CONF-801237

*s
»1 \K

CONF-801237 —
DE82 006199

Proceedings of the Meeting on

Electrical Insulators Fusion Magnets

Sponsored By
U.S. Department of Energy
Assistant Secretary for Energy Research
Division of Development and Training

WSHHBOIKK OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED

Published: November 1981

 PROCEEDINGS OF THE

MEETING ON ELECTRICAL INSULATORS

FOR FUSION MAGNETS

DOE HEADQUARTERS
GERMANTOWN, MARYLAND

DECEMBER 2-3, 1980

CONTENTS

PAGE

Prefacp
3
Executive Committee Report

Attendees 13

PRESENTATIONS

BACKGROUND

1. Magnet Designs and Materials Requirements - ETF

(R. Derby, ORNL) 1.1

2. Magnet Designs and Materials Requirements - Large Coil Project

(J. Luton, ORNL) 2.1

3. Magnet Designs and Materials Requirements - MFTF

(0. Henning, LLNL) 3.1

4. Magnet Designs and Materials Requirements - MIT

(H. Becker and J. Schultz, MIT) 4.1

5. Magnet Shielding and Neutronics Calculations

(B. Engholm, GA). 5.1

6. Insulator Materials in Magnetic Fusion Reactors

(Y. Gohar, ANL) 6.1
 ii

MATERIALS PERFORMANCE CONSIDERATIONS

7. Relative Radiation Sensitivity of Insulators, Stabilizers,

and Superconductors (R. Van Konynenburg and M. W. Guinan, LLNL). . . 7.1

8. Insulators in Magnets - Practical Considerations

(R. Thome, MIT) 8.1

9. Status of Organic Insulators for Magnets

(M. B. Kasen, NBS) 9.1

10. Status of Inorganic Insulators for Magnets

(R. Blaugher, Westinghouse-Pittsburgh) 10.1

11. Survivability of Organic Insulators in a Radiation Environment

(H. Becker, MIT) 11.1

12. Irradiation Effects in Organic Insulators

(L. Hobbs, Case Western Reserve University) 12.1

13. Perspectives on Radiation Effects in Organic Insulators

(V. van Lint, Mission Research Corporation) 13.1

1A. Radiation Damage in the Stabilizer in a Superconducting Magnet

(R. E. Nygren, Westinghouse-Hanford) 14.1

ONGOING AND PROPOSED WORK

15. The Organic Insulator Program at NBS

(M. B. Kasen, NBS) 15.1
16. Irradiation Studies of Organics at ORNL
(R. Coltman and C. Klabunde, ORNL) 16.1

17. The Inorganic Insulator Program at LASL

(F. Clinard and D. Parkin, LASL) 17.1

18. Organic Insulator Studies at MIT

(E. A. Erez and H. Becker, MIT) 18.1

19. Magnet Materials Work at ANL

(B. S. Brown, ANL) 19.1

20. Magnet Materials Work at BNL

(G. Morgan, BNL) 20.1

21. Relevant BES-Sponsored Activities

(R. Gottschall, OBES/DOE) 21.1

22. Irradiation Sources for Magnet Insulator Studies

(L. Greenwood, ANL) 22.1
 iii

23. Use of the RTNS-II Cryostat for Insulator Studies

(R. Van Konynenburg, LLNL) 23.1

24. Proposed Organic Insulator Studies at Penn State

(W. Diethorn, Pennsylvania State University) 24.1

25. Proposed Organic Insulator Studies at LASL

(D. Parkin and F. Clinard, LASL) 25.1

26. Proposed Organic Insulator Studies at MIT

(H. Becker, MIT) 26.1

27. Proposed Organic Insulator Studies at NBS

(M. B. Kasen, NBS) , 27.1
 -1-

PREFACE

Magnetic fusion energy devices require magnetic coils to perform

such functions as containment and shaping of the plasma, diversion of
impurities from the plasma edge, and recovery of the energy of ionized
particles from neutral beam injectors. All such coils require electrical
insulators, and those operating at cryogenic temperatures also incorporate
thermal insulation.

A major decision to be made by magnet designers is whether to

specify inorganic (ceramic) or organic (polymeric) insulators for these
applications. Organics are preferred for their generally lower cost,
ease of fabrication, and adaptability to various coil configurations,
but these materials are degraded relatively easily by high temperatures
or irradiation fields. Since fusion magnets are designed to operate at
no higher temperatures than slightly above room temperature, thermal
degradation is not considered a problem; however, radiation fields are
typically high, necessitating heavy shielding for organics. Where such
shielding is prohibited by design or operating requirements, inorganic
insulators must be used.

Fusion device designers, materials people, and shielding experts

have been aware of potential magnet insulator problems for some time,
and this topic was addressed at the Meeting on CTR Electrical Insulators
held in Los Alamos in 1976 (proceedings available as DOE report CONF-760558),
Over the last several years,the Materials and Radiation Effects Brancli of
the Office of Fusion Energy has sponsored small programs to examine
radiation stability of both organic and inorganic insulators, and the
Magnetic Systems 'Branch has supported studies of magnet insulators for
specific applications. Recently, as more detailed magnet and shield
designs and systems studies have been generated, it has become apparent
that magnet insulator problems are on the critical path to development of
fusion power. This recognition led to the convening of a Meeting on
Electrical Insulators for Fusion Magnets, the goals of which were:

• identification of major problem areas and the state

of knowledge in these areas
• establishment of an adequate problem definition
• recommendation of appropriate research and
development areas .

This document is a record of that meeting.

Although the meeting was intended to address insulator requirements

fcr all fusion magnets, emphasis was on organic insulators for toroidal
 -2-

field (TF) coils. This focus was the result of two factors:

• TF coils have received more attention in the fusion

community than have others because of their size, cost,
and critical role in plasma containment
• the tradeoff between shielding requirements and materials
performance makes development of a high-performance
insulator of great economic importance.

In addition to the emphasis on TF coils, some attention was directed to

the lightly-shielded divertor coil. Here the intense radiation fields
appear to demand water-cooled normal conductors and inorganic insulation.
Magnets in areas of intermediate radiation intensity (e.g., internal
poloidal and trim coils) were not discussed; detailed design, system,
and neutronics studies are needed here to determine whether organic or
inorganic insulators should be specified.

Those participants who gave presentations at the meeting were

asked to supply a written version for inclusion in the proceedings, and
these constitute the bulk of this report. An ad hoc Executive Committee
was assembled to oversee the progress of the meeting, and later summarize
presentations and recommend a research and development program to the
Office of Fusion Energy. Their report is also included here. Since an
extensive program plan for inorganic insulators is already in place,
recrramendations were primarily directed to the development of organics.

The meeting opened with background presentations on magnet

designs and materials requirements, and on shielding and neutronics
considerations. These were followed by papers on materials performance.
Here it became apparent that radiation resistance of the copper stabilizer
in TF coils must be considered along with that of organic insulators.
Accordingly, a written contribution on stabilizers was later prepared and
is included as paper No. 14. The last half of the meeting was devoted to
a review of ongoing and proposed work, followed by a general discussion
of programmatic needs and recommendations which proved quite helpful in
putting into focus critical aspects of the magnet insulator problem.

We would like to thank all who attended, presented papers, and

participated in the discussion, for their valuable contributions to this
meeting.

F. W. Clinard, Jr. M. M. Cohsn

Los Alamos National Laboratory Office of Fusion Energy, DOE
 -3-

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT

MEETING ON ELECTRICAL INSULATORS FOR FUSION MAGNETS

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
R. Nygren, ORNL
C. Henning, LLNL
F. Clinard, Los Alamos
M. Kasen, NBS
M. Cohen, DOE
D. Beard, DOE (Chairman)
 -4-

SUMMARY

The design and fabrication of magnets for fusion energy devices borrows
heavily on technology developed in other areas. For superconducting magnets,
the experience base extends from' the fabrication of relatively small laboratory
magnets to the comparatively large magnets required for magnetohydrodynamic
devices. But magnetic fusion technology extends the design parameters
within which such magnets must function and introduces new requirements as well.
Magnet fabricators need inexpensive, strong, rigid, formable, tough and
radiation-resistant insulating materials. Except for uncertainties in radiation
resistance, available reinforced and unreinforced polymeric materials meet these
requirements reasonably well. A substantial effort must be made to characterize
the effects of fusion radiation on a variety of organic insulating materials,
with particular emphasis on temperature, spectra and material configuration
effects.

The allowable exposures to neutron irradiation for superconducting coils

in fusion devices may well be limited by radiation damage to their organic
insulation, However, all of the components of a superconducting magnet coil
(the organic insulation, metallic stabilizer, and superconductor) are sensitive
to irradiation. Current estimates as to the weakest link among these founder
partly jpon lack of data for radiation effects in organic materials at 5 K.
Existiiig data establish limits for a few materials irradiated in gamma fields
with other environmental conditions only partly simulating those in the magnet.
Data for the effects of neutron irradiation and for post-irradiation temperature
cycling are urgently needed to scope the problem. Further studies of materials
optimization, neutron and gamma-ray spectral effects, dose and dose-rate
effects, multi-axial mechanical tests, and of electrical properties will be
required in order precisely to define the lifetime of these components. The
uncertainties in the critical dose limits not only to the insulation, but also
to the stabilizer span more than an order of magnitude, from below 10 9 rads
to above 1 0 1 0 rads.

Magnet radiation shielding is required to limit heating of the superconductor

windings as well as to limit damage to the insulation and stabilizer. It would
be most desirable that magnet heating be the factor controlling shielding
requirements. It is estimated that this could be achieved with thermal insulators
able to survive about 1 0 1 0 rads and with electrical insulators able to survive
about 5 x 10 9 rads under the prevailing stress conditions.

The dose limits for magnets dictate shielding requirements which in turn
will impact other components and affect the overall design and cost of a
facility. Where space is tight, lack of space to add shielding can set limits
below which the radiation exposure cannot be reduced and may even render some
components infeasible. Examples of applications where high minimum exposures
would occur are (some) internal poloidal coils and trim coils, bundle divertor
coils, coils for the direct conversion system on neutral beams, and probably
a variety of coils for diagnostics and plasma control for which designs are
not yet well characterized.
 -5-

A key issue is whether lack of appropriate data on insulators will impair

the design of FED, or of a fusion reactor. The organic insulators currently used
(or specified) for large superconducting coils in fusion projects may be adequate
for FED (and, in fact, for fusion reactors); however, the problem is that the
•limited data on radiation effects in these insulators leave gross uncertainities
in the expected performance in a fusion environment.
Conventional glass-reinforced bisphenol A epoxy laminates such as G10 or
Gil are seriously degraded in flexural and compression strength at radiation
doses of 2.4 x 10 9 rads (-y) + 2.2 x 10 2 0 n/m2 when irradiated at 5 K and tested
at 77K after warming to room temperature. Despite limitations1, the OEHL
demonstration of a substantially increased radiation resistance for polyimide-
matrix insulating laminates as compared to that of laminates fabricated with
conventional bisphenol A epoxy suggests that organic materials having the required
performance may be available, but the cost premium for radiation resistance could be
substantial, as polyimide-resln laminates are 5-10 times as expensive as
convential epoxy types. Furthermore, problems of insulator performance
variability, already evident in non-radiative applications, will be exacerbated
by the anticipated sensitivity of specific radiation damage to the exact
molecular structure of organic materials.

1
Experimental studies to date of radiation effects in organic insulators have
been limited in scope end have been carried out in conditions which do not fully
replicate the service environment. (For example, an MIT-INEL study has examined
fatigue resistance at 77 K after irradiation above room temperature, with
compressive stresses below those expected for TF coils in FED. ORNL has
investigated the behavior of several epoxy and polyimide materials after
Irradiation at 5 K, warmup to room temperature and subsequent cool down to
77 K for testing.) The radiation field in all cases was mostly gamma.
 -6-

INTRODUCTION

The Office of Fusion Energy, DOE, arranged an information meeting on

..December 2-3, 1980 at DOE Headquarters to determine the readiness of present
technology to address problems associated with insulators for use in super-
conducting and normal magnets for fusion reactors. Approximately forty people
participated, representing the gneral areas of magnet design, fabrication and
materials technology. The emphasis of the meeting was on superconducting
coils and organic insulators. The meeting was Chaired by Marvin Cohen, DOE.

The objective of the meeting was to bring together a group of people

intimately involved with the problems of magnet insulation so as to define
the nature and extent of existing and potential problems and to assist in the
formulation of rational approaches to achieving functional solutions.

Twenty-seven presentations were given reviewing the background of the

problem, materials performance considerations and a summary of ongoing and
proposed work. A general discussion of programmatic needs and recommendations
was held at the close of the meeting.

PROBLEM DEFINITION

The potential problems associated with the long-term performance of

nonmetallic insulators exposed to neutron and gamma radiation in the magnets
of MFE devices has been recognized for a number of years. Because the extent of
the problems was design independent, the concern fluctuated with changing
predictions as to the radiation fluence to which the insulators would be
subjected. The problems have recently come into focus through design
refinements that indicate a substantial cost saving if superconducting magnets
in the ETF design could operate at substantially higher fluences than specified
for earlier designs.

Allowable exposures (to neutron and gamma irradiation) of the organic

insulation in superconducting magnets for fusion devices is one limiting
feature in the lifetime of these devices. Based on current knowledge and pro-
jections, epoxy-based insulation as well as copper and aluminum-based
stabilizers appear about equally sensitive to radiation damage and either or
both may limit the lifetime. Polyimide insulators, on the other hand, appear
more resistant and may prove least sensitive to radiation damage of any of tha
magnet components. Limits on shielding due to space constraints indicate that
Insulators will be exposed to doses ranging from 10 9 to 1 0 1 0 rads, with at
least half of the dose coming from neutrons, the balance from gamma ray absorption.
It is of critical significance that no data are now available for property
changes in organic materials of interest when irradiated in a spectrum containing
a significant flux of neutrons at 4 K. Hence, lifetime estimates noted above
are based upon limited studies of organic insulators after irradiation in
primarily gamma flux and with other conditions only partly simulating the magnet
environment.
 -7-

Inorganic insulators may also be considered candidates for superconducting

magnet insulation although they are clearly not the material designers' first
choice because of fabrication difficulties. Virtually no cryogenic irradiation
effects data exists for ceramics; however, extensive irradiation studies of a
number of oxida materials in the room temperature to 473 K range suggest that
ifetime would be limited only by the ability to accommodate swelling strains.
This ability would be enhanced if the insulator is powdered. Available studies
show that strength is maintained or improved after irradiation to high neutron
fluences for several inorganic materials.

There is a need to restrain electromagnetic forces much larger than in previous

applications and to maintain continued operation for very long times under high
fluences of neutron and gamma radiation with essentially no opportunity for
inspection or repair. Concomitant with these requirements is the need to
minimize cost of the overall system.

Alternatively, adding space for shielding can increase plant size and cost.
Superconducting TF coils in tokamak reactors are the best examples of potentially
large increases in plant cost associated with increases in shielding to protect
the coils. The cost effectiveness of minimizing the inboard shielding in
tokamak reactors has been shown in parametric studies. The dose (fluence) to
the TF coils also fixed the shielding thickness in the INTOR and ETF designs.
The current INTOR design, for example, specifies s lifetime dose of 1 0 1 0 rads
for the organic insulators. (Shielding thicknesses for FED of about 0.6-0.7 meters
result from a flux limit associated with nuclear heating rather than a fluence
limit. However, the exposures presently calculated for the coil do not include
the effects of neutron streaming or provision for subsequently upgrading
performance by increasing the number of burn cycles and burn time.)

SYSTEM APPLICATIONS AND PROBLEMS

The primary function of winding insulators within MFE superconducting magnets

is to provide mechanical support for the magnet windings and to provide passageways
and volumes for liquid helium. Electrical insulating functions become significant
during rapid magnet discharge but play a relatively small role during steady-state
operation. Compression, shear and creep properties of the insulators are
particularly important as is resistance to fretting in pulsed magnets. Voltage
breakdown of insulation does not appear to be a problem; however, surface
tracking (running of current along the insulator surface) could create problems
in some designs during a magnet quench. Electrical resistivity during and after
irradiation has not been characterized, and the possibility of electrolysis should
be considered.

Bulk glass-fabric reinforced epoxy industrial laminates of the NEMA (National

Electrical Manufacturers Association) G-10 type are most widely used for magnet
insulation, although various films, ceramics and B-staged glass-epoxy tspes are
also used to s certain extent. The main problems, other than those related to
radiation stability referred to above, appear to be:
 1. Excessive cost and difficulty of insulator fabrication
2. Helium and iaoisture absorption by the insulators
3. Inadequate characterization of insulator properties
4. Inadequate knowledge of long-term insulator performance-

Differences in assumed composition of organic insulators such as G-10 among

various laboratories results in different calculated KERMA cross sections anJ
therefore different conversions from a neutron fluence to rads. A standardi-
zation of terminology and of conversion procedures would benefit everyone.

Other magnet Insulators for operation at elevated temperatures and higher neutron
fluxes (10 1 2 rads) will be necessary as welli In tokamaks internal vertical field
and poloidal field coils will decrease the pulsed fields experienced by the large
toroidal field coils. Similarly, in tandem mirrors, the use of very high field
solenoidal hybrid coils will decrease the peak fields required in the geometrically
difficult yin-yang coils. In both instances, the technical requirements and costs
of the complete magnet system may be reduced by using some unshielded conventional
magnets. Ceramic insulators such as magnesium oxide or copper sulfide need to be
explored for these uses.

STATE OF TECHNOLOGY

Recent tests have shown that conventional glass-reinforced bisphenol A epoxy

laminates such as G-10 or G-ll are seriously degraded in flexural and compression
strength at radiation doses of 2,4 x 10 9 rads ( Y ) + 2.2 x 1 0 2 0 n/m2 when irradiated
at 5 K and tested at 11 K after warming to room temperature. Similar experiments
have indicated that strength degradation is much less in laminates made with
polyimide matrix. Available data suggest that the latter type laminate is more
likely to meet the radiation requirements but at a cost estimated to be five times
that of conventional G-10. Some recent experiments in Europe have indicated that
laminates fabricated with cydoaliphatic epoxy resins have much improved radiation
resistance compared to those using bisphenol A systems. This suggests that there
may exist a series of organic laminates of use to magnet designers for which
radiation resistance will scale with cost.

Laboratory testing and practical experience over the past twenty years have
indicated that orgcnic films and reinforced laminates developed for service at room
temperature maintain their structural integrity when cooled to cryogenic
temperatures. It has been observed, however, that embrittling of the polymer
matrix increases scatter in mechanical properties and can reduce the range of
useful strength to below that at room temperature if matrix cracking is deleterious
to the application. Further, it appears that sensitivity to radiation damage is
greater at lower temperatures.

The primary deficiencies of present insulating materials for superconducting

MFE magnets are as follows:
 -9-

1. Inadequate data base

An in-depth characterization of the performance of well-characterized1

insulators at 4 K under stress and under irradiation is required. The data
base must include potting compounds and putties as well as films and laminates.
In addition to the usual mechanical, thermal, and electrical characterization,
information is required on creep, fretting, and fatigue as a function of radiation
dose. The effect of radiation on thermal conductivity and on surface tracking
must be defined. The validity of accelerated radiation testing as a predictor
of long-term radiation performance must be established experimentally and by
modelling the degradation mechanism. The effect of sample thickness and physical
environment, as well as thermal history must be established so that oxidation
phenomena can be understood. Finally, as noted elsewhere, the nature of the
irradiation environment (gamma-neutron mix and spectrum) must be investigated
not only to include predicted magnet conditions but to allow for variations with
location in a given design and with different designs.

2. Lack of materials standardization

There is no accepted method of associating the designation of an

insulator with its performance. The common NEMA designations for laminates
define only material systems, leading to large variability in cryogenic perfor-
mance among products carrying the same NEMA designation. A similar problem
exists with insulating films where differences in ciystallinity significantly
alter the cryogenic performance. A start towards standardization has been made
with the establishment of cryogenic (CR) grades of some NEMA laminates.
Introducing radiation resistance as a performance parameter will increase the
need for materials standarization because of the anticipated dependence of
radiation resistance on the exact polymer chemistry and molecular structure.

3. Lack of understanding of failure modes

Consideration must be given to physical requirements for superconducting

magnet insulators in fusion devices. A materials program can, in time, fully
characterize the behavior of the materials with and without irradiation. Careful
attention both by designers and materials people must be given to service failure
modes in order to understand how to predict service lifetime from material
properties and their changes under irradiation.

TECHNOLOGY NEEDS

The long lead time required for magnet construction requires the establishment
of materials properties well ahead of the start of construction. The necessary
radiation studies should therefore be undertaken at an early stage. As intrinsic
materials variability is an important parameter, it is suggested that a radiation
program be coordinated with the establishment of standards for insulating
materials currently being used in magnet manufacture.
 -10-

For conducting future testing in a neutron environment, the program should

make use of the IPNS-I accelerator-based neutron source at ANL which is expected
to be available in about the middle of 1981. This facility is expected to provide
fluences in the range 2 to 5 x 1 0 1 2 n/cm2 sec above 0.1 MeV. IPNS-I will also
provide a comparatively large irradiation volume of 200 cm 3 permitting greater
experimental possibilities. A second facility which is already available is
RTNS-II at LLNL which produces a tnonoenergetic flux of 14 MeV neutrons with a
small (1 cm 3 ) irradiation volume.

The constitution of organic insulators within a nominal specification such

as G-10 can vary widely. Some standarization of materials specifications among
experimentors and vendors is needed. Establishment of standards should include
participation of magnet manufacturers and appropriate suppliers.

An insulator R and D program should have the following objective:

To provide magnet fabricators with a commercial supply of

well-characterized insulating materials reflecting state-
of-the-art for use in ongoing construction.

Current construction must utilize available commercial products, but we

recognize that the use of such materials in critical applications at 4 K under
a radiation environment is subjecting insulating materials to use in an environ-
ment in which their behavior cannot now be predicted. The inherent variability
of these materials, exacerbated by low temperature and radiation, combined with
a lack of understanding of the factors critical to their long term performance
in magnet structures requires that materials be characterized by components and
manufacturing process as well as by mechanical, electrical and thermal per-
formance .

In addition, the program must lay the basis for a systematic modification
and development in response to material performance deficiencies demonstrated
during characterization or revealed by field experience. We must seek to distinguish
those elements of insulator chemistry and structure which play dominant roles in
magnet performance to facilitate materials selection and will provide direction
for optimization of material performance, and for development of the most cost-
effective insulating materials for a given application.

Performance characterization of insulating materials will play a major role

in the R and D effort. It is recognized that our lack of fundamental under-
standing of "representative fusion radiation damage" applies not only to
cryogenic organic insulators but to organic and ceramic insulators for use at
room temperature as well. Without this fundamental understanding, and perhaps
even with it, irradiation testing in facilities such as the proposed IPNS and
EMIT facilities, where fusion-like spectra can be created, will be the only
realistic proof tests of insulators. To the degree that simulation of fusion
radiation environments are imperfect, correlations based on fundamental under-
standing will be needed to apply the test data to fusion conditions.

This program requires close coordination between insulator manufacturers,

polymer specialists, radiation specialists, magnet fabricators and materials
specialists.
 -li-

lt is proposed that selected materials, well characterized by chemistry

and structure as well as by mechanical, thermal and electrical performance
within the 295-4 K temperature range be evaluated under the following exper-
imental conditions to produce relevant data on radiation behavior:

1. Appropriate radiation environments in order to understand

the effects of both neutron and gamma irradiation on properties
and structure, and to simulate the actual service environment.
Early work should include irradiation in neutron sources in
order to compare results with those obtained by ORNL after
irradiation in gamma sources. To the extent possible, spectral
effects should also be investigated.

2. Varying dose rate conditions. Dose rate in projected tests is

much greater than would occur in service. Experimental work
should investigate dose rate effects in order to establish that
the mechanism of degradation is the same. Also, interim sample
warm-up to room temperature may affect damage through competing
processes of recovery and oxidation. Effect of thermal history
and of atmosphere on the damage must be established. In-situ
post-irradiation testing or cryogenic transfer from the irradiation
vehicle will be required.

3. Appropriate mechanical property tests such as tension, flexure,

compression, and interlandnar shear strength measurements, as
well as evaluation of electrical properties including breakdown
strength and radiation induced conductivity. The possibility
of electrolysis should also be investigated.

A. Correlation of performance degradation and failure modes with

specific types of damage accumulation so as to lay the basis
for a fundamental understanding of the nature of radiation
damage in organic insulators.

Definitive experiments for the magnet community should be designed to

determine whether the insulators as such or the environment with radiation
(ions in the gas phase) constitute the limit of high voltage breakdown.
(If the latter, and not recognized as such, catastrophic destructive events
can occur both for TF coil emergency shutdown with energy dump and for
normal OH coil operation and abnormal OH coil operation with plasma disruption).

The effects of radiation on corona aging effects should be determined.

Insulation breakdown and especially tracking breakdown should be determined
in a cryogenic environment as a function of radiation damage. Occluded,
trapped, and free ions can be important. Magnetic fields may affect ion
effects on tracking. Surface contaminant effects and means of cleaning should
be determined.
 -12-

The porosity of non-conducting dewars to helium as a function of

radiation damage should be determined. Both boron and non-boron glass in
fiber-reinforced plastics should be evaluated. (This work should be undertaken
only if an ETF-INTOR-FED need assessment indicates there is a need for such
non-conducting dewars.)

All experimental programs and other experimental variables should be

part of a mature program with a good statistical design base.
 -13-

LIST OF ATTENDEES
MEETING ON ELECTRICAL INSULATORS FOR FUSION MAGNETS

NAME AFFILIATION
Linn W. Hobbs Case Western Reserve University
Frank W. Clinard, Jr. LASL
Richard E. Nygren HEDL (FED-ORNL)
Richard Van Konynenburg LLNL
John D. Rogers LASL
Richard D. Blaugher Westinghouse/R & D
Joel H. Schultz MIT
Leonard Coffman GE
Herbert Becker MIT
M. B. (Bud) Kasen NBS
Tom Blewitt ANL
Bruce Brown ANL
Richard Thome MIT
Larry Greenwood ANL
Allen N. Goland BNL
Michael W. Guinan LLNL
Ralph R. Coltman, Jr. ORNL
James L. Scott ORNL
Raymond Ng DOE/RS & A
Gregory Haas DOE
Den Beard DOE
Barney Engholm GA
 -14-

Carl Henning LLNL

T. C. Reuther DOE

Bruno Fanconi NBS

Robert J. Dowling DOE

George R. Imel EG&G Idaho

Richard E. Schmunk EGS.G Idaho

Ward Diethorn Penn State University

James Gtuchel Owens Corning Fiberglas Tech Center

Victor van Lint Mission Research Corp.

Vivien Yang Steggr General Dynamics

Steven A. Muelder LLNL

Ed M. Sheen HEDL

Donald G. Doran HEDL

Yousry Gohar ANL

Alan F. Lietzke Lawrence Beiiceley Laboratory

Klaus 11. Zwilsky DOE

M. M. Cohen DOE

Gary P. Lang McDonnell Douglas

 1.1

MAGNET DESIGNS AND MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS - ETF

Roger Derby
Francis Bitter National Magnet Lab

DOE Headquarters
December 2, 1980
 1.2

My first slide gives you an idea of where I am going in my talk and how I
plan to get there. I will start with a brief overview of an ETF device and
then move on to discuss the function of electrical insulation. Next, I will
pass out a variety of samples so that people here who are unfamiliar with
magnet construction may get a real feel for the substances we are talking
about. After the samples I plan to discuss

I N T R O D U C T I O N
• Machine overview
• Function of insulation
• Samples
• Insults to insulation
• Requirements
« Parting "shots"
• Summary and bottom line

SLIDE #1

some of the insults that an insulation will experience in a large fusion re-
actor. A brief summary of requirements follows logically and ends the first
part of the talk. The next three slides I call "parting shots" and are some
general comments based on personal observations and experiences. Finally, I
hope to combine the "parting shots" with the material presented in the first
part of the talk to give you the "bottom line".

In SLIDE #2 you can see two concepts for a Tokamak reactor. On the right is
the so-called INTOR machine. Note the large external poloidal coils. On the
left is the DESIGN #1 of ETF. Note the internal polidal field coils. They
1.3
 1.4

will almost certainly be water-cooled. The INTOR concept incorporates a

poloidal divertor, and you can see the opening in the lower part of the

shielding to accommodate the flow of waste particles. In DESIGN #1 there

is a bundle divertor and it is out of sight behind the model, appropriate

because divertors are currently out of fashion, at least for the next

month or two. One can also see an interesting error on the model. The

ohmic heating and vertical field coils near the axis of the machine must

be continuous in the radial direction. Layers are not allowed. You can

get an idea of the scale from the little men with their tool boxes. The

toroidal field coils will be about 35 ft. tall and will weigh over 200 tons

each. (Tnere will be 10 or 12 cf them.) The largest external poloidal coils

will be about 60 ft. in diameter, The toroidal coils will probably cost

$20 million each in 1980 dollars.

In SLIDE #3 I have listed three regimes in which insulation performs different

functions.

During charging the voltage between turns is low and the ohr.dc resistance of

the superconductor is zero. You might ask, "why have insulation?" and you

wouldn't be the first person to ask that question. Many years ago several

experiments were made to find out if insulation was really needed during

charging, and the answer was, "Yes, for any conceivable practical application".

What the experimenters discovered was that given a very long time for charg-

ing, days or weeks, it would be possible to charge a magnet without insulation,

but that without insulation within any practical time current would start to

flow in the copper stabilizer and would quench the magnet. Hence, insulation

is needed during charging to prevent leakage between turns or layers and

between conductor and case.

 1.5

FUNCTIONS OF INSULATION

• During charging

Why have insulation?

- Turn-to-turn, layer-to-layer, conductor-to-case.

• During discharge

- Induced voltages as field collapses.

- Much higher than during charging.

• During steady operation

Transfers mechanical loads.

Provides helium volume.

SLIDE #3

During discharge the energy stored in the field of the coils induces sub-

stantial voltages within the coils which can result in arcing. The arcs

will damage, perhaps ruin, the insulation. More will be said about this

subject later.

Finally, during steady operation the insulation performs two vital mechanical

functions: it transfers the mechanical load from turn to turn, from layer

tc layer and,finally, to the case. It also provides empty space for helium.

Some years ago Bruce Montgomery did a survey of magnets in which, he found a

correlation between volume fraction of helium and successful operation. Let's

not forget that point when the stress analysts start telling us what they

think the insulation space should look like.

I have a number of samples of insulation that are typical of the kinds of things

magnet builders like. The first is a disk of G10 that was used between the
 1.6

smm

^^'^^

Sample #1. G10 disk with machined slots

• • • • • • •.• • • • • ® # #.« «««.«.«

Sample #2. Perforated G10 strips

 1.7

Sample #3. Convair 'paper doll" arrangement.

Sample #4. Lexan sheet machined in two directions for

helium ventilation.
 1.8

Sample #5. Tough kapton film

Sample #6. Section of a resistive coil wrapped in glass cloth

and impregnated with epoxy
 1.9

pancakes of a 10-tesla laboratory magnet. Note the criss-cross machining

to allow helium "ventilation". Another typical specimen is a sheet of G-10

that has been perforated repeatedly to provide room for helium. Note the

other strip with smaller holes. Another application is the so-called "paper

doll" configuration favored by Convair. An unusual specimen is a sheet of

Lexan (a polycarbonate) that has been machined to optimize helium circulation.

Other typical materials include Kapton film (a tough polyimide), mylar

(a polyethylene), and Nomex. Among the specimens is a sheet containing

Kevlar fibers. (The latter have a tensile strength over 300,000 psi.)

Finally, there is an example of insulation from a resistive coil in which

12 turns of copper are individually wrapped in glass cloth, surrounded by

an over-wrap and then impregnated with epoxy.

The next series of slides shows many of the types of insults that insulation

receives. SLIDE #4 shows the mechanical insults.

The first and most obvious insult is crushing. The problem is, of course,

ameliorated by lateral restraint when the insulation is used in these films.

MECHANICAL INSULTS TO INSULATION

• Crushing (ameliorated by lateral restraint)

o Fretting

• Void growth from fatigue

• Delamination

« Thermal stress FiaAT

• Perforation

SLIDE #4
 1.10

Fretting is the interfacial wear which always occurs when substances of

different stiffness are bolted or jammed together and then loaded. The
fine powder one observes when removing a cylinder head from a gasket is
an every day example.
An ameliorating factor in a superconducting inagnet is that the extreme
cold eliminates the possibility of forming corrosion products. On the
other hand, sometimes wear is accelerated in ultra pure environments such
as vacuum and parts-per-billion-pure reactor water when no protective
oxide film is formed.
Almost any molding or casting of polymer will contain small defects. It is
possible for a crack to grow out of such a defect. Remember that the state
of stress changes sign as one moves around the periphery of a cylindrical
(or spherical) stress raiser. That is the reason glass loaded in compression
actually fails in tension.
Delamination of a fiberous body loaded in compression is an obvious possibility
and is particularly likely with column-like specimens. Thermal stress is
another obvious possible source of trouble. Materials people don't need to
be reminded that polymers have -very large coefficients of expansion.
Probahly the most serious insult is the inclusion of dirt, metal chips, solder
beads, weld spatter, match heads, et cetera, between the insulator and the

insulatee. Such items tend to puncture the insulation as the inter-turn

forces grow with increasing magnetic field. Keeping such junk out of a
winding is an important QA task: Every magnet shop has a short, muscular,
hairy chested guy who uses an enormous mallet to beat those last recalcitrant
turns into line.

In SLIDE #5 I mention two other types of distressing things that can happen
to insulators. The first is creep. By creep, we mean time dependent plastic
 1.11

deformation. (Electrical engineers may mean something else.) Recently,

some of the magnet builders at Oak Ridge put a strain gage on the metallic
bobbin of a coil during winding. Every morning they discovered that there
was less compression than on the day before. The explanation was, of
course, that the insulation was creeping and relieving the prestress. As
one investigator commended, "If you gotta creep, night's a good time for it".

Very different kinds of insult are those associated with ageing. I know
from my own experience with testing polymers that the fracture strength is
age dependent. Evidently, some kind of chemical reaction may continue long
after a specimen is removed from the mold. Again, change of properties
with time will probably be completely inhibited by cryogenic temperatures.

OTHER INSULTS

• Creep
• Age
(Ameliorated by low temperature)
? Synergistic effects
SLIDE #5

Finally, at the bottom of the slide I have substituted a question mark for
a bullet because I don't know if there will be synergistic effects when nuclear
radiation is imposed on top of other insults.

In SLIDE #6 I have listed two types of electrical insults. The first,

voltage breakdown, will be unusual. In fact, it probably will not be a
problem in any kind of fusion magnet.
 1.12

ELECTRICAL INSULTS

o Voltage breakdown

- 1 to 2 thousand volts/mil

o Tracking

- 5 to 10 volts/mil

SLIDE #6

The voltage required to puncture a few thousandths of an inch is so large

compared to that required to cause tracking (the running of an arc along

a surface) that we can almost ignore breakdown and direct most of our atten-

tion to tracking. The point is clearly illustrated by my next specimen

which is a disk composed of three .003 inch layers of mylar film. The

specimen, SLIDE #7), was exposed to as much as 50,000 volts DC at a number

of locations. As can be seen (or felt) the resulting tracks often ran

along the surface for a considerable distance without any noticeable effect

on the opposite side. (The specimen was loaned to me by Bill Schwenterly

of ORNL.)

In SLIDES #8 and #9 we present one possible configuration for the TF coils

of a fusion reactor. In SLIDE#8 the radial stress on a conductor builds up

from zero at the inner surface to a maximum of around 30 ksi. The location

of the highly stressed regions are shown in SLIDE #9 which is one of many

possible designs.

Note the superconducting cable supported in a flattened U channel which

contains holes for helium ventilation. The lateral compressive stresses

(on the insulation between pancakes) is caused by the operation of the poloidal

field coils.
 1.13

°4
 1.14

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS M Cm.

PANCAKES

•MM

Hv

/l
1 / a
- *
a —1.
> 132

TF COIL WINDING LAYOUT FOR DESIGN 1

PANCAKES

TF COIL WINDING LAYOUT FOR DESIGN 2

TF COIL WINDING LAYOUT FOR DESIGN 1 AND DESIGN 2

 1.15

•HOLE HOLE

C.

0.20

2 TESLA GRADE
(ALL DIMENSIONS IN cm)

U.
2
<
a. 0)
1.88
O
o
u.
O
in
a:
o
m

0.20

12 TE»LA GRADE

TF COIL CONDUCTOR CROSS SECTION

B
5L1DE S
 .16

1 TURN AXIAL SUPPORT,

CO-WOUND WITH CONDUCTOR

HORIZ. SLOTS i
1-1/2" WIDE. I
SP. AT 3" C-C
AT INNER RADII

AXIAL SUPPORT
PLATE

VERT. SLOTS
1-1/2" WIDE,
ALIGNED WITH
HORIZ. SLOTS

PF COIL CROSS SECTION

I"' i"

SLIDE */O
 1.17

In SLIDE #10 is shown a preliminary concept for a superconducting poloidal

field coil. The cross hatched region is insulation which has grooves machined
into it to allow helium bubbles to escape.

Because designs, missions, and concepts are currently (Dec. 1980) very fluid,
it is impossible to state insulation requirements with any degree of precision.
In SLIDE #11 I have, however, presented some typical numbers which should
be helpful when planning a materials testing program.

TYPICAL REQUIREMENTS
• Fretting § fatigue 50,000 1,000,000 cycles
• Stress
10's of thousands of psi

• Electrical
- 3 volts between turns
- 100 volts between layers or pancakes
- 2,500 volts between pack and case
SLIDE #11

Let's consider fatigue first. An ideal operating reactor will probably

operate in a continuous or quasi-steady state mode and not on a pulsed or
batch basis. But, a commercial reactor is 25 years away. What about an
experimental reactor? Surely nobody wil.T know how to operate it continuously.
And, if they did, they'd still want to experiment with it. For a couple of
$ Billion, nobody is going to settle for a measly 50,000 shots. But, what
about the new, inexpensive $1 Billion models? Maybe 50,000 cycles is enough.
My guess is that we will move toward the million cycles end as time goes by.
 1.18

The picture for compressive stress is somewhat better. Material specialists

should think in terms of tens of thousands of psi. In some instances, stress
may be as low as 4 or 5 ksi, but values of 20, 30, or 40 ksi are more typical.
(Very large valves, in the hundred of ksi, are unlikely because of limits on
both conductor and structure.)
The electrical requirements can be inferred by remembering that 2500 volts
is a good average value for breakdown in gaseous helium. Experiments have
shown that it is difficult to establish a voltage much greater than 2500 volts
in any practical configuration in helium. (We are interested in gaseous
helium because liquid helium will be quickly vaporized during a temperature
excursion.) Typical values of volts between turns can be established by
dividing 2500 by the number of turns per coil. The inter-layer or inter-
pancake voltage can be calculated by multiplying the inter-turn voltage by
the number of turns per layer. The values shown in SLIDE #11 are typical of
what magnet designers are thinking about for TF coils.

At this point the second part of my talk begins, my "parting slots". In

SLIDE #12 I have listed some of the uncertainties currently involved in using

PARTING SHOT #1: UNCERTAINTIES

• Fracture is a messy subject
Fatigue curves are BANDS
da/dN curves are steep
- Test rigs
- Data may be non-existent
« Polymers are messy substances
- Age
- Moisture
- Composition
 1.19

PARTING SHOT #12: UNCERTAINTIES (continued)

• Leaky shielding will result in "Hot Spots"
subject to higher radiation levels
SLIDE #12

polymeric insulations. Most of the items are self-explanatory. The

question of testing devices deserves an extra comment. There are going to
be many questions about the applicability of data obtained from small
laboratory specimens to large scale devices. Temperature and radiation
present additional complications.
I am so worried about radiation that I have devoted SLIDE #13 to the subject.

PARTING SHOT #2: HOW VALID EXTRAPOLATIONS?

SLIDE #13

The point I want to make in SLIDE #13 is that a given amount of energy
delivered by a neutron may do far more damage than would be done by an
equivalent amount of energy from gamma rays. One .can compare the hydrogen
atoms to pool balls and the neutron to a cue ball. If you've ever played
pool, you know that during a head-on collision the cue ball, comes to a stop
and the pool ball rolls off at approximately the same velocity as the cue ball
had before.
 1.20

My third parting shot, SLIDE #14, deals with administrative matters.

PARTING SHOT #2: ADMINISTRATIVE

0 Time

« Money

e People

• Facilities

• Leadership (noc al] DOE's fault)

SLIDE #14

Golda Meier used to say, "Nothing happens by itself". It is going to take

leadership and time to get the necessary money, people, and facilities

together to select and demonstrate the reliability and practicality of

candidate insulations for a fusion reactor.

Finally, in SLIDE #15, there is a summary and a bottom line.

