1 / 40

The performance of improved H-modes at ASDEX Upgrade and projection to ITER George Sips

EX/1-1. The performance of improved H-modes at ASDEX Upgrade and projection to ITER George Sips MPI für Plasmaphysik, EURATOM-Association, D-85748, Germany

phuc
Download Presentation

The performance of improved H-modes at ASDEX Upgrade and projection to ITER George Sips

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. EX/1-1 The performance of improved H-modes at ASDEX Upgrade and projection to ITER George Sips MPI für Plasmaphysik, EURATOM-Association, D-85748, Germany G. Tardini1, C. Forest2, O. Gruber1, P. Mc Carthy3, A. Gude1, L.D. Horton1, V. Igochine1, O. Kardaun1,C.F. Maggi1, M. Maraschek1, V. Mertens1, R. Neu1, A. Peeters1, G. V. Pereverzev1, A. Stäbler1, J. Stober1,W. Suttrop1 and the ASDEX Upgrade Team. 1 Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, EURATOM-Association, D-85748, Germany. 2The University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA. 3Dep. of Physics, University College Cork, Association EURATOM-DCU, Cork, Ireland. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  2. Motivation: ITER performance ITER primary goal: Q=10, Pfus~400MW. Energy confinement:IPB98(y,2) scaling expression.  ITER size, 15MA/5.3T, Paux≤ 73 MW, <ne>=0.85,…. bN=1.8 Mukhovatov V. et al Nucl. Fusion 43 (2003) 942 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  3. Motivation: ITER performance • Integrated simulation codes: ‘envelope’ of performance. • Strong dependence, of Q and Pfus with H98(y,2). • Significant increase in ITER performance for ‘small’ increase in energy confinement. bN>2 bN=1.8 Mukhovatov V. et al Nucl. Fusion 43 (2003) 942 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  4. Motivation: ITER performance • Integrated simulation codes: ‘envelope’ of performance. • Strong dependence, of Q and Pfus with H98(y,2). • Significant increase in ITER performance for ‘small’ increase in energy confinement. • H98(y,2) > 1, and bN> 2: • Higher performance at 15 MA. • Long pulse operation, Ip=11 to 14 MA, with Q=5-10 (Hybrid). • DEMO: H98(y,2) ≥ 1.2, bN≥3.5. bN>2 bN=1.8 Mukhovatov V. et al Nucl. Fusion 43 (2003) 942 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  5. Motivation  Outline • ASDEX Upgrade: Improved H-modes (H98(y,2) > 1, and bN> 2). • Operational range: - wide range in density, Ti0/Te0 and n*. - at q95→ 3.1. - high beta: Limits and control of NTMs. • Scaling to ITER using experimental data. • Conclusions. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  6. 1.6 ASDEX Upgrade H-mode data 1.4 1.2 H98(y,2) 1.0 ITER 0.8 0.6 1 2 3 H-modes with Type I ELMs bN ASDEX Upgrade: H-mode data • H-mode operation for a wide range of plasma conditions: • Ip=0.6-1.4MA, BT=1.6-3.0T. • All type I ELMy H-modes: • q95 < 5.5, stationary > 0.2 s. • (values shown are averaged) George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  7. Ip=300 kA Ip=540 kA Ip=700 kA Ip=0.8-1.2 MA z(m) z(m) z(m) z(m) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0 0 0 0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 W C R(m) R(m) R(m) R(m) 1.0 1.5 2.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 W C W C W C heating 0.1 0.4 0.6 >1.0 time (s) Current rise phase  Low magnetic shear Current rise: 1. Early divertor configuration t~0.5s. 2.  low <ne> ~ 3x1019 m-3, control of impurities. 3. Additional heating: Slow down the current penetration.  Low magnetic shear in the centre. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  8. Low magnetic shear Improved H-mode q95= 4.8 ASDEX Upgrade: Equilibrated q-profiles 5 ~ zero magnetic shear ←q 4 3 2 1 1 shear/q → 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 rtor • MSE data available in 2006. • Timing of preheating: ‘control’ of q-profile  H98(y,2). • The q-profile remains flat in the core. McCarthy P. et al, EX/P3-7 Stober J. et al, EX/P1-7 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  9. (3,2) NTM activity Fishbone activity Low magnetic shear Improved H-mode q95= 4.8 ASDEX Upgrade: Equilibrated q-profiles 5 ~ zero magnetic shear ←q 4 3 2 1 1 shear/q → 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 rtor • MSE data available in 2006. • Timing of preheating: ‘control’ of q-profile  H98(y,2). • The q-profile remains flat in the core. MHD modes main candidate. • Typically (3,2) NTMs and higher (m,n) activity or fishbone activity. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  10. ASDEX Upgrade, all improved H-modes 1.6 1.4 1.2 H98(y,2) 1.0 ITER 0.8 0.6 Improved H-modes 1 2 3 bN ASDEX Upgrade: Improved H-mode data • A second dataset includes all“improved H-mode” discharges: • Early heating (some selected cases with late heating). • Stationary for > 0.5 s. • NOT just a selection of the best discharges. Minimum valuesrequired for DEMO George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  11. ASDEX Upgrade 1.6 1.4 1.2 H98(y,2) 1.0 ITER 0.8 Improved H-modes H-modes (Type I) 0.6 1 2 3 bN ASDEX Upgrade: Improved H-mode data Improved H-modes do not exclusively occupy the domain H98(y,2) > 1 at βN= 2-3. Any H-mode, when it manages to achieve high beta is likely to develop low central shear in the centre, due to bootstrap current (overlap of ‘grey’ and ‘red’ data). Physics criteria for improved H-modes would depend on the details of the current density profile (not routinely available). George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  12. ASDEX Upgrade: Improved H-mode data Various physics studies on the reason for the high stability/ confinement in improved H-modes. Core: Stober J. et al, EX/P1-7 Pedestal: Suttrop W. et al, EX/8-5 Maggi C. et al, IT/P1-6(various experiments) Similar results have been obtained in other experiments (DIII-D, JET, JT-60U, NSTX..), for a range of conditions (See this conference !!). George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  13. Operational range: Density Improved H-modes:Typically operate at low density, <ne>/nGW = 0.35-0.6. After formation of q(r), the density can be increased together with an increase in heating power and d. <ne>/nGW = 0.85, H98(y,2) ~ 1.2 are obtained at high d=0.4.→At 1MA: <ne>=1.1x 1020 m-3. → Tolerable ELMs. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  14. NBI only NBI+ICRH Operational range: Ti0/Te0 ASDEX Upgrade improved H-modes 1. Operation at high <ne>. 2. ICRH and NBI at low <ne>.  0.7 < Ti0/Te0 < 2.5 Ti0/Te0 ~ 1 for a substantial subset of the data, while maintaining high confinement. Moreover, some of these discharges have low plasma rotation (low momentum input). 2.5 2.0 1.5 Ti0/Te0 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 <ne>/nGW George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  15. Operational range: n* Strongest correlation of maximum H98(y,2) with plasma collisionality (n*/n*ITER). Also density peaking (ne0/<ne>) can be higher at lower n*/n*ITER.  b and v* dependence of the IPB98(y,2) scaling expression are under investigation. Weisen H. et al, EX/8-4 McDonald D. et al, EX/P3-5 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  16. Operational range: low q95=3.17 # 20449 • 1.2MA/2.0T  q95 = 3.17, • NBI used with beta feedback,50% of NBI is off-axis! • Central ICRF heating. • <ne>=6.4x1019m-3, Ti0/Te0=1.4 <ne>/nGW=0.42, n*/n*ITER=2. • H98(y,2) rises to 1.4 at bN=2.9. • CW,core = 2.5x10-5 (< 10-4). 1.2 Ip (MA) Da 0 8 PNBI (MW) PICH (MW) 0 even n odd n 3 bN 1 H98(y,2) 0 0 2 4 6 time (s) George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  17. Operational range: low q95=3.17 # 20449 • 1.2MA/2.0T  q95 = 3.17, • NBI used with beta feedback,50% of NBI is off-axis. • Central ICRF heating. • <ne>=6.4x1019m-3, Ti0/Te0=1.4 <ne>/nGW=0.42, n*/n*ITER=2. • H98(y,2) rises to 1.4 at bN=2.9. • CW,core = 2.5x10-5 (< 10-4). • Core MHD: • (1,1) fishbones. • (4,3) NTMs. • NO sawteeth. • Early (3,2) NTM when bN ~2. 