160 likes | 250 Views
2012/2013 Golem , Prague. GOMTRAIC. Electrostatic Probe. Supervisor: Jana Brotankova. 1 . The probe. 2 . Radial Profile. A. Floating Potential. Not consistent. 2 . Radial Profile. A. Floating Potential. 2 . Radial Profile. A. Floating Potential. 2 . Radial Profile.
E N D
2012/2013 Golem, Prague GOMTRAIC ElectrostaticProbe Supervisor: JanaBrotankova
2. Radial Profile A. FloatingPotential Notconsistent
2. Radial Profile A. FloatingPotential
2. Radial Profile A. FloatingPotential
2. Radial Profile A. FloatingPotential t t+5ms
2. Radial Profile A. FloatingPotential – Electrical Field Notconsistent
2. Radial Profile A. FloatingPotential – PoloidalVelocity Notconsistent
2. Radial Profile A. FloatingPotential – PoloidalVelocity t+5ms t
2. Radial Profile B. IonSaturationCurrent Probe disturbing the plasma
2. Radial Profile B. IonSaturationCurrent t t+5ms
3. ProbeOrientation A. IonSaturationCurrent Mess 1st day 2nd day
3. ProbeOrientation A. IonSaturationCurrent 2nd day t+2ms t
3. ProbeOrientation A. IonSaturationCurrent Poloidal cross-sectional view Top view LFS
2. ProbeOrientation B. Floatingpotential Opposite behaviour of LFS and HFS 1st day Consistent with expectation 2nd day
3. Conclusions • Radial profiles of Ufl and Isat were measured: • For deeper positions the plasma is disturbed by the probe • Safe depth of the probe was estimated • Radial electrical field and poloidal velocity were determined • Polar dependence of radial profiles of Ufl and Isat were measured: • Four angles of Langmuir probe were measured • For some regimes, results are consistent with expectations • We found very inconsistent regime => we need to be careful about LFS and HFS • Gomtraic doesn’t end up today