Processing math: 100%
Advanced Search+
Qilong DONG, Defeng KONG, Xiaohe WU, Yang YE, Kun YANG, Tao LAN, Chen CHEN, Jie WU, Sen ZHANG, Wenzhe MAO, Zhihao ZHAO, Fanwei MENG, Xiaohui ZHANG, Yanqing HUANG, Wei BAI, Dezheng YANG, Fei WEN, Pengfei ZI, Lei LI, Guanghai HU, Shoubiao ZHANG, Ge ZHUANG. Investigation of the compact torus plasma motion in the KTX-CTI device based on circuit analyses[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2022, 24(2): 025103. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ac446e
Citation: Qilong DONG, Defeng KONG, Xiaohe WU, Yang YE, Kun YANG, Tao LAN, Chen CHEN, Jie WU, Sen ZHANG, Wenzhe MAO, Zhihao ZHAO, Fanwei MENG, Xiaohui ZHANG, Yanqing HUANG, Wei BAI, Dezheng YANG, Fei WEN, Pengfei ZI, Lei LI, Guanghai HU, Shoubiao ZHANG, Ge ZHUANG. Investigation of the compact torus plasma motion in the KTX-CTI device based on circuit analyses[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2022, 24(2): 025103. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ac446e

Investigation of the compact torus plasma motion in the KTX-CTI device based on circuit analyses

More Information
  • Author Bio:

    Yang YE: E-mail: yeyang@ie.ah.cn

    Kun YANG: E-mail: yangk_shz@sina.com

  • Received Date: October 17, 2021
  • Revised Date: December 15, 2021
  • Accepted Date: December 16, 2021
  • Available Online: February 22, 2024
  • Published Date: January 13, 2022
  • Compact torus (CT) injection is one of the most promising methods for the central fuelling of next-generation reactor-grade fusion devices due to its high density, high velocity, and self-contained magnetised structure. A newly compact torus injector (CTI) device in Keda Torus eXperiment (KTX), named KTX-CTI, was successfully developed and tested at the University of Science and Technology in China. In this study, first, we briefly introduce the basic principles and structure of KTX-CTI, and then, present an accurate circuit model that relies on nonlinear regression analysis (NRA) for studying the current waveform of the formation region. The current waveform, displacement, and velocity of CT plasma in the acceleration region are calculated using this NRA-based one-dimensional point model. The model results were in good agreement with the experiments. The next-step upgrading reference scheme of the KTX-CTI device is preliminarily investigated using this NRA-based point model. This research can provide insights for the development of experiments and future upgrades of the device.

  • As a key target of next-step fusion devices, the China Fusion Engineering Test Reactor (CFETR) should achieve self-sufficiency in case of tritium, that is, a tritium breeding ratio (TBR) > 1, for which, the tritium burn-up fraction (fburn-up) should be > 3% [1, 2]. The latest results of the one-modelling framework for integrated tasks model show that as the fuelling (deuterium and tritium) peak location changes from r/a=0.9 to 0.7, fburn-up increases by approximately 70%, when density is fixed. With a fuelling deposition deeper than r/a=0.75 and thermal diffusivity is fixed at 0.35, the energy confinement time is significantly prolonged and fburn-up can exceed 3%, satisfying the TBR requirement for the self-sufficient operation of CFETR [3, 4]. Thus, central fuelling has become a key technical requirement for burning plasma. Conventional fuelling methods, such as gas puffing and cryogenic pellet injection, are considered inadequate for this purpose in future devices because the high temperature and density of core region lead to premature ionisation [5, 6]. CT injection based on the magnetised coaxial plasma guns principle can be used to overcome the penetration problem; however, it is currently a rare technology with potential for central fuelling in reactor-grade fusion devices [79]. The schematic of the device structures and the basic principles of CT are depicted in figure 1. A solenoid is used to prepare a bias magnetic field (stuffing magnetic field), and the gas is puffed into the coaxial cylindrical electrode through valves. The formation bank capacitor discharges across the electrodes, ionizing the gas to form plasma and creates a toroidal magnetic field for CT. The radial current component, Jr, passing through the CT plasma, interacts with the toroidal field, Bθ, being present in CT to produce the Lorentz force, Jr×Bθ, and then pushes the plasma down the formation electrodes [10]. Simultaneously, the magnetic field lines are stretched and reconnected behind the plasma, forming the CT poloidal magnetic field. In the subsequent compression and acceleration regions, the CT is reaccelerated by a strong Lorentz force to reach an extremely high injection velocity. In addition, during the acceleration process, radial expansion is prevented due to a radial equilibrium force generated by the image current in the conducting walls [11].

