
Citation: | Guanming YANG, Yueqiang LIU, Zhibin WANG, Yongqin WANG, Yutian MIAO, Guangzhou HAO. Effect of ideal internal MHD instabilities on NBI fast ion redistribution in ITER 15 MA scenario[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2023, 25(5): 055102. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/acab43 |
Transport of fast ions is a crucial issue during the operation of ITER. Redistribution of neutral beam injection (NBI) fast ions by the ideal internal magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) instabilities in ITER is studied utilizing the guiding-center code ORBIT (White R B and Chance M S 1984 Phys. Fluids 27 2455). Effects of the perturbation amplitude A of the internal kink, the perturbation frequency f of the fishbone instability, and the toroidal mode number n of the internal kink are investigated, respectively, in this work. The n = 1 internal kink mode can cause NBI fast ions transporting in real space from regions of 0 < s ≤ 0.32 to 0.32 < s ≤ 0.53 where s labels the normalized plasma radial coordinate. The transport of fast ions is greater as the perturbation amplitude increases. The maximum relative change of the number of fast ions approaches 5% when the perturbation amplitude rises to 500 G. A strong transport is generated between the regions of 0 < s ≤ 0.05 and 0.05 0.1 < s ≤ 2 in the presence of the fishbone instability. Higher frequency results in greater transport, and the number of fast ions in 0 < s ≤ 0.05 is reduced by 30% at the fishbone frequency of 100 kHz. Perturbations with higher n will lead to the excursion of fast ion transport regions outward along the radial direction. The loss of fast ions, however, is not affected by the internal MHD perturbation. Strong transport from 0 < s ≤ 0.05 to 0.05 0.1 < s ≤ 2 does not influence the plasma heating power of ITER, since the NBI fast ions are still located in the plasma core. On the other hand, the influence of fast ion transport from 0 < s ≤ 0.32 to 0.32 0.5 < s ≤ 3 needs further study.
Generated either from fusion reactions, or from auxiliary heating like neutral beam injection (NBI), ion cyclotron radio frequency wave, and low hybrid wave, the fast ions are usually highly populated in the center of the plasma and play an important role in the plasma heating [1, 2]. The magneto-hydrodynamic (MHD) instabilities in tokamaks, however, will interact with fast ions and result in the transport and loss of fast ions from the core region to the edge of the plasma. This degraded confinement of fast ions has a significant impact on the fusion power and plasma properties. It will not only reduce the fusion power and energy gain of tokamaks, but also cause the degradation of plasma confinement performance and damage to the first wall. Therefore, the transport of fast ions is a critical issue for present tokamaks and future fusion devices such as ITER [3, 4].
Due to the importance of this topic, the transport of fast ions has been studied for many years [5]. With the development of tokamak devices and theoretical models, both experiment and simulation works have been extensively carried out to study the conditions and mechanism of fast ion transport. In several tokamak devices, the transport and loss of fast ions induced by various MHD instabilities have been investigated [6–10]. Besides the experimental investigations, the modeling works are devoted to analyzing the experimental data and relevant physical processes, which contribute to continuous progress in the understanding of fast ion transport in recent years. Based on the experimental results of DIII-D, several simulation works are carried out utilizing the codes ORBIT, M3D-C1, OFSEF and TRANSP to study the NBI fast ion transport [11–13]. The fast ion redistribution triggered by sawtooth instability is also investigated with the codes M3D-K and ORBIT [14, 15]. The effects of other MHD instabilities, like toroidal field (TF) ripples, neoclassical tearing mode [16] and ion temperature gradient driven mode [17], on fast ion transport are studied with original theoretical models. Moreover, the numerical simulation is a crucial solution for fast ion transport study during the design of future tokamak devices in the absence of experimental conditions. For instance, the codes ASCOT, SPIRAL and ORBIT are utilized to study the TF ripple-induced fusion alpha transport in SPARC [18] and CFETR [19].
