
Citation: | Zhengxiong WANG, Weikang TANG, Lai WEI. A brief review: effects of resonant magnetic perturbation on classical and neoclassical tearing modes in tokamaks[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2022, 24(3): 033001. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ac4692 |
This paper reviews the effects of resonant magnetic perturbation (RMP) on classical tearing modes (TMs) and neoclassical tearing modes (NTMs) from the theory, experimental discovery and numerical results with a focus on four major aspects: (ⅰ) mode mitigation, where the TM/NTM is totally suppressed or partly mitigated by the use of RMP; (ⅱ) mode penetration, which means a linearly stable TM/NTM triggered by the externally applied RMP; (ⅲ) mode locking, namely an existing rotating magnetic island braked and finally stopped by the RMP; (ⅳ) mode unlocking, as the name suggests, it is the reverse of the mode locking process. The key mechanism and physical picture of above phenomena are revealed and summarized.
For decades, the neoclassical tearing mode (NTM) instability in tokamak has attracted extensive research interests [1–7]. The NTM has been found to result in a great degradation of confinement, by generating large magnetic islands at the resonant surfaces [8–11]. It generally originates in a small magnetic island seeded by other types of instabilities or residual error field due to the asymmetry of the tokamak device [12–15]. As the size of the seed island is large enough to lead to the flattening of the pressure inside the separatrix of the island, the local reduction of the bootstrap current, which is proportional to the pressure gradient, can further destabilize and trigger the NTM [16, 17]. Thus, the NTM is linearly stable, but can be nonlinearly destabilized by the change of pressure gradient, which is different from the classical tearing mode (TM) driven by the equilibrium radial current density gradient. To describe the physics of NTM more specifically, it is best to use the modified Rutherford equation, including the influence of bootstrap current, the Glasser effect (GGJ), the ion polarization current and other current drive effects [18]
τRrsdWdt=rs∆' | (1) |
Considering the
To control the TM/NTM, externally applied resonant magnetic perturbation (RMP) is a widely-used tool [22–25]. RMPs were first used to study their effects on TMs and disruptions [26–28]. Later on, RMP was found to bring about additional effects on magnetic islands in tokamak plasmas. For example, with a sufficiently large static RMP, the existing rotating magnetic islands could be decelerated and then stopped by the electromagnetic torque imposed by the RMP. This process is called locked mode (LM) [29–32]. As the magnetic island is in phase with the RMP, the magnetic islands could be continuously driven unstable by the external magnetic perturbation, leading to the rapid growth of the magnetic island. For a rotating RMP, the LM could be utilized to modify the rotation frequency of the magnetic island and maintain a stable toroidal and poloidal rotation [33]. Even if the plasma is originally stable to the TM/NTM, the RMP can drive the magnetic reconnection and generate the magnetic island at the resonant surface, called mode penetration [34–39]. Typically, a very small magnetic perturbation at the order of
In order to get a comprehensive view of the TM/NTM and RMP interaction, this paper reviews the effects of RMP on TM and NTM with a focus on four major aspects, i.e. mode mitigation, mode locking, mode unlocking, and mode penetration. Among them, the corresponding physical mechanism and some mainstream numerical method/codes are introduced as well. Finally, open questions about the current situation and future prospects in this area are presented, followed by a brief summary of this paper.
It is well received that the RMP can drive stabilizing effects on magnetic islands through the electromagnetic interaction. The static RMP is applied in the experiments to study the interaction between RMP and TM first. Later on, considerable investigations on the rotating RMP are carried out in the early 20th century. Recently, the modulated RMP and synergetic effects of RMP and ECCD are explored as emerging and promising ways of NTM control. In this section, the mitigation effects of RMP on NTM are reviewed from the perspective of four above scenarios.
The first observation of TM mitigation by static RMP dates back to the 1970s [26–28]. In 1992, Hender et al conducted a series of RMP experiments on COMPASS-C tokamak with the main concentration on the m/n=2/1 harmonics [49]. The COMPASS-C is a medium-sized tokamak with the major radius R=0.557 m, minor radius a=0.2 m and toroidal field Bt=1.75 T. It is found that, in low density discharges shots, upon the static RMP turning on, the natural rotating TM with mode number m/n=2/1 decays into noise level quickly. As illustrated in figure 1, the mode amplitudes and the frequencies of TM for different flat-top current values are shown. Interestingly, this mode stabilization always happens accompanied by the downward shift of mode frequency. Two major effects of the static RMP on the natural rotating magnetic islands should be considered. First, the rotation frequency of the island is reduced by the RMP, which can directly affect the velocity shear, leading to the mode stabilizing. Second, the non-uniformity of the island rotation can cause that the magnetic island spends slightly more time staying in the regime where the static RMP is stabilizing, than where it is destabilizing. The mode stabilizing by the static RMP could be explained by the following MHD model [49]. The RMP induced frequency difference
(2) |
where
(3) |
According to equation (2), it can be easily obtained that there is a critical frequency shift
(4) |
where
(5) |
To conclude, if the saturated island width is smaller than the threshold, the TM is firstly stabilized and eventually locked by the applied static RMP as the RMP amplitude increasing. As for a large magnetic island above the threshold, the externally applied RMP can no longer be stabilizing. This mechanism is verified by many numerical and experimental results later on.
