Progress in the area of MHD stability and disruptions, since the publication of the 1999 ITER Physics Basis document Nucl. Fusion 39 2137-2664, is reviewed. Recent theoretical and experimental research has made important advances in both understanding and control of MHD stability in tokamak plasmas. Sawteeth are anticipated in the ITER baseline ELMy H-mode scenario, but the tools exist to avoid or control them through localized current drive or fast ion generation. Active control of other MHD instabilities will most likely be also required in ITER. Extrapolation from existing experiments indicates that stabilization of neoclassical tearing modes by highly localized feedback-controlled current drive should be possible in ITER. Resistive wall modes are a key issue for S128 Chapter 3: MHD stability, operational limits and disruptions advanced scenarios, but again, existing experiments indicate that these modes can be stabilized by a combination of plasma rotation and direct feedback control with non-axisymmetric coils. Reduction of error fields is a requirement for avoiding non-rotating magnetic island formation and for maintaining plasma rotation to help stabilize resistive wall modes. Recent experiments have shown the feasibility of reducing error fields to an acceptable level by means of non-axisymmetric coils, possibly controlled by feedback. The MHD stability limits associated with advanced scenarios are becoming well understood theoretically, and can be extended by tailoring of the pressure and current density profiles as well as by other techniques mentioned here. There have been significant advances also in the control of disruptions, most notably by injection of massive quantities of gas, leading to reduced halo current fractions and a larger fraction of the total thermal and magnetic energy dissipated by radiation. These advances in disruption control are supported by the development of means to predict impending disruption, most notably using neural networks. In addition to these advances in means to control or ameliorate the consequences of MHD instabilities, there has been significant progress in improving physics understanding and modelling. This progress has been in areas including the mechanisms governing NTM growth and seeding, in understanding the damping controlling RWM stability and in modelling RWM feedback schemes. For disruptions there has been continued progress on the instability mechanisms that underlie various classes of disruption, on the detailed modelling of halo currents and forces and in refining predictions of quench rates and disruption power loads. Overall the studies reviewed in this chapter demonstrate that MHD instabilities can be controlled, avoided or ameliorated to the extent that they should not compromise ITER operation, though they will necessarily impose a range of constraints.

Significant progress has been made in the area of advanced modes of operation that are candidates for achieving steady state conditions in a fusion reactor. The corresponding parameters, domain of operation, scenarios and integration issues of advanced scenarios are discussed in this chapter. A review of the presently developed scenarios, including discussions on operational space, is given. Significant progress has been made in the domain of heating and current drive in recent years, especially in the domain of off-axis current drive, which is essential for the achievement of the required current profile. The actuators for heating and current drive that are necessary to produce and control the advanced tokamak discharges are discussed, including modelling and predictions for ITER. The specific control issues for steady state operation are discussed, including the already existing experimental results as well as the various strategies and needs (qψ profile control and temperature gradients). Achievable parameters for the ITER steady state and hybrid scenarios with foreseen heating and current drive systems are discussed using modelling including actuators, allowing an assessment of achievable current profiles. Finally, a summary is given in the last section including outstanding issues and recommendations for further research and development.

Neoclassical tearing modes (NTMs) will be the principal limit on performance in ITER in the standard scenario, which has beta well below the ideal kink limit. Measurements of island size from ASDEX Upgrade, DIII-D and JET in beta rampdown experiments are used to determine the marginal size for m/n = 3/2 NTM removal. This is compared with data from ASDEX Upgrade, DIII-D and JT-60U with removal of the 3/2 NTM by electron cyclotron current drive (ECCD) at near constant beta. The empirical marginal island size is consistent in both sets of removal experiments and is found to be about twice the ion banana width. A common methodology is developed for fitting the saturated m/n = 3/2 island before (or without) ECCD in all four experimental devices, ASDEX Upgrade, DIII-D, JET and JT-60U. To this is added (and model tested to experiments) the effect of un-modulated co-ECCD on the island width due to replacing the missing bootstrap current and making the tearing stability parameter Δ′ more negative. The common model is then used to evaluate the ITER ECCD system, with or without modulation, for both the m/n = 3/2 mode, which is benchmarked here, as well as the m/n = 2/1 NTM. The ITER ECCD top launch system with 20 MW of power is found to be effective in greatly reducing the size of the islands. An m/n = 2/1 mode locking model is used to show that the rotation in ITER should be sufficient for the island reduction by ECCD to avoid locking that causes loss of H-mode and disruption.

IAEA-CN-116/EX/2-1 _______________________________________________________________________________________ This is a preprint of a paper intended for presentation at a scientific meeting. Because of the provisional nature of its content and since changes of substance or detail may have to be made before publication, the preprint is made available on the understanding that it will not be cited in the literature or in any way be reproduced in its present form. The views expressed and the statements made remain the responsibility of the named author(s); the views do not necessarily reflect those of the government of the designating Member State(s) or of the designating organization(s). In particular, neither the IAEA nor any other organization or body sponsoring this meeting can be held responsible for any material reproduced in this preprint.