Overview of ASDEX Upgrade results

Stroth, U.; Adámek, Jiřı́; Aho-Mantila, L.; Äkäslompolo, S.; Amdor, C.; Angioni, C.; Balden, M.; Bardin, S.; Orte, L. Barrera; Behler, K.; Belonohy, É.; Bergmann, Andreas; Bernert, M.; Bilato, R.; Birkenmeier, G.; Bobkov, V.; Boom, J.; Bottereau, C.; Bottino, A.; Braun, F.; Brezinsek, S.; Brochard, T.; Brüdgam, M.; Buhler, A.; Burckhart, A.; Casson, F. J.; Chankin, A.; Chapman, I. T.; Clairet, F.; Classen, I. G. J.; Coenen, J. W.; Conway, G. D.; Coster, D.; Curran, D.; Silva, F. da; Marné, P. de; D’Incà, R.; Douai, D.; Drube, R.; Dunne, M.; Dux, R.; Eich, T.; Eixenberger, H.; Endstrasser, N.; Engelhardt, K.; Esposito, B.; Fable, E.; Fischer, R.; Fünfgelder, H.; Fuchs, Julien; Gál, K.; Muñoz, M. García; Geiger, B.; Giannone, L.; Görler, T.; Graca, S. da; Greuner, H.; Gruber, O.; Gude, A.; Guimarãis, L.; Günter, S.; Haas, G.; Hakola, A.; Hangan, D.; Happel, T.; Härtl, T.; Hauff, T.; Heinemann, B.; Herrmann, A.; Hobirk, J.; Höhnle, H.; Hölzl, M.; Hopf, C.; Houben, A.; Igochine, V.; Ioniţă, C.; Janzer, A.; Jenko, F.; Kantor, M. Yu.; Käsemann, C.-P.; Kallenbach, A.; Kálvin, S.; Kappatou, A.; Kardaun, O.; Kasparek, W.; Kaufmann, Michael; Kirk, A.; Klingshirn, H.-J.; Kočan, M.; Kocsis, G.; Konz, C.; Koslowski, H. R.; Krieger, K.; Kubič, M.; Kurki-Suonio, T.; Kurzan, B.; Lackner, K.; Lang, P. T.; Lauber, Philipp; Laux, M.; Lazaros, A.; Leipold, F.; Leuterer, F.; Lindig, S.; Lisgo, S.; Lohs, A.; Lunt, T.; Maier, H.; Makkonen, T.; Mank, K.; Manso, M. E.; Maraschek, M.; Mayer, M.; McCarthy, Patrick J.; McDermott, R. M.; Mehlmann, F.; Meister, H.; Menchero, L.; Méo, F.; Merkel, P.; Merkel, R.; Mertens, V.; Merz, F.; Mlynek, A.; Monaco, F.; Müller, Stefan; Müller, Hans; Münich, M.; Neu, G.; Neu, R.; Neuwirth, D.; Nocente, M.; Nold, B.; Noterdaeme, J.‐M.; Pautasso, G.; Pereverzev, G.; Plöckl, B.; Podoba, Y.; Pompon, Franck; Poli, E.; Polozhiy, K.; Potzel, S.; Püschel, M.; Pütterich, T.; Rathgeber, S. K.; Raupp, G.; Reich, M.; Reimold, F.; Ribeiro, Tiago; Riedl, R.; Rohde, V.; Rooij, G.J. van; Roth, J.; Rott, M.; Ryter, F.; Salewski, M.; Santos, J.; Sauter, P.; Scarabosio, A.; Schall, G.; Schmid, K.; Schneider, P. A.; Schneider, W.; Schrittwieser, R.; Schubert, M.; Schweinzer, J.; Scott, B.; Sempf, M.; Sertoli, M.; Siccinio, M.; Sieglin, B.; Sigalov, A.; Silva, A.; Sommer, Fabian; Stäbler, A.; Stober, J.; Streibl, B.; Strumberger, E.; Sugiyama, K.; Suttrop, W.; Tala, T.; Tardini, G.; Teschke, M.; Tichmann, C.; Told, D.; Treutterer, W.; Tsalas, M.; Zeeland, M. A. Van; Varela, P.; Veres, G. I.; Vicente, J.; Vianello, N.; Vierle, T.; Viezzer, E.; Viola, B.; Vorpahl, C.; Wachowski, Marcin; Wágner, D.; Wauters, T.; Weller, A.; Wenninger, R.; Wieland, B.; Willensdorfer, M.; Wischmeier, M.; Wolfrum, E.; Würsching, E.; Yu, Q.; Zammuto, I.; Zasche, D.; Zehetbauer, T.; Zhang, Y.; Zilker, M.; Zohm, H.

