The JET hybrid scenario in Deuterium, Tritium and Deuterium-Tritium

Hobirk, J.; Challis, C.D.; Kappatou, A.; Lerche, E.; Keeling, D.; King, D.; Aleiferis, S.; Alessi, E.; Angioni, C.; Auriemma, F.; Baruzzo, M.; Belonohy, É.; Bernardo, J.; Boboc, A.; Carvalho, I.S.; Carvalho, P.; Casson, F.J.; Chomiczewska, A.; Citrin, J.; Coffey, I.H.; Conway, N.J.; Douai, D.; Delabie, E.; Eriksson, B.; Eriksson, J.; Ficker, O.; Field, A.R.; Fontana, M.; Fontdecaba, J.M.; Frassinetti, L.; Frigione, D.; Gallart, D.; Garcia, J.; Gelfusa, M.; Ghani, Z.; Giacomelli, L.; Giovannozzi, E.; Giroud, C.; Goniche, M.; Gromelski, W.; Hacquin, S.; Ham, C.; Hawkes, N.C.; Henriques, R.B.; Hillesheim, J.C.; Ho, A.; Horvath, L.; Ivanova-Stanik, I.; Jacquet, P.; Jaulmes, F.; Joffrin, E.; Kim, H.T.; Kiptily, V.; Kirov, K.; Kos, D.; Kowalska-Strzeciwilk, E.; Kumpulainen, H.; Lawson, K.; Lennholm, M.; Litaudon, X.; Litherland-Smith, E.; Lomas, P.J.; de la Luna, E.; Maggi, C.F.; Mailloux, J.; Mantsinen, M.J.; Maslov, M.; Matthews, G.; McClements, K.G.; Meigs, A.G.; Menmuir, S.; Milocco, A.; Miron, I.G.; Moradi, S.; Morales, R.B.; Nowak, S.; Orsitto, F.; Patel, A.; Piron, L.; Prince, C.; Pucella, G.; Peluso, E.; Perez von Thun, C.; Rachlew, E.; Reux, C.; Rimini, F.; Saarelma, S.; Schneider, P. A; Scully, S.; Sertoli, M.; Sharapov, S.; Shaw, A.; Silburn, S.; Sips, A.; Siren, P.; Sozzi, C.; Solano, E.R.; Stancar, Z.; Stankunas, G.; Stuart, C.; Sun, H.J.; Szepesi, G.; Valcarcel, D.; Valisa, M.; Verdoolaege, G.; Viola, B.; Wendler, N.; Zerbini, M.; ,

doi:10.1088/1741-4326/acde8d

Cited by 27 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The high fusion performance branch of DTE2 experiments has confirmed these observations, albeit with the combined NBI and RF power reaching maximum values of around 35 MW [25,28,30]. In figure 3 we display how the onesecond-averaged TRANSP computed power depends on the total external heating power P heat , launched by the heating systems, for the DTE2 modelling database.…”

Section: D-t Performance Driversmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…The baseline discharges suffered from detrimental effects of uncontrolled n e increase on performance, but indicate a thermal fusion dominated discharge pathway, provided D-T plasma control issues can be overcome. Note that the conclusions we draw about the approach of both baseline and hybrid discharges' conditions to a thermal fusion dominated performance are relevant for JET's heating configuration and transport conditions, yet remain relevant for informing extrapolations to ITER operations in D-T [25,28].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Baseline: 50-50 D-T, ELMy (not type I) H-mode scenario generally performed at high toroidal current I p ⩾ 3.0 MA, toroidal field B t ∼ 3.3 T, safety factor of q 0 < 1 and q 95 ∼ 3, beta values of β P < 1 and β N ∼ 1.8-2.0, high electron density (core line-averaged density ≳7.5 • 10 19 m −3 ), mixed 50-50 D-T NBI and H RF minority heating, D pellet ELMpacing, aimed at maximizing thermal fusion performance [20,24,25]; • Hybrid: 50-50 D-T, Type I ELMy H-mode scenario generally performed at lower current than baseline with 2.2 ⩽ I p ⩽ 2.5 MA, toroidal field B t ∼ 3.45 T, shaped broad qprofile at q 0 ⩾ 1 and 4.5 ⩽ q 95 ⩽ 5.0, beta values of β P ⩾ 1 and β N ∼ 2.0-2.3, modest electron density (core lineaveraged density within 4.0 × 10 19 ≲ ne ≲ 5.5 × 10 19 m −3 ), mixed 50-50 D-T NBI and H RF minority heating, aimed at improved stability and reduced core transport for better confinement [26][27][28]; • T-rich: hybrid-like H-mode scenario optimized to maximize non-thermal fusion with a D-T fuel mix of ∼15%-85%, single species D NBI and fundamental D RF heating with T gas injection-achieved fusion energy record in DTE2 [29,30]; • Energetic particle afterglow (EP): 50-50 D-T H-mode discharges with mixed D-T NBI-only heating with two reference plasmas-ITB lowest density discharges for high transient fusion power, exploiting q 2 scaling in TAE stability, performed at toroidal current I p = 2.9 MA, toroidal field B t = 3.45 T, elevated q-profile with q 0 > 1.5, q 95 = 3.8 and conventional magnetic shear, with β N ∼ 1.3 and T i ≫ 2T e .…”

