1 FNS/1-2Ra The accomplishment of the engineering design activities - - PDF document

SLIDE 1

1

FNS/1-2Ra The accomplishment of the engineering design activities of IFMIF/EVEDA: The European-Japanese project towards a Li(d,xn) fusion relevant neutron source

• J. Knaster1 and the IFMIF/EVEDA Integrated Project Team

1IFMIF/EVEDA Project Team, Rokkasho, Japan

E-mail contact of main author: juan.knaster@ifmif.org

• Abstract. The International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility (IFMIF), presently in its Engineering Validation

and Engineering Design Activities (EVEDA) phase under the frame of the Broader Approach Agreement between Europe and Japan, has accomplished on summer 2013, on schedule, its EDA phase with the release of the engineering design report of IFMIF plant, which is here described, compliant with our mandate. Many improvements of the design from former phases are implemented, particularly a reduction of beam losses and

• perational costs thanks to the superconducting accelerator concept; the re-location of the quench tank outside

the Test Cell with a reduction of tritium inventory and a simplification on its replacement in case of failure; the separation of the irradiation modules from the shielding block gaining irradiation flexibility and enhancement of the remote handling equipment reliability and cost reduction; and the water cooling of the liner and biological shielding of the Test Cell, enhancing the efficiency and economy of the related sub-systems. In addition, maintenance strategy has been modified to allow a shorter yearly stop of the irradiation operations and a more careful management of the irradiated samples. The design of IFMIF plant is intimately linked with the EV activities carried out since the entry into force of IFMIF/EVEDA in June 2007. These last activities and their on- going accomplishment have been thoroughly described elsewhere (IFMIF: overview of the validation activities, Nuclear Fusion 53 (2013) 116001 (18pp)), which combined with the present paper allows a clear understanding

• f the maturity of the European-Japanese international efforts. This released intermediate design report, which

could be complemented if required concurrently with the outcome of the on-going EV activities, will allow the decision making on its construction and/or serve as the basis for a less ambitious facility in terms of dpa, aligned with the evolving needs of our fusion community.

• 1. Introduction

The safe design of a fusion power reactor is indispensable for getting the operational license granted by the corresponding Nuclear Regulatory Agency. As essential as confining the plasma in a stable manner under fusion conditions is the use of suitable materials for the plasma facing components, capable of withstanding the severe operational conditions without being degraded either in their dimensional stability, or in their mechanical and physical properties beyond allowable design levels. Furthermore, low levels of constituents either forming long-lived isotopes or causing substantial decay heat have to be assured. The seminal proposal towards a fusion relevant neutron source based on Li(d,xn) nuclear reactions was published in 1976 [1]. As early as 1979, the first review of the state-of-the-art of the underlying technology concluded that such a neutron source is indispensable to validate and calibrate the existing models [2]. The complexity of the radiation damage mechanisms in materials, that is due to a superposition of transmutation products, displacement damage, thermo-mechanical loads and corrosion/erosion enhancement calls for experimental studies under conditions as close as possible to realistic cases in order to develop models and tune computational algorithms. The diversity of key parameters (neutron flux, spectrum, fluence,

SLIDE 2

2

FNS/1-2Ra

material temperature, mechanical loading conditions, microstructure, thermo-mechanical processing history, lattice kinetics…) can only be found out unambiguously by experiments with fusion relevant neutron sources. Thus a neutron source with suitable flux and spectrum becomes an unavoidably step to design and construct any fusion reactor device subsequent to ITER, where potentially structural damage exceeding 15 dpaNRT per year of operation [3,4] is expected compared with less than 3 dpaNRT of the latter.

• 2. The genealogy of the International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility (IFMIF)

Different concepts have been proposed throughout last four decades. The first initiative took place in the 70s in the United States of America (USA) with the “Fusion Materials Irradiation Test” project (FMIT) [5], which aimed at obtaining a neutron flux of 1019 m-2s-1 in a 10 cm3 volume by means of a deuteron accelerator of 100 mA in CW and 35 MeV of beam energy colliding on a flowing lithium screen (see FIG. 1).

• FIG. 1 Principle of FMIT facility [5].