Among the existing and future tokamak devices, ITER is the most promising device to demonstrate controlled fusion energy. In the design of ITER, the fast ions generated from NBI are the main external heating method to maintain plasma heating power and achieve high energy gain [2]. Different from the energy of about 100 keV in other tokamak devices, the energy of NBI fast ions in ITER is about 1 MeV due to the heating requirement [20]. With this high energy, NBI fast ions are able to penetrate into the central region and heat the bulk plasma there. On the other hand, the plasma current in ITER is designed to be 15 MA in the D-T fusion scenario [21]. This high current may lead to a burst of the internal kink mode in the plasma core. Meanwhile, the fishbone instability can be excited by the interaction of fast ions with the internal kink mode [22]. The relevant simulation works have been extensively carried out, for instance, the investigations of NBI transport and loss in ITER by radial electric field [23] and RMPs [24, 25]. Redistribution of alpha particles by internal kink and sawtooth is studied with circular cross section and ITER-like parameters [26–28]. Fast ion transport by fishbone is simulated for a JET plasma based on the experimental measurements [22]. Besides the fast ion transport, the effects of fast ions on internal kink/fishbone have been extensively studied since the last century [29–42], which are therefore not discussed in this work.
As the NBI fast ion redistribution can be triggered by internal kink mode [28] and fishbone instability [43], the effect of internal MHD instabilities on transport and loss of NBI fast ions is also a key issue in ITER. Numerical studieson redistribution of high energy NBI fast ions by internal kink/fishbone in ITER, however, arescarce, which motivates the present study. In this work, the tracing particle orbit code ORBIT [44] is utilized to calculate the redistribution of NBI fast ions with ideal internal MHD instabilities in ITER. The initial fast ion distribution function is calculated by a time-dependent 2D Fokker–Planck solver in velocity space [45] with the first orbit averaged ion sources. The initial distribution of half a million fast ions is in accordance with the operation condition of ITER. Based on the operation parameters and high energy NBI condition in ITER, the effects of the internal kink mode and the fishbone with higher frequency, which is supposed to be a special phenomenon in ITER, are studied numerically. Three parameters are investigated, respectively: the perturbation amplitude
The effects of internal kink mode on the redistribution of NBI fast ions in ITER are simulated using the tracing particle orbit code ORBIT [44]. The code traces and calculates the position and velocity of particles in plasma by solving guiding center orbit equations. From the Hamiltonian quantities, Lagrangian quantities, Lagrangian equations and magnetic field expressions for guiding center drift motion without perturbation, the equations of particle motion without perturbation can be derived. If the magnetic field perturbation is considered, the canonical momentum, Hamiltonian, poloidal and toroidal canonical momentum will be modified and new motion equations can be obtained [44, 47]. The specific expressions and equations are presented in the appendix. By solving the particle guiding center motion equations with the fourth-order Runge–Kutta method, ORBIT can trace the position and velocity of particles and then obtain their orbits and distribution.
The particle orbit tracing code ORBIT is utilized to simulate the effects of internal kink mode on the redistribution of NBI fast ions in ITER. In the calculation of ORBIT, this work uses the initial distribution data of half a million of NBI fast ions, which is calculated by time-dependent 2D Fokker–Planck solver in velocity space [45] with first orbit averaged ion sources, as the input data of particle distribution at the initial moment.
Figure 1 shows the distribution of half a million NBI fast ions in ITER at the initial moment. Figures 1(a) and (b) show, respectively, the initial distribution in real space and in phase space. The color bar indicates the number of particles. Figure 1(a) shows that most NBI fast ions are populated in the core region in ITER at the initial moment. Figure 1(b) shows that most NBI fast ions have a pitch angle larger than 0.5, and the number of NBI fast ions with an energy around 1 MeV is the largest. The information provided by the real and phase spaces indicates that the initial distribution is a distribution of NBI fast ions which have just been injected into ITER and have not been slowed down for a long time. Thus, the energy and pitch angle of most fast ions are centered around 1 MeV and 0.8, respectively.
To study the effects of internal kink mode/fishbone instability on redistribution of NBI fast ions in ITER, three instability parameters are investigated: the perturbation amplitude
Figures 2(a)–(c) show the profiles of bulk plasma temperature, bulk plasma density and safety factor q in the ITER 15 MA scenario assumed for ORBIT. The horizontal coordinate
Figure 3 presents the structure of the internal kink mode assumed for ORBIT with
This section focuses on the effects of perturbation amplitude
The calculation results of ORBIT are shown in figure 4. Figures 4(a)–(c) compare, respectively, the number profiles of NBI fast ions in real space for
Figures 4(d)–(f) show more clearly the relationship between the degree of NBI fast ion transport and the perturbation amplitude. The vertical coordinate indicates the relative change of NBI fast ion number at the corresponding radial position in the presence of perturbation, which is calculated as:
Relativechange=Npert(s)-N0(s)N0(s), |
(1) |
where
Figure 5 illustrates the relationship curve between the NBI fast ion loss rate and the perturbation amplitude. The loss rate is obtained by dividing the number of fast ions lost by the total number of fast ions, which is half a million. In this work, the free boundary condition is adopted for the internal kink computation. As for the fast ion tracing simulation by ORBIT, the last closed flux surface (LCFS) is assumed as the boundary, i.e. the fast ions that intersect the LCFS are considered lost. It can be seen that the perturbation amplitude basically does not affect the number of fast ions lost. This is because the internal kink mode perturbation occurs in the core region in ITER, and the NBI fast ions are mainly transported from
The redistribution of NBI fast ions in the particle phase space with 500 G perturbation is shown in figure 6. Figure 6(a) corresponds to the real space region of
Figure 6(a) shows that in the region of
In the region with the largest change of NBI fast ion number in figure 6, the fast ion with an energy of 960 keV and pitch angle of 0.8 is selected. The real-space Poincaré diagrams of NBI fast ion are presented in figure 7. Figures 7(a) and (b) show, respectively, the cases without perturbation and with 500 G perturbation. The vertical coordinate
In this section, the effect of different mode perturbation frequencies
The calculation results of ORBIT are shown in figures 8 and 9. Figure 8 compares the number profiles of NBI fast ions in real space with six different perturbation frequencies and without perturbation. The two black vertical dotted lines in plot (f) represent the radial positions of
Figure 9 shows the relative change of NBI fast ion number in real space with different perturbation frequencies. The transport phenomenon of NBI fast ions from
Although the transport of NBI fast ions in the inner region in the presence of high-frequency perturbations is severe, the radial position of this massive transport of fast ions is small and still located in the plasma core region. Therefore, in the absence of transport out of the plasma core, this large transport of NBI fast ions does not affect the NBI heating power and fusion condition in ITER.
Figure 10 presents the relationship curve between the NBI fast ion loss rate and the perturbation frequency. It can be seen in the figure that the variation of NBI fast ion loss rate with the change of perturbation frequency is extremely small. In the background of half a million NBI fast ions, the maximum variation of the number of fast ions lost between different perturbation frequencies does not exceed 50. Thus the loss of NBI fast ions is considered to be unaffected by the perturbation frequency.
As different fishbone frequencies are investigated here, the resonance between the mode and the fast ions indeed affects the fast ion transport. This resonant interaction depends on the mode frequency and the assumed initial distribution of fast ions. In this work, such resonance is partially taken into account. In this subsection, the 3D perturbation structure (internal kink mode with
However, the nonlinear evolution of fishbone and the associated fast ion redistribution is not studied in the present work. Such nonlinear interactions, which often lead to the mode frequency chirping, have again been studied in literature e.g. in [55, 56] for ITER. Such a study is beyond the capability of the computational tools (MARS and ORBIT) employed in this work.
