(a) A photograph of NSTX lower divertor with the IR camera field of view indicated as a red shadowed region and (b) Plasma equilibrium and layout of the IR diagnostic.
(a) 2D temperature distribution after an ELM, (b) 2D divertor heat flux distribution calculated from (a) using the original version of TACO (no consideration of thin surface layer effect), and (c) 1D heat flux profile along the red radial line indicated in (b).
Comparison of the result between TACO and THEODOR for the same radial line and 60 000 (W m−2 K−1) α value; (a) Comparison of temporal evolution of peak heat flux and (b) Comparison of radial heat flux profiles at an ELM peak.
The 2D heat flux distribution with 60 000 (W m−2 K−1) α value. Some of the tile gaps are indicated with arrows.
Energy deposition calculated from the data by the IR camera, with different α values during and after the discharge.
Striated heat flux distribution at the divertor surface, (a) 2D heat flux distribution on the divertor surface with individual striations (from the ELM filaments) visible and (b) A 1D heat flux distribution along the red radial line indicated in (a).
(a) Temporal evolution of measured mean peak heat flux ( ) during a type-I ELMy H-mode, (b) Toroidal degree of asymmetry for qpeak, ɛDA (qpeak), (c) Toroidal ɛDA (λq) as a function of , and (d) Relation between ɛDA (λq) and ɛDA (qpeak). Data for each of the 1/3 of the ELM cycle have been colored green, sky blue, and gold, respectively.
Comparison of ELM energy deposition onto the outer divertor target, from the IR camera measurement to the ELM energy loss from the fast diamagnetic measurement. These data points use α = 40 000 W m−2 K−1.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...