4.4 Article

Numerical investigation of the 2/1 double tearing mode in EAST with the CLT code

Journal

AIP ADVANCES
Volume 13, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/5.0159182

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The pressure crashes observed in shot No. 71326 in the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak are numerically investigated and found to be caused by the nonlinear evolution of the m/n = 2/1 double tearing mode. The stability of the mode based on the safety factor (q) profile is analyzed, and it is concluded that the original q profile is inconsistent with the actual profile due to q measurement uncertainty. The influence of plasma rotation and the two-fluids effect is also discussed.
The pressure crashes observed in shot No. 71326 in the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak are numerically investigated with the three-dimensional, toroidal, and full resistive-magnetohydrodynamics code (CLT). Based on the experimental observations, the pressure crash is caused by the nonlinear evolution of the m/n = 2/1 double tearing mode (DTM), where n and m are the toroidal and poloidal mode numbers, respectively. However, we find that the m/n = 2/1 DTM is stable based on the safety factor (q) profile from the equilibrium code EFIT, which indicates that the original q profile is somewhat inconsistent with the actual profile due to q measurement uncertainty. Since there is no motional Stark effect diagnostic for this shot, the local information of the magnetic field is missing, which leads to the largest contribution to the discrepancy. If other information is perfectly known and the q profile is the only uncertainty, then we could provide some information for the EFIT reconstruction by comparing our simulation results with electron cyclotron emission signals to constrain the uncertainty of the q profile to a much smaller region. The influence of plasma rotation and the two-fluids effect is also discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available