S U M M A R Y

o Big, heavy, expensive, highly stressed coils

• Insulation serves multiple functions

» There are many types of insults

• And ma/iy uncertainties

— We need a steady, well-funded,

well-manned, aggressive program

or

•"" We must be very conservative in

our use of shielding and in estimating

life

SLIDE #15
 1.21

An successively conservative design will be both more expensive and less

useful than a sound design based on convincing verification tests.
 2.2

LARGE COIL PROGRAM

INSULATOR ENVIRONMENTS

TEST
UP TO 2.5 KV
ROOM TEMPERATURE TO 3.5°K
HELIUM LIQUID AND GAS
1/2 TO 6 ATM./ 10"5 TORR
REQUIRED
107 RAD
UPSET
10" 5 TORR TO 1 ATM OF H E , N 2 OR AIR
 LCP INSULATION USEAGE
COILS
APPLICATION W JJ3L
GROUND WALL
GENERAL MACHINED GIO-CR MACHINED G10 6 LAYERS 1 MIL 2 LAYERS 1 MIL
KAPTON BUTT KAPTON UNDER
LAPPED, UNDER 2 LAYERS 5 MIL
CORNERS SHINGLED & MOLDED SHINGLED NOMEX 2 LAYERS 10 MIL B-STAGE EPOXY

CASE PENETRATION MOLDED rtr; MACHINED BONDED G10 B-STAGE EPOXY GLASS TAPE, PLUS
GIO-CR GLASS TAPE, PLUS GAP 3/4"
BETWEEN WEDGES, WITH OR w/O
TURN MACHINED GIO-CR 10 MIL NOMEX BEDDING COMPOUND
STRAND "INSUUTION" COPPER SULFIDE
TEAIER KAPTON COATED WIRE TEFLON COATED MAGNET WIRE,
FILM EPOXY POTTED
 COILS.
APPLICATION GE W LCTF
FEEDTHROUGHS
INSTRUMENT MULTIPLE-PIN SINGLE-PIN CERAMIC POTTED GDC CONNECTOR
CERAMIC CONNECTOR FEEDTHROUGH
COIL CURRENT METALIZED CERAMIC CAST G10 (ROOM TEMPERATURE)

INSTRUMENT CABLE KAPTON WRAP

STRUCTURAL PLATE ANNODIZED Al

CROYOGEN ELECTRICAL EXPOXY FIBERGLASS
BREAK TUBE
PULSE COIL SYSTEM TO BE DETERMINED
 2.5

LARGE COIL PROGRAM

INSULATION %TERIAL NEEDS

1. BETTER DATA BASE

§ IN-SITU RADIATION EFFECTS
• LOW TEMPERATURE THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY
• LOW TEMPERATURE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

2. (MATERIALS WITH RADIATION RESISTANCE AND ROOM

TEMPERATURE FLEXIBILITY OR ECONOMICAL MOLDABILITY
- FOR CORNERS AND PENETRATIONS
3. ECONOMICAL MULTILAYER THERMAL INSULATION WHICH
IS RADIATION RESISTANT
4. A CONTINUOUS INSULATING COATING WHICH IMPROVES OR
DOES NOT DEGRADE CONDUCTOR STABILITY
 DYNAMIC*
Convtir Division
LARGE COIL INSULATION CONCEPT

LAYER TO LAYER
TURN TO TURN
INSOLATION
INSULATION
G-10 CR
G-10 CR

/GRID INSULATION
G-10 CR
CONDUCTOR

GROUND INSULATION
G-10 CR

DIVERTER

ALIGNMENT PROVISIONS

LHe FLOW PATH

2.2
 dlNlRAL DYNAMICS
Convtir Division
SIDE PLATE TO INNER RING INSULATION

VENTILATED INSULATION (G-tO)

INSULATION (G-10)

,- SIDE PLATE

v—FORMED MYLAR
/ INSULATION
(SWITCHED TO FEP)

-INNER RING

GRID /
INSULATION —

2.22
ll0Y;ULATi0JO
 2.9

'. ^_ ..
. _ .MATU.

Pi Ll_ £.!«£. ?\£C£.S

C»O^>N^Efc, >CD50 JOOMEX ?A?fife.
%it>E. WALL
SHEET G>-tO

SJ6»^{5)< PAPS-J6.

fhsor HEUUHA | 6-POKy

I
i/ACHIN£p (5-lb $ Ce«AM1c
2.10

u
Q
O
O
OL
O

m
ui

3-174
 SHIMS

LEAD SUWOHT
IEPOXY)

TAPE

SUPPORT INSULATION

CHIMNEY
(LOWER)
FLANGE ISTEEL)

ADAPTER
COLLAR ISTL)

LEAD COLLAR (STL)

SWAGED INSERT
LEAD (SUPER CONDUCTOR)

FIGURE 3.4^42 THE MAIN LEAD

COMMON MAGNET FAILURES L:

Stability
Electrical shorts and arcs
Cryogenic/vacuum systems
Conductor fracture
Joint delamination S3

Structural deflection
MFTF MAGNET LOAD LINE.

i r I r I I
LLL specification l c at 4.2 K-
12

at 4.5 K

0 8 9
QUENCH VOLTAGE, TEMPERATURE RELATIONSHIP

0.4

0.3
Cold, hard

I 0.2
Warm, annealed
0.1

100 200 300

Peak conductor temperature (K)
 3.5

ARC INITIATION AND EXTINGUISHMENT m

Arc initiation—Paschen curve

Arc extinguishment

1 I
10 1
10- 2 icr1 1 IO 1 10 2
Density X distance (bar * mm)
 3.6

WINDING COMPACTION

3500

- 2500
Q.

2?
2000
0>
w
E = 3 X 10 6
a
o 1500
a.

| 1000

Over 95% of to,.al strain occurs

500
below 500 psi

0 L
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Conductor pack compressive strain (%)
 3.7

MFTF CONDUCTOR JOINT

Cold weld

50% Pb - 50% Sn Half-hard Cu

solder Splice bar
(0.490 in. X
1.0 in. overall)

Annealed
tapered wings

Copper
stabilizer

Solder
Strain-gage
locations Cooling holes
Core
STRAIN DISCONTINUITY

Differential
strain
SLIP PLANE

Mylar-film
slip plane
on outer
surface of
Leads allow for conductor pack
conductor motion
COMPUTER GRAPHIC DISPLAY OF MFTF MAGNET WITH NEUTRAL
BEAM INJECTION ACCESS

Beam lines

Yin-yang
magnet
 fiFTF HAfiNET PARAMFTFRS

MAXIMUM F I E L D 7-68 T
CENTRAL FIELD 2-0 T
MIRROR RATIO 2-1
MIRROR-TO MIRROR LENGTH 3-6 n
MAJOR RADIUS (MEAN) 2-5 M
MINOR RADIUS (MEAN) 0-75 M
CURRENT 5775 AMPS
TURNS 1392
STORED ENERGY 409 MJ
CONDUCTOR CURRENT DENSITY 3729 A/CM2
COIL CURRENT DENSITY 2525 A/CM2
SURFACE HEAT FLUX .19 W/CM2

CONDUCTOR LENGTH 50 KILOMETERS

TOTAL WEIGHT 341.000 KB

I MFTF
MIUOX FUSION TEST FACILITY
MFTF MAGNET WINDING
 3.13

MFTF COIL ASSEMBLY II

-Guard vacuum space
-Copper injection bladder
-Injected urethane
filler
-316L steel coil jacket
•Fiber filled epoxy
•Mylar-Dacron
slip plane
Kapton ground
plane insulation
G-11 filler block
Conductor stabilizer
Superconductor
core
Perforated G-11
insulation

\r*— Button insulation

i

wwwwww
316 L steel
coil form

304 LN steel
structure ( 3 " thicK/\v>
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\sJ
3.14
 4.1

MAGNET DESIGNS AND

MATERIALS REQUIREMENTS - MIT

H. BECKER and J. SCHULTZ

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

(The following contribution is by J. Schultz)

 4.2

Si/ing of the Thermal and I lucl rical Systems

for :ui II' I) Ituudle Din-Hoi Design nidi IWgO Insulation

M.I.I, Hasina liision( inter Research Report

hy.l.ll.Schultz.

December, 1980

Because of the \cry high-order dependence of hot-ion ripple losses in the I-'I'F plasma on the magnetic

moment of the bundle divertor coil system, it is interesting to investigate magnet technologies which require

Ihc least amount of shielding against neutrons and gamma rays. Previous studies (1.2) have indicated that, for

bold superconducting and normal conductor magnets with organic insulation, (lie mosi limiting factor is in-

sulation life. Therefore, a good direction to look is at ceramic insulations, such as MgO powder. Ceramics have

higher radiation resistance than organic insulations on general principles, because of their absence of easily

broken chemical bonds. However, interest in ceramic insulations in general and MgO powder in particular is

besi justified by the superior operating performance of MgO powder insulated coils in high gamma irradiation

and high-heat environments.

(I) History

MgO powder insulation is used in commercial stove elements, thermocouples for nuclear reactors and

as a magnet insulation for accelerator magnets in a high gamma flux environment. Approximately 40 such

magnets have been built b> A. Harvey's group at the l.os Alamos Scientific Laboratory (I.ASL) and 20 for

accelerators operated by SIN (Suisse Inslitul Nucleairc) in Switzerland. There have been no failures related

to insulation degradation in the several dozen magnets using ceramic powder insulation in a high gamma

irradiation environment. The world's record irradiation is not known, but is believed to be greater than 1010

rads in one of the SIN magnets. Some of the magnets at I.ASL have logged over .10,000 hours of failure-free dc

operation.

The operational experience of organic insulations in radiation environments is difficult to obtain. Failure

reports appc'r infrequently in the open literature (3]. Few magnets have failed because of radiation damage to

the insulation. Most accelerators never achieve their original design specification radiation dosages. Insulations

arc routinely inspected at laboratories like Stanford and Ikookhavcn and arc replaced when significant dis-

coloration or dclamination of the insulation is observed. According to D.Hay[4], at the Stanford Linear
 4.3

Accck'nitoi (SI.AC), iiKigncis with ALO.r filled epoxy glass insulation are routinely replaced after irradiations

of l()!l rad? because of observed depoivnicri/ation. Therefore, magnets subjected to successful preventive

maintenance can not test the hypothesis that thin insulations will continue to function successfully at irradia-

tions well beyond the threshold to visible damage. Hie most spectacular tinicportcd magnet failure, which

was unambiguously due to radiation damage, is the failure of the DKSY ring magnets in West Germany at

radiation doses of about 108 rads. These magnets used aliphatic aminc cured cpoxics with mica and glass

fillers. Do/ens of magnets failed at radiation levels of I0 8 rads. It is believed that the failure mechanism

was bubble rupture, bubbles being prevented from diffusing out of the insulation by the mica fillers. The

most encouraging examples of nonfailurc that I have identified arc the NINA bending magnets in Darsbury,

l-'ngland (near Liverpool). R. Sheldon at Princeton [5] believes that these insulations have been irradiated to

greater than 10l(l rads with no magnet failures. The insulations arc S-glass filled imide cpoxics, cured with

NM A. They arc relatively thin, thus avoiding trapped gas formation.

While no spectacularly high magnet irradiations have been fcpoited for MgO insulation, the insulation

of the neutron flux detectors in the Canadian Fickrcll reactors is known to have been irradiated to 10 H rads

in the first three full power years [6]. No insulation failures occurcd. When the detectors were removed

from service, the insulation resistance had changed from 10fl Q to 108 fi at 100 V. This contrasts with the

order of magnitude reduction in the resistivity of G-10 after an irradiation of 1O'° rads reported by Collman

|7]. lircchna [8] reported a decrease in the unirradiatcd resistivity of wet-wound epoxy DKR 332 of 5 orders

of magnitude at an irradiation of 1010 rads and of 10 orders of magnitude at an irradiation of 10 13 rads.

Therefore, the electrical properties of MgO insulation appear to be far more stable under irradiation than

those of organic insulations.

The difference in the operating experience of inorganic vs. organic insulation magnets is one argument

in favor of using the MgO insulation in highly irradiated environments in HTF. The other, and probably

more powerful argument, is the lack of clearly identified integrated failure mechanisms for ceramic powder

insulation, as will be explained below. In order of applicability, relevant environments include (1) the bundle

divcrtor magnets, (2) toroidal ripple compensation coils, attached to a shield or vacuum vessel flange, (3) inter-

nal poloidal divcrtor coils or (4) the main T F coils if very high beta is established by the current experimental

program.
 4.4

(2) Di-sign Code Description

The ceramic insulation technology has sc\eral limilations. which have been modeled in a thermal-

electrical systems sizing code, entitled MJNDI.I: [.CON . There are also several variations of this code in

use at MIT which include models of 1 .-shaped coils, such as have been recommended for use in bundle

divertors. circular coils, internally-cooled conductors and externally-cooled conductors. Our worked example

in section three will be a bundle diverlor with I.-shaped coils with internally-cooled conductors, since this

appears to he the most attractive fusion application of the ceramic insulation technology. The limitations on

how lighlh shielded the magnei can be include (1) instantaneous nuclear heating. (2) copper transmutations.

(3) copper lattice displacements, (4) neutron-induced leakage current in the MgO insulation. (5) electrolysis

of the ceramic break in the external coolant line. (6) electrolysis of the MgO insulation by neutron-enhanced

migration of ceramic impurities, (7) erosion of the copper by radiolyzcd water derivatives, (8) swelling of the

insulation and (9) cnihrittlcmcnt of ihe copper. These limitations will be discussed below.

Instantaneous neiiiion and gamma heating appears to be the single most limiting factor for coils built

with the MyO insulation technology, even at very high duty factors and availabilities. Typical heating rates

have been calculated by Kngholm [9| and arc modeled in BUNDI.K LCOIL by (he correlation

Q" = 18.8 PU.M e x p ( - o Thickahicllt) (1)

where \\, is the wall-loading in (W/m 2 ) and a, the attenuation coefficient, is 13 m ~ ' for tungsten with

titanium hydride and 11 m ~ ' for stainless steel and boratcd water. Notice that the Joule heating of a conduc-

tor with a current density in copper of 3 kA/cm 2 is 15 W/cc. If the nuclear and gamma heating is to held

to about one-tenth of that amount, then approximately 30 cm of stainless stecl/borated HaO shield, 24 cm of

tungsten/titanium hydride shield or, possibly, 16 cm of tungsten/titanium hydride shield plus a 10 cm thick

steel coil case would be required.

Copper is transmuted by neutrons to unstable isotopes of copper, which decay into nearly equal amounts

of zinc and nickel. Bach atom of zinc or nickel can be thought of as the equivalent of three or four lattice

displacements in their effect on the copper resistivity. The code BUNDLE LCOIL uses the following uses the

following relations:
 4.5

Atom density-u = .75 10" (<%-') (i)

Transmutation density = (2)

efold distance
where the c-fokling distance of transmutations in copper is taken to equal 10 cm.

Iff" Transmutation density „..

Appm = — 7— -. (j)
Atomic density
where uppm is the atomic parts per million of transmutations.
A single fusion 14 Mc\ fusion neutron can be expected to cause 1200 lattice displacements in copper. A
typical fission spectrum would cause about 400 displacements per neutron. At room temperature, about 85 %
of those displacements would be almost immediately annealed out. There is also a saturation limit of about .1
% defects that can be supported in copper at room temperature. Uoih the annealing and the saturation limits
improve at elevated temperatures. However, 1 don't have design data over a range of temperatures and will use
the conservative room temperature values. Therefore, each fusion neutron entering the magnet is assumed to
cause (400(l-.85) = 60) sixty lattice displacements, until a level of .001 dpa is reached. Kach transmutation is
taken to be 3.5 times worse than each lattice displacement in its effect on additional resistivity.

lxlO'H(fi — m) (3)

for dpa < .001 and

Apiaitiie — -4z 1 0 ~ S ( n — m) (4)

for dpa > .001. The resistivity due to transmutations is

. .014810~ 8 .
Aptrarurnvt = 3-5 a«m? ^ (ft - w) (5)

The temperature dependent resistivity of copper is taken to equal

Pte,nP = (1.48 + .00754 Tav) x 10" 8 (11 - m) (6)

 4.6

'I'l'.c neutron induced leakage current in ihc MgO insulation is based on Clinard's irradhilion experiments

with Al^Oj. Since there arc, as yet, no data on neutron-induced free carriers in MgO, we have to assume

that the behavior of alumina is typical of ceramics. As will be seen, this assumption has a significant elfect on

the magnet and electrical circuit design and requires more careful analysis and, hopefully, further experiment.

Clinard found that the electrical conductivity of Al2O;j is almost linear with irradiation over a fairly broad

range ofinadiatiim intensities [10). Clinard's data is fitted with the correlation

where Grays is the instantaneous irradiation in Grays/second. Scaling from the I ASF. Reverse Thcta Pinch

RcactoilRTPRkcramic first-wall design, the following conversion is used:

Grays = .05 Pw (8)

where Pw is the magnet wall-loading in W/m 2 .

In order to predict the temperature rise in the MgO and, thus, the possibility of electrical breakdown due

to thermal runaway, die following correlation was developed from the MgO thermal conductivity reported in

Kingeiv.ttov.cn and Uhlmunn[U].

8 4 8 3 5 6 2 9 6
ur 779s j . 1 M-23 ,m
KMgO = —.7728 + —2 1- - 3 (9)
1
norm ' norm * norm

Weeks [12] discovered that MgO crystals in a dc electrical field could suffer destruction through electrolyis

at elevated fields. Dielectric breakdown was observed at fields as low as 10-100 V/mm after 5 to 150 hours of

heating at 1200 K. Subsequent, unpublished tests on AI2O3 showed superior performance, with no evidence

of clcctrolyis at temperatures in the range of 800-1000 C. While there is reason to believe that neutron and

gamma irradiation will enhance ion migration at the lower temperatures typical of magnets, 1 have assumed

that electrolysis will not be a failure mechanism. However, this should be confirmed by experiment
 4.7

At high water velocities, very high purity water is required in order to prevent rapid erosion of a copper

channel. A certain number of residual inipuritcs, as well as gamma-hydrolyzcd oxygen, may attack an inter-

nally cooled conductor, such as the jacketed conductors manufactured by Pyrutcnax. The total absorption

mass attenuation coefficient (^) of water is .03 cin.Vg over a broad range of photon energies. If all of the

photon absorption energy went into chemical bond breaking, a worst-case 100 W/cm 2 channel wall flux would

cause an absorption rate of 3 W/cc or, at a weighted average of about 1 cv per molecular dissociation, 7.5 x

101!) ions/cc per second. Recombination may not be negligible, but recombination products will include a

significant fraction of corrosive free radicals and hydrogen peroxide; erosion is desired to be low. Therefore, if

convection were the dominant ion removal mechanism, a 10 m/s water flow velocity through a 10 m hydraulic

path would leave a residual ion population of 7.5 x 10 19 ions/cc, which is equal to the the number of hydrogen

ions in an acid with a pH of 2.6. Although this calculation is extraordinarily crude, even if the population of

corrosive radiolysis products due to gamma irradiation is 1,000 times lower, there is a strong priina facie case

that there should be an erosion-resistant cladding between the water and the copper.

Radiolysis products also attack the ceramic break needed between the cooling channels of intcrnally-

coolcd conductors and the grounded plumbing system. It is standard practice at the I.AMPF facility [3] to

provide a 6 mm sacrificial electrode in the ceramic tubing end. However, one insulator has failed after a few

years at I. A M PF because of electrolytic corrosion.

An interesting idea for a cladding-coolant combination might be to use stainless-sicci or a hafnium alloy,

which arc good neutron absorbers in the epithcrmal range and bonucd H2O, which is a good absorber of

thermal neutrons and a good moderator over a wide range. It might be possible to reduce neutron absorption

in the copper and insulation by a nontrivial factor (1.5-2) by this use of "internal shielding", while simul-

taneously sr- ing lifetime limitations due to water erosion. (The relatively obscure hafnium alloys are very

similar in their mechanical and thermal properties to the widely-used zirconium alloys. They arc not used in

nuclear reactors, largely because they are neutron absorbers.) A candidate reference conductor is shown in

Figure 1,

According to F. Clinard [13], MgO swells about I % at magnet temperatures, at relatively low doses

(10 20 — 10 21 n/cm 2 ), but then saturates. The dominant failure mechanism in bulk ceramics is cracking along

grain boundaries, which don't exist in the fine MgO powder. Of course, most of die stress "relief" comes from
 4.8

the fact that the powder may only ha\e a 95-97 % packing factor. It should be noticed that the 1012 rad

limitation on ceramic insulation, which one sees frequently quoted in fusion literature [2], must be referring

to cracking in bulk ceramics due to swelling. This failure mechanism probably doesn't exist for the ceramic

powder technology. In fact, no lifetime limiting mechanism has been clearly identified for this insulation.

According to T.H. Hlcwitt [14], neutron cmbrittlcmcnt of the copper should not be a factor. Up to a

flucncc- of 102n n/cin 2 , there should be no significant loss of ductility in copper or any other metal with face-

ccntcicd-cubic crystals. Ulcwitt irradiated pure copper crystals to an irradiation of 10 2 2 n/cin 2 on the HIFR

reactor at room temperature and measured no significant change in the yield strength from the unirradiatcd

ensc. Therefore, copper cmbritllcmcnt has been ignored.

(3) I I I ' Design Example

A recent I-'TF bundle divcrtor design case was developed by T.F. Yang [15], as shown in figure 2. Each

I.-shaped coil near the main plasma requires 6.72 MAT, while each coil far from the main plasma requires

4.8 MAT. If a 10 cm thick coil case and 20 cm of tungsten-titanium hydride shielding arc used, then a cross-

section of at least 54 cm x 74 cm should be available for each conductor, or an overall current density in die

near conductors of 1.89 kA/cin 2 and 1.2 kA/cm 2 in the far conductors.

Significant parameters of the electrical and thermal system were reported at the RTF Interim Design

Review [15], The reported power in ihc near coiis of 48 MW per coil was undesirable, but there is very

little design freedom to improve the situation, with current day conductor technology, which is limited at best

to about 60 % overall packing factor in die conductor. However, A. Harvey's group at L.ASL is currently

collaborating with Pyrotenax to develop a conductor with an overall current density of 75 % . 'Hie new

technology would involve larger conductors and preformed ceramic rings, instead of tamped in powder. They

also hope to eliminate the failure mechanisms of copper erosion and ceramic break corrosion by using external

steel or nickel-alloy conductors, without breaks. 1 have used the goal of 75 % packing factor as an input in

a model of an internally-cooled conductor in order to find an ETF example with desirably low rccirculating

power.

One solution with a number of desirable features is shown in Tables F and II. The rccirculating power in

each of the front coils is down to 28.2 MW. The maximum temperature in the copper is only 55 C, keeping the

copper resistivity low and considerably lower than allowable temperatures. Rvcn with 30 paralleled leads to
 4.9

reduce the electric field in the insulation and the leakage current losses, the MgO loss/unit length is still 1,160

W/m, comparable to the 5.120 W/m lost in the copper. This necessitates a 134 kA bus for each of the front

coils. The water velocity is 10 m/s and the head drop for each single turn hydraulic circuit is 12 atmospheres.

Currently, the ETF design center is considering a Fusion Hncrgy Device (FHD), which would have a

reduced mission, such as a plasma Q = 5, from that of the original KTF, and which would also, hopefully, have

significant economics compared with the original F.TF mission. A key feature of the FI-'D is the reduction of

the overall integrated duty factor to .02, from the HTF duty factor of .5. This allows both lower current and

lower shielding in a bundle divcrior coil. A possible FHD bundle divcrtor design was generated by reducing

the shielding by 10 cm, and keeping the original major machine and bundle divcrtor dimensions, while reduc-

ing all magnetic fields to reflect the reduced mission. This leads to a bundle divcrtor front coil requirement of

5.2 MAT, with an overall conductor current density of 1.03 kA/cm 2 .

The parameters of a candidate FKD bundle divcrtor design arc shown in Tables 111 and IV. All limita-

tions have now been greatly relaxed. The power requirement of each front coil is only 10.9 MW, while the

entire bundle divcrtor system requires slightly over 30 MW. The water vclocitj has been reduced to 5 m/s,

significantly reducing any vibration problems that might arise at the higher water velocity. The number of

terminal pairs has been held at 30, which reduces the loss/length due to leakage currents to 246 W/m, despite

the decreased shielding, while the nuclear heating/unit length has risen to 1,287 W/m. The dc terminal voltage

is now only 67 V, greatly reducing the possibility of insulation electrolysis or electrical breakdown, even in a

highly irradiated environment.

If the insulation thickness is reduced and the heat flux from the insulation is held constant by placing

more conductors in parallel, the electrical bus current must increase. In the reference design, with 7.6 kA

conductors and 30 parallel turns per coil, two 105 kA busses arc required for the near coils and two 60 kA

busses for the far coils, if the conductors are connected ± to ground. If standard copper bus is designed for a

total voltage drop of 10 V and costs $50/kA-m (9), then the bus losses would equal 4.5 MW and cost $4.5 M

for a 200 m run, forward and return. If Robicon rectifiers can still be purchased at $200 K for a 50 kA module

at low voltage, then the rectifiers and rectifier-transformers would cost $2.0 M. For the reference design, both

the buswork and the rectifier costs will be functions of current only, so doubling the number of parallel turns

will nearly double the cost of the electrical circuits. While not clearly desirable, there is some flexibility in this
 4.10

trade-off, if rccircuiating power is to be reduced further.

While an optimization code could certainly be written for the total electrical energy, the trade-offs are
such that judgment on design limitations and inherent inaccuracies in modeling overwhelm the prospect of
there being any reality to the computer-predicted gains in system performance. The two candidate systems
were selected by the personal judgment of the author, after inspecting .16 possible designs for each system.

The technology of jacketed, MgO-insulatcd coils presents the safest way of doing magnet design at high
irradiations. A disadvantage olthe current technology is that it has a moderately low overall packing density.
This could hopefully be remedied by a development program to work with larger billets for the same insula-
tion filling gap or with lower filling gaps. In order to be attractive, more benefit can be imagined from coil
topology optimization, relaxation of physics constraints or changes in overall reactor dimensions man from
conductor size optimization.
 4.11

References

1. J.II. Schultz," Neutron Irradiation Limits on the HTF Toroidal Field Coils", ETF Design Center internal

memorandum; October, 1979

2. 1). Hay and H. Rappcrport, "Final Report - A Review of Hlcctrical Insulation in Superconducting Magnets

for Fusion Reactors," Magnetic Hngincering Associates, prepared for Oak Ridge National Laboratory; April

21,3976

3. A. Harvey, "Experience with the LAMPF Mineral-Insulated Magnets," Sixth International Conference on

Magnet Technology, hratislava, Czechoslovakia. August 29 - September 2,1977

4. D. Hay, private communication

5. R. Sheldon, private communication

6. Rcutcr-Stokes Canada, Ltd., Cambridge, Ont., Canada, private communication

7. R.R. Coltman, Jr. et al, "Radiation F.fFccts on Organic Insulators for Superconducting Magnets. Annual

Progress Report for Period Knding September 30, 1979", Oak Ridge National Laboratory Report ORNL/TM-

7077, Nov. 1979 September 30,1979,"

8. M. Brcchna. "Effect of Nuclear Radiation on Organic Materials; Specifically Magnet Insulations in High-

Fncrgy Accelerators," Stanford Linear Accelerator Report SLAC-40, March, 1965

9. tt. Hngholm, "HTF" Divcrtor Coil Shielding for Normal Conductors-Addendum," H I T Design Center

internal memorandum; May 22,1980

10. F'.W. Clinard, Jr. ct al,"Contribution to the Special Purpose Materials Annual Progress Report for

]979",l.os Alamos Report LA-UR 80-242; Jan 11,1980

11. Kingcry, Bowcn and Uhlmann, Introduction to Ceramics, Wiley-Intcrscicncc, 1976

12. H. Sonder, K.F. Kclton.J.C. Pigg and R.A. Weeks,"Thc effect of electric current on the conductivity of

MgO single crystals at temperatures above 1300 K", J.Appl.Phys.49(12), December 1978

13. F.W. Qinard, private communication

14. T.H. Blewitt, private communication

15. T.F. Yang, contributor, "F,nginccring Test Facility Design Summary - Magnetic System Design Summary",

HTF Design Center Report, July 1980

 4.12

Table I

KUXTKICAI. I'AKAIYIi: I I K S 01- I/IT IlllNDI J-! l)f VkKTOR

Joule heating 27.7 MW

Total electric power consumption 28.2 MW

Turns per coil 750 turns

Terminal pairs 30 pairs

Terminal voltage, dc 144 V

Conductor current 8,955 A

Copper resistivity 2.32 x 10**-8 (Ohm-m)

Overall current density 1.89kA/cm**2

Bus current 134 k A

 4.13

Table II
Till KMAL IWRAMKTKRS KTF IJUNDLK DIN KIM OR

Conductor height 2.0 cm

Coolant channel height 6.0 mm
Water inlet temperature 20 C
Water outlet temperature 51C
Inlct-outlct head loss 12 atmospheres
Water velocity 10 m/s
Ideal pump powci .3 MW
Heat flux 21.8W/cm**2
Maximum temperature in the copper 55 C
Joule loss/unit length 5120 W/m
MgO loss/unit length 1160 W/m
Nuclear heating/unit length 117 W/m
 4.14

Table HI

KLKCTRK AL rAKAMl' I l.ltSOl I Ki) HUNDI.K DIM It TOR

Joule heating 10.86 MW

Totiil electric power consumption 10.94 MW

Turns per coil 662 turns

Terminal pairs 30 pairs

Terminal voltage, dc 67 V

Conductor current 7,625 A

Cupper resistivity 2.23 x 10**-8 (Ohm-m)

Radiation induced resistivity 4.1 x 10**-9 (Ohm-m)

Overall current density 1.03kA/cm**2

Bus current 114kA

 4.15

Table IV

TIIIKMAI, PARAMITI RSOI I I.I) IUJNDIK DIVKRTOR

Conductor height 2.5 cm

Coolant channel height 7.5 mm

Water inlet temperature 20 C

Water outlet temperature 43.4 C

Inlct-outlct head loss 2.7 atmospheres

Water velocity 5 m/s

Ideal pump power .05 MW

Heat flux 11.9 W/cm**2

Maximum temperature in the copper 45.9 C

Joule loss/unit length 2,278 W/m

MgO loss/unit length 246 W/m

Nuclear heating/unit length 1,287 W/m

 A.16

Appendix: I'rognim Listing of IttJNDI.K I .COIL

ttyoff:true$
mo dedec tare ([1 ma*.Del tat .appro, v , amp turns , [twa ll,h,a,tdiffcu,peq,deq,
g. lav, rliotemp, rho latt ice, i hotransmu, rhocii ,acu , jcond , icond , t jack,h jack,
Ai.ond ,j jack . t ins , 1 turn , nturns , max bend ,jsquarerho,turndiss,coildiss,
acondtotal.qh,pw,achan,dli,visc,rho,cp.cond,gni,deHio,twater,re,f,
fkoo,del pi,powpl,pdelt,pumpower,eleepump,totalpower,vrterm.efield,
vleg.h legtor.hlegrad.pacfac.
kmgo,rip reonv,magrad.sigrad],float)$
/• BUNDLE LCOILO is an open-loop version of BUMDLl LCOIL, which analyzes •/
/• rattier than sizing a magnet conductor for a highly-irradiated magnet, •/
/• using the technology developed by Pyrotenax of Canada, Ltd, for •/
/* accelerators. The conductor consists of an internally-cooled, squared-off•/
/""conductor, with M g O powder insulation, in an air-tight sheath. This */
/*firsl program asssumes no new development effort, so only one original tube*/
/• s i70 before drawing is modeled.*/
(kCu:350. , Imax : 110. , 1 in : 20. , Td i ff cii: 30 . .Del taT:50 . ,
h:.05,a:.02 .Iguess:100.,
appm:3000. , Amp turns : 5 . 05*10 6, VI eg : 1. 2 , 111 og lor: 1. 2,Hlegrad: 1.2,Npairs:30,
V-,6. ,1'wall: .66*10 6, Jcond: 1. 03*10 7,
duty:.04,ava il:.5.years:5,
shield:WT iH2.Shthick:.15)$
SOl():= (
ttyoff:false,
r:read("input 1 to read new inputs"),if r = 1 then (
Tmax:read("Imax in copper") .Deltal:read("1 Wall d r o p " ) ,
appm: road( "Impurity level appin" ) ,V: road{ "Coolant v e l o c i t y " ) ,
Amp turns:read(" Coil ampere-turns "),Vleg:read("Vertical leg height " ) ,
111 eg tor: read(" loroidal horizontal leg length " ) ,
Illegrad: read(" lladial horizontal leg length " ) ,
I'wal I: i ead( "Pwa 11 , first-wall neutron loading (W/m**2) " ) ,
h:read("Conductor height"),a:read("Channel h e i g h t " ) ) ,
Powplmgo:0,
lav:Tguess,
for h:.O15 thru .03 step .005 do(
for aoverh:.3 thru .4 stap .1 do(
for v:5 thru 10 step 5 do(
a:h*aoverh,
for n:1 thru 3 step 1 do(
/* shield is the shield material Wri 112 means a Lungslen and titanium*/
/• hydride shield. SSB1I2O is a stainless steel and borated water shield*/
if shield = WTiM2 then Atten:13,
/• Fluence is the neutron fluence at the surface of the coil ( n / c m * * 2 ) * /
lluence: . 44el6*l 1 uall*duty*avail*years*exp(-Atten*Shthick),
/* Atorodens is the atomic density of copper (atoms/cc)*/
Atomdens:6.023e23*8/64,
/• efoldcu is ths efolding distance of neutron capture in copper (cm)*/
efoldcu:10. ,
/* Transmudens is the density of transmuted atoms in copper (atoms/cc)*/
Transmudens:Fluenco/efoldcu,
/* Appin is the atomic parts per million of transmuted atoms */
Appm:lransmudens'l. e6/Atomdens,
/* Nucheat is the volumetric nuclear and gamma heating (W/m**3)V
Nucheat: 18.8*l>wall*exp(-Atten*Shthick),
/• G is the thermal conductance of the thermal circuit •/
/* from McAdams, Heat Transmission*/
/• Remember to check this. It looks high to me •/
G.kCu*4.*((2*a/{h-a))+.54),
/* Acu is the cross-section area of copper in the conductor •/
Acu:h 2 - a 2,
/• Tjack is the jacket thickness •/
 4.17

Tjack:h/(16*1.63).
/• Tins is the insulation thickness •/
Tins:h/20.,
/• Hjack is the flat-to-flat height of the jacket.[2.07*h/1.63. today.] */
Mjack:h+T ins+Tjack,
/* Acond is the area of the conductor, insulation and jacket •/
Acom!:Hjack*Hjack,
/* Qnuc is the dissipation per unit length due to nuclear heating*/
Qnuc:Nucheat*Acond,
/• Pacfac is the overall packing factor (copper/conductor) */
Pacfac:Acu/Acond,
/* Jcu is the maximum current density in the copper itself •/
Jcu:Jcond/Pacfac,
/* lcond is the conductor current */
lcond:Jcu*Acu,
/• Jjack is the overall current density in the conductor and jacket •/
Jjack:Icond/Acond,
/• L turn is the length of a single turn (m) */
lturn:2.*(VlegHlleglor-tHlegrad),
/* Nturns is the number of turns required •/
N turns:Ampturns/Icond,
/• Minuend is the maximum pormissible bending radius (m) •/
Minbend:12.*Hjack.
/* dpn is the expected displacements per neutron after annealing*/
dpn:60,
/• dpa is the expected latice displacements per atom*/
dpa: (lpn*appm*l.e-6.
/* Rholattice is the electrical resistivity of the copper, •/
/* due to lattice displacements. •/
if dpa<.001 then Rholattice:(dpa/.001)*.4*10 -8 else
Rholattice:.4*10 -8 ,
/* Oadtrans is the badness ratio cf additional resistivity due to a •/
/* single transmutation over that due to a single lattice displacement */
Gadtrans:3.5,
/* Rholransmu is the electrical resistivity of the copper, due to */
/* transinut.at.ions of the copper into zinc and nickel (Ohm-m) •/
Rholransmu:badtrans*appm*( .01-18*10 -OJ/300 ,
/* Rhoteinp ii '.he electrical resistivity of copper as a function of V
/* temperature. (Ohm-m) •/
l!hotomp:( 1.48 + .00754 * Tav)*10 -8 ,
/* Hhocu is the total electrical resistivity of the copper •/
Rhocu:Rhotemp * Rholattice + Rhotransmu,
/* Jsquarerho is the power/volume dissipated in the conductor (W/m 3) •/
Jsquarerho:Rhocu*Jcu 2,
/* Turndiss is the power dissipated per single turn (W) •/
Turndiss:Lturn*Acu*Jsquarerho+l. turn*Acond*Nucheat,
/• Turndisse is the electrical power dissipated per turn •/
Turndisse:Lturn*Acu*Jsquarerho,
/* Coildiss is the power dissipated per coil ( W ) * /
Coildiss;Turndiss*Nturns,
/• Coildisse is the electric power dissipated per coil ( W ) * /
Coildisse:(urndisse*Nturns,
/* Acondtota? is the area required by all the turns of the coil (in) V
Acondlotal:Mturns*Acond,
/* Oh is the heat flux into the water-cooling channel*/
0h:Ttirndiss/(Lturn*4*a),
/* Pw is the wetted perimeter*/
Pw:4*a.
/* Achan is the area of the coolant channel*/
Achan:a 2,
/• Oh is the hydraulic diameter*/
 4.18

Dh:4'Achan'l'w,
/• Vise is ihe viscosity of water as a function of temperature •/
/* in kg/s-m.V
Visc.(Tin+20.) .9'(Tin/400 + 1.),
Visc:95./Visc,
Visc.Visc/3600,
P.ho:1000 ,
Cp:4178,
Cond:.61,
/* Gm is the mass flow rate/unit area •/
Gm:Rho*V,
/* Re is the Reynold's number*/
l!e:Gm*Dh/Visc,
/* Pr is the Prandtl number*/
lJr:Visc*Cp/Cond,
/• IIGiar is the heat-transfer coefficient, according to the*/
/• Ditlus-Boelter correlation as modified by Giarratano*/
HCiar: .259*(Cond/nh)*l!e .8*l'r . 4*(1 in/(Tin+DeHat)) .716,
/• Doltat is the wall drop*/
l)«Hal:0h/IIC1ar,
/ * Deltjoule is the difference between the o u t l e t and i n l e t temperature*/
/ * due lo Joule h e a l i n g . * /
l)eHjoule:Turndisse/(v*Rho*Achan*Cp),
/* Oeltnuc is the temperature r i s e due to nuclear heating of the • /
/• conductor (C) • /
Uellnuc:Nucheat*Acond*l.lurn/(v*Rho*Achan*Cp) .
/• Deltmgo is the temperature rise due to MgO leakage currents • /
Dal tingo:Powp lingo*t t.uni/( v*l!ho*Achan*Cp),
/ * f is the f r i c t i o n f a c t o r . Good f o r clean steel pipe. Re < 10 5 . * /
r:0.04/(ne 0.16),
/ * fKoo is the f r i c t i o n factor. Good for Re > 2000 in smooth tube*/
TKoo:.0014 + .125/(Re .32),
/ * Delpl is the pressure drop per u n i t l e n g t h * /
Dolpl:2*rKoo*Rho*V 2/Dh,
/ * Powpl is Ihe ideal pump power per u n i t l e n g t h * /
Powpl:V*Achan*Delpl,
/ * Pdelt is the pressure drop per hydraulic channel*/
I'del t : D e l p l * l t u r n ,
/* Dellmu is the temperature rise duo to isenthalpic expansion. Mu */
/* is the Joule-Thomson coefficient -dT/dP at constant enthalpy.•/
Mu:Cond/(Rho*Cp),
Dellmu:PdeH*Hu ,
/* Deltio is the difference between the inlet, and outlet water •/
/• temperature*/
Del t io: Del t joul e+Deltimi+Del tnuc+Del tmgo ,
Tdiffcu: (Powplmgo+Nuchoat*Acond+Jsquarerho*Acu)/G,
/* Tout is the outlet temperature of the water*/
Tout:Tin+Deltio,
/* Thot is the copper hot spot temperature «ith the specified water */
/• velocity*/
Thot:Tout+Tdiffcu+Deltat,
/• Tav is the nverage temperature within the copper (C) •/
Tav:Thot-Tdiffcu/2.,
/* SiginapH2O is the stress in the jacket due to the water pressure.*/
Sigmapll20:Pdelt*a/(h-a),
/* Pumpower is the pump power per coilV
Pumpower:Powpl*Lturn*Nturns,
/* [lecpump is the electrical power need for the pump motors*/
t lecpump:1.5*Pumpomer,
Totalpower:Elecpump+Coild1sse,
/* Npairs is the number of terminal pairs per coll*/
 4.19

/ * V r t e r m is the; r e s i s t i v e t e r m i n a l v o l t a g e a t the c o i l * /
Vrterm:Coildisse/(Icond*Npairs).
/ • Vterm i s t h e t o t a l t e r m i n a l v o l t a g e a t the c o i l * /
Vlerni: V r t e r m ' l . 4 ,
/ • [ f i e l d is the dc e l e c t r i c f i e l d a c r o s s the i n s u l a t i o n . * /
£Meld:Vrterm/Tins,
/* KMgO is the thermal conductivity of MgO. •/
/* Thermophysical properties of MgO from Kingery.Bowen and Uhlmann, •/
/* Introduction to Ceramics, Wiley-lnterscience, 1976 •/
/* Correlation by Schultz.*/
Tnorm:Tmax/100.,
KHgO:-.7728+84.835/Tnorm-62,696/Tnorm 2+16.23/Tnorm 3.
/* RTPRconv is the conversion factor, scaling from the RTPR design,*/
/* for a ceramic facing combine neutron and gamma radiation, from •/
/• W/m 2 to Gray/s •/
RTPRconv:.05,
/* Magrad is the maximum radiation absorption in the magnet insulation •/
/* in Gray/s '/
Magrad:RTPRconv*Pwal1,
/• Sigrad is the electrical conductivity of the insulator due to •/
/* irradiation. Data taken from Clinard's contribution to the LASL */
/• 1979 Special Purpose Materials Annual Progress Report */
Sigrad:5"10 -6«(Magrad/6.6) .65,
/• Emgo is the electric field in the MgO •/
Emgo:Vrterm/Tins,
/• Jmgo is the current density in the MgO*/
Jmgo:[mgo'S igrad,
/* Powmgo is the power density in the MgO, due to leakage currents*/
Powmgo:Jmgo 2/Sigrad,
/* Qmgo is the heat flux in the insulation*/
Qmgo: Powmgo*Tins,
/* Powplmgo is the power per unit length due to leakage currents (W/m) •/
Pcwplmgo: P o w m g o * I T ins*lljack ,
/* Ue I la lingo is the temperature rise in the MgO*/
Deltatingo:Qmgo*f ins/(2*KMgO),
Pacf ac: Acu/Acoi.d
/* end of iteration guessing Tav */ ) ,
print(" • » • « • • * • » • • • • • • • • • • • » • » • • • - j t
print(" " ) ,
prinl(" Overall current density, including insulation and jacket is "
.Jjack/10000000., " (kA/cra**2) " ) .
print(" Overall packing factor, (copper/conductor) ".Pacfac),
print(" ">,
print(" Conductor height is " , h ) ,
print(" Cooling channel height is " , a ) ,
prit:t(" Water inlet temperature is ".Tin),
print(" Wall-drop is ".DeltaT),
print(" Water inlet-outlet drop is ".Deltio),
print(" Copper drop is ".Tdiffcu),
print(" " ) .
print("Inlet-outlet head loss is ".Pdelt*10 -6." (MPa) " ) ,
print("Ideal pump power is ' : umpower*10 -6," (MW) " ) ,
print(" Coil Joule heating is ",Coildisse*10 -6," (MW) " ) ,
print(" Total electrical power consumption is ",Totalpower*10 - 6 , " (MW) " ) ,
print(" " ) ,
print(" Total number of turns is ".Nturns),
print(" Number of terminal pairs/coil is ".Npairs),
print(" Total terminal voltage is ",Vterm, " (V) " ) ,
print(" Average surface heat flux, cooling channel, is",Qh/10 4," (W/cm Z ) " ) ,
print(" Coolant velocity is ",v," (m/s) " ) ,
print(" Reynolds number of coolant is ",Re),
 4.20

p ! •. : n ; CL'PI'.IIIL t c . c u r r e n t i s ", I c o n t l . " ( A )" ) ,

pr ml ; " ) .
P' 'i I ; /\ v « . " .1 o - . ! C'liOiicl c.'i i-"iipera tlire i s " . l a v . " ( C ) " ) ,
! • • ! ( ''i.i.'. iiMiin L'lhrluc l e i ! 'Miipt'i at.ui h i s " , T h o t , " ( C )" ) .
"r M i x imuiii t ' l p p o r i ( s' ">t i v i l y i s " , K h o c u . " ( O h m - m ) " ) ,

pi i n i; » i c s i ^ i ;•.- i i. y duo •" r a d i a t i o n is" . Rholatlice+ltliolranjinu , "(Ohm-ni)" ) ,

P' ini( ").