1.2 Ip (MA) Da 0 8 PNBI (MW) PICH (MW) 0 even n odd n 3 bN 1 H98(y,2) 0 0 2 4 6 time (s) George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  18. Operational range: ECCD, stabilise (3,2) NTM 1. ECCD: Stabilise this (3,2) NTM at q95~3.1 After ECCD, discharge continues as improved H-mode (shown before). Zohm H. et al, EX/4-1Rb • 2. Otherwise (2,1) NTM may develop, and disruption recognition algorithms will act: (mode-lock, radiation peaking, regime identification, neural net): • React by issuing a soft stop or triggering killer gas injection. Pautasso G. et al, EX/P8-7 3. Stabilisation of (3,2) NTM is not required for improved H-modes with q95 > 4. at q=1.5 position Stober J. et al, EX/P1-7 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  19. Scaling to ITER using experimental data • Motivation: • Integrated simulation codes rely on use of transport models and models for actuators, require benchmarking on current experiments. • Scaling the measured kinetic profiles to ITER: 100% fit to experimental data, gradient length preserved, pedestal. • Use experimental profile shapes. • Same bN, H-factor's. • Use ITER geometry. • Impurities: Be 2 %, Ar 0.12 %, He 4.3 %  (nD+nT)/ne ~ 0.8. • Assemble set of discharges with good profile measurements. • ITER predictions: Pfus, Paux, Q (+ other parameters using ASTRA). Luce T. et al 2004 Phys. Plasmas 11 2627 Tardini G. et al 33rd EPS Conference, Rome 19-23 June 2006, P1.112 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  20. Scaling to ITER Scaling to ITER using experimental data Density: Use shape of ne profile from ASDEX Upgrade, set <ne> = 0.85nGW. Temperatures: Use shape of Ti profile or use shape of Te profile from ASDEX Upgrade (select highest), set Ti =Te and bNITER=bNAUG. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  21. Scaling to ITER: q95=3.0, bN=2.1, high <ne> 14 30 bN,thITER = bN,thAUG ne 12 Ti = Te 25 10 ne (x1019 m-3) - ITER 20 Ti,e (keV) - ITER 8 15 6 10 4 5 2 0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 rmin (m) rmin (m) Density: Use shape of ne profile from ASDEX Upgrade, set <ne> = 0.85nGW. Temperatures: Use shape of Ti profile or use shape of Te profile from ASDEX Upgrade (select highest), set Ti =Te and bNITER=bNAUG. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  22. Scaling to ITER: q95=3.0, bN=2.1, high <ne> 14 30 bN,thITER = bN,thAUG ne ITER Scenario 2 12 Ti = Te 25 10 ne (x1019 m-3) - ITER 20 Ti,e (keV) - ITER 8 15 6 10 4 ITER Scenario 2 5 2 0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 rmin (m) rmin (m) • Comparison with integrated ITER scenario modelling (Scenario 2): • Density:Assumed flat. • Temperatures: Set pedestal, models for core transport & heating systems. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  23. 14 30 bN,thITER = bN,thAUG ne 12 Ti = Te 25 10 20 ne (x1019 m-3) - ITER Ti,e (keV) - ITER nD+nT 8 15 6 10 4 5 2 0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 rmin (m) rmin (m) Scaling to ITER: q95=3.17, bN=2.9 ITER Scenario 2 ITER Scenario 2 • At higher bN (Improved H-mode): • Temperature profiles rise over whole plasma region. • Consistent with observations of increased edge pedestal. Suttrop W. et al, EX/8-5Maggi C. et al, IT/P1-6 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  24. Prediction of fusion performance in ITER 4 typical cases: ITER predictions at <n>/nGW=0.85 1200 Q= 1000 800 Q=8 Q=11.4 Pfus (MW) 600 ITER 15 MA Q=6.5 400 200 Open symbols Paux > 73 MW* Closed symbols Paux≤ 73 MW* 0 10 11 12 13 14 15 Ip– ITER (MA) *Paux based on using IPB98(y,2) scaling. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  25. ITER predictions at <n>/nGW=0.85 1200 1000 bN,th = 2-3 800 Pfus (MW) 600 ITER 15 MA 400 bN,th ≤ 2.0 200 Open symbols Paux > 73 MW* Closed symbols Paux≤ 73 MW* 0 10 11 12 13 14 15 Ip– ITER (MA) Prediction of fusion performance in ITER • Operation at bN,th =2-3: • Significant fusion power for Ip=9.5MA to Ip=12MA. With bootstrap current fraction fBS~0.4 , and Q=6-15. Long pulse lengths (> 400s). • At low q95~3 (Ip=14-15 MA) would in principle be able to reach Pfus~1GW, Q=∞. *Paux based on using IPB98(y,2) scaling. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  26. Prediction of fusion performance in ITER Petty G. et al 2003Fusion Sci. Technol. 