1 / 23

M9: Stability & Pedestal Experiments

M9: Stability & Pedestal Experiments. Ian Chapman & Samuli Saarelma on behalf of all contributors to MAST stability team. M9 headlines. ELM control with 3D magnetic perturbations Evolution and stability of the edge pedestal Role of ion-scale turbulence in core transport

garima
Télécharger la présentation

M9: Stability & Pedestal Experiments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. M9: Stability & PedestalExperiments Ian Chapman & Samuli Saarelma on behalf of all contributors to MAST stability team

  2. M9 headlines • ELM control with 3D magnetic perturbations • Evolution and stability of the edge pedestal • Role of ion-scale turbulence in core transport • Development of integrated scenarios for the MAST upgrade • Development and benchmarking of edge modelling tools in benefit of the divertor upgrade • Fast-ion transport to guide profile and heating optimisations

  3. Proposals Process • Proposals considered: • 38 through proposal webpage • 2 transferred to Integrated Plasma Scenarios Area • 3 transferred from Transport and Confinement Area • 1 raised during Stability meetings • = 40 proposals requesting 643 shots • Amalgamation and prioritisation led to: • 13 experiments requiring 273 shots

  4. Main Experiments

  5. Parasitic Experiments

  6. Back-up Experiments

  7. Headline Coverage • Headline 1 (RMP ELM control) • 8 experiments, 1 parasitic, 178 shots • 8 by CCFE PiC • Headline 2 (Pedestal evolution) • 3 experiments, 2 parasitic, 48 shots • 2 led by non-CCFE PiC, 1 by CCFE PiC • Non-headlines • 2 experiments, 2 parasitic, 47 shots • 1 led by non-CCFE PiC, 1 by CCFE PiC

  8. ITPA Contributions • Contributing to the following ITPA experiments: • PEP 6: Pedestal structure and ELM stability in DN • PEP 19: Basic mechanisms of edge transport with resonant magnetic perturbations in toroidal plasma confinement devices • PEP 23: Quantification of the requirements for ELM suppression and mitigation by magnetic perturbations • PEP 32: Access to and exit from H-mode with ELM mitigation at low input power above PLH • MDC 1: Disruption mitigation by massive gas jets • MDC 15: Disruption database development • PEP 29: Vertical jolts/kicks for ELM triggering and control

  9. M9-MHD-001: RMPs in 400kA SND • Aim • Investigate RMPs in n=3,4,6 on a sawtooth-free discharge • Is a LSND n=3 case best route to ELM suppression if we can avoid rotation braking (perhaps by lower Ip) • Strategy • Repeat shot 28168 (a LSND 400 kA shot) • Apply RMPs in n=3 n=4 and n=6 configurations and optimise ELM mitigation/ suppression • Increase density until ne/NGW > 0.53 and attempt to suppress type I ELMs

  10. M9-MHD-002: Rotating RMPs • Aim • Investigate rotating RMPs in time and effect on the strike point splitting and coil penetration • Strategy • Develop a LSN shot in which ELM mitigation can be performed using n=3 perturbations • Assess impact of rotating strike point on L-mode heat flux • Rotate phase of the perturbation during the shot & monitor strike points for rotation of splitting patterns • Then in inter-ELM and ELMing discharges • Monitor strike point splitting and effectiveness of ELM mitigation (via pump out, ELM frequency changes etc) • Specific requirements • New IR view, as required by splitting experiments

  11. M9-MHD-003: RMPs on L-H & 1st ELM • Aim • Determine impact of RMPs on L-H transition • n=3,4,6; q95 scan (match ITER Ip ramp); vary ne; IELM • Determine impact of ELM coils on dithery I-mode phase • Mitigate 1st ELM (determine ∆W on with various RMPs) • Demonstrate ELM mitigation close to Pthr w n=4 and n=6 • Strategy • Find L-H threshold in plasma with no RMP • Find threshold (delayed or at same time) with RMPs • Change q95 & density and repeat power scans • Specific requirements • ECELESTE and RP for edge Er and turbulence data • Visible and IR Cameras set up for lobe and strike point measurements respectively; Burst TS at L-H time

  12. M9-MHD-004: RMPs at low/high collisionality • Aim • Obtain ELM suppression at low/high collisionality (seen in DIII-D for ν*e <0.3 or ν*e >2.0 and AUG for ne/nGW >0.53) • Strategy • Take LSND (eg 27205) and reduce pedestal collisionality by reducing the density and heating early • (See for example 14643 which has ne,ped = 1.9x1019m-3 and Te,ped = 380eV giving ν*e = 0.03) • For high n/nGW drop Ip and increase the density

