Current Drive for FIRE AT-Mode T.K. Mau University of California, San Diego Workshop on Physics Issues for FIRE May 1-3, 2000 Princeton Plasma Physics.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Glenn Bateman Lehigh University Physics Department

Advertisements

Physics Basis of FIRE Next Step Burning Plasma Experiment Charles Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory U.S.-Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plant.

ARIES-Advanced Tokamak Power Plant Study Physics Analysis and Issues Charles Kessel, for the ARIES Physics Team Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory U.S.-Japan.

Stability, Transport, and Conrol for the discussion Y. Miura IEA/LT Workshop (W59) combined with DOE/JAERI Technical Planning of Tokamak Experiments (FP1-2)

6 th ITPA MHD Topical Group Meeting combined with W60 IEA Workshop on Burning Plasmas Session II MHD Stability and Fast Particle Confinement General scope.

ELECTRON CYCLOTRON SYSTEM FOR KSTAR US-Korea Workshop Opportunities for Expanded Fusion Science and Technology Collaborations with the KSTAR Project Presented.

Introduction to Spherical Tokamak

Discussion on application of current hole towards reactor T.Ozeki (JAERI) Current hole plasmas were observed in the large tokamaks of JT-60U and JET. This.

1 Heating and Current Drive Studies In the ARIES Program T.K. Mau University of California, San Diego Peer Review of the ARIES Program August 17, 2000.

Physics Analysis for Equilibrium, Stability, and Divertors ARIES Power Plant Studies Charles Kessel, PPPL DOE Peer Review, UCSD August 17, 2000.

Optimization of a Steady-State Tokamak-Based Power Plant Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA IEA Workshop 59 “Shape and.

ARIES-ACT1 preliminary plasma description C. Kessel, PPPL ARIES Project Meeting, October 13, 2011.

Physics Issues and Trade-offs in Magnetic Fusion Power Plants Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA APS April 2002 Meeting.

D. Borba 1 21 st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu China 21 st October 2006 Excitation of Alfvén eigenmodes with sub-Alfvénic neutral beam ions in.

1 Electron Bernstein Wave Research and Plans Gary Taylor Presentation to the 16th NSTX Program Advisory Committee September 9, 2004.

1 ST workshop 2008 Conception of LHCD Experiments on the Spherical Tokamak Globus-M O.N. Shcherbinin, V.V. Dyachenko, M.A. Irzak, S.A. Khitrov A.F.Ioffe.

C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory For the NSTX National Team DOE Review of NSTX Five-Year Research Program Proposal June 30 – July 2, 2003.

MHD Issues and Control in FIRE C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Workshop on Active Control of MHD Stability Austin, TX 11/3-5/2003.

1 ST workshop 2005 Numerical modeling and experimental study of ICR heating in the spherical tokamak Globus-M O.N.Shcherbinin, F.V.Chernyshev, V.V.Dyachenko,

Advanced Tokamak Plasmas and the Fusion Ignition Research Experiment Charles Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Spring APS, Philadelphia, 4/5/2003.

TOTAL Simulation of ITER Plasmas Kozo YAMAZAKI Nagoya Univ., Chikusa-ku, Nagoya , Japan 1.

J A Snipes, 6 th ITPA MHD Topical Group Meeting, Tarragona, Spain 4 – 6 July 2005 TAE Damping Rates on Alcator C-Mod Compared with Nova-K J A Snipes *,

Analysis and Simulations of the ITER Hybrid Scenario C. Kessel, R. Budny, K. Indireshkumar Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, USA ITPA Topical Group.

Excitation of ion temperature gradient and trapped electron modes in HL-2A tokamak The 3 th Annual Workshop on Fusion Simulation and Theory, Hefei, March.

Exploring ECRF Heating on CS Reactors T.K. Mau UC-San Diego ARIES Project Meeting January 8-10, 2003 University of California-San Diego.

Initial Exploration of HHFW Current Drive on NSTX J. Hosea, M. Bell, S. Bernabei, S. Kaye, B. LeBlanc, J. Menard, M. Ono C.K. Phillips, A. Rosenberg, J.R.

HAGIS Code Lynton Appel … on behalf of Simon Pinches and the HAGIS users CCFE is the fusion research arm of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority.

Integrated Modeling and Simulations of ITER Burning Plasma Scenarios C. E. Kessel, R. V. Budny, K. Indireshkumar, D. Meade Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory.

