Integrated Modelling of Burning Plasmas in ITER

Integrated Modelling of Burning Plasmas in ITER

Therefore there is an important motivation to carry out detailed modelling of these discharges, in order to gain better understanding of the physics and also to define a modelling strategy to extrapolate this regime to ITER.
Figures give an example of an ITER hybrid scenario simulation (fig. 1) at 13 MA (q95 = 4.5).The density is 9.4 101919 m-3 and a density peaking factor of 1.5 is prescribed . The simulation is made with the Kiauto model, using the DS03 scaling law for confinement energy without MHD activity. The additional heating power is composed of 33 MW of Neutral Beam Injection, 20 MW of Ion Cyclotron Resonance Heating at 2ndnd harmonic of T and to sustain a central value of the safety factor greater than 1, we add 30 MW of Lower Hybrid (fig. 2 and 3). The central temperature reaches 33 KeV (figure 4). The fusion power is 875 MW (Q = 10.5).
5. CONCLUSIONS
The integrated modelling for ITER and next step devices, such as DEMO is an essential element of the fusion research program, which is presently in its starting phase. The next generation [ref ITM] of simulators will include all the aspects of Tokamak operation and physics (from blanket to the center, with antenna, scrape off layer, MHD effects and “first principle” transport models based on gyrokinetic codes). The final goal is the design of a reactor producing about 1.5 GW of electricity at a competitive price.
REFERENCES
1.ITER PHYSICS BASIS, Nuclear. Fusion 39, 1999.
2.Basiuk V et al., Nuclear Fusion 43, pp 822-, 2003.
3.G.T.A. Huysmans et al, CP90, 1991.
4.W.A. Houlberg,et al, Phys. Plasmas 4,1997.
5.Y. Feng et al, Comp. Phys. 88, 1995.
6.Wolle et al., PPCF,pp 1051-, 1994.
7.L.G. Eriksson et al, Nucl. Fus. 33, pp 1037-1048,1993.
8.F. Imbeaux, Y. Peysson , PPCF 47,pp 2041-2065, 2005.
9.M Schneider et al , PPCF 47, pp 2087-2106,2005.
10.H.-S. Bosch and G.M. Hale, Nucl. Fus. 32, pp 611-633, 1992.
11.J. Dies et al.,will be presented at th IAEA 2006.
12.X. Litaudon et al, PPCF, 44, p.1057-1086, 2002.
13.F. Imbeaux et al, PPCF 47, B179–B194, 2005.
14.Strand P et al , Nucl. Fusion 38, pp 545 – , 1998.
15.Kinsey J E et al, Phys. Plasmas 12, pp 052503-, 2005.
16.J.F. Artaud et al, 32nd EPS Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics, 2005.
17.J.G. Cordey, NuclearFusion 43, pp 670-674,2003.
18.Petty et al, Fus. Science tech. 43, 2003.
19.E. Joffrin et al, 20th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference (2004) & references therein.
20.E. Tsitrone et al,22nd European Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics ,1995.
21.H. Weisen, 20th IAEA FEC EX/P6-31, 2004.
22.Sips A C C et al, PPCF 47, A19-40, 2005.
23.Staebler A et al., Proc. EX/4-5, IAEA Fusion Energy Conference 2004, Vilamoura, Portugal.
24.Wade M et al, Nuclear Fusion 45, pp 407-, 2005.
25.Joffrin E et al, Nuclear Fusion 45 pp 626-, 2005.
26.Suzuki T et al., Proc. EX/1-3, IAEA Fusion Energy Conference 2004, Vilamoura, Portugal.
FIGURE 3: evolution of the safety factor
FIGURE 4: electron and ion temperature profiles at 50s and 1000 s

Опубликовано в рубрике Documents