    Figure  1.  Schematic diagram of the KTX-CTI device. Red part represents the outer electrode of the entire system, blue part represents the inner electrode of the formation region, purple part represents the inner electrodes of the compression and acceleration regions, and the red ring on the right side represents the magnetic field structure of CT.

    Alfvén, Lindberg, and Mitlid et al first proposed CT technology as a fusion concept in 1960 [12]. In 1988, in the Ring ACcelerator Experiment (RACE) device of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Hammer et al developed a simple one-dimensional point model to describe the trajectory of the CT in the acceleration region; the model results were in good agreement with the experiments [13]. In the same year, Parks and Perkins et al proposed the use of CT injection to fuel a reactor-grade tokamak [14, 15]. Thereafter, studies have attempted to validate the feasibility of CT injection and investigate the interactions between CT plasma and tokamak plasma. In 1992, the first tokamak fuelling experiment through CT injection was performed on Caltech's ENCORE tokamak with CT density of approximately 1021m-3 and velocity of approximately 30kms-1 [16]. However, in the initial experiments, CT injections usually introduced large amounts of impurities, especially high-Z impurities, which inevitably led to radiative cooling, magnetohydrodynamic instabilities excitation, fuel loss, and even more serious plasma disruption [17]. In 1994, the first nondisruptive experiment was performed in Tokamak de Varennes (TdeV) with the compact torusfueller [18, 19]. Compact Torus injection experiments with high-confinement mode (H-mode) plasma were carried out for the first time at the JFT-2M (Jaeri Fusion Torus 2M) tokamak in 1999 [20]. A novel L–H transition with almost no change in the radial electric field profiles due to CT injection was observed on the STOR-M tokamak in 2002 [21]. The magnetically accelerated ring to achieve ultra-high directed energy and radiation device of the Phillips laboratory has attained the highest parameters so far with CT plasma mass up to milligrams and velocity up to 1000 km s-1 [22]. The main conclusions in the CT injection researches in the past decades can be briefly summarized as follows: (1) the feasibility of the tokamak as a central fuelling method is demonstrated [23]; (2) the possibility of using an additional means to control plasma flow and transport is observed [24]; (3) the importance of maintaining high-β , improving confinement, and stabilising the operation of tokamak plasma is emphasised [25, 26]; and (4) the impact of CT tangential injection on momentum transfer is examined [2729]. Recently, for use in the reversed-field pinch device of the Keda Torus eXperiment (KTX) project, a CTI device is developed (KTX-CTI) [30] at the University of Science and Technology in China (USTC). In this paper, we briefly introduce the bench test results of this device in section 2 and use nonlinear regression analysis (NRA) to calculate the circuit parameters of the formation bank discharge circuit in section 3. In section 4, the current waveform, displacement, and velocity of CT plasma in the acceleration region are calculated using this NRA-based point model, and then, the experimental pre-setting parameters and device upgrade are also predicted using this model. Finally, a brief summary is provided in section 5.

    The KTX-CTI device presented herein comprises a host system, a gas delivery system, a vacuum chamber, four power supply units, and various diagnostics systems. The overall length of the host system is approximately 2 m, and it includes the formation, compression, and acceleration regions, as shown in figure 2. The inner electrodes of the formation and acceleration regions are separate, while the outer electrodes are shared. Furthermore, the host system has a coaxial configuration, and the length of the formation region is shorter than that of the acceleration region (Lform=10.2cm,Lcom=15.2cm,andLacc=35cm). In the compression region, the diameters of the inner/outer electrodes decrease from 17/25 cm to 7/14 cm, respectively. The gas delivery system is composed of eight gas valves, and the test gas is hydrogen, which is also used in this study. In the acceleration region, two sets of fibre optical interferometers are constructed (specific positions shown in figure 2) to monitor local plasma density [31]. Beyond that, the Rogowski coils, which are mainly covered on the cables, are used to measure the current in the formation and acceleration bank circuits.

