1 / 13

Progress on ITER Rampdown Modeling with TSC

Progress on ITER Rampdown Modeling with TSC. C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory ITPA-IOS Meeting, 3/31-4/3/2009, Naka, Japan. ITER Rampdown Modeling Requirements. Rampdown in ITER is complicated by several constraints and the desire to avoid disruptions Rampdown Ip

matt
Download Presentation

Progress on ITER Rampdown Modeling with TSC

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. Progress on ITER Rampdown Modeling with TSC C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory ITPA-IOS Meeting, 3/31-4/3/2009, Naka, Japan

  2. ITER Rampdown Modeling Requirements • Rampdown in ITER is complicated by several constraints and the desire to avoid disruptions • Rampdown Ip • Rampdown elongation to avoid vertical instability • Terminate burn • Avoid additional flux consumption after EOB, avoid increase in CS1 coil current • Maintain divertor strike points on allowed target ranges to handle power and particle control • Maintain diverted configuration down to very low Ip (1.5 MA)

  3. Several Possible Strategies • Ip rampdown rate • Transport regime • H-mode • Heated L-mode • Ohmic • H-mode/L-mode/ohmic • Density trajectory during rampdown • Auxiliary power trajectory and H-mode threshold • (Some) Uncertain features • Density drop during H to L, or H to L to H • Response to drops in auxiliary power • H-mode threshold, H to L back-transition threshold

  4. Power and H-mode Thresholds • Typical flattop ELMy H-mode power to compare to Pth • 80 MW alpha power • 40 MW injected power • Giving 120 MW of input power • 47 MW of radiated power (Pbrem = 21 MW, Pcycl = 8 MW, and Pline = 18 MW) • Giving 73 MW of input power • If we use rule of thumb for power radiated inside the pedestal (Pbrem + Pcycl + Pline/3) • Giving 85 MW of input power • ---> role of radiated power in estimating H-mode sustainment???

  5. Density Evolution in Rampdown • From the threshold formulas, it is clear density will play an important role in the transport regime we sustain in rampdown, and the auxiliary power requirements for it • Fastest density drop is assumed to be P* = 5 x E, roughly based on pumped divertor experiments • Slowest density drop is at same rate as Ip to keep n/nGr ≤ 0.85 • Otherwise density drop could be anywhere in between • Strike points locations not optimal • Divertor physics regime dependences

  6. Auxiliary Power into the Plasma • There is a total of 73 MW available from the day-1 H/CD mix • 33 MW NNBI • 20 MW ICRF • 20 MW EC • NNBI has a density permissible, nL > 5 x 1019 /m3, so in rampdown this source is not available for the entire phase • ICRF and EC would prefer plasma that “sees” midplane port substantially, so vertical height of plasma is constrained • If we are injecting power we must have strike points in allowed locations of divertor slots to handle the power

  7. Classification of rampdowns • Non-heated L-mode rampdown • Heated L-mode rampdown • H-mode rampdown • Slow, medium and fast density rampdowns

  8. TSC simulations of rampdown

  9. TSC simulations of rampdown

  10. TSC simulations of rampdown

  11. Focused on Plasma Midplane Coupling, But we Need to be Coupled to Divertor Also J-toroidal

  12. Results • The flux state does not advance for any of the cases examined • The plasma shifts by about 5 cm inward with the complete shutdown of power and transition to L-mode at EOB • Simulations with more abrupt density drops showed this got up to 7-8 cm, but still no FW contact • The CS1 coil rise at the beginning of the rampdown is lower when the plasma stored energy stays higher, either by H-mode or heating with L-mode • Need to check whether forcing ICS1 to remain flat when it reaches it maximum current is OK • Other pre-programming/feedback tricks may be sufficient to avoid the ICS1 limit from creating a problem (disruption)

  13. Result, cont’d • The li rises more slowly in the H-mode than in the L-mode in the first half of the rampdown, but due to higher edge temperatures it rises faster in H-mode later • Use experimental guidance on how H-mode temperature pedestal behaves as power is brought down • Vertical stability of plasmas as li rises • Uncertain features and complicated behavior • The ratio n/nGr can easily exceed 1.0 when Ip is dropping, unless n and Ip drop together • Injected power to stay in H-mode P(MW) > 86.2 ne200.73, given large incremental drops from NB’s • Tped must stay sufficiently low in H-modes to avoid high values, drives negative edge current, drives higher li than L-mode • Modeling precise transition features is difficult but possible with experimental prescription, what are they?

More Related