However, the need of a fusion relevant neutron source, running in hand with the technological endeavours to learn how to confine the plasma, was not so apparent at the time without fusion power in the horizon and, despite the positive results of the validation activities [6], the project was stopped in 1984. Nevertheless, the International Energy Agency (IEA) fostered a series of regional meetings (in the United States, Europe, and Japan) throughout 1988, which culminated early 1989 in an international workshop to select the most promising candidate [7] for a fusion neutron source. Consensus was attained within the material scientist community that an accelerator-based neutron source utilizing Li(d,xn) nuclear stripping reactions would be the optimal choice [8]. Aligned with this, JAERI timely proposed the “Energy Selective Neutron Irradiation Test Facility (ESNIT) Program” (1988-92) with 50 mA CW, 40 MeV deuteron beam and a 125 cm3 testing volume with a neutron flux of 3 x 1018 m-2s-1 [9,10], together with parallel, but less successful initiatives in the United States [11]. Eventually, through international advisory boards coordinated by the IEA, a neutron source based on Li(d,xn) nuclear reactions was acclaimed in 1992 [12]. Since 1994, the “International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility” (IFMIF) is the reference concept within the Fusion community. The design baseline was documented in the final report of its “Conceptual Design Activity” (CDA) phase issued in 1996 [13] as the outcome of a joint effort of the European Union (EU), Japan, the Russian Federation (RF), and USA within the framework of the “Fusion Materials Implementing Agreement” of the International Energy Agency (IEA). A cost estimate [14] for IFMIF was developed during the CDA phase, which entailed further design studies in 1997 and 1998 resulting in the “Conceptual Design Evaluation (CDE)” report [15]. In 1999, the “IEA Fusion Power Coordinating Committee”

SLIDE 3

3

FNS/1-2Ra

(FPCC) asked for a review of the IFMIF design, and stipulated to focus on cost reduction [16] while safeguarding the original mission. The “Key Element Technology Phase” (KEP) implemented those directives with 83 tasks during 2000-2002 with the objectives of 1) reducing the key technology risk factors on the way to achieve a CW deuteron beam with the needed current, 2) verifying relevant component designs on a laboratory scale (both in the lithium target system and test facilities), and 3) validating design codes [17]. In 2004, the “Conceptual Design Report” co-authored by a team from the four aforementioned countries was released [18]. World-wide discussions preceded the approval of the IFMIF/EVEDA project in 2007, concurrently with ITER Agreement. The IFMIF/EVEDA project (acronym that stands for Engineering Validation and Engineering Design Activities) is

• ne of 3 projects defined in the Broader Approach Agreement between Japan and

EURATOM, which entered into force in June 2007. The IFMIF/EVEDA specific Annex in the BA Agreement mandates the project to produce an integrated engineering design of IFMIF and the data necessary for future decisions on the construction, operation, exploitation and decommissioning of IFMIF, and to validate continuous and stable operation of each IFMIF

• subsystem. Though the validation activities were not fully completed when the EDA phase

ended in June 2013, within the six years allocated, maturity of the studies allowed the successful development of the IFMIF Intermediate Design Report that is here described. In turn, the status of the project and of the Engineering Validation Activities (EVA) phase at the time of the accomplishment of the EDA phase has been reported elsewhere [19,20].

• 3. The IFMIF Intermediate Engineering Design Report (IIEDR)

IFMIF consists of five major systems [20, 21]: (1) the Accelerator Facility; (2) the Li Target Facility; (3) the Test Facility, (4) the Post-Irradiation and Examination (PIE) Facility, and (5) the Conventional Facility compliant with international nuclear facility regulations (see FIG. 2).

Lithium Target Thickness 25±1 mm Flow speed 15 m/s

Test Cell

Li Dump tank EMP

Dump Tank Ti Trap Cold trap Y Trap

Impurity control system

Cooling water from /to Conventional Facilities

EMP

Quench tank

Pump

Secondary Heat Exchanger

Dump Tank Pump

Tertiary Heat Exchanger

Heat removal system

Primary Heat Exchanger

Secondary

• il loop

Tertiary oil loop Main Li loop R F Q I

• n

s

• u

r c e L E B T M E B T HEBT S u p e r c

• n

d u c t i n g c a v i t i e s

1 k e V 5 M e V 9 1 4 . 5 2 6 4 M e V

Access Cell

Test Modules Handling cells Test Facility Ancillary systems

Test Facility

Be Hot Cell Lab. Tritium Hot Cell Lab. Liquid Metal Lab. Macrography Lab. Microscopy Lab. Hot Cell Laboratory