43 1 Cordey J. G. et al 2005Nucl. Fusion 45 1078 ITER Physics Basis 1999 Nucl. Fusion 39 2137 • Q and input power (Paux) required (ASDEX Upgrade profile data): • Calculated for three different energy confinement scaling expressions. • Using IPB98(y,2): In some high b cases : Paux > 73MW. • Ip <11MA, despite H98(y,2)~1.4. George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  27. Conclusions • ASDEX Upgrade: • H-modes with low magnetic shear in the centre: H98(y,2) > 1 and bN=2-3.5. • Operation at high density and Ti0/Te0 ~ 1 is demonstrated. • Highest H98(y,2) values are achieved at ITER relevant n*. • At q95=3.1: H98(y,2)=1.4, bN=2.9, fishbone activity keeps q(r) stationary. • ECCD can be used to stabilise (3,2) NTM activity (q95~3). • ITER predictions, scaling kinetic profile shapes : <ne>=0.85nGW , keep bN,th. • At q95=3.1: Pfus=1070 MW, Q=∞. • At Ip=9.5-12MA: Pfus 300-600 MW, Q=6-15 (some cases Paux>73 MW). George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  28. Back-up slides George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  29. Operation: Tungsten coverage  85% All H-modes require central ICRH or ECRH to avoid impurity accumulation. Operation at <ne> ~ 4-6x1019 m-3 requires a boronisation to minimise tungsten influxes. Gruber O. et al, OV/2-3 Dux R. et al, EX/3-3Ra George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  30. Operational range: Density, n* Strongest correlation of maximum H98(y,2) with plasma collisionality (n*/n*ITER). Also density peaking (ne0/<ne>) can be higher at lower n*/n*ITER.  b and v* dependence of the IPB98(y,2) scaling expression are under investigation. McDonald D. et al, EX/P3-5 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  31. 80 ELMs 60 40 (4,3) NTMs 20 fishbone activity 0 5.00 5.02 5.04 5.06 time (s) Operational range: low q95=3.17 Core MHD activity F (kHz) Soft X-ray data George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  32. Use of ECCD to stabilise (3,2) NTM Zohm H. et al, EX/4-1Rb George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  33. 14 30 Ti , Te (Ti+Te)/2 12 ne 25 10 ne (x1019 m-3) - ITER 20 Ti,e (keV) - ITER 8 nD+nT 15 6 10 4 5 2 0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 rmin (m) rmin (m) ITER Scenario 2 ITER Physics Basis 1999 Nucl. Fusion 39 2137 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  34. Scaling to ITER: q95=3.0, bN=2.1, high <ne> 14 30 bN,thITER = bN,thAUG ne ITER Scenario 2 12 Ti = Te 25 10 ne (x1019 m-3) - ITER 20 Ti,e (keV) - ITER 8 nD+nT 15 6 10 4 ITER Scenario 2 5 2 0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 rmin (m) rmin (m) George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  35. 14 30 bN,thITER = bN,thAUG ne 12 Ti = Te 25 10 20 ne (x1019 m-3) - ITER Ti,e (keV) - ITER nD+nT 8 15 6 10 4 5 2 0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 rmin (m) rmin (m) Scaling to ITER: q95=3.17, bN=2.9 ITER Scenario 2 ITER Scenario 2 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  36. 14 30 ne bN,thITER = bN,thAUG 12 Ti = Te 25 10 ne (x1019 m-3) - ITER 20 Ti,e (keV) - ITER nD+nT 8 15 6 10 4 5 2 0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 rmin (m) rmin (m) Scaling to ITER: q95=3.8, bN=2.6 ITER Scenario 2 ITER Scenario 2 George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  37. Scaling to ITER: q95=4.6, bN=2.4 14 30 bN,thITER = bN,thAUG ITER Scenario 2 12 Ti = Te 25 10 ne (x1019 m-3) - ITER 20 Ti,e (keV) - ITER ne 8 15 6 nD+nT 10 4 ITER Scenario 2 5 2 0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 rmin (m) rmin (m) George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  38. Prediction of fusion performance in ITER profile shapes George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  39. Prediction of fusion performance in ITER ITER predictions at <n>/nGW=0.85 Calculated bootstrap fraction fBS increases at lower current. ITER (15MA) ~ 0.18. Maximum of cases presented here: fBS ~ 0.4. A current ramp to lower plasma currents compared to reference design AND the ability to operate at same stored energy. longer pulse length. 1200 IBS/Ip 1000 = 0.25 = 0.30 800 = 0.35 Pfus (MW) = 0.40 600 ITER 15 MA 400 200 0 10 11 12 13 14 15 Ip– ITER (MA) George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

  40. Prediction of fusion performance in ITER ASDEX Upgrade Improved H-modes 1200 Most of the scaled edge pedestal temperatures are within range of what is expected for typical H-modes in ITER. 5.3keV ± 23% Open symbols Paux > 73 MW Closed symbols Paux≤ 73 MW 1000 800 Pfus (MW) 600 Sugihara M. et al 2003 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 45 L55 400 200 5.3 keV ± 23% 0 2 4 6 8 Te,ped_ITER (keV) George Sips21st IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Chengdu, China, 16-21 October 2006

More Related