Verifying raytracing/Fokker–Planck lower-hybrid current drive predictions with self-consistent full-wave/Fokker–Planck simulations
Raytracing/Fokker–Planck (FP) simulations used to model lower-hybrid current drive (LHCD) often fail to reproduce experimental results, particularly when LHCD is weakly damped. A proposed reason for this discrepancy is the lack of ‘full-wave’ effects, such as diffraction and interference, in raytrac...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of plasma physics 2022-12, Vol.88 (6), Article 905880603 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | |
container_title | Journal of plasma physics |
container_volume | 88 |
creator | Frank, S.J. Lee, J.P. Wright, J.C. Hutchinson, I.H. Bonoli, P.T. |
description | Raytracing/Fokker–Planck (FP) simulations used to model lower-hybrid current drive (LHCD) often fail to reproduce experimental results, particularly when LHCD is weakly damped. A proposed reason for this discrepancy is the lack of ‘full-wave’ effects, such as diffraction and interference, in raytracing simulations and the breakdown of the raytracing approximation. Previous studies of LHCD using non-Maxwellian full-wave/FP simulations have been performed, but these simulations were not self-consistent and enforced power conservation between the FP and full-wave code using a numerical rescaling factor. Here, we have created a fully self-consistent full-wave/FP model for LHCD that is automatically power conserving. This was accomplished by coupling an overhauled version of the non-Maxwellian TORLH full-wave solver and the CQL3D FP code using the Integrated Plasma Simulator. We performed converged full-wave/FP simulations of Alcator C-Mod discharges and compared them with raytracing. We found that excellent agreement in the power deposition profiles from raytracing and TORLH could be obtained, however, TORLH had somewhat lower current drive efficiency and broader power deposition profiles in some cases. This discrepancy appears to be a result of numerical limitations present in the TORLH model and a small amount of diffractional broadening of the TORLH wave spectrum. Our results suggest full-wave simulation of LHCD is likely not necessary as diffraction and interference represented only a small correction that could not account for the differences between simulations and experiment. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0022377822001106 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_2419383</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0022377822001106</cupid><sourcerecordid>2734448348</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-37a0b044a7024ae97f686075335577c858c939e6d94d2b51b6ed553110fc538b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UctKxEAQHETBdfUDvAU9x-15JJMcRXyBoODjGiaTzu642WSdmbjszZM_4B_6JU5cwYMIDd1NVxXV3YQcUjihQOXkHoAxLmXGGAClkG6RERVpHssM5DYZDeN4mO-SPeeeAYADkyPy_oTW1GvTTiOr1t4qHcrJRTefo_18-7hrVKvnUdOt0MazdWlNFeneWmx9VFnzitHSYmW0N13ropXxs8hhU8c6tMb5AVb3TROv1Cv-UXVm0Tfqm7pPdmrVODz4yWPyeHH-cHYV39xeXp-d3sSaC-HDAgpKEEJJYEJhLus0S0EmnCeJlDpLMp3zHNMqFxUrE1qmWCUJD_eodcKzko_J0Ua3c94UThuPehbMtqh9wQTNecYD6HgDWtrupUfni-eut23wVTAZfIiMhxgTukFp2zlnsS6W1iyUXRcUiuEnxZ-fBA7_4ajFcMsp_kr_z_oC7mGRcw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2734448348</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Verifying raytracing/Fokker–Planck lower-hybrid current drive predictions with self-consistent full-wave/Fokker–Planck simulations</title><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Frank, S.J. ; Lee, J.P. ; Wright, J.C. ; Hutchinson, I.H. ; Bonoli, P.T.</creator><creatorcontrib>Frank, S.J. ; Lee, J.P. ; Wright, J.C. ; Hutchinson, I.H. ; Bonoli, P.T. ; Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (United States) ; Univ. of California, Oakland, CA (United States)</creatorcontrib><description>Raytracing/Fokker–Planck (FP) simulations used to model lower-hybrid current drive (LHCD) often fail to reproduce experimental results, particularly when LHCD is weakly damped. A proposed reason for this discrepancy is the lack of ‘full-wave’ effects, such as diffraction and interference, in raytracing simulations and the breakdown of the raytracing approximation. Previous studies of LHCD using non-Maxwellian full-wave/FP simulations have been performed, but these simulations were not self-consistent and enforced power conservation between the FP and full-wave code using a numerical rescaling factor. Here, we have created a fully self-consistent full-wave/FP model for LHCD that is automatically power conserving. This was accomplished by coupling an overhauled version of the non-Maxwellian TORLH full-wave solver and the CQL3D FP code using the Integrated