skip to main content
DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Core plasma physics basis and its impacts on the FNSF

Abstract

The FNSF core plasma physics is reportede on with detailed analysis to establish the basis for the reference configuration, R = 4.8 m, a = 1.2 m, Ip = 7.87 MA, and B T = 7.5 T, q 95 = 6, f BS = 0.52, β N < 2.7 established in Ref. [1]. Central solenoid (CS) and poloidal field (PF) coils are far from the plasma as in a power plant, and acceptable coil currents are determined for the rampup and flattop fiducial states. Time-dependent free-boundary plasma evolution simulations demonstrate that the FNSF plasma can be established, ramped up, and relaxed into flattop, including vertical stabilizers, internal feedback coils and feedback control on plasma current, position, and shape. A range of density (n o/ = 1.3–1.5) and temperature (T o/ = 2.2–2.7) profiles are examined, indicating that energy confinement of H 98 = 1.1–1.2 is required to provide 100% non-inductive plasma current in the FNSF. GLF23 theory based transport model predicted lower energy confinement of H 98 ~0.6–0.85. The EPED analysis shows that the pedestal temperature ranges from 4.0–4.7 keV for pedestal densities of 1.7–1.0 × 10 20/m 3. The n = 1 kink stability shows no-wall beta limits, usingmore » the pressure and current profiles associated with the transport and current drive sources, ranging from β N ~2.25–2.55 depending on l i. A conducting wall can extend these limits by 10–40% depending on li and wall location. At the lower beta’s of the reference plasma, a combination of 50 MW of NB, 30 MW of LH, 20 MW of ICRF, 20 MW of EC, and bootstrap current, are found to provide 100% of the plasma current with a stable current profile. Impacts on the FNSF of plasma physics are discussed and R&D challenges are recorded.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [3];  [4];  [4];  [5];  [3];  [3]
  1. Princeton Plasma Physics Lab. (PPPL), Princeton, NJ (United States)
  2. Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
  3. Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (United States)
  4. Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
  5. General Atomics, La Jolla, CA (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA); USDOE Office of Science (SC), Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) (SC-24)
OSTI Identifier:
1542740
Report Number(s):
LLNL-JRNL-770166
Journal ID: ISSN 0920-3796; 961634
Grant/Contract Number:  
AC52-07NA27344; AC02-09CH11466; FC02-99ER54512; AC05-00OR22725
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Fusion Engineering and Design
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 135; Journal Issue: PB; Journal ID: ISSN 0920-3796
Publisher:
Elsevier
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY

Citation Formats

Kessel, C. E., Batchelor, D. B., Bonoli, P. T., Rensink, M. E., Rognlien, T. D., Snyder, P., Wallace, G. M., and Wukitch, S. J. Core plasma physics basis and its impacts on the FNSF. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.1016/j.fusengdes.2017.06.003.
Kessel, C. E., Batchelor, D. B., Bonoli, P. T., Rensink, M. E., Rognlien, T. D., Snyder, P., Wallace, G. M., & Wukitch, S. J. Core plasma physics basis and its impacts on the FNSF. United States. doi:10.1016/j.fusengdes.2017.06.003.
Kessel, C. E., Batchelor, D. B., Bonoli, P. T., Rensink, M. E., Rognlien, T. D., Snyder, P., Wallace, G. M., and Wukitch, S. J. Mon . "Core plasma physics basis and its impacts on the FNSF". United States. doi:10.1016/j.fusengdes.2017.06.003. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1542740.
@article{osti_1542740,
title = {Core plasma physics basis and its impacts on the FNSF},
author = {Kessel, C. E. and Batchelor, D. B. and Bonoli, P. T. and Rensink, M. E. and Rognlien, T. D. and Snyder, P. and Wallace, G. M. and Wukitch, S. J.},
abstractNote = {The FNSF core plasma physics is reportede on with detailed analysis to establish the basis for the reference configuration, R = 4.8 m, a = 1.2 m, Ip = 7.87 MA, and BT = 7.5 T, q95 = 6, fBS = 0.52, βN < 2.7 established in Ref. [1]. Central solenoid (CS) and poloidal field (PF) coils are far from the plasma as in a power plant, and acceptable coil currents are determined for the rampup and flattop fiducial states. Time-dependent free-boundary plasma evolution simulations demonstrate that the FNSF plasma can be established, ramped up, and relaxed into flattop, including vertical stabilizers, internal feedback coils and feedback control on plasma current, position, and shape. A range of density (no/ = 1.3–1.5) and temperature (To/ = 2.2–2.7) profiles are examined, indicating that energy confinement of H98 = 1.1–1.2 is required to provide 100% non-inductive plasma current in the FNSF. GLF23 theory based transport model predicted lower energy confinement of H98 ~0.6–0.85. The EPED analysis shows that the pedestal temperature ranges from 4.0–4.7 keV for pedestal densities of 1.7–1.0 × 1020/m3. The n = 1 kink stability shows no-wall beta limits, using the pressure and current profiles associated with the transport and current drive sources, ranging from βN ~2.25–2.55 depending on li. A conducting wall can extend these limits by 10–40% depending on li and wall location. At the lower beta’s of the reference plasma, a combination of 50 MW of NB, 30 MW of LH, 20 MW of ICRF, 20 MW of EC, and bootstrap current, are found to provide 100% of the plasma current with a stable current profile. Impacts on the FNSF of plasma physics are discussed and R&D challenges are recorded.},
doi = {10.1016/j.fusengdes.2017.06.003},
journal = {Fusion Engineering and Design},
number = PB,
volume = 135,
place = {United States},
year = {2017},
month = {6}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 4 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share: