4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Numerical study of the resonant magnetic perturbations for Type I edge localized modes control in ITER

期刊

NUCLEAR FUSION
卷 48, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

INT ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY
DOI: 10.1088/0029-5515/48/2/024003

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A number of possible designs of external and in-vessel coils generating resonant magnetic perturbations (RMPs) for Type I edge localized modes (ELMs) control in ITER are analysed for the reference scenarios (H-mode, Hybrid and Steady-State) taking into account physical, technical and spatial constraints. The level of stochasticity (Chirikov parameter similar to 1 at psi(1/2) similar to 0.95) generated by the I-coils in the DIII-D experiments on ELMs suppression was taken as a reference. Designs with a toroidal symmetry n = 3 were considered to avoid lower n numbers producing larger central islands, a potential trigger of MHD instabilities. The evaluation of RMP coils designs is done with respect to the RMPs spectrum that should produce enough edge ergodisation and minimum central perturbations at minimum current. The proposed designs include in-vessel, mid-ports and external coils. Changes in the equilibrium due to changes in the internal inductance I(i), the poloidal beta beta(p) and the edge magnetic shear in a reasonable range for ITER scenarios were demonstrated to have a small effect on the edge ergodisation. Present estimations were done without margins and for vacuum fields neglecting plasma response on RMPs. The validity of the vacuum approach was estimated analytically in the visco-resistive linear response regime using [1]. The typical radial magnetic field amplitudes produced by RMP coils in DIII-D and ITER are an order of magnitude or slightly above the critical values for the 'downward' bifurcation to the reconnected stage indicating the possibility of the islands formation in the pedestal region. Central islands (from the top of the pedestal) are expected to be screened.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据