2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.fusengdes.2017.09.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Extended scintillator-based fast-ion loss diagnostic in the EAST

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results show that orbit loss (induced by orbits [11,12] that intersect with the wall or divertor within the poloidal orbit) rate of co-I p beam injectors linearly increases with the increase of beam energy but weakly depends on line averaged density, whilst fast ion orbit loss rate of counter-I p beam injectors is correlated with beam energy, line averaged density and plasma current. A comparison of the orbit loss rate of co-tangent and counter-tangent beam injector is shown in figure 4, where counter-tangent beam injector has a higher orbit loss rate than co-perp beam injector [6], which is consistent with fast ion loss diagnostic [13]. Table 3 shows scalings of orbit loss rate for four beams injectors through the regression analysis.…”
supporting
confidence: 57%
“…The results show that orbit loss (induced by orbits [11,12] that intersect with the wall or divertor within the poloidal orbit) rate of co-I p beam injectors linearly increases with the increase of beam energy but weakly depends on line averaged density, whilst fast ion orbit loss rate of counter-I p beam injectors is correlated with beam energy, line averaged density and plasma current. A comparison of the orbit loss rate of co-tangent and counter-tangent beam injector is shown in figure 4, where counter-tangent beam injector has a higher orbit loss rate than co-perp beam injector [6], which is consistent with fast ion loss diagnostic [13]. Table 3 shows scalings of orbit loss rate for four beams injectors through the regression analysis.…”
supporting
confidence: 57%
“…In previous fast ion loss experiments on EAST, the fastion loss detector (FILD) system observed a stronger loss signal from the case with the counter-clockwise toroidal magnetic field in contrast to the case with the clockwise one [21]. Note that the FILD system on EAST is located at the outer wall above the mid-plane.…”
Section: Influence Of the Toroidal Magnetic Field And The Beam Energy...mentioning
confidence: 88%
“…As a result of close joint works, as shown in Fig. 3, the FILD has been successfully installed on four devices of LHD [63], KSTAR [64], HL-2A [65] and EAST [66,67]. Based on the common detector system, effects of RMP fields and MHD instabilities on EP behavior are studied in detail in LHD, KSTAR and HL-2A [68][69][70].…”
Section: Fild and Neutron Detector Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%