Modelling of 3D fields due to ferritic inserts and test blanket modules in toroidal geometry at ITER

Liu, Yueqiang; Äkäslompolo, S.; Cavinato, M.; Koechl, F.; Kurki-Suonio, T.; Li, Li; Parail, V.; Saibene, G.; Särkimäki, Konsta; Sipilä, S.; Varje, J.

doi:10.1088/0029-5515/56/6/066001

Cited by 10 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Two different MHD codes were used to calculate the plasma response: MARS-F [15,16] is a one-fluid, linear (each n solved independently) code solving the full resistive MHD equations in toroidal geometry. JOREK [4] is a two-fluid, non-linear code solving the reduced MHD equations in toroidal geometry which (unlike for MARS-F) includes the divertor and X-point.…”

Section: Overview Of the Models Used To Evaluate The Plasma Response ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mechanics of ELM control coil induced fast particle transport in ITER

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using the orbit-following code ASCOT, we model alpha particle transport in ITER under the influence of ELM control coils (ECCs), toroidal field ripple, and test blanket modules, with emphasis on how the plasma response (PR) modifies the transport mechanisms and fast ion loads on the divertor. We found that while PR shields the plasma by healing broken flux surfaces, it also opens a new loss channel for marginally trapped particles: PR causes strong toroidal variation of the poloidal field near the X-point which leads to de-localisation of banana tips and collisionless transport. The reduction in passing particle losses and the increase in marginally trapped particle losses shift divertor loads from targets to the dome and under-the-dome structures. The plasma response was calculated by both MARS-F and JOREK codes. The new transport mechanism was stronger for PR calculated by JOREK which, unlike MARS-F, explicitly includes the X-point.

show abstract

Section: Overview Of the Models Used To Evaluate The Plasma Response ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For MARS-F the procedure is similar with the exception that only magnetic field is used (not vector potential) and Fourier decomposition is done also in the poloidal direction. The MARS-F calculations are described in detail in [18].…”

Section: Overview Of the Models Used To Evaluate The Plasma Response ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanics of ELM control coil induced fast particle transport in ITER

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although previous modeling for ITER [20,52] has demonstrated a relatively weak effect of flow variation on the plasma response, as long as the flow remains sufficiently fast and the flow speed does not vary by order of magnitude, this sensitivity issue need to be checked for DEMO plasmas.…”

Section: Choice Of Coil Geometry and Coil Current Phasingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toroidal plasma response based ELM control coil design for EU DEMO

Zhou

Liu

Wenninger³

et al. 2018

Nucl. Fusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic coil design study is carried out, for the purpose of mitigating or suppressing the edge localized modes (ELMs) in a EU DEMO reference scenario. The coil design, including both the coil geometry and the coil current requirement, is based on criteria derived from the linear, full toroidal plasma response computed by the MARS-F code (Liu et al 2000 Phys. Plasma 7 3681). With a single midplane row of coils, a coil size covering about 30°–50° poloidal angle of the torus is found to be optimal for ELM control using the n > 2 resonant magnetic perturbation (RMP) field (n is the toroidal mode number). For off-midplane coils, the coils’ poloidal location, as well as the relative toroidal phase (coil phasing) between the upper and lower rows of coils, also sensitively affects the ELM control according to the specified criteria. Assuming that the optimal coil phasing can always be straightforwardly implemented, following a simple analytic model derived from toroidal computations, it is better to place the two off-midplane rows of coils near the midplane, in order to maximize the resonant field amplitude and to have larger effects on ELMs. With the same coil current, the ex-vessel coils can be made as effective as the in-vessel coils, at the expense of increasing the ex-vessel coils’ size. This is however possible only for low-n (n = 1–3) RMP fields. With these low-n fields, and assuming 300 kAt maximal coil current, the computed plasma displacement near the X-point can meet the 10 mm level, which we use as the conservative indicator for achieving ELM mitigation in EU DEMO. The risk of partial control coil failure in EU DEMO is also assessed based on toroidal modeling, indicating that the large n = 1 sideband due to coil failure may need to be corrected, if the nominal n > 1 coil configurations are used for ELM control in EU DEMO.

show abstract

“…Note also a roughly 60 • offset between the vacuum and plasma response criteria for low-n (n = 1-3) RMP fields. The offset is somewhat smaller for the n = 4 field, indicating that the plasma response plays a less important role with higher-n RMPs [64].…”

Section: Plasma Response With Varying Elongationmentioning

confidence: 93%

Influence of elongation and triangularity on plasma response to resonant magnetic perturbations

Yang

Liu

et al. 2021

Nucl. Fusion

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic toroidal modeling of the plasma response to the n = 1–4 (n is the toroidal mode number) resonant magnetic perturbation (RMP) field is carried out in order to understand the plasma-shaping effect on controlling the type-I edge-localized modes (ELMs) in tokamak experiments. Considered are large variations of the plasma elongation and triangularity at a fixed edge safety factor q a, for limiter plasmas with both single-null (SN) and double-null (DN) divertor-like boundary shapes. Numerical results assuming conformal 3D RMP coils show that (i) the optimum coil phasing between the upper and lower rows for ELM control becomes increasingly sensitive to the plasma elongation with higher-n toroidal spectra, (ii) the optimum coil phasing is however essentially independent of the plasma triangularity for all n = 1–4 RMP fields, (iii) with the same coil current and the optimum coil phasing, high elongation generally favors ELM control but it may be more challenging for plasmas with intermediate elongation and with lower-n (n = 1–2) RMPs, and (iv) higher triangularity is generally always better for ELM control with all n = 1–4 fields for both DN and SN divertor-like plasma boundary shapes.

show abstract

Modelling of 3D fields due to ferritic inserts and test blanket modules in toroidal geometry at ITER

Cited by 10 publications

References 35 publications

Mechanics of ELM control coil induced fast particle transport in ITER

Mechanics of ELM control coil induced fast particle transport in ITER

Toroidal plasma response based ELM control coil design for EU DEMO

Influence of elongation and triangularity on plasma response to resonant magnetic perturbations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About