Comment on ‘Relationship between magnetic field and tokamak size—a system engineering perspective and implications to fusion development’

Abstract The recent Federici et al (2024 Nucl. Fusion 64 036025) article makes the argument that higher magnetic fields cannot reduce the size and cost of a tokamak-based fusion power plant due to: structural considerations of the toroidal field (TF) coils, the required thickness for neutron shielding and the blanket, and challenges with heat exhaust in the divertor. This conclusion is based on a series of assumptions that are design decisions made by the authors, not fundamental limits on physics or engineering. This Comment demonstrates that the conclusions of Federici et al are invalid if one makes different design choices and that its results are therefore not broadly generalizable.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nuclear Fusion
Published
2024-08-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/ad6c5f
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Magnetic confinement fusion research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.30
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comment on ‘Relationship between magnetic field and tokamak size—a system engineering perspective and implications to fusion development’

Brandon Sorbom, D.G. Whyte, A. J. Creely, D. Brunner et al.
5 citations
Nuclear Fusion
Magnetic confinement fusion research
3.30
article

Comment on ‘Relationship between magnetic field and tokamak size—a system engineering perspective and implications to fusion development’

Brandon Sorbom, D.G. Whyte, A. J. Creely, D. Brunner, Michael Segal, M. Greenwald, R. Mumgaard, B. LaBombard, T. Eich
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Abstract The recent Federici et al (2024 Nucl. Fusion 64 036025) article makes the argument that higher magnetic fields cannot reduce the size and cost of a tokamak-based fusion power plant due to: structural considerations of the toroidal field (TF) coils, the required thickness for neutron shielding and the blanket, and challenges with heat exhaust in the divertor. This conclusion is based on a series of assumptions that are design decisions made by the authors, not fundamental limits on physics or engineering. This Comment demonstrates that the conclusions of Federici et al are invalid if one makes different design choices and that its results are therefore not broadly generalizable.

Nuclear FusionVol. 64(10)
Plasma Technology (United States) (US), Commonwealth Fund (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Magnetic confinement fusion research
3.30
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Comment on ‘Relationship between magnetic field and tokamak size—a system engineering perspective and implications to fusion development’ — Brandon Sorbom, D.G. Whyte, et al. · Nuclear Fusion (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS