abderrahim (SCK•CEN)


The MYRRHA accelerator: background

End 90’s: several collaborative R&D activities worldwide on ADS accelerators (APT/AAA, TRASCO, etc. w/ especially a CEA/CNRS/INFN collaboration)

2001: “The European roadmap for developing ADS for Nuclear Waste Incineration”, European Technical Working Group on ADS (chaired by C. Rubbia, ENEA)

2002: pre-design “Myrrha Draft 1” (cyclotron 350 MeV)

2002-2004: MYRRHA is studied as one of the 3 reactor designs within the PDS-XADS FP5 project (coord. Framatome/AREVA)(cyclotron turns into linac, first reliability analyses show a need for fault-tolerance capability)


The MYRRHA accelerator: background

2005: updated pre-design “Myrrha Draft 2” (linac 350 MeV)

2005-2010: MYRRHA is studied as the XT-ADS demo within the EUROTRANS FP6 project (coord. FZK)(600 MeV linac conceptual design, R&D activities w/ focus on reliability)

2010: MYRRHA is on the ESFRI list, and officially supported by the Belgium government at a 40% level (384M€, w/ 60M€ already engaged)

2010-2014: MYRRHA accelerator advanced design phase w/ support from the EURATOM FP7 projects (MAX especially)

2015-2019: possible construction phase 2020-2023: possible commissioning phase & progressive start-up


MYRRHA within EURATOM FP7: 2010-2014

FREYAGUINEVERE experiment

SCK●CEN

CDTReactor design

SCK●CEN

MAXAccelerator

designCNRS

See Conclusion talk by R. Garbil (EC)

7

The MAX project


MAX = “Myrrha Accelerator eXperiment, research & development programme” 3 years & coordinated by CNRS

2011 – 2012 – 2013 (February 2011 to January 2014)

Goal of the project = support the transition from the EUROTRANS “conceptual design phase” to the MYRRHA pre-construction “engineering design phase” Pursue the R&D related to ADS-type accelerators, that request a “beyond the

state-of-the-art” reliability level Follow up of FP5 PDS-XADS & FP6 EUROTRANS activities

Fine-tune the design of the driver accelerator for the MYRRHA system To initiate a possible MYRRHA detailed engineering design & subsequent construction phase

starting at the end of the MAX project

Key data Call identifier: FP7-FISSION-2010

Collaborative Project – Small/medium-scale Focused (CP-FP) Project cost: 4.9 M€ total cost – 2.9 M€ EU contribution

With a total involvement of about 300 p.m. (8 persons FTE) from 11 partners

8

The MAX project


http://ipnweb.in2p3.fr/MAX/

WP1: Global accelerator design

WP2: Injector developments

WP3: Main linac developments

WP4: System optimisation


1. Background

2. The MYRRHA accelerator concept

3. Review of the MYRRHA linac design


MYRRHA as an ADS demonstrator

Main features of the ADS demo50-100 MWth power

Highly-enriched MOX fuel

Pb-Bi Eutectic coolant & target

keff around 0.95 in subcritical mode

600 MeV, 2.5 - 4 mA proton beam

Demonstrate the physics and technology of an Accelerator Driven System (ADS) for transmuting long-lived radioactive waste Demonstrate the ADS concept (coupling accelerator + spallation source + power reactor) Demonstrate the transmutation(experimental assemblies)


Choice of the proton beam energy: 600 MeV

Accelerator cost

Power density deposited in LBE


Choice of the proton beam current: 4mA

Current / Energy / Sub-Criticity for a 80 MWtherm ADS demo

(simulation by ANSALDO)


MYRRHA proton beam requirements

Proton energy 600 MeV

Proton beam current 2.5 mA (up to 4 mA for burn-up compensation)

Allowed beam trip number (>3 sec) <10 per 3-month operation cycle

Beam entry into the reactor Vertically from above

Beam stability on target Energy < ±1% Current < ±2% Position & size < ±10%

Beam time structure TBD (CW with regular beam interruptions >200µs for keff monitoring)

High power proton beam (up to 2.4 MW)

Extreme reliability level


The ADS reliability requirement Beam trips longer than 3 sec must be very rare: To limit thermal stress & fatigue on the target window, reactor structures & fuel

assemblies To ensure a 80% availability – given the foreseen reactor start-up procedures

Present MYRRHA spécifications: <10 beam trips per 3-month operation period (i.e. MTBF > 250h) – derived from the PHENIX reactor operation analysis

Far above present HPPA accelerator performance – MTBF is a few hours at PSI or SNS

Far above present ADS specifications in US or Japan – mainly based on simulations

D. Vandeplassche, IPAC2012


The ADS reliability requirement

In any case, reliability guidelines are needed for the ADS accelerator design: Strong design i.e. robust optics, simplicity, low thermal stress, operation margins… Redundancy (serial where possible, or parallel) to be able to tolerate failures Repairability (on-line where possible) and efficient maintenance schemes

Beam trips longer than 3 sec must be very rare: To limit thermal stress & fatigue on the target window, reactor structures & fuel

assemblies To ensure a 80% availability – given the foreseen reactor start-up procedures

Present MYRRHA spécifications: <10 beam trips per 3-month operation period (i.e. MTBF > 250h) – derived from the PHENIX reactor operation analysis