As for the static RMPs with high harmonics, they were found to change the local current density by nonlinear mode coupling and then to drive stabilizing or destabilizing effects on NTMs, even at small amplitudes below the penetration threshold [50]. In the visco-resistive regime, the modification to the local current density gradient by RMPs is approximately
(6) |
In the inertia dominated regime, the change of local current density gradient can be estimated by
(7) |
(8) |
(9) |
where
Up until the early 2000s, considerable experiments concerning the dynamic rotating RMP are conducted on the TEXTOR tokamak [51, 52]. The TEXTOR is upgraded and equipped with the dynamic ergodic divertor (DED) consisting of two tangential neutral beam injectors and a set of helical perturbation coils, which allows the production of the static or rotating RMP up to 10 kHz. In experiments [52], the equilibrium toroidal plasma rotation
(10) |
Therefore, when
(11) |
The
(12) |
If the externally applied helical field is a static one, then we have
(13) |
In the MHD frame,
These experimental results are then verified by numerical simulation conducted by Yu et al in 2008, using the two-fluid model [54]. In figure 5, it is clearly observed that for the same RMP amplitude, the TM can be excited when the rotation frequency is close to the frequency of RMP, but screened for other rotation value, indicating that there is a minimum of the mode excitation for
According to the theory, it is known that the phase difference between the RMP and the magnetic island plays an important role in affecting the mode amplitude and frequency. The RMP has a stabilizing effect in the regime where the phase difference is 0.5π–1.5π, but has a driving effect when the phase difference is 0–0.5π or 1.5π–2π, as illustrated in figure 6(a) [33]. The effects on the mode frequency are similar. If the phase difference is in the regime of 0–π, the RMP will decelerate the magnetic island. On the contrary, it accelerates the magnetic island while out of this regime.
Referring to this rationale, if the RMP is turned on only in the stabilizing regime, then the magnetic island can be always stabilized by this modulated RMP configuration. Based on this principle, numerical investigation is carried out by Hu et al. By applying the RMP with configuration of figure 6(b) after the saturation of NTM, the magnetic island can be almost totally suppressed. In figure 7 [33], the suppression process is plotted. In each single period, when the RMP is turned on in the stabilizing regime, the island width reduces. Even though the island width recovers a bit after the RMP is switched off, a net stabilizing effect is still maintained in one period. Period by period adding up, the magnetic island is suppressed. It should be pointed out that, this feedback control method needs a very high definition of diagnostic and control system in the experimental set-up, as it needs to know the real-time phase information of the island and the response of the modulated RMP should be very fast. Thus, the feasibility in experiments should be further verified.
In very recent investigation, the utilization of RMP and electron cyclotron current drive (ECCD) simultaneously has been found to be an effective and promising method for NTM control. One desirable method is applying a static RMP to lock the magnetic island first, and then launching an ECCD deposited at the O-point of the island. This approach is numerically modelled in [55], and then proven to be feasible for the first time by experiments in 2015 [56]. Figure 8 shows the capability of stabilization of the large LM. The black curves indicate the shot with ECCD, and the red curves are for shot without ECCD. Applying a continuous ECCD after the mode is locked can effectively suppress the NTM to noise level. At the same time, the density of electron recovers and the disruption is avoided. However, there are still some side effects of this method to further prolong the energy confinement time. One main reason is that the static RMP stops the rotation of the plasma, and hinders the achievement of H-mode and better confinement.