Post Irradiation Examination Facility

100 keV 5 MeV 9 14.5 26 40 MeV

RFQ Ion source Superconducting cavities LEBT MEBT

Accelerator Facility

PIEF Ancillary systems Maintenance systems RH systems Test Modules

Target system

Lithium Target Facility Conventional Facility

Buildings Site General Infrastructures Plant Services

AF Ancillary systems LF Maintenance systems LF Ancillary systems

EMFM

Lithium Target Thickness 25±1 mm Flow speed 15 m/s

Test Cell

Li Dump tank EMP

Dump Tank Ti Trap Cold trap Y Trap

Impurity control system

Cooling water from /to Conventional Facilities

EMP

Quench tank

Pump

Secondary Heat Exchanger

Dump Tank Pump

Tertiary Heat Exchanger

Heat removal system

Primary Heat Exchanger

Secondary

• il loop

Tertiary oil loop Main Li loop R F Q I

• n

s

• u

r c e L E B T M E B T HEBT S u p e r c

• n

d u c t i n g c a v i t i e s

1 k e V 5 M e V 9 1 4 . 5 2 6 4 M e V

R F Q I

• n

s

• u

r c e L E B T M E B T HEBT S u p e r c

• n

d u c t i n g c a v i t i e s

1 k e V 5 M e V 9 1 4 . 5 2 6 4 M e V

R F Q I

• n

s

• u

r c e L E B T M E B T HEBT S u p e r c

• n

d u c t i n g c a v i t i e s

1 k e V 5 M e V 9 1 4 . 5 2 6 4 M e V

Access Cell

Test Modules Handling cells Test Facility Ancillary systems

Test Facility

Be Hot Cell Lab. Tritium Hot Cell Lab. Liquid Metal Lab. Macrography Lab. Microscopy Lab. Hot Cell Laboratory

Post Irradiation Examination Facility

100 keV 5 MeV 9 14.5 26 40 MeV

RFQ Ion source Superconducting cavities

100 keV 5 MeV 9 14.5 26 40 MeV

RFQ Ion source Superconducting cavities

100 keV 5 MeV 9 14.5 26 40 MeV

RFQ Ion source Superconducting cavities LEBT MEBT

Accelerator Facility

PIEF Ancillary systems Maintenance systems RH systems RH systems Test Modules

Target system

Lithium Target Facility Conventional Facility

Buildings Site General Infrastructures Plant Services Buildings Site General Infrastructures Plant Services

AF Ancillary systems LF Maintenance systems LF Ancillary systems

EMFM

• FIG. 2 Layout of IFMIF Facility as included in IIEDR.

The IIEDR is composed by 5 major sections: 1) an “Executive Summary”; 2) the ‘‘IFMIF Plant Design Description’’ (PDD), that summarizes the content of the full IIEDR consisting of more than 100 technical reports ; 3) a careful cost and schedule report, based on the

SLIDE 4

4

FNS/1-2Ra

experience gained with the construction of prototypes during the EVA phase and the help of widely recognised Japanese and European engineering companies; 4) Annexes to the PDD; and 5) 34 Detailed Design Description documents of all the sub-systems supporting the PDD. The PDD, together with the Executive Summary, is available in a handy booklet.

• FIG. 3 List of documents of the IIEDR

The ‘‘IFMIF Intermediate Engineering Design Report’’ (IIEDR) was released in December 2013 following the recommendations of a Quality Review Panel called in by the Steering Committee of the BA. All documents of the EDA phase have been archived and made easy retrievable from IFMIF’s internal electronic database. Finally, a Risk Register document assessing the project risks has been carefully developed.

• 4. The engineering design of IFMIF

The continuous worldwide activities carried out since the seminal proposal in 1976 of a Li(d,xn) fusion relevant neutron source [1], produced a solid conceptual design of IFMIF in 2004 [18], that was the starting point for the definitive EVEDA phase as an effective risk mitigation exercise before facing its construction. Clearly, IFMIF schedule is directly associated to ITER and DEMO schedule. The key factor that drives the decisions related with IFMIF operation and DEMO is the timely availability of a comprehensive database for irradiated structural materials. To ensure that the needs of materials scientists and fusion technologists were fulfilled in this final stage before construction, a “Specification Working Group” was formed soon after the start of the EVEDA Phase in order to update the IFMIF users requirements defined in 1998 [22]. The major conclusions of this working group can be summarized as follows: 1) Irradiation programme for structural materials will consist of three exposure types to focus on data taking up to 50, 100 and 150 dpa levels, 2) Damage production in high flux region shall be >20 dpa/full power year, 3) Design lifetime of Plant is 30 years to cover all planned irradiation tests, 4) Use of SSTT is considered for both Post-Irradiation and Examination (PIE) facility and in-situ type experiments, 5) Some tests of non-structural materials will also be possible in the high flux region. Validated data are essential for the final design, licensing and for the reliable operation and lifetime evaluation of DEMO components; data generated from IFMIF are at least needed and expected within the same time frame as results from ITER

• peration.