    Figure  2.  Circuit diagram of the KTX-CTI device. Purple part represents the inner electrode in the compression and acceleration regions, green part represents the inner electrode in the formation region, and red part represents the overall outer electrode. The power supply parameters of the formation, acceleration, solenoid, and the gas valve are marked in this plot.

    The formation and acceleration bank currents play an important role in the performance of the CT plasma. The discharge voltage of the formation and acceleration bank capacitors in a typical shot is 4.5kV, and the peak currents are approximately 74kA and 63kA (figures 3(a) and (b)) respectively. The current waveforms of these two regions exhibit sinusoidal oscillating characteristics accompanied by a decreasing peak amplitude and a nearly fixed oscillation period. Figures 3(c) and (d) show the CT density at different locations in the acceleration region with a peak value of approximately 1.21×1021m-3 at point-1 and 9.36×1020m-3 at point-2 respectively. The corresponding particle number (NCT) as well as the mass (mCT) of the CT plasma decrease from 1.02×1019 (~16.9 μg, for hydrogen) to 8.37×1018 (~13.9 μg) during the acceleration, which is attributed to the loss of nonionized gas and nontrapped particles [10]. Here, the particle number is estimated using equation (1):

    NCT=VnedVvCTSCTnedt, (1)
    Figure  3.  Typical discharge waveform of KTX-CTI. (a) and (b) plasma current at formation and acceleration banks measured by the Rogowski coils; (c) and (d) CT density measured by the fibre optical interferometers (viewing positions are indicated by the blue lines in figure 2).

    where SCT is the cross-sectional area of CT plasma, and the full-width integration of the density waveform is performed [30]. According to the time-of-flight method [31], the calculated average velocity of the CT plasma between point-1 and point-2 of the acceleration region is approximately 40kms-1 (vCT=Ltdelay~20cm5μs=40kms-1).

    To verify the stability of KTX-CTI, CT density of multi-shots with different solenoid voltages and the same formation and acceleration bank voltages are overlaid in figure 4. The electron density exhibits a rapid increase (~1μs) and a relatively slow decrease (~10 μs) trend, which is mainly due to the trailing effect of the fast moving plasma [32]. However, the generated plasma has high repeatability, and the density of CT seems to be independent of the solenoid voltage.

    Figure  4.  CT plasma density for different solenoid voltages with the same formation and acceleration bank voltages (4.5 kV).

    The resistance and inductance of the CT plasma are considered to be very small because the current waveforms of the formation bank under different CT masses are approximately the same, as shown in figure 5. Therefore, only the impacts of the host system, cables, ignitions, and capacitors are considered in the circuit parameters estimation. The basic calculation equations are as follows:

    Lcable=μ0l2π(ln(routrin)+14), (2)
    Lhost=μ0l2πln(routrin), (3)
    R=ρls=ρlπ[r2-(r-d)2], (4)
    Figure  5.  Superimposed waveform of the CT formation bank current for different CT masses with a fixed formation bank voltage of 4.5 kV.

    where l,rin, and rout represent the length, inner radius, and outer radius, respectively, of the host system and cable; d is the skin depth, and ρ and μ0 are the resistivity and permeability of the vacuum respectively. The inductance calculation equations of the host system and the cable are different because of their different structures, i.e. the cable is a solid structure and the host system is a hollow structure. The calculation equations of the inductance can be found in [33]. According to the device size and materials used, the resistance and inductance of the host system and cables are Rhost=7.42mΩ,Lhost=213.27nH and Rcable=0.09mΩ,Lcable=40.12nH, respectively. The inductance of the ignitrons is obtained according to the product manual, and the resistance of the coaxial capacitors is measured using an LCR digital bridge system. The resistance of the ignitrons and the inductance of the coaxial capacitors are very small and ignored in the circuit estimation. The total resistance and inductance of the circuit in the formation region calculated by the above-mentioned resistance/inductance formula (RLF) method are approximately 9.45 mΩ and 258.39 nH, respectively, as shown in table 1. However, the disadvantage of this method is that it does not consider the impacts of contact resistance and skin effect (especially for the inductance).

    Table  1.  The circuit parameters of the formation bank estimated by the RLF method.
    Device Host system Cables Ignitrons Capacitors
    Resistance (mΩ) 7.42 0.09 Ignored 1.94
    Inductance (nH) 213.27 40.12 5 Ignored
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    To ensure accuracy in the above estimation, we start from the circuit model, solve the ordinary differential equation of the circuit and obtain the mathematical form of the current in the formation region, and then perform NRA on the current to reverse the circuit parameters. The detailed derivation process is as follows.

