Progress in GYRO validation studies of DIII-D H-mode plasmas

The need for a validated predictive capability of turbulent transport in ITER is now widely recognized. However, to date most validation studies of nonlinear codes such as GYRO (Candy and Waltz 2003 J. Comput. Phys. 186 545) have focused upon low power L-mode discharges, which have significant differences in key dimensionless parameters such as ρ* = ρs/a from more ITER-relevant H-mode discharges. In order to begin addressing this gap, comparisons of the turbulent transport and fluctuations predicted by nonlinear GYRO simulations for a number of DIII-D (Luxon 2002 Nucl. Fusion 42 614) H-mode discharges to power balance analyses and experimental measurements are presented. The results of two H-mode studies are presented in this paper, this first of which investigates the importance of nonlocality at typical DIII-D H-mode ρ* values. Electrostatic global GYRO simulations of H-mode discharges at low and high rotation are shown to predict turbulence and transport levels lower than corresponding local simulations, and which are consistent with or slightly above experimental measurements and power balance analyses, even at 'near-edge' radii where gyrofluid and gyrokinetic models systematically underpredict turbulence and transport levels. The second study addresses the stabilizing effect of a significant density of energetic particles on turbulent transport. The results of local GYRO simulations of low-density QH-mode plasmas are presented, which model the fast beam ion population as a separate, dynamic ion species. The simulations show a significant reduction of transport with this fast ion treatment, which helps to understand previously reported results (Holland et al 2011 Phys. Plasmas 18 056113) in which GYRO simulations without this treatment significantly overpredicted (by a factor of 10 or more) power balance calculations. These results are contrasted with simulations of a high-density, low fast ion fraction QH-mode discharge, which predict transport levels consistent with power balance, regardless of the fast ion treatment.

[1]  W. Horton Drift waves and transport , 1999 .

[2]  W. A. Peebles,et al.  L-mode validation studies of gyrokinetic turbulence simulations via multiscale and multifield turbulence measurements on the DIII-D tokamak , 2011 .

[3]  G. Bateman,et al.  The tokamak Monte Carlo fast ion module NUBEAM in the National Transport Code Collaboration library , 2004 .

[4]  J. Candy,et al.  Linear and nonlinear verification of gyrokinetic microstability codes , 2011 .

[5]  F Jenko,et al.  System size effects on gyrokinetic turbulence. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[6]  R. Budny,et al.  Transitionless Enhanced Confinement and the Role of Radial Electric Field Shear , 1999 .

[7]  R. E. Waltz,et al.  ITER predictions using the GYRO verified and experimentally validated trapped gyro-Landau fluid transport model , 2011 .

[8]  Jeff M. Candy,et al.  Implementation and application of two synthetic diagnostics for validating simulations of core tokamak turbulence , 2009 .

[9]  E. Doyle,et al.  Millimeter-wave backscatter diagnostic for the study of short scale length plasma fluctuations (invited) , 2006 .

[10]  J. Kinsey,et al.  A theory-based transport model with comprehensive physicsa) , 2006 .

[11]  I. Holod,et al.  Gyrokinetic particle simulations of reversed shear Alfvén eigenmode excited by antenna and fast ions , 2010 .

[12]  Jeff M. Candy,et al.  A unified method for operator evaluation in local Grad–Shafranov plasma equilibria , 2009 .

[13]  R. Fonck,et al.  Plasma Turbulence Imaging via Beam Emission Spectroscopy in the Core of the DIII-D Tokamak , 2007 .

[14]  Alain J. Brizard,et al.  Foundations of Nonlinear Gyrokinetic Theory , 2007 .

[15]  Mechanisms and scalings of energetic ion transport via tokamak microturbulence , 2008 .

[16]  R. Waltz,et al.  Turbulent transport of alpha particles in reactor plasmas , 2006 .

[17]  Z. Lin,et al.  Size scaling of turbulent transport in magnetically confined plasmas. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[18]  T. L. Rhodes,et al.  Measurements of core electron temperature and density fluctuations in DIII-D and comparison to nonlinear gyrokinetic simulations , 2008 .