P' :nt { ! f i » | i •• ?.; » i • « r i <u i.i the m.ignesia is " .Del tatMgO," (C) " ) ,
pr nit 1 lles< ( l u x in the m.V]iiesia is ".QMgo/10 4. " (W/cm**J) " ) ,
Pr int ( " ) ,
D i i i ipal i o n / m i i t l u n q l h . Joule h e a t i n g , is " , A c u ' J s q u a r e r h o , " ( W / m ) " ) ,
p r i n t: I) io'o ir>'-! I:JII/IIM i!. l«;ii|t.h. nuc!e<ii h e a l i n g , i s " , Nucheal*Acond, " ( W / m ) " ) ,
!"' i m ( II i «,r pal ' j n / i : n i1 l e n y L h , leakage c u r r e n t , i s " , I'owp lingo , " (W/m)")
-)i.ireii l o t li'i loop on a s i z e * / )
. ' • '•[ ii !.>: ;i' loo|i on h size */ )
/ • ii 1I - i : a i " e i i ( o r ill. loop on u * / ) )$
 0.2 mm—H MgO Powder
Insulation

Copper
Sheath

Copper
Conductor

Hafnium Alloy
Cladding

Bora ted Water

Coolant

0.6 mm-
1.7mm

Figure 1
Conceptual Conductor Design for an ETF Bundle Diverter Coil
 R, = 7.70 m
R2 = 11.40m
dx< = 1.20m
dy1 = 2.40m
i = 1.40m
I, =8.5MA-T
= 4.8MA-T

dy

R.

Figure 2
ETF Bundle Diverter Example Design by T. F. Yang
 5.1

MAGNET SHIELDING AND NEUTRONICS CALCULATIONS

Bernard A. Engholm
General Atomic Company
San Diego, California

INTRODUCTION
Radiation shielding for fusion magnets performs four different
functions: control of nuclear heating in the cryostat, coil structure,
and coils during the burn; restriction of integrated radiation exposure
of the coil insulation to an acceptable lifetime dose; limitation of
fast-neutron exposure of the copper stabilizer to prevent excessive
resistivity increases in the coil, after allowance for annealing; and,
especially for the outboard coils, prevention of excessive neutron
activation which would result in unacceptable shutdown dose rates around
the device. The shield may also be called upon to perform additional
functions, such as breeding, power generation, fissile or synfuel material
production, structural, etc.

This presentation will emphasize the insulation protection function

of the shield.
SHIELD ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
The shield analysis methods applied to fusion magnet shielding are
similar to the analytical methods which have been used for many years in
the fission reactor field. The major difference is the much higher
fusion source energy of 14.2 MeV.
Most fusion shielding calculations are done by the discrete ordinates
technique. As shown in Viewgraph 3, this technique can be classified as
1-D, 2-D, or 3-D. One-dimensional calculations are adequate for scoping,
comparison, optimization, and some design studies, particularly where
the shield is of wide expanse with a thickness small in comparison with
important machine dimensions such as major radius. More expensive 2-D
techniques are needed where discontinuities exist (such as where the NBI
drift duct intersects the bulk shield]; where the source strength is
highly nonuniform; or where detail design accuracy is called for.

Monte Carlo techniques are essential to complex 3-D situations such

as a poloidal divertor slot and duct, a highly shaped and optimized
bundle divertor coil shield, and minor gaps and penetrations. Sometimes
the otherwise expensive Monte Carlo technique can be supplemented with a
coupled discrete ordinates code to reduce overall computer time.
The purpose of sensitivity codes is to identify and quantify che
effect of cross section and other uncertainties on shield performance
(i.e., responses for a fixed shield thickness, or shield thickness for a
fixed response). Successful sensitivity studies depend on the avail-
ability of covariance data.
 5.2

Viewgraph 4 outlines some important considerations regarding shield

system modeling. A major question arising in 1-D cylindrical transport
analysis of a tokamak is where to place the axis--along the vertical
machine centerline, or along the plasma centerline (assuming the torus
is unbent into a long cylinder). For the inboard region of a D-shaped
torus, such as FED, toroidal geometry seems appropriate (i.e., problem
axis coincident with machine vertical axis). Machines like TFTR are
frequently analyzed both ways, and the results integrated together.
Cross section data from the latest Evaluated Nuclear Data File,
ENDF/B-V, are currently being incorporated into production cross section
sets such as shown in Viewgraph 5. Users usually reduce the number of
energy groups to around 50 or 60 neutron-plus-gamma for routine discrete
ordinates calculations; the proper selection of the coarse-group structure
and weighting procedures is crucial to the ultimate accuracy of the
calculations. In fusion shielding analysis it is essential to carefully
represent the threshold region for many fusion-neutron reactions (i.e.,
5-14 MeV).

Activation and reaction cross sections are either combined with the
majn cross section set (i.e., MACKLIB can be combined with DLC-41) or
treated as a separate calculation, especially when reaction rates by
isotope, as well as buildup and decay rates, are required (i.e., DKR).
SHIELD ANALYSIS RESULTS
There have been numerous studies of magnet exposure as a function
of shield thickness, materials, configuration, and operating conditions.
Viewgraph 6 shows the calculated magnet radiation levels for NUWMAK.
The shielding is designed to limit the epoxy dose to 1.5 x 10 8 rads (ten
years operation at 50% load factor). The inboard TF coil compressive
stresses are frequently the least near the shielded side, rising to a
maximum at the inboard bore. Hence, the drop of insulation exposure
with penetration into the magnet at a rate of a factor of ten per foot
is a favorable characteristic.

Starfire studies reported at the 4th Topical Meeting included the

curves shown in Viewgraph 7. To achieve the same conditions as NUWMAK
requires a Fe-1422 shield thickness of 0,6 m in addition to the breeding
blanket.

A study done for the bundle divertor coil shielding is extracted in

Viewgraph 8, where the problem with an unshielded coil is highlighted by
the greater than 10 1 3 rad per year insulation exposure. This study
showed that a tungsten/water shield thickness of 0.7 m is needed to
limit the ten-year insulation exposure to around 10 9 rads.
Moving on to ETF/FED, a general elevation view of ETF as of the
July 1980 Design Review is shown in Viewgraph 9. The inboard and outboard
bulk shields are composed of alternating layers of stainless steel and
 5.3

borated water. The inboard shield was about 0.8 m in thickness, dictated
by insulation and copper stabilizer radiation limits in the inboard TF
•coils; while the outboard shield was 1.25 m in order to limit the shut-
down dose rate just outside the shield.

GA and LASL both performed 1-D calculations on the inboard shield,

with the materials arrangement shown in Viewgraph 10. The relative
thicknesses and spacing of the layers were such as to minimize dpa to
the inboard copper stabilizer, based on a study by Gilai and Greenspan.
The resulting.responses are plotted in Viewgraph 11, for a 0.7-1.2 m
range of shield thickness. Of particular interest is the dose to the
G10 insulation, plotted separately in Viewgraphs 12 and 13. The neutron
and gamma dose rates add up to 2 x 10 6 Gy/y or 2 x 10 8 rad/y at 100%
load factor. The dropoff of dose rate through the coil is a factor of
ten in one foot, as previously determined for NUWMAK.

UNCERTAINTIES

The most important function of this paper is to point out some of

the areas where uncertainties may arise in the calculation of radiation
effects on the insulation and the shield thickness required to control
these effects.

The neutron and photon intensity and spectrum at the insulation

are, of course, key input quantities. These are shown for ETF in
Viewgraphs 14 and IS. Note that the particular energy group structure
used at GA for these ANISN calculations may not provide adequate accuracy
for neutrons in the 0.4-2.5 MeV region and below 5 KeV. The photon
structure becomes quite coarse below 1 MeV. Furthermore, the spectra
are quite sensitive to shield configuration and thickness, and distance
into the magnet. Incidentally, note the peak in photon intensity
between 7.5 and 8 MeV owing to captured gammas from steel.

Folding these neutron and gamma fluxes with the kerma cross section
for G10 introduces further uncertainties. Viewgraph 16 discusses the
units involved, which, when multiplied by flux and number density,
result in a rate of energy deposition per unit volume. A few pertinent
kerma cross sections being used at GA are plotted in Viewgraphs 17 and
18; the MACKLIB factors come from ANL and are incorporated with DLC-41
cross sections, while the LASL factors are normally used with their
ONEDANT or TRIDENT codes. Note the appreciable divergence in the 4-
14 MeV neutron energy region for a common element like carbon; there is
a 50% difference at 14 MeV. Another large discrepancy turns up for B 1 ^,
where a factor of three difference exists at 0.2 eV. (This difference
may be due to the coarse group structure.) On the other hand, the
photon kerma cross sections agree quite well.

Number densities assigned to G10 or other insulators can also

display a wide variation between individual calculations, as shown in
Viewgraph 19. Some researchers consider epoxy alone, in various C/H/O
compositions; others take account of the accompanying fiberglass in
 5.4

varying degrees of detail. One certain outcome: a divergence of

rad/hour results even though the same fluxes and atomic cross sections
are used. For instance, the presence of boron in the fiberglass can
make a significant difference in energy deposition, particularly if the
neutron spectrum is soft.

A more basic question is how the calculated energy loss is really

related to radiation damage in the insulation. If the insulation were
damaged by transmutations, there might be no correlation between rads
and damage. The only solution would appear to be comprehensive experi-
ments relating rad exposure to loss in compressive strength or other
physical quantities. The experiments should duplicate the neutron and
photon fluxes and spectra and the physical conditions expected in the
actual magnet. However, as shown in Viewgraph 20, the conditions may
not be matched. The excellent experiments by Coltman on G10, for
example, had a much lower neutron-to-gamma ratio than calculated for the
shielded system, and furthermore, the BSR could hardly be expected to
provide 14 MeV neutrons in any event.

The inevitable existence of penetrations, gaps and irregularities

in the shield, such as illustrated for ETF in Viewgraph 21, forces the
shield analyst to utilize Monte Carlo methods, even when 1-D transport
would have been adequate for the homogenized bulk shield. Since penetra-
tions can never be completely eliminated, the question arises as to
whether the magnet insulation can withstand localized peaks in radiation
exposure. For example, suppose that 10% of the G10 facing the shield
received ten times higher exposure, resulting in localized regions of
very low compressive strength. Presumably, a 3-D stress analysis would
be needed to determine the acceptability of such a nonuniform strength
distribution.

FED STATUS

As shown in Viewgraphs 22 through 24, the Fusion Engineering Device

constitutes a downgrade of ETF, with a smaller major radius, fusion
power, wall loading, TF field, and number of burns. Hardware differences
include the substitution of pump limiters and RF heating for bundle
divertors and neutral beam injectors.

The ETF Systems Code continues to be used for FED optimization

studies. Because of the smaller number of pulses (equivalent to a load
factor of 2%), FED seemed a natural candidate for a reduction in inboard
shield thickness, since integrated rad and dpa would go down. The
determining criterion on inboard shield thickness becomes the permissible
heating rate in the magnet during the 100-second burn. Viewgraph 25
summarizes the results of a Systems Code study in which the inboard
shield was reduced from 0.7 m to 0.6 m to 0.5 m. Surprisingly, the
usual expectation of an overall reduction in capital cost with decreasing
shield thickness was not fulfilled; rather, the refrigeration cost went
up fast enough to cancel benefits from TF coil savings (see Viewgraph
26). Note, however, that the study groundrules did not permit an increase
 5.5

in toroidal field; if the field had been allowed to increase with de-
creasing major radius, more cost benefit of reducing the inboard shield
.might have accrued. Furthermore, the relation with power cost does not
show up in a development device such as FED.
 5.6

MAGNET SHIELDING AND NEUTRONICS CALCULATIONS

BERNARD A. ENGHOLM
GENERAL ATOMIC CO.
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

PRESENTED AT:
MEETING ON ELECTRICAL INSULATORS FOR FUSION MAGNETS
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
GERMANTOWN
DECEMBER 2-3, 1980
 5.7

OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION

SHIELD ANALYSIS
METHODS
MODELS
DATA
SELECTED RESULTS
NUWnAK
STARFIRE
INTOR
ETF
UNCERTAINTIES
FLUX INTENSITIES AND SPECTRA
KERMA DATA
G1O COMPOSITION
DESIGN SPECTRA VS EXPERIMENTAL SPECTRA
PENETRATIONS
FED STATUS
 5.8

SHIELD ANALYSIS METHODS

TRANSPORT METHODS
DISCRETE ORDINATES
1-D ANISN
ONEDANT
2-D DOT
TWOTRAN
TRIDENT-CTR
3-D THREETRAN (UNDER DEV.)
MONTE CARLO
MORSE
MCNP
TRIPOLI
COUPLED DISCRETE ORDINATES/MONTE CARLO
SENSITIVITY CODES
1-D SWANLAKE
SENSIT
2-D SENSETWO
OTHER
POINT KERNEL
COMPARISON METHODS
 5.9

SHIELD ANALYSIS MODELS

1-D SLAB OK FOR PARAMETRIC STUDIES,

OPTIMIZATION; HIGH SN
FEASIBLE
CYLINDRICAL PICKS UP EFFECTS
TOROIDAL GEOMETRY USEFUL FOR FED
POLOIDAL GEOMETRY USEFUL FOR TFTR
HOMOGENIZATION OK IF STREAMING PROVEN
INSIGNIFICANT
2-D R-Z
TOROIDAL GEOMETRY POLOIDALLY CONTINUOUS OBJECTS
NET ACCOUNTED FOR (I.E.,
TF COILS)
POLOIDAL GEOMETRY IGNORES PF COILS, ETC.
3-D FLEXIBLE GEOMETRY, HIGHLY DESIRABLE FOR MOST
USUALLY SUBDIVIDED STREAMING PROBLEMS
INTO CYLINDERS,
PRISMS, ETC.
 5.10

SHIELD ANALYSIS DATA

CROSS SECTION SETS

EVALUATED DATA

VITAMIN C (DLC-41)
VITAMIN E <ORML 5505) f BROAD GROUP SETS
RMCCS (LASL)
MONTAGE - 400
MACKLIB-IV ^ ACTIVATION AND REACTION RATES
DKR

OTHER
COVARIANCE FILES
DISCRETE ORDINATE QUADRATURES
ALBEDO DATA
DOSE CONVERSION FACTORS
GAMMA BUILDUP FACTORS
 5.11

tO* r- 10" r- 10'

ATOM DISPLACEMENT IN
ALUMINUM STABILIZER

DOSE RATE IN MYLAH

10s 10"
DOSE RATE IN EPOXY

in

a.
CO T3
>
o
"~E
X
I «>'
IU
h 3 io» - £
UJ
io'

I
Ou
o NEUTRON FLUX
w
h- O-
co
U)
o
5
O
in
8
o
10 v 10'

10' 1— 10" L- I I
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

DEPTH INTO MAGNET (m)

RADIATION LEVELS IN NUWMAK MAGNET (E. CHENG ET AL)

 5.12

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

DEPTH IN OUTBOARD BULK SHIELD, m
COMPARISON OF STARFIRE SHIELD MATERIALS ON EPOXY DOSE
RESPONSE (J. JUNG)
 5.13

EPOXY DOSE RATE CALCULATION

FOR BUNDLE DIVERTOR COIL (E. CHENG)

50 % W

% (B) H20

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

SHIELD THICKNESS (m)

 ETF NEUTRONICS CONCERNS

OTHER PENETRATIONS
(FUELING, DIAGNOSTIC OUTBOARD BULK SHIELD
ETC.) RADIATION STREAMING (INDUCED ACTIVATION ANO
THRU DIVERTOR SLOTS SHUTDOWN DOSE RATE)
DIVERTOR PUMP INBOARD SHIELD SHUTTER
COMPONENT SHIELD BULK SHIELD (CLOSED DURING BURN)
/INDUCED ACTIVATION l U - N B I COMPONENT
/ I N DIVERTOR PUMPS "^ SHIELD
L - HEATING ANO
^ INDUCED ACTIVATION
IN NBI COMPONENTS

OIVERTOR COIL
SHIELDING

NBI DRIFT DUCT

STREAMING
VACUUM PUMP ^
DUCT STREAMING

SHUTDOWN DOSE
OTHER NEUTRONICS CONCERNS: RATE AT PUMPS
TF COIL DPA AND
TEST MODULES HEATING; INSULATION DUCT
• H F I M T F Haunt IMP cnuiMiciiY SHUTDOWN OOSE RATE ' EXPOSURE SHIELDING
• REMOTE HANDLING EQUIPMENT A N D A F T E H H E A T D U B |NG
• CASKS SECTOR REMOVAL
• HUT CELLS
• BUILDING WALLS
 ETF INBOARlfsHIELD GEOMETRY
MAGNET-60v/o Cu, 4 0 v / o ST STL 244.0 en

100
fH
CO
194.

179 181 189

CO
KAGNET STRUC- ST STL 8 190.
VOID Ot CM
188.
DEWAR - ST STL
8 186.
VOID CM
CM fH
184.
CO
CLAD - ST STL CM
183.
m

170
(B) H 2 0 1/1
CM
180.68
ST STL

165
sr <M
180.20
<B> H2O CO
CM tH
177.88
ST STL

158
CM
CM 176.17
(B) HjO fH
CM
17'.. 75
ST STL o •n

147
CM 170.18
m
(B) H 2 0 s CM

-t 167.62
ST STL 09 CO
fH f-4
135.06
(B) H 2 0 m
fH 132 162.50
ST STL a s CM
157.05
(B) "Ho2uO m co
117

m co iH

ST STL fH 155.68
v> sr o_ fH

(B) H2O co ©
150.21
ST STL CM a
101

fH
148.84
(B) H2O fH CO rH
at 143.37
O CO
ST STL s tH 00
142.0
(B) H 2 0 ot CM
CO
135.64
<o 135.16
ST STL
00 s
(B) HjO r. CM
128.81
128.33
ST STL s s
(B) H 2 0
121.98
s 121.50
ST STL s CM
m 101.0
FIRST WALL - ST STL CO ro
CM
fH
100.0
GRAPHITE CM OX

PLASMA
98.0
m
0.
u .. _
• urn
o. « « a

nun • 8
 ORNL-OWG 8 0 - 3 2 6 3 FED

iO3 r~ 109 p 103

TOTAL NEUTRON FLUX
OUTSIDE SHIELD
to2 h io8 10'

OPARATE
Nf H-
107 10 1
IN Cu
^ SLAB I0 9 -
SEOMETRY .
W
E 10° ~ ^ 106 •a 10'L"-
o a
•s E
4) HEATING
s RATE, 0
Sio
6 1 0 DOSE
N-2
- iO' RAtE t D

BIOLOGICAL DOSE
(0"
RATE OUTSIDE SHIELD*
DB
- 10 I . I
to"
0.5 1.0
SHIELD THICKNESS (m)
 NEUTRON DOSE TO INSULATION,, ETF 82-CM SHIELD (LASL)

IO 7

a id1 =
8
Q
53 lrf r
O

10 4 r
o
o

1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5

Radius (m)
 GIOCR GAMMA DOSE ( G y / y )

q.

o
CD o
CO

5
o

oo
i
o
3 CO

m
S
PC
CO
5
C/5

I I 1 I I I II
en
 LOGARITHMIC J x 5 CYCLES
KEUFFEL ft CS5ER CO. MIM la us«. 46 7522
£TF—NEUTRON SPECTRUM IN INBOARD G10 INSULATIOM
n o
Total Neutron F1ux=4.04x10 n/cin -sec. Total Photon F1ux=4.46x10 photons/cma- 4 S 6 7 89 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89.
3 4 5 6 7 6 9, , , . , , , I

l-»

0.001 0.1
NEUTRON ENERGY (fteV)
 5.20

ETF--PHOTON SPECTRUM IN INBOARD G1O INSULATION

Total Neutron Flux = 4.84x10 9 n/cm 2 -sec.
n p
Total Photon Flux
4.46x10 photons/cm -sec.
::::;:::; : : 3 E : ::::::ffi:5
-- - fT

—i

... L
r
•5 10 3 L. ..
at = ::::::::: c

1
i

1 tt.. t.
to

10
PHOTOfl ENERGY (fteV)
 5.21

UNITS

KERMA UNIT BARN-ELECTRONVOLT

ATOM
NUMBER DENSITY ATOMS
BARN-CM

FLUX PARTICLES
CM2 - SEC
__|V_\
(PRODUCT CM3 - SEC/
RAD 100 ERGS
G
ERG 6.24 x 108 EV
DENSITY G

(HENCE, TO CONVERT—§¥— T0 EADS

CM3-SEC SEC
DIVIDE BY DENSITY AND 6.24 x 10 10 )
GRAY 100 RADS
 07 3 100 190'0
100

iiinliiiiiii
nttittuitttiM
iiffliiiiUiiiHiiiiiniiiaimiiiitiiiiiiiiiiffiiiiiiiiKiiRiiiiiiHiiiiiiHiiiiin
M'iiSiilBiiiil
f J!(riiiiHiliI!:ii!liHiiHUimiIIIHIIl!tlHIMiHiii!^.;lil!ill»Uiiiiilll!ll
;iin!JII!SHei«!!!i!ll!!U:!l!i!!!IiailiinilllIIUliil!|):ii!!!i!!i!itt!!!!!linillllir
11 iiliilftlH f 11 yjiflli IP iHffiiHLEli II f i II in JIW11 f (j^lfflBffil! mil-
HMIHMIIlllt
iiSi!!!!!!l!:i!!li!liin
i!ii!!ii lililOKiiHHIM

CM
CM

16119 S t E Z

SN0U33S SS0H3 HO«in3N

3
02SZ 9f S31DA0 S « C DIWHXItJVQOT
to i^l PHOTON KERMA CRO^S(SECTIONS

i"7:._ra • r
 5.24

610 COMPOSITION COMPARISON

GA/ETF GA/INTOR LASL/ETF

H 0.04 0.0384 0.0245
B 10 — — 1.921xL0"4

BU — — 7.789xlO"4

c 0 .027 0.0364 0.01227

0 0.024 0.00607 0.01403

Si 0.012 — 0.005987 I

AL — — 0.00117 i

CA — — 0.002589 ;

BULK DENSITY 1,8 G/CM 3 0.95 G/CM 3 1.0 G/CM 3 1

 0.82 N OPTIMIZED INBOARD SHIELD

CALCUUTEB RADIATION EXPOSURE OF G10 (RADS)

NEUTRON GAu 1A TOTAL
H HM + 8 0.32 8 1.78 + 8
C 0.68 + 8 1.40 8 2.08 + 8 (19%)
0 0.61 + 8 1.68 + 3 2.31 + 8 (21%)
Si 0.21 + 8 1.57 1.80 + 8 (162)

Q.60 + 9 0.50 + 9 1.1 + 9

(55%) I)

I ^ N T S OH 610

MEUTROJI mm\
97%
 ETF BULK SHIELD IRREGULARITIES
INBOARD
TF COILS

TEST
MODULE
OUTBPARD GAPS
TF COILS / INBOARD
BULK SHIELD
GAPS

POLOIDAL DIVERTOR
COLLECTOR SHIELD
PENETRATION /

OUTBOARD BULK SHIELD

GAPS AND MINOR
PENETRATIONS
 FED ELEVATION

SUCKING CYLINDER OH * E? COILS

_CRVOSTAT CONTAINMENT

ECBH SOPH-LMtNTAL IILATING

90 !•!•

FUELING SYSTEM
2 Pn«UBiatlc Injector*
t AMacl>lt4 ShltMlnf-
.LIMITER DUCT 1 SHIELDING
10 Pit.
CRYOPUMP CHAMBER
\ 10 PU.

J ;
' - ' ' = ' ' - « • " ' * « ' • • * * * • • • : * • " • ' • • •
 FED PLAN VIEW

1CH1I LAUNCHER

ami sumEMEHTM. HEATING

13 He.
NEUTIMl MAM
riHitClO* •> l»"l.f
/ •••« O(lv» Pciln

I
(X

|V

rUMPEO UMITE*

\
 5.29

DESIGN PARAMETERS

EIE EE&
PLASMA MAJOR RADIUS, n 5.4 4.8
PLASMA MINOR RADIUS, M 1.3 1.3
PLASMA ELONGATION 1.6 1,6
PLASMA CURRENT, MA 6.1 6.2
TOTAL FUSION POWER, MW 750 130
NEUTRON WALL LOADING, M W / M 2 1.5 0.4
NUMBER OF TF COILS 10 10
TF COIL VERTICAL BORE, M 10.8 10.9
TF COIL HORIZONTAL BORE, M 7.5 7.5
FIELD AT TF COIL, T 11.4 8
FIELD ON AXIS, T 5.5 3.6
STEADY STATE BURN TIME, SEC 100 100
BULK HEATING TIME, SEC 6 106
TOTAL CYCLE TIME, SEC 135 152
DUTY FACTOR 0.74 0.66
NO. OF BURNS 5xlO5 5x10^
 5.30

INBOARD SHIELD THICKNESS TRADE STUDY

(COMPUTED BY R. L. REID)

CONSTRAINTS

a = 1.3 T = 10 keV
0=0.06 Q=5
8 T T
" B = 300 sec

A =
PARAMETER S °' 50 m &s = 0.60 m A s = 0.70 in

A 3.55 3.65 3.70

BT, T 3.78 3.75 3.62

P
FUS' MW 205 204 180
L, MW/m2 0 .52 0.50 0.44

DPA (Cu) 5 .18 X io-4 1.03 x io-4 1 .89 x io-5

DOSE^ rads 7 .89 X 108 I .57 x 108 2 .89 x 107
(INSULATION)
NUCLEAR HEATING, kW 185 48 10.7

RELATIVE CAPITAL COST 1.06 1.03 1.00

 5.31

COST BREAKDOWN
0t6 m 0i5 m
As * °>70 m ° °
TF COILS 0.164 0.160 0.147

PF COILS 0.130 0.128 0.123

SHIELD 0.148 0.139 0.129

RF INITIATION 0.028 0.027 0.027

BULK HEATING 0.073 0.080 0.078

PULSED ELECTRICAL 0.154 0.155 0.153

BUILDINGS 0.243 0.233 0.219

REFRIGERATION* 0.010 0.027 0.067

MISCELLANEOUS 0.0*3 0.050 0.058

TOTAL 1.00 1.03 1.06

* Refrigeration for nuclear heating only

 COOLANT MAN/FOLD DUMP RES ISTOR - VACUUM DUCT
• SHIELD OUTLET AND SWITCHES

VACUUM PUMP

c r COIL

T F COIL

ISOLATION VALVES
E F COIL

ANT 1-TORQUE PANEL

SHIELD COOLANT LINES

R F DUCT

r-MONO - RAIL

FIRST WALL AND

BLANKET

PRIMARY COOLANT
MANIFOLDS

E C R H DUCT
COOLANT MANIFOLD •COOLANT MANIFOLD
• SHIELD INLET L 1MI TER
6.3
 6.4

THE GUIDELINES CONCERN THE MAGNET PROTECTION

IN THE CURRENT REACTOR DESIGN STUDIES

• A total dose limit of 1O 10 rads in the thermal insulator

materials at the end of life.
3
• A total dose limit of 5 x 1 0 * rads to the electrical insulator
in the superconductor materials at the end of life.

A maximum fast neutron fluence (E > 0.1 MeV) of 10 1 8 n/cm2 in

the superconductor at the end of life.

• A maximum radiation-induced resistivity of 5 x 10" 8 _ft-cm in

the stabilizer materials at the end of life (anneal process
every 6-10 yr during the plant downtime for maintenance with
83% recovery is assumed).

• A maximum nuclear heating of 1 kW is deposited in the magnet.

 6.5

INNER BLANKET AND SHIELD IMPACT ON THE REACTOR PERFORMANCE

The dose in the thermal insulator.

The neutron fluence in the superconductor.

Energy, leakage to the magnet.

Radiation-induced resistivity in the stabilizer materials.

Plasma power density.

Maximum magnetic field required to maintain the same plasma

power density.

Cost of energy.
Thermal Insulator Dose Versus Inboard Blanket and Shield
Thickness at the End of Life (40 of operation M03 MW-yr/V
neutron wall loading)

110.0 100.0 90.0 8C.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0

INBORRD BLRNKET RNO SHIELD THICKNESS (CM)
 Neutron Fluence Versus Inboard Blanket and Shield Thickness at
the End of Life (40 yr of operation *1O8 MW-yr/m2 neutron wall
loading)
- ; i

A r

'/' ' • " ,

f 1

7 t

5S (E > 0 . 0 M
UENCE

•yS..

__J
E > . Q . L r1eV)..
/ /
: - " . : : : : : : : : : : : • / .

a:
f- :
LJ

2 \y'
"a /
\v"::.-;:.y:::: ':.
\T'7

UO.O 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 «0.0

INBOARD BLflNKET RND SHIELD THICKNESS (CM)
 Refrigeration Power Versus Inboard Blanket and Shield Thickness for
the 1200-MW Net Electrical Power (STARFIRE Design)

"o. \

o
Q_
a

u.

40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0

' INBQRRD BLRNKET RND SHIELD THICKNESS (CM)
Radiation-induced Resistivity in tne oiuum^er nuiei iui
10 yr of Operation (27 MW-yr/m2 Neutron Wall Loading)

-
. . / •
X-.
•

o .j.
1

• / ••

;: !
x^0 E# Ei:-:
(
7
/
7i
•—'in-

u 2": /
i : ; : : : : : : : : : : : : : ^ /::.
o I 9-

:::::::::rz"
MOUC

...X.. .
1 IS

!:=:=/,
IflT

a
y../ . ;
ac
z:
zT.
£ :

110.0 100.0 • 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0

INBOflRO BLRNKET flND SHIELD THICKNESS (CM)
 6.10

Plasma power density

P plasma power density

R Major radius

a Plasma halfwidth

,v Scrape-off region thickness

,c Inboard blanket and shield thickness (first wall to

point of maximum field)
 6.11

• Maximum magnetic field required to achieve c certain plasma

power density

. ^ /» - a - A V -

Bt Toroidal field strength at the plasma center

Bm Toroidal field strength at the surface of superconductor

R Major radius

a Plasma halfwidth

Av Scrape-off region thickness

A fiS Inboard blanket and shield thickness (first wall to

point of maximum field)
Cost of Energy as a FunctioVof Inboard Blanket and Shield
Thickness A g s (Aspect Ratio = 3, Neutron Wall Loading =
3 MW/nT)

2
0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
A o e (WALL TO CONDUCTOR), m
DO
 6.13

RADIATION ENVIRONMENT EXPECTED IN

TOKAMAK TOROIDAL FIELD MAGNET

• Neutron and gamma fluxes

• Energy deposition profile

• Insulator dose
 • Neutron Fluence in the Toroidal Field Magnet at the End of Life
(40 yr of Operation *103 MW-yr/m2 Neutron Wall Loading) with
1.2-mA BS (1,01 Inboard Blanket and Shield Thickness)
; ^f. ;
s / •

j?r.:::::::s.:::::

(E > 0.0 MeV) / , ' '

tf::::::::::?'.:::::
yrf.

UJ

"y~ :
/ (E > 0 . 1MeV)
3"°r
U. : • : : . • : : : : . • / : : : . : • ; : : : .

2T j .."..••.•p. ' ' '?••

• / •

,jf- *

.Z.. /...
/

in

.\:r.v.:v.Zv.::.v.;
-

HO.O 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 <0.0 •20.0 0.0 20.0

MflGNET THICKNESS (CM)
 • Gemma Fluence in the Toroidal Field Magnet at the End of Life
(40 yr of Operation *108 MW-yr/m2 Neutron Wall Loading) with
1.2 m A 3 S (1.01 Inboard Blanket and Shield Thickness)

•-4 Z

! i
I i
IS

"b / \
:y*::::::::::::::\
<•• •
— :
EE!3i
... s
...Z.. !
s/
Y:.Y:;::;.Y.\y!.Y>
xa. : i:::::::^::::::;
UJ . z........
o
Zin
-
/
Z.
U.
/ : : : ; .
X /

_)
u.
/

a: : J
^ = :

/ . .
CD
/ . . . .

140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 20.0

MRGNET THICKNESS (CHI
 6.16

-O

.o

f .o
s;

."b
CD
co
CO

00
LU
•o _o
c
a
a:
CO 51
c
a> a
C3
a:
»_ LJ
O
(D O LJ
o

a> _o
cn
o O
O)
JC c
Loadi

+->
4->
O
X
—1 "a
_o
:ron
:ron

O)

TtTTT i.j.l f u i i\M., . . ,..„',. i ,..,.111 f i m i i" l-ii.li i ' .;,.i l ~ ,.;i. ^...,1111 ,.,.IIII ',,,II * ..ill '-^;
M0l £,0I v0\ , 01 0,0T £0l ,01 ,01 90I s0l ,01 t 0l pi ,0t 00t
 . Gamma Flux at the Magnet Surface in tne STARFIRE Design (3.6 MW/m'
Neutron Wall Loading and 1.01 Inboard Blanket and Shield)

•"* i

t/J o
.' O.

id1 10s 10 s 107 10'

ENEREGY tMEVJ
• Nuclear Heating In the STARFIRE Toroidal Field Magnet (3.6 MW/m
Neutron Wall loading, 1.2A B S and 1.01 Inboard Blanket and
Shield Thickness)
- •:;;r^::::^
\ i
t• 1
( !

1 ! 1TT....:...^ ^?.^= •
ii

- .^
.^jffn
«
iira j

*—* t ••••••••;••••••-•••••••-••••"•

M I ,/.' j

CJ ,' S. : i

-TOTAI""
CD ; ^ • }

/
.•.•.••.•.•.•.•.•.•.viir-.-.-.-.-.
• 1
::.;...
LEflR

/ /

D
!§f:::::::::: •
• i
> ' •

r
o

MO.O 120.0 100.0 60.0 60.0 20.0

40.0 0.0 20.0
MflGNET THICKNESS (CM)
 Electrical Insulator Dose in the STARFIRE Toroidal Field Magnet
(3.6 MW/m2 Neutron Wall Loading, 1.2A B S and 1.01 Inboard
Blanket and Shield Thickness)
°b
:::::::::::::::::::b:::::::;:::^:i : -ji-v'

•
'•^ysr-s '• • • j
r
^ • ^ " ' - ;

«b.
i .•:.•.•.•:.•:.•::.•.•:.•;.;>;
[RflOS)

::::::::.-^d

<
o -
or
-^ ^ • * i

o
f-
cc
TOTAL/ -'h . ^'y
i n —<1

o
: y
o —-
UJ
-y
.^
."Z^i:

::£?::::::::::
125.0 U2.5 . 100.0 87.5 7S.0 62.5 50.0 -25.0
37.S 12.5 0.0
SUPERCONOUCTOR MflTERIfiL THICKNESS (CM)
 6.20

INBOARD BLANKET AND SHIELD THICKNESS FOR STARFIRE REFERENCE DESIGN

Thickness
(cm) Region

1 First wall (H20, PCA steel)

5 Neutron multiplier (Zr5Pb3)

1 Second wall (H20, PCA steel)

28 Tritium breeding material (LiA102, H 2 0, PCA steel)

2 Blanket jacket (PCA steel)

2 Shield jacket (Fe-1422)

15 Tungsten shield (W, Fe-1422, H 2 0)

7.5 B4C shield (W, Fe-1^22, H 2 0)

15 Tungsten shield (W, Fe-I422, H 2 0)

7.5 B4C shield <B4C, Fe-1^22, H 2 0)

7.5 Tungsten shield (W, Fe-1^22^ H 2 0)

7.5 B 4 C shield (B4C^ Fe-1422, H 2 0)

2 Shield jacket (Fe-1422)

 6.21

INSULATOR DOSE, NUCLEAR HEATING, AND RAD 1 AT ION-INDUCED RESISTIVITY

IN STARF1RE TOROIDAL FIELD COIL

Electrical insulator dose 1.22 x 10 9 (n, 1.06 x 10 9 ; y, 0.15 x 109)

(rods)

Thermal insulator dose 2.39 x 10 9 (n, 2.10 x 10 9 ; Y; 0.19 z 109)

(rods)

Maximum nuclear heating 1.54 x 10" 5 (n. 2.20 x 10" 6 ; Y, 1.32 x 10~5)
(W/cm3)

Maximum radiation-induced fi-cm 1.4*4 x 10"

revistivity after 10-yr of
operation

Maximum DPA rate ofter dpa 1.34 x 10" 4

10 yr of operation

Maximum neutron fluence n/an2 1.87 x 10 1 7

(E > 0.1 MeV) after
10 yr of operation)
 7.2
Relative Radiation Sensitivity of
Insulators, Stabilizers, and Superconductors

Introduction

Recent developments in the design of fusio.i devices have again

shown that the cost of such a machine depends strongly on the size of
the superconducting magnets. Their size in turn is greatly dependent on
the thickness of shielding used to protect them from the effects of
neutrons and gamma rays. It therefore has become important to determine
what the minimum shielding thickness might be, which in turn depends on
the sensitivity of the magnet components to radiation damage and the al-
lowable refrigeration power to compensate for nuclear heating. This
paper will deal with the relative radiation sensitivity of each compo-
nent of the magnet, in an effort to indicate where applied materials
research could be most profitable in producing an efficient overall de-
sign. This general topic has been considered many times in the past by
other authors [1-8], and the results of their work will be drawn upon
here.
The general approach of this talk will be as follows: First, I
will discuss the operating conditions of the magnets including temper-
ature and radiation fields. I will comment on the nuclear heating.
Then I will describe the components of the magnet system, including the
materials used, the important properties, the atomic structure, the
damage mechanism, and the effects of room temperature warmup. I will
suggest some failure criteria for the various components. I will then
discuss the available data concerning radiation effects on each compo-
nent. Next, I will attempt to compare their radiation sensitivities
using the conditions calculated for the ETF toroidal field magnet in-
board leg, and to rank them in order of sensitivity. Finally, I will
comment on the implications of this ranking for the directions of
future applied materials research.
 7.3
Superconducting Magnets - Operating Conditions
In general, the effects of radiation depend strongly on the
operating temperature and the type and energy spectrum of the radiation,
so I will review these first.
The operating temperature for present designs of superconducting
magnets is between 4 and 5 K, which is maintained by ordinary liquid
helium-I. Recently there have been suggestions that superfluid liquid
helium-II may be used [9]. In this case, the operating temperature
would be about 1.8 K. Superfluid helium offers the potential advantages
of a higher surface heat transfer coefficient, higher thermal conduc-
tivity, and lower viscosity.
A valid comparison of the relative radiation sensitivity of the
magnet components can only be made if they are compared for the radi-
ation fields expected to be present in the application of interest.
These fields will vary from one device to another and between different
locations in the same device. Penetrations in the shielding are expect-
ed to have strong effects on the radiation fields, as are the materials
chosen for shielding.
For purposes of comparison, I will use the radiation fields cal-
culated for the inboard shield of the Engineering Test Facility by
Barney Engholm [8]. In this design, the shield is 82 cm thick, and is
constructed of alternating layers of stainless steel and borated water.
Approximately equal fluxes of gamma rays and neutrons are present, with
the spectra given in Tables I and II. The mean neutron energy is 0.9
MeV, and the median is 0.2 MeV. The mean and median gamma ray energies
are 0.8 and 0.7 MeV, respectively.
In comparing this neutron spectrum to those calculated for other
devices [1, 6, 10], I note that there are several similarities. In
general, less than 3% of the neutrons have energies greater than 10 MeV,
while between 14 and 22% have energies above 1 MeV, and between 55 and
62% have energies above 0.1 MeV. No published gamma ray spectra other
than Engholm1s were found.
 7.4
Nuclear Heating

The nuclear.heating load in the magnets is due primarily to gamma

rays interacting with the metal components. At 4-5 K, about 500 W or
more are required to power the refrigeration system to remove 1 W of
heat from the magnet [11]. If liquid helium-II is used at 1.8 K, this
requirement will increase, possibly by a factor of 2 1/2 to 3. Optimiz-
ation of design trade-offs as discussed in another talk at this meeting
[12] is necessary to determine whether heat load or radiation damage
will dictate the minimum shield thickness for a particular machine.