    Based on Kirchhoff's law and the basic principle of RLC circuit (figure 6), the loop equation of the circuit can be written as follows:

    -Uform+URform+ULform=0, (5)
    IF=CformdUformdt, (6)
    Uform=Q(t)Cform, (7)
    IF=-dQ(t)dt, (8)
    dUformdt=-IFCform, (9)
    URform=RformIF, (10)
    dURformdt=RformdIFdt, (11)
    ULform=d(LformIF)dt=LformdIFdt, (12)
    Figure  6.  Simplified RLC circuit for the formation bank power supply system, where IF represents the formation bank current.

    where Q(t) refers to the amount of charge of the formation bank capacitor with respect to time.

    The second derivative of equation (5) can be simplified according to equations (6)–(12) as follows:

    d2IFdt2+RformLformdIFdt+IFLformCform=0. (13)

    Furthermore, the mathematical form of the current of the formation region, IF, can be written as follows:

    IF=2UformRform2-4LformCforme-Rform2LformtsinRform2-4LformCform2Lformt+C1e-Rform2LformtcosRform2-4LformCform2Lformt, (14)

    where C1 is the constant. Considering the boundary condition that the current at the zero-time point should also be zero, equation (14) can be further simplified as follows:

    IF=2UformRform2-4LformCforme-Rform2LformtsinRform2-4LformCform2Lformt. (15)

    The circuit parameters can be estimated more accurately from equation (15) and by employing nonlinear regression fitting on the actual measured current waveform. Fast Fourier transform is performed on the current waveform to obtain the period information, as shown in figure 7. All the oscillation periods under different CT masses are ~25.65 μs (± 0.03 μs). Furthermore, it is evident from the enlarged view of figure 7(b) that when the resonance amplitude decreases, the period slightly increases, which is consistent with the characteristics of the RLC circuit. However, this slight change has little effect on the subsequent estimation of the circuit parameters. Subsequently, the resonance period and capacitance of the formation bank were fixed and the current waveform was fitted according to equation (15) with the NRA method. The fitting results were found to be in good agreement with the experimental results (figure 8), with the goodness of fit index R2 exceeding 0.91 in the first four cycles (R2=nl=1(^yl-ˉy)2ni=1(yi-ˉy)2), where yi is the experimental data, ˉy is the mean value, and ^yl is the fitted value. On this basis, the overall resistance and inductance of the formation bank of the CT device can be calculated by substituting the fitting parameters, oscillation period, and fitting errors into equation (15). The values obtained are Rform=9.50±0.50mΩ and Lform=198.13±4nH. The comparison of the circuit parameters calculated using these two methods is drawn in table 2. The values of resistance obtained from the two methods were similar. However, there was a marked difference between the values of inductance; the value of inductance calculated by the RLF method is larger than that of the NRA method, since the influence of the skin effect and stray inductance on the inductance is ignored in the RLF method (the skin effect can reduce the inductance, as demonstrated in [34, 35]). However, in explanation of the exceedingly close resistance values, the skin effect is considered in the RLF method (the formula is clear), as shown in equation (4).

    Figure  7.  FFT results of the current waveforms of the formation bank under different CT masses with fixed formation bank voltage (Uform=4.5 kV). The X- and Y-axes are the period and power spectra, respectively.
    Figure  8.  Experimental and fitted current waveforms of the CT plasma in the formation region.
    Table  2.  Comparison of the circuit parameters calculated by the NRA and RLF methods.
    Methods Rform (mΩ) Lform (nH) Cform (μF)
    The NRA method 9.50 198.13 64.00
    The RLF method 9.45 258.39 64.00
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The point model is generally used to describe the motion of CT in the acceleration region, and the basic equations are as follows:

    Ltotal=Lext+Lacc·x, (16)
    mCTd2xdt2=12Lacc.I2acc-Fdrag, (17)
    d2(LtotalIacc)dt2+RextdIaccdt+IaccCacc=0, (18)
    Lacc=μ02πln(routrin). (19)