[19]  F. Imbeaux,et al.  Turbulence in the TORE SUPRA tokamak: measurements and validation of nonlinear simulations. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[20]  Jeff M. Candy,et al.  Tokamak profile prediction using direct gyrokinetic and neoclassical simulation , 2009 .

[21]  T. L. Rhodes,et al.  Advances in validating gyrokinetic turbulence models against L- and H-mode plasmas a) , 2011 .

[22]  T. Osborne,et al.  High-frequency coherent edge fluctuations in a high-pedestal-pressure quiescent H-mode plasma. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[23]  R. E. Waltz,et al.  The first transport code simulations using the trapped gyro-Landau-fluid model , 2008 .

[24]  T. L. Rhodes,et al.  Measurements of the cross-phase angle between density and electron temperature fluctuations and comparison with gyrokinetic simulations , 2010 .

[25]  R. L. Miller,et al.  Ion temperature gradient turbulence simulations and plasma flux surface shape , 1999 .

[26]  Alberto Bottino,et al.  Gyrokinetic simulations of impurity, He ash and α particle transport and consequences on ITER transport modelling , 2009 .

[27]  A. Peeters,et al.  Gyrokinetic calculations of diffusive and convective transport of α particles with a slowing-down distribution function , 2008 .

[28]  J. Deboo Probing Plasma Turbulence by Modulating the Electron Temperature Gradient , 2009 .

[29]  Viktor K. Decyk,et al.  Scalings of energetic particle transport by ion temperature gradient microturbulencea) , 2010 .

[30]  Jeff M. Candy,et al.  The local limit of global gyrokinetic simulations , 2004 .

[31]  Jeff M. Candy,et al.  Gyrokinetic turbulence simulation of profile shear stabilization and broken gyroBohm scaling , 2002 .

[32]  L. L. Lao,et al.  Advances in understanding quiescent H-mode plasmas in DIII-D , 2005 .

[33]  T. Osborne,et al.  Edge pedestal control in quiescent H-mode discharges in DIII-D using co-plus counter-neutral beam injection , 2008 .

[34]  F. Jenko,et al.  Development of a synthetic phase contrast imaging diagnostic for turbulence studies at Wendelstein 7-X , 2010, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion.

[35]  J. L. Luxon,et al.  A design retrospective of the DIII-D tokamak , 2002 .

[36]  G. Staebler,et al.  Quiescent double barrier regime in the DIII-D tokamak. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[37]  H. Sugama,et al.  Nonlinear electromagnetic gyrokinetic equation for plasmas with large mean flows , 1998 .

[38]  W. Nevins,et al.  System for simulating fluctuation diagnostics for application to turbulence computations , 2006 .

[39]  R. Waltz,et al.  VALIDATING SIMULATIONS OF CORE TOKAMAK TURBULENCE: CURRENT STATUS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS , 2008 .

[40]  R. Waltz,et al.  Gyrokinetic simulations of mesoscale energetic particle-driven Alfvénic turbulent transport embedded in microturbulence , 2010 .

[41]  T. S. Hahm,et al.  Zonal flows in plasma—a review , 2005 .

[42]  D. McCune,et al.  Thermal ions dilution and ITG suppression in ASDEX Upgrade ion ITBs , 2007 .

[43]  Maxim Umansky,et al.  Stability and dynamics of the edge pedestal in the low collisionality regime: physics mechanisms for steady-state ELM-free operation , 2007 .

[44]  Laurent Villard,et al.  Flux- and gradient-driven global gyrokinetic simulation of tokamak turbulence , 2011 .

[45]  W. W. Heidbrink,et al.  Basic physics of Alfvén instabilities driven by energetic particles in toroidally confined plasmas , 2008 .

[46]  Ihor Holod,et al.  Gyrokinetic particle simulation of beta-induced Alfvén eigenmode , 2010 .