Materials
Superconducting magnets are made up of four main components: the
superconductor, the stabilizer, insulators, and the magnet case and
structure. The two candidate superconductor materials are Nb-Ti and
Nb3Sn. Copper appears to be the favored material for stabilizers, but
aluminum is also a candidate. Up to the present, the insulators have
been made of organic material, but inorganics may also have to be con-
sidered. The case and structure are generally made of steel.
I will now review the pertinent features of each of the compo-
nents, including the important properties, the type of radiation that
causes damage, the atomic structure, the damage mechanism, and the
effects of room temperature warm-up.

Superconductors
In both cases, the important parameter is the critical current
density at the operating magnetic field and temperature. Only the
neutrons are significant in changing this property, for the case of
equal neutron and gamma fluxes. The neutrons interact with nuclei in
the material and knock atoms out of their lattice sites. The primary
knock-on atoms interact with other atoms, producing cascades of vacant
sites and interstitial atoms. Many of these are "frozen in" at the
magnet operating temperature. Since the behaviors of Nb-Ti and NbgSn
are quite different, I will discuss them separately.
 7.5
Nb-Ti
This material is a random substitutional alloy, and its atomic
order is not important for its superconducting properties. The critical
current density in Nb-Ti is limited by the strength of the fluxoid pin-
ning. In the manufactured state, the fluxoid pir.ners are dislocation
cell walls. These can be fashioned by appropriate mechanical working
and heat treating to be of optimum dimensions to serve as effective pin-
ners. When Nb-Ti is irradiated, damage cascades are formed throughout
the material, including the regions within the cells formed by the dis-
location walls. Since large cascades can also exert pinning forces on
the fluxoids, they can have the effect of raising the critical current
density in material which has not been manufactured with optimum pinning
structures. However, in optimized material (and eventually also in
material which was not optimized) the cascades will have the effect of.
"averaging out" the pinning forces of the existing pinners in such a way
that the overall pinning strength decreases, and the critical current
density goes down [13]. Upon annealing at room temperature, approxi-
mately 70% of the Jc decrease is recovered [7].

NboSn
In contrast to Nb-Ti, Nb,Sn is an ordered alloy, and its super-
conducting properties depend on its state of order. Its critical cur-
rent density is limited both by fluxoid pinning and by its atomic order.
As in Nb-Ti, the pinners in manufactured material are dislocation cell
walls. However, since Nb,Sn is formed by a diffusion-reaction process
and cannot be subsequently mechanically worked because of its brittle
nature, there is less freedom to form an optimum pinning structure.
Consequently, the as-manufactured superconductor tends to be under-
pinned. At low fluences, therefore, the radiation-produced cascades
improve the pinning and raise Jc. However, at higher fluences, the dis-
ordering effect of radiation-induced atomic replacements causes the in-
trinsic superconducting peoperties of the material to be degraded, and
Jc decreases [7,14]. In the case of Nb-Sn, room temperature annealing
does not cause much recovery of this decrease (less than 10%) because
 7.6

reordering of the alloy does not occur until temperatures near 700°C.

Stabilizers
The function of the stabilizer in superconducting magnets is to
protect against the possibility of the superconductor catastrophically
reverting to a normal conductor and bringing about a magnet quench, with
the attendant large release of energy and possible damage. The stabi-
lizer holds the superconducting filaments in place, bears the magnetic
forces on them, carries the current in the event that part of the super-
conductor "goes normal" due to a flux jump or other causes, and conducts
heat to the liquid helium coolant.
The important parameter for stabilizers is the normal electrical
resistivity at the operating temperature and magnetic field. For equal
fluxes of neutrons and gamma rays, only the neutrons are important in
changing the resistivity.
The atomic structure of both copper and aluminum is face-centered
cubic crystalline, with one atomic species. As in the superconductors,
the damage mechanism begins with neutrons interacting with nuclei and
causing atomic displacements. These result in cascades of vacancies
and interstitial atoms. Again, since they are unable to diffuse ther-
mally at the operating temperature, many of them are "frozen in". They
serve as scattering centers for the normal conduction electrons, and
this causes an increase in the resistivity. When a magnetic field is
applied, the normal resistivity is increased, a phenomenon known as
magneto-resistivity. The total resistivity of the stabilizer under
operating conditions is a result of the interplay between the presence
of the magnetic field and the structure of the material, including im-
purities, dislocation structure, and radiation-prod <sd defects. While
this behavior is understood to some degree for relatively pure, well-
characterized materials [15, 16, 7 ] , it is difficult to be very quanti-
tative in predicting the behavior of the commercial material to be used
in large magnets. [During discussion at this meeting, Carl Henning of
LLNL stated that magnet makers are typically using OFHC copper obtained
from Phelps-Dodge or Revere that has a residual resistivity ratiu of
 7.7
180 to 240].
As a function of fluence, the resistance at field increases
linearly at first, and then curves over to a saturation value. Upon
annealing at room temperature, aluminum exhibits essentially total re-
covery, while copper may recover 80% or more.

Organic Insulators
The functions of insulators in a superconducting magnet are to
electrically separate the turns and layers of the magnet coil from each
other and from the magnet case, to transfer the magnetic forces from
the windings to the case, and to provide channels for the liquid helium
coolant. The important parameters are cotnpressive, shear, and bonding
strengths, dimensional changes, resistivity and dielectric breakdown
strength, and gas evolution.
The insulators are mainly loaded in compression with shear loads
on the interlayer sheets as a result of possible accumulated differences
in the thickness of windings due to variations in manufacturing. Cyclic
loads will be present in tokamak designs. Adhesives are used in various
locations during assembly. Dimensional stability is important in order
to avoid causing excessive strain in the superconductor or shorting of
turns. Resistivity need not be extremely high, but is necessary during
charging and discharging of the magnet. Breakdown strength is important
particularly during rapid discharging. Gas evolution must be minimized
to avoid fracturing of the insulators due to internal pressurization
during warm-up and fouling of the refrigeration system by foreign
species such as H2> H2O, CH4, and others.
Organic insulators differ from the componenets previously men-
tioned in that they can suffer damage from both gamma rays and neutrons.
Doses are generally expressed in rads or grays (1 gray = 100 rads) which
measure the energy absorbed per unit mass of material. The effects of
neutrons and gamma rays may differ on a per rad basis.
In general, organic insulators are composed of long chain mole-
cules with cross links between the chains. They may vary from being
amorphous to being partially crystalline.
 7.8
The damage mechanisms in organic materials are different for
gamma rays and neutrons, respectively. Neutrons produce primary knock-
on atoms as in the other materials. These recoil, causing ionization
and excitation of electrons, and displacement of other atoms. These
processes result in broken bonds. The hydrogen content is particularly
important, because neutrons are able to transfer a great deal of energy
to hydrogen atoms, since they have the same mass.
Gamma rays interact with electrons, primarily via the Compton ef-
fect under the conditions of interest. These recoil electrons interact
with others, again resulting in ionization, excitation, and broken bonds.
The results of all these processes are that main chain bonds are broken,
tending to reduce the molecular weight and strength, while cross-linking
between chains tends to increase the molecular weight and make a more
rigid structure. The competing processes result in discoloration, hard-
ening, and then breakdown of the structure. At high doses, the materials
are reduced to tar and gas.
Up to the present, magnet builders have generally used epoxy-fiber-
glass laminates (G-10 or G-ll), polyethylene teraphthalate sheets (Mylar),
polyimide sheets (Kapton), aromatic polyamide sheets (Nomex) and similar
materials. These have generally been chosen for properties other than
radiation resistance.
Warming irradiated organic insulators to room temperature does
not generally bring about much recovery in their structure, and may cause
more damage. In particular, smaller molecular fragments will convert to
the gas phase and escape from the insulators.
Organic insulators are favored over inorganic insulators by the
builders of magnets because they are more easily fabricated, they are
flexible, they are less expensive, adhesives are available for them,
and there is considerable experience with them.
 7.9
Inorganic Insulators
If organic insulators prove to be too vulnerable to radiation,
magnet builders will be forced to consider inorganic insulators for
superconducting magnets. These offer much higher radiation resistance,
but present the disadvantages of brittleness and higher cost. As with
organic insulators, the important parameters are compressive, shear, and
bonding strengths and dimensional changes. The electrical properties
should be more than adequate, and gas evolution is not a concern.
Neutrons are an important source of damage for all types of in-
organic insulators. Gamma rays are important in silica-based materials.
The structure of ceramics is crystalline, while glasses are amorphous.
Glass-ceramics contain both crystalline and amorphous material. More
than one atomic species is present in these materials, which makes their
structures and radiation damage behavior more complex.
The mechanism of neutron damage is similar to that described for
the other materials, in that damage cascades are formed. Ionization
from recoil atoms and gamma rays can cause atomic displacements in
silica-based materials. The overall effects on properties depend on
the particular material. At high doses, swelling due to void formation
can occur at certain temperatures. In non-cubic structures, such as that
of aluminum oxide, anisotropic swelling causes intergranular cracking.
The effects of warming a low-temperature irradiated inorganic insulator
to room temperature should be minor, although it would probably be wise
to check experimentally whether the release of stored energy might be a
problem as was true in graphite.

Steel
Since the sensitivity of steel to neutron damage has been found
to be less than that of other magnet components [3,7], it will not be
discussed further in this talk.

Dose Conversion Factors for Insulators

In order to calculate the total radiation dose in insulators, it
is necessary to convert neutron and gamma fluences to rads. In the past,
 7.10

some authors have used a factor of 10" rads per n /cm 2 for all insulators
across the board. However, this factor varies with composition and
neutron spectrum. In order to provide a basis for comparison, I have
performed some hand calculations of the conversion factors for six in-
sulators.
In performing these calculations, I divided the neutron spectrum
in Table I into six energy groups, and applied the following equation to
the chemical elements of interest:

D(E) r a d s / n/cm 2 = 9.64 x 1 0 1 5 x a tot (an2) x Loc. Energy(MeV)

M (amu)

In this equation, atot is the total neutron cross section, Loc. Energy
is the average energy deposited locally per interaction (not counting
the energy of scattered neutrons and of gamma rays), and M is the atomic
mass. The values for atot and Loc. Energy were taken from the ENDL
library [17]. The elemental conversion factors were then added together
in linear combinations according to the weight percent of each element.
The chemical compositions were taken to be those shown in Table H i .
The factors for each energy group were then weighted according to the
spectrum in Table I. The results are shown in Table IV. As can be
seen, there is a considerable spread in the values for different in-
_q
sulators, and they are considerably below 10 for this spectrum. The
effects of hydrogen and boron content can be clearly seen.
The gamma ray dose conversion factors are somewhat easier to
estimate, since the interactions can be estimated as taking place totally
via the Compton effect for all the insulators of interest. Using a mean
energy of 0.8 MeV and a mass absorption coefficient of 0.029 cm /g, the
conversion factor is about 3.7 x 10" rads / gamma/cm?.

Failure Criteria
In order to compare the various components according to radiation
sensitivity, it is necessary to establish criteria for failure of each
part. This is difficult to do, because it involves system trade-offs
such as the frequency of warm-ups to room temperature, the allowable
 7.11
excess stabilizer which can be designed into the magnet, the difficulty
in coping with foreign gases in the refrigeration system, and others.
Nevertheless, I will propose some failure criteria to serve as a basis
for discussion.
For Nb-Ti, I suggest that the criterion be set at a 10% decrease
in the critical current density between annealing periods. [Carl Henning
of LLNL stated at the meeting that warm-ups may occur once per year,
during periods when other maintenance is performed.] This seems reason-
able, since the critical current density decreases rather slowly with
fluence, and considerable annealing takes place at room temperature.
For Nb3Sn, I suggest a criterion of 1% decrease in Jc for the
lifetime dose. This more conservative criterion is established because
Nb3Sn will not recover significantly on annealing and because the drop
in Jc with fluence is more rapid in this material [Note that a criterion
of 10% was actually presented in the talk, but upon further reflection,
I have become more conservative.]
For the stabilizers, a criterion of 25% increase in resistivity
at the operating field and temperature between anneals seems like an
appropriate first guess. There are a number of uncertainties in the
radiation effects on commercial material which should be resolved, such
as the fraction of damage recovery for successive anneals. Also, the cost
of extra stabilizer and increased magnet thickness required must be
weighed against the cost of additional shielding and increased magnet
inside diameter to arrive at the best trade-off.
For fiber-reinforced organic insulators, I suggest a criterion
of 20% decrease in compressive strength perpendicular to the plane of
the laminate, for the lifetime dose. The bases for this are my beliefs
that the mechanical requirements are more stringent than the electrical
ones, and that evolved gases could be separated from the helium coolant
upon warm-up. The available data on low temperature irradiations of the
materials of interest [18] indicate that the mechanical properties de-
grade at lower dose than the electrical ones. Further research on part-
icular materials may alter this choice.
For inorganic insulators, I recommend a failure criterion of 0.1%
swelling. This is based on the need to avoid strains in the supercon-
 7.12
ductors, and the guess that swelling will be the earliest deleterious
effect in materials of this type. I know of no data on cryogenic ir-
radiations of inorganic insulators.

Estimates of Time to Failure

Having established failure criteria, I will now estimate the time
each component would last in the neutron and gamma ray spectra of Tables
I and II.

Nb-Ti
Unfortunately there have been few experiments in which Nb-Ti was
irradiated with neutrons at low temperature and tested at fields above
5 Tesla. However, Soell [13,5] performed irradiations on Nb-Ti at 5K
with the Munich Research Reactor, and tested up to 5 Tesla. The
spectrum given for this facility is somewhat similar to that in Table
I, in that about 25% of the neutrons are above 1 MeV and about 52% are
above 0.1 MeV, compared to about 17% and 62%, respectively, for Table I.
If we compare these neutrons one for one, this yields failure at a
fluence of about 3 x 1 0 ^ n /cm 2 , which would be reached in a time of 6x10^
seconds. This is also fairly consistent with the results of Birtcher,
Brown, and Scott [19], who found a 2% decrease in Jc for fields from
2 to 5 Tesla at a fluence of 5.4xlO 17 "/cm2, (E>0.1MeV) and the results
of Van Konynenburg, Guinan, and Kinney [20], who observed a 3% decrease
in Jc at H=4 Tesla, but no change at 6, 8, and 10 Tesla for a fluence
of 8xlO 16 "/cm2 (14.8MeV). Note that the damage energy of the latter
neutron spectrum is estimated to be a factor of 4.4 times as great as
the Birtcher, Brown, and Scott spectrum, and this effect appears to scale
with damage energy [7]. Accordingly, I will use a failure time of 6x10**
seconds for Nb-Ti. If the trend with field is as indicated in the only
high field experiment [20], this value should be conservatively low for
8 Tesla operation. Periodic annealing with 70% recovery would increase
the lifetime to 1.6x10* seconds if 10 or more anneals were made.
 7.13

Unfortunately, there have so far been no experiments in which

Nb3Sn was irradiated with neutrons at low temperature and tested at fields
up to 12 Tesla at fluences high enough to cause J c to decrease below its
initial value. Also, because of the two competing mechanisms in Nb3Sn,
as discussed above, it is more difficult to get a consistent picture
even at fields below 5 Tesla, where data are available, than in Nb-Ti.
Soell [5], based upon his own measurements and those of others
(up to 5 Tesla) estimated that a 1% decrease in Jc will occur for a
neutron fluence of about l.lxlO^8 n /cm 2 , for the Munich spectrum. On
the other hand, Brown et al U 3 ] found that Jc was still well above its
initial value at a fluence of 4xlO 18 n /cm 2 (E>0.1 MeV) and a field of
3.3T. In later work at 4.92 Tesla [24], they found Jc still rising at
this fluence.
Colucci, Weinstock, and Brown observed apparent saturation in the
pinning effect of defect cascades for a fluence of about 2.2x10^ "/cm2
(E>.1 MeV) (corrected fluence, based on measurements of Kirk and Green-
wood [25]). Measurements were made at 4.2 K at fields up to 10T after
warming at 77 K.
Scanlan and Raymond [26] found Jc continuing to rise after a 5 K
fluence of about 5x10 17 n /cm 2 "equivalent" 14.8 MeV neutrons [21]. The
percent increase in Jc was the same for fields between 8T and 12T. In
room temperature 14.8 MeV neutron irradiations, Snead et al [27] found
these neutrons to be about 3.2 times as effective as High Flux Beam
Reactor Neutrons when specified as E>1.0 MeV. In 60°C irradiations in
the HFBR, Parkin and Schweitzer [28] and Snead and Parkin [29] found Jc
decreases after a fluence of about 2-3xlO 18 (E>1.0 MeV), for fields up
to 14T.
Considering all these data, I will estimate failure of the Nb3Sn,
as defined earlier, to occur at a fluence of 4xlO^ 8 n /cm 2 in the spectrum
of Table I. The time to failure would then be 8x10 8 seconds.
 7.14
Organic Insulators
Only a few experiments have been performed which involve cryogenic
irradiation and testing of relevant organic insulators [30-33, 18, 34-35].
Although the data are incomplete, I will estimate failure in G-10 at
lxlO9 rads and failure in polyimide-fiberglass at 1x10^° rads. For
Q

G-10, the failure time would than be about 2.6x10 seconds. For poli-
mide-fiberglass, the failure time would be about 3x10^ seconds.
Inorganic Insulators
Although little is known about cryogenic radiation effects in
inorganic insulators, higher temperature irradiations generally have
shown them to be considerably more resistant than organic insulators.
Machinable glass-ceramic would probably be the easiest type of inorganic
insulator to use for magnets. Clinard [36] reports no swelling in MACOR
irradiated to 1 0 ^ n /cm2 (14 MeV) at room temperature. I will estimate
failure to occur at a fluence of no less than 5x10^9 n /cm2 in the spec-
trum of Table I, which translates to a failure time of about 1 0 1 0 seconds.

Copper Stabilizer
The International Annealed Copper Standard resistivity at 20°C is
1.724 microhm-cm. If copper having a residual resistivity ratio of 215
is used, the resistivity at 4-5 K would be 8.0 nanohm-cm. Using the
extensive magnetoresistance data of Fickett3' for copper the resistivity
in an 8T field will increase to 45.6 nanohm-cm. A 25% increase at field
due to irradiation would require an increase at zero field of 9.8 nanohm-
cm. At 12T, the resistivity would be 63.4 nanohm-cm. A 25% increase at
field would require an increase of 13.3 nanohm-cm at zero field.
In the neutron spectrum of Table I, the damage energy cross-section
for copper 38 is 39.1 b-keV compared to 81.3 b-keV in a pure fission
spectrum for which the resistivity damage rate is 3 9 .723 x 10" 1 6 nanohm-
cm /n/cm^. We therefore expect a 25% increase in resistivity at field
to occur at fluences of 2.8xlO17 and 3.8xlO17 at 8T and 12T, respectively,
in times of 5.8xlO7 seconds and 7.9x10? seconds. Annealing over 10 or
more cycles with 80% recovery would allow an increase of a factor of 4
 7.15

in failure times to 2.3xlO8 seconds and 3.2xlO8 seconds at 8T and 12T

respectively.

Aluminum Stabilizer
The magnetoresistive behavior of aluminum differs greatly from
copper for which the change in resistivity at field is, to first order
the same as the change at zero field, while for aluminum the resistivity
at high fields is roughly two to three times that at zero field. In
order to compare aluminum with copper we will estimate the fluence at which
the resistivity of aluminum is equal to that of copper at the end of life.
Magnetoresistance data for aluminum at 4 K covering a wide range of purity
' as well as radiation induced defects indicate that the resistivity
will reach the copper values of 57 nanohm-cm at 8T and 79.2 nanohm-cm at
12T when the zero field values reach 27.0 nanohm-cm and 30.7 nanohm-cm
respectively.
The resistivity of aluminum at 20°C is 2.824 microhm-cm. With a
residual resistivity ratio of 215 the resistivity at 4.5 K would be 13.1
nanohm-cm thus allowing radiation induced zero field changes of 13.9
nanohin-cm and 17.6 nanohm-cm respectively at 8T and 12T.
In the neutron spectrum of Table I, the damage energy cross-section
for aluminum38 is 47.2 b-keV compared to 98.3 b-keV in a pure fission
spectrum for which the resistivity damage rate is-^ 2.19x10"^ nanohm-cm
. The changes given above would be reached at fluences of 1.3x10"
and 1.7x10^ n/cm^ for 8T and 12T respectively, corresponding to
times of 2.7x10^ and 3.5x10^ seconds. Since less than 1% of the radiation
induced resistivity remains after room-temperature annealing in aluminum,
the times to failure would be reached in 2.7xlO8 and 3.5x10 seconds if
ten annealing cycles were carried out. However, unlike Nb-Ti and copper
for which little can be gained by increasing the number of annealing
cycles, in aluminum the lifetime will be directly proportional to the
number of annealing cycles. With ten annealing cycles the performance
of aluminum is nearly the same as copper of comparable purity. For a
reactor designed for a thirty year life with yearly anneals, aluminum
could operate in a neutron flux three times larger than copper could
accommodate.
 7.16
Summary
The relative radiation stability of various components of super-
conducting magnets in the neutron and gamma spectra of the ETF design are
summarized in Table V. Each material is listed with its estimated life-
time in seconds at full power of 2.4 MW/m wall loading. For convenience,
the lifetimes are also given in MW-y/m? The materials fall into four
groups, each separated by about a factor of three in lifetime. Inorganic
insulators are the least sensitive to irradiation with "lifetimes of
1 x 1 0 ^ seconds, followed by polyimide-based insulators at 3x10^ seconds,
superconductors at ixlCP seconds and in the most sensitive group, stabi-
lizers and epoxy-based insulators with lifetimes of 3xlO 8 seconds.
Since design engineers will necessarily be conservative in allowing
for uncertainties in component lifetimes, we also need estimates of the
accuracy of our predictions. As an example of a material in the most
sensitive group, I have included an estimate of uncertainty in the life-
time of a copper stabilizer by M. Guinan in Appendix A. His conclusion
that at present the uncertainty is nearly a factor of two underscores
the recommendations which follow.

Recommendations
1. In view of the fact that organic insulators appear to be the
most vulnerable part of present magnet systems from the radiation damage
standpoint, I recommend that more effort be put into irradiation and
testing of (preferably, organic) materials having more radiation tolerance.
This should be done under conditions of temperature, stress, and radiation
type and spectrum which are closer to t'.3 proposed application than the
testing performed heretofore. Polyii.nde-fiberglass materials appear to
be promising candidates. It would be desirable to perform fast neutron
irradiations at 4-5 K. The samples should be placed in compression and
shear, in directions that correspond properly to the orientation of the
fiber reinforcement. Loading during irradiation would be desirable.
Post-irradiation mechanical tests should be performed both without warming
up and after warming to room temperature and cooling back to 4 K. If
organic insulators are found to be inadequate, inorganic materials should
 7.17
be studied.
2. The changes in high-field magnetoresistivity of stabilizer
materials under repeated low-temperature neutron irradiations and room-
temperature anneals should receive further study. It is particularly
important to make measurements on materials that have the same species
and amounts of impurities and degree of cold work as would actually be
present in magnet material, and to assess the effects of variation in
these parameters over the ranges expected for magnet material.
3. Nb-Ti should be irradiated with neutrons at 4-6 K, and critical
current measurements up to 10T should be performed, without warming the
samples. Both 14 MeV and lower energy neutron irradiations are needed.
Repeated irradiations and room temperature anneals should be performed,
to see how the damage accumulates.
4. Nb3Sn should be irradiated with neutrons at 4-6 K, and critical
current measurements up to 12T should be performed without warming the
samples. Both 14 MeV and lower energy neutron irradiations are needed,
to fluences high enough to cause Jc to decrease to less than its initial
value.
5. System studies should be continued in order to determine the
best trade-offs of factors that affect shielding thickness. In particular,
the effects of operation with superfluid helium-II on these trade-offs
should be studied to see whether refrigeration power or radiation damage
is the limiting factor in this case.
 7.18
Table I - Neutron Spectrum [8] at Inboard Leg of ETF Toroidal
Field Coil, Assuming 2.4 MW/m2 Wall Loading and 82-cm Thick SS-BH20
Shield.

Lower Energy Flux

n
(MeV) ( /cm2-sec)

13.5 5.76E+7 3.73E-5 1.53E+8

12.2 4.32E+7 3.9E-6 1.39E+8
11.05 1.18E+7 4.1E-7 5.1E+7
10.0 1.41E+7
9.05 1.40E+7 Total 4.84E+9
8.19 1.32E+7
7.41 1.19E+7
6.70 1.14E+7
6.07 1.08E+7
5.49 9.6E+6
4.49 1.94E+7
3.68 2.27E+7
3.01 2.92E+7
2.47 4.05E+7
1.35 2.11E+8
0.74 6.8E+8
0.41 5.1E+8
0.166 9.84E+8
0.032 9.17E+8
3.35E-3 7.35E+8
3.54E-4 1.48E+8
 7.19
Table II - Gamma Ray Spectrum [8] at Inboard Leg of ETF Toroidal
Field Coil, Assuming 2.4 MW/m2 Wall Loading and 82-cm Thick SS-BH2O Shield

Lower Energy Flux

(MeV) (/cm2-sec)

8.0 5.46E+7
7.5 1.0 E+8
7.0 5.07E+7
6.5 4.17E+7
6.0 4.44E+7
5.5 4.89E+7
5.0 5.31E+7
4.5 5.66E+7
4.0 6.82E+7
3.5 7.97E+7
3.0 9.82E+7
2.5 1.21E+8
2.0 1.53E+8
1.5 2.04E+8
1.0 3.27E+8
0.4 1.43E+9
0.2 1.08E+9
0.1 4.49E+8

Total 4.46E+9
 7.20
Table III - Chemical Compositions Used for Six Insulators
(Wt. %)

ement Insulator
u.
CO

Polyimide -
Fiberglass
G-IO(BF)
ro

MACOR
G-10 O

H 2.02 2.02 1.56

B 1.74 2.51
C 21.8 21.8 28.2
N 1.0 1.0 3.13
0 39.41 37.86 35.05 45.08 47.1
F .070 .077 .066 6.18
Na .312 .343 .294
Mg 1.90 2.09 1.79 8.60
Al 5.19 5.7 4.89 7.54 52.9
Si 17.7 19.4 16.7 22.2
K 7.89
Ca 8.76 9.6 8.23
Ti
Fe .098 .108 .09
 7.21

Table IV - Conversion Factors (rads per n/cm2) using

Engholm's ETF spectrum [ 8 ] .

Material Factor

AI2O3 l.OxlO"10

MACOR 2.0X10"10

Polyimide-Fiber 3.3xl(T 10
glass (BF)

G-10 (BF) 3.8xl(T 10

G-10 4.4xlO" 10
 7.22
Table V. Relative Radiation Sensitivity of Magnet Materials at
Inboard Leg of ETF Toroidal Field Coil

Material Lifetime
Seconds MW-y/m2
Inorganic insulators l.OxlO10 761
Polyimide-based insulators 3.0xl09 228
*Nb-Ti 1.6x109 122
Nb3Sn 0.8xl09 61
*+Aluminum stabilizer 2.7-3.5xlO8 21-27
*+Copper stabilizer 2.3-3.2x108 18-24
Epoxy-based insulators 2.6x108 20

* Assuming 10 annealing cycles to room temperature.

+ Values are for 8T and 12T respectively.
 7.23
Appendix A. Uncertainties in estimating the lifetime of a copper
stabilizer.

M. W. Guinan

Uncertainties in estimating the lifetime of a copper stabilizer

will be considered from three aspects:
1. the determination of the zero field resistivity damage
rate, dp/d*, in neutron spectra of interest;
2. the magnetoresistive behavior of copper; and
3. the recovery of irradiation induced resistivity under
cyclic annealing.
Resistivity damage rate. Experimental resistivity damage rates
20 '25 '39 in copper in neutron spectra varying from a reactor spectrum to
a 40 MeV d-Be spectrum are found to be proportional to damage energy
cross sections. Damage rates in the ETF spectrum were thus scaled from
experimental results 39 in a pure fission spectrum by damage energy cross
sections. However, in ion irradiation studies, Averback et. al.
found that while resistivity damage rates were proportional to damage
energy cross sections at high recoil energies, at energies below a few
keV the resistivity per unit damage energy increased substantially.
For neutron irradiations this is expected to become significant at
neutron energies below a few tenths of a MeV. The magnitude of this
effect has been estimated for various neutron energies using Averback
et. al's results for efficiency as a function of median recoil energy,
and applied to several spectra of interest. In the following table we
list damage energy cross sections, aDr» their ratios to that for a pure
fission spectrum and the relative values of resistivity damage rates,
dp/d<f>, expected at the magnet for several tokamak designs. In each
case the spectrum used was that calculated at the inboard leg of the
toroidal field coil.
 7.24

Spectrum Blanket and Damage Energy Relative Relative

Shield Cross Section anc dp/d<j>
ut
Thickness (b-keV)

Pure Fission 81.3 1.000 1.000

TEPR6 .47 m 36.4 0.448 0.535
ETF8 .82 m 39.1 0.481 0.556
Starfire 12 1.01 m 37.8 0.465 0.542

For the three spectra above the increase in the estimated resis-
tivity damage rate varies from 15% to 19%. At present, since we have
estimated efficiencies only on the basis of median recoil energies, we
conclude that the correction will be 16% + 8% in spectra of interest.
44 ~
The approach taken by Simons , in which the experimental data are
analyzed directly in terms of recoil energy should reduce this uncertainty
considerably when additional data are included. Apart from the above,
the overall uncertainty in the resistivity change per unit damage energy
20 25 39
is within 10% based on experiments * ' with higher energy neutrons.
If we superpose a statistical uncertainty of ± 10% in the flux calculated
at the magnet, the overall uncertainty is +_ 14% in addition to that
arising from the increased efficiency of low energy recoils.

Magnetoresistivity of copper. Resistivity changes as a function

of field, H, are usually presented in the form of a Kohler plot in
which the fractional change in resistivity at field is plotted as a
function of field divided by initial (zero field) resistivity, p Q , i.e.

P(H) - Po = f , h\ (AT)
V
Fickett^ in measurements of annealed copper up to 10 Tesla, found de-
viations of less then 5% from a single Kohler plot when p 0 was varied
by changing both purity and temperature. These results were used in
the body of this paper to estimate the change in p 0 required to produce
 7.25
a given change in p(H) at 8T and 10T. More recently, Williams et. at.
found substantially different Kohler plots for irradiated samples in
which the nature of the defects varied from point defects to loops.
We are aware of only three studies in which Kohler plots have
been determined for samples irradiated at 4-5K with neutrons. Williams
et. al. irradiated 99.999% Asarco copper, internally oxidized and fully
20
annealed, with thermal neutrons at 4K and Van Konynenburg e t . a l . ir-
radiated cold-worked and p a r t i a l l y annealed samples of both 99.95%
Phelps-Dodge oxygen-free copper and 99.999% A. D. Mackay copper with
14.8 MeV neutrons at 4K. The i n i t i a l and f i n a l values of p 0 and maximum
f i e l d s used are given below:

Sample Maximum Initial Final

Field Resistivity (H=0) Resistivity (H=0)

Asarco 2.5T 0.78 n-fi-cm 5.75 n-fl-cm

20
MacKay 12.4T 10.68 n-fi-cm 22.68 n-n-cm
20
Phelps-Dodge 12.4T
12.4T 9.49 n-n-cm 25.48 n-n-cm

Kohler plots f o r a l l three samples deviated substantially from that o f

Fickett and, t o a much lesser degree, from each other.
Assuming a l l the samples started with a p 0 of 8.0 nanohm-cm we
can determine the expected r e s i s t i v i t i e s a t 8T and 12T from the i n d i -
vidual Kohler p l o t s . These vary by as much as 15% since the Kohler plots
were not i d e n t i c a l . The c r i t e r i o n to be applied t o the s t a b i l i z e r at
the end o f l i f e i s a l i m i t i n g value o f the r e s i s t i v i t y at f i e l d . To
compare the three samples, we have taken the average r e s i s t i v i t i e s at
8T and 12T, and increased them by 25% to a r r i v e at l i m i t i n g values o f
52 nanohm-cm a t 8T and 75 nanohm-cm at 12T. Again, from the individual
Kohler plots we can determine the increase i n p 0 above 8.0 nanohm-cm
required to reach these l i m i t i n g values at f i e l d . The required i n c r e -
ments i n r e s i s t i v i t y are given i n the table following f o r each of the
three samples.
f 7.26
Sample Ap to Reach Ap to Reach
52 H-ft-cm at 8T 75 nyfi-cm at 12T

Asarco 12.4 n-fi-cm 17.8 n-fi-cm

MacKay 16.6 n-a-cm 25.9 n-fi-cm
Ph^lps-Dodge 14.6 n-a-cm 21.2 n-fi-cm

Average 14.5 + 2.2 21.6 ± 4.3 n-fi-cm

We note that the allowed resistivity increments are 48% larger at 8T and
62% larger at 12T than our previous estimates using the "Standard" copper
magnetoresistance data. Although these show variations of +_ 15% at 8T
and +_ 20% at 12T, they are probably more representative of the behavior
expected in a fusion reactor.
Recovery during cyclic annealing. A retention of 20% of the in-
duced resistivity after room temperature annealing is consistent with
that observed after thermal neutron irradiation^ and is 5% lower than
that observed after 14.8 MeV neutron irradiation. We expect that the
retention could drop as much as 5% after several irradiation-annealing
cycles. At present, our best estimate is that the lifetime increase
resulting from 10 annealing cycles will be a factor of 4.0 +^ 0.6, i.e.
an uncertainty of +_ 15%. However, the above estimate considers only
the magnitude of the retained zero field resistivity. Since the nature
of the defects contributing to the resistivity will change as a result
of annealing, the work of Williams et. al.15 leads us to expect a shift
in the Kohler plot. As a result the uncertainty in the possible exten-
sion of lifetimes by annealing must be increased to at least +_ 30%.
Summary. The estimates of copper stabilizer lifetimes made here
will be compared to those made in the paper using "standard" data
sources. The three aspects discussed will be considered separately and
then combined.
Consideration of zero field resistivity damage rates leads to a
factor of 0.86 (1.00+..16) in lifetime. The reduction arises from a con-
sideration of increased defect production by low energy recoils. The
16% uncertainty could probably be reduced to 10% by a careful analysis
 7.27
of existing data and improved calculations of expected fluxes at the
magnet.
The use of only data on the magnetoresistive behavior of copper
during 4 K neutron irradiations leads to a factor of 1.48 (1.00 +_ .15)
at 8T and 1.62 (1.00 + .20) at 12T. The increase is due to the large
difference in Kohler plots exhibited by neutron irradiated samples com-
pared to "standard" copper. The uncertainties of 15-20% could probably
be reduced to 10% or less by high field irradiations on copper samples
typical of those to be used in actual stabilizer applications.
The factor (1.00 ± .30) resulting from uncertainties in the effects
of cyclic annealing arises primarily from a lack of data on the shifts
in magnetoresistive behavior which will be encountered. This will only
be reduced by actually performing repeated irradiation-anneal cycles on
typical samples.
The net result of this exercise is that the estimates made in the
body of the paper for the lifetimes of a copper stabilizer should be in-
creased by a factor of 1.28 (1.00 +. .34) at 8T and 1.40 (1.00 +. .40) at
12T. It should be possible to reduce the overall uncertainties to 20%
by the aquisition of new data.
 7.28
References

1. 6. M. McCracken and S. Blow, "The Shielding of Superconducting

Magnets in a Fusion Reactor," CLM-R120, UKAEA Research Group Report,
Culham Laboratory, Abingdon, Berkshire, England (1972).
2. G. L. Kulcinski, R. 6. Brown, R. G. Lott, and P. A. Sanger, "Radia-
tion Damage Limitations in the Design of the Wisconsin Tokamak
Fusion Reactor," Nucl. Technol. 22, 20 (1974).
3. J. F. Guess, R. W. Boom, R. R. Coltman, Jr., and S. T. Sekula,
"A Survey of Radiation Damage Effects in Superconducting Magnet
Components and Systems," ORNL-TM- 5187, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN (1975).
4. H. Ullmaier, "Radiation Damage in CTR Magnet Components," in:
Radiation Effects and Tritium Technology for Fusion Reactors,"
CONF-750989, p. 11-401, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge,
TN (1975).

5. M. Soil, "Influence of Radiation Damage on the Maximum Attainable

Magnetic Field for Toroidal Fusion Magnet Systems," J. Nucl. Mat
72, 168 (1978).
6. M. A. Abdou, "Radiation Considerations for Superconducting Fusion
Magnets," J. Nucl. Mat. 72, 147 (1978).
7. B. S. Brown, "A Review of Radiation Effects in Superconducting
Fusion Magnet Materials," to be published in J. Nucl. Mat. (1980).
8. Personal communication with R. Nygren and B. Engholm, Engineering
Test Facility Design Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak
Ridge, TN (1980).
9. Personal communication with D. Cornish and R. Scanlan, Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (1980).
10. R. W. Moir et al, "Standard Mirror Fusion Reactor Design Study,"
UCID-17644, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore,
CA (1978).
11. Personal Communication with R. L. Nelson, Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory, Livermore, CA (1980).
12. V. Gohar, Argonne National Laboratory, this meeting.
13. M. Soil, C.A.M. van der Klein, H. Bauer, and G. Vogl, "The In-
fluence of Low Temperature Neutron Irradiation on Superconducting
Magnet Systems for Fusion Reactors," IEEE Trans. Magnetics MAG-11,
178 (1975).
 7.29
14. A. R. Sweedler, D. E. Cox, and S. Moehlecke, "Neutron Irradiation
of Superconducting Compounds," J. Nucl. Mater. 72, 50 (1978).
15. J. M. Williams, C. E. Klabunde, J. K. Redman, R. R. Coltman, Jr.,
and R. L. Chaplin, "The Effects of Irradiation on the Copper Normal
Metal of a Composite Superconductor," IEEE Trans. Magnetics MAG-15,
731 (1979).
16. C. F. Klabunde, R. R. Coltman, Jr., and J. M. Williams, "The Effects
of Irradiation on the Normal Metal of a Composite Superconductor:
A Comparison of Copper and Aluminum," J. Nucl. Mater. 85 and 86,
385 (1979).
17. E. F. Plechaty, D. E. Cullen, R. J. Howerton, and J. R. Kimlinger,
"Tabular and Graphical Presentation of 175 Neutron-Group Constants
Derived from the LLNL Evaluated-Nuclear-Data Library (ENDL)," UCRL-
50400, Vol. 16, Rev. 2, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (1978),
18. C. J. Long, R. R. Coltman, Jr., C. E. Klabunde, and R. H. Kernohan,
"Effects of Radiation at 5 K on Organic Insulators for Superconduc-
ting Magnets," p. 73 in Special Purpose Materials Annual Progress
Report, DOE/ER-0048/1, U. S. Dept. of Energy (1980).
19. Personal communication with Bruce Brown, Argonne National Laboratory
(1980). Results to be published in Journal of Nuclear Materials.
20. R. A. Van Konynenburg, M. W. Guinan, and J. H. Kinney, to be pub-
lished in Special Purpose Materials Annual Progress Report, U. S.
Dept. of Energy (1981).
21. R. A. Van Konynenburg and M. W. Guinan, "Radiation Effects on Super-
conductors and Magnet Stabilizer Materials," p. 67 in Special
Purpose Materials Annual Progress Report, DOE/ER-0048/1, U. S. Dept.
of Energy, Washington, D.C. (1980).
22. B. S. Brown and T. H. Blewitt, "Critical Current Density Changes in
Irradiated Nb3Sn," J. Nucl. Mater. 80, 18 (1979).
23. B. S. Brown, T. H. Blewitt, D. G. Wozniak and M. Suenaga, "Critical
Current Changes in Nb^Sn Irradiated with Fast Neutrons at 6 K,"
J. Appl. Phys. 46, 5163 f1975) with corrected fluences in Ref. [22].
24. B. S. Brown, T. H. Blewitt, T. L. Scott, and D. G. Wozniak, "Critical-
Current Changes in Neutron-Irradiated Nb3Sn as a Function of Irradia-
tion Temperature and Initial Metallurgy,•' J. Appl. Phys. 49, 4144
(1978).
25. M. A. Kirk and L. R. Greenwood, "Determination of the Neutron Flux
and Energy Spectrum in the Low-Temperature Fast-Neutron Facility
in CP-5, Calculations of Primary-Recoil and Damage-Energy Distribu-
tions, and Comparisons with Experiment," J. Nucl. Mater. 80, 159
(1979).
 7.31
26. R. M. Scanlan and E. L. Raymond, "Low Temperature Irradiations of
Nb3Sn with 14-MeV Neutrons," IEEE Trans. Magnetics MAG-15, 56 (1979).
27. C. L. Snead, Jr., D. M. Parkin, M. W. Guinan, and R. A. Van Konynenburg,
"Determination of the Damage Energy Cross Section of 14-MeV Neutrons
from Critical-Property Changes in Irradiated Nb3Sn," p. 229 in Proc.
of the Second Topical Meeting on The Technology of Controlled Nuclear
Fusion, Richland, WA, Vol. 1, C0NF-760935-P1, U. S. Energy Research
and Development Administration, Wash., D. C. (1976).
2? D. M. Parkin and D. G. Schweitzer, "Effects of Neutron Irradiation
on the Superconducting Properties of Nb-Ti and Nb3Sn Multifilamentary
Composites," Nucl. Technol. 22, 108 (1974).
29. C. L. Snead, Jr., and D. M. Parkin, "Effect of Neutron Irradiation
on the Critical Current of Nb3Sn at High Magnetic Fields," Nucl.
Technol. 29, 264 (1976).
30. D. Evans, J. T. Morgan, and G. B. Stapleton, "Epoxy Resins for Super-
conducting Magnet Encapsulation," RHEL/R251, Rutherford High Energy
Laboratory (1971).
31. M. H. Van de Voorde, "Radiation Resistance of Organic Materials at
Cryo-Temperatures," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-18, 784 (1971).
32. M. H. Van de Voorde, "Results of Physical Tests on Polymer Materials
at Cryogenic Temperatures," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-20, 693 (1973).
33. R. H. Kernohan, C. J. Long, and R. R. Coltman, Jr., "Cryogenic
Radiation Effects on Electric Insulators," J. Nucl. Mater. 85 and
86, 379 (1979).
34. S. Takamura and T. Kato, "Effect of Low Temperature Irradiation on
the Mechanical Strength of Organic Insulators for Superconducting
Magnets," Cryogenics, (August, 1980) p. 441.
35. R. R. Coltman, Jr., talk given at this meeting.
36. F. W. Clinard, Jr., talk given at this meeting.
37. F. R. Fickett, "Magnetoresistivity of Copper and Aluminum at Cryo-
genic Temperatures," in Proc. of 4tji Intl. Conf. on Magnet
Technology, CONF-720908, p. 539, Brookhaven Natl. Lab. (1972).
38. L. R. Greenwood, "Displacement Damage Cross Sections" (private com-
munication) (1980). Recoil spectra and damage energy cross-sections
calculated from ENDF/B-IV using the DISCS 45 code are available as
a function of neutron energy on the MFE computer Network by calling
the global file SPECTER.
 7.32
39. R. R. Coltman, C. E. Klabunde and J. M. Williams, "Rates of Defect
Production by Fission Neutrons in Metals at 4.7K," (private com-
munication) submitted to J. Nucl. Mats. (1980).
40. F. R. Fickett, Phys. Rev, B3 1941 (1971).
41. F. T. Hedgcock and Y. Muto, Phys. Rev. 134 A 1593 (1964).
42. K. Boning, H. J. Fenzl, E. Olympios, J. M. Walter and H. Wenzl, Phys.
Stat. Sol. 34 395 (1969).
43. R. S. Averback, R. Benedek and K. L. Merkle, Phys. Rev. Bl_8, 4156
(1978).
44. R. L. Simons, "The Correlation of Irradiation Effects Data Using
Primary Recoil Spectra," in Damage Analysis and Fundamental Studies
Quarterly Progress Rept. DOE/ER-0046/3 p. 41 (1980).
45. G. R. Odette and D. R. Doiran, Nucl. Technology 29^, 346 (1976).