    Here, Lacc is the inductance per unit length of the host system in the acceleration region, mCT is the CT mass, x(t) is the CT axial position, and rin and rout are the inner and outer radii of the acceleration region, respectively. 'Ext' refers to the external input parameters, including the formation and compression region circuits. As the acceleration region is made of copper, its resistivity is significantly lower than that of the stainless steel. Thus, the resistance of this region is ignored in the above equations [36]. The Fdrag, which represents the resistive drag of the metal acceleration electrode, is also ignored in the simulation because the resistance of CT is significantly smaller than that of the external circuit [36]. In addition, for the convenience of calculation, two approximations are considered in the simulation, which have previously been employed in the [13, 36]. The first approximation is that the initial velocity of CT in the acceleration region is set to zero with the consideration that the CT plasma would experience a deceleration process in the compression region. The second is that the time point when CT enters the acceleration region is ahead of the time when the power supply system of this region is turned on.

    For comparison, we substitute the external input parameters calculated by the NRA and RLF methods (as shown in table 3) into the point model, respectively, and use the fourth-order Runge–Kutta method to numerically solve the above equations system (equations (16)–(19)). The circuit parameters in tables 2 and 3 are different, since the circuit loop changes when the CT enters the acceleration region. The parameters in table 3 are obtained after deducting the inner formation electrode and adding the electrode connectors of the acceleration and the compression regions on the basis of table 2. Figure 9 presents the comparison of the current waveforms in the acceleration region in the point model calculation and the experimental measurement (shot#200605024). Here, approximately only the first 1/4 cycle of the simulated data is covered, owing to the limited length of the acceleration region. At about 40μs, the CT leaves the acceleration region and enters the test platform. The red curve calculated by the NRA-based point model is closer to the measured waveform (black curve) in the current ramping-up phase than it is to the RLF method (blue dash curve).

    Table  3.  External input parameters of the point model.
    Parameters The NRA method The RLF method
    Rext(mΩ) 9.52 9.47
    Lext(nH) 240.71 300.97
    Cacc(μF) 100 100
    rout(mm) 70 70
    rin(mm) 35 35
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure  9.  Comparison of the experimentally measured current waveforms with the simulation results of the NRA or RLF-based point models in the acceleration region.

    Figure 10 further presents the comparison of the differences in the displacement and velocity calculated using the point model based on these two methods. The black diamonds show the experimental data (shot#200605030 with the CT mass mCT~25.6μg and the voltage of the acceleration bank Uacc=5.5kV). The CT velocity in the experiment is measured by fibre optical interferometers using the time-of-flight method, which is the average velocity [31]. The first point is the average velocity between the entrance of the acceleration region and the first interferometer, while the second is the value between the first and second interferometers. For the displacement, the RLF method appears to be better than the NRA method (figure 10(a)). However, for the velocity calculation, which is the prime focus of this study, the NRA method is obviously more accurate, especially for the later stages of acceleration (~43 μs, figure 10(b)). This can potentially provide a basis for the subsequent experimental development and upgrade of the device.

    Figure  10.  Time evolution of the displacements and velocities of CT plasma in experiment and simulation. Here, x=0 represents the initial position of the acceleration region.

    According to the more accurate NRA-based point model, the CT plasma behaviour, especially the velocity simulation, can be predicted more accurately. This will aid in broadening the scope of research and device upgrades. For example, for the central fuelling requirements of a KTX device, the required CT velocity, vCT, is approximately 100 km s-1, the particle number NCTisapproximately3×1019m-3 (for hydrogen), and the corresponding mCT is close to 50μg [30]. The relationship between the CT mass and the required acceleration bank voltage is obtained based on the NRA-based point model, by fixing the length of the acceleration region (36.3 cm) and the final injection velocity (100 km s-1) (figure 11). It is evident that to meet the central fuelling requirements of a KTX device, the minimum requirement of acceleration voltage is 6 kV, as shown by the purple star. This setting parameter is consistent with the current KTX experimental results, as demonstrated in [30].

    Figure  11.  Relationship between the required acceleration bank voltage and CT mass with the fixed KTX-CTI acceleration region length x=33.6cm and the final injection velocity vCT=100kms-1.

    In figure 12, the acceleration efficiency of the KTX-CTI system has been further investigated by the NRA-based point model. Here, the abscissa is the ratio of the inner and outer radii of the acceleration region, while the ordinate is the acceleration efficiency, defined as follows:

    η=mCTvCT2CaccUacc2. (20)
    Figure  12.  Relationship between the ratio of the outer and inner radii of the acceleration region and the acceleration efficiency in KTX.