SLIDE 5

5

FNS/1-2Ra

Main expected IFMIF contributions can be summarized in the following: 1) provide data for the engineering design for DEMO, 2) provide information to define performance limits of materials and materials systems for DEMO and beyond, 3) contribute to the completion and validation of (existing) databases to gather and confirm data required for licensing and safety assessment, 4) contribute to the selection or optimization of different alternative fusion materials, 5) validate the fundamental understanding of radiation response of materials including benchmarking of irradiation effects modelling at length-scale and time-scale relevant for engineering application, and 6) tests blankets and functional materials prior to or complementary to ITER test blanket modules [22,23]. IFMIF is based on two 125 mA in CW (100% duty cycle) deuteron beams at 40 MeV colliding on a liquid lithium screen, flowing at a speed of 15 m/s, with a beam footprint of 20 x 5 cm. The maturity of today’s accelerators technology reliably allows the construction of facilities with beam powers in the MW range, such as IFMIF [24]. The space charge issues of IFMIF will be validated in LIPAc, which profits from the successful operation of LEDA, which demonstrated in 1999 the technological feasibility of operating in 100 mA current range in CW at low β [25]. LEDA validated the concept of APT, which aimed at operating a proton beam of 100 mA in CW at 1 GeV in the 100 MW beam power range [26]. The lithium screen serving as beam target presents two main functions: 1) react with the deuterons to generate a stable neutron flux in the forward direction and 2) evacuate the beam power in a continuous manner. To efficiently fulfil both functions, it shall present a stable flow to the deuteron beam to completely absorb the 2 x 5 MW average beam power and protect the thin reduced activation ferritic-martensitic steel (RAFM) backwall that channels it. The liquid lithium is shaped and accelerated in proximity of the beam interaction region by a two-stage reducer nozzle to form a concave jet of 25 mm thickness with a minimum radius of curvature of 250 mm in the beam footprint area, building a centrifugal acceleration of 90g; this compression raises the boiling point of the flowing lithium guaranteeing stable liquid phase in Bragg’s maximum heat absorption regions. The free surface stability (±1 mm tolerance is specified) and adequate thickness allows to safely stop the deuteron beam and to limit the fluctuations of the neutron flux in the test specimens. The power density deposited in the flowing lithium is 1 GW/m2, which is one order of magnitude below FMIT’s power

• density. The heat is evacuated with the liquid lithium, which flows at a temperature of 523 K

exposing its surface to the accelerator high vacuum. The average temperature rise in the liquid is only about 50 K due to the cross flow and its short exposure of 3.3 ms to the two concurrent 5 MW deuteron beams and high heat capacity of lithium. Thanks to the target design, the stability of the lithium screen absorbing 2 x 5 MW power is ensured [27]. The Test cell [28], where test samples are placed thanks to different experimental holders, called Modules, are located behind the backplate and are divided in three categories, correlated with the decreasing neutron flux: 1) the high flux area of about 0.5 l volume and a neutron flux of typically 1018 m-2s-1, inducing > 20 dpa/full power year in the materials (this area will be mainly used for irradiation of structural materials by means of the High Flux Test Module); 2) the medium flux area, with a global available volume of 6 l with a damage rate of a few dpa/full power year (different types of experiments can be located here; the presently foreseen ones are a Creep Fatigue Test Module, a Liquid Breeder Validation Module and a Tritium Release Test Module); 3) the low flux area, with a global available volume of 8 l, with a damage rate less than 1 dpa/full power year.