46. M. Kohler, Ann. Phys. (Germany) 32 211 (1938).

47. R. R. Coltman, C E. Klabunde and J. K. Redman, Phys. Rev. 156
715 (1967).

*This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of
Energy by Lawrence Livermore Laboratory under contract No. W-7405-ENG-48.

DISCLAIM KR

This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of

the I tilled Stales Government. Neither the I nited Stales Government nor the
I niversily of California nor any of Iheir employees, makes any warranty, ex-
press or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the ac-
curacy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or
process disclosed, or represents that its use would nol infringe privately owned
rights. Reference herein to any specific commeicial products, process, or service
by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does nol necessarily
constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the I nilcil
States Government or the University of California. The views and opinions of
authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United
Stales Government thereof, and shall nol be used for advertising or product en-
dorsement purposes.
 8.1

General Insulation Requirements Arising

from Coil Fabrication Practice
Richard J . Thome

I Introduction

The design requirements for insulation to meet i t s mechanical, electrical

and radiation operating conditions may be quantified and can, therefore, be
the basis for an objective specification. Other requirements are imposed,
however, by the fabrication process. These are more subjective in nature and,
as a result, are d i f f i c u l t to quantify. Nevertheless, they can present formid-
able stumbling blocks and should be kept in mind in establishing an insulation
evaluation and/or development program.

The material which follows begins with a description of an insulation

system used in a large number of conventional coils. I t is not universally
used, but is quite common and has evolved primarily because i t can withstand
the rigors of large coil fabrication and assembly to other heavy components
without degrading the coils a b i l i t y to withstand the mechanical and electrical
stresses i t w i l l experience in operation. Although the system is not applicable
for superconducting coils stabilized by bath cooled liquid helium; the example
drives home the point that a successful insulation scheme requires due considera-
tion of the fabrication and assembly process.
The general types of insulations used in superconducting coils are discussed
next to i l l u s t r a t e the point that the insulation evaluation and development
program must aim for a class of insulations with different handling and fabrica-
tion characteristics ranging from fiber reinforced tapes to block like material
which can be machined, to putty like material which can be applied and cured in
place. I t is unlikely that a single insulation material w i l l satisfy a l l coil
fabrication requirements.
The coil fabrication environment is then discussed as well as supply/demand
issues. I t is necessary to determine the mechanical, electrical and radiation
limitations of candidate materials for specification development to satisfy
operational conditions, but i t is also necessary to determine the preparation
requirements for application and sensitivity to the type of contamination conmon
in a large coil fabrication environment. Complex application techniques can be
costly or impractical. Finally, the program must strive to use materials which
can be made available and quality controlled in an economic situation where the
quantity required is small compared to other demand sources for the material
manufactured for use as insulation.

II "Common" Fabrication Practice

I t is useful to consider selected characteristics of conventional large coil

fabrication practice to gain an insight into the criteria for insulation selection.
 8.2

Literally thousands of conventional coils using copper conductors with large

cross-sections (eg - ^ 2 - 3 cm2) have been b u i l t for use in high energy physics
(eg - accelerators) and industrial (eg - magnetic separation) applications. The
specific insulation utilized may differ but the type of insulation has generally
evolved in a specific direction. The next four figures i l l u s t r a t e the general
approach.
Large coils are often formed by winding onto a mandrel without insulation
on the conductor. A coil or coil segment is then removed from the mandrel and
i t s turns are spread to allow application of the turn insulation. Figure 1
shows a coil wound with copper conductor (% 1.25 i n . square in cross-section)
to which a woven tape turn insulation is being applied. The coils are then
reformed and the coil surface appears as shown in Figure 2 with typical turn-to-
turn insulation thicknesses of 0.030 i n . to 0.060 i n . The assembled c o i l , or a
coil segment, *s then wrapped with a ground insulation of woven tape as shown
in Figure 3. Typical ground wrap thicknesses are 0.080 i n . to 0.125 i n . The
coil is then placed in a mold, vacuum impregnated with epoxy and cured. The
epoxy completely penetrates the turn and ground insulation to form a fiber
reinforced composite. A finished coil surface is shown in Figure 4. This
insulation scheme is certainly not universally utilized or specified. I t has,
however, been used in enough systems to imply a trend in this direction and we
should ask ourselves why.

The current and operating voltages for coils of the above type are often
at the few thousand amp level with several volts per turn and one to two k i l o -
volts to ground potential. These are moderate design requirements and cannot
be considered to be the primary reason for requiring the complexity of epoxy
impregnation. This requirement has evolved because the result is a monolithic,
rugged coil which has a high probability of surviving the abuse which arises in
handling, shipping and assembling coil and structural components which are
large and weigh many tons. Furthermore, the surface of the coil is completely
sealed so that moisture, d i r t , metal chips or other foreign matter cannot enter
the coil as a potential source for future problems. Finally, the impregnation
process assures that a l l voids in the coil are f i l l e d so that turns are prevented
from relative motion or contact unless the strength of the epoxy is exceeded.

The epoxy impregnated winding approach is not applicable to superconducting

windings with conductor s t a b i l i t y dependent on bath cooling with liquid helium.
However, the above example illustrates that the physical requirements we specify
for the insulation in a superconducting magnet must go beyond the usual mechanical
and electrical characteristics imposed by normal operating conditions. The
insulation must be suitable for ease of fabrication and survive the winding and
assembly process without property degradation. The l a t t e r requirement is t r i v i a l
in a small system, but may be dominant in a large one.
 8.3

III Insulation Requirements Imposed by Fabrication

The specification of the mechanical, electrical and radiation resistance
requirements for an insulation during operation is not necessarily straight-
forward, but can be quantified. The requirements imposed by fabrication are
primarily subjective, but should be remembered as insulation specifications
are developed and an insulation evaluation program progresses. In this regard,
the following comments are offered for consideration.
1. Requirements can probably not be satisfied by a single insulating
material. The stability of bath cooled superconducting windings
is dependent on liquid helium access to and percolation through
the winding. Typical turn-to-turn and layer-to-layer insulations
are, therefore, 1) tape-like, so they can be applied with a space
allowing conductor exposure, 2) perforated or grooved strips,or
3) pieces or spacers. Conductor transitions from layer-to-layer,
conductor.joints and coil leads represent locations with tortuous
geometries which require electrical insulation and mechanical
support. This is often done with 1) machined insulators or cast in-
sulators if the dimensions are predictable or 2) with hand-fit solid
insulating shims or putty-like insulators which can be formed and
cured in place. Ground insulations often consist of tape-like
material with an adhesive, film-like (flexible sheets) materials
or sheet-like ("inflexible" sheets) materials. In addition, some
form of adhesive or glue as well as a tape are essential for local
repairs, attachment of instrumentation or support of instrumentation
leads. Finally, an insulation for small wire instrumentation leads
is necessary.
The implication of the above is that i t is unlikely that a single
insulating material can be produced in all of the forms which will
be required in a superconducting magnet. An insulation c/aluation
or development program should, therefore, strive to identify suit-
able materials in each general category, that i s :
a. tape-like with adhesive and with fiber reinforcement
for mechanical strength and thickness build up; total
thickness of 0.007 in. to 0.015 in. and widths of 0.5
to 3 inches.
b. tape-like with adhesive and without fiber reinforcement,
total thickness of 0.002 to 0.005 in. and widths of 0.5
to 1 inch.
 8.A

c. filmlike (flexible sheet) without adhesive or fiber

reinforcement; thickness of 0.005 to 0.020 i n . and
widths up to 36 i n .
d. fiber reinforced sheet ("inflexible") capable of
perforation or machining; thicknesses of 0.060 i n .
to 1/4 i n . and areas up to 31 x 6"
e. block-like,fiber reinforced composite capable of
machining; sizes up to 3" x 3' x 61
f. putty-like for casting or in place application and
cure (time < 24 hours; temp. < 100 C)
g. glue-like for local repairs (time < 24 hours; temp.
< 100 C)
h. coating for instrumentation leads
Materials must not require complex application or cleaning
techniques. The preparation and application of the insulation
is.usually one of the most time consuming operations in coil
fabrication. Cleanliness is necessary to prevent short
circuits due to metal chips or foreign matter. I t is however,
one of the most d i f f i c u l t requirements to meet in a large coil
fabrication and assembly area because of the large areas, large
equipment, assembly procedures using soldering, brazing s welding
or mechanical fasteners and large number of people involved.
The mechanical or electrical lifetime of the insulating materials
should not be sensitive to the presence of airborne vapors which
ere normal byproducts of this type of environment and i t s sensi-
t i v i t y to contamination by solvents, f l u x , moisture, etc. must be
understood. I t must be relatively easy to keep clean and re-
clean i f required. In short, the insulation and i t s requirements
for preparation must be compatible with the fabrication environment.
The materials must be available at reasonable cost. This is a
"motherhood" statement, but often a stumbling block. Even though
we are considering very large magnets with what seems like large
quantities of insulation, the quantities are small when compared
to the more usual demand sources for manufacturers of materials
which go into insulations. Typical examples might be material
for c i r c u i t boards,cases for electronic equipment, fiber rein-
forced molded household goods and broadgoods for consumer products.
This, has two effects from our standpoint: 1) i t is d i f f i c u l t for
us to compete with these other demand sources when we have s t r i n -
gent specifications and small quantities and 2) the level of •
quality control required to assure the material properties we
 8.5

need may not exist except at selected producers. The impact

on our program is that we need to concentrate on sample
materials with well defined production specifications (or
develop the specification as we go along) and that we need
to concentrate on materials which are likely to be available
at reasonable cost with reasonable schedules.
FIGURE LARGE COILS ARE OFTEN WOUND ON A MANDREL THEN SEPARATED
FOR APPLICATION OF TURN INSULATION. TYPICAL INSULATIONS
ARE WOVEN TAPES OF POLYESTER OR GLASS.
FIGURE 2 COILS ARE REASSEMBLED FOLLOWING APPLICATION
OF TURN INSULATION. TYPICAL TURN-TO-TURN
INSULATION THICKNESSES ARE 0.030 IN. TO
0.060 IN.
r

FIGURE 3 APPLICATION OF A GROUND INSULATION TO THE ASSEMBLED'

COIL. TYPICAL INSULATIONS ARE WOVEN TAPES .APPLIED
IN TWO OR MORE OVERLAPPING LAYERS TO A TOTAL THICK-
NESS IN THE RANGE OF 0.080 IN. TO 0.125 IN.
FIGURE 4 SURFACE OF THE COIL FOLLOWING IMPREGNATION
WITH EPOXY TO FORM A FIBER REINFORCED COMPOSITE
INSULATION.
r 9.1

STATUS OF ORGANIC INSULATORS FOR MAT-NETS

11. B . K a s n n
Fracture S Deformation Division
National Bureau of Standards
Boulder CO 30303

Organic insulators o f primary interest to s u o e r c o n d u c t i n o

m a g n e t d e s i g n e r s a r e s u m m a r i z e d on F i g s . 1-3. T h e reinforced
l a m i n a t e s listed on F i n s . 1 a n d 2 a r e u s e d for s t r u c t u r a l
p u r p o s e s as w e l l as for e l e c t r i c a l a n d t h e r m a l insulation.
O f t h e s e , thr? m a t e r i a l s on F i o . 1 r e p r e s e n t t h e l a m e s t con-
s u m p t i o n , as they a r e c o m p a r a t i v e l y i n e x p e n s i v e m a t e r i a l s
p r o d u c e d in b u l k q u a n t i t i e s by i n d u s t r i a l l a m i n a t i n g firrrs.
Available forms a r elimited to m a t e s , sheets tubes a n d
rods from w h i c h t h e final s h a p e s m u s t b e m a c h i n e d . HE MA
G-10 is the m o s t w i d e l y used f o r m a g n e t i n s u l a t i o n a n d f o r
thermal s t a n d o f f s . NEMA LE a n d C a r e a l s o w i d e l y used f o r
n o n - c r i t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n s a s they a r e t h e l o w e s t c o s t a n d
offer excellent machinabiIity. T h elatter Products a r e often
g e n e r i c a l l y r e f e r r e d t o as M i c a r t a , a l t h o u o h t h a t d e s i g n a t i o n
is a t r a d e n a m e o f only o n e o f the s e v e r a l n r o d u c e r s . I t
s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t t h e NEMA S D e c i f i c a t i o n s p r i m a r i l y define
room t e m p e r a t u r e e l e c t r i c a l i n a u l a t i n o r e q u i r e m e n t s w h i c h c a n
be a c h i e v e d in a v a r i e t y o f w a y s t h a t c a n p r o d u c e substantial
v a r i a b i l i t y in c r y o g e n i c m e c h a n i c a l performance.
T h e low p r e s s u r e l a m i n a t e s o f Fig. 2 a r e used t o p r o d u c e
c o m p o n e n t s e s s e n t i a l l y t o t h e i r final s h a p e b y a v a r i e t y o f
molding techniques includinn press m o l d i n o , filament w i n d i n g ,
v a c u u m b a g g i n g a n da u t o c l a v i n a o r h a n d l a y u p s . The specific

1- R e f e r e n c e t o c o m m e r c i a l m a t e r i a l s in this r e v i e w does n o t
imnly r e c o m m e n d a t i o n o r e n d o r s e m e n t by t h e N a t i o n a l B u r e a u
ot S t a n d a r d s .
 9.2

Fin. 1
Types and Grades of Industrial Laminated Thermosetting Materials
of Primary Interest in Magnetic Fusion Energy Systems

ASTK/KEHA MIL-P and LP

Designation Designation Description
NEKA/ASTM IE MIL-P-15035, Type FBE Cellulose fabric fine-weave, phenolic resin
NEMA/ASTM G-10 MIL-P-18177. Type GEE Glass cloth, epoxy resin
NEMA/ASTM G-ll MIL-P-18177, Type GEB Glass cloth, high-temperature epoxy resin
NEKA/ASTK C MIL-P-15O35. Type FBM Cellulose fabric, medium weave, phenolic resin
NEW/ASTM G-5 Glass cloth, melanrine resin
HI, W2 EH LP 5094 Beechwood veneer, phenolic impregnated

ia. 2
Types and Grades o f Low Pressure Composite Laminates
of Primary I n t e r e s t In Magnetic Fusion Energy
Low Modulus Hioh Performance

Uniaxial Glass-Epoxy Unfaxial Aramid-Epoxy

Aramid Fabn'c-Epoxy
Glass Fabric-Epoxy u.;1ax1al, High-Strength
Graphite-Epoxy
Fabric, High-Strength
Glass Mat-Epoxy Graphite-Epoxy
Glass Fabric-Polyester
Uniaxial, Medium-Modulus
Graphite-Epoxy

Glass Mat-Polyester Uniaxial, High-Modulus

Graphite-£poxy
Glass-Polyester Pultrusion
Uniaxial, 5.6-roil
Boron-Epoxy
 9.3

Fin. 3
Commonly Used Insulating Films, Coatings and Inorganics

Generic Name Common Name

Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Mylar
Polypyromellitimide (PPM) Kapton
Polyvinyl Formal Formvar
Poiyamide Nylon
Polyurethane
Polyparaxylylene (PPX) Parylene
Polycarbonate (PC) Lexan
Aluminum Oxide (AlgO3) Alumina
Magnesium Oxide (MgO) Magnesia
Porcelain
Fused Quart2 (SiO2)
Mineral Silicate Mica
 9.4

m a t r i x r e s i n and r e i n f o r c e m e n t must be agreed upon by the

p u r c h a s e r and f a b r i c a t o r from t h e many a v a i l a b l e choices.
The high performance l a m i n a t e s a r e r a r e l y used a t t h e p r e s e n t
time but r e c e n t data have i n d i c a t e d t h a t some m a t e r i a l s such
as q r a p h i t e - e p o x i e s may be c l e a r l y s u p e r i o r for thermal
isolation, in p a r t i c u l a r where s t i f f n e s s is required.
Mylar, KaDton and Formvar a r e t h e most widely used
films and c o a t i n g s for e l e c t r i c a l insulation. These a r e
weakly c r o s s l i n k e d , l i n e a r polymers a v a i l a b l e in varying
degrees of c r y s t a l l i n i t y t h a t a f f e c t s both t h e i r insulating
and mechanical properties
P r a c t i c a l e x p e r i e n c e and l a b o r a t o r y t e s t data have shown
a l l of t h e s e m a t e r i a l s to be v i a b l e for 4 K s e r v i c e . But
e x p e r i e n c e has a l s o r e v e a l e d d e f i c i e n c i e s t h a t s h o u l d be
r e c o g n i z e d in t h e i r a-plications.
The major d e f i c i e n c i e s a r e in b a s i c m a t e r i a l performance
and in t e c h n o l o g y t r a n s f e r . A major problem in performance
is excessive property v a r i a b i l i t y at cryonenic temperatures
a r i s i n g from two primary s o u r c e s . One s o u r c e of variability
is a s i g n i f i c a n t difference in t h e methods used t o fabricate
NEMA-grade i n d u s t r i a l l a m i n a t e s by the v a r i o u s producers.
The p r o d u c e r s a r e not a t f a u l t — t h e s e m a t e r i a l s were n e v e r
i n t e n d e d t o perform oDtimally a t 4 K. One can therefore
find as much as a 30-40% d i f f e r e n c e in 4 K s t r e n g t h amonq
G-10 p r o d u c t s r e f l e c t i n g d i f f e r e n t f i b e r c o n t e n t s even among
t h e major, reliable producers. A still greater variability
 9.5

can be e x p e c t e d from m a r n i n a l producers.

An i n t r i n s i c source o f c r y o g e n i c performance variability

is due t o t h e e m b r i t t l e m e n t o f the polymer m a t r i x a t low

temperatures. This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y evident tn qlass-reinforced

p r o d u c t s where c o o l i n q i n c r e a s e s the s t r a i n capability of the

glass while diminishing that of the m a t r i x . One result,

illustrated on F i g . 4 , i s a substantial increase in scattt

of strength properties uoon c o o l i n g . This r e f l e c t s the in-

creasing notch s e n s i t i v i t y o f t h e p o l y m e r on c o o l i n o , causino

the failure t o be s e n s i t i v e t o t h e presence or absence of

flaws t h a t would be i n n o c u o u s at room t e m p e r a t u r e . Performance

scatter from t h i s s o u r c e i s most e v i d e n t in p r o p e r t i e s such

as compression o r s h e a r s t r e n g t h that are m a t r i x dependent.

A second s o u r c e o f v a r i a b i l i t y illustrated on F i g . 5

is also a r e f l e c t i o n of matrix e m b r i t t l e m e n t . At 295 K, a

material such as G-10 i s useful in s t a t i c l o a d i n g almost to

its ultimate s t r e n g t h because t h e s t r a i n capability of the

epoxy m a t r i x is approximately equal ( o r can exceed) that of

the r e i n f o r c e m e n t . Cooling.such a material to 4 K almost

doubles the u l t i m a t e tensile s t r e n g t h ; however, it is found

that damage i n t h e e m b r i t t l e d m a t r i x develops a t about 20-25%

o f the u l t i m a t e , frequently causing a "knee" i n a s t r e s s - s t r a i n

curve. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of this damage depends on t h e appli-

cation. High p e r f o r m a n c e laminates are l e s s a f f e c t e d by

matrix damage a c c u m u l a t i o n at low t e m p e r a t u r e s due t o the

inherently low s t r a i n capability of the higher modulus

reinforcement.
 9.6

Z
u

Fio. 4

. 5
 9.7

A basic deficiency in knowledge of material performance

exists in regard to the effect of ionizing radiation on the
mechanical, elastic, thermal and electrical properties of
insulating films and laminates. As will be discussed later
in this meeting, this subject is enormously complicated by
the difficulty of conducting radiation experiments at 4 K
and by the probability that radiation effects may be depend-
ent on the exact chemistry and molecular structure of the
polymer and of the polymer-matrix interface.
Finally, there remains the problem of devising labora-
tory test procedures that provide data meaninoful to magnet
structures. In some ceses such as interlaminar shear, it
has been found that existing ASTM methods are invalid at
any temperature. Significant differences in the temperature
effect on thermal conductivity measured by different reputable
laboratories indicates a need for refinement of techniques
and for the development of appropriate reference standards.
The estent to which temperature effects alter the validity of
scaling small scale tests to large structures must also be
calrified.
A major problem in technology transfer is the lack of
standardization of terminology for insulators. Most of these
products are produced under a variety of tradenames causing
a great deal of confusion for designers wishing to obtain
specific performance in a structure. This problem has been
addressed by NBS and others and will be discussed later in
this meeting*.
 9.8

Another problem in technology transfer is the limited

data base available for transferrence to designers. In p a r t ,
this reflects the high cost of conducting t e s t s at cryogenic
temperatures, particularly at 4 K, and in part i t reflects
the lack of adequate characterization and standardization
of meterials that have been tested. Composite materials
present a particular problem in that their performance is
significantly affected by the quality of the laminate in
addition to the quantity and type of constituents that go
into their fabrication. In this respect, they are more
analagous to welds in metals technology than to base metals.
There is an inadequate understanding of failure modes
of insulating materials and of the effect on cryogenic
performance. Unlike metals, reinforced or unreinforced
polymers tend to accumulate damage on a global scale rather
than by unique crack formation. This may occur a t r r ^ l a t i v e l y
low stress levels as discussed e a r l i e r ; furthermore, damage
may be contributed to by variations in surface a c t i v i t y of
the polymer In the media to which i t is exposed. Not all
such "damage" is of signfi cant--some types may be b e n f i d a l
in some applications. But present knowledge is woefully
inadequate.
h n a l l y , the designer must nave much more information
on the life-cycle performance of insulating materials. This
will require a much better understanding of such factors as
viscoeiasticity and of changes in material performance as
a function of aging.
 10.1

STATUS OF INORGANIC INSULATORS

FOR MAGNETS

R. BLAUGHER

WESTINGHOUSE - PITTSBURG

(No written contribution submitted)

 11.1

SURVIVABILITY OF ORGANIC INSULATORS

TN A RADIATION ENVIRONMENT

11. BECKER

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

(No written contribution submitted - see paper No. 18)

 12.1

IRRADIATION EFFECTS
IN ORGANIC INSULATORS

L. HOBBS
CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY

(No written contribution submitted)

 13.1

PERSPECTIVES ON RADIATION EFFECTS IN ORGANIC INSULATORS

Victor A.J. van Lint
Mission Research Corp. n

While we cannot predict the radiation response of practical insula-

tors from first principles, our understanding of the phenomena enable us to
identify the most important parameters for testing. These are discussed
below:

1. Irradiation Temperature

At room temperature the net effect is the result of ionizaiion,

trapping, recombination followed by considerable thermal motion of bonds and
species foreign tothe preirradiated material (e.g. H atoms). At LHe tempera-
ture the thermal motion will be inhibited and totally different damage can
occur. There is no £ priori way to predict the low temperature damage from
room temperature data, although we can probably be assured that gas bubbles
will not form until the sample is heated. There 1s some danger of a large
exothermic energy release during a post-irradiation warmup.

2. Irradiation Type

Gamma rays produce relatively isolated electron-ion pairs, as do

relativistic electrons. In hydrogen-containing insulators neutrons produce
heavily ionizing recoil" protons, in which the interaction between 1on pairs
can be strong. Therefore, there can be qualitative differences between gamma
and neutron Induced damage. 14 MeV neutron Induced ionization events are
not much idfferent from those produced by ~ 1 MeV neutrons. Only in the pro-
duction of He by (n, a) reactions do I expect any qualitative differences be-
tween reactor and 14-MeV neutrons.
 13.2

3. Stress Conditions During Irradiation

While it's desirable to expose samples under realistic stresses,

I give this secondary important in LHe exposures. If irradiation products
could move, as in room temeprature irradiations, the damage could be markedly
influenced by stress. Since the defects are assumed to be immobile at LHe
temperature, stressing the sample seems to be less important.

4. Flux

At the ranges of fluxes between realistic exposures and practical

simulations I don't expect any significant differences in LHe temperature
response at the same fluence, because we don't expect any rate dependent
interaction (e.g. second order interaction between short lived species).
In effect, we expect the species either to be too short lived to undergo such
interactions (e.g. electrons, Ions) or to be permanently stable (e.g. free
radicals).

5. Property Measurement

Obviously the properties to be measured should be those most

relevant to the insulators application, not those that are sensitive indica-
tors (e.g. coloration) or easily measured (e.g. electrical conductivity).
We don't know enough to establish correlation between different measures
of damage.

6. Fluence/Dose
g
At ~ 1 0 rad 1% of the electrons have been ionized. This means that
the molecular structure of a polymer is heavily influenced by radiation-pro-
duced bonds. Only if the radiation-produced modifications have acceptable
properties can be expect to use particular insulator in the fusion reactor.
Therefore, it would" not be surprising if a material that is satisfactory at
10 9 rad will also work at 10 1 0 rad.
 13.3

7. Transient Conductivity

The argument I presented in 1976 at LASL was designed to exclude

concern (at least place low priority on) for ionization-induced transient
conductivity in fusion reactors. I have heard no reason to change that view.

8. Magnetic Field

While the magnetic field may change a measured property (e.g. magne-
toresistance of a metal) I expect no effect of imposing the magnetic field
during irradiation. In these solids the mean-free path before collisions of
any mobile species (e.g. free electrons) is extremely small compared to any
reasonable Larmor radius.

In summary, I rate the following order of priority parameters for

irradiation experiments.

Very Important
Exposure temperature.
Y and n exposure.
Measure relevant properties.
Realistic dose.
Desirable, but much less important
Realistic stress during exposure.
y or neutron spectrum.
Unimportant
Flux or dose rate.
Magnetic field.
i-
 14.1

RADIATION DAMAGE IN THE STABILIZER IN A

SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNET
R. E. Nygren
We^stinghouse-Hanford ''
(At FED Design Center--ORNL)

If radiation damage to the constituents of a superconducting magnet

determines the shielding needed, then radiation-induced resistivity in
the stabilizer will result in dose limits that fall within the corresponding
range of dose limits for organic insulators suggested by current data.
The limiting dose to the stabilizer will probably set a corresponding
ceiling for the maximum useful radiation tolerance of organic insulators.

During the course of the DOE meeting on Electrical Insulators for

Fusion Magnets, an informal discussion of radiation damage and annealing
of the stabilizer (copper) in a TF coil was arranged. The discussion
involved several meeting attendees, including Tom Blewitt (ANL), Bruce
Brown (ANL), Ralph Coltman (ORNL), Mike Guinan (LLL), and Carl Henning
(LLL). The following summary covers the main elements of this discussion
plus some background information. The central subject is the resistivity
of copper and hence the amount of copper stabilizer in a superconducting
coil, and there are several related topics divided among three sections.

• Stabilizer Requirements (amount of copper)

• Initial Resistivity and Magnetoresistivity
• Radiation-Induced Resistivity and Annealing

Stabilizer Requirements
The conductor in a superconducting coil comprises the superconductor
itself together with a stabilizer that carries the current when the superconductor
temporarily becomes resistive, and structural material that supports the
 14.2

superconductor/stabilizer filaments. Many designs are possible. One

example is shown in Figure 1. Generally in the high field region of a
superconducting coil, the copper stabilizer and surrounding space for coolant
take up roughly half of the cross-sectional area of the conductor. Thus
significant changes in the amount of copper needed in the conductor imply
corresponding large changes in the size and cost of the whole magnet.
Copper is generally specified for the stabilizer in superconducting
magnets for advanced fusion devices and has its increase in resistivity with
radiation dose of roughly one-third that for aluminum, the logical and less
expensive alternative. The central issue in this discussion is the amount of
copper needed in a superconducting magnet, or'more precisely:
What is the minimum amount of copper stabilizer that a
designer can specify, based on industrial experience
and experimental data, that will result in a cryostable*
conductor after actual fabrication of the magnet and
service in a radiation environment?
The designer must answer this question.
Uncertainties related to fabrication history, magnetoresistivity and
radiation-induced resistivity, and the potential benefits from intermittent
anneals of the magnet all influence the answer to the question above. These
uncertainties are the subjects of concern here.

*If a hot spot occurs in a "cryostable" conductor so that the super-

conductor temporarily goes resistive, i.e., current is shunted through-t<he
copper stabilizer, the hot spot will not propagate and adequate heat removal
will allow the superconducting mode to resume. Cryostability implies a
combination of sufficient cooling capability and low enough resistance in
the copper stabilizer.
 14.3

The resistivity of the copper stabilizer may be described by the

following relationships:

+
Design Resistivity = P f i n a l = P Q AP M + A P r > (1)

where

p.p. is in-service resistivity, (design maximum)

p is initial resistivity zt 4°K,

Ap., is incremental magnetoresistivity,

M
Ap is radiation induced resistivity.

PJ.. I - p - Ap,, = Ap . (2)

K K v
final o M *r

The latter restatment of this equation is useful because it describes

the crux of the problem. The useful life of a TF coil, if limited by radiation

damage to the stabilizer, will occur when the radiation-induced resistivity

satisfies the equation above. The value of p_. 1 is fixed by the magnet

design and the values of p and Ap are to some degree the result of fabrication

processes. Thus, in a very real sense, the allowable increment Ap for

radiation-induced resistivity is "whatever is left over" after p_. , p ,

and Ap are set. The subsequent sections will review some concerns

about "as fabricated" copper, magnetoresistivity, radiation-induced resistivity,

and annealing characteristics.

Initial Resistivity and Magnetoresistivity

When a superconducting coil begins its service in a fusion device, the

resistivity of the copper stabilizer is the sum of an initial resistivity

p and an incremental magnetoresistivity Ap M . (At this point, no radiation

dose has been accumulated and the radiation-induced resistivity Ap is zero.)

 14.4

Initial resistivity varies greatly (more than an order of magnitude)

with the grade of copper. Magnetoresistivity depends on the applied

magnetic field but also varies with the grade of copper. Rough values

for the copper stabilizer in a TF coil are:

P o ( 4 ° K ) ^ 20 nflcm , (3)

Ap-. (10 tesla)"^ 70 nficm , (4)

Ap /p c* factor of three to four. (5)

Before irradiation, the initial resistivity of copper at 4°K depends

on impurities and dislocations. Their numbers are established

during preparation of the raw stock and by the fabrication history of the

conductor and winding of the coil. All these steps can introduce impurities

and the deformation that occurs during fabrication of the conductor and

winding produces dislocations. The separate roles of impurities and dislocations

are important in the annealing of radiation-induced defects, discussed

later.

The fabrication history typically involves severe deformation, and

subsequent annealing at high temperature (^300°C) which removes the

dislocations. Winding is done at room temperature without further high

temperature anneals and introduces a "winding strain" in the conductor!

As the discussion above indicates, in the "as fabricated"

stabilizer the copper has changed from the starting stock. Magnet

builders maximize the predictability of these changes by a variety

 14.5

of process controls. For example, the starting stock and samples of prototypic
conductors are thoroughly tested and the tension on the conductor during winding is
carefully controlled. The technology of fabricating large superconducting
coils is fairly new, but demands in several fields, high energy physics,
fusion, and MHD, have brought rapid progress.
Magnetoresistivity depends on the initial resistivity of the copper and
the strength of the applied magnetic field. This dependence is often
characterized in a Kohler plot such as the one shown in Figure 2 (taken from
Reference 1 ) . Basically, the Kohler approach suggests that the total
magnetoresistivity p(H) can be reliably predicted from the applied field B
and the resistivity in the absence of the applied field. Coltman has
expressed Kohler's Rule in the form below.

p(H) = K(p Q + A p p 1 " 8 H 6 + PQ + Ap r . (6)

Since 3 is close to unity, the equation is often written as was done in

Equation 1.

p
finalH PCH) = A p M + P o + Ap r , (7)

and the three terms are treated as independent. However, deviations from
Kohler's Rule (with fj equal 1) are observed. At 10 tesla and a starting
resistivity of 20 nftcm, potential variations of about 10% in p(H) are . *
suggested in Coltman's treatment of the data scatter.

Radiation-Induced Resistivity and Annealing

As a superconducting magnet is operated in a D-T fusion device, neutron
radiation will produce defects (vacancies and interstitial;") in the copper that will
slowly increase its resistivity. Initially, the increase with dose is roughly
 14.6

linear but eventually the radiation-induced resistivity saturates. This

behavior has been described as an exponential dependence. The constants in

Equation 8 were recently derived by Brown.

Ap r = 400 [1 - exp(-F x 10" 19 )] , (8)

where F is neutron fluence in n/cm . The exponential decay factor is

appropriate for the (fast neutron) spectrum in the CP-5 facility at Argonne

National Lab.

Correlation among damage (defect production) rates and neutron spectra

is another important subject of current work but will not be discussed here.

Some relevant information on 14 MeV neutron irradiations of copper at 4°K

was included in a presentation by Mike Guinan (LLL) in this meeting.

The values of interest for resistivity in the stabilizer are far below

the saturated resistivity. It is the initial rate of increase (Ap /AF) |

that is most important; however, the trend toward saturation does slightly increase I
I
the allowable dose to the stabilizer. Based on a linear increase, the jj
allowable dose (F ) would be:
3.
'final - A P M
a" (Ap r /AF) Q

Equation 10 is a similar expression using the exponential form:

If exposure to radiation has increased the resistivity in the stabilizer to

some maximum permissible value for safe operation of the magnet, its useTul

life can be extended by warming the magnet to room temperature. At room

temperature, recovery of the radiation-induced damage due to defects "frozen in"

 14.7

at 4°K, is about 80% complete. Figure 3 (taken from Reference 3) shows

a typical annealing curve of high purity copper where irradiation-induced
defects dominate. Above room temperature, the rate of further recovery
with increasing temperature is low. Temperatures high enough to provide
further significant increases in recovery would probably damage the
magnet, for example by allowing creep in the organic insulators or
stresses from differential thermal expansion of components.
The annealing of radiation-induced defects also depends on the relative
contributions of impurities and dislocations. Generally, the defects
moving to dislocations will be annihilated and the defects moving to
impurities will become trapped as defect-impurity complexes which produce
greater electron scattering and thus result in higher resistivity than
the impurities alone.
Predicting the resistivity of a copper stabilizer after many anneals
is not a simple matter and will depend on the concentrations and type of
impurities, the strain (dislocation density) and neutron spectrum. Experimental
characterization of the annealing behavior and the sensitivity to the factors
above can be done and is clearly warranted. A further concern is the local
variations of these factors within the magnet.
Using a few anneals to extend the life of the magnet is generally
considered feasible. The benefits from many anneals (more than five)* is
less clear. The following discussion is directed toward the utility of
many anneals although the principles apply for both many and few anneals.
The use of annealing to extend the life of the magnet will be productive
when several conditions are satisfied concurrently.
 14.8

1. Radiation limits for other magnet materials are well above

the dose to the stabilizer.
2. Repeated annealing of the copper does not give substantially
diminished capability, i.e., 80% after first anneal, 64% (80% of 80%)
after the second anneal, etc.
3. Warming and cooling of the magnet does not introduce damage from
thermal expansion, release of gases trapped in the insulator, etc.
4. The nontrivial operation of warming and recooling the magnet
can be accomplished on schedules for cost and time that are
consistent with the operating philosophy of the facility.
The change in resistivity in the stabilizer with several anneals is
shown schematically in Figures 4 and 5. Figure 4 shows the contributions
of p , Ap , and Ap before and after the first anneal, indicated by the
numbers in parenthesis (0) and f.l), respectively. In Figure 4, Ap (1) is less
than Ap (o). The portion of radiation-induced resistivity from Ap (o)
that does not anneal out adds to the initial resistivity p (1) after the
anneal and results in a smaller allowable increment of radiation-induced
resistivity Ap (1). The previously mentioned uncertainties in p and
Ap,. also add in the same way to decrease the allowable increment for
radiation-induced resistivity.
Figure 5 shows only Ap for several cycles. A pattern of decreasing
recovery followed by an "equilibrium limit" for recovery is suggested in
Figure 5, but there is no evidence for this behavior. Figure 5 falls
between two extreme possibilities for applying the recovery in a single
anneal to the case of many anneals (80% recovery is used here). The two
extreme cases are represented by Equations 11 and 12 below:
 14.9

F* = F + F + F +
0 1 2 " "'

and f1 = ?2 = F 3 80% o£ F Q , (11)

F F F a n d F
and x > 2 > 3 - • • i FQC0-8)1 •

Table 1 compares the number of anneals needed to obtain specified

fluences using the types of annealing behavior given above for F* or

F**. The allowable fluences between anneals were calculated using a

value of 30 nfJcm for Ap (o) and the exponential form (Equation 8) rather

than the simplified approximations in Equations 11 and 12. The third

column (F***) uses the same diminishing recovery as for F** but with a

.'•0% higher damage rate, i.e., the exponential factor in Equation 8 becomes
19
1.5 x 10 , which is probably more representative of fusion damage

rates.

Table 1

Goal Fluence Magnet Anneals

(Total n/cm2-CP-5) F* p** p***

3 x 10 1 7 0 0 0
io 1 8 1 1 2
3 x 1018 4 5 16
1019 14 00 CO

The most interesting result from this type of comparison is the effective

fluence limit that occurs if multiple anneals produce continuously

18 2
diminishing recovery. Fluences in the range of 3 x 10 n/cm can be

obtained with relatively few anneals; however, the severely diminished

 14.10

recovery after about 10 anneals makes further annealing unproductive

18
and fluences much above 3 * 10 are not obtainable.
Generic concerns about the schedule and cost for annealing magnets
include: the type of facility—experimental or reactor; capital costs for
any refrigeration equipment needed for fast cool down; acceptable time outages
for annealing; and cost of liquid nitrogen for initial cooling. Eventually,
fusion reactors, presumably with requirements for long-lived superconducting
coils, will generate power and may be capable of extended maintenance periods
in the spring or fall when annealing of magnets could be accomplished. Apart
from concerns about possible damage to the coils, (a subject not addressed
h c e ) , the major factor in the desirability of multiple anneals will
probably be the cost of repeatedly cooling the coils. For example, a
rough estimate of the (nonrecoverable) liquid nitrogen needed to cool
down the TF coils for a fusion device of the sizt of ETF or FED is about
2000 tank car loads of liquid nitrogen with a cost of about half a
million dollars. A captive plant for producing liquid nitrogen would
probably be considered as an attractive alternative to repeated outside
contracts if many anneals were planned.