Section: Transp Databasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Next an analysis of the time evolution of fusion performance for two representative high-power discharges is presented, the baseline #99863 and hybrid #99950. These [25,28]. Panels (a) and (b) display a comparison between the time-evolved total neutron rate measurement (red) and the TRANSP calculation (black), which is further split into the thermal (orange) and beam-target (blue) components.…”

Section: D-t Performance Driversmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The BT component becomes steady when both the edge electron density and temperature flatten out, equilibrating the effects of beam penetration and slowing-down time on beam density. The high performance is sustained for ∼3 s with good core n e control, after which the T e profiles became hollow due to impurity accumulation, which lead to increased neoclassical tearing mode activity and performance deterioration [28]. Compared to be baseline discharge the (quasi) steady yield was dominated by the BT component, with the TH approximately 25% lower.…”

Section: D-t Performance Driversmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Overview of interpretive modelling of fusion performance in JET DTE2 discharges with TRANSP

Štancar,

Kirov,

Auriemma

et al. 2023

Nucl. Fusion

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the paper we present an overview of interpretive modelling of a database of JET-ILW 2021 D-T discharges using the TRANSP code. The main aim is to assess our capability of computationally reproducing the fusion performance of various D-T plasma scenarios using different external heating and D-T mixtures, and to understand the performance driving mechanisms. We find that interpretive simulations confirm a general power-law relationship between increasing external heating power and fusion output, which is supported by absolutely calibrated neutron yield measurements. A comparison of measured and computed D-T neutron rates shows that the calculations’ discrepancy depends on the absolute neutron yield. The calculations are found to agree well with measurements for higher performing discharges with external heating power above ∼20 M W , while low-neutron shots display an average discrepancy of around +40% compared to measured neutron yields. A similar trend is found for the ratio between thermal and beam-target fusion, where larger discrepancies are seen in shots with dominant beam-driven performance. We compare the observations to studies of JET-ILW D discharges, to find that on average the fusion performance is well modelled over a range of heating power, although an increased unsystematic deviation for lower-performing shots is observed. The ratio between thermal and beam-induced D-T fusion is found to be increasing weakly with growing external heating power, with a maximum value of ≳ 1 achieved in a baseline scenario experiment. An evaluation of the fusion power computational uncertainty shows a strong dependence on the plasma scenario type and fusion drive characteristics, varying between ±25% and 35%. D-T fusion alpha simulations show that the ratio between volume-integrated electron and ion heating from alphas is ≲ 10 for the majority of analysed discharges. Alphas are computed to contribute between ∼15% and 40% to the total electron heating in the core of highest performing D-T discharges. An alternative workflow to TRANSP was employed to model JET D-T plasmas with the highest fusion yield and dominant non-thermal fusion component because of the use of fundamental radio-frequency heating of a large minority in the scenario, which is calculated to have provided ∼10% to the total fusion power.

show abstract

Section: D-t Performance Driversmentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%