Figures 11(a) and (b) present, respectively, the redistribution of NBI fast ions in the particle phase space in the regions of
Combining the information in figure 11, it can be seen that in the presence of 100 kHz perturbation, most of the NBI fast ions transported from
To verify the conclusions from the real-space and phase-space redistribution, an NBI fast ion with an energy of 960 keV and pitch angle of 0.8 is taken in the region of
In this section, the effect of internal kink modes with different toroidal mode numbers
Figure 13 presents the calculation results of ORBIT for different
The boundary of fast ion transport increases as
The relationship curve between the loss rate of NBI fast ions and toroidal mode number
Figure 15 presents the redistribution of NBI fast ions in the particle phase space in the regions of
The NBI fast ion with an energy of 720 keV and pitch angle of 0.8 is selected from the region where fast ion transport occurs in figure 15. The real-space Poincaré diagram is calculated and plotted. As figure 16(b) shows, the fast ion orbit is distorted in the region of
Redistribution of half a million of NBI fast ions by the ideal internal MHD instabilities in ITER has been simulated utilizing the tracing particle orbit code ORBIT. Three parameters associated with MHD perturbations are considered in this work: the perturbation amplitude
Redistribution of NBI fast ions is found to be sensitive to the perturbation amplitude and frequency. With the
With respect to the effect of fishbone perturbation frequency, a strong fast ion transport occurs between the regions of
The perturbation structure with different toroidal mode numbers
As for the loss of NBI fast ions, we find that the loss number is independent of the perturbation amplitude
Although the NBI fast ion transport induced by 100 kHz fishbone perturbation can result in a maximum decrease of 30% in the relative value of fast ion number, the transport regions of
Here are the specific expressions and equations applied by ORBIT. First, there are Hamiltonian quantities, Lagrangian quantities, Lagrangian equations, and magnetic field expressions for guiding center drift motion without perturbation:
H=ρ2‖B22+μB+Φ |
(A.1) |
L=(A+ρ‖B)⋅v+μ˙ξ−H |
(A.2) |
ddt∂L∂˙q=∂L∂q |
(A.3) |
B=g∇ζ+I∇θ+δ∇ψp, |
(A.4) |
where ρ‖=v‖/B represents the normalized parallel gyration radius of a particle; μ=v2⊥/2B represents the normalized magnetic moment of a particle; Φ is the electric potential. The magnetic field can be written as B=∇×(ψ∇θ−ψp∇ζ)=∇×A with A=ψ∇θψp∇ζ representing the magnetic vector potential; v denotes the guiding center velocity; ξ labels the cyclotron phase. q is the safety factor, (ψp,θ,ζ) is the magnetic surface coordinates used in ORBIT, ψp represents the poloidal flux coordinates, θ represents the poloidal angle, ζ represents the toroidal angle. From the above equations, the equations of particle motion without perturbation can be derived as:
˙ρ‖=−1−ρ‖g′D((μ+ρ2‖B)∂B∂θ+∂Φ∂θ) |
(A.5) |
˙ψp=−gD((μ+ρ2‖B)∂B∂θ+∂Φ∂θ) |
(A.6) |
˙θ=ρ‖B2D(1−ρ‖g′)+gD((μ+ρ2‖B)∂B∂ψp+∂Φ∂ψp) |
(A.7) |
˙ζ=ρ‖B2D(q+ρ‖(I′ψp−qδ′θ))−ID((μ+ρ2‖B)∂B∂ψp+∂Φ∂ψp)+qδD((μ+ρ2‖B)∂B∂θ+∂Φ∂θ) |
(A.8) |
where
D=gq+I+ρ‖(gI′ψp−Ig′ψp−gqδ′θ+Iqδ′ζ) |
After considering the magnetic field perturbation, the perturbation in ORBIT takes the form:
δB=∇×αB, |
(A.9) |
where α is an arbitrary function of ψp,θ,ζ, i.e. α = α(ψp,θ,ζ) From the modified canonical momentum, Hamiltonian, poloidal and toroidal canonical momentum:
ρc=ρ‖+α |
(A.10) |
H=(ρc−α)2B22+μB+Φ |
(A.11) |
Pθ=Iρc+ψ |
(A.12) |
Pζ=gρc+ψp. |
(A.13) |
The new motion equations can be obtained as:
˙ρ‖=ρ2‖B+μD((−1+ρcg′+g∂α∂ψp)∂B∂θ+(I∂α∂ζ−g∂α∂θ)∂B∂ψp)−q+ρcI′D∂Φ∂ζ−1−ρcg′D∂Φ∂θ+1D(∂α∂ψp(g∂Φ∂θ−I∂Φ∂ζ)+∂Φ∂ψp(I∂α∂ζ−g∂α∂θ))−∂α∂t |