Conclusions
The following conclusions are consistent with the informal discussion
at the DOE meeting. No specific conclusions or recommendations were «*
formulated at the meeting.
1. Where radiation damage to an organic insulator is of concern
in a superconducting coil, radiation-induced resistivity in
the stabilizes: should also be considered.
 14.11

2. The initial resistivity of the stabilizer when the magnet is

first operated will depend on impurity levels and winding strain
which may vary locally along the length of the conductor.
Quality and process controls during manufacturing of the magnet
are the primary factors in obtaining predictable initial
resistivity ind magnetoresistivity in the stabilizer.

3. Both the production rate of defects in copper at 4°K and

subsequent annealing of these defects are sensitive to impurity
levels, dislocation density, and ths energy spectrum of the
irradiating neutrons. Reliable estimates of annealing behavior,
especially for multiple anneals, cannot be made with current
data.

References
1. J. M. Williams, C. E. Kianbunde, J. K. Redman, R. R. Coltman, Jr.,
R. L. Chaplin, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol MAG-15, January 1979
p 731.
2. B. S. Brown, "A Review of Radiation Effects in Superconducting Fusion
Magnet Materials" to be published in Journal of Nuclear Materials.
3. B. S. Brown, T. H. Blewitt, T. L. Scott, and A. C. Klank, J. Nuclear
Mat., 52 (1974) p 215.
 14.12

i i r

TF Coll Conductor Crou Section

20 90 40 13060 «> 100 ISO 200 300 SC

TEMPERATURE.*K

Fig. 11. Recovery and differential recovery versuj.logarithm

of absolute temperature for copper.

FIGURE. 3 .
FIGURE 1 .

r i T-1 i i i—i—i— —i—r—i—i—r-r -1—I—1—

/-
/
I
I
I
!

A/

/
o = -0.3 -
/3 = 0.95-.
? -t -
- w — a = -0.54
(.23 -

-2 -
w 0
110 kOe
430nn-cni
-
-

' /

-
i i i i

Fig. 2. Kohler plot containing all the data tor all the
samples, a's and B's are the Intercepts and slopes oC
the envelope lines. There are 1218 points on the graph.

FIGURE 2 .
 14.13

ff>na( ~ ~T

/ 1
.1

to
r
P(O

U_ F. _ J

FIGURE 4 .

FIGURE 5 .
 15.1

THE ORGANIC INSULATOR PROGRAM AT NB.S

M. B. Kasen
Fracture & Deformation Division
National Bureau of Standards
Boulder CO 80303

The overall objective of the NBS program is to meet the

short and long-range needs of MFE magnet fabricators for
functional and reliable organic electrical and thermal
insulators. Within this objective, the project goals are:
-To provide consultation on organic insulating materials
66 required for the cryogenic portions of MFE devices
-To facilitate a commercial supply of the most widely
used organic laminates having minimum performance
variability at 4 K
-To provide basic mechanical, thermal and electrical
property data on such laminates to 4 K
-To lay the funadamental basis for a systematic modifi-
cation of such laminates as dictated by experience or
changing requirements
-To relate insulating film and laminate properties to
superconducting coil performance
-To develop improved cryogenic test methods as required
-To assist industry in development of standard codinq
systems for insulating and structural laminates
NBS has taken several approaches thus far 1n addressing
these goals. One has been to survey and to keep abreast of
current MFE needs and to anticipate future needs in the cryo-
genic area. This has led to the publication of an MKE Low
Temperature Materials Survey (March 1977) and to the publi-
cation of handbooks. We are also workinn closely with Industry
and with industry standards groups to establish controlled-
specification laminate products that provide fabricators with
 15.2

a s e l e c t i o n of well c h a r a c t e r i z e d laminates having minimum

cryogenic property v a r i a b i l i t y at minumum c o s t . Results of
t h i s program are evident in the p r e s e n t a v a i l a b i l i t y of
laminates designated fi-lOCR and G-11CR from three U. S.
laminate producers. The o b j e c t i v e here i s to f i l l the immed-
i a t e need for r e l a i a b l e m a t e r i a l s r e f l e c t i n g c u r r e n t s t a t e -
o f - t h e - a r t technology. We are p r e s e n t l y n e g o t i a t i n g with
i n d u s t r i a l firms to add a uniaxial g l a s s - r e i n f o r c e d epoxy
product and a glass-mat reinforced epoxy product to the l i s t '
of CR-grade m a t e r i a l s . These are not experimental materials
but will provide a systematic basis for future development
of improved m a t e r i a l s .
NBS i s providing the basic mechanical, e l a s t i c , e l e c t r i c a l
and thermal c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of these standard products from
295 K to 4 K including assessment of performance variability
among products of d i f f e r e n t manufacturers. I t i s expected
t h a t the users of these products will conduct a d d i t i o n a l
performance t e s t i n o , thereby adding to the o v e r a l l data base.
NBS has begun a program to c o r r e l a t e the temDerature
e f f e c t on mechanical p r o p e r t i e s of laminates with changes
in f a i l u r e mode. An i n i t i a l program has been completed on
compressive f a i l u r e in G-1OCR
In the area of t e s t methodology, NBS has n»od$f*aeldthe
e x i s t i n g procedures for determining the temperature effect
on i n t e r l a m i n a r shear s t r e n g t h of l a m i n a t e s , has conducted
i n t e r l a b o r a t o r y c o l l a b o r a t i o n to resolve problems in thermal
 15.3

c o n d u c t i v i t y t e s t i n q and i s d e v e l o p i n g and improving dynamic

methods f o r d e t e r m i n i n g o f f - a x i s e l a s t i c c o n s t a n t s of l a m i -
n a t e s as a f u n c t i o n of temperature.
NBS i s a l s o u n d e r t a k i n g a s y s t e m a t i c s t u d y of t h e effect
of i n s u l a t i o n on magnet t r a i n i n g . This i n v o l v e d t h e develop-
ment of a t e s t a p p a r a t u s in which an e l e m e n t of a s u p e r c o n d u c t -
i n g magnet in a c o i l form i s s u b j e c t e d t o s t r e s s e s simulating
t h o s e in a magnet w h i l e a s s e s s i n g t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n of Insulat-
ion f a i l u r e t o magnet p e r f o r m a n c e . Different t y p e s of insulat-
ing films and l a m i n a t e s a r e e v a l u a t e d as a r e d i f f e r e n t methods
of i n s u l a t i o n fabrication. A unique a s p e c t of t h i s program
is the c o r r e l a t i o n of thermal energy r e l e a s e f r e q e n c y and rate
due t o i n s u l a t i o n f a i l u r e with magnet training.

!he problem of i n t r o d u c i n n a l a m i n a t e coding s y s t e m into

t h e i n d u s t r y s i m i l a r t o t h a t used in m e t a l s t e c h n o l o g y i s a
g e n e r i c one t o c o m p o s i t e t e c h n o l o g y . It is particularly acute
in t h e c r y o g e n i c a r e a b e c a u s e of t h e need t o combine predicta-
ble material performance with minimum c o s t . The CR-grade
program i s a s t a r t in t h i s d i r e c t i o n and a l o n g e r range approach
t o t h e o b j e c t i v e has been p r o p o s e d by t h e w r i t e r (Standardiz-
i n g N o n m e t a l l i c Composite M a t e r i a l s f o r Cryogenic Applications,
P r o c e e d i n g s ICMC C o n f e r e n c e , Aug. 4 - 5 , 1 9 8 0 ) .

We b e l i e v e t h e s e programs w i l l be r e l e v a n t t o magnet
a p p l i c a t i o n s by i n c r e a s i n g t h e r e l i a b i l i t y of c u r r e n t magnet,
construction a t minimum c o s t , of f a c i l i t a t i n g a transfer of
e x p e r i e n c e t o s u b s e q u e n t g e n e r a t i o n magnets and of facilitating
 15.4

magnet insulation design and f a b r i c a t i o n . The NBS approach

is also designed to provide f l e x i b i l i t y in modifying material
performance in a systematic manner to meet newly defined or
anticipated needs. We also hope that the work w i l l similify
the communication between the designer and the materials
producer in providing the materials required to meet the
design performance.
The FY 81 program currently under way at NBS r e l a t i n g
to organic magnet insulation consists of the f o l l o w i n g :
-The cryogenic performance of G-1OCR from a t h i r d
producer w i l l be screened and compared to that of
two previous producers
-The performance of a lightweight glass variant of
G-1OCR w i l l be screened. This variant, produced
in response to LLL needs for thermal insulators
having a higher reinforcement density in a thin
section, is an example of the systematic variation
of the basic CR grade to meet industry needs.
- The performance of a polyimide-matrix variant of
G-10CR w i l l be screened. This variant has shown
promise of improved cryogenic radiation resistance
as compared to the epoxy-matrix product.
- Development of a standardized laminate coding system
w i l l be continued
- Continued e f f o r t s w i l l be made to resolve the dis-
crepancy in laminate thermal conductivity
- Direct comparisons with s t a t i c methods w i l l be made
to validate the dynamic method of determining e l a s t i c
constants of laminates as a function of temperature
- Work w i l l begin an a system for precise measurement
of viscoelastic effects in laminates as a function of
temperature
- The study of the interaction between insulation type
and fabrication method on magnet performance w i l l con-
tinue
f
15.5

NBS PUBLICATIONS RELATING TO MAGNET INSULATION

I n s u l a t i n g Films

Schramm, R. E., Clark, A. F. and Reed, R. P., A Compilation and Evaluation

o f Mechanical, Thermal and E l e c t r i c a l Properties of Selected Polymers, NBS
Monograph 132, September 1973.

Reinforced Laminates

Kasen, M. B., "Mechanical and Thermal Properties o f Filamentary-Reinforced

S t r u c t u r a l Composites a t Cryogenic Temperatures - 1 ; Glass-Reinforced
Composites," Cryogenics, V. 15, No. 6, June 1975, p. 327. ( - 2 : Advanced
Composites," Cryogenics, V. 15, No. 12, December 1975, p. 701).

Kasen, M. B., "Properties o f Filamentary-Reinforced S t r u c t u r a l Composites

a t Cryogenic Temperatures," Composites R e l i a b i l i t y , ASTM STP 580, ASTM,
1975, p. 586.

Kasen, M. B. and Schramm, R. E., "Fatigue o f Composites a t Cryogenic

Temperatures," ASTM STP 636, ASTM, 1977, p. H I .

Kasen, M. B. and Schramm, R. E., "Cryogenic Mechanical Properties o f

Several Boron-, Graphite- and Glass-Reinforced Composites," Materials
Science and Engineering, V. 30, November 1977, p. 197.

Kasen, M. B . , "Composite Materials f o r Cryogenic S e r v i c e , " i n Advances

i n Cryogenic Engineering, V. 24, Plenum Press, NY, 1978.
 15.6

Kasen, M. B., "Composite Laminate Applications in Magnetic Fusion Energy

Superconducting Magnet Systems," in Proceedings, 1978 International
Conference on Composite Materials, AIME, 1978.
kasen, M. B., Schramm, R. E., MacDonald, R. and Beekman, D., "Mechanical,
Electrical and Thermal Characterization of G-1OCR and G-11CR Glass/Epoxy
Laminates Between Room Temperature and 4K" in Advances in Cryogenic
Engineering, V. 26, Plenum Press, NY, 1980. •
Kasen, M. B.» "Standardizing Nonmetallic Composite Materials for
Cryogenic Applications," in Nonmetallic Materials and Composites at
Low Temperatures-II, Plenum Press, NY (to be published, Proceedings
ICMC Conference, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, August 4-5, 1980).
Kasen, M. B., "Cryogenic Properties of Filamentary-Reinforced Composites:
An Update," submitted for publication to Cryogenics Journal, 1980.
Hust, J. G., "Low Temperature Thermal Conductivity of Two Fibre-Epoxy
Composites," Cryogenics 15, No. 3, March 1975, p. 126-8.
Hust, J. G., "Low Temperature Thermal Conductivity Measurements on
Longitudinal and Transverse Sections of a Superconducting Coil,
Cryogenics X5, No. 1, June 1975, p. 8-11.

Superconductor Performance
Ekin, J. W., "Effect on Strain on Epoxy-Impregnated Superconducting
Composites," Nonmetallic Materials and Composites at Low Temperatures,
edited by A. F. Clark, R. P. Reed and G. Hartwig, Plenum Press, NY, 1979,
p. 301-308.
Fowlkes, C. W., Angerhofer, P. E., Newton, R. N. and Clark, A. F.,
"Characterization of a Superconducting Coil Composite," NBSIR 73-349,
National Bureau of Standards, Boulder, CO* 1973.
Clark, A. F., Weston, W. F., Arp, V. D., Hust, J. G. and Trapani, R. J.,
"Characterization of a Superconducting Coil Composite and its Components,"
NBSIR 76-837, National Bureau of Standards, Boulder, CO, 1976.
Ekin. J. W.» Kasen, M. B., Read, D. T., Schramm, R. E., Tobler, R. L. and
Clark, A. F», "Materials Studies for Superconducting Machinery Coil
Composites," NBSIR 80-1633, National Bureau of Standards, Boulder, CO, 1980.
Ekin, J. W., Schramm, R. E. and Superczynski, M. J., "Training of Epoxy-
Impregnated Superconductor Windings," in Advances in Cryogenic Engineering,
V. 26, Prenum Press, NYS 1980.
Ekin, J. W., "Mechanical Effects on Superconductor Performance,"
Superconduting Materials: Science and Technology, edited by S. Foner
and B. Schwartz, Plenum Press, NY, 1981.
 16.1

MAGNET MATERIALS STUDIES

IN THE
SOLID STATE DIVISION
ORNL

R. CCLTMAN C. KLABUNDE

I. THE PROPERTIES OF ORGANIC INSULATORS IRRADIATED

AT 4.9 K.
(FED - 50 K FOR FY 81 )

II. THE MAGNETORESISTIVITY OF NEUTRON-IRRADIATED COPPER

AT 4.5 K.
(BES - 1 MY + 115 K REACTOR COSTS FOR FY 81
PROGRAM ENDS 3/31/81 )
 16.2

SUMMARY OF STUDIES TO DATE

I. INSULATORS

1. MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND SEVERAL OTHER PROPERTY

CHANGES HAVE BEEN STUDIED ON SEVERAL FILLED EPOXIES
AFTER GAMMA-RAY IRRADIATION AT 4.9 K TO DOSES OF
2 X 1O 8 , 2.4 x 1 0 9 , AND 1 X 1 O 1 0 RADS.

2. MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL PROPERTIES OF UNFILLED

AND GLASS-FILLED POLYIMIDES HAVE BEEN STUDIED AFTER
IRRADIATION AT 4.9 K TO 1 X 1O 1 0 RADS.
(THIS WORK NOW IN PROGRESS.)

II. STABILIZERS

USING THE LIMITED DATA AVAILABLE ON THE MAGNETO-

RESISTANCE OF IRRADIATED Cu AND Al, ANALYSES HAVE
BEEN MADE WHICH PREDICT TOTAL RESISTIVITIES AT
VARIOUS MAGNET LOCATIONS IN A TOKAMAK. (NEUTRONICS
BY SANTORO ET AL.) FURTHER EXPERIMENTATION IS
PLANNED.
 16.3

look at some of the more important experimental results,

There is not time to show the details of all of the results we
have obtained.
In this picture we see the flexural-strength results of
both polyimides and epoxies after irradiation at 4.9 K to
various doses.
1. The bars indicate the strengths measured at liquid-
nitrogen temperature, and the + signs indicate
strength measured at room temperature.
2. As indicated by the small steps on the tops of the
bars, 3 specimens were tested for each material and
each dose.
3. The doses are indicated at the base of the bars.
4. The open bars are the results obtained for unirradiated
controls.
There are several features to be noted in these results.
1. At 2.4 x 10 rads and beyond, these epoxies are prob-
ably useless to the designer.
2. If, however, epoxies can find use at low-dose loca-
tions, then there is an unmistakable need for additional data
o g

between 2 x 10 and 2 x 10 rads. We already know there is

virtually no loss in strength at 2 x 10 rads. Funding for our
epoxy work has only been enough to determine the dose range in
which the response of property change to dose is the greatest.
 16.4

3. The superior radiation resistance of the polyimides

over the epoxies is quite clear in these results;
however, like the epoxi-es, more data for intermediate
doses are needed.
4. The difference in height between the + signs and the
tops of the bars shows the generally known tempera-
ture dependence of the strength of p o l y i m i d e s ; i.e.,
the strength increases with decreasing temperature.
Note that this temperature dependence is reduced by
irradiation by both decreasing the low-temperature
strength but actually increasing the room-temperature
strength.
5. Finally, note that the unfilled pure polyimide Vespel
made by Du Pont seems to be unaffected by 10 rads.
We found that this material retained its rather stiff
rubber-like b e h a v i o r , and we consider the possibility
that it may serve as a very radiation-resistant gasket
material.
In this next viewgraph we see the results obtained for
compressive strength which bear nearly a one-to-one correspondence
to the flexural-strength results except for one point. Note that
the strength for stress applied perpendicular to the glass
laminations is unchanged by a dose of 1 x 10 rads. This is
seen for one set of Kerimid specimens. We observe that the fail-
ure mode for specimens with this orientation is different than
for the parallel case which fails by d e l a m i n a t i o n .
 16.5

OTHER PROPERTIES WE HAVE STUDIED

1. ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE FOR T O 1 0 RADS EPOXIES DECREASE BUT

ARE'STILL USEFUL -- POLYIMIDES ARE
2. VOLTAGE BREAKDOWN VIRTUALLY UNCHANGED.

3. FLEXURE STRAIN

4. LINEAR FLEXURE MODULUS

5. DIMENSIONAL STABILITY

6. COLOR AND APPEARANCE CHANGES

7. RADIOACTIVITY -- VERY LOW FOR HOST MATERIALS -- MOST

ACTIVITY COMES FROM GLASS.

8. WEIGHT LOSS -- POLYIMIDES BETTER THAN EPOXIES.

9. GAS EVOLUTION -- DURING WARMUP AFTER EACH OPERATING

CYCLE, REACTOR OPERATORS SHOULD EXPECT
OUTGASSING OF SUCH SPECIES AS h'2, CH 4 ,
H 2 0, N 2 .

TO. SUPERINSULATION -- ALUMINIZED MYLAR FAILS AT 2 X TO 9 RADS,

-- ALUMINIZED KAPTON (POLYIMIDE)
VIRTUALLY UNCHANGED G> 1 X 1O 1 0 RADS.
 16.6

TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS
DRAWN FROM WORK UP TO NOW

I. INSULATORS

1. GLASS-FILLED POLYIMIDES SHOW AN AVERAGE LOSS IN

STRENGTH OF -x. 40% AFTER IRRADIATION AT 4.9 K TO A
DOSE OF 1 x 1 0 1 0 RADS.

2. GLASS-FILLED POLYIMIDES ARE ABOUT 5 TO 10 TIMES MORE

RADIATION RESISTANT THAN GLASS-FILL ED EPOXIci.

3. FOR THE MOST PRUDENT USE OF POLYIMIDES FURTHER

STUDIES ARE REQUIRED. IF IT IS PRACTICAL A'.SO TO USE
EPOXIES AT LOCATIONS RECEIVING LOWER DOSES, THEN THEY
NEED FURTHER STUDY.

II. STABILIZERS

4. IF THERE ARE NO ECONOMIC OR OTHER TECHNICAL REASONS

FOR NOT USING GLASS-FILLED POLYIMIDE, THEN THE COPPER
STABILIZER "ALMOST CERTAINLY" WINS THE TROPHY FOR
"WEAKEST LINK" IN THE MAGNET MATERIALS GROUP.

5. THE PRESENT DATA BASE FOR THE MAGNETORESISTIVITY OF

IRRADIATED COMMERCIAL COPPER IS INADEQUATE FOR
PREDICTING END-OF--LIFE RESISTIVITY VALUES WITH
SUFFICIENT ACCURACY.
 16.7

STUDIES PLANNED WITH REMAINING FUNDING -- THE SHORT RUN

I. INSULATORS -- IN AN EFFORT TO ESTABLISH SOME SORT OF A

STRENGTH-VS-DOSE CURVE, STUDIES OF
POLYIMIDES WILL BE MADE TOR TWO ADDITIONAL
INTERMEDIATE DOSES. THE FIRST WILL BE
5 X 1 0 9 RADS, AMD THE SECOND WILL BE
CHOSEN TO ESTABLISH THE BEST CURVE BASED
ON PREVIOUS RESULTS.

II. STABILIZERS -- A SINGLE EXPERIMENT ASSEMBLY WITH EIGHT

VARIOUSLY PREPARED PURE AND COMMERCIAL
COPPER SPECIMENS WILL BE GIVEN FIVE
SUCCESSIVE NEUTRON-IRRADIATION (4.5 K)
AND ANNEALING (300 K) CYCLES. RESISTIVITY
CHANGES WILL BE MEASURED AT ALL STAGES
IN MAGNETIC FIELDS UP TO 5 T. EFFORTS
WILL BE MADE TO EXTRAPOLATE RESULTS TO
10 T. FIELD-ON RESISTIVITY INCREASES ARE
EXPECTED TO REACH THE RANGE OF VALUES
PRESENTLY CONSIDERED FOR ALLOWED LIFETIME
INCREASES ("o 25% OF INITIAL FIELD-ON
VALUES).
 16.8

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES

OF ORGANIC INSULATORS

1. STRENGTH VS DOSE IN THE RESPONSIVE RANGE.

•I. NEUTRON VS GAMMA-RAY DAMAGE.

3. THE EFFECT OF POSTIRRADIATION WARMUP UPON STRENGTH.

4. THE EFFECT ON STRENGTH OF PERIODIC ANNEALING DURING

IRRADIATION.

5. THE PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY OF IRRADIATION EFFECTS.

A. A CHARACTERIZATION OF THE MECHANISMS OF

MECHANICAL FAILURE.

B. ELECTRON-MICROSCOPY STUDIES OF POSSIBLE BUBBLE

NUCLEATION AND GROWTH.

C. THE TEMPERATURE DEPENDENCE (4 TO 300 K) AND

POSSIBLE KINETICS OF GAS EVOLUTION OF THE SEVERAL.
MOLECULAR SPECIES RELEASED.
 16.9

1. Strength vs Dose in the Responsive Range

For the magnet d e s i g n e r , the insulator strength at
"end of life" may be negotiable as a result of possible
trade-offs between shield thickness and magnet age. For
this r e a s o n , he needs more detailed data than we now have
on the response of strength to irradiation dose for the
polyimides and the epoxies if they can be used.

2. Neutron vs Gamma-Ray Damage

Most of the irradiation-effects d a t a , including our
own from O R N L , have been obtained using gamma r a y s . In
this c a s e , property changes are customarily correlated
with the energy deposited in the material (in rads) by the
gamma r a y s . In the case of fast n e u t r o n s , however, a
different damage mechanism should p r e v a i l , and we are not
certain that the criterion of energy deposition will still
apply in the same way to these property c h a n g e s .
The ratio of neutron flu.x to gamma-ray dose rate n/y,
present at many magnet locations is much higher than that
obtainable in the present ORNL facility and in other sources
that have been used for insulator s t u d i e s . In order to pre-
dict property changes as a function of exposure time at
magnet l o c a t i o n s , it must be possible to calculate the
contribution to changes made by fast neutrons as well as
gamma rays. It becomes essential then to establish a corre-
lation between neutron fluence and property change. While
 16.10

the n/y ratio could be increased to a more suitable value

at O R N L , it would entail a m a j o r m o d i f i c a t i o n to the c r y o -
genic facility at s i g n i f i c a n t e x p e n s e . The new IPNS-I
facility at A N L , h o w e v e r , will provide a s u i t a b l e intense
f a s t - n e u t r o n s o u r c e nearly free of gamma rays with ample
e x p e r i m e n t a l v o l u m e and r e f r i g e r a t i o n c a p a c i t y near 4 K.
The f a c i l i t y is e x p e c t e d to be ready for users at no cost
in about months.

3. The Effect of P o s t i r r a d i a t i o n W a r m u p Upon S t r e n g t h

T h r o u g h o u t our p r o g r a m , m e c h a n i c a l p r o p e r t i e s w e r e
tested a f t e r i r r a d i a t i o n at 5.0 K and w a r m u p to room tem-
perature. This is a m e a n i n g f u l p r o c e d u r e , since it is
e x p e c t e d that in s i m i l a r fashion f u s i o n - r e a c t o r m a g n e t s
will be warmed to 300 K from time to t i m e . Our k n o w l e d g e
of the s t r e n g t h of the i n s u l a t o r s under these cyclic c o n -
d i t i o n s is just as essential as that under static cold
conditions. The cost of testing at l i q u i d - H e temperature
after i r r a d i a t i o n w i t h o u t w a r m u p is many times g r e a t e r
than with w a r m u p . In the present p r o g r a m , such tests w e r e
excluded in an effort to m a x i m i z e the a m o u n t of i n f o r m a t i o n
that could be obtained with a v a i l a b l e f u n d s .
From i n f o r m a t i o n we have obtained so f a r , we are led
to s p e c u l a t e that a m a j o r portion of the loss in s t r e n g t h
may o c c u r during .warmup after an i r r a d i a t i o n increment
rather than during the irradiation at low t e m p e r a t u r e . To
replace s p e c u l a t i o n with f a c t , it is proposed that mechanical
 16.11

t e s t s of some t o p - r a t e d m a t e r i a l s be m a d e w i t h o u t warmup
after irradiation. Such t e s t s , w h i c h will r e q u i r e the
d e s - g n and f a b r i c a t i o n of i n-s i t u t e s t i n g d e v i c e s , c o u l d
be m o s t e a s i l y p e r f o r m e d in t h e I P N S - I f a c i l i t y because
it p r o v i d e s the n e e d e d e x p e r i m e n t a l v o l u m e and refrigera-
tion capacity.

4. T h e E f f e c t on S t r e n g t h of P e r i o d i c A n n e a l i n g During Irra-
diation
We r e c o g n i z e the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t the l o s s in strength
m a y be r e l a t e d to g a s - b u b b l e n u c l e a t i o n and g r o w t h during
warmup after low-temperature irradiation. The question is
r a i s e d w h e t h e r for a p a r t i c u l a r d o s e s u c h n u c l e a t i o n and
g r o w t h a r e i n h i b i t e d or e n h a n c e d as a r e s u l t of periodic
w a r m u p s d u r i n g the i r r a d i a t i o n . In o t h e r t e r m s , to o b t a i n
r e l i a b l e s t r e n g t h - v s - d o s e d a t a is it n e c e s s a r y to simulate
p e r i o d i c r e a c t o r and r e f r i g e r a t o r shutdowns?
 16.12

ORNL-DWG 80-18346

FLEXURE STRENGTH
tso
1200 POLYIMIDES EPOXIES
t

160

1000
140

120
600

o
0.
I 100
to
Q.

I
600
80

400 60

1
40

200

20

DOSE- 0 10
i 0 10 0 10 0 2.4 10 0
1
2.4 10
VESPEL KERIMID G-10 CR G-H CR
SPAULDITE
IRRADIATION DOSE AT 4.9 K DOSE UNITS = 10 9 rods
I I STRENGTH AT 78 K
AFTER WARMUP TO 307 K
+ STRENGTH AT 3 0 0
 16.13

ORNL-DWG 80-18345

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
1000 POLYIMIDES

800

600
£

400

200

DOSE-
0
• 0 10 0
VESPEL
i

10 0 10 | 0
KERMID-
SPAULDITE
i 10

KERIMID-1
IRRADIATION DOSE AT 4.9 K
0 2.4 10
G-10 CR G-11CR

DOSE UNITS = 109 rods

• STRENGTH AT 78,K 1
AFTER WARMUP TO 307 K
+ IOK J
STRENGTH AT 300
 17.1

THE INORGANIC INSULATOR PROGRAM AT LASL*

F. W. Clinard, Jr. and D. M. Parkin
University of California
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Los Alamos, NM 87545
December 2, 1980

INTRODUCTION
It is the responsibility of this program to address
critical and generic materials problems associated with the use of
ceramics in fusion reactors. These materials are primarily used
as electrical insulators, and the most severe problems result from
the presence of radiation fields characteristic of fusion devices.
Thus the focus of this work is for the most part on radiation
effects in ceramics.
The program is made up of two projects. In the first,
experiments are conducted to determine electrical and structural
changes resulting from neutron and ionising radiation. The
second involves calculation of damage effects in compounds and the
dependence of this damage on neutron energy. These activities are
outlined in Sections I and II of this report.

I. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
Six major applications for ceramics in fusion devices have
been identified:^*-'
• Insulators for magnetic coils
• The toroidal current break
• Neutral beam injector insulators
• Dielectrics for RP heating systems
• Direct converter insulators
• First wall (including structure, armor,
limiters, and collectors).
Those parts of the LASL program that address the use of inorganic
insulators for magnets are the subject of this paper.

*Work performed under the auspices of the U. S. Department of

Energy, LA-UR 80-3579.
 17.2

Sin critical and generic ceramic problem areas, three

structural and three electrical, are apparent for fusion appli-
cations:
• Swelling
• Strength degradation
• Reduction of thermal conductivity
• Decrease in electrical resistivity
• Reduction of dielectric strength
• Increase in loss factor (for RF applications).
All but the last are of concern for magnetic coil applications, and
are discussed below.

Swelling
At elevated irradiation temperatures, swelling results
from the creation of new lattice sites (e.g., by conversion of
displacement-induced interstitials to lattice atoms and stabi-
lization of vacancies in voids). At room temperature and below
this mechanism operates less efficiently, but significant swelling
can result from lattice dilation induced by finely-dispersed
defects. Results of two low-temperature swelling studies conducted
at LASL are described here.
MgO and MgAl294 are candidate ceramics for high-dose
applications because of their cubic lattice structure (which
minimizes problems associated with anisotropic dimensional
changes). Samples of these materials were irradiated to fluences
of ~2.1 x 10 2 6 fast n/m2 (E>0.2 MeV) and~4.6 x 1 0 2 6 thermal n/m2
at 155°C, generating damage levels which might be encountered in
the poorly-shielded divertor coil of a power reactor. Resulting
swelling values are:'2)
MgO 2.8 vol %
MgAl2O4 0.8 vol %.
TEM examination showed the defect structure of each to be char-
acterized by fine defect aggregates and dislocation loops. The
magnitude of the observed swelling may be sufficient to cause
significant dimensional changes in magnetic coils.
 17.3

MACOR* machinable glass-ceramic is an attractive material

for magnet applications, but is sensitive to radiolysis (struc-
tural damage induced by ionizing radiation or by the ionizing
component of neutron energy loss). Electron irradiation studies
near room temperature conducted in the electron microscope show
visible structural damage at ~ 1 0 ^ Gy. However, little or no
damage is seen after irradiation at RT to — l O 2 2 14 MeV n/m2,
corresponding to ~10^ Gy, and no swelling is observed. " » ^ ' If
swelling does not worsen at cryogenic temperatures, MACOR would,
by the swelling criterion, be useful for such applications as the
toroidal field (TF) coil.

Strength
Strength of ceramics varies directly with fracture tough-
ness, inversely with critical flaw size, and is degraded by
internal stresses. Of greatest concern for a polycrystalline
ceramic is anisotropic swelling, which usually results from a non-
cubic crystal structure or the presence of dissimilar phases.
Such swelling can result in high internal stresses and ultimately
in microcracking. On the other hand, fracture toughness of
ceramics may actually increase, as cracks are pinned by irradia-
tion-induced defects.'•*'
Preliminary tensile strength measurements for MgO and
MgAl2O4 irradiated at 155°C (to the fluences described earlier)
show the following strength increases:'2'
MgO ~18%
MgAl2O4 ^21%
This good performance is encouraging, but it must be recalled that
very high stresses can result from swelling unless dimensional
changes can be accommodated by coil design.
Bend strength of MACOR after irradiation to 1 0 2 2 14 MeV
n/m2 at RT showed essentially no change,(*) consistent with
swelling and electron microscopic observations.

*A product of Corning Glass Works, Corning, NY.

 17.4

Thermal Conductivity
Heat is primarily conducted by phonons in an electrically-
insulating ceramic. Radiation-induced defects scatter phonons and
therefore reduce thermal conductivity, with fine-scale damage
being the most deleterious at room temperature and above. (At
cryogenic temperature? the greater phonon mean free path results
in strong scattering by larger, more widely-spaced defects.) Thus
degradation of thermal conductivity increases with increasing dose
and decreasing ii radiation (or measurement) temperature. However,
sensitivity to damage is less at higher fluences (Fig. 1).'°' The
lower limit for degradation (unless microcracking occurs) is
reached when phonon mean free path is reduced to the interatomic
spacing (~3 & ) , at which point the thermal conductivity approxi-
mates that of a glassy structure.
Large decreases in thermal conductivity are anticipated
for insulators in divertor coils, where fluences will be high and
temperatures relatively low. At the much smaller radiation doses
expected beyond the shield (e.g., at TF coils), room-temperature
reductions should be small; no decreases were observed in the
irradiated MACOR described e a r l i e r . ^ However, degradation might
be significant at cryogenic temperatures.

Electrical Resistivity
Post-irradiation measurements in AI2O3 show an increase in
electrical resistivity, apparently due to defect-induced scatter-
ing or trapping of electronic charge carriers.O A slight
decrease in resistivity was observed in MACOR after irradiation
to ~ 1 0 2 2 n/m2 at RT (Fig. 2 ) / 8 ^ perhaps resulting from changes
in ionic conductivity of the glassy matrix.
Resistivity decreases significantly during irradiation,
as absorption of ionizing energy enhances the number of charge
carriers."' This phenomenon is dependent primarily on rate of
energy absorption rather than total ionizing dose. Dependence on
dose rate is roughly linear in Cr-doped AI2O3 near RT, although
this relationship does not hold at elevated temperatures.
Temperature-dependence of radiation-induced conductivity is com-
plex, possibly involving trapping, detrapping, recombination,
 17.5

and/or scattering of charge carriers. The result in AI2O3 is a

lessened temperature dependence (Fig. 3 ) . ( "
A significant reduction in resistivity can be expected in
coils subjected to high rates of irradiation, either from ganma or
neutron fluxes. Although measurements have not been made at
cryogenic temperatures, the low irradiation rate beyond the shield
(on the order of 0.1 Gy/s) suggests that radiation-induced
conductivity effects will be minimal at that point.

Dielectric Strength
Dielectric breakdown of ceramics occurs by one of two
mechanisms, depending on temperature and length of time that
voltage is applied. For low temperatures or short times the
avalanche mechanism prevails, in which electron collision ioni-
zation and multiplication causes breakdown. Under other condi-
ditions, thermal breakdown occurs via Joule heating. Cryogenic
magnets are expected to operate in the avalanche regime, whereas
near-room-temperature coils may be in either the avalanche or
thermal regime depending on material chosen and operating condi-
tions.

There is no obvious reason why fine-scale structural damage

should degrade the post-irradiation dielectric breakdown strength
of a ceramic, unless microcracking occurs. Indeed, no degradation
was observed in single-crystal AI2O3 irradiated t o ~ 2 x 1 0 ^ n/m^
at elevated temperatures and tested in the avalanche regime (Fig.
4).W Defects present included a high concentration of dislo-
cations and voids up to 100 & d i a . ^ )
Dielectric strength of polycrystalline AI2O3 is slightly
reduced by an ionizing flux of 6 Gy/s near room temperature, but
above ~175°C no degradation was observed.^"' The latter behavior
was attributed to a swamping ot the ionization contribution by
thermal effects. These results suggest that reduction in di-
electric strength may not be a problem for shielded magnets, but
that close-in coils (e.g., the divertor coil, where the neutron
contribution to ionization flux alone will be 1 to 100 Gy/s) may
suffer degradation.
 17.6

II. DAMAGE CALCULATIONS

The lack of intense 14 MeV neutron sources has made it
necessary to conduct high-dose neutron irradiation studies of
ceramics in fission reactors. Calculations have been carried out
to determine whether fission neutrons supply an adequate simu-
lation of fusion neutrons. Results show that in low-Z ceramics
(e.g., AI2O3, MgO, MgA^O^) the relative amount of damage energy
deposited in the cation and anion sublattices is roughly the same
for fast fission and for fusion neutrons (Fig.5). ' I D This is not
the case, however with high-Z ceramics (e.g., TaO, UO2), where
relative damage levels in the two sublattices differ for the two
neutron energies (Fig. 6).'**-'
These calculations also show that the ratio of cation to
anion displacements can be strongly dependent on displacement
thresholds and atomic masses. This observation has important
implications for the nature of damage produced and the consequent
damage 'licrostructure.

SUMMARY
1. It does not appear that irradiation problems will be
severe for ceramic insulators in well-shielded magnets (e.g., the
toroidal field coils), unless materials particularly sensitive to
radiolysis are used.
2. Ceramic insulators for poorly-shielded magnets (e.g.,
divertor coils) could suffer significant degradation of structural
and electrical properties, making it important that proper mate-
rials choices be made.
3. More data are needed near room temperature for high-
dose applications. Of particular importance are:
• fusion neutron data (to be obtained when the Fusion-
Materials Irradiation Test Facility becomes available)
• damage results obtained with the proper dpa/gas atom
ratio (this can be supplied by irradiation of isoto-
pically-adjusted ceramics in a mixed-spectrum fission
reactor)
• measurement of electrical resistivity and dielectric
strength during absorption of ionizing energy at appro-
priate rates.
 17.7

REFERENCES
1. F. W. Clinard, Jr., "Ceramics for Applications in Fusion
Systems," J. Nuclear Mater. 85-86, 393-404 (1979).
2. F. W. Clinard, Jr., G. F. Hurley, R. A. Youngman, and W. R.
McDonell, "Evaluation of Structural Properties of MgO and
MgAl204 after Fission Neutron Irradiation Near Room Tempera-
ture," Special Purpose Materials Annual Progress Report for
1980 (DOE report in preparation).
3. F. W. Clinard, Jr., D. L. Rohr, and L. W. Hobbs, "14 MeV
Neutron and Ionizing Radiation Damage in MACOR Glass-Cera-
mic," op. cit. ref. 2.
4. G. F. Hurley and J. C. Kennedy, "Evaluation of Structural
Properties of MACOR Glass-Ceramic Following 14 MeV Neutron
Irradiation in RTNS-II," op. cit. ref. 2.
5. G. F. Hurley and F. W. Clinard, Jr., "Fracture Toughness and
Hardness of Neutron-irradiated AI2O3, MgAl2O4, and Y3AI5-
0l2>" Special Purpose Materials Annual Progress Report for
1979, report DOE/ER-0048-1, pp. 51-57.
6. G. F. Hurley and F. W. Clinard, Jr., "Thermal Diffusivity of
Neutron-Irradiated Ceramics," Special Purpose Materials An-
nual Progress Report for 1978, report DOE/ET-0095, pp. 59-64.
7. R. W. Klaffky, "Radiation-Induced Conductivity of AI2O3," op.
cic. ref. 5, pp. 19-27.
8. J. D. Fowler, Jr., "Electrical Conductivity of MACOR Machin-
able Glass-Ceramic after 14 MeV Neutron Irradiation," op.
cit. ref. 2.
9. J. M. Bunch, "Insulator and Ceramics Research—Electrical
Effects," LASL Controlled Thermonuclear Research Program,
January-December 1977, Report LA-7474-PR (1979), p. 166.

10. E. J. Britt and M. V. Davis, "Dielectric Breakdown in

Electrical Insulators used in Thermionic Converters," Proc.
1971 Thermoinic Conversion Specialists Conference, IEEE
Report 71C63-ED, 137-146 (1971).
11. D. K. Parkin and C. A. Coulter, "Displacement Functions for
Diatomic Materials," J. Nuclear Mater. 85-86, 611-615 (1979).
r 17.8

, O O r ( a ) S I N G L E CRYSTAL | 0 0 p <b> A i 2 ° 3
AI 2 0 3

IOI5K HOOK
NOOK

100 ^ (d)MgAI 2 0 4
9 2 5 ft HOOK \

(c) SINGLE CRYSTAL —.. *_925K

50
I0I5K

O IOOT ( e ) SINGLE CRYSTAL 100

^ Y Al 0

(f)Y,A! 5 O
• II
0 1 2 0 1 2
22 2
NEUTRON FLUENCE (xlO n/cm ) (En>0.1 MeV)

Fig. 1. Decrease in RT thermal diffusivity (approximately pro-

portional to thermal conductivity) as a function of
irradiation temperature and fission neutron fluence for
several ceramics.'"^
 17.9

10 £50 522 400 300 200 150 100 75 50 30

\ T (°C>
-5

-6
l 0
«
*\
r -?
w
Vv

U 10
NQ^^NX *
2i0- 8 ^xx x
100 KHz
~~^ X X y
"—— X )
£ 10 X v 10 KHz
X
*-^- -~^ >
O -ia
D10 \ X
X 1 KHz
• ^ • ^

2
O X •—— .\ 2
U U
\ \ ^^^ X 100 Hz
10-

-12 \ \
10
\ \
10- 13 \
\ \
-14 \
10
\ D. C.

1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2

1000/T ( O K)" !