A possible solution to this problem is utilizing the rotating RMP. The rotating RMP could be launched first to keep a stable rotation. After the mode is locked to the rotating RMP, it is capable to use a modulated ECCD to suppress the NTM, as the real-time phase of the RMP is already known, as well as the magnetic island. This method is numerically studied by Tang et al for the NTM control in the reversed magnetic shear configuration [23]. It is found that, for a relatively low frequency of the rotating RMP applied, the stabilizing effect is better. The mechanism can be understood through figure 9. In figure 9, the effectiveness for different frequencies of rotating RMP is compared. The blue, yellow and green traces are for the rotation frequency of RMP equal to -2×10-3, -6×10-3 and -8×10-3, respectively. The negative sign indicates the direction of the rotation only, so only the absolute value counts. The lower panel shows the evolution of the driven current fraction Icd/Ip versus time after the modulated ECCD is turned on. The on-duty ratio of the modulated ECCD is set to be 50%, which means the ECCD is turned on at 50% of time in a rotation period. One can find that, for a relatively low rotation frequency, Icd/Ip has adequate time to raise or fall, in response to the magnetic island approaching and going away from the deposit location of ECCD. As a result, a better stabilizing effect is gained. Another advantage for a slow rotating RMP is that, it can lower the required modulated frequency of ECCD, since achieving a very high frequency modulated ECCD can face the technical bottleneck.
For an intrinsic tearing stable plasma, the external RMP can penetrate through and induce magnetic islands at the resonant surface, known as the mode penetration. Mode penetration is different from mode locking by that the latter needs an already existing rotating magnetic island. Mode locking is termed to describe the process that a rotating magnetic island is stopped by the RMP and turned into a locked state. However, mode penetration is the transition from a suppressed (but locked) island state to a fully reconnected (but locked) state accompanied by the locking of the tearing frame. The frequency of the tearing frame is the frequency where the response of the tearing layer to the external RMP is maximal, called tearing frequency. For a nonlinear magnetic island, the rotation frequency of the magnetic island is identical to the tearing frequency, known as the 'no-slip' condition. On the other hand, in the linear state, the tearing frequency is to some extent different from the rotation frequency, allowing a suppressed island with the order smaller than the linear tearing layer. This frequency difference is called the slipping frequency. In the presence of the external helical magnetic structure, the slowing down of the plasma rotation can be described by the following equation
(14) |
where
The threshold of mode penetration is pivotal in experiments, since it is used to measure the maximum endurance of the error filed. Considerable scaling on error field penetration is carried out in EAST tokamak, concerning the dependency on density, toroidal field,
Later, the density scaling of n=1 error field penetration of TM in the RF-dominate heated tokamak plasmas is studied by Ye et al [58]. It is found that the scaling law (
The earliest mode locking theory is established by Nave et al in 1990 [59], considering the interaction of the magnetic island with a resistive conducting wall. The rotating magnetic islands induce a perturbed magnetic field outside the plasma. To the conductor, this magnetic perturbation rotates with a high frequency in the order of kHz. As a result, an electric field is formed inside the conducting wall to produce a fluctuating current. The perturbed magnetic field and fluctuating current exert an electromagnetic torque
(15) |
where r is the radial location, m and n are the poloidal and toroidal mode number,
The boundary condition of this equation is obtained by solving the magnetic flux in vacuum and in the vessel. For the case in the vacuum, the governing equation is
(16) |
and in the vessel, the equation becomes
(17) |
where
(18) |
where
(19) |
where
(20) |
This is the equation showing the basic feature for mode locking. Numerical results based on this equation are given in figure 13 [59]. A relatively low frequency is set to be 2000 rad s-1, with b=a and
(21) |
where
Experimental and numerical investigations on mode locking of TM are carried out on J-TEXT tokamak by Hu et al in recent years [29, 60]. The results show a good consistence with the previous theory.
In addition to the conventional mode locking, a small locked island (SLI) regime is discovered. In figure 15, it can be seen that there is a regime where the mode frequency is locked to zero but the island width keeps in a very low magnitude, which is different from the conventional understanding on mode locking [29]. It is found that two factors contribute to this SLI phenomenon. First, there exists a strong shielding current near the resonant surface cancelling the effects of external RMP. Second, the magnetic island is locked in the regime where the phase difference between the RMP and the magnetic island is 1.5π–2π, leading to a stabilizing effect on the magnetic island.