    Here, Cacc and Uacc are the capacitance and voltage of the power supply system of the acceleration bank, respectively. It is evident from this rough calculation that the acceleration efficiency of KTX-CTI is relatively low and only reaches up to 8.4%, represented by the black square. Generally, the easiest way to improve the acceleration efficiency is to increase the length of the acceleration region; however, it has the drawback of not only increasing the construction cost but also the loss of the CT plasma. Therefore, optimising the ratio of the inner and outer radii of the accelerating region is a viable and economical solution. The acceleration efficiency improves significantly with the increase in the radius ratio; this is mainly attributed to the increase in inductance, as indicated by equations (17) and (19). However, one may notice that when the radius ratio reaches a certain level, there is a deceleration in the increase rate of η. This is attributed to the increase of Lacc, which will cause a decrease in Iacc (as shown in equation (18)); these two acceleration terms, Lacc and Iacc, restrict each other to modulate the velocity of the CT plasma. In addition, an excessively large radius ratio may lead to density dilution and uneven distribution of the CT plasma, resulting in asymmetricity of the toroidal magnetic field strength, thus further limiting the lifetime of CT plasma. Considering the acceleration efficiency, the lifetime, and the density uniformity of CT plasma, the acceleration electrodes of KTX-CTI devices are redesigned with the radius ratio of 6 (rout=6cm and rin=1cm) in the next-step. Under this design, the acceleration efficiency can reach 20%, as shown below, which is a large improvement in the current condition.

    The KTX-CTI system in USTC was successfully constructed and tested. The maximum parameters that this system can achieve are an electron density of 1022m-3 and a velocity of 100kms-1 under typical values of magnetic field strength and temperature of approximately 0.14T and 10eV, respectively. In this study, we conducted a detailed analysis of the current waveform in the formation bank and obtained the mathematical expression of this waveform by assuming that the circuit in this bank is a simple RLC oscillator circuit. Moreover, the NRA method was used to calculate the inductance and resistance of the formation bank circuit. The current waveform, displacement, and CT plasma velocity in the acceleration region are calculated using the NRA-based one-dimensional point model and further compared with the experimental measurements. The simulated results are in an agreement with the experimental results and are superior to those obtained by the previously employed RLF method. Finally, the point model based on the NRA method is used to simulate the influence of the radius ratio of the acceleration region on the acceleration efficiency. The results of this study are crucial to better understand and control the CT plasma, and also provide a certain reference for device upgrade in the future.

    This work is supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Nos. 2017YFE0300500, 2017YFE0300501), the Institute of Energy, Hefei Comprehensive National Science Center (Nos. 19KZS205 and 21KZS202), the International Partnership Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences (No. Y16YZ17271). National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 11905143 and 12105088) and Users with Excellence Program of Hefei Science Center CAS (No. 2020HSC-UE008). The University Synergy Innovation Program of Anhui Province (Nos. GXXT-2021-014, GXXT-2021-029).