Far above present HPPA accelerator performance – MTBF is a few hours at PSI or SNS

Far above present ADS specifications in US or Japan – based on simulations


Generic scheme of the European ADS accelerator Modular SC main linac

Upgradeable concept (demo, transmuter) Independently-controlled elements The function of a missing element can be

replaced by retuning adjacent elements (“FAULT-TOLERANCE”)

Redundant injector Fault-tolerance is non applicable

(β<0.15) Minimized number of elements Spare stand-by injector with fast

switching capabilities

17

+

Operational injector 1: RF + PS + beam ON

Warm stand-by injector 2: RF+ PS ON, beam OFF (on FC)

Initial configuration

-

The failure is localized in injector

The switching magnet polarity is changed

(~1s)

+

A failure is detected anywhereBeam is stopped in injector 1 by the Machine Protection System @t0

-

Beam is resumed

Injector 2 operational (@t1 < t0 +3sec)

Failed injector 1, to be repaired on-line if possible

Need for an efficient fault diagnostic system !

Strategy for a fault case in the injector


18

A failure is detected anywhere→ Beam is stopped by the MPS in injector at t0

The fault is localized in a SC cavity RF loop→ Need for an efficient fault diagnostic system

New V/φ set-points are updated in cavities adjacent to the failed one→ Set-points determined via virtual accelerator application and/or at the commissioning phase

The failed cavity is detuned (to avoid the beam loading effect)→ Using the Cold Tuning System

Once steady state is reached, beam is resumed at t1 < t0 + 3sec→ Failed RF cavity system to be repaired on-line if possible

Failed cavity Failed cavity positionposition

Failed cavity Failed cavity positionposition

Fast fault-recovery procedure



1. Background2. The MYRRHA accelerator concept

3. Review of the MYRRHA linac design


Layout of the MYRRHA linac

22

WP1 – Global accelerator design


H. Klein (IAP): MYRRHA injector design (Monday 11:00)

J-L. Biarrotte (CNRS): SC linac design & associated MEBT (Monday 11:35)

F. Bouly (CNRS): Beam tolerance to RF faults (Monday 14:30)

L. Perrot (CNRS): High-energy beam lines (Monday 12:10) from the CDT work

D. Uriot (CEA): Instrumentation & operation aspects (Monday 15:00)

23

WP2 – Injector developments


C. Zhang (IAP): Injector layout & beam dynamics (Monday 15:50)

H. Podlech (IAP): Cavity development for MYRRHA (Monday 16:25)

D. Vandeplassche (SCK•CEN): MYRRHA injector at UCL (Monday 17:00) → towards a MYRRHA R&D platform

24

WP3 – Main linac developments


H. Saugnac (CNRS): Spoke cryomodule design (Tuesday 08:30)

R. Paparella (INFN): SC elliptical cavities design & associated R&D (Tuesday 09:05)

F. Bouly (CNRS): Fault-recovery procedures & associated R&D (Tuesday 09:40)

25

WP4 – System optimisation


N. Chevalier (ACS): Cryogenic system for the MYRRHA linac (Tuesday 10:30)

D. Vandeplassche (SCK•CEN): RF and control aspects (Tuesday 11:05)

A. Pitigoï (EA): Reliability analysis (Tuesday 11:35)

L. Medeiros (SCK•CEN): Conclusion (Tuesday 13:50) → Roadmap towards MYRRHA accelerator construction

26

Charge to the review: Q/A

Q: What is the goal of the MAX Euratom FP7 project (Feb 11 – Jan 14)? Deliver a consolidated reference layout of the MYRRHA linac in 2014 so as to

initiate its engineering design and subsequent construction phase

Q: What is the goal of this MYRRHA linac review ? Review, at MAX mid-project, the design choices and the technical progress made

so far and give recommendations for the forthcoming activities

Q: What documentation does the review team need to consider ? Because we have no fully consistent TDR-like document yet, the review is to be made

on the basis of the slides shown at the meeting. Nevertheless, possibly useful additional documentation has also been made available. o EUROTRANS final report on XT-ADS accelerator design (March 2010)o Already issued MAX deliverables: Project presentation (March 2011), Detailed work programme (April 2011),

Cryogenic analysis (Jan 2012), Injector conceptual design (Fev 2012)o CDT deliverables on: Myrrha HEBT design (Feb 2012) and instrumentation needs (March 2012)


27

Charge to the review: Q/A

Q: On which specific points should the review team focus in particular ? Besides a critical analysis (Findings/Comments/Recommendations) of the various technical contributions,

we would like the review team to answer specifically to the following questions:

1) May the adopted general philosophy and methodology lead to the design of a highly reliable accelerator?

2) Are the different design choices appropriate for such a machine?

3) Is the R&D programme coherent, adequately focused and efficient at this stage of the project?

4) In a more global view, what should be the essential points of concern for the MYRRHA project team in the two following years (2013-2014) to prepare for the accelerator construction?



Thank You for your kind involvement !

http://ipnweb.in2p3.fr/MAX/

http://myrrha.sckcen.be/

1 overview of the myrrha accelerator presentation of the max project jean-luc biarrotte cnrs-in2p3...

Documents