Fig. 2. Electrical conductivity (inverse of resistivity) of MACOR

before and after 14 MeV neutron irradiation, as a function
of measurement temperature and frequency.C)
 17.10

i i i r
UNDOPED LINDE
AI203

-JO6
£

>
g
Q
Z
o
o

io8

66x10' Gy/s
6.6x10° Gy/s

I69 1 I
0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8 ZZ 2.6 3.0 3.4

Fig. 3. Dependence of electron irradiation-induced conductivity

in single-crystal AI2O3 on temperature and ionizing dose
 17.11

SINGLE-CRYSTAL AI 2 O 3
A

o UNIRRADIATED oP
Q
• IRRAD. AT 925 K lo«s&/o lames
A IRRAD. AT 1100 K
I
CO 0
I 2 3 4
1
I0 10^ 10° 10
EFFECTIVE NO. OF PULSES TO BREAKDOWN

Fig. 4. RT, short-pulse dielectric breakdown strength of AI2O3

before and after elevated-temperature irradiation to
~2 x 1 0 2 6 n/m2 (E > 0.1 ^9)
 17.12

I ' ' I

o.6

CCO A

io3 io4 10= 10*

RECOIL ENERGY (eV)

Fig. 5. The fraction ij£j of type-j displacements produced by a

primary knock-on atom of type i in AI9O3 (Al = 1 , 0 = 2 )
assuming E i d = 18 eV, E 2 d = 72 e v A u >
 17.13

1.0 ""1 •"1 ' i I

T a O (60, 60) '_
0.8
1
—=
2 0.6
-
§0.4
-
/ _ —«—
:
• %

A
0.2 i -

0 ...i 1 1 1 11 ...I . i r i i i MI i i > i i111

Kf I0 4 • 11111ii 5
I0 i
I0 6
I07
RECOIL ENERGY (eV)

Fig. 6. The fraction >?jj of type-j displacements produced by a PKA

of type i in TaO (Ta = lp 0 = 2) assuming Ei^= E2^ = 60
 18.1

RADIATION DAMAGE IN THIN SHEET FIBERGLASS INSULATORS1

MIC-R2

BY
ELENA A,

AND
HERBERT BECKER^

WORK WAS PERFORMED IN THE MIT PLASMA FUSION CENTER

UNDER D.O.E, AUSPICES.
L
STAFF MEMBER, MIT PLASMA FUSION CENTER
 18.2

RADIATION DAMAGE IN THIN SHEET FIBERGLASS INSULATORS

Introduction

The term "radiation damage", as applied to structural behavior, can

be defined as the reduction in load-carrying ability resulting from

exposure to radiation. It has been observed that the radiation induced

loss of strength of a material could depend upon the type of load to be

resisted, (references 1-4).

The data in this paper indicate that the structural configuration

could be of major importance. The research was part of an investigation of

material properties for an ignition test reactor (ITR) which is being

designed to study the physics of fusion ignition.

The reactor magnet consists of large flat plates of copper/steel

composite separated by thin insulator sheets. The insulator must survive

10,000 cycles of 20 ksi (140 MPa) pulsed pressure, 1.2 ksi (8.4 MPa) pulsed

interlaminar shear stress and a lifetime radiation fluence of 10 20 n/cm z . The

pulses could occur at 30 minute intervals. Furthermore, each cycle would

start at 77 K and end near 150 to 200 K. In addition, the insulator must

have a coefficient of friction of at least 0.30.

Most of the existing test data on insulator radiation survivability

have been obtained from static flexural and compression tests of rods

(references 2-8). It may be apparent that those results would not apply to

thin sheets under cyclic compressive load. Preliminary studies on unirrad-

iated insulators indicated that a 1/2-millimeter-thick fiberglass composite

with an organic matrix might withstand the ITR environment. Consequently,

a program of irradiation and test was carried out to explore that possibility.
 18.3

Rationale

The failure mode in a compressed thin sheet of brittle material is

different from that of a rod. The stress distribution in a rod is uniaxial

and failure usually occurs on the familiar diagonal shear plane, more or

less at 45 degrees to the rod axis. The thin sheet also would be under

uniaxial compression if a pure pressure were to be applied. However, the

insulators on the ITR are compressed between large flat plates. As a result,

there is friction-induced restraint in the plane of the sheet similar to

the behavior studied by Bridgman (reference 9 ) . The diagonal shear failure

planes cannot form easily. Failure can occur only by crushing. Observa-

tions reveal that the insulator specimens are reduced to powder by extensive

compressive eye]ing, in support of that hypothesis.

Failure of G-10 and similar grp materials may begin by crushing

at the intersections of the cloth warp and fill fibers. Tendency for the

cloth to spread would be resisted by friction from the metal plates retarding

breakage until the fibers begin to crush between intersections. The matrix

material would help to support the fibers during that process. The onset

of failure has been observed to be accompanied by rapid degradation of stiff-

ness.

Development of a quantitative theoretical explanation would require

more extensive study. Until that time, the above rationale has been adopted

as part of the basis for believing that materials like grp can withstand

the ITR fluence at the design compression stress for the required number of

cycles.
 18.4

Failure Criterion

It is a simple matter to observe failure in compressed brittle rods.

A break occurs and the testing machine load drops suddenly toward zero.

In thin sheets, however, the failure process is not so obvious. This is

particularly true of fatigue loading.

It was noticed, during exploratory tests or< unirradiated specimens,

that the stiffness appeared to increase by a few percent up to approximately

5000 to 10,000 cycles alter which the stiffness reduced relatively rapidly

up to 100,000 cycles. The same phenomenology was observed during the INEL

tests on irradiated specimens except that the degradation in stiffness

occurred in a few hundred cycles. Subsequent examination showed that at

least one disk in a stack of five had been reduced to powder.

It was decided to define failure in thin sheets as the rapid re-

duction of stiffness. The relevant data were chosen as the stress level

and the number of cycles at which that rapid reduction occurred.

Initial Tests

Experiments were carried out with sheets of fiber reinforced plastics

and one common inorganic electrical insulator. Unirradiated specimens of

G-7, G-10 and micaglass were subjected to compression fatigue at RT. Both

G-7 and G-10 are commercial E-glass rei-iforced plastics. The matrix system

of G-7 is silicone while that of G-10 is epoxy. The test fixture and loading

scheme are shown in Fig. 1.

The initial test results appear in Table 1. The frp survived

pressures twice as high as in ITR for the required 10,000 cycles. The mica-

glass, however, did not survive under pressures 50 percent greater than in
 18.5

I
11,1 MM DlA

TYPICAL
MM "STEEL PAD

TYPICAL G-10 SPECIMEN

ARRANGEMENT IS TYPICAL FOR G-10 AND

MICAGLASS TESTS, FOR G-/, TWO PAIRS
OF DISKS AND THREE SINGLE DISKS WERE
F b-11, ONLY
TESTED IN THE STACK. FOR
ONE DISK WAS TESTED AT A TIME.

t
MAX

LOAD
0
I*— 1 SEC—»|
TIME

FIGURE 1 TEST FIXTURE SCHEMATIC AND LOADING CYCLE

 18.6

Table 1 Results of Compression Fatigue Tests of Unirradiated Samples at RT

(5 specimens of each type tested in stack shown in Figure 1)

INITIAL TESTS

Material Thickness Max. Applied Number of

(mm) Stress Cycles
(MPa)

207 10,000 S

G-7 0.3 276 10,000 S

207 100,000 F

G-10 0.50 310 60,000 S

Mica-Glass 0.50 207 10,000 F

Survived , F = Failed

ADDITIONAL TESTS

Material Max. Applied

Thick Stress Number of
Matrix System Reinf. (mm) (MPa) Cycles

Kerimid 601 S 0.50

TGPAP & DCA S2 0.50
All All
DGEBA & DDS S2 0.50 310 60,000
TGPAP & DDM E 0.46
TGPAP & DDM S2 0.48
TGPAP & DDS S2 0.50

Tests were halted arbitrarily at indicated number of cycles.

All specimens survived.
 18.7

Table 2

Results of INEL Compression

Fatigue Tests of Irradiated Insulators

For all Specimens D = 11.1 mm

(See Figure 1 for test arrangement)

Material Thickness Temperature Max. Applied Number of

(mm) Stress (MPa) Cycles

G-7 0.30 RT 207 10,000 F *

G-11 4.00 RT 207 io.ooo F

207 200,000 S
241 200,000 S
RT 276 21,900 F
310 3,570 F
G-10 0.50 345 460 F
207 20,000 S
77 K 241 40,000 S
276 36,000 S
310 30,000 S
345 30,000 S

* Paired disks broke, singles survived

 18.8

ITR. The 1 Hz frequency was chosen as a practical compromise between the

low ITR cycle and the need for shorter test times to collect data from

several samples.

Additional tests (Table 1) were performed on unirradiated specimens

selected from the composite formulations described below. Those results

also indicated high survivability potential.

TESTS ON IRRADIATED SPECIMENS

INEL Tests

Disks were cut from thin sheets of G-7, G-10 and G-ll CR*. They

were irradiated in the Advanced Test Reactor at Idaho National Engineering

Laboratory. The radiant flux was calculated from a standard code used at

INEL and is stated to be within 20 percent of actual values. The total

fluence was 1.6 x 1 0 1 9 n/cm2 for neutron energies greater than 0.1 Mev,

1 0 2 0 n/cm2 for the total neutron spectrum and 3.8 x 10 1 * rads of gamma

radiation. That dose is somewhat higher than the fluence expected in ITR.

The specimen temperature was reported to be 120 F. All specimens

were found to be highly radiactive after months of cooldown. Consequently,

testing was conducted in a hot cell.

The compression fatigue tests were conducted in the same manner as

for the unirradiated samples (Figure 1 ) . The results appear in Table 2.

In addition the G-10 data are plotted on the graph of Figure 2. All tests

were stopped arbitrarily at 200,000 cycles if no failure had been observed.

* Diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A reinforced by E-glass.

 5 SAMPLES PER TEST POINT
.2 xRT
ioor B90

Vi
Vi

• s so
1/16
CO
C7 = 75N~ (KSI) S = SURVIVED
UJ - 518N-1/16(MPA)
a. 10
4 5 C
F>9
10 10 1O
NUMBER OP CYCLES

RT 77K

FIGURE 2 IRRADIATED G-10 COMPRESSION FATIGUE TEST DATA

 18.10

It is clear that the observed strengths are much greater than

reported previously for rods irradiated at 4.9 K (Ref. 6) for which G-10 CR

static compression values of about 69 MPa were obtained. The INEL

results also exceed the ITR requirements. The stress level of 345 MPa is

more than twice the ITR requirement. Furthermore, 200,000 cycles corresponds

to 20 times the required life.

If it is assumed that the low temperature fatigue strength is

twice the RT value, which matches the ratio for static ultimate compression

of G-10 rods, then the 77K fatigue curve would be as shown on Figure 2.

The observed survivability of the 77K specimens is consistent with that

curve.

MIT Tests

The INEL tests were considered to support the rationale that

G-10 might survive the ITR environment. It was important

to obtain independent data as a further check. It also was decided to

broaden ths scope of the program by including other potential candidate

insulators.

A search of the literature showed that epoxy and polyimlde

resins with fiberglass reinforcement could be considered as candidate

insulator for ITR. Among epoxy resins, glycidyl amines were concluded

to be more radiation resistant (ref. 2,3). The aromatic amine hardeners

lead to resin systems which appear to be more stable under radiation

than do anhydride hardeners (ref. 3 ) . According to ref. 2, glycidyl

amine and glycidyl ether resins are best when combined with anhydride

whereas novolac is best when combined with an aromatic atuine.

 18.11

Most radiation tests had been carried out with commercial

laminates with E-glass reinforcement (Refs. 5,6). Because of greater

purity, S-glass appears to provide a more useful reinforcement than

E-glass for radiation resistant insulators. In ref. 1 it is shown

that boron-free glass begins to show damage under 10 n/cm while

21 2
quartz shows no damage up to 10 n/cm (E > 0.1 MEV).

Sheets of composite were prepared from two epoxy resins (glycidyl

amine and glycidyl ether) mixed with aromatic amine and anhydride

hardeners in combination with E-glass, S-glass and quartz fiber reinforce-

ment. Polyimide resins were also employed with these three types of

reinforcements. The components are shown in Table 3.

Twenty-eight types of specimens (Table 4) of various thicknesses

were evaluated for residual radiactivity. They were irradiated in the

18 2
MIT Reactor for 95 hours. The total fluence was 1.4 x 10 n/cm and
9
5 x 10 rads of gamma radiation.

The activation of each specimen was measured 258, 330 and 450

hrs. after irradiation. The S-glass composites were seen to be much

less active than E-glass composites. This agrees with the INEL

observations regarding the high residual activity of E-glass composites.

The composite combinations in Table 4 were irradiated in the

M.I.T. reactor to 2.3 * 1 0 1 0 rads of gamma radiation, 1.06 * 1 0 1 9 n/cm2

at E > 1 Mev and 2.16 * 1 0 1 9 total n/cm2. It is roughly equivalent to

1/5 of the ITR fluence. Compression testing is in progress at RT. Some of

the early results aDDear in Table 5. As can be seen, the strengths exceed

the ITR requirements. Furthermore, they are higher than for the INEL

fluence.
 18.12

Table 3 Common Resins, Hardeners and Reinforcements Used in Insulators

Resins

Designation Classification Chemical Name Trade Name

TGPAP Epoxy Triglycidyl Ciba 0500

p-amino phenol
DGEBA Epoxy Diglycidyl ether Ciba 6010
of Bisphenol A

KERIMID 601 Polyimide Bis-maleimide Rhodia

amine Kerimid 601

Hardeners

DDM Aromatic Diaminodiphenol Ciba 972

methane

DDS Aromatic Diaminod ipheno1 Ciba

sulfone Eporal

OCA* Anhydride Proprietary,

Owens- Corning

* M.I.T. Designation

Woven Fabric Reinforcement

(All specimens contained approximately 70 percent by volume)

Material Weave Style Finish Manufacturer

Designation

E-glass 181 A-1100 Clark-Schwebel

El-glass 181 P-283B Owens-Corning

S-glass 181 901 Owens-Corning

S2-glass 6581 GB-770B Burlington

Quartz 527 A-1100 J.P. Stevens

 18.13

Table 4 Specimens Irradiated in M.I.T. Reactor

Material
Specimen -Thickness
Type Matrix System Reinforcement mm

1 E 0.50
2 El 0.50
3 S 0.56
DGEBA +. OCA
4 S 2.79
5 S2 0.50
6 None 3.05
7 E 0.50
8 El 0.50
TGPAP +. OCA
9 S 0.56
10 S2 0.50
11 None 3.18
12 E 0.46
13 El 0.50
TGPAP + DDM
14 S2 0.48
15 Quartz 0.43
16 E 0.46
TGPAP + DDS
17 S2 0.50
18 E 0.46
DGEBA + DDS
19 S2 0.50
20 E 0.46
21 S 0.50
Keriraid 601
22 Quartz 0.50
23 Polyimide NR-150B2 Quartz 0.50
2
24 PNE + APF E 0.50
25 G-7 0.30
26 G-ll CR 0.50
27 4.00
28 G-10 0.50

1 - Some specimens of Kerimid 601 with E-glass were cured under 360°F,
some under 440°F. S-glass - style 6528, A-110 finish
2 - Phenolic novalac epoxy + aniline modified epoxy.
 18.14

Table 5 Results of M.I.T. Compression Tests of Irradiated Insulators

All specimens D = 12.7 mm

(5 specimens of each type tested in stack shown in Figure 1)

Max. Applied
Material
Thickness Stress Number of
Matrix System Reinf. (nan) (MPa) Cycles

Kerimid 601 S 0.50 10,000

DGEBA + OCA S 0.56 30,000
All
DGEBA + OCA S2 0.50 30,000
310
TGPAQ + OCA S 0.56 30,000
TGPAP + OCA S2 0.50 30,000

Tests arbitrarily halted at indicated number of cycles. All

specimens survived.
 18.15

Friction Tests

One of the first insulation candidates was mica paper which was

considered to be free of damage at the ITR fluence level. The potential use

was tentatively ruled out partially as a result of tests that revealed a

coefficient of friction of 0.033 to 0.049 at RT and 0.079 to 0.092 at

77 K. The relatively poor showing in the preliminary compression tests

(Table 1) was another reason.

G-10, on the other hand, exhibited a minimum coefficient of

0/33 between RT and 4.2 K (reference 10).

The above results were obtained on unirradiated materials. If

irradiation reduces structural strength then it might also reduce

frictional resistance. Test data are required in this area.

Conclusions

Evidence has been obtained at RT to support the

that thin sheet grp can withstand the ITR radiation and compression

loading environment. It remains to conduct combined interlaminar shear

and compression tests during irradiation at 77 K before the survivability

of grp can be established reliably for use in ITR.

Future Testing

Compression testing will continue at RT and at 77 K on

the remainder of the large variety of specimens irradiated at M.I.T.

A fixture has been designed for exploratory tests under combined

normal compression in conjunction with interlaminar frictional shear

(C-S tests). Static load and fatigue experiments will be conducted

 18.16

in that fixture at INEL on irradiated grp specimens at RT and 77 K.

M.I.T. also plans C-S tests on specimens already irradiated in the M.I.T.

reactor.

Impile compression fatigue testing at 77 K is now being planned.

A friction test program also is being designed to obtain data at RT and

77 K on irradiated specimens.

Acknowledgements

The materials for this program were donated by the Spaulding

Fibre Company and by the Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corporation. The

authors appreciate the help of J. Benzinger of Spaulding and J. Olinger

of Owens-Corning for their assistance and for numerous enlightening

discussions.

Thanks are due R. E. Schmunk (of EG&G) for directing the irradiation

and testing at INEL and to G. Imel (also of EG&G) for his assistance in

developing the test program. They both offered numerous helpful suggestions.

W. Fecych is to be commended for his organization and direction of

the M.I.T. irradiation program. C-H. Tong is to be congradulated for

performing the M.I.T. compression testing program so well on short notice.

Appreciation is expressed to Y. Iwasa and R. Kensley for the

friction testing of micaglass.

i
 18.17

REFERENCES

1. Anon., "Radiation Effect Design Handbook". Section 3, Electrical

Insulation Materials and Capacitors. NASA CR 1787, July 1971.

2. E. Laurant, "Radiation Damage Test on Epoxies for Ceil Insulation,"

NAL, EN-110, July 1969.

3. D. Evans, J.T. Morgan, R. Sheldon, G.B. Stapleton, "Post-Irradiation

Mechanical Properties of Epoxy Resin/Glass Composites" RHEL/R200

Chilton, Berkshire, England, 1970.

4. M.M. Von de Voorde, "Selection Guide to Organic Materials for Nuclear

Engineering" CERN 72-7, May 1972.

5. G.R. Imel, P.V. Kelsey and E.H. Ottewitte, "The Effect of Radiation

on TFTR Coil Materials" 1st Conference on Fusion Reactor Materials,

January 1979.

6. R.R. Coltman, Jr. } C.A. Klabunde, R.M. Kernohan and C.J. Long,

"Radiation Effects on Organic Insulators for Superconducting Magnets"

ORNL/TM-7077, November 1979.

7. H. Brechna, "Effect of Nuclear Radiation on Organic Materials;

Specifically Magnet Insulations in High-Energy Accelerators", SLAC

Report No. 40, 1965.

8. K. Shiraishi, Ed. "Report of Group 6 Materials", IAEA Workshop

on INTOR, June 1979.

9. P.W. Bridgman, "The Physics of High Pressure", G. Bell, London, 1931.

10. R.S. Kensley, "An Investigation of Frictional Properties of Metal-

Insulated Surfaces at Cryogenic Temperatures", MIT MS Thesis,

June 1979.
 19.2

The Radiation Damage Program at Argonne National Laboratory

as Applied to Fusion Magnets and the Intense Pulsed Neutron Source

B. S. Brown

The results of some of the basic radiation damage program of the Materials
Science Division at ANL can be directly applied to studies of radiation effects
in fusion magnets, rtt the time of its closing in October 1979, the cryogenic
irradiation facility at the CP-5 reactor at ANL was the only U.S. source of fast
neutrons capable of irradiating moderately sized samples at 4K. The results of
defect production rates and annealing behavior of stabilizing material, Cu and
Al, are well known to magnet designers and will not be discussed here. It
appears, however, that further studies on these materials are necessary, in
particular high field magnetoresistance measurements on various starting material
and the effect on residual resistivity and defect production rates of cyclic
irradiation followed by room temperature anneals. These studies will require
irradiations with fast neutrons at 4K with the ability to measure in a magnet
capable of 10T (lOOkOe).
A program was undertaken to understand the effect of fast-neutron irradiation
on superconducting NbTi and Nb-Sn. The results of irradiation temperature and
initial sample metallurgy of Nb-Sn are shown in figs. 1 and 2, where J is the
•5 C
critical current density, i.e. the current that the superconductor can carry
before developing a voltage. (2~4)' In all cases, the radiation induced defects
increase J , but it is seen that the size of the increase is a strong function
of the initial sample metallurgy, i.e. the initial value of J , and the irradiation
 19.3

temperature. Although the bulk of the magnet is not expected to receive more
22 2
than a few 10 n/m during its lifetime, the results of fig. 3 show that the
superconducting properties degrade significantly for larger doses, such as may
result near shielding penetrations. Since the superconducting fusion magnets
will be irradiated during operation in the superconducting state, it is necessary
for design data that the effects of irradiation at temperatures below 10K be
known. Figure 1 shows clearly that irradiation at ambient (and probably LN,)
temperatures are not useful for design data.
The reason for the different behavior at different irradiation temperatures
is due to defect mobility. This mobility at higher temperatures leaves the
defects in a different final state than that after irradiation at cryogenic
temperatures where the defects are "frozen in". The different defect states
will usually have a different effect on the measured property.
The difference in behavior after irradiation at 4K and higher temperatures
has been observed for almost all metals and semiconductors that have been studied.
It has been discussed here to emphasize the likelihood of this difference also
occuring in the insulating materials. Systematic studies of the effects of
(A\

J
irradiation temperature in insulators have not been made, but it is almost
certain that only irradiations performed at 4K will be useful as design data for
fusion magnets.
There are presently two facilities in this country for fast neutron irradia-
tions at 4K. The RTNS has a monoenergetic neutron spectrum (~14 MeV) and the
2
flux falls rapidly (~l/r ) with distance from the 1 cm. diameter disk 9source.
Therefore, many sample insulator irradiations to significant doses (10 -10 10
rads) for screening purposes will be difficult. The BSR reactor at ORNL has
 19.4

done a number of successful Y irradiations at 4K utilizing neutron capture in

Cd. The volume for fast neutron irradiations is small (~ 1 cm ) and insulator
irradiations have not been made with fast neutons. The funding and continuing
operation of this cryogenic irradiation facility for basic research beyond
October 1981 is in doubt.
A new neutron source is being built at Argonne: the Intense Pulsed Neutron
Source-I (IPNS-I)(Figs. 4-8). IPNS-I is a national facility for condensed
matter research using neutron scattering and radiation damage techniques.
Pulsed proton beams are accelerated in a synchrotron and projected onto a heavy
metal target. Large numbers of neutrons are emitted by the target nuclei through
spallation and fission processes. The materials research resulting from IPNS-I
use will provide information for national energy programs as well as for studies
of a fundamental nature. IPNS-I is intended to be a user-oriented facility, and
its performance goals are shown on the next page.
The IPNS-I radiation effects facility (REF) experimental assembly, one of
two research facilities at IPNS-I, provides a concentrated high-flux pulsed
source of fast neutrons to irradiation positions within the assembly for fast-
neutron radiation-damage studies on a variety of sample materials. The fast
neutrons, typically 1 to 10 MeV, produced in the target pass into the experimental
assembly where the flux is maximized within the irradiation locations by the use
of high-density reflector material to reflect fast neutrons back into the irradia-
tion locations and enhance the flux there. Samples placed in the irradiation
locations are exposed to this intense fast neutron flux and the resultant change
in sample properties are measured. There will be two cryogenically cooled
irradiation thimbles for irradiations down to 4K and an ambient temperature
irradiation tube for remotely handled irradiations.
 IPNS-I PERFORMANCE GOALS

On Start-up Final
(April 1981) (July 1983)

Proton Current*"' 8 vA 20 -vA+-

500-
Proton Energy 500 MeV 600 MeV

Repetition Rate 30 Hz 45 Hz

Peak Thermal Flux 3 x 101/j n/cm2s 5 x 1 0 ^ n/cm2

Peak Epithermal Flux (1 eV) 10 1 5 n/cm2s eV 1,4 x 1015 n/cm2 eV

Time-Average Fast Flux (> 0.1 MeV) 2 x 10 1 2 n/cm2s 5 x 10 1 2 n/cm2s

*Including availability factors (actual/scheduled.running time)

tCurrent and energy eauivalent in neutron production to 20 vA at 500 MeV
 19.6

The important aspects of the REF at IPNS-I are the dedication and flexibility

of the facility. The beam intensity, frequency and periods of operation will

be completely dictated by the experimenter during his irradiation time. The

irradiation facility not only will permit irradiation down to 4K, but there is

also the capability of transferring samples at 4K for measurement in other

cryostats without warmup. This is extremely important when considering the

effect of mobile defects on the measured property as discussed above. The irradiation

volume of > 200 cm permits the simultaneous irradiation of many samples.

This is necessary for insulator irradiations since the present dirth of pure

fast-neutron irradiation data requires the simultaneous irradiation of a large

number of samples for screening purposes. The original REF target will be

U, from which there will be some y's associated with fission processes,

although still considerably fewer y's than reactor based facilities. It will be

possible to change to a Ta target from which there will be a greatly reduced y

flux. Therefore, the relative contributions of damage in the insulators, i.e., rads,

from fast neutrons and y's can be measured.

Superconductor and stabilizer studies can be greatly aided by the ability

to insert a high field (7-10T) superconducting magnet in the irradiation

cryostat. This will permit detailed dose and field (transverse and longitudinal)

dependence to be investigated for both critical current changes in the superconductor

and magnetoresistance changes in the stabilizer. In addition, irradiation of

these materials while they are in a stressed state is possible due to the large

experimental volume.

Therefore, the REF at IPNS-I is not only well suited, but is also the only

facility in the country for doing many experiments needed for design data for

fusion magnets.
 19.7

These include:
1. Multi-sample irradiations at 4K of insulators to determine the contribution
of fast-neutron damage.
2. The effect of periodic annealing (after fast neutron irradiation at 4K) on
the cumulative magnetoresistance of stabilizers with different initial
resistivities.
3. Detailed dose and field dependence of various candidate superconductors
during fast-neutron irradiation in the superconducting state.
The present user mode of operation makes it very convenient for outside users to
perform experiments at IPNS-I, and it is anticipated that experiments such as
discussed above will be among the initial proposals next year.
 19.8

References

1. M. A. Abdou, "Radiation Considerations for Fusion Magnets", J. Nucl.

mater 72, 147 (1978).
2. B. S. Brown and T. H. Blewitt, "Critical Current Density Changes in
Irradiated Nb3Sn", J. Nucl. Mater. 80, 18 (1979).
3. B. S. Brown, T. H. Blewitt, T. L. Scott and D. G. Wozniak, "Critical
Current Changes in Neutron-Irradiated Nb,Sn as a Function of Irradiation
Temperature and Initial Metallurgy", J. Appl. Phys. 49, 4144 (1978).
4. B. S. Brown, "A Review of Radiation Effects in Superconducting Fusion
Magnet Materials", to be published in J. Nucl. Mater.
 19.9

Figure Captions

1. Fractional change in high J material during 6 and 305K fast-neutron

irradiation.
2. Changes in Nb,Sn in J vs. field and dose (at 6K) for samples with different J .
O C CO

3. Fractional change in critical temperature for various superconductors after

neutron irradiation at •v- 370K.
4. General layout of IPNS-I.
5. IPNS-I Experimental Facilities
6. IPNS-I Neutron Generation System.
7. Radiation Effects Experimental Assembly.
8. Calculated dependence of flux on radial distance from target center line
for Ta and U targets with Pb reflector.
 19.10

Nb3Sn

1.16

1.12

o
o
1.08

1.04

I.OOCi

1.96 I
2
!022
FLUENCE ((!0 .l MeV)
 19.11

O SAMPLE A ( J c o = 3.10 x I0 1 0 A/m 2 AT 3.3 T a 4.2 K)

A PREVIOUS WORK (J c o * 155 x I 0 101
" A/m* AT 3.3 T a 4.2 K)

O SAMPLE B ( J r o • 1.30 x I0 1 0 A/m 2 AT 3.3T 8 4 . 2 K)

2.2

2.0

1.8

1.6
8
5
a
1.4

1.2
O
Z
1.0

FLUENCE (!O 22 n / m 2 , E > O.I MeV)

 19.12 CVl

d o

£
Kl
CO
o

o
CM
O r

CO

S co - O
ro ro ro crj , ,
= ro -Q

O O D + x D>
M)

T I
O 00 CO
•H
{

o o o O
03
 19.13

N...

^ftsr'flM
 IPNS-lA
• EXPERIMENT FAC!LITIES;»

PROTON BEAU LINE

UoiC-SUAUSaOE
i'SERS SUPPORT BUILDING

COMPUTER SHELTER

EFFECTS TARGET

NEUTRON
SCATTEfUNG
/"I .e-

TARGET

BE4M. UTILIZATION
TUBE
t\ CRYSTAL A//AMER SPECTROUETER
fZ GENERAL PURPOSE POWDER OIFFRACTOUETER
F3 UNASSWNED IFOR SOU FLIGHT PATHS
Cl SHALL ANGLE DIFFRACTOUETER
CZ UNASSIGHEO
C3 VNASSIMEO
F1 LOW-RESOLUTION VEOWU-ENERGY
SCSLE IN METERS CHOPPER SPECTROUETIA
F5 SPECIAL ENVIRONUENT POWOER O/FFRACTOUETE/f
F6 WASSIGNEO I FOR IOOU FLIGHT PATH/
HI S/NGLE CRrSTAL DIFFRACTOUETER
H2 UNASSI6NE0
USER'S LAB 3 OFFICC SUILBWC HJ HI CM'-RESOLUTION UEOIUU-EHERCr
CHOPPER SPECTROUETER
VI WASSIGHED /VERTICAL BEAU TUBE I
Rl CRYOGENIC IRRADIATION THIUSLES
R2 "
P) ONASSIGNEO (FORWAR0 PROTON TUBE)
 I P N S"I NEUTRON GENERATION SYSTEM

TARGET HANDLING TUBE VERTICAL NEUTRON BEAM TUBE

GATE DRIVE THERMAL NEUTRON IRRADIATION HOLE

TARGET COOLING FAST NEUTRON IRRADIATION HOLE

EQUIPMENT WELL
PROTON BEAM DIAGNOSTIC
WELL (TWO)
NEUTRON BEAM GATE

REFLECTOR ASSEMBLY

CHOPPER CAVITY
RADIATION EFFECTS FACILITY
TARGET

NEUTRON BEAM TUBE

(TYPICAL) PROTON BEAM GATE

'PROTON BEAM LINE

NEUTRON SCATTERING FACILITY TARGET "ATMOSPHERE CONTROL TANK

STEEL SHIELDING
MODERATOR / REFLECTOR ASSEMBLY
CONCRETE SHIELDING
tlolCMU-USOOE
GENERAL PURPOSE DIAGNOSTIC WELL (TYPICAL OF TWO)
 IPNSI RADIATION EFFECTS EXPERIMENTAL ASSEMBLY
IRRADIATION "HOLES"

PROTON BEAM

H UstC-AUA-USDOE

HIGH DENSITY TARGET CAVITY LINER

REFLECTOR REGION

TARGET INSERTION
a REMOVAL TUBE
RADIATION EFFECTS
TARGET ASSEMBLY *>•

FAST FLUX IRRADIATION TUBE

ULTRA HIGH DENSITY
REFLECTOR REGION
TARGET COOLING LINES

TARGET CAVITY DRAIN

 10

C\J
8
° U TARGET
o To TARGET
'o 6

X
4
EDGE OF
§ 2 Pb REFLECTOR
UJ 0 / 1
8.1 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
RADIAL DISTANCE FROM TARGET (cm)
 20.1

MAGNET MATERIALS WORK

AT BNL

G. MORGAN

BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY

(No written contribution submitted)

 21.1

RELEVANT BES-SPONSORED ACTIVITIES

R. GOTTSCHALL
OFFICE OF BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES, DOE
 21.2

STRUCTURE
OF THE
MVISION OF MATERIALS SCIENCES

OFFICE OF BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES

Materials Sciences

Director

0. K. Stevens

(Sandra Tucker - Secretary)

Scientific Coordinator
L. C. Ianniello

Metallurgy and Ceramics Solid State Physics and

Branch
FTS: 233-3428 Materials Chemistry Branch
Commercial: 301-353-3428

(Janet Venneri - Secretary) (Linda Twenty - Secretary)

Chief: L. C. Ianniello Chief: M. C. Hittels
S. M. Wolf R. P. Epple
R. J. Gottschall A. S. Switendick 2/
F. V. Nolfi, Jr. 1/ J. L. Warren 3/
K. L. Kliewer~4/
D. T. Cromer 57
Notes: 1/ On Leave from Argonne National Laboratory
On Leave from Sandia Laboratories
Returning to Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory 8/80
Returning to Ames Laboratory 8/80
On Leave front Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
 MATERIALS SCIENCES

60ALS

« TO ADVANCE THE IINnFRSTJtffflHK OF BASIC STRUCTURES AND MECHANISMS GOVERNING

PROPERTIES AND BEHAVIOR OF MATTER IN THE CONDENSED STATE.
l-o

• TO MOVI!)E A FOUNDATION FOR MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT

OF BASIC KNOWLEDGE IN MATER!ALS-REUTED QOfil PROBLEM AREAS OF INTEREST
TO DOC.

• TO EXPLOIT THE UNIQUE CAPABILITIES AND FACILITIES EXISTIN6 IN DOE

LABORATORIES FOR CONDUCTING NATIONAL MATERIALS SCIENCES PROGRAMS.
MATERIAL SCIENCEo - MAJOR FACILITIES

o HIGH FLUX ISOTOPE REACTOR

o HIGH FLUX BEAM REACTOR
o NATIONAL SYNCHROTRON LIGHT SOURCE
o HIGH VOLTAGE ELECTRON MICROSCOPES
o BULK SHIELDING REACTOR
o OAK RIDGE RESEARCH--REACTOR
o CORROSION CENTER
o ATOMIC RESOLUTION MICROSCOPE ('SO PROJECT)
o IPNS ZING P' PROTOTYPE
 21.5

WVISIOB OF H*TEtMLS SCIBKfS

FY19H BUDGET
m
IETMUJMV M l CEMMCS

mu* STATE nnrsics sum

MTERJAU OOISTRY
 MATERIALS SCIENCES
FY 1980 SUPPORT FOR MAJOR TOPICAL AREAS
(TOTAL = 78.0 M$)

NIUTRON SCATTERING
 MATERIALS SCIENCES
FY 1980 SUPPORT BY LABORATORY
(TOTAL - 78.0 M$)

SOLAR ENERGY
RESEARCH INSTITUTE

IDAHO

MOUND
LAWRENCE
LIVERMORE
 21.8

ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY

9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
Solid State Science Division
P. D. Vashishta - Phone (FTS) 972-5493 or 312-972-5493

DEFECTS AND RADIATION DAMAGE $404 000

IN OXIDES AND INSULATORS
C. 0. Delbecq, S. A. Marshall.
W. Primak and P. H. Yuster
Studies of defects in insulators involving the damage caused by
X-rays, y-rays, neutrons and charged particles, and the relation of
such defects to the transport of ions, atoms and electrons. Major
areas of activity include: radiation induced dimensional changes and
stress relaxation of glasses in high radiation level environments;
investigations of glasses in connecMon with their use as waste
storage media and diagnostic windows in fusion reactions; relationships
of radiation damage to radiation dosages; paramagnetic resonance
studies of ion probes in refractory oxides such as Y2O3.

OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY

P. 0. Box X
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
Solid State Division
M. K. Wilkinson - Phone (FTS) 624-6151 or 615-574 fiisi
F. w. Young, Jr. - Phone (FTS) 624-5501 or 615-574.55^

LOW TEMPERATURE RADIATION EFFECTS $350 000

R. R. Coltman, Jr., C. E. Klabunde,
o M. Williams
Fission-neutron
reS1S a
damage
Ce
rates at 4.7 K for damage-efficiency determinations-
firradiated Cu f
nSrt J !] ° PUre a d d
°r composite superconductors; defect?
ff" PfwV" " f °P^ meta1s f«t-neutron irradiated near room
temperature; effects on insulators for superconducting magnets irradiated at
4.7 K; effect of fission-neutron irradiation at 4,7 K on the transition twn-
perature of Pd fiMms; stored energy in % and 2 ^ , fission-f^nt-SamagTd Cu.

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF CERAMICS $310 000

E. Sonder, Y. Chen,
N. J . Dudiiey, J . Gastineau,
F. A. Modine, R. A. Weeks

: e a c t i o na ns at
, h i g h temperatures involving charge and mass transport
kTn' J /Ga ] eSn c ?f i ? hang s o f
? ^P^Tties in materials such as 85)
n r S , , f n 9? 2S'- ? - P m urities
. dislocations, and ambient oxygen '
of t h T ™ ? ! / - e -C c ? nd iJ Cti ° n a n d Other physi cal
" Properties; determination
of the mechanisms involved in accelerated electrical breakdown at hi ah tem-
peratures under moderate electric fields; techniques include meSureSnts of
electrical conductivity and dielectric contant.thermoelectr^ poier! dif-
fusion coefficients, optical spectroscopy, electron paramagnetic resonance
and electron microscopy. '
 21.9

MICHIGAN MOLECULAR INSTITUTE

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PHYSICAL $ 26,000
PROPERTIES OF POLYMERS AND CROSS-
SECTIONAL AREA PER POLYMER CHAIN
R. L. Miller, Sr.
Phone: (517)-631-9450
R. F. Boyer
Phone: (517)-631-9450
Compilation of data on property-structure relationships of macromolecular
systems, with emphasis on correlations between physical properties and cross-
sectional area per polymer chain. Experimental work is undertaken when gaps
or discrepancies in data are found. Emphasis on the prediction of physical
properties.

UNIVERSITY OF UTAH

THE EFFECT OF PROCESSING $ 77,235

CONDITIONS ON THE RELIABILITY
OF CROSS-LINKED POLYETHYLENE
CABLE INSULATION
P. J. Phillips - Dept. of Materials
Science and Engineering
Phone: (801J-581-8574
Studies of the internal structure of polyethylene insulation, Including the
effect of melting and recrystallization on the interfacial boundary between
the insulation and the semiconducting layer. Morphology, dielectric loss
spectra and treeing properties of an extensive series of miniature cables
will be determined under carefully controlled extrusion, cross-linking and
crystallization conditions. Apparatus for accelerated testing of "treeing"
is under construction.
 21.10

ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY

9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
Materials Science Division
B. R. T. Frost - Phone (FTS) 972-4928 or 312-972-4928
F. V. FrflJin - Phone (FTS) 972-4925 or 312-972-4925

HIGH VOLTAGE ELECTRON MICROSCOPE $475,000

TANDEM FACILITY
A. Taylor
Operation and development of 1.2 MeV High Voltage Electron Microscope Facility
with in-situ capability for ion implantation, ion damage, and ion beam
analysis; the HVEM is currently being utilized for research programs in
mechanical properties, radiation damage, oxidation and hydroqenation effects;
specimen stages for heating (1000°C), cooling (9°K), straining, specific
gaseous environments and for the ion beam interface with a 300 kV ion accel-
erator are in use; a 2 MV tandem accelerator will be available for in-situ
irradiations in FY 1981; approximately 50% of the HVEM usage is by non-ANL
scientists on research proposals approved by a steering committee for the HVEM
that meets every four months; installation of the 2 MV tandem accelerator and
interconnection with the interface is scheduled in two phases, Phase I in FY80
with the internal positive ion source and Phase II in FY81 with the tandem mode.

OAK RIDGE ASSOCIATED UNIVERSITIES

P, 0. Box 17
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
William E. Felling - Phone: (FTS) 626-3304 or (615) 576-3304
DOE FACILITY USERS PROGRAM $ 80,000
W. E. Felling
This project supports collaborative work between university researchers
and national laboratories; one program involves apparatus at ORNL such as
the high voltage electron microscope and the analytical electron microscope;
the second program involves the National Synchrotron Light Source at BNL.
 21.11

LAWRENCE BERKELEY LABORATORY

University of California
Berkeley, California 94720
Materials and Molecular Research Division
A. W. Searcy - Phone: (FTS) 451-6062, or 415/486-6062

1.5 MeV ELECTRON MICRSCOPE $320,000

K. H. Westmacott
Crystal lattice defect-solute atom interactions, segregation phenomena, preci-
pitation reactions, structural transitions. High voltage electron microscopes
equipped with environmental cells used for dynamic in-situ studies of gas-
solid reactions, microstructurai stability in hostile environments and mechan-
isms for improving material performance.

ATOMIC RESOLUTION MICROSCOPY $215,000

R. Gronsky and G. Thomas
Development and application cf electron-optical instrumentation and techniques
to image atoms in solids. Real-space structural analysis of crystalline and
amorphous materials. Identification of atomic mechanisms responsible for
solid state reactions, bulk behavior, surface properties and performance of
materials used in the energy technologies.
 21.12

ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY

9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
Materials Science Division
B. R. T. Frost - Phone (FTS) 972-4928 or 312-972-49?8
F. Y. Fradin - Phone (FTS) 972-4925 or 312-972-4925

IPNS OPERATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT $1,229,000

D. C. L. Price
The Intense Pulsed Neutron Source (IPNS) program is involved in the development
of an intense pulsed spallation neutron source for materials science research
with neutron scattering and irradiation techniques; during FY1980, the IPNS
program operates the prototype source ZING-P'; IPNS is scheduled to begin
operation in FY1981 as a national users facility.

ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY

9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439

Intense Pulsed Neutron Source Program

D. L. P r i c e , Phone (FTS) 972-5518 or 312-972-5518

PULSED NEUTRON SOURCE DEVELOPMENT $1,100,000

D. L. Price, B. S. Brown, J. M. Carpenter,

R. L. Kustom, N. J. Swanson

This IPNS Program has the present goal of providing an intermediate-flux pulsed
spallation neutron source for condensed matter research with neutron scattering
and irradiation techniques. The components of the Program are: (a) the IPNS-I
construction project, funded at the level of $6.4 M beginning in FY 1979, to provide
an operating facility with a partial set of instrumentation by April 1981; (b)
the IPNS-I Expansion construction project funded at the level of $2.4 M beginning
in FY 1980, to provide additional research instrumentation; (c) an R 4 D program
to upgrade the IPNS-I Accelerator System and to develop neutron targetry and
research instrumentation required for IPNS-I; (d) a source operations program
to run the ZING-P' prototype and develop operating procedures for IPNS-I, proceeding
into IPNS-I operation on the completion of the construction project. Relevant
research programs appear under the neutron activities of the Materials Science,
Solid State Science and Chemistry Divisions of Argonne National Laboratory.
 21.13

3R00KHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY

Upton, Long Island, New York 11973
Department of Physics
N. P. Samios - Phone: TFTS) 666-3866

EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH - NATIONAL $1,132,000

SYNCHROTRON LIGHT SOURCE, R&D
A. van Steenbergen, M. Blume,
K. Batchelor, J. R. Godel,
G. Bagley, L. Blumberg, J. B.
Hastings, M. Howells, H. C. H.
Hsieh, S. Krinsky, M. Perlman,
J. Sheehan

R&D in support of the NSLS project. This facility is the first in

this country designed expressly for use of synchrotron radiation and
the performance objectives for the electron storage rings are quite
different from those of importance in high energy physics applica-
tions. Program involves design studies, model work, experimental
testing and computer analyses to optimize performance characteristics
and to develop new beam line instrumentation which permit users to
take full advantage of the capabilities of this new research facility.
 FINDI&S AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BASIC RESEARCH IN NIGH TEMPERATURE CERAMICS
FROM CERAMICS PANEL REPORT TO THE COUNCIL <•« MATERIALS SCIENCE
OF SEPTEMBER 1978 (COPIES AVAILABLE ON REQUEST):
|
! ElNWft I THE MAJOR AND OVER-RIDING PROBLEM OF HI3H PERFORWMCI CERAMICS It THAT COMPQNiNTI
: WITH DESIRED PROPERTIES AND MCROSTRUCTURI CANNOT BE RELIABLY AND REPROOUCIBLY
i MANUFACTURED, BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF FUNDAMENTAL UNDERSTANDING THERE IS A
I CRITICAL NEED FOR BASIC STUDIES ON CERAMIC MICROSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND CONTROL,

RECOMMENDATIONS AS HIGHFST PRIORITY TOPICS FOR CERAMIC RESEARCH

i

0 1NTERPARTICLE FORCES AND MECHANISMS TH,< CAUSE PARTICLE AGGLOMERATION,

t PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SOLID-FLUID WTMPACES.
• RELATIONSHIP OF PARTICLE/ FLUID/ AND INTERFACIAL FACTORS TO STRUCTURE AMfe
FLOW BEHAVIOR OF SOLID-FLUID SYSTEMS UNDER VARIOUS EXTERNAL FORCES.
• RELATIONSHIP OF KINETICS OF INTERFACE-CONTROLLED REACTIONI TO STRUCTURAL'
> CHEMICAL PARAMETERS.
' t IDENTIFICATION AND RELATIONSHIP OF MICROSTRUCtURM. ANt OHfMICAL FACTORS TO
I ELECTRICAL INSTABILITIES.
I • IDENTIFlCATION AND «UANTITATIVf UNOfRSftdttfflt Of STHfUGTH LIMITING F U W AMI
i THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO MECHANICAL STABILITY.
t UNDERSTANDING OF THE PHYSICS OF CRACK PPOMtATlGt ANB HOf IT IS AFFECftf BY
MICROSTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT.
• UNDERSTANDING OF THE MECHANISMS OF DEFORMATION tPf MULTIPHASE CERAMICS.
 22.1

IRRADIATION SOURCES FOR

MAGNET INSULATOR STUDIES

L. R. GREENWOOD

ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY

CHAIRMAN - DAFS SUBTASK GROUP A

DOSIMETRY AND DAMAGE PARAMETERS

DECEMBER 2-3, 1980

PRESENTED TO MEETING ON ELECTRICAL

INSULATORS FOR FUSION MAGNETS
DOE, GERMANTOWN, MD
 22.2

OBJECTIVES

DEVELOP TECHNIQUES TO MEASURE RADIATION EXPOSURE IN TERMS

OF NEUTRON FLUX, SPECTRA, AND FUNDAMENTAL DAMAGE PARAMETERS IN
ORDER TO CORRELATE MATERIALS EFFECTS BETWEEN FACILITIES AND
EXTRAPOLATE TO FUSION REACTOR ENVIRONMENTS.

- CHARACTERIZE ALL IRRADIATION FACILITIES

ORR, HFIR, EBR II, OMEGA WEST, RTNS II,
U.C. DAVIS, FMIT.
- DEVELOP DAMAGE PARAMETER CROSS SECTIONS DPA,
PKA, H, HE, TRANSMUTANTS.
- THEORETICAL MODELING OF PRIMARY DAMAGE STATE.
- IDENTIFY AND PROCURE REQUIRED NUCLEAR DATA
FOR DOSIMETRY AND DAMAGE CALCULATIONS.
- STANDARDIZE DOSIMETRY AND DAMAGE PRACTICES.
 22.3

DAMAGE PRODUCTION
STRATEGY
DETERMINE DAMAGE PRODUCTION FROM PRIMARY RECOIL
ENERGY USING EXPERIMENT AND ANAUYSIS, EMPHASIZING
FISSION-FUSION CORRELATIONS

STUDY RELATIVE RATES FOR TOTAL DEFECTS, DISORDERING,

FREE DEFECTS/ AND CLUSTERS

DEVELOP DATA BASE AND DAMAGE SOURCE TERM FOR

CORRELATION METHODOLOGY

DAMAGE PARAMETERS - ENERGY, DPA, PKA, H, HE

METALLIC ELEMENTS - ANL, HEDL, LASL, LLL, ORNL
HIGH-ENERGY (50 MEV, FMIT) - ANL - L. GREENWOOD
POLYATOMIC MATERIALS - LASL - D. PARKIN
INSULATORS; IONIZATION-ASSISTED - BNL - A. GOLAND

DEVELOPMENT OF DISPLACEMENT PROCESSES

(COMPUTER CODES - MARLOWE, COMENT, SCAS)
DYNAMIC COLLISION CASCADES - LLL - H. GUINAN
COLLISION CASCADE DEVELOPMENT- ORNL - M. ROBINSON
ANNEALING OF CASCADES - HEDL - H. HEINISCH

EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES (DISORDERING, FREE DEFECTS, CLUSTERS)

CORRELATION OF FISSION REACTOR/RTNSII
- LLL, M. GUINAN
- HEDL, D. DORAN, H. BRAGER
 22.4

PRIMARY DOSIMETRY TECHNIQUES

NEUTRON
TYPE COMMENTS

PASSIVE-FOIL, HAFM FLUX, ENERGY SPECTRUM* HE

NOT GAMMA SENSITIVE

ACTIVE-PROTON RECOIL, FLUX ONLY; GAMMA SENSITIVE

BF3, FISSION, SELF-POWERED

GAMMA*

PASSIVE-EMULSION, TLD DOSE ONLY; NEUTRON SENSITIVE

ACTIVE-IONIZATION. DOSE ONLY (EXCEPT COMPTON)

CALORIMETRY, SELF-POWERED NEUTRON SENSITIVE
(PT), COMPTON

*GAMMA TECHNIQUES MAY NOT BE RELIABLE AT

INTENSE SOURCES OF FAST NEUTRONS.
 22.5

•-s
r\/
o
*
O o O

U
u o o
Oo Oo

Oo

Si
43
V
5 O Q

X
X X X X 0
I d
4-
u U.
4;
0
v\ -2 o
9i
ri U 4)

3 0
h 5i in
- <3Q
X.
VJ

CQ
22.6

_ O

xrnj
 22.7

(V\

5 i 2

o
-M
rtf

o
X

II

4-
o VJ

CO X
 s
o.
OflK RIDGE REflCTOR E7
s
0:3

1
OS

u.
m
o. " 1 ^ •J""^ ••""1 l»»imi •J Iln l """ ""! 14' ln ^ •••m^ i'" 1 ^ }sllnl *
0 7
1O" 10" 10"* 10"* 10"* UT 10" 10° 101 10* 1
ENERGY,MeV
NEUTRON FLUX SPECTRUM IN ORR (E7, 1MW). THE STAYSL CODE WAS
USED WITH 28 REACTIONS. DOTTED AND DASHED LINES ARE
STANDARD DEVIATION ERRORS.
 22.9

OflK RIDGE RESEflRCH REflCTOR C7

m
i

s THERMflL FLUX

£ O FLUX>0.92MeV
C
en

0°

-30.0 -18.0 -6.0 6.0 13.0 30.0

HEIGHT fiBOVE VERTICflL MIDPLflNE,.cm
NEUTRON FLUX GRADIENTS FOR 0RR-MFE1 EXPERIMENT. NOTE THE RAPID
CHANGE FROM SOUTH TO NORTH FOR THE FAST FLUX.
 22.10

OAK RIDGE REACTOR

ENERGY, MeV F LUX, % DPA (NI ) , 7,

Thermal 26 ±1 -

T-.001 21 ±2

.001-0.1 12 db6 3.7

0.1-1 21 ±7 23.0

1-2 10 ±2 24.8

2 - 4 10 ±1 32.2

>4 2.3±.2 16.4

 FOIL POSITIONS

To TARGET, 3 1/4" DIA. x 5 1/2" LONG;

COOLING WATER, 1/2" THICK;
Fe WATER JACKET, 1/8" THICK
A* LINER, 3/16" THICK
Pb REFLECT0R,26"DIA.
 22.12

-01
NQlO^ld
 22.13

1PNS NEUTRON FLUX MEASUREMENTS

(Flux per incident proton. E»- 500 MeV)

Energy Limit Uranium Tantalum Ratio

MeV Target Target (Ufa)
Total 5.75 x Iff"2 3.81 x !0-2 1.51

Thermal 4.51 x IO"4 8.31 x 10-4 0.54

>0.l 3.58x10-2 2.07x10-2 1.73

>l ud xio-2 5.79 x I0" 3 1.90

>IO 6.54x10-4 6.10 x 10-4 1.07

>20 3.72x10-4 3.40 x 10-4 1.09

>30 1.93 x JO"4 1.65 x 10-4 1.17

Proton Current(p/s) 3.55 x I0 12 3.73 x !0 12

Proton Fluxfo/cm^-s) 1.06 x I0 9 1.12 X I0 9

 1 1 1
12 _ L 1 1 l 1 1 1 ' 1 1 | MM
lJ TARGET
—MEASURED
10 —
— o CALCULATED
0 ° o •Ta TARGET
Q o o MEASURED
O
• CALCULATED
1
O o o
X 6—
— _> a a a o — S3

I- 1

rD J D —
u_
a
o a D o
«-•
o 4 o a (3 O —
LU o a D o
TV"— i
0 D a XL.
a n
a a
n 1 1 i 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 1
-16 -12 - 8 - 4 0 4 8 12 16
DISTANCE FROM CENTER LINE OF TARGET (cm)
 22.15

IU
till 1 1 ! I i i ! 1 1 1 1 I 1 !
-
- Ta TARGET
o n MEASURED
o a CALCULATED
- a a -
6 — D a —

- a —
a
4 a
D
— a —
D _1
2 D

0 1 1 1 i l I I 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 i
1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 ! i t i l l ! 1 i
#
X
20 U TARGET
MEASURED
— ' O CALCULATED —

5 16 — —
LU

o 0
12 O
o _
_ 0
o
8 o __
o
O o
o
4 o
o
_ c —a _
h —TAR6ET-
....
n 1 1 1 I i r r 1 1 i 1 i 1 1 | I
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
DISTANCE ALONG TARGET (cm)
PROTON B E A M - * -
22.16
 22.17

ZENITH
(CAPSULE AXIS)

HELIUM SPECIMEN AND

RADIOMETRIC FOIL
OUTSIDE DIAMETER

I 1
SCALE (mm)

Fig* 2. Constant Flux Contours (x 1Q17 n/cm^) Deduced from Helium

and Radiometric Dosimetry at RTKS I. Note Che Asymmetry
and Small Scale. Data from Ref. 18.
 AXIAL NEUTRONS HELIUM GENERATION SPECIMENS
304 SS COVER
Hill DOSIMETRY
WIRE RINGS

DOSIMETRY FOIL STACK A T O

^

FOIL STACK c mmmmm^- (O

h-1
00

iTACK D = m^3~^^>^5J=?^.:-r=:

/ s / / s /- A s / s s s /^/ / s S

\ \ww\\ w

304 SS COVER WIRE RING

304 SS CAPSULE BODY HELIUM GENERATION
SPECIMENS
SCALE (mm)

Figure 1. Cross Sectional V?ew of the Be(d,n) Inner Irradiation Package

22.19
 04 Be(d/n), 30 MQV, 30 cm

CD- 0 cleg
CO
I
e
o
1
(DO.
SI—<
J
c
X
3 o_

0.0 7.0 14.0 21,0 28.0 35.0

ENENSY^MeV
NEUTRON FLUX SPECTRA MEASURED AT U.C. DAVIS CYCLOTRON. NOTE THE
LARGE SPECTRAL CHANGES WITH ANGLE. DOTTED AND DASHED LINES ARE.
STANDARD DEVIATION ERRORS.
 22.21

BE (D, N) , 40 MeV (FMIT )

ENERGY, MeV FLUX,% DPA(NI) ,%
<1 10 ±2 2
1- 5 12 ±2 4
5-10 13 ±2 11
10-15 21 ±3 23
15-20 21 ±4 28
20-25 14 ±3 19
25-30 6 ±2 8
>30 3 ±1 5
 22.22

FLUENCE/Coul, > 1 MeV

0.52 x 10 1 7

-6.0 -3.0 0.0 3.0

RRDIUS, mm
FLUENCE CONTOURS MEASURED AT U.C. DAVIS, B e ( d , n ) , 30 MeV.
 22.23

DPR/Coul, COPPER
1.2 x
o
in-

GC "
£-•

o
CO'

-6.0 -3.0 0.0 3.0 6.0

RRDIUSjmm
DISPLACEMENT-PER-ATOM CONTOURS MEASURED AT U.C, DAVIS,
Be(d,n) 30 MeV.
 23.2
Use of the RTNS-II Cryostats
for Insulator Studies

Introduction
Superconducting magnets for fusion reactors require insulators
that will withstand neutron and gamma ray irradiation at cryogenic tem-
peratures while maintaining satisfactory mechanical and electrical prop-
erties. In addition, it is desirable that they not evolve significant
quantities of gases or suffer degradation of properties during subsequent
warm-up to room temperature. In order to select materials for this ap-
plication, irradiation experiments must be performed under conditions
that closely resemble those expected in the reactors themselves. The
Rotating Target Neutron Source (RTNS-II) [1] at Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory is a facility where such experiments could possibly
be carried out. In this talk, I will discuss the existing cryogenic
facilities at RTNS-II and suggest approaches toward using them for in-
sulator studies.

The Rotating Target Neutron Source

RTNS-II was built specifically to provide 14-MeV neutrons for the
study of radiation effects on materials for fusion reactors. It has been
in operation since 1978, and is currently the highest flux source of
"pu^e" 14-MeV neutrons available for materials research. The facility
consists of two separate accelerator - target combinations, only one of
which has been put into operation. There are plans to begin operation
with the second machine in late 1981.
Each source consists basically of a 400-kV Cockcroft - Walton
accelerator which produces a beam of deuterons, and a rotating copper
alloy target, which is coated on the inside with titanium tritide.
The deuteron beam is focussed onto a spot about 1 cm in diameter on the
rotating target. A small fraction of the deuterons undergo fusion reac-
tions with the tritium, producing neutrons and alpha particles. The
alphas are stopped in the target material, while the neutrons fly out in
all directions, nearly isotropicaily. The target is rotated at about
5000 rpm and cooled by water flowing through internal channels in order
 23.3
to dissipate the heat produced by the beam, which amounts to over 25kW.
The object to be irradiated is positioned near the back side of
the spinning target, at the location of highest flux.

Cryogenic Facilities
Because of the nature of this neutron source, it is important to
place samples as close as possible to the target in order to achieve the
highest flux. Also, because of the small size of the beam spot and the
rapid drop-off of flux with distance from the target, samples must be
small in order not to have large flux gradients within them. Accordingly,
we have chosen to use cold-finger-type cryostats with the end of the
finger butted toward the target. To keep the mass of material near the
target to a minimum, so as to reduce activation, a transfer-line-type
cryostat is desirable.
In response to these requirements, we have chosen to use Heli-
tran cryostats, which are manufactured by the Air Products and Chemicals
Company. A Heli-tran cryostat consists basically of a flexible transfer
line, which is inserted into a liquid helium dewar at one end, and at-
tached to the cryostat head at the other. The head incorporates a cold
finger, to which samples can be attached. The cold finger is surrounded
by a removable thermal radiation shield, which operates at an intermediate
temperature. This in turn is surrounded by a removable vacuum shroud,
which operates at room temperature. Inside the cold finger tip is an
adjustable needle valve. Cooling of the tip is accomplished by pres-
surizing the liquid helium dewar, passing liquid helium through the
transfer line, and evaporating it at the needle valve. The vapor then
passes out of the cryostat head through a flowmeter. A small heater is
mounted on the cold finger tip to make it possible to vary the temperature.
Temperatures below 4K can be achieved by pumping on the exhaust line.
The temperature is measured by copper-constantan thermocouples and carbon-
glass resistors. Feedthroughs are provided for electrical connections
to samples. Neutron fluence is determined within an overall uncertainty
of +7.5% from the activation of niobium foils mounted on the cold finger
tip [2].
 23,4
We have used these devices to make measurements of resistivity
changes in various metals as well as critical current changes in super-
conductors, and have found them to be convenient and reliable. A control
unit, which includes flow meters, valves, a bellows vacuum pump, strip
charts, and temperature and pressure control and monitoring equipment is
installed in the RTNS-II control room, and wiring and helium gas lines
are connected from there to the target room. A computerized data
acquisition system is available for rapid in situ electrical measurements.
A 500-liter dewar which is refiliable during cryostat operation will be
purchased this year, to allow more convenient operation of long experi-
ments.

Capabilities and Limitations

The cryostats presently in operation can be used at temperatures
from below 4K to room temperature. Isochronal annealing is relatively
convenient. The useable sample volume depends on the flux required.
For highest flux operation at 4K, the volume is about 1 cm 3 , over which
the flux varies from about 1x10 n /cm 2 -sec in the front to about 2xl0 ]1
n
/cm 2 -sec in the back, with present targets. In testing metal samples,
we have typically used dimensions of about 1 cm in lateral extent and
less than 1 mm in thickness. Larger targets and higher deuteron beam
currents, to be used in the future, will increase the flux by a factor
of 2 to 3.
At positions near the back of the target in line with the deuteron
beam, the neutron spectrum of the RTNS-II is essentially monoenergetic at
14.8 MeV. (The half-width is a few tenths of an MeV). The fluxes of
scattered neutrons are small compared to the direct flux at positions
close to the target [3J. The fluence achievable on cryogenic samples
is up to about 3x10 n/cm2 per week, with 5-day, 2-shift operation and
present targets. This is equivalent to about 9x10 rads per week in G-10.
The gamma ray flux at positions close to the target is believed
to be small compared to the neutron flux. The sources of gamma rays are
inelastic scattering of a small fraction of the neutrons as they pass
through the target backing and the windows on the cryostat vacuum shroud
and thermal radiation shield, and inelastic scattering and capture of
 23.5
neutrons in the target assembly and the concrete walls of the target
room.
The liquid helium consumption rate of the present cryostats is
about 2 liters per hour. If a 500-liter dewar were used, the most
convenient operating mode would be to refill the dewar on Monday mornings,
allowing the target room activity to decay over the weekends to minimize
dose to personnel during refilling.
Measurements of electrical resistance and gas evolution of insul-
ators on warm-up should be relatively easy with a cryostat of this type.
Mechanical properties measurements would be more difficult. The major
problems would be (1) achieving a large enough sample size to observe
bulk behavior, particularly for the fiber-reinforced material, while
keeping the flux high and the flux gradients low, (2) controlling the
temperature in an insulator sample in the presence of nuclear heating,
while allowing free motion of the sample in response to mechanical loads,
(3) applying a controllable mechanical load to the sample «iii?e keeping
it at 4K, without incurring a large heat conduction rate into the cryo-
stat, and (4) applying loads of the type expected in the actual appli-
cation (compression and shear) in the tight geometry needed to allow
operation close to the RTNS-II target.

Recommendations ,
I recommend that a new Heli-tran head and transfer line be pur-
chased for insulator studies. This could be designed for the appropriate
size of samples, and would be compatible with the existing control unit
and the dewar soon to be acquired. The cost would be about $4000.
A possible approach [which occurred to me after the meeting] to
solving the problems outlined above for mechanical properties measurements
would be to use a disc-shaped sample glued to the inside surface of the
end face of a copper can, which would form the end of the cold finger.
This would be butted up to the RTNS-II target, so that neutrons would
impinge on the sample from the glued side. The opposite surface would
have E pointed penetrator pressed against it, in a geometry similar to
that of a hardness tester. The penetrator could be made from a permanently
 23.6
magnetic material, and force could be applied by a solenoid wound around
the cold finger, either internal and superconducting or external and
normally conducting. An atmosphere of helium gas could be maintained
around the sample to improve heat transfer [as suggested by Victor van
Lint at this meeting]. The sample could be cooled to 4K before the load
was applied to the penetrator. The stress state would be compression
and shear, and the thickness and diameter of the sample could be selected
so as to achieve bulk behavior for the applied load and duration of ex-
periment. Cyclic loads could be applied by varying the current in the
solenoid. The observed parameter would be the size of the indentation
at the conclusion of the experiment. This could be compared to that
for a control experiment without radiation to see at what fluence damage
becomes significant. It may be possible to test more than one sample
simultaneously with the appropriate mechanism. For example, a tripod
coupled to a ball joint could be used to apply equal force to three
samples exhibiting different deformations. An apparatus of this type
could be used to apply load either during irradiation or afterwards.

Conclusion
It appears that the RTNS-II could be used to make some useful
contributions to understanding the effects of neutrons on the electrical
and mechanical properties of insulators at cryogenic temperatures. The
chief disadvantage is the relatively small irradiation volume, but it
appears that this could be compensated for by appropriate design.
 23.7
References

1. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, "RTNS: A Tool for Studying

Neutron Damage," p. 16 in Energy arid Technology Review, UCRL-52000-
78-3 (March, 1978) (available from C. M. Logan at LLNL).
2. R. A. Van Konynenburg, "Neutron Dosimetry (14 MeV) for Foil Samples
Irradiated with the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Rotating Target
Neutron Source," UCRL-51393, Rev. 1 (1974).
3. L. R. Greenwood, talk given at this meeting.

T h i s work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of

Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract No.
W-74O5-Eng-48.

DISCLAIMER

This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of

the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the
University of California nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, ex-
press or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the ac-
curacy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or
process disclosed, or represents thai its use would not infringe privately owned
rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service
by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily
constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United
Stales Government or the University of California. The views and opinions of
authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United
States Government thereof, and shall not be used for advertising or product en-
dorsement purposes.
 24,1

Effect of Beta Radiation on the 4°K Static Mechanical

Properties of G-1.0 Epoxy-Glass Composite

W. S. Diethorn
Nuclear Engineering Department
J. C. Conway
Engineering Science and Mechanics Department

Pennsylvania State University

Background

A current DOE effort is concerned with the selection and performance

of materials for pulsed tokamaks of advanced design. G-10 epoxy-glass

composite is the reference material for insulators in the cryogenic magnets,

which receive a high radiation dose in the mixed neutron-photon field

present. Over their lifetime (10 -10 pulses), insulators will receive
o
a reference dose of 1 x 10 rads (ignoring hot spots!) and up to 10

annealing cycles from A K to room temperature. The data base on static

mechanical and fatigue properties of irradiated organic-based m.iteri.ils

in this dynamic environment is inadequate. Over the past 5 years, progress

toward correcting this situation has been tortuously slow. Some trends in

insulator material performance and its relationship to dose have been

identified, but the level of understanding is poor and the dose which de-

fines unacceptable service at 4 K is elusive.

The complexity and cost of irradiation experiments at 4 K are well-

known factors in this picture. Practical constraints include neutron-

induced radioactivity in cryostat and specimen, remote operation of a

cryostat behind massive shielding (often under 15-20 ft. of water), high

helium boil-off rate due to radiation heating, and limited irradiation space

for specimens. A new method of dose delivery, based on the use of a

radioactive beta emitter, will eliminate some of those classic, diffi-

culties in radiation effects studies of organic-based materials. We

 24.2

suggest that a beta source be used to study the effect of radiation dose

on the static mechanical properties of the C-10 reference material for the

magnet insulators.

Beta Source
198
The irradiation source is the beta emitter Au, produced by thermal

neutron irradiation of a thin, metallic, gold foil. After neutron ir-

radiation, foils are transferred to the helium cryostat and placed in

contact with a thin test specimen immersed in liquid helium, and the

mechanical tests are performed at h K.

source properties
198
1) Au properties

\ 2.7d

Y 0.4Jmev

6 0.96mev

average beta energy 0.31mev

2) foil preparation

nuclear reaction Au(n,Y) Au

cross section 97b

thermal neutron flux 10 n/cm -sec

weight 75mg

activity (t-0) 5Ci

3) foil performance
9
beta dose to test specimen ~\ x 10 rads during 10<!
decay period
average dose rate in test specimen ~A x 10 rads/hr.

dose rate in air at 10 ft. (t=0) 100 milliroentgens/hr.

 24.3

(a) in the 1MW Triga reactor at Penn State

In this test configuration, the specimen and foils absorb practically all

the beta energy emitted, while the cryostat absorbs the accompanying

gamma energy. The amount of energy (beta + gamma) deposited in the cryo-

stat is so small that it makes no significant contribution to helium boil

] 98

off. The range of the An betas in the specimen determines the per-

missible specimen thickness. A specimen thickness of l-2mm is suitable.

As the table above shows, a pair of foils will deliver to such a specimen
9
a beta dose of 1 x 10 rads in 10 days. The dose rate is not uniform over

the specimen thickness; the surface/mldplane dose ratio is estimated to be

as high as 3. The time average dose rate is controlled by the neutron

irradiation conditions and can be adjusted accordingly. A foil does not

present, it will be observed, a large personnel radiation hazard during

the transfer of the foil to the cryostat. Since specimen testing begins

after the foil has decayed away, there is not personnel radiation hazard

during testing. Finally, several approaches to beta dosimetry in the

specimen are available. The most flexible appears to be the use of 'IT,I)

dosimetry. TLD dosimeters in the form of thin sheets are commercially

available.
9 13 2
Doses larger than 1 x 10 rads (for a neutron flux of 1 x 10 n/cm -sec)
can be delivered by replacing the foils every 10 days with freshly irradiated
q
foils. The maximum incremental dose in this strategy is therefore 1 x 10 rads.

Radiation Effects Study

The use of a beta source rests on the generalization that equal rad

doses delivered by electrons, gammas, or neutrons produce equal damage

relevant to the performance of organic insulators at 4 K. This generalization

 24.4

can be easily criticized, but even with neutrons, differences, when they

do exist, are undoubtedly of second or higher order. A few key experi-

ments at 4 K, addressing fundamental mechanical properties, should be

carried out first in order to bring some order into the field and thus

enhance the prospects of raising the right questions later on. For this

reason, we recommend the following study.

Purpose: Search for the effect of beta radiation dose on the

stress-strain behavior of C-10 glass-epoxy com-
posite at 4°K.

Tests: Specimens will be irradiated at h K and tensile and

flexure tests performed to failure at this temperature.
To achieve good statistics, many duplicate tests
will be required. Doses up to 5 x 10^ rads are of
interest. These results are to be compared with
results obtained with unirradiated specimens in the
cryostat and with results in the literature. Op-
tical and electron microscopy will be used to
document failure modes in the specimens.

Material Selection: The selection of the C-10 material will be based

on input from the ROK design studies. Although
material has top priority, other materials, such
as the epoxy matrix material alone, are also
expected to receive some attention in the study.

The following tasks are proposed in a three-year study.

1) Design and construct a liquid helium cryostat for tensile and

fluxure tests on thin specimens at 4 K.

2) Develop the beta irradiation technique for use in the eryostat and

perform the necessary dosimetry.

3) Investigate the effect of dese on tensile and flexure test properties

of G-10 reference material at 4 K.

The purpose of the program is short range and but a first step.

We must go beyond materials testing and attempt to define the relationship

between dose and those bulk mechanical properties of importance to magnet

 24.5

designers. Tills task is, frankly, ;i very formidable one. Here, a close

working relationship with those already making contributions to the insu-

lator program is essential.

We expect that the results of this study will stimulate efforts with

other organic candidate materials, raise the issue of fatigue and fracture

testing, and suggest some directions for modeling the relationship between

property changes and radiation dose. With respect to fatigue, we note that

the beta irradiation technique should permit fatigue testing during

radiation.
 LA-UR 81-1297 25.1

ORGANIC INSULATOR STUDIES AT LOS ALAMOS *

Don M. Parkin and Frank W. Clinard

The effects of radiation on the structural and electrical properties of

organic insulators to be used in superconducting magnets in fusion devices
has been identified as a critical materials problem. These materials will be
exposed to both y-ray and neutron radiation. LANL has been asked by the OFE
Materials branch to look at the relationship between the effects of y-ray and
neutron radiation effects.
The program is in the early planning stage at this time. Three pre-
1 Quinary thrusts have been set for the program. Calculations of the radia-
tion doses at the inboard coils of magnets for conceptual fusion device de-
signs performed at LANL, ANL and Culham show that from 50-90% of the radiation
dose comes from neutrons. Based on this information, the primary data needed
for evaluating the behavior of organic insulators is neutron irradiation data.
Furtherv since the majority of the existing data is from y-ray irradiations,
basic neutron irradiation results are needed before correlations with y-rays
can be made.
The neutron spectrum that an organic insulator will be exposed to will
vary greatly depending on the shield design, specific type of magnet and
location relative to shield penetrations. Under ideal conditions the spect-
rum will be mostly very low energy down scattered neutrons with few fast
neutrons. Near penetrations, the spectruir. will be considerably harder. This
variation necessitates some knowledge of the neutron energy dependence of the
response of organic insulators to neutron irradiations. Therefore, a "rough"
neutron response function for these materials is required so that the results
can be effectively utilized in the design of fusion device magnet systems and
for magnet shield designs.
The irradiation environment will include both neutrons and y-rays. A
description of the projected behavior of organic insulators will require
knowledge of the effects of both types of radiation. The relationship between
them is needed so that the relative importance of the two components can be
evaluated. When sufficient information is available from neutron irradiations,
correlation with y-rays will be possible.

*Work performed under the auspices of the U. S. Department of Energy.

 25.2

The experimental program will be to irradiate a statistically meaning-

ful number of selected organic insulators of interest to OFE with neutrons.
Environmental considerations and service conditions require that these irra-
diations be at liquid He temperatures. Irradiations will be performed at the
IPNS low temperature facility at ANL and at the RTNS-II at LLNL. Using these
two facilities will aid the development of a neutron response function.
The experimental data will focus on mechanical properties measurements.
The combination of irradiation and post-irradiation measurement conditions
is a critical aspect of the program. Projected service conditions in fusion
devices suggest that liquid He temperature irradiations followed by measurements
at the same temperature with no intervening temperature rise, warm up to liquid
nitrogen temperature followed by He temperature measurements and warm up to room
temperature before liquid He temperature measurements each represent possible
operating conditons and are thus relavent experimental procedures. Initial
experiments will most likely utilize a room temperature warm up but ultimately
data with no temperature rise is required.
 27.1

PROPObED ORGANIC INSULATOR STUDIES AT NBS

M. B. Kasen
Fracture & Deformation Division
National Bureau o f Standards
Boulder CO 80303

NBS views an e f f e c t i v e MFE insuator development program

to be i n t e r d i c i p l i n a r y between s p e c i a l i s t s in the producing

i n d u s t r i e s , and a v a r i e t y of s p e c i a l i s t s in research and devel

opment. Included in the l a t t e r are i n d i v i d u a l s having exper-

t i s e in f r a c t u r e and deformation, in polymer physics and

chemistry,and in r a d i a t i o n research. The proposed program

will encompass a l l of these d i s c i p l i n e s , identifying those

areas in which NBS i s q u a l i f i e d to c o n t r i b u t e . The w r i t e r

believes that cooperation between a l l elements i s essential

to long range success of the program. However, the subject

ot program coordination is not addressed in t h i s document.

The proposed MFE i n s u l a t o r program consists of four

major efforts:

Materials Standardzation

Materials Characterization and Development

Nondestructive Inspection

Technology Transfer

The o b j e c t i v e of materials standardization should be to

initially continue the development of standard CR grades of

those laminates and i n s u l a t i n o f i l m s of primary importance

to the successful development of superconducting magnets r e -

quired f o r MFE s e r v i c e . This i s required to meet the present

needs as previously described by the w r i t e r . But I t 1s also

necessary to address the problems presented by the present

 27.2

inability of a designer to associate the cryogenic perfor-

mance required for diverse applications with the profusion
of products identified by trade names, most of which were
developed for purposes remote from cryogenic technolopy.
A system of codinq analgous to that used in the metals in-
dustry is required.
The writer believes it possible to isolate those par-
ameters of a composite laminate that are most instrument,
in defining material oerformancs and codinq them so as to
provide the designer with lower bound performance informat-
ion required for materials selection. An example of the
form such coding might take is given on Fig. 1. The example
defines a G-10 type of glass-fabric reinforced epoxy product
for which meaningful lower bound mechanical, electrical and
thermal properties could be established at any temperature.
Svseries of such codings with associated lower bound values
would allow a designer to select a system based on perfor-
mance requirements without requiring extensive knowledge
of composite laminates. Such codings would inform the supplier
of the minimum laminate fabrication requirements, allowing
competitive bidding from existino products. For the most
demanding applications, the addition of a CR or other desig-
nation could define a controlled specification product having
closely defined design allowables.

It would appear logical to separate the materials charact-

erization and development effort Into two categories as illus-
trated on Fig. 2. To serve the immediate needs of magnet
 27.3

f/G.l

Vnf Itxtbilt

F»loi-ie.
1

1F4OU-E/76

MATERIALS

STANDARDISED HICH-
PER FORMWCg GR»0B5

&/SSS-Fabric /£poxtf
G-ttat-

S«/ecf«4
 27.4

designers and to lay the goundwork for eventual development

of a coding system as described above, the group of standard-
specification grades should be increased to include the listed
examples and such others as are required based upon demonstrated
need. These grades would be used in more highly stressed,
critical components or components requiring special capabilities
such as radiation resistance. They would be well character-
ized as to upper and lower performance bounds having statisti-
cal significance. However, it is recognized that the addit-
ional costs associated with controlled grades may not be
justified in many non-critical magnet applications and that
materials produced to lesser controls and of lower cost would
be preferable.
Figure 3 details the NBS approach currently being taken
in development of the standardized grades and which is proposed
for expansion in future programs. The essential elements are
a careful selection of materials in cooperation with industry,
an iteration based upon basic characterization, if necessary.and
development of a formal specification-distributed to all inter-
ested suppliers. Material performance 1s then followed in
practical applications and the materials are subjected to
special test situations to define operating limitations. When
deficiencies are defined, materials development programs are
systematically undertaken to provide the needed performance.
As an example of system functioning, the development of
the CR grades of G-10 and G-ll are indicated by dashed lines.
Although both grades have performed well in service, radiation
 27.5

HIG-H

- Materials Selection*

i
i
i

Tentative Specification*

o k
i

Basic Mechanical,
Electrical and Thermal
Characterization
Industry Participation
i
Daflclant |0K

Formal Specification*

JL
Current Requirements Anticipated Future Requirements
(practical experience)

fOK DallelantJ
o k_ Screening (radiation, etc.)

Oaflelant
Possible Possible
Material
Specification Specification
Development* Revision*
Revision*
 27.6

tests performed at ORNL have shown substantial property degra-

dation in both CR grades. As both radiation and non-irradiation
properties of G-11CR were found to be no better than that of
the G-1OCR, the G-11CR grade has been dropped from the l i s t
of standard grades while a program'was undertaken to Improve
the radiation resistance of G-1UCR. I t was also found that
the weight of the glass cloth in the o r i g i n a l G-1OCR product
produced a laminate in which the individual layers were thicker
than desired for certain thermal standoff applications of thin
cross section. The solution was to produce a G-1OCR-L variant
identical to G-1OCR but fabricated with a lightweight glass
cloth.
A portion of Fig. 3 is expanded in Fig. 4 to i l l u s t r a t e
the approach suggested by NBS in developing standard laminate
grades having improved resistanco to neutron and gamma i r r a d -
i a t i o n at 4 K. The p r i n c i p l e is again a systematic approach
based on industry p a r t i c i p a t i o n , recognizing that the feasib-
i l i t y of commercial production is an essential element in the
program. The proposed approach also recognizes that the
radiation damage sustained by a polymer or a polymer-matrix
laminate is very l i k e l y a function of the specific chemistry
(including impurities) and molecular structure of the organic
material. I t is therefore unlikely that the radiation damage
accumulated in a generic type of laminate w i l l be representat-
ive of the general population of such laminates. This nec-
cessitates an i t e r a t i o n cycle in the research 1n which the
radiation damage is correlated as closely as possible with
 27.7

RADIATION

Controled Materials industry

Selection j f f Consultation

Initial Mechanical
Property Screening
Iteration
at4K * • L Cycle d

Analytical and Frectographlc

Simulated 4 K Irradiation
Correlation of Molecular-
and Mechanical Degradation
Level Damage with
Screening
Property Degradation *

Confirmatory Tutting
Under Neutron-Gamma
Irradiation In Reactor at 4 K

Establishment of Standard-
Specification Cryogenic Radiation-
Resistant Laminates *

Component Experience Complete Mechanical, Electrical

and Thermal Property Characterization,
2 9 5 K t o 4 K •¥•
\ Final Products

W8S

. f-
 27.8

a detailed analytical and fractographic analysis of molecular

level damage anci with detailed chemical analysis of the con-
stituents.
I t would appear highly desirable to develop some means of
simulating 4 K radiation damage in the laboratory as a screening
step/as" the cost of conducting such tastsi irt.a reactor, is very
high and a v a i l a b i l i t y is l i m i t e d .
I t is very l i k e l y that the development of r a d i a t i o n - r e s i s t a n t
organics w i l l be a continuing process as knowledge and exper-
ience is gained. The proposed program therefore has the twin
objectives of providing designers with a commercial supply of
the best available material while providing for a systematic
development of improved performance materials.
The nonstandard, lower performance grades l i s t e d on Fig.
2 require a substantially d i f f e r e n t treatment. Here i t is
suggested that i t is s u f f i c i e n t to establish the lower per-
formance bounds of commercially produced materials of a given
class based on a s t a t i s t i c a l sampling of the production of
d i f f e r e n t suppliers. The assumption is that the demands made
on such materials w i l l be met by providinq the designer with
information t h a t , while the performance of a NEMA Type LE
cotton-phenolic laminate may be quite variable, any such
laminate w i l l have at least some definable lower bound per-
formance at 4 K.
I t should be noted that the complete materials characteri-
zation indicated on Figs. 3 and 4 must address the l i f e - c y c l e
performance of the insulator materials as a function of tempera-
 27.9

ture, thermal cycling and radiation as well as the basic

mechanical, thermal and electrical characterization. These
must include analysis of aging effects and of creep and other
viscoelastic effects that could affect long term magnet
integrity.
The performance of an insulating laminate in a magnet
is strongly influenced gy the quality of the laminate as well
as by the components from which it is made. Furthermore,
most insulations require bonding to other insulators or to
metallic components. It is for these reasons that non-
destructive testing of the basic materials and of bonded
joints is considered to be an essential part of a magnet
insulator program.
The NDE effort is seen to have three major components.
One must be the establishment of inspection standards which
requires an understanding of the significance of flaws as
they affect cryogenic performance. This is essential if
the proper NDb methods are to be used. A second component
addresses the problems of intrinsic material evaluation,
whether done by the manufacturer, the purchaser or both.
Visual examination, ultrasonic methods, radiographic enhance-
ment techniques and acoustics will be useful but may require
development tor heavy thicknesses or special configurations.
UStrasonic methods and holographic techniques appear worthy
ot consideration as methods for assessinn the integrity of
bonded joints.
 27.10

The fourth and final element in the program proposed

by NBS for effective development of insulating materials is
efficient technology transfer. The approach here is the
same as has been employed by NBS in its current MFE materials
effort:
- Preparation and dissemination of data in handbook form.
- Maintainance of a mail list for promot dissemination
of data to interested parties
- Informal consulatation with all interested parties
- Literature publications
- Expansion of the role of insulators in the Vail workshop.
- Increased attention to insulator problems in the ICMC
Conferences and participation in conferences sponsored
by other relevant societies.

ftU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE! 1981-361-076:3052