(A.14) |
˙ψp=−gD(ρ2‖B+μ)∂B∂θ+gρ‖B2D∂α∂θ+Iρ‖B2D∂α∂ζ−gD∂Φ∂θ+ID∂Φ∂ζ |
(A.15) |
˙θ=∂H∂Pθ=(ρ2‖B+μ)gD∂B∂ψp+ρ‖B2(1−ρcg′)D−ρ‖B2gD∂α∂ψp+gD∂Φ∂ψp |
(A.16) |
˙ζ=∂H∂Pζ=−(ρ2‖B+μ)ID∂B∂ψp+ρ‖B2(q+ρcI′)D+ρ‖B2ID∂α∂ψp−ID∂Φ∂ψp |
(A.17) |
˙Pθ=−∂H∂θ=−(ρ2‖B+μ)∂B∂θ+ρ‖B2∂α∂θ−∂Φ∂θ |
(A.18) |
˙Pθ=−∂H∂ζ=ρ‖B2∂α∂ζ−∂Φ∂ζ. |
(A.19) |
The code ORBIT solves the above particle guiding center equations by the fourth-order Runge–Kutta method to obtain the orbits and distribution of particles.
G Y acknowledges Professor RB White for providing the code ORBIT, and Dr Alexei Polevoi for providing the initial distribution data of NBI fast ions in ITER utilized in this work. Numerical computations were performed on HPC Platform of Southwestern Institute of Physics. This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Nos. 2022YFE03060002, 2019YFE03090100) and by the Innovation Program of Southwestern Institute of Physics (No. 202001XWCXRC001). This work is also partly supported by the Youth Science and Technology Innovation Team of Sichuan Province (No. 2022JDTD0003).
[1] |
Heidbrink W W and Sadler G J 1994 Nucl. Fusion 34 535 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/34/4/I07
|
[2] |
Fasoli A et al 2007 Nucl. Fusion 47 S264 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/47/6/S05
|
[3] |
Spong D A 2011 Phys. Plasmas 18 056109 doi: 10.1063/1.3575626
|
[4] |
Gorelenkov N N, Pinches S D and Toi K 2014 Nucl. Fusion 54 125001 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/54/12/125001
|
[5] |
White R B 1983 Phys. Fluids 26 2958 doi: 10.1063/1.864060
|
[6] |
Von Thun C P et al 2010 Nucl. Fusion 50 084009 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/50/8/084009
|
[7] |
Kiptily V G et al 2017 Nucl. Fusion 58 014003 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/aa9340
|
[8] |
Muscatello C M et al 2012 Nucl. Fusion 52 103022 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/52/10/103022
|
[9] |
Van Zeeland M A et al 2013 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 56 015009 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/56/1/015009
|
[10] |
Garcia-Munoz M et al 2013 Nucl. Fusion 53 123008 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/53/12/123008
|
[11] |
White R B et al 2010 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 52 045012 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/52/4/045012
|
[12] |
Van Zeeland M A et al 2015 Nucl. Fusion 55 073028 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/55/7/073028
|
[13] |
Muscatello C M et al 2012 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 54 025006 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/54/2/025006
|
[14] |
Shen W et al 2014 Phys. Plasmas 21 092514 doi: 10.1063/1.4896341
|
[15] |
Kim D et al 2018 Nucl. Fusion 58 082029 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/aac10f
|
[16] |
Khan M et al 2012 J. Fusion Energy 31 547 doi: 10.1007/s10894-011-9503-3
|
[17] |
Feng Z C, Qiu Z Y and Sheng Z M 2013 Phys. Plasmas 20 122309 doi: 10.1063/1.4849455
|
[18] |
Scott S D et al 2020 J. Plasma Phys. 86 865860508 doi: 10.1017/S0022377820001087
|
[19] |
Zhao R et al 2020 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 62 115001 doi: 10.1088/1361-6587/abb0d4
|
[20] |
Singh M J et al 2017 New J. Phys. 19 055004 doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/aa639d
|
[21] |
Shimada M et al 2007 Nucl. Fusion 47 S1 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/47/6/S01
|
[22] |
Von Thun C P et al 2012 Nucl. Fusion 52 094010 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/52/9/094010
|
[23] |
Tani K et al 2015 Nucl. Fusion 55 053010 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/55/5/053010