doi:10.1088/0029-5515/53/10/104003

Cited by 35 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All plasma-facing components were converted stepwise from initially carbon (C) to W; complete W coverage has now been achieved. For details see [9] and the references therein. The investigations reported here were all performed in the divertor IIc configuration, with a plasma volume of typically about 12 m 3 .…”

Section: Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

ELM control at the L → H transition by means of pellet pacing in the ASDEX Upgrade and JET all-metal-wall tokamaks

Lang¹,

Meyer²,

Birkenmeier³

et al. 2015

Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In ITER pellets are envisaged for ELM control and fuelling. More important, ELM control, particularly control of the first ELM needs to be demonstrated already in the non-nuclear phase of ITER during operation in H or He. Whilst D pellets have been established as ELM control technique in the stationary phase with D target plasmas in devices with C as plasma-facing component, the question of other isotopes and non-stationary phases are not so well known. Here, we report on new pellet triggering experiments in ASDEX Upgrade and JET mimicking specific ITER operating scenarios. Both machines are equipped with an all-metal wall, where recent investigations have shown that pellet triggering and pacing become more intricate. In both machines ELM triggering by D pellets injected into D plasmas during extended ELM-free phases, often following the L → H transition, has been demonstrated. In both devices the pellets are found to induce ELMs under conditions far from the stability boundary for type-I ELMs. Near the L → H transition, induced ELMs in some cases might more likely have type-III rather than type-I characteristics. Furthermore, in ASDEX Upgrade this study was conducted during L → H transitions in the current ramp-up phase as envisaged for ITER. In addition, the pellet ELM trigger potential was proven in ASDEX Upgrade with a correct isotopic compilation for the non-nuclear phase in ITER, viz. H pellets into either He or H plasmas. Results from this study are encouraging since they have demonstrated the pellets' potential to provoke ELMs even under conditions quite far from the stability boundaries attributed to the occurrence of spontaneous ELMs. However, with the recent change from carbon to an allmetal plasma-facing components examples have been found in both machines where pellets failed to establish ELM control under conditions where this would be expected and needed. Consequently, a major task of future investigations in this field will be to shed more light on the underlying physics of the pellet ELM triggering process to allow sound predictions for ITER. Keywords: ELM control, tokamak, pelletExtended 41th EPS contributed paper O3.115 Accepted Version V4.0, 2.3.2015 2 INTRODUCTIONOperating ITER in the reference inductive scenario at the design values I P = 15 MA and Q DT = 10 relies on good H-mode confinement facilitated by the presence of a strong edge transport barrier and a sufficiently high plasma pressure pedestal. The steep gradients evolving at the edge can drive MHD instabilities resulting in an Edge-Localized Mode (ELM) producing a rapid energy burst from the pedestal region. Without dedicated ELM control, the resulting transient heat loads on plasma-facing materials in ITER become critical for operation at a plasma current I P ≈ 9.5 MA [1]; progressing to a higher I P would result in an intolerably short lifetime of the divertor plates [2]. Currently, several options are being considered for this inevitable ELM actuation, but all of them need further validation for the ITER tasks. Obviously...