Taking the bootstrap current into account, Tang et al [25] extend this result including the neoclassical effects. It is discovered that the threshold for the SLI has the contrary tendency with the threshold for the conventional LM, as shown in figure 16. In the simulation, the SLI tends to appear in the regime where the TM is more stable, e.g. the ratio of parallel transport coefficient to perpendicular transport coefficient
The mode locking of TM can lead to great degradation of plasma confinement and even major disruptions. Thus, the understanding of the unlocking process can be very significant for improving the plasma performance. From a theoretical point of view, the error field model shows a locking-unlocking mechanism [61, 62]. According to the error field model developed by Fitzpatrick including the torque balance equation, island evolution equation and no-slip condition, the locking threshold can be obtained as follows [63]
(22) |
where
Assuming the amplitude of the RMP
(23) |
and
(24) |
Above equations give the relationship of the unlocking threshold
If ignoring the evolution of the magnetic island, and the island width
(25) |
It should be noted that the scaling law in simplified mode is only suitable for lower plasma parameter
Some simulation results can show the unlocking solution more directly [63]. By scanning the initial toroidal rotation frequency and the external RMP amplitude, the interaction of the RMP and the magnetic island can be classified as three regimes, namely, the locking regime, the intermediate regime and the unlocking regime. It is divided by two thresholds, locking and unlocking thresholds, as shown in figure 17. It can be seen that the unlocking threshold is lower than the locking threshold. When the RMP amplitude is larger than the locking threshold, LM would occur with arbitrary initial conditions. Lower than the unlocking threshold, the magnetic island would always enter into an oscillated state [63]. However, when the RMP amplitude is between the two thresholds, the final state depends on the initial perturbed velocity, i.e. static island (
The above mentioned two kinds of behaviors in the intermediate regime can give a good explanation for the observed hysteresis phenomenon in experiments [38, 64–66]. For example, in figure 18, a typical shot 25089 in EXTRAP T2R [66], magnetic island starts braking at
In summary, this paper reviews the effects of RMP on TM and NTM from the theory, experimental discovery and numerical results with a focus on four major aspects, i.e. mode mitigation, mode penetration, mode locking and mode unlocking. The main points can be summarized as follows.
For the first time mode mitigation found in experiments is by the static RMP. The externally applied static RMP is found to drive stabilizing effects on the TMs with the downward shift of mode frequency. The velocity shear and non-uniform rotation are the two main causes of the stabilizing effects. By applying a simple analytical model, it is found that the effect of a relatively small static RMP is always stabilizing, before it exceeds the threshold for mode locking. The static RMPs with high harmonics are also found to drive stabilizing effects on NTM by affecting the local current density gradient.
During the early 2000s, considerable research efforts have been dedicated to the rotating RMP. It is found that there is a minimum RMP threshold for the excitation of TM, when the frequency difference between the RMP and the plasma is zero, which means for a high frequency rotating RMP, it can be utilized to prevent the mode excitation and keep the sustainable rotation. Considering two-fluid effects, this plasma frequency should additionally include the electron diamagnetic frequency.
In recent years, some emerging RMP related methods are explored to stabilize the NTM, e.g. modulated RMP and synergetic effects of RMP and ECCD. According to the theory, The RMP has a stabilizing effect in the regime where the phase difference is 0.5π–1.5π, but has a driving effect when the phase difference is 0–0.5π or 1.5π–2π. The modulated RMP is came up based on this rationale. If the RMP is only applied in the stabilizing regime, the destabilizing effects of RMP would be eliminated and the mode locking could be prevented. However, this method needs a very high definition and fast feedback control system to locate the real-time phase of the magnetic island. Therefore, further experiments need to be carried out to verify the feasibility of this method.
Experiments of another approach, synergetic effects of RMP and ECCD, are conducted on DIIID tokamak very recently. RMP can work as an auxiliary method to lock the island. Once the island is locked to the static RMP, the ECCD can deposit at the O-point of the island continuously. The experiments have been a great success, but the energy confinement time is still hard to be further prolonged. The main reason is that the utilization of a static RMP hinders the natural rotation of the plasma, while the plasma rotation is crucial for achieving a steady-state H mode confinement. Modification of this method could be made, by replacing the static RMP by a rotating RMP. When the plasma is locked to the rotating RMP, the modulated ECCD can be launched to eliminate the magnetic island, as the phase of the RMP and the island have been already known. In this way, the NTM is controlled and the H-mode recovers.
Mode penetration is distinguished from mode locking by the absence of any rotating island before the formation of the nonlinear locked island. Mode penetration is actually a linear response of a suppressed island to the external RMP, accompanied with the transition from the linearly stable island to a nonlinear locked island and the locking of the tearing frame. However, mode locking is exactly a nonlinear response of the nonlinear rotating magnetic island to the RMP, accompanied with the locking of the already existing magnetic island.
