In JET-ILW dedicated melt exposures were performed using a sequence of 3MA/2.9T H-Mode JET pulses with an input power of P-IN = 23 MW, a stored energy of similar to 6 MJ and regular type I ELMs at Delta W-ELM = 0.3 MJ and f(ELM) similar to 30 Hz. In order to assess the risk of starting ITER operations with a full W divertor, one of the task was to measure the consequences of W transients melting due to ELMs. JET is the only tokamak able to produce transients/ ELMs large enough (>300 kJ per ELM) to facilitate melting of tungsten. Such ELMs are comparable to mitigated ELMs expected in ITER. By moving the outer strike point (OSP) onto a dedicated leading edge the base temperature was raised within similar to 1 s to allow transient ELM-driven melting during the subsequent 0.5 s. Almost 1 mm (similar to 6 mm(3)) of W was moved by similar to 150 ELMs within 5 subsequent discharges. Significant material losses in terms of ejections into the plasma were not observed. There is indirect evidence that some small droplets (similar to 80 mu m) were ejected. The impact on the main plasma parameters is minor and no disruptions occurred. The W-melt gradually moved along the lamella edge towards the high field side, driven by j x B forces. The evaporation rate determined is 100 times less than expected from steady state melting and thus only consistent with transient melting during individual ELMs. IR data, spectroscopy, as well as melt modeling point to transient melting. Although the type of damage studied in these JET experiments is unlikely to be experienced in ITER, the results do strongly support the design strategy to avoid exposed edges in the ITER divertor. The JET experiments required a surface at normal incidence and considerable pre-heating to produce tungsten melting. They provide unique experimental evidence for the absence of significant melt splashing at events resembling mitigated ELMs on ITER and establish a unique experimental benchmark for the simulations being used to study transient shallow melting on ITER W divertor PFUs.
2015. Vol. 463, 78-84 p.