1 / 26

Simulation and Analysis of the Hybrid Operating Mode in ITER

Simulation and Analysis of the Hybrid Operating Mode in ITER. C. Kessel, R. Budny, and K. Indireshkumar Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Symposium On Fusion Engineering Knoxville, TN September 26-29, 2005. So What is a Hybrid Operating Mode in ITER?. Reference H-mode Ip = 15 MA

toviel
Download Presentation

Simulation and Analysis of the Hybrid Operating Mode in ITER

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. Simulation and Analysis of the Hybrid Operating Mode in ITER C. Kessel, R. Budny, and K. Indireshkumar Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Symposium On Fusion Engineering Knoxville, TN September 26-29, 2005

  2. So What is a Hybrid Operating Mode in ITER? Reference H-mode Ip = 15 MA BT = 5.3 T R = 6.2 m a = 2.0 m Vloop = 0.09 q95 = 3 N = 1.8 H98(y,2) = 1.0 q(0) ≤ 1.0(rsaw ≈ 1 m) Q = 10 Tflattop = 500 s Hybrid Mode Ip = 12 MA BT = 5.3 T R = 6.2 m a = 2.0 m Vloop = 0.025-0.04 q95 = 4 N = 3.0 H98(y,2) = 1.5 q(0) ≥ 1.0(rsaw small) Q = 5-10 Tflattop = 3000 s Steady State (AT) Mode Ip = 9 MA BT = 5.3 T R = 6.35 m a = 1.85 m Vloop = 0.0 q95 = 4 N = 3-4.5 H98(y,2) = 1.6 q(0) > 1.5-2.0 Q = 5 Tflattop = ∞

  3. Hybrid Scenario in ITER • Plasma parameter ranges • E ≈ 1.0-1.5  E98(y,2) • NNTM < N < Nno wall (≈ 3) • fNI ≈ 50% • IP ≈ 12 MA • n/nGr varied • CD determined from TRANSP, or other analysis • Impurities defined to provide acceptable divertor heat loading • Operating Modes • NNBI + ICRF • NNBI + ICRF + LH • NNBI + ICRF + EC • Prefer to avoid (or minimize) the sawtooth, q(0) ≥ 1.0 • Maximize fNIoff-axis (IBS, ILH, IECCD) • Maximize neutron fluence • Nwall tflattop • tflattop is minimum of tV-s or tnuc-heat • Remain within installed power limitations • NNBI at 1.0 MeV, 33 MW • ICRF at about 52 MHz, 20 MW • EC at 170 GHz, 20 MW • LH at 5 GHz, 30+ MW (UPGRADE)

  4. Integrated Modeling of ITER Hybrid Burning Plasma Scenarios • 0D systems analysis to identify operating space within engineering contraints • 1.5D discharge simulations • Energy transport (GLF23) • Heating/CD • Free-boundary equilibrium evolution/feedback control • Other control; stored energy, fNI, etc. • Energy transport experimental verification • Ideal MHD analysis • Offline heating/CD source analysis • Offline gyrokinetic transport simulations (Budny) • Fast particle effects and MHD (Gorelenkov) • Particle transport/impurity transport • Integrated SOL/divertor modeling • Non-ideal MHD, NTM’s

  5. 0D Systems Analysis Identifies Device Constraints for Scenario Simulations • ITER’s Primary Device Limitations That Affect Scenarios • Fusion power vs pulse length ----> heat rejection system • 350 MW for 3000 s • 500 MW for 400 s • 700 MW for 150 s ----> (maximum Pfus cryoplant limits) • Divertor conducted heat load, maximum > 20 MW/m2, nominal 5-10 MW/m2 ----> allowable divertor heat load • Radiation from plasma core and edge, PSOL = (1 - fcorerad) Pinput • Radiation in divertor and around Xpt, Pcond = (1 - fdivrad) PSOL • Radiation distribution in divertor channel, impurities, transients • Volt-second capability ----> PF coil current limits • Approximately 260-280 V-s • First wall surface heat load limit (not limiting for normal operation) • Duty cycle, tflattop/(tflattop + tdwell) ----> cryoplant for SC coils • Limited to about 25% What device upgrades are required for advanced operating modes, and are they major or minor upgrades?