The mode locking theory is initially established by considering the interaction between the magnetic island and a resistive conducting wall. Later on, Fitzpatrick summed up all the previous theories turning into a more general one. In the presence of a static RMP, the plasma in the vicinity of the resonant surface has two bifurcated states, i.e. the 'unreconnected' state, where the plasma rotates and RMP is screened, and the 'fully reconnected' state, where the plasma is locked by the RMP and large magnetic islands are formed. The transition from the 'unreconnected' state to the 'fully reconnected' state is called downward bifurcation. On the contrary, the transition from the 'fully reconnected' state to the 'unreconnected' state is called upward bifurcation. In the linear response, the downward bifurcation refers to the mode penetration. For the non-inear response, the downward bifurcation corresponds to the mode locking, while the upward bifurcation corresponds to the mode unlocking. The critical amplitude of RMP to trigger these bifurcations is given analytically, by dividing the response into different regimes. The later numerical and experimental results show a good consistency with the theory established by Fitzpatrick, except that a small locked island (SLI) regime is discovered. SLI is a phenomenon that a nonlinear magnetic island returns to the linear state where the island is suppressed. Therefore, perhaps the branch of this kind of solution is missed in the previous theory. It should be pointed out that, almost all the previous theories and simulation results are based on the cylindrical geometry. The toroidal effects and the shaping effects could, to what extent, modify the results, remaining to be further addressed.
This work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11925501) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Nos. DUT21GJ204 and DUT21LK28).
[1] |
Chang Z et al 1995 Phys. Rev. Lett.
74 4663 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.4663
|
[2] |
Sauter O et al 1997 Phys. Plasmas
4 1654 doi: 10.1063/1.872270
|
[3] |
Buttery R J et al 2000 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
42 B61 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/42/12B/306
|
[4] |
Gantenbein G et al 2000 Phys Rev Lett
85 1242 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.1242
|
[5] |
La Haye R J et al 2002 Phys. Plasmas
9 2051 doi: 10.1063/1.1456066
|
[6] |
La Haye R J et al 2006 Nucl. Fusion
46 451 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/46/4/006
|
[7] |
Buttery R J et al 2008 Phys. Plasmas
15 056115 doi: 10.1063/1.2894215
|
[8] |
de Vries P C et al 2011 Nucl. Fusion
51 053018 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/51/5/053018
|
[9] |
Hender T C et al 2007 Nucl. Fusion
47 S128 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/47/6/S03
|
[10] |
Maraschek M 2012 Nucl. Fusion
52 074007 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/52/7/074007
|
[11] |
Ding Y H et al 2018 Plasma Sci. Technol.
20 125101 doi: 10.1088/2058-6272/aadcfd
|
[12] |
Gude A et al 1999 Nucl. Fusion
39 127 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/39/1/308
|
[13] |
Wilson H R 2002 Fusion Sci. Technol.
41 107 doi: 10.13182/FST02-A206
|
[14] |
Wilson H R 2006 Fusion Sci. Technol.
49 155 doi: 10.13182/FST06-A1115
|
[15] |
Wilson H R 2010 Fusion Sci. Technol.
57 164 doi: 10.13182/FST10-A9407
|
[16] |
Arcis N and Sharapov S E 2008 Phys. Lett. A
372 5807 doi: 10.1016/j.physleta.2008.07.028
|
[17] |
Muraglia M et al 2017 Nucl. Fusion
57 072010 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/aa654d
|
[18] |
La Haye R J 2006 Phys. Plasmas
13 055501 doi: 10.1063/1.2180747
|
[19] |
Zohm H et al 1997 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
39 B237 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/39/12B/018
|
[20] |
King J D et al 2012 Phys. Plasmas
19 022503 doi: 10.1063/1.3684648
|
[21] |
Ji X Q et al 2010 Chin. Phys. Lett.
27 065202 doi: 10.1088/0256-307X/27/6/065202
|
[22] |
Lu S S et al 2020 Vacuum
182 109656 doi: 10.1016/j.vacuum.2020.109656
|
[23] |
Tang W et al 2020 Nucl. Fusion
60 026015 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/ab61d5
|
[24] |
Wang X et al 2015 Nucl. Fusion
55 093024 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/55/9/093024
|
[25] |
Tang W et al 2019 Plasma Sci. Technol.
21 065103 doi: 10.1088/2058-6272/ab0a18
|
[26] |
Karger F et al 1975 5th IAEA Int. Conf. on Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Energy Research (Tokyo) p 207
|
[27] |
Zhao Q C et al 1985 10th IAEA Int. Conf. on Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Energy Research (London) p 345
|
[28] |
Ellis J J et al 1985 10th IAEA Int. Conf. on Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Energy Research (London) p 363
|
[29] |
Hu Q et al 2012 Nucl. Fusion
52 083011 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/52/8/083011
|
[30] |
Ding Y et al 2013 Plasma Sci. Technol.