show abstract

Section: Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

ELM control at the L → H transition by means of pellet pacing in the ASDEX Upgrade and JET all-metal-wall tokamaks

Lang¹,

Meyer²,

Birkenmeier³

et al. 2015

Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2012; Romanelli 2013; Stroth et al . 2013) have established disruption databases and all have developed suitable methods of characterizing the plasma current decay waveform. What is more, a multidevice International Tokamak Physics Activity (known as ITPA) disruption database (known as IDDB) including nine tokamak devices with various scales describing CQ time, halo current and massive impurity injection, has been developed by the ITPA since 1994 (Eidietis et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetic energy dissipation during the current quench of disruption in EAST

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A disruption database characterizing the current quench of disruptions with ITER-like tungsten divertor has been developed on EAST. It provides a large number of plasma parameters describing the predisruptive plasma, current quench time, eddy current, and mitigation by massive impurity injection, which shows that the current quench time strongly depends on magnetic energy and post-disruption electron temperature. Further, the energy balance and magnetic energy dissipation during the current quench phase has been well analysed. Magnetic energy is also demonstrated to be dissipated mainly by ohmic reheating and inductive coupling, and both of the two channels have great effects on current quench time. Also, massive gas injection is an efficient method to speed up the current quench and increase the fraction of impurity radiation.

show abstract

“…Section 3 reviews the key physics relevant for ELM crashes, and shows to which extent simulations agree with experiments and how they promote a basic understanding of ELM physics. On the example of ASDEX Upgrade, we demonstrate that quantitative agreement is obtained between simulations and experiments in many respects. At the same time, a brief overview is given of recent ELM‐related simulations performed with JOREK.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insights into type‐I edge localized modes and edge localized mode control from JOREK non‐linear magneto‐hydrodynamic simulations

Hoelzl

Huijsmans

Orain

et al. 2018

Contributions to Plasma Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Edge localized modes (ELMs) are repetitive instabilities driven by the large pressure gradients and current densities in the edge of H‐mode plasmas. Type‐I ELMs lead to a fast collapse of the H‐mode pedestal within several hundred microseconds to a few milliseconds. Localized transient heat fluxes to divertor targets are expected to exceed tolerable limits for ITER, requiring advanced insights into ELM physics and applicable mitigation methods. This paper describes how non‐linear magneto‐hydrodynamic (MHD) simulations can contribute to this effort. The JOREK code is introduced, which allows the study of large‐scale plasma instabilities in tokamak X‐point plasmas covering the main plasma, the scrape‐off layer, and the divertor region with its finite element grid. We review key physics relevant for type‐I ELMs and show to what extent JOREK simulations agree with experiments and help reveal the underlying mechanisms. Simulations and experimental findings are compared in many respects for type‐I ELMs in ASDEX Upgrade. The role of plasma flows and non‐linear mode coupling for the spatial and temporal structure of ELMs is emphasized, and the loss mechanisms are discussed. An overview of recent ELM‐related research using JOREK is given, including ELM crashes, ELM‐free regimes, ELM pacing by pellets and magnetic kicks, and mitigation or suppression by resonant magnetic perturbation coils (RMPs). Simulations of ELMs and ELM control methods agree in many respects with experimental observations from various tokamak experiments. On this basis, predictive simulations become more and more feasible. A brief outlook is given, showing the main priorities for further research in the field of ELM physics and further developments necessary.

show abstract

Overview of ASDEX Upgrade results

Cited by 35 publications

References 39 publications

ELM control at the L → H transition by means of pellet pacing in the ASDEX Upgrade and JET all-metal-wall tokamaks

ELM control at the L → H transition by means of pellet pacing in the ASDEX Upgrade and JET all-metal-wall tokamaks

Magnetic energy dissipation during the current quench of disruption in EAST

Insights into type‐I edge localized modes and edge localized mode control from JOREK non‐linear magneto‐hydrodynamic simulations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About