A path to stable low-torque plasma operation in ITER with test blanket modules

New experiments in the low-torque ITER Q  =  10 scenario on DIII-D demonstrate that n  =  1 magnetic fields from a single row of ex-vessel control coils enable operation at ITER performance metrics in the presence of applied non-axisymmetric magnetic fields from a test blanket module (TBM) mock-up coil. With n  =  1 compensation, operation below the ITER-equivalent injected torque is successful at three times the ITER equivalent toroidal magnetic field ripple for a pair of TBMs in one equatorial port, whereas the uncompensated TBM field leads to rotation collapse, loss of H-mode and plasma current disruption. In companion experiments at high plasma beta, where the n  =  1 plasma response is enhanced, uncorrected TBM fields degrade energy confinement and the plasma angular momentum while increasing fast ion losses; however, disruptions are not routinely encountered owing to increased levels of injected neutral beam torque. In this regime, n  =  1 field compensation leads to recovery of a dominant fraction of the TBM-induced plasma pressure and rotation degradation, and an 80% reduction in the heat load to the first wall. These results show that the n  =  1 plasma response plays a dominant role in determining plasma stability, and that n  =  1 field compensation alone not only recovers most of the impact on plasma performance of the TBM, but also protects the first wall from potentially damaging heat flux. Despite these benefits, plasma rotation braking from the TBM fields cannot be fully recovered using standard error field control. Given the uncertainty in extrapolation of these results to the ITER configuration, it is prudent to design the TBMs with as low a ferromagnetic mass as possible without jeopardizing the TBM mission.

[1]  M. Cavinato,et al.  ITER fast ion confinement in the presence of the European test blanket module , 2015 .

[2]  L. Lao,et al.  Fast ion transport during applied 3D magnetic perturbations on DIII-D , 2015 .

[3]  E. Strait,et al.  Magnetic control of magnetohydrodynamic instabilities in tokamaks , 2015 .

[4]  Alice Ying,et al.  A fusion nuclear science facility for a fast-track path to DEMO , 2014 .

[5]  D. Humphreys,et al.  Array magnetics modal analysis for the DIII-D tokamak based on localized time-series modelling , 2014 .

[6]  E. J. Strait,et al.  The importance of matched poloidal spectra to error field correction in DIII-D , 2014 .

[7]  R. L. Haye,et al.  The spectral basis of optimal error field correction on DIII-D , 2014 .

[8]  A. Loarte,et al.  Progress on the application of ELM control schemes to ITER scenarios from the non-active phase to DT operation , 2014 .

[9]  N. Logan,et al.  Neoclassical toroidal viscosity in perturbed equilibria with general tokamak geometry , 2013 .

[10]  Yueqiang Liu,et al.  Measurement, correction and implications of the intrinsic error fields on MAST , 2013, 1312.6507.

[11]  J. Snipes,et al.  Simulation of localized fast-ion heat loads in test blanket module simulation experiments on DIII-D , 2013 .

[12]  T. Takizuka,et al.  Effects of local toroidal field ripples due to test blanket modules for ITER on radial transport of thermal ions , 2012 .

[13]  Mikio Enoeda,et al.  Overview of the ITER TBM Program , 2012 .

[14]  R. D. Stambaugh,et al.  A fusion development facility on the critical path to fusion energy , 2011 .

[15]  K. Burrell,et al.  Advances towards QH-mode viability for ELM-stable operation in ITER , 2011 .

[16]  T. Osborne,et al.  The impact of 3D fields on tearing mode stability of H-modes , 2011 .

[17]  Michael J. Schaffer,et al.  ITER test blanket module error field simulation experiments at DIII-D , 2011 .

[18]  R. Mitteau,et al.  Heat loads and shape design of the ITER first wall , 2010 .

[19]  R. Budny,et al.  Results of ITER Test Blanket Module Mock-Up Experiments on DIII-D , 2010 .

[20]  R. E. Bell,et al.  Observation and correction of non-resonant error fields in NSTX , 2010 .

[21]  G. Jackson,et al.  Effect of resonant and non-resonant magnetic braking on error field tolerance in high beta plasmas , 2009, Nuclear Fusion.

[22]  C.P.C. Wong,et al.  The integration of TBM systems in ITER , 2008 .

[23]  T. Petrie,et al.  Demonstration of ITER operational scenarios on DIII-D , 2008 .

[24]  T. Petrie,et al.  Influence of toroidal rotation on transport and stability in hybrid scenario plasmas in DIII-D , 2008 .

[25]  Jong-Kyu Park,et al.  Control of asymmetric magnetic perturbations in tokamaks. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[26]  T. Fujita,et al.  Chapter 2: Plasma confinement and transport , 2007 .

[27]  Kenro Miyamoto,et al.  Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics , 2006 .

[28]  J. A. Leuer,et al.  Anomalies in the applied magnetic fields in DIII-D and their implications for the understanding of stability experiments , 2003 .

[29]  L. L. Lao,et al.  Sustained rotational stabilization of DIII-D plasmas above the no-wall beta limit , 2002 .

[30]  A. Boozer Error field amplification and rotation damping in tokamak plasmas. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[31]  R. Fitzpatrick Bifurcated states of a rotating tokamak plasma in the presence of a static error-field , 1998 .

[32]  M. Schittenhelm,et al.  24th European Physical Society Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma physics : abstracts of invited and contributed papers, Kongresshaus Berchtesgaden, Germany, 9-13 June 1997 , 1997 .

[33]  J. T. Scoville,et al.  Locked modes in DIII-D and a method for prevention of the low density mode , 1991 .