| 1. |
- Abel, I, et al.
(author)
-
Overview of the JET results with the ITER-like wall
- 2013
-
In: Nuclear Fusion. - : IOP Publishing. - 1741-4326 .- 0029-5515. ; 53:10, s. 104002-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Following the completion in May 2011 of the shutdown for the installation of the beryllium wall and the tungsten divertor, the first set of JET campaigns have addressed the investigation of the retention properties and the development of operational scenarios with the new plasma-facing materials. The large reduction in the carbon content (more than a factor ten) led to a much lower Z(eff) (1.2-1.4) during L- and H-mode plasmas, and radiation during the burn-through phase of the plasma initiation with the consequence that breakdown failures are almost absent. Gas balance experiments have shown that the fuel retention rate with the new wall is substantially reduced with respect to the C wall. The re-establishment of the baseline H-mode and hybrid scenarios compatible with the new wall has required an optimization of the control of metallic impurity sources and heat loads. Stable type-I ELMy H-mode regimes with H-98,H-y2 close to 1 and beta(N) similar to 1.6 have been achieved using gas injection. ELM frequency is a key factor for the control of the metallic impurity accumulation. Pedestal temperatures tend to be lower with the new wall, leading to reduced confinement, but nitrogen seeding restores high pedestal temperatures and confinement. Compared with the carbon wall, major disruptions with the new wall show a lower radiated power and a slower current quench. The higher heat loads on Be wall plasma-facing components due to lower radiation made the routine use of massive gas injection for disruption mitigation essential.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Romanelli, F, et al.
(author)
-
Overview of the JET results
- 2011
-
In: Nuclear Fusion. - : IOP Publishing. - 1741-4326 .- 0029-5515. ; 51:9
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Since the last IAEA Conference JET has been in operation for one year with a programmatic focus on the qualification of ITER operating scenarios, the consolidation of ITER design choices and preparation for plasma operation with the ITER-like wall presently being installed in JET. Good progress has been achieved, including stationary ELMy H-mode operation at 4.5 MA. The high confinement hybrid scenario has been extended to high triangularity, lower ρ*and to pulse lengths comparable to the resistive time. The steady-state scenario has also been extended to lower ρ*and ν*and optimized to simultaneously achieve, under stationary conditions, ITER-like values of all other relevant normalized parameters. A dedicated helium campaign has allowed key aspects of plasma control and H-mode operation for the ITER non-activated phase to be evaluated. Effective sawtooth control by fast ions has been demonstrated with3He minority ICRH, a scenario with negligible minority current drive. Edge localized mode (ELM) control studies using external n = 1 and n = 2 perturbation fields have found a resonance effect in ELM frequency for specific q95values. Complete ELM suppression has, however, not been observed, even with an edge Chirikov parameter larger than 1. Pellet ELM pacing has been demonstrated and the minimum pellet size needed to trigger an ELM has been estimated. For both natural and mitigated ELMs a broadening of the divertor ELM-wetted area with increasing ELM size has been found. In disruption studies with massive gas injection up to 50% of the thermal energy could be radiated before, and 20% during, the thermal quench. Halo currents could be reduced by 60% and, using argon/deuterium and neon/deuterium gas mixtures, runaway electron generation could be avoided. Most objectives of the ITER-like ICRH antenna have been demonstrated; matching with closely packed straps, ELM resilience, scattering matrix arc detection and operation at high power density (6.2 MW m-2) and antenna strap voltages (42 kV). Coupling measurements are in very good agreement with TOPICA modelling. © 2011 IAEA, Vienna.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
- Mavaddat, N, et al.
(author)
-
Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, natural menopause, and breast cancer risk: an international prospective cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers
- 2020
-
In: Breast cancer research : BCR. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1465-542X. ; 22:1, s. 8-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundThe effect of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) on breast cancer risk forBRCA1andBRCA2mutation carriers is uncertain. Retrospective analyses have suggested a protective effect but may be substantially biased. Prospective studies have had limited power, particularly forBRCA2mutation carriers. Further, previous studies have not considered the effect of RRSO in the context of natural menopause.MethodsA multi-centre prospective cohort of 2272BRCA1and 1605BRCA2mutation carriers was followed for a mean of 5.4 and 4.9 years, respectively; 426 women developed incident breast cancer. RRSO was modelled as a time-dependent covariate in Cox regression, and its effect assessed in premenopausal and postmenopausal women.ResultsThere was no association between RRSO and breast cancer forBRCA1(HR = 1.23; 95% CI 0.94–1.61) orBRCA2(HR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.62–1.24) mutation carriers. ForBRCA2mutation carriers, HRs were 0.68 (95% CI 0.40–1.15) and 1.07 (95% CI 0.69–1.64) for RRSO carried out before or after age 45 years, respectively. The HR forBRCA2mutation carriers decreased with increasing time since RRSO (HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.26–0.99 for 5 years or longer after RRSO). Estimates for premenopausal women were similar.ConclusionWe found no evidence that RRSO reduces breast cancer risk forBRCA1mutation carriers. A potentially beneficial effect forBRCA2mutation carriers was observed, particularly after 5 years following RRSO. These results may inform counselling and management of carriers with respect to RRSO.
|
|
| 20. |
|
|
| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
|
|
| 23. |
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