SLIDE 6

6

FNS/1-2Ra

The Post-Irradiation and Examination Facility, an essential part of IFMIF, is hosted in a wing

• f the main building in order to minimize the handling operations of irradiated specimens

[29]. It will not only allow the testing of irradiated specimens exposed to the three irradiation levels but also their metallographical characterization after destructive testing. In turn, the conventional facilities have been described elsewhere [30]. The design of IFMIF is also supported by the RAMI analyses performed for each facility that are an integral part of the Annexes of the PDD of the IIEDR. Adequate redundancies of the equipment are included to reach suitable sub-system availabilities and reach the specified global availability of 70% to maximize the neutron fluence. Irradiation cycle is established in 11 months, mainly based on the lifetime expectations for the Target Assembly. This is broken down in one long maintenance period of 20 days for general maintenance (mainly in the Li Target Facility and Test Modules replacement) and long term accelerator maintenance, and another intermediate maintenance period of 3 days for short-term maintenance activities in the accelerator and other ancillary and conventional systems. A basic assumption of the defined maintenance strategy is that the specimens irradiated will not be required to be immediately re-irradiated and included in an ensuing irradiation campaign.

• 5. Conclusions

The success of the EDA phase of IFMIF, delivered on schedule within the 6 years allocated, with a design backed by the parallel successful validation activities of the main technological challenges within the on-going EVA, is perfectly qualified to reliably face its construction on schedule and cost.

10m

RFQ SRF Linac Injector Beam Dump Li Loop Post Irradiation Examination Nuclear HVAC Industrial HVAC Electric Power Supply Test Cell RF Modules Access Cell PIE Detritiation Process Human

10m 10m

RFQ SRF Linac Injector Beam Dump Li Loop Post Irradiation Examination Nuclear HVAC Industrial HVAC Electric Power Supply Test Cell RF Modules Access Cell PIE Detritiation Process Human

• FIG. 4 Artistic bird’s eye view of the IFMIF Plant

The wealth of the constituent reports, listed in FIG. 3 will allow entering into the construction phase in a smooth manner. The CDR [18], exploiting the design mastery established throughout some 3 decades of continuous R&D activities served as sound ground for this definitive EDA phase on the way to construction. In the EDA phase significant advancements have been introduced into the design of the sub-systems of the 5 major systems, resolving technical issues remaining from previous design phases [31]. The main ones are: the irradiation modules have no more a shielding function, by this change, the irradiation has been significantly gained in flexibility as alike to greater ease in modules positioning; the remote handling equipment has been improved allowing an increase of the reliability and a decrease

• f the cost; the Drift Tube Linac in the Accelerator Facility has been replaced by a

Superconducting Radio-Frequency Linac, with a significant reduction in beam losses and

• peration costs; as a consequence, the RF system could be better modularised; the Quench

Tank of the Li loop, previously included inside the Test Cell, has been re-located outside, with a reduction of the tritium production and, in addition, the operations required to exchange the

SLIDE 7

7

FNS/1-2Ra

Quench Tank, in case of failure, have been simplified; the Li loop has now two intermediate secondary cooling oil circuits, reducing the risks associated with the presence of Li, reducing the thermal gradients in the heat removal system and avoiding potential water boiling in case

• f loss of water flow; the liner and biological shielding of the Test Cell can now be cooled

with water, enhancing the efficiency and economy of the related sub-systems, by adding a liner in the Li Loop Room; the Li Loop has now a by-pass, allowing more flexibility during its

• peration; most of the safety critical operations linked to the manipulation of the irradiated

modules and Target Assembly have been concentrated in a relatively small Hot Cell; Injector design has been improved by adding a supplementary extraction electrode gaining in availability and a chopper that will ease the commissioning of the accelerators, and the maintenance strategy has been modified to allow a shorter yearly stop of the irradiation

• perations and a more careful management of the irradiated samples.

References

[1] GRAND, P. et al., “An intense Li(d,n) neutron radiation test facility for controlled thermonuclear reactor materials testing”, Nuclear Technology, Vol 29, 1976, p. 327 [2] ODETTE, G.R. “Modelling of microstructural evolution under irradiation”, Journal of Nuclear Materials 85 & 86 (1979) 533 -545 [3] GILBERT, M.R. et al., “An integral model for materials in a fusion power plant: transmutation, gas production, and helium embrittlement under neutron irradiation”, Nuclear Fusion 52 (2012) 083019 [4] NORGETT, M.I. et al, “A proposed method of calculating displacement dose rates”, Nuclear Engineering Design 33 (1975) 50-54 [5] POTTMEYER, E.W. Jr., “The Fusion Material Irradiation Facility at Handford”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 85 & 86, 463-5 (1979) [6] TOREGO, A.L. et al., “Fusion Materials Irradiation Test Facility - A facility for Fusion Materials Qualification”, Nuclear Technology/Fusion 4 (2), 695 (1983) [7] LEIS, J.E. et al. (Ed.), “Report on the international Fusion Irradiation Facility,” IEA Workshop at San Diego, Calf., USA., February, 1989 [8] SERBER, R., “The Production of High Energy Neutrons by Stripping” Phys. Rev. Vol. 72, No 1, December 1947 [9] KONDO, T. et al., “Selective energy neutron source based on the D-Li stripping reaction”, Journal of Fusion Energy, 8 229-235, (1989) [10] NODA, K. et al., “Capability of energy selective neutron irradiation test facility (ESNIT) for fusion reactor materials testing and the status of ESNIT program”, Journal