  6. 0D Operating Space Analysis IP = 12 MA BT = 5.3 T R = 6.2 m A = 3.1 95 = 1.75 95 = 0.5 P*/E = 5 ∆total = 300 V-s ∆breakdown = 10 V-s li = 0.80 CE = 0.45 NBCD = 0.3 x 1020 A/W-m2 PCD = 33 MW T = 1.75, Ta/To = 0.1 n = 0.075, na/no = 0.3 fBe = 2.0% 1.5 ≤ N ≤ 3.0 0.4 ≤ n/nGr ≤ 1.0 3.0 ≤ Q ≤ 12.0 0.0 ≤ fC ≤ 2.0% 0.0 ≤ fAr ≤ 0.2% Energy balance Particle balance, P*/E and quasi-neutrality Bosch-Hale fusion reactivity Post-Jensen coronal equilibrium Albajar cyclotron radiation model Hirshman-Neilson flux requirement (benchmarked with TSC) T(r) = (To - Ta)[1-(r/a)2]T + Ta Same for density profile Etc. Input parameters Scanned parameters

  7. ITER Hybrid Systems Analysis Fusion power pulse length limitation significantly reduces accessible fluence values, and changes dependence on density

  8. ITER Hybrid Systems Analysis Operating space shows strong dependence on allowable conducted peak heat flux on divertor, which must be low enough to accommodate radiation flux and transients

  9. ITER Hybrid Systems Analysis Increasing the power radiated in the divertor can recover operating space at lower conducted peak heat flux

  10. ITER Hybrid Systems Analysis • Large Operating Space Scan • 1.05 ≤ n(0)/n≤ 1.25 • 1.5 ≤ T(0)/T≤ 2.5 • 11.0 ≤ IP (MA) ≤ 13.0 • 1.5 ≤ N ≤ 3.0 • 0.4 ≤ n/nGr ≤ 1.0 • 3.0 ≤ Q ≤ 12.0 • 1% ≤ fBe ≤ 3% • 0% ≤ fC ≤ 2% • 0% ≤ fAr ≤ 0.2% • Other input fixed at previous values

  11. Results • Fusion power pulse length limitation is a significantfactor in determining Hybrid operating space • Hybrid operating modes on present tokamaks operate in N window, close to N ≈ 3 • Existing pulse length vs fusion power limits indicate optimum N to maximize neutron fluence is about 2.0 (Pfusion ≈ 325 MW) • For ITER to operate close to N ≈ 3, Pfusion ≈ 500 MW, the pulse length would be severely limited by heat rejection system • Hybrid operating modes in ITER require upgrades to heat rejection system • Volt-seconds capability of PF coils appears to be enough to offer few thousand second flattops • Depending on precise value of Vloop • First wall surface heat loadlimits do not appear to be limiting during normal operation due to large FW surface area

  12. Systems Analysis Results • Divertor heat load limits is second most significant factor for Hybrid operating space • Core/edge radiated power (bremsstrahlung, cyclotron, line) • Conducted power • Power radiated in divertor region • Transient conducted power • Operating space shows that existing ITER design can provide reasonable fluence levels within a discharge • HOWEVER time between discharges is constrained • Appears that cryoplant limitation sets tflat/(tflat+tdwell) ≈ 25% • For Hybrid operating modes in ITER to provide significant fluence the cryoplant must be upgraded

  13. Pursuing 1.5D Integrated Modeling of ITER with TSC/TRANSP Combination Plasma geometry T, n profiles q profile • TSC • Predictive • Free-boundary/structures/PF coils/feedback control systems • T, n, j transport with model or data coefficients (, , D, v) • LSC for LH • Assumed source deposition for NB, EC, and ICRF: typically use off-line analysis to derive these • TRANSP • Interpretive • Fixed boundary Eq. Solvers • Monte Carlo NB and  heating • SPRUCE/TORIC/CURRAY for ICRF • TORAY for EC • LSC for LH • Fluxes and transport from local conservation; particles, energy, momentum • Fast ions • Neutrals TSC evolution treated like an experiment Accurate source profiles fed back to TSC both codes have models for bootstrap current, radiation, sawteeth, ripple loss, pellet fueling, impurities, etc.

