1. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 A summary of some recent edge physics research on TCV and JET R. A. Pitts Centre de Recherches en Physique des Plasmas Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland Association EURATOM-Swiss Confederation and Leader, Task Force E, EFDA-JET

2. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 2 Outline  TCV Brief overview of the machine: first wall, heating systems, edge diagnostics Divertor detachment Turbulent transport Parallel flows Not covered: ELMs, Infra-red investigations, SOLPS5 H-mode modelling  JET Retarding field energy analyser Flows and far SOL ELM ion energies A lot more not covered!

3. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 3 TCV Tokamak à Configuration Variable

4. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 4 The TCV tokamak  R= 0.88m; a= 0.25m  B T ≤ 1.5T; I p ≤ 1.2MA  0.9<  <2.8; -0.6<  <0.9 X2: 82.7GHz 6  0.5MW, 2s Side launch ECH, ECCD n cut-off = 4.2  10 19 m -3 X3: 118GHz 3  0.5MW, 2s Top launch ECH n cut-off = 11.5  10 19 m -3

5. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 5 TCV first wall  All graphite machine Upgrade to ~90% coverage in 1998 First wall tiled with polycrystalline graphite (~1700 individual elements) Cold walls (during operation) Regularly boronised (~220  C, Glow with 10% B 2 D 6 /90% He) Pulse length typically ~1.2 s All tiles being B 4 C blasted this summer R. A. Pitts, R. Chavan, J-M. Moret, Nucl. Fus. 39 (1999) 1433

6. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 6 TCV: configurational flexibility  16 independently powered poloidal field coils Enormous scope for flexibility in plasma shape Nightmare for edge physics and PSI however!

7. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 7 TCV: Edge diagnostics 80 tile embdedded Langmuir probes IR cameras Fast reciprocating probe (flows and turbulence) In-vessel pressure gauges Fast AXUV diode cameras

8. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 8 Divertor detachment  Mandatory for successful ITER (and reactor) operation Without (partial) divertor detachment in the separatrix region, power fluxes will be beyond the design power handling capacity SOLPS5 (B2.5-Eirene) solutions show that this will be possible But has the code been sufficiently benchmarked on today’s machines for us to have confidence? OSP ISP ITER Divertor DDD 17 (SOLPS5 runs by A. Kukushkin)

9. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 9 Divertor detachment on TCV  Studies always made in simple ohmic discharges Isolate physics, obtain best possible data X2 ECR heating system precludes high density L-mode operation Studied effect of geometry on detachment – “plasma plugging” R. A. Pitts et al., J. Nucl. Mater., 290-293 (2001) 940 R. A. Pitts et al., IAEA-CN77/EXP4/23 (2000) Time (s) (10 19 m -3 ) Z eff PP P RAD,TOT P RAD,DIV D ,divertor J sat (Acm -2 ) ISP OSP (kW)

10. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 10 “Anomalous” detachment  TCV outer divertor does not detach like in other tokamaks Divertor densities too low Neutral baffling insufficient SOLPS4 simulations (with A. Loarte) unable to reproduce observed detachment M. Wischmeier, Phd Thesis (EPFL: TH3176 (2005)) M. Wischmeier et al.,ECA 29C P-5.013 (2005) M. Wischmeier, R. A. Pitts, in preparation for Nucl. Fusion  3 year study with SOLPS5 tracked the problem down (probably) Strong outward convective transport  main chamber recycling  increased C release  increased radiation  “power detachment” J sat (Acm -2 ) T e (eV) n e (10 19 m -3 )

11. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 11 Turbulent transport  Expts. on TCV some of the first to identify profile broadening with increased plasma density Fast RCP under midplane n e, T e and fluctuation driven flux Large database in ohmic plasmas Broad profiles at high density  increased main chamber wall interaction Why does this happen?

12. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 12 Intermittency  In the far SOL, density fluctuations more bursty and rare Almost all the radial transport in these regions carried by the blobs Convect plasma quickly to the wall regions Competes equally with parallel transport Consistency with known statistical distributions discovered on TCV J. P. Graves, J. Horacek, R. A. Pitts, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 47 (2005) L1

13. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 13 Modelling the turbulence O. E. Garcia, J. Horacek, R. A. Pitts, et al., Plasma Phys. Control. Fus. 48 (2006) L1  2-dimensional fluid turbulence simulations – ESEL code (Risø) Centred on outer midplane n e, T e and vorticity evolution Collective motions driven by non- uniform B-field Linear SOL damping terms driven by SOL transport  Model parameters set by a high density TCV case Sample turbulent fields over long time series by an array of trial probes

14. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 14 Encouraging agreement with expt. O. E. Garcia, R. A. Pitts, J. Horacek et al., PSI 2006, Heifei & Plasma Phys. Control. Fus. 48 (2006) L1  Code matches turbulent statistics Relative fluctuation level Higher moments of PDF (Skewness, Flatness) Detailed “structure” of blobs – sharp front and trailing wake Conditionally averaged density

15. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 15 Implications for main wall fluxes J. Horacek, O. E. Garcia, R. A. Pitts et al., IAEA EXP4/21 (2006)  Good agreement between expt. & simulation provides extremely strong evidence for interchange motions as the origin of anomalous SOL  transport Flux-gradient paradigm:  = D eff  n/  r not adequate to describe TCV data. Convection:  = nV eff does better across region of broad SOL profile TCV results show that the scaling of wall flux with density seen elsewhere is due to turbulent interchange motions PDF of turbulent flux at wall radius

16. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 16 BB Bx  B E r xB,  pxB Ballooning Pfirsch- Schlüter Divertor sink ExBExB  Determine transport of impurities from source to destination in a tokamak – material migration – T-retention FWD B  SOL Flows BB Bx  B REV B  Poloidal Parallel

17. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 17 #26092#27585#27582#27588 Studying flows on TCV Bx  B Mach probe  Use configurational flexibility of TCV to study flows in simplest possible diverted, ohmic plasmas Emphasis on direction of B , configuration and density (|B  | = 1.43 T) B  and I p always reversed together to preserve helicity

18. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 18 FWD-B/REV-B, I p =  260 kA, density scan wall  Strong field direction and density dependence near outer midplane Flows always co-current Direction consistent with Pfirsch-Schlüter flow Slight, field independent negative offset R. A. Pitts et al., PSI 2006

19. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 19 Ballooning drive? +10 cm 0 cm -10 cm = 4.2 x 10 19 m -3 OUTER divertor  Change of M || with location above and below plasma midplane is consistent with a ballooning drive for the field independent flow offset Not unambiguous owing to presence of lower divertor sink – new results this week(!!) show that is a real “ballooning” drive Bx  B R. A. Pitts et al., PSI 2006

20. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 20 260 kA density scan in FWD/REV-B: OUTER divertor INNER divertor (10 19 m -3 ) 1.72.54.27.36.3 REV B  OUTER divertor INNER divertor (10 19 m -3 ) 1.72.54.27.36.3 REV B  FWD B  Choose radial band in the main SOL: 8 < r-r sep < 12 mm Take mean exptl. M || and plot versus density Compare with predicted Pfirsch-Schlüter flow  Field dependent component OUTER divertor INNER divertor OUTER divertor INNER divertor R. A. Pitts et al., PSI 2006

21. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 21 Interchange driven flows  Assume radial transport by interchange motions in outer midplane vicinity – estimate parallel flow due to transients Time averaged Mach No. due to transport driven flow: M || ~ 0.5f p>  p  f p>  p  = t(p >  p  )/  t Duration of time series,  t t(p >  p  ) time over which p exceeds  p  by factor  R. A. Pitts et al., PSI 2006 W. Fundamenski, R. A. Pitts et al., accepted for publication in Nuclear Fusion  Reasonable agreement with experiment TCV results show that parallel flows can be explained by combination of classical (drift driven) and transport (turbulence driven) components

22. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 22 JET

23. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 23 JET DOC-L Discharges Retarding field energy analyser RFA  Designed and built at CRPP as part of enhancement project (JW0-ED-3.7) for reciprocating probe head upgrades Previous attemps to make such a device function had always failed on JET  Provides radial profile of SOL T i Almost never measured, especially in large tokamaks Can also yield plasma potential and local Mach flow

24. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 24 -180 V -150 V 0 V VsVs RFA Principle  Usual application is to sweep ion retarding grid to generate I-V characteristic and extract T i, V sheath agreement with experiment Negative slit bias allows simultaneous extraction of parallel ion flux  Mach flows can be measured with a bi-directional device Long cable lengths (> 100 m on JET!) and small signals (  A) prevent fast grid sweeping, but ELMs can be measured – see later

25. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 25 JET DOC-L Discharges The JET RFA  Complex design – probes on JET subject to much greater constraints than elsewhere Bi-directional – 2 RFA cavities looking along B  All boron-nitride design, like all JET probes 30  m wide entrance slits 2 mm grid separation Theoretical ion transmission ~0.2 March 2003 40 mm Slit plate Grids Collector  They don’t always last long either Probe drive accident on last day of operation in Campaign C14 R. A. Pitts et al., Rev. Sci. Instr. 74 (2003) 4644 After March 2004

26. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 26 Excellent flow data from top LFS  Probe samples at the near zero point for Pfirsch-Schlüter flow – and yet, large flows – not understood nor reproduced by edge codes (SOLPS5, EDGE2D) B  B  strong parallel flow towards inner divertor at RCP B  B  flow stagnates at RCP Mean flow offset towards inner divertor – consistent with transport driven flow as in TCV – verified also with ESEL on JET S. K. Erents, R. A. Pitts et al., PPCF. 46 (2004) 1757

27. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 27 SOL flow confirmed by T i data  Large change in ion- side/electron side T i ratio with field reversal B  B  : T i,i-side /T i,e-side > 1 B  B  : T i,i-side /T i,e-side ~ 1 Due to the strong perturbing effect of the probe itself Ions depleted on the “downstream” side  strong electric fields develop  ion f(v || ) modified R. A. Pitts et al., ECA Vol. 27A, P-2.84 R. A. Pitts et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 337-339 (2005) 146 JET RFA provided first ever demonstration of this theoretically expected effect – quantitative agreement with theory for FWD B 

28. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 28 DD JET #62218 t = 19.05 s, ELM-freet = 19.06 s, Type I ELM Time (s) H-mode  Edge MHD instabilities  periodic bursts of particles and energy into the SOL. Type I ELMing H-mode is currently the baseline ITER scenario Edge Localised modes

29. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 29 Far SOL ELMs on the RFA  Delicate edge probes can never be used close to separatrix in high power discharges But measurements in the far SOL just as important (determine wall interaction) Use RFA to detect the ELM transient near the limiter radius Use constant grid bias and catch ELM convected ions able to surmount the potental barrier (~400 V) Only a few measurements in H-mode Hydrogen plasmas Time (s) d sep at probe (mm) j slit (Acm -2 ) I coll (  A) H  (outer) /10 15 V slit (V) V grid1 (V) V grid2 (V) W dia (kJ) #63214

30. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 30 Individual ELMs d sep ~134 mm HH W dia (kJ) j slit (Acm -2 ) I coll (  A) d sep ~86 mmd sep ~74 mmd sep ~73 mm

31. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 31 Far SOL ELM ion energies  Clear filaments in each ELM Net apparent flow to inboard side  ELM enters SOL mainly on outboard side Multiple filaments and clear trend for lower energies in successive filaments suggest picture of ELM as a train of toroidally rotating, feld aligned structures r - r sep ~ 80 mm at the probe Current of ions with energy > 400 eV R. A. Pitts et al., Nucl. Fusion 46 (2006) 82

32. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 32 Solves dynamical particle and energy two-fluid equations in the ELM filament frame subject to parallel losses determined by sheath boundary conditions Normalisation parameter:  n,0 = L || /c s Characteristic parallel loss time evaluated at the initial conditions of the transient Filament origin location T e, T i, n e at ELM origin ELM radial speed, v ELM Parallel connect. length, L || Input Output T e, T i, n e in the ELM filament at any radial distance Compute ion collector current with simple model of RFA function  compare with expt. Modelling the ELM transient W. Fundamenski & R. A. Pitts PPCF 48 (2006) 109 New transient model of ELM parallel losses

33. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 33 Model consistent with RFA data  Good agreement with i-side fluxes Assume ELM starts anywhere from pedestal top to separatrix but with “mid-pedestal” T i, T e, n Semi-adiabatic broadening v r ELM = 600 ms -1 (from previous JET scaling) Predicts T i,RFA /T i,ped = 0.3  0.5 T e,RFA /T e,ped = 0.13  0.25 n e,RFA /n e,ped = 0.3  0.4  Filament cools faster than it dilutes, electrons cool more rapidly than ions W. Fundamenski & R. A. Pitts PPCF 48 (2006) 109

34. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 34 ELMs can interact strongly with main chamber surfaces  New KL8 visible (Photron) camera at JET picks up ELM induced main wall interactions during recent dedicated ELM ablation session (1 MJ ELMs!) Images courtesy of CIEMAT team and C. Silva

35. R. A. Pitts: KFKI-RMKI, Budapest 12/04/2007 35 ~260 eV ~600 eV ~1100 eV Model prediction for ITER  Model implies significant ELM wall erosion in ITER and beyond, even for high Z-wall ELM starts mid-pedestal D +  W: 0.5% yield (1% for T + ) D +  W threshold (209 eV D +, 136 eV T + ) Confirmed experimentally on JET (RFA) Ion impact energy = 3T e + 2T i R. A. Pitts et al., PPCF 47 (2005) B303 W. Fundamenski & R. A. Pitts PSI 2006