|
[24] |
Varje J et al 2016 Nucl. Fusion 56 046014 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/56/4/046014
|
[25] |
Sanchis L et al 2021 Nucl. Fusion 61 046006 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/abdfdd
|
[26] |
Farengo R et al 2012 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 54 025007 doi: 10.1088/0741-3335/54/2/025007
|
[27] |
Farengo R et al 2013 Nucl. Fusion 53 043012 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/53/4/043012
|
[28] |
Farengo R et al 2014 Phys. Plasmas 21 082512 doi: 10.1063/1.4893145
|
[29] |
Chen L, White R B and Rosenbluth M N 1984 Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 1122 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.52.1122
|
[30] |
White R B et al 1985 Phys. Fluids 28 278 doi: 10.1063/1.865198
|
[31] |
Heidbrink W W et al 1986 Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 835 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.835
|
[32] |
White R B et al 1988 Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 2038 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.2038
|
[33] |
Betti R and Freidberg J P 1993 Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 3428 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.3428
|
[34] |
Kolesnichenko Y I, Lutsenko V V and Marchenko V S 2000 Nucl. Fusion 40 1731 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/40/10/305
|
[35] |
Wang S J 2001 Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 5286 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.5286
|
[36] |
Graves J P 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 185003 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.185003
|
[37] |
Fu G Y et al 2006 Phys. Plasmas 13 052517 doi: 10.1063/1.2203604
|
[38] |
He H D et al 2011 Nucl. Fusion 51 113012 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/51/11/113012
|
[39] |
Shen W et al 2015 Phys. Plasmas 22 042510 doi: 10.1063/1.4917341
|
[40] |
Wang X Q, Zhang R B and Meng G 2016 Phys. Plasmas 23 074506 doi: 10.1063/1.4958645
|
[41] |
Pei Y B et al 2017 Phys. Plasmas 24 032507 doi: 10.1063/1.4978562
|
[42] |
Yu L M et al 2019 Nucl. Fusion 59 086016 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/ab22dd
|
[43] |
Von Thun C P et al 2011 Nucl. Fusion 51 053003 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/51/5/053003
|
[44] |
White R B and Chance M S 1984 Phys. Fluids 27 2455 doi: 10.1063/1.864527
|
[45] |
Polevoi A, Shirai H and Takizuka T 1997 Benchmarking of the NBI Block in Astra Code Versus the OFMC Calculations (Tokyo: Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute JAERIData/Code 97-014)
|
[46] |
ITER Physics Expert Group on Energetic Particles, Heating and Current Drive and ITER Physics Basis Editors 1999 Nucl. Fusion 39 2471 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/39/12/305
|
[47] |
White R B 2001 The Theory of Toroidally Confined Plasmas(London: Imperial College Press)
|
[48] |
Liu Y Q et al 2000 Phys. Plasmas 7 3681 doi: 10.1063/1.1287744
|
[49] |
Gude A et al 1999 Nucl. Fusion 39 127 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/39/1/308
|
[50] |
Staebler A et al 2005 Nucl. Fusion 45 617 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/45/7/009
|
[51] |
Chen W et al 2010 Nucl. Fusion 50 084008 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/50/8/084008
|
[52] |
Zheng T et al 2016 Plasma Sci. Technol. 18 595 doi: 10.1088/1009-0630/18/6/03
|
[53] |
Yu L M et al 2017 J. Phys. Soc. Japan 86 024501 doi: 10.7566/JPSJ.86.024501
|
[54] |
Furth H P et al 1990 Nucl. Fusion 30 1799 doi: 10.1088/0029-5515/30/9/009
|
[55] |