15 1154 doi: 10.1088/1009-0630/15/11/14
|
[31] |
Lu S S et al 2020 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
62 125005 doi: 10.1088/1361-6587/abbcc4
|
[32] |
Han D L et al 2021 Plasma Sci. Technol.
23 055104 doi: 10.1088/2058-6272/abeeda
|
[33] |
Hu Q and Yu Q 2016 Nucl. Fusion
56 034001 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/56/3/034001
|
[34] |
Scoville J T et al 1991 Nucl. Fusion
31 875 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/31/5/006
|
[35] |
Howell D F et al 2007 Nucl. Fusion
47 1336 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/47/9/034
|
[36] |
Cole A J et al 2008 Phys. Plasmas
15 056102 doi: 10.1063/1.2838241
|
[37] |
Menard J E et al 2010 Nucl. Fusion
50 045008 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/50/4/045008
|
[38] |
Shiraki D et al 2015 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
57 025016 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/57/2/025016
|
[39] |
Ivanov N V and Kakurin A M 2017 Nucl. Fusion
57 016021 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/57/1/016021
|
[40] |
Fitzpatrick R 1998 Phys. Plasmas
5 3325 doi: 10.1063/1.873000
|
[41] |
Fitzpatrick R 2020 Phys. Plasmas
27 042506 doi: 10.1063/5.0003117
|
[42] |
Frassinetti L et al 2010 Nucl Fusion
50 035005 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/50/3/035005
|
[43] |
Frassinetti L et al 2011 Nucl Fusion
51 063018 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/51/6/063018
|
[44] |
Yan W et al 2018 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
60 035007 doi: 10.1088/1361-6587/aa9c14
|
[45] |
Zohm H 2015 Nucl. Fusion
55 104010 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/55/10/104010
|
[46] |
Hu Q et al 2020 Nucl. Fusion
60 076006 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/ab8b79
|
[47] |
Liang Y et al 2007 Phys. Rev. Lett.
98 265004 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.265004
|
[48] |
Kirk A et al 2013 Nucl. Fusion
53 043007 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/53/4/043007
|
[49] |
Hender T C et al 1992 Nucl. Fusion
32 2091 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/32/12/I02
|
[50] |
Yu Q et al 2021 Nucl. Fusion
61 036040 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/abd197
|
[51] |
Kikuchi Y et al 2006 Phys. Rev. Lett.
97 085003 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.085003
|
[52] |
De Bock M F M et al 2008 Nucl. Fusion
48 015007 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/48/1/015007
|
[53] |
Yu Q et al 2009 Phys. Plasmas
16 042301 doi: 10.1063/1.3100236
|
[54] |
Yu Q et al 2008 Nucl. Fusion
48 024007 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/48/2/024007
|
[55] |
Yu Q and Günter S 2008 Nucl. Fusion
48 065004 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/48/6/065004
|
[56] |
Volpe F A et al 2015 Phys. Rev. Lett.
115 175002 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.175002
|
[57] |
Wang H et al 2018 Nucl. Fusion
58 056024 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/aab5c0
|
[58] |
Ye C et al 2021 Nucl. Fusion
61 056010 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/abeed5
|
[59] |
Nave M F F et al 1990 Nucl. Fusion
30 2575 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/30/12/011
|
[60] |
Hu Q et al 2013 Phys. Plasmas
20 092502 doi: 10.1063/1.4820800
|
[61] |
Fitzpatrick R 1993 Nucl. Fusion
33 1049 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/33/7/I08
|
[62] |
Huang W and Zhu P 2015 Phys. Plasmas
22 032502 doi: 10.1063/1.4913989
|
[63] |
Huang W and Zhu P 2016 Phys. Plasmas
23 032505 doi: 10.1063/1.4943411
|
[64] |
Fitzpatrick R and Yu E P 2000 Phys. Plasmas
7 3610 doi: 10.1063/1.1286990
|
[65] |
Frassinetti L et al 2014 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
56 104001 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/56/10/104001
|
[66] |
Fridström R et al 2015 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
57 104008 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/57/10/104008