  13. M9-MHD-005: Edge current with SAMI • Aim • Use the Synthetic Aperture Microwave Imaging radiometer to measure the edge current density • Measurement of the BXO mode conversion asymmetry above and below the midplane • Strategy • Scan Te,ped as much as is reasonable, to obtain a variety of good H mode shots with different edge collisionalities • Modulate loop volts • BT scan between shots • Move SAMI to a midplane window and observe DND H modes with ELM free periods lasting 10ms or more • Specific requirements • Thomson scattering in burst mode to get measurements around at least one ELM crash in each shot

  14. M9-MHD-006: Global β and pedestal • Aim • Assess global beta evolution influence on achievable pedestal and global confinement • Obtain high quality equilibria during sharp L-H transition and in the fast post-ELM pedestal recovery. • Use these equilibria to perform gyrokinetic analysis • Strategy • Run DND with DI start-up (highest Te,ped in M8), but upshifted to keep in L-mode • Shift down to get L-H and do so at different times/power to vary β • Compare to ELITE modelling (which shows higher beta gives higher critical pressure gradient) • Trigger the TS in the burst mode at the transition time • Specific requirements • TS in burst mode, BES at the edge

  15. M9-MHD-007: RMP Midplane displacement 4 ne (1019m-3) 2 0 600 Te (eV) 400 200 0 1.35 1.45 1.55 Radius (m) • Aim • Measure and model the 3d corrugation with n=3,4,6 RMPs • Strategy • Temporarily disable the position controller when RMPs are turned on by feed-forward programming of coil currents based on a coils off shot. • Do for two phases of both n=3 and n=4 in DND plasmas, • Perform a systematic current scan, • Specific requirements • Move fast cameras; position control off Thomson Scattering

  16. M9-MHD-008: RMP alignment scan • Determine IELM threshold in even and 90L configurations and ensure that it is lower than 1 kA • Perform pitch angle scan • Modify q95 and repeat scan • Compare to vacuum and plasma response modelling • Aim • Utilise unique pitch alignment capability to show resonance effect • Strategy • Use 600 kA shot developed in IPS and perform a pitch angle alignment scan to determine resonance condition

  17. M9-MHD-009: Lobe formation time n=6 RMP • Aim • Use quickly ramping RMPs to see if there is a delay between RMP application lobe length increase • Strategy • Apply n=3, n=4 and n=6 RMPs in LSND • Ramp RMP current as quickly as possible from zero to maximum, hold constant for ~40ms, then ramp down • Do in the L-mode and one during the H-mode phase • Specific requirements • HeII (or maybe CIII) filtered camera on the lower divertor

  18. M9-MHD-010: Effect of fuelling on ELM control • Aim • To investigate if ELM mitigation/suppression is dependent on the refuelling/recycling location • Strategy • Use the HFS top bottom puff in the scenario 6 discharge (600kA) and the HFS midplane puff in the scenario 4 discharge (750kA) to investigate the effects on ELM mitigation • Repeat both with LFS fuelling

  19. M9-MHD-011: Pedestal with Ip scan • Aim • Observe how the pressure gradient varies with Ip • Strategy • CDN Ip scan (5 - 10 discharges) (600-1000kA) • LSN Ip scan (5 - 10 discharges) (400-700kA)

  20. M9-MHD-012: NTM physics and control • Strategy • Demonstrate the robustness of brief H-L-H transitions as a means of controlling 2,1 TMs • Test how quickly a detected TM can be removed • Perform earlier vertical shifts (also useful for isolating different contribution to NTM stability at small island width) • Measure NTM onset with increased/reduced n=1 • Aim • Demonstrate NTM control for MAST-U and increase understanding of TM stability in STs

  21. M9-MHD-013: Disruption mitigation • Aim • Study the effect of disruption mitigation on heat loads and halo currents at high stored energy • Investigate the efficiency of HFS mitigation using the cHFS and combined LFS mitigation • Strategy • Perform a series of mitigations at a range of stored plasma energies, including H mode • Specific requirements • Disruption mitigation valve; Halo current detectors; IR thermography for heat load measurements

  22. M9-MHD-014: Reconnection studies • Aim • Previously TS shows rapid electron heating due to magnetic reconnection. Now measure pitch angle and ion temperature during reconnection • Strategy • Use NBI from start for MSE measurements • M/C scan, ie increase P3 from 200kA to max and change P6 bias to move reconnection point up-down • Measure Ti with CXRS and pitch angle with MSE • Scan TF to vary BT effect • Specific requirements • Needs P3 start-up with >250kA to get large-bore plasma to merge so MSE can see merging point • Burst TS, Bullet cam with high res, Xsa, Xsm for Ti

  23. What has been omitted?

More Related