• f Nuclear Materials 191-194, 1367-1371 (1992)

[11] VARSAMIS, G. L., “Conceptual Design of a High-Performance Deuterium-Lithium Neutron Source for Fusion Materials and Technology Testing,” Nuclear Science and Engineering, Vol 106, 1990, p. 160 [12] EHRLICH, K. and DAUM, E. (Ed), “Proceedings of the IEA Workshop on Selection of Intense Neutron Sources,” Karlsruhe, Germany (September, 1992), KfK Report 5296 (May, 1994) [13] MARTONE, M. (Ed.), “IFMIF - Conceptual Design Activity Final Report”, IFMIF- CDA-Team, ENEA-RT/ERG/FUS/9611-Report, December 1996

SLIDE 8

8

FNS/1-2Ra

[14] RENNICH, J.M. (Ed.), “IFMIF - Conceptual Design Activity Cost Report”, compiled by, ORNL/M-5502-Report, December 1996. [15] MÖSLANG, A. (Ed.), “International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility, Conceptional Design Evaluation Report, A Supplement to the CDA by the IFMIF TEAM”, FZKA 6199, January 1999. [16] IDA. M. (Ed.), “IFMIF CDA, Reduced Cost Report”, Report JAERI-Tech 2000-014, February 2000. [17] IDA, M. (Ed.), “IFMIF key element technology phase task description”, JAERI-Tech. 2000- 052, January 2000 [18] IFMIF International Team, “IFMIF Comprehensive Design Report”, IEA on-line publication, (2004) http://www.iea.org/Textbase/techno/technologies/fusion/IFMIF- CDR_partA.pdf and partB [19] KNASTER, J. et al., “IFMIF: overview of the validation activities”, Nuclear Fusion 53 (2013) 116001 (18pp) [20] KNASTER, J. et al., “IFMIF, a fusion relevant neutron source for material irradiation current status”, Journal of Nuclear Materials 453 (2014) 115–119 [21] HEIDINGER, R. et al., “Progress in IFMIF Engineering Validation and Engineering Design Activities”, Fusion Engineering and Design 88 (2013), 631-634. [22] NODA, K. et al., “Users' requirements for IFMIF”, Journal of Nuclear Materials 258- 263 (1998) 97-105 [23] GARIN, P. et al., “IFMIF specifications from the users point of view”, Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 86 (Issues 6-8), pp. 611-614, 2011 [24] WEI, J., “The very high intensity future”, MOYBA01, IPAC2014, www.jacow.org [25] SCANTAMBURLO, F. et al., “LIPAc, the 125 mA/9 MeV CW deuteron IFMIF’s prototype accelerator: what lessons have we learnt from LEDA?”, THPME019, IPAC2014, www.jacow.org [26] WRANGLER, T.P., “Basis for low beam loss in the high-current APT linac”, LINAC 1998, www.jacow.org [27] KNASTER, J. et al., “Assessment of the beam-target interaction of IFMIF: a state of the art”, Fusion Engineering and Design (2014). [28] KUON, T. et al., “Overview of IFMIF EVEDA Test Facility Design”, Fusion Engineering and Design (2015) [29] KOGAWARA, T. et al., “Basic design guideline for the preliminary engineering design

• f PIE facilities in IFMIF/EVEDA”, Fusion Engineering and Design Volume 86, Issue

12, December 2011, pp 2904–2907 [30] PRUNERI, G. et al., “The design accomplishment of the Conventional Facilities of IFMIF”, Fusion Engineering and Design (2015) [31] PÉREZ, M. et al., “Engineering Design Evolution of IFMIF: from CDR to EDA Phase”, Fusion Engineering and Design (2015)