|
[1] | Liangkang DONG, Shaoyong CHEN, Maolin MOU, Yang LUO, Chenchen QIN, Changjian TANG. Investigation on the roles of equilibrium toroidal rotation during edge-localized mode mitigated by resonant magnetic perturbations[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2024, 26(1): 015102. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ad0d4d |
[2] | Liangkang DONG (董良康), Shaoyong CHEN (陈少永), Maolin MOU (牟茂淋), Changjian TANG (唐昌建). The effect of resonant magnetic perturbation with different poloidal mode numbers on peeling–ballooning modes[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2020, 22(11): 115101. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aba3bd |
[3] | Jie HUANG (黄杰), Yasuhiro SUZUKI (铃木康浩), Yunfeng LIANG (梁云峰), Manni JIA (贾曼妮), Youwen SUN (孙有文), Nan CHU (楚南), Jichan XU (许吉禅), Muquan WU (吴木泉), EAST team. Magnetic field topology modeling under resonant magnetic perturbations on EAST[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2019, 21(6): 65105-065105. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ab0d35 |
[4] | Weikang TANG (汤炜康), Lai WEI (魏来), Zhengxiong WANG (王正汹), Jialei WANG (王佳磊), Tong LIU (刘桐), Shu ZHENG (郑殊). Effects of resonant magnetic perturbation on locked mode of neoclassical tearing modes[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2019, 21(6): 65103-065103. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ab0a18 |
[5] | Ding LI (李定), Wen YANG (杨文), Huishan CAI (蔡辉山). On theoretical research for nonlinear tearing mode[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2018, 20(9): 94002-094002. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aabde4 |
[6] | Bicheng LI (李必成), Zhonghe JIANG (江中和), Jian LV (吕健), Xiang LI (李想), Bo RAO (饶波), Yonghua DING (丁永华). Numerical simulation of plasma response to externally applied resonant magnetic perturbation on the J-TEXT tokamak[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2018, 20(5): 54004-054004. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aa97cf |
[7] | Guiliang SONG (宋桂良), Huishan CAI (蔡辉山). Linear tearing modes in an electron-positron plasma[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2017, 19(4): 45002-045002. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aa5801 |
[8] | LIANG Shaoyong (梁绍勇), XIAO Bingjia (肖炳甲), ZHANG Yang (张洋), WANG Linfang (王淋芳), YUAN Qiping (袁旗平), LUO Zhengping (罗正平), SHI Tonghui (石同辉), TI Ang (提昂). Real-Time Detection for Magnetic Island of Neoclassical Tearing Mode in EAST Plasma Control System[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2016, 18(2): 197-201. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/18/2/17 |
[9] | QU Hongpeng (曲洪鹏), PENG Xiaodong (彭晓东), SHEN Yong (沈勇), WANG Aike (王爱科), HAO Guangzhou (郝广周), HU Shilin (胡世林). Effect of Finite-Ion-Banana-Width on the Polarization Contribution to the Neoclassical Tearing Modes Evolution[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2014, 16(12): 1090-1095. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/16/12/02 |
[10] | HAO Changduana(郝长端), ZHANG Minga(张明), DING Yonghua(丁永华), RAO Boa(饶波), CEN Yishuna(岑义顺), ZHUANG Ge(庄革). Stress and Thermal Analysis of the In-Vessel Resonant Magnetic Perturbation Coils on the J-TEXT Tokamak[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2012, 14(1): 83-88. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/14/1/18 |
1. | Xu, J., Luan, Q., Li, H. et al. Neural network based fast prediction of double tearing modes in advanced tokamak plasmas. Physics of Plasmas, 2024, 31(12): 122113. DOI:10.1063/5.0229910 | |
2. | Gao, Q., Zheng, P.-W. Effects of counter-current driven by electron cyclotron waves on neoclassical tearing mode suppression. Chinese Physics B, 2024, 33(5): 055202. DOI:10.1088/1674-1056/ad23d3 | |
3. | Ren, G., Wei, L., Li, J. et al. Effect of resonant magnetic perturbation on edge-core turbulence spreading in a tokamak plasma. Nuclear Fusion, 2024, 64(5): 056016. DOI:10.1088/1741-4326/ad2ca9 | |
