Role of trapped electron mode turbulence in internal transport barrier control in the Alcator C-Mod Tokamak
Phys. Plasmas 11, 2637 (2004); doi:10.1063/1.1705653
Published 23 April 2004
You are not logged in to this journal. Log in
Nonlinear gyrokinetic simulations of trapped electron mode (TEM) turbulence, within an internal particle transport barrier, are performed and compared with experimental data. The results provide a mechanism for transport barrier control with on-axis radio frequency heating, as demonstrated in Alcator C-Mod experiments [S. J. Wukitch et al., Phys. Plasmas 9, 2149 (2002)]. Off-axis heating produces an internal particle and energy transport barrier after the transition to enhanced D
high confinement mode. The barrier foot reaches the half-radius, with a peak density 2.5 times the edge density. While the density profile peaks, the temperature profile remains relatively unaffected. The peaking and concomitant impurity accumulation are controlled by applying modest central heating power late in the discharge. Gyrokinetic turbulence simulations of the barrier formation phase, using the GS2 code [W. Dorland et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5579 (2000)] show that toroidal ion temperature gradient driven modes are suppressed inside the barrier foot, but continue to dominate in the outer half-radius. As the density gradient steepens further, trapped electron modes are driven unstable. The onset of TEM turbulence produces an outflow that strongly increases with the density gradient, upon exceeding a new nonlinear critical density gradient, which significantly exceeds the linear critical density gradient. The TEM turbulent outflow ultimately balances the inward Ware pinch, leading to steady state. Moreover, the simulated turbulent particle diffusivity matches that inferred from particle balance using measured density profile data and the calculated Ware pinch. This turbulent diffusivity exhibits a strong unfavorable temperature dependence that allows control with central heating. ©2004 American Institute of Physics.
high confinement mode. The barrier foot reaches the half-radius, with a peak density 2.5 times the edge density. While the density profile peaks, the temperature profile remains relatively unaffected. The peaking and concomitant impurity accumulation are controlled by applying modest central heating power late in the discharge. Gyrokinetic turbulence simulations of the barrier formation phase, using the GS2 code [W. Dorland et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5579 (2000)] show that toroidal ion temperature gradient driven modes are suppressed inside the barrier foot, but continue to dominate in the outer half-radius. As the density gradient steepens further, trapped electron modes are driven unstable. The onset of TEM turbulence produces an outflow that strongly increases with the density gradient, upon exceeding a new nonlinear critical density gradient, which significantly exceeds the linear critical density gradient. The TEM turbulent outflow ultimately balances the inward Ware pinch, leading to steady state. Moreover, the simulated turbulent particle diffusivity matches that inferred from particle balance using measured density profile data and the calculated Ware pinch. This turbulent diffusivity exhibits a strong unfavorable temperature dependence that allows control with central heating. ©2004 American Institute of Physics.
| History: | Received 3 November 2003; accepted 23 February 2004; published 23 April 2004 |
| Permalink: |
http://link.aip.org/link/?PHPAEN/11/2637/1 |
KEYWORDS and PACS
plasma turbulence,
plasma transport processes,
plasma instability,
plasma toroidal confinement,
pinch effect,
plasma boundary layers,
plasma impurities,
plasma radiofrequency heating,
plasma kinetic theory,
plasma simulation,
plasma density,
plasma temperature
- 52.35.Ra
Plasma turbulence - 52.25.Fi
Plasma transport properties - 52.25.Vy
Impurities in plasmas - 52.58.Lq
Z-pinches, plasma focus, and other pinch devices - 52.40.Hf
Plasmamaterial interactions; boundary layer effects - 52.35.Qz
Plasma microinstabilities including ion-acoustic, two-stream, loss-cone, beam-plasma, drift, ion- or electron-cyclotron instabilities, etc - 52.50.Qt
Plasma heating by radio-frequency fields including ICR, ICP, helicons - 52.65.Tt
Gyrofluid and gyrokinetic plasma simulations - 52.25.Dg
Plasma kinetic equations - YEAR: 2004
RELATED DATABASES
PUBLICATION DATA
1070-664X (print)
1089-7674 (online)
REFERENCES (63)
For access to fully linked references, you need to log in.
For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.
- A. M. Dimits, G. Bateman, M. A. Beer et al., Phys. Plasmas 7, 969 (2000).
- B. Coppi and F. Pegoraro,
Nucl. Fusion 17, 969 (1977) . - M. Kotschenreuther, G. Rewoldt, and W. M. Tang,
Comput. Phys. Commun. 88, 128 (1995) . - W. D. Dorland, E. Jenko, M. Kotschenreuther, and B. N. Rogers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5579 (2000).
- D. R. Ernst, R. E. Bell, M. G. Bell et al., Phys. Plasmas 7, 615 (2000).
- S. J. Wukitch, R. L. Boivin, P. T. Bonoli et al., Phys. Plasmas 9, 2149 (2002).
- J. E. Rice, P. T. Bonoli, E. S. Marmar et al.,
Nucl. Fusion 42, 510 (2002) . - W. Horton, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 735 (1999).
- M. Kotschenreuther, W. Dorland, M. Beer, and G. W. Hammett, Phys. Plasmas 2, 2381 (1995).
- D. R. Ernst, B. Coppi, S. D. Scott, M. Porkolab, and the TFTR Group, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 2454 (1998).
- O. Grüber, R. C. Wolf, R. Dux et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1787 (1999).
- T. Fujita,
Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 39, B75 (1997) . - C. Gormezano, Y. F. Baranov, C. D. Challis et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5544 (1998).
- C. M. Greenfield, K. H. Burrell, J. C. DeBoo et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4544 (2001).
- J. E. Rice, R. L. Boivin, P. T. Bonoli et al.,
Nucl. Fusion 41, 277 (2001) . - M. Kotschenreuther, W. Dorland, Q. P. Liu, G. W. Hammett, M. A. Beer, S. A. Smith, A. Bondeson, and S. C. Cowley, Sixteenth IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Montreal, Canada, 711 October 1996, paper F1-CN-64/D1-5 (IAEA, Vienna, 1997).
- ITER Physics Basis Editors, ITER Physics Expert Group Chairs and Co-Chairs, ITER Joint Central Team, and Physics Integration Unit,
Nucl. Fusion 39, 2137 (1999) . - R. Goldston,
Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 26, 87 (1984) . - I. H. Hutchinson, R. Boivin, F. Bombarda et al., Phys. Plasmas 1, 1511 (1994).
- C. L. Fiore, J. E. Rice, P. T. Bonoli et al., Phys. Plasmas 8, 2023 (2001).
- C. L. Fiore, P. T. Bonoli, D. R. Ernst et al., Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 48, 331 (2003);
- P. C. Efthimion, S. von Goeler, W. A. Houlberg et al., Phys. Plasmas 5, 1832 (1998).
- W. P. West, M. R. Wade, C. M. Greenfield et al., Phys. Plasmas 9, 1970 (2002).
- R. Budny, R Andre, C. D. Challis et al., 30th EPS Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics, St. Petersburg, 711 July 2003, ECA Vol 27A, O-3.4A.
- E. J. Strait, L. L. Lao, M. E. Mauel et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 4421 (1995).
- F. M. Levinton, M. C. Zarnstorff, S. H. Batha et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 4417 (1995).
- L. Lao, H. S. John, R. D. Stambaugh, A. G. Kellman, and W. Pfeiffer,
Nucl. Fusion 25, 1611 (1985) . - R. J. Goldston, D. C. McCune, H. H. Towner, S. L. Davis, R. J. Hawryluk, and G. L. Schmidt,
J. Comput. Phys. 43, 61 (1981) . - M. A. Beer, G. W. Hammett, G. Rewoldt, E. J. Synakowski, M. C. Zarnstorff, and W. Dorland, Phys. Plasmas 4, 1792 (1997).