  • [1]
    Song Y T et al 2014 IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 42 503 doi: 10.1109/TPS.2014.2299277
    [2]
    Wan B N et al 2014 IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 42 495 doi: 10.1109/TPS.2013.2296939
    [3]
    Zhang J and Parks P 2020 Nucl. Fusion 60 066027 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/ab868e
    [4]
    Xie H et al 2020 Nucl. Fusion 60 046022 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/ab742b
    [5]
    Raman R 2008 Fusion Eng. Des. 83 1368 doi: 10.1016/j.fusengdes.2008.06.043
    [6]
    Garbet X et al 2003 Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 035001 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.035001
    [7]
    Nagata M et al 2005 Nucl. Fusion 45 1056 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/45/9/004
    [8]
    Nagata M, Kikuchi Y and Fukumoto N 2009 IEEJ Trans. Electr. Electron. Eng. 4 518 doi: 10.1002/tee.20438
    [9]
    Raman R et al 2019 Nucl. Fusion 59 016021 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/aaf192
    [10]
    Baker K L et al 2002 Nucl. Fusion 42 94 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/42/1/313
    [11]
    Hammer J H et al 1991 Phys. Fluids B 3 2236 doi: 10.1063/1.859641
    [12]
    Alfvén H, Lindberg L and Mitlid P 1960 J. Nucl. Energy C 1 116 doi: 10.1088/0368-3281/1/3/302
    [13]
    Hammer J H et al 1988 Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 2843 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.61.2843
    [14]
    Parks P B 1988 Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 1364 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.61.1364
    [15]
    Perkins L J, Ho S K and Hammer J H 1988 Nucl. Fusion 28 1365 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/28/8/005
    [16]
    Brown M R and Bellan P M 1990 Phys. Fluids B 2 1306 doi: 10.1063/1.859546
    [17]
    Brown M R and Bellan P M 1992 Nucl. Fusion 32 1125 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/32/7/I04
    [18]
    Raman R et al 1994 Phys. Rev. Lett. 73 3101 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.73.3101
    [19]
    Raman R et al 1997 Nucl. Fusion 37 967 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/37/7/I05
    [20]
    Ogawa T et al 1999 Nucl. Fusion 39 1911 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/39/11Y/334
    [21]
    Sen S et al 2002 Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 185001 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.185001
    [22]
    Degnan J H et al 1993 Phys. Fluids B 5 2938 doi: 10.1063/1.860681
    [23]
    Liu W, Hsu S C and Li H 2009 Nucl. Fusion 49 095008 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/49/9/095008
    [24]
    Onchi T et al 2013 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 55 035003 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/55/3/035003
    [25]
    Xiao C, Hirose A and Sen S 2004 Phys. Plasmas 11 4041 doi: 10.1063/1.1768177
    [26]
    Zhang W et al 1992 Phys. Fluids B 4 3277 doi: 10.1063/1.860383
    [27]
    Xiao C, Hirose A and Zawalski W 1998 Nucl. Fusion 38 249 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/38/2/308
    [28]
    Xiao C J et al 2005 Plasma Sci. Technol. 7 2701 doi: 10.1088/1009-0630/7/2/001
    [29]
    Rohollahi A et al 2017 Nucl. Fusion 57 056023 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/aa64fb
    [30]
    Chen C et al 2022 Plasma Sci. Technol. 10.1088/2058-6272/ac4e75 doi: 10.1088/2058-6272/ac4e75
    [31]
    Zhang S et al 2020 Rev. Sci. Instrum. 91 063501 doi: 10.1063/5.0005868
    [32]
    Baker K L et al 2001 App. Phys. Lett. 79 1237 doi: 10.1063/1.1400773
    [33]
    Miyazawa J et al 2001 Fusion Eng. Des. 54 1 doi: 10.1016/S0920-3796(00)00097-1
    [34]
    Smith G S 2014 Eur. J. Phys. 35 025002 doi: 10.1088/0143-0807/35/2/025002
    [35]
    Gatous O M O and Pissolato J 2004 IEE Proc. —Microw. Antennas Propag. 151 212 doi: 10.1049/ip-map:20040469
    [36]
    Fukumoto N et al 2006 Fusion Eng. Des. 81 2849 doi: 10.1016/j.fusengdes.2006.07.034
  • Related Articles