4. | Yu, L.M., Zhu, X.L., Chen, W. et al. Observation of resonant tearing mode induced by energetic-ion redistribution due to sawtooth collapse in HL-2A NBI plasmas. Nuclear Fusion, 2024, 64(4): 046006. DOI:10.1088/1741-4326/ad1d76 | |
5. | Ye, K., Zhou, Z., Zhang, T. et al. Experimental study of core MHD behavior and a novel algorithm for rational surface detection based on profile reflectometry in EAST. Plasma Science and Technology, 2024, 26(3): 034010. DOI:10.1088/2058-6272/ad0f0a | |
6. | Liu, T., Wang, Z.-X., Wei, L. et al. Enhancement of ECCD by the current condensation effect for stabilizing large magnetic islands caused by neoclassical tearing modes in tokamak plasmas. Nuclear Fusion, 2024, 64(3): 036001. DOI:10.1088/1741-4326/ad1c94 | |
7. | Liu, T., Munaretto, S., Logan, N.C. et al. Real time detection of multiple stable MHD eigenmode growth rates towards kink/tearing modes avoidance in DIII-D tokamak plasmas. Nuclear Fusion, 2024, 64(1): 016025. DOI:10.1088/1741-4326/ad0bce | |
8. | Zhu, X.-L., Chen, W., Wang, F. et al. Hybrid numerical simulation on fast particle transport induced by synergistic interaction of low- and medium-frequency magnetohydrodynamic instabilities in tokamak plasma | [托卡马克中低频磁流体不稳定性协同作用引起快粒子输运的混合模拟研究]. Wuli Xuebao/Acta Physica Sinica, 2023, 72(21): 215210. DOI:10.7498/aps.72.20230620 | |
9. | Huang, W., Wang, Z., Yang, M. Self-consistent study of tearing mode with finite current gradient in the resistive-inertial and viscous-resistive regimes. AIP Advances, 2023, 13(11): 115027. DOI:10.1063/5.0177637 | |
10. | Jiang, S., Wang, Z.-X., Wei, L. et al. Effects of plasma radiation on the nonlinear evolution of neo-classical tearing modes in tokamak plasmas with reversed magnetic shear. Chinese Physics B, 2023, 32(10): 105203. DOI:10.1088/1674-1056/acedf7 | |
11. | Huang, Z., Mao, F., Ding, Y. et al. An application of the shortest path algorithm for the identification of weak MHD mode. Plasma Science and Technology, 2023, 25(8): 085101. DOI:10.1088/2058-6272/acc055 | |
12. | Li, H., Li, J.-Q., Wang, F. et al. Features of transport induced by ion-driven trapped-electron modes in tokamak plasmas. Chinese Physics B, 2023, 32(7): 075206. DOI:10.1088/1674-1056/acae7e | |
13. | Wang, H., Wang, Z.-X., Liu, T. et al. Effects of Plasma Boundary Shape on Explosive Bursts Triggered by Tearing Mode in Toroidal Tokamak Plasmas with Reversed Magnetic Shear. Chinese Physics Letters, 2023, 40(7): 075201. DOI:10.1088/0256-307X/40/7/075201 | |
14. | Tang, W., Luan, Q., Sun, H. et al. Screening effect of plasma flow on the resonant magnetic perturbation penetration in tokamaks based on two-fluid model. Plasma Science and Technology, 2023, 25(4): 045103. DOI:10.1088/2058-6272/aca372 | |
15. | Zhu, X., Yu, L., Chen, W. et al. Hybrid-kinetic simulation of synergy between fishbone/sawtooth and tearing mode-induced energetic-ion transport in a tokamak plasma. Nuclear Fusion, 2023, 63(3): 036014. DOI:10.1088/1741-4326/acb221 | |
16. | Ge, W., Wang, Z.-X., Wang, F. et al. Multiple interactions between fishbone instabilities and internal transport barriers in EAST plasmas. Nuclear Fusion, 2023, 63(1): 016007. DOI:10.1088/1741-4326/aca10c | |
17. | Zheng-Xiong, W., Tong, L., Lai, W. Nonlinear evolution and control of neo-classical tearing mode in reversed magnetic shear tokamak plasmas. Reviews of Modern Plasma Physics, 2022, 6(1): 14. DOI:10.1007/s41614-022-00074-4 | |
18. | Zheng, W., Xue, F., Shen, C. et al. Overview of machine learning applications in fusion plasma experiments on J-TEXT tokamak. Plasma Science and Technology, 2022, 24(12): 124003. DOI:10.1088/2058-6272/ac9e46 | |
19. | Liu, T., Li, H., Tang, W. et al. Intelligent control for predicting and mitigating major disruptions in magnetic confinement fusion. iEnergy, 2022, 1(2): 153-157. DOI:10.23919/IEN.2022.0022 | |
20. | Li, H., Li, J., Wang, Z. et al. Role of the zonal flow in multi-scale multi-mode turbulence with small-scale shear flow in tokamak plasmas. Chinese Physics B, 2022, 31(6): 065207. DOI:10.1088/1674-1056/ac6011 |