Brochard G et al 2020 Nucl. Fusion 60 086002 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/ab9255
|
[56] |
Brochard G et al 2020 Nucl. Fusion 60 126019 doi: 10.1088/1741-4326/abb14b
|
[1] | Zhihui ZOU, Ping ZHU, Charlson C KIM, Wei DENG, Xianqu WANG, Yawei HOU. Frequency multiplication with toroidal mode number of kink/fishbone modes on a static HL-2A-like tokamak[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2022, 24(12): 124005. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aca00a |
[2] | Xingyuan XU (徐行远), Yingfeng XU (徐颖峰), Xiaodong ZHANG (张晓东), Youjun HU (胡友俊), Lei YE (叶磊), Xiaotao XIAO (肖小涛). Simulations of first-orbit losses of neutral beam injection (NBI) fast ions on EAST[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2020, 22(8): 85101-085101. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ab8973 |
[3] | Yaorong YANG (杨耀荣), Yawei HOU (候雅巍), Wei CHEN (陈伟), Ping ZHU (朱平), Xianqu WANG (王先驱), Zhihui ZOU (邹志慧), Yi YU (余羿), Min XU (许敏), Minyou YE (叶民友). Investigation of ion fishbone stability on HL-2A using NIMROD[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2019, 21(8): 85101-085101. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/ab1295 |
[4] | Kunihiro OGAWA, Mitsutaka ISOBE, Takeo NISHITANI, Sadayoshi MURAKAMI, Ryosuke SEKI, Hideo NUGA, Neng PU, Masaki OSAKABE, LHD Experiment Group. Study of first orbit losses of 1 MeV tritons using the Lorentz orbit code in the LHD[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2019, 21(2): 25102-025102. DOI: 10.1088/2058-6272/aaeba8 |
[5] | ZHENG Ting (郑婷), WU Bin (吴斌), XU Liqing (徐立清), HU Chundong (胡纯栋), ZANG Qing (臧庆), DING Siye (丁斯晔), LI Yingying (李颖颖), WU Xingquan (伍兴权), WANG Jinfang (王进芳), SHEN Biao (沈飙), ZHONG Guoqiang (钟国强), LI Hao (李昊), SHI Tonghui (石同辉), EAST Team. Fishbone Mode Excited by Deeply Trapped Energetic Beam Ions in EAST[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2016, 18(6): 595-600. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/18/6/03 |
[6] | HE Yihua (贺艺华), YANG Chang (杨昶), HE Zhaoguo (何兆国), ZHANG Zelong (张择龙), et al.. Observation and Modeling of Geostationary Orbit Electron Energization Induced by Enhanced Dayside Whistler-Mode Waves[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2013, 15(9): 866-870. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/15/9/06 |
[7] | QU Hongpeng (曲洪鹏). Ion-Banana-Orbit-Width Effect on Bootstrap Current for Small Magnetic Islands[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2013, 15(9): 852-856. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/15/9/03 |
[8] | WANG Zhongtian (王中天), WANG Long (王龙), LONG Yongxing (龙永兴), DONG Jiaqi (董家齐), HE Zhixiong (何志雄), LIU Yu (刘宇), TANG Changjian (唐昌建). Shaping Effects of the E-Fishbone in Tokamaks[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2013, 15(1): 12-16. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/15/1/03 |
[9] | WU Guojiang (吴国将), ZHANG Xiaodong (张晓东). Calculations of the Ion Orbit Loss Region at the Edge of EAST[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2012, 14(9): 789-793. DOI: 10.1088/1009-0630/14/9/03 |
[10] | GAO Zhe. Analytical Theory of the Geodesic Acoustic Mode in the Small and Large Orbit Drift Width Limits and its Application in a Study of Plasma Shaping Effect[J]. Plasma Science and Technology, 2011, 13(1): 15-20. |
1. | Hao, G., Xu, J., Sun, Y. et al. Summary of the 11th Conference on Magnetic Confined Fusion Theory and Simulation. Plasma Science and Technology, 2024, 26(10): 101001. DOI:10.1088/2058-6272/ad5d8a |
1. | Hao, G., Xu, J., Sun, Y. et al. Summary of the 11th Conference on Magnetic Confined Fusion Theory and Simulation. Plasma Science and Technology, 2024, 26(10): 101001. DOI:10.1088/2058-6272/ad5d8a |