    [1]Jie HUANG (黄杰), Yasuhiro SUZUKI (鈴木康浩), Kunpei NOJIRI (野尻訓平), Naoko ASHIKAWA (芦川直子), EAST Team. Two-point model analysis of SOL plasma in EAST[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2021, 23(8): 84001-084001. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ac02aa
    [2]Xiaomeng LI (李晓萌), Huili LU (陆慧丽), Jianhong YANG (阳建宏), Fu CHANG (常福). Semi-supervised LIBS quantitative analysis method based on co-training regression model with selection of effective unlabeled samples[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2019, 21(3): 34015-034015. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aaee14
    [3]Yong LU (卢勇), Lijun CAI (蔡立君), Yuxiang LIU (刘雨祥), Jian LIU (刘健), Yinglong YUAN (袁应龙), Guoyao ZHENG (郑国尧), Dequan LIU (刘德权). Thermal-hydraulic analysis of the HL-2M divertor using an homogeneous equilibrium model[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2017, 19(9): 95601-095601. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aa7628
    [4]ZHANG Weiwei (张卫卫), DENG Baiquan (邓柏权), ZUO Haoyi (左浩毅), ZHENG Xianjun (曾宪俊), CAO Xiaogang (曹小岗), XUE Xiaoyan (薛晓艳), OU Wei (欧巍), CAO Zhi (曹智), GOU Fujun (芶富均). Analysis of Power Model for Linear Plasma Device[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2016, 18(8): 844-847. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/18/8/09
    [5]NIU Chunping (纽春萍), DING Juwen (丁炬文), WU Yi (吴翊), YANG Fei (杨飞), DONG Delong (董得龙), FAN Xingyu (范星宇), RONG Mingzhe (荣命哲). Simulation and Experimental Analysis of Arc Motion Characteristics in Air Circuit Breaker[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2016, 18(3): 241-246. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/18/3/05
    [6]LIN Xin (林莘), WANG Feiming (王飞鸣), XU Jianyuan (徐建源), XIA Yalong (夏亚龙), LIU Weidong (刘卫东). Study on the Mathematical Model of Dielectric Recovery Characteristics in High Voltage SF6 Circuit Breaker[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2016, 18(3): 223-229. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/18/3/02
    [7]A. K. FEROUANI, M. LEMERINI, L. MERAD, M. HOUALEF. Numerical Modelling Point-to-Plane of Negative Corona Discharge in N2 Under Non-Uniform Electric Field[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2015, 17(6): 469-474. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/17/6/06
    [8]LIN Xin (林莘), WANG Na (王娜), XU Jianyuan (徐建源). Arcing Model of a Disconnector and its Effect on VFTO[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2013, 15(7): 644-647. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/15/7/08
    [9]CHENG Jia(程嘉), ZHU Yu(朱煜), JI Linhong(季林红). Modeling Approach and Analysis of the Structural Parameters of an Inductively Coupled Plasma Etcher Based on a Regression Orthogonal Design[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2012, 14(12): 1059-1068. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/14/12/05
    [10]Kazumichi NARIHARA, Hiroshi HAYASHI. Asphericalizing the Light Collection Mirror for the 200-Point Thomson Scattering Diagnostic Installed on the Large Helical Device[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2011, 13(4): 415-419.
  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(8)

    1. Lan, T., Chen, C., Xiao, C. et al. Preliminary compact torus injection experiments on the Keda Torus eXperiment reversed field pinch. Plasma Science and Technology, 2024, 26(10): 105102. DOI:10.1088/2058-6272/ad60f4
    2. Li, Y.-H., Ye, Y., Tang, L.-H. et al. Development of high current and refrequency pulse supply power system for compact torus core fueling device | [紧凑环芯部加料装置用大电流高重频脉冲电源系统的研制]. Hejubian Yu Dengliziti Wuli/Nuclear Fusion and Plasma Physics, 2024, 44(3): 304-311. DOI:10.16568/j.0254-6086.202403009
    3. Tan, M., Ye, Y., Kong, D. et al. Design and operation of a repetitive compact torus injector for the EAST tokamak. Fusion Engineering and Design, 2024. DOI:10.1016/j.fusengdes.2024.114559
    4. Dong, Q., Zhang, J., Lan, T. et al. Effects of vacuum magnetic field region on the compact torus trajectory in a tokamak plasma. Plasma Science and Technology, 2024, 26(7): 075102. DOI:10.1088/2058-6272/ad36aa
    5. Zhao, H., Zhang, Y., Yang, L. et al. Method and application analysis of remote magnetic controlling for space target | [空间目标远程磁控方法及应用分析]. Xi Tong Gong Cheng Yu Dian Zi Ji Shu/Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2024, 46(1): 261-270. DOI:10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2024.01.30
    6. Huang, Y.Q., Kong, D.F., Xia, T.Y. et al. Theory and simulation of the force-free equilibria in the EAST-CTI. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 2023, 65(9): 095016. DOI:10.1088/1361-6587/ace992
    7. Kong, D., Zhuang, G., Lan, T. et al. Design and platform testing of the compact torus central fueling device for the EAST tokamak. Plasma Science and Technology, 2023, 25(6): 065601. DOI:10.1088/2058-6272/acaf61
    8. Zhao, H., Zhang, Y., Yang, L. et al. Plasma Ring Transportation Feature Parameters Optimization and Dynamics Analysis with Multiobjective Particle Swarm Optimization. 2022. DOI:10.1109/ICMRA56206.2022.10145645

    Other cited types(0)

Catalog

    Figures(12)  /  Tables(3)

    Article views (178) PDF downloads (167) Cited by(8)

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return