- K. H. Burrell, Phys. Plasmas 4, 1499 (1997).
- F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine, Rev. Mod. Phys. 48, 239 (1976).
- S. Hirshman, Phys. Fluids 21, 1295 (1978).
- P. T. Bonoli, C. L. Fiore, R. L. Boivin et al., Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 46, 54 (2001).
- M. A. Beer, S. C. Cowley, and G. W. Hammett, Phys. Plasmas 2, 2687 (1995).
- R. L. Miller, F. L. Waelbroeck, A. B. Hassam, and R. E. Waltz, Phys. Plasmas 2, 3676 (1995).
- R. J. Goldston, D. C. McCune, H. H. Towner, S. L. Davis, R. J. Hawryluk, and G. L. Schmidt,
J. Comput. Phys. 43, 61 (1981) . - G. Rewoldt, W. M. Tang, and R. J. Hastie, Phys. Fluids 30, 807 (1987).
- L. R. Baylor, T. C. Jernigan, S. K. Combs et al., Phys. Plasmas 7, 1878 (2000).
- G. Rewoldt and W. Tang, Phys. Fluids B 2, 318 (1990).
- M. H. Redi, W. Dorland, R. Bell et al., 30th EPS Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics, St. Petersburg, 711 July 2003, ECA Vol. 27, P-3.98.
- J. E. Rice, P. T. Bonoli, C. L. Fiore et al.,
Nucl. Fusion 43, 781 (2003) . - J. E. Rice, W. D. Lee, E. S. Marmar et al., Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 48, 18 (2003);
- S. P. Hirshman and D. J. Sigmar,
Nucl. Fusion 21, 1079 (1981) . - D. R. Ernst, M. G. Bell, R. E. Bell et al., Phys. Plasmas 5, 665 (1998).
- B. B. Kadomstev and O. P. Pogutse,
Sov. Phys. JETP 24, 1172 (1967) . - B. B. Kadomstev and O. P. Pogutse, Sov. Phys. Dokl. 14, 470 (1969).
- B. Kadomtsev and O. Pogutse, Turbulence in Toroidal Systems (Consultants Bureau, New York, 1970), Vol. 5, p. 249.
- J. C. Adam, W. M. Tang, and P. H. Rutherford, Phys. Fluids 19, 561 (1976).
- C. Z. Cheng and L. Chen,
Nucl. Fusion 21, 403 (1981) . - B. Coppi and G. Rewoldt,
Phys. Lett. 49A, 36 (1974) . - B. Coppi and G. Rewoldt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33, 1329 (1974).
- B. Coppi, S. Migliuolo, and Y.-K. Pu, Phys. Fluids B 2, 2322 (1990).
- D. W. Ross, J. C. Adam, and W. M. Tang, Phys. Fluids 20, 613 (1977).
- M. A. Beer, "Gyrofluid Models of Turbulent Transport in Tokamaks," Ph.D. thesis, Princeton University, Dept. of Astrophysical Sciences, 1995.
- S. Parker, V. Chen, W. Wan, B. I. Cohen, and W. M. Nevins, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 48, 84 (2003);
- W. M. Tang, G. Rewoldt, and L. Chen, Phys. Fluids 29, 3715 (1986).
- K. Hallatschek and W. Dorland, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 47, 135 (2002), Paper GI1.5).
- M. N. Rosenbluth and F. L. Hinton, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 724 (1998).
- B. N. Rogers, W. Dorland, and M. Kotschenreuther, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5336 (2000).
- M. Brambilla,
Nucl. Fusion 38, 1805 (1998) . - F. Jenko, W. Dorland, and G. W. Hammett, Phys. Plasmas 8, 4096 (2001).
- E. J. Doyle, T. A. Casper, T. B. Kaiser et al., Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 47, 301 (2002).
- S. Ishida, the JT-60, and JFT-2M Groups, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 48, 82 (2003);