Advanced Tokamak Plasmas and Their Control C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Columbia University, 4/4/03.

ITER Standard H-mode, Hybrid and Steady State WDB Submissions R. Budny, C. Kessel PPPL ITPA Modeling Topical Working Group Session on ITER Simulations.

Heating and Current Drive Systems for ARIES-AT T.K. Mau University of California, San Diego ARIES Project Meeting September 18-20, 2000 Princeton Plasma.

Fyzika tokamaků1: Úvod, opakování1 Tokamak Physics Jan Mlynář 8. Heating and current drive Neutral beam heating and current drive,... to be continued.

ARIES-AT Physics Overview presented by S.C. Jardin with input from C. Kessel, T. K. Mau, R. Miller, and the ARIES team US/Japan Workshop on Fusion Power.

RF simulation at ASIPP Bojiang DING Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences Workshop on ITER Simulation, Beijing, May 15-19, 2006 ASIPP.

1 Instabilities in the Long Pulse Discharges on the HT-7 X.Gao and HT-7 Team Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.O.Box 1126, Hefei,

Simulation and Analysis of the Hybrid Operating Mode in ITER C. Kessel, R. Budny, and K. Indireshkumar Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Symposium On.

OPERATIONAL SCENARIO of KTM Dokuka V.N., Khayrutdinov R.R. TRINITI, Russia O u t l i n e Goal of the work The DINA code capabilities Formulation of the.

Emanuele Poli, 17 th Joint Workshop on ECE and ECRH Deurne, May 7-10, 2012 Assessment of ECCD-Assisted Operation in DEMO Emanuele Poli 1, Emiliano Fable.

ITPA Topical Group on MHD, Control, and Disruptions Summary of 5th meeting, Nov. 8-10, 2004 Presented by Ted Strait Workshop on MHD Mode Control Princeton,

ITER STEADY-STATE OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS A.R. Polevoi for ITER IT and HT contributors ITER-SS 1.

AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc NSO Collaboration Implications.

Comprehensive ITER Approach to Burn L. P. Ku, S. Jardin, C. Kessel, D. McCune Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory SWIM Project Meeting Oct , 2007.

JT-60U -1- Access to High  p (advanced inductive) and Reversed Shear (steady state) plasmas in JT-60U S. Ide for the JT-60 Team Japan Atomic Energy Agency.

HL-2A Heating & Current Driving by LHW and ECW study on HL-2A Bai Xingyu, HL-2A heating team.

Exploration of High Harmonic Fast Wave Heating on NSTX J. R. Wilson 2002 APS Division of Plasma Physics Meeting November 11-15, 2002 Orlando, Florida.

1 EBW & HHFW Research - G. Taylor PAC-19 2/23/06 EBW & HHFW Research (Including EBW Collaborations with MAST & P EGASUS ) Gary Taylor presented on behalf.

Steady State Discharge Modeling for KSTAR C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory US-Korea Workshop - KSTAR Collaborations, 5/19-20/2004.

Summary of RF-Related Presentations at the 2011 EPS Meeting G. Taylor NSTX Physics Meeting July 25, 2011 NSTX Supported by 1.

Heating and current drive requirements towards Steady State operation in ITER Francesca Poli C. Kessel, P. Bonoli, D. Batchelor, B. Harvey Work supported.

MHD Issues and Control in FIRE C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Workshop on Active Control of MHD Stability Austin, TX 11/3-5/2003.

20th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, 2004 Naka Fusion Research Establishment, Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute Stationary high confinement plasmas.

FIRE Advanced Tokamak Progress C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory NSO PAC 2/27-28/2003, General Atomics 1.0D Operating Space 2.PF Coils 3.Equilibrium/Stability.

Advanced Tokamak Modeling for FIRE C. Kessel, PPPL NSO/PAC Meeting, University of Wisconsin, July 10-11, 2001.

Characterization of Fast Ion Power Absorption of HHFW in NSTX A. Rosenberg, J. Menard, J.R. Wilson, S. Medley, R. Dumont, B.P. LeBlanc, C.K. Phillips,

Integrated Modeling for Burning Plasmas Workshop (W60) on “Burning Plasma Physics and Simulation 4-5 July 2005, University Campus, Tarragona, Spain Under.