  14. 1.5D ITER Hybrid Simulations Integrate Transport, Heating/CD, and Equilibrium • Density evolution prescribed, magnitude and profile • 2% Be + 2% C + 0.12% Ar for high Zeff cases • GLF23 thermal diffusivities, no rotation stabilization, and with rotation stabilization (plasma rotation from TRANSP assuming  = i) • Prescribed pedestal height and location amended to GLF23 thermal diffusivities • Control plasma current, radial position, vertical position and shape • Plasma grown from limited starting point on outboard limiter, early heating required to keep q(0) > 1, keep Pheat < 10 MW • Control on plasma stored energy, PICRF in controller, PNB not in controller since it is supplying NICD

  15. Using TRANSP Monte Carlo NB and SPRUCE Full Wave/FPICRF Analysis to Model ITER Hybrid Sources IP = 12 MA, PNB = 33 MW, PICRF = 20 MW NINB Heating/CD ICRF Heating Wth = 300 MJ Wth = 350 MJ INB = 2.1 MA INB = 1.8 MA

  16. Source Modeling in TRANSP Each NB source is 16 MW, although modulation could provide finer power injection ITER’s NBs are large single source beams Minority heating with ICRF shows very centralized absorption slightly off axis Plasma rotation produced by NBs is much lower than present devices

  17. ITER Hybrid at N ≈ 3 Produces 475 MW of Fusion Power IP = 12 MA BT = 5.3 T INI = 7.8 MA N = 2.96 n/nGr = 0.93 n20(0) = 0.93 Wth = 450 MJ H98 = 1.6 Tped = 9.5 keV ∆rampup = 150 V-s Vloop = 0.025 V Q = 9.43 P = 100 MW Paux = 53 MW Prad = 28 MW Zeff = 2.25 q(0) < 1, ≈ 0.93 r(q=1) = 0.45 m li(1) = 0.78 Te,i(0) = 30 keV Available tflattopV-s > 4000 s

  18. Shape control points

  19. High Tped Required to Get N ≈ 3 with GLF23 Core Transport • ITER expected to have • Low vrot (≈ 1/10 vrotDIII-D) • Ti ≈ Te • Low n(0)/<n> • Present Expts have • High vrot • Ti > Te • n(0)/<n> > 1.25 • Direct extrapolation from present Expts to ITER may be optimistic

  20. Density Peaking Makes Energy Transport Worse with GLF23 Core Transport GLF23 predicts higher thermal diffusivities for more peaked density case Flat n() Peaked n()

  21. Efforts to Benchmark GLF23 Transport in DIII-D 104276 Hybrid Discharge t = 1.5 s t = 5.0 s • TSC free-boundary, discharge simulation • DIII-D 104276 data • PF coil currents • Te,i(), n(), v() • NB data TRANSP • Use n() directly • TSC derives e, I to reproduce Te and Ti • Turn on GLF23 in place of expt thermal diffusivities • Test GLF23 w/o ExB and w EXB shear stabilization L-mode, i-ITB H-mode

  22. TSC Simulation Benchmark of DIII-D 104276 Discharge Profiles from TSC and TVTS and CER data at t = 5 s

  23. TSC Simulation Benchmark of DIII-D 104276 Discharge

  24. Using JSOLVER/BALMSC/PEST2, … to Analyze Ideal MHD Stability of ITER Hybrid N’s up to 3.2 are stable to n=1 w/o conducting wall Hybrid discharges operate in a N window NNTM < N < Nn=1(no wall) Hybrid discharges have fNI ≥ 40%, from NBCD on-axis and BS off-axis Hybrid discharges prefer q(0) > 1 or small sawtooth amplitude or possibly small r(q=1) Examine Porcelli sawtooth model in 1.5D simulations to determine the sawtooth response to small r(q=1), and local dq/dr and dp/dr

  25. ITER Hybrid Scenario Requires High Tped, High n/nGr, and High E • Systems Analysis shows that upgrades to the heat rejection and cryoplant systems will be necessary to achieve long pulses and significant neutron fluence in the Hybrid operating mode • 1.5 Discharge Evolution calculations, with GLF23 core transport model, indicate that the Hybrid will require • High Tped ≈ 10 keV (making power to divertor too high) • High n/nGr ≈ 0.95 • High H98(y,2) ≈ 1.6 • to reach its operating space of N ≈ 3 • Including plasma rotation, determined by TRANSP, does not improve the energy confinement significantly

  26. Present Hybrid experiments have characteristics that give them high performance • Strong plasma rotation • Ti > Te • Some level of density peaking • However, these features will be missing in ITER, so we must project with caution to the ITER Hybrid • Verification of the GLF23 core transport model shows reasonable agreement with experimental Hybrid discharges, work is continuing • Ideal MHD calculation indicate the ITER Hybrid discharge simulation cases are stable to n=1 external kink modes without a wall, but they may be unstable to sawteeth, work is continuing

More Related