| PHYSICS OF GASES, PLASMAS, AND ELECTRIC DISCHARGES |
Prev
Next
|
|
|
Comparative study of boron and neon injections on divertor heat fluxes using SOLPS-ITER simulations |
| Lei Peng(彭磊)1, Zhen Sun(孙震)2, Ji-Zhong Sun(孙继忠)1,†, Rajesh Maingi2, Fang Gao(高放)3, Xavier Bonnin4, Hua-Yi Chang(常华溢)1, Wei-Kang Wang(汪炜康)1, and Jin-Yuan Liu(刘金远)1 |
1 Key Laboratory of Materials Modification by Laser, Ion, and Electron Beams (Ministry of Education), Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China;
2 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ 08543, United States of America;
3 School of Computer and Communication Engineering, Dalian Jiaotong University, Dalian 116028, China;
4 ITER Organization, Route de Vinon-sur-Verdon, CS 90 046, 13067 St-Paul-lez-Durance, France |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Based on the EAST equilibrium, the effects of boron (B) and neon (Ne) injected at different locations on the target heat load, and the distributions of B and Ne particles were investigated by transport code SOLPS-ITER. It was found that the B injection was more sensitive to the injection location for heat flux control than impurity Ne. The high electron and ion densities near the inner target in the discharge with impurity B injected from over $X$-point ($R_{1}$) led to plasma detachment only at the inner target, and the localized B ions in the cases with injection from outer target location ($R_{2}$) and upstream location ($R_{3}$) led to far-SOL detachment at the outer target, but not at the inner target. In contrast, for Ne, the spatial distributions of Ne ions and electrons were found to be similar in all the cases at the three injection locations, and the detached plasma was achieved at the inner target and the electron temperature was reduced at the outer target. For locations $R_{2}$ and $R_{3}$, impurity B showed a more pronounced effect on the heat flux at the far-SOL of the outer target. Further analysis indicated that Ne atoms came mainly from the recycling sources, whereas B atoms came mainly from injection, and that their distinct atomic distributions resulted from the difference in the ionization threshold and ionization mean free path. In addition, the radiation proportion of B in the divertor region was larger than that of Ne when the total radiation power was similar, which suggests that B has less influence on the core region.
|
Received: 29 June 2024
Revised: 13 August 2024
Accepted manuscript online: 20 August 2024
|
|
PACS:
|
52.25.Vy
|
(Impurities in plasmas)
|
| |
52.55.Fa
|
(Tokamaks, spherical tokamaks)
|
| |
52.55.Rk
|
(Power exhaust; divertors)
|
| |
52.65.-y
|
(Plasma simulation)
|
|
| Fund: Project supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2019YFE03030004), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 12275040), and the Users with Excellence Program of Hefei Science Center CAS (Grant No. 2020HSC-UE010). This research is also sponsored in part by the U.S. Department of Energy under contract DEAC02-09CH11466. |
Corresponding Authors:
Ji-Zhong Sun
E-mail: jsun@dlut.edu.cn
|
Cite this article:
Lei Peng(彭磊), Zhen Sun(孙震), Ji-Zhong Sun(孙继忠), Rajesh Maingi, Fang Gao(高放), Xavier Bonnin, Hua-Yi Chang(常华溢), Wei-Kang Wang(汪炜康), and Jin-Yuan Liu(刘金远) Comparative study of boron and neon injections on divertor heat fluxes using SOLPS-ITER simulations 2024 Chin. Phys. B 33 115201
|
[1] Xiao W W, Diamond P H, Zou X L, et al. 2012 Nuclear Fusion 52 114027
[2] Lunsford R, Hu J S, Sun Z, et al. 2018 Nuclear Fusion 58 126021
[3] Lang P T, Maingi R, Mansfield D K, et al. 2017 Nuclear Fusion 57 016030
[4] Reimold F, Wischmeier M, Bernert M, et al. 2015 Nuclear Fusion 55 033004
[5] Kallenbach A, Dux R, Fuchs J C, et al. 2010 Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion 52 055002
[6] Nakano T 2015 Journal of Nuclear Materials 463 555
[7] Bernert M, Wischmeier M, Huber A, et al. 2017 Nuclear Materials and Energy 12 111
[8] Pitts R A, Bonnin X, Escourbiac F, et al. 2019 Nuclear Materials and Energy 20 100696
[9] Li L, Zhang D H, Meng X C, et al. 2021 Nuclear Materials and Energy 28 101049
[10] Li K, Lin X, Yang Z, et al. 2023 Nuclear Fusion 63 026025
[11] Lunsford R, Rohde V, Bortolon A, et al. 2019 Nuclear Fusion 59 126034
[12] Kawate T, Ashikawa N, Goto M, et al. 2022 Nuclear Fusion 62 126052
[13] Gilson E P, Lee H H, Bortolon A, et al. 2021 Nuclear Materials and Energy 28 101043
[14] Bodner G, Gallo A, Diallo A, et al. 2022 Nuclear Fusion 62 086020
[15] Effenberg F, Bortolon A, Casali L, et al. 2022 Nuclear Fusion 62 106015
[16] Sun Z, Diallo A, Maingi R, et al. 2021 Nuclear Fusion 61 014002
[17] Maingi R, Hu J S, Sun Z, et al. 2020 Journal of Fusion Energy 39 429
[18] Stangeby P C 2000 The Plasma Boundary of Magnetic Fusion Devices (Boca Raton)
[19] Schneider R, Bonnin X, Borrass K, et al. 2006 Contributions to Plasma Physics 46 3
[20] Chankin A V, Coster D P, Dux R, et al. 2006 Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion 48 839
[21] Bonnin X, Dekeyser W, Pitts R, et al. 2016 Plasma and Fusion Research 11 1403102
[22] Xu W, Hu J S, Sun Z, et al. 2021 Physica Scripta 96 124034
[23] Wang R, Yang Z, Li K, et al. 2022 Physics of Plasmas 29 112502
[24] Sun Z, Maingi R, Hu J S, et al. 2019 Nuclear Materials and Energy 19 124
[25] Jia G, Wang H, Xu G, et al. 2022 Nuclear Fusion 62 056005
[26] Ma X, Wang H Q, Guo H Y, et al. 2021 Nuclear Fusion 61 054002
[27] Xu J C, Wang L, Wang H Q, et al. 2021 Nuclear Fusion 61 096004
[28] Paradela Pérez I, Groth M, Wischmeier M, et al. 2019 Nuclear Materials and Energy 19 531
[29] Park J S, Bonnin X, Pitts R, et al. 2024 Nuclear Fusion 64 036002
[30] Tokar M Z 2008 Fusion Science and Technology 53 243
[31] OPEN-ADAS, https://open.adas.ac.uk/
[32] Xu G S, Yuan Q P, Li K D, et al. 2020 Nuclear Fusion 60 086001
[33] Groth M, Andrew P, Fundamenski W, et al. 2002 Nuclear Fusion 42 591
[34] Chrobak C P, Stangeby P C, Hollmann E, et al. 2018 Nuclear Fusion 58 106019 |
| No Suggested Reading articles found! |
|
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
Altmetric
|
|
blogs
Facebook pages
Wikipedia page
Google+ users
|
Online attention
Altmetric calculates a score based on the online attention an article receives. Each coloured thread in the circle represents a different type of online attention. The number in the centre is the Altmetric score. Social media and mainstream news media are the main sources that calculate the score. Reference managers such as Mendeley are also tracked but do not contribute to the score. Older articles often score higher because they have had more time to get noticed. To account for this, Altmetric has included the context data for other articles of a similar age.
View more on Altmetrics
|
|
|