1 NSTX EXPERIMENTAL PROPOSAL - OP-XP-712 Title: HHFW Power Balance Optimization at High B Field J. Hosea, R. Bell, S. Bernabei, L. Delgado-Aparicio, S.

T. Hellsten IAEA TM Meeting on Energetic Particles, San Diego 2003 T. Hellsten 1, T. Bergkvist 1, T.Johnson 1, M. Laxåback 1 and L.-G. Eriksson 2 1 Euratom-VR.

Nonlinear Simulations of Energetic Particle-driven Modes in Tokamaks Guoyong Fu Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Princeton, NJ, USA In collaboration.

Simulation of Non-Solenoidal Current Rampup in NSTX C. E. Kessel and NSTX Team Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory APS-DPP Annual Meeting, Savannah, Georgia,

Integrated Plasma Simulations C. E. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Workshop Toward an Integrated Plasma Simulation Oak Ridge, TN November 7-9,

Energetic Particles Interaction with the Non-resonant Internal Kink in Spherical Tokamaks Feng Wang*, G.Y. Fu**, J.A. Breslau**, E.D. Fredrickson**, J.Y.

AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.

Off-axis Current Drive and Current Profile Control in JT-60U T. Suzuki, S. Ide, T. Fujita, T. Oikawa, M. Ishikawa, G. Matsunaga, M. Takechi, M. Seki, O.

Lower Hybrid Wave Coupling and Current Drive Experiments in HT-7 Tokamak Weici Shen Jiafang Shan Handong Xu Min Jiang HT-7 Team Institute of Plasma Physics,

6 th ITPA MHD Topical Group Meeting combined with W60 IEA Workshop on Burning Plasmas Summary Session II MHD Stability and Fast Particle Confinement chaired.

Long Pulse High Performance Plasma Scenario Development for NSTX C. Kessel and S. Kaye - providing TRANSP runs of specific discharges S.

1 J. Garcia ITPA-IOS meeting Kyoto October 2011 Association Euratom-CEA Free boundary simulations of the ITER hybrid and steady-state scenarios J.Garcia.

A.D. Turnbull, R. Buttery, M. Choi, L.L Lao, S. Smith, H. St John

High Bootstrap Fraction Plasmas with ITBs

Current Drive and Plasma Rotation Considerations for ARIES-AT

Presentation transcript:

Current Drive for FIRE AT-Mode T.K. Mau University of California, San Diego Workshop on Physics Issues for FIRE May 1-3, 2000 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory TKMau/01

OUTLINE Status of CD / rotation drive scenarios for ARIES-AT RFCD for FIRE DT-Burning AT mode: - On-axis drive with ICRF - Off-axis drive with LHW Issues: - CD for non-burning AT modes - Current profile control and analytic tools - Database Conclusions TKMau/02

CD / Rotation Drive Scenarios for ARIES-AT ARIES-AT is a 1-GWe fusion power plant design based on a high elongation (  = 2.2), high bootstrap fraction (f BS  ) RS plasma with wall stabilization (  N ~6.0). CD and rotation drive both involve external power, and are considered together. Two scenarios are being considered: Base Case: (1) ICRF/FW for on-axis CD; ECCD an alternative (2) LHW for off-axis CD (3) some form of RF power for rotation drive Back-up Case:(1) ICRF/FW for axis CD; ECCD an alternative (2) low-energy NBI for off-axis CD (3) same beam for rotation drive TKMau/03

RFCD Power Requirements are Modest for ARIES-AT Power requirements were calculated for on-axis CD with ICRF/FW and off-axis CD with LHW, for three ARIES-AT design points. R = 5.2 m, A = 4,  = 2.2,  = 0.8, I p ~ 13 MA, B o ~ 6 T, P net = 1000 MW. Full  N  (%) (keV) I bs /I p P IC (MW) P LH (MW) The  N = 6.0 case has been picked as the reference equilibrium, based on CD power consideration. On-axis seed current is small, requiring only ~4 MW of ICRF power. ECCD may be an attractive alternative. TKMau/04

CD Power can be Very Low for FIRE Burning AT Mode Based on a FIRE DT-burning AT mode equilibrium (from Kessel): R = 2 m, a = 0.52 m, B o = 6.75 T, I p = 4.50 MA, T eo = 13.9 keV, n eo = 5.10x10 14 cm -3, Z eff = 1.38,  = 5.62%,  N = 4.38 (with wall stabilization of kink) I BS /I p = 0.926, I seed = MA   n, T Profiles T n n o / =1.7 T o / =1.5 - (A/cm 2 ) EQ SD BS Dia SD Using ICRF to drive on-axis seed (0.1 MA), and LHW to drive off-axis seed (0.25 MA), total CD power can be as low as 7.3 MW !!  Normalized efficiency  CD = TKMau/05

T Be D 2T 2Be 2D,3T 4T,3Be 3D 4Be 75 MHz axis R+a 5T MHz R-a 28 MHz Frequency Options for Fast Wave On-Axis Current Drive 75 MHz : Avoid resonance with D and  ; moderate damping on T 28 MHz : Avoid ion resonance altogether; large antenna size MHz : Significant ion absorption; requires strong single-pass electron absorption. TKMau/06

FWCD Power is Similar for Three Frequency Options f (MHz) N || P e /PP D /PP T /PP He /PP CD (MW) f spa Ion species mix : f D = f T = 0.394, f He = 0.208, f Be =  damping is not calculated in 120 MHz case. Would increase P CD somewhat if included. 15 rays are used along 1.0 m antenna poloidal length with P ~ cos 2 k o y. f spa is initial single pass absorption fraction for central ray. TKMau/07

CURRAY ray tracing code is used. Power is launched from 10 o above OB midplane with N || spectrum for strong single-pass absorption and best current profile alignment. Wave parameters : f = 75 MHz, N || = Results: P CD = 3.8 I/P = A/W, I seed = 0.11 MA single-pass absorption = 0.81, 9% of power to T at 2f cT. Driven j Seed j On-Axis Seed Current Drive with ICRF Fast Waves TKMau/08

LH Launching Parameters for Off-Axis CD Required penetration to  = 0.67, where R=2.43 m on OB midplane, B = 5.61 T, n e = 3.7x10 14 cm -3, and T e = 9.8 keV. To avoid parametric process, f > 2 f LH (0.67) = 2.65 GHz. To avoid  damping, f > 1.86 f pe (0.67)N ||,min ~ 9 GHz Since  damping will be weak for  > 0.67, we can set f = 4.0 GHz. From linear picture, accessible only to  =0.72; Found some rays that reflect off the edge can penetrate slightly further. N || vs  Accessible TKMau/09

Requires 4 waveguide modules, launching different N || and located at 30 o below OB midplane. Wave parameters: f = 4 GHz, N || = P CD = 3.5 I/P = A/W. I seed = 0.25 MA Efficiency is sensitive to local T e and n e. High efficiency here is due to high T e and low n e near edge. 1% of power to energetic  ’s. [  ’s treated as ~800 keV ] N || = 2.2 Driven j Seed j Off-Axis Seed CD with LH Waves TKMau/10 4

CD and Profile Control Issues for FIRE AT Modes CD power requirements for non-burning AT modes and for transients to DT-burning AT modes with lower bootstrap fraction need to be investigated. Realistic edge n,T profiles are required to truly assess LH off-axis CD power. Quasilinear LHCD analysis may be needed. Current profile control while accessing flattop AT modes is critical, and modeling in conjunction with transport codes will be required. Ref. D. Moreau, et al, Nucl. Fusion 39 (99) 685. An analytical tool for self-consistent analysis of CD and equilibrium/ stability will be useful. For LH off-axis CD, interaction with energetic alphas should be studied in more detail. TKMau/11

 B = I p R o / P CD  CD = (1-f BS )  B AT: advanced tokamak RS: reverse shear FS: first stability ST: spherical torus SS: second stability FIRE (AT) is on Development Path to AT Power Plant from Current Drive / Bootstrap Current Perspective RS formation with off-axis LHCD on JT-60U and Tore Supra FWCD data TKMau/12

Conclusions and Discussions RFCD power was assessed for optimized FIRE DT-burning AT mode. P CD ~ 8 MW. ICRF on-axis CD and LH off-axis CD are adequate for the seed current profiles. CD assessments should be carried out for non-burning AT modes and for access to flattop AT modes. Current profile control during transients for AT flattop is critical and should be investigated and modeled. Should expand experimental data base on RS formation with LH off-axis CD, and possibly with ICRF on-axis CD. - DIII-D : off-axis ECCD - C-Mod: off-axis LHCD TKMau/13