Plasma Simulator. We performed converged full-wave/FP simulations of Alcator C-Mod discharges and compared them with raytracing. We found that excellent agreement in the power deposition profiles from raytracing and TORLH could be obtained, however, TORLH had somewhat lower current drive efficiency and broader power deposition profiles in some cases. This discrepancy appears to be a result of numerical limitations present in the TORLH model and a small amount of diffractional broadening of the TORLH wave spectrum. Our results suggest full-wave simulation of LHCD is likely not necessary as diffraction and interference represented only a small correction that could not account for the differences between simulations and experiment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-3778</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-7807</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0022377822001106</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Deposition ; Electric fields ; Interference ; Magnetic fields ; Mathematical models ; Physics ; Plasma ; Plasma physics ; Ray tracing ; Rescaling ; Simulation ; Velocity ; Wave diffraction ; Wave spectra</subject><ispartof>Journal of plasma physics, 2022-12, Vol.88 (6), Article 905880603</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-37a0b044a7024ae97f686075335577c858c939e6d94d2b51b6ed553110fc538b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-37a0b044a7024ae97f686075335577c858c939e6d94d2b51b6ed553110fc538b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6524-6149 ; 0000-0001-8414-6987 ; 0000-0002-4382-4515 ; 0000-0003-4276-6576 ; 0000000243824515 ; 0000000342766576 ; 0000000165246149 ; 0000000184146987</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022377822001106/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,55603</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/2419383$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Frank, S.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, J.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wright, J.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hutchinson, I.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bonoli, P.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (United States)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Univ. of California, Oakland, CA (United States)</creatorcontrib><title>Verifying raytracing/Fokker–Planck lower-hybrid current drive predictions with self-consistent full-wave/Fokker–Planck simulations</title><title>Journal of plasma physics</title><addtitle>J. Plasma Phys</addtitle><description>Raytracing/Fokker–Planck (FP) simulations used to model lower-hybrid current drive (LHCD) often fail to reproduce experimental results, particularly when LHCD is weakly damped. A proposed reason for this discrepancy is the lack of ‘full-wave’ effects, such as diffraction and interference, in raytracing simulations and the breakdown of the raytracing approximation. Previous studies of LHCD using non-Maxwellian full-wave/FP simulations have been performed, but these simulations were not self-consistent and enforced power conservation between the FP and full-wave code using a numerical rescaling factor. Here, we have created a fully self-consistent full-wave/FP model for LHCD that is automatically power conserving. This was accomplished by coupling an overhauled version of the non-Maxwellian TORLH full-wave solver and the CQL3D FP code using the Integrated Plasma Simulator. We performed converged full-wave/FP simulations of Alcator C-Mod discharges and compared them with raytracing. We found that excellent agreement in the power deposition profiles from raytracing and TORLH could be obtained, however, TORLH had somewhat lower current drive efficiency and broader power deposition profiles in some cases. This discrepancy appears to be a result of numerical limitations present in the TORLH model and a small amount of diffractional broadening of the TORLH wave spectrum. Our results suggest full-wave simulation of LHCD is likely not necessary as diffraction and interference represented only a small correction that could not account for the differences between simulations and experiment.</description><subject>Deposition</subject><subject>Electric fields</subject><subject>Interference</subject><subject>Magnetic fields</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Physics</subject><subject>Plasma</subject><subject>Plasma physics</subject><subject>Ray tracing</subject><subject>Rescaling</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>Velocity</subject><subject>Wave diffraction</subject><subject>Wave spectra</subject><issn>0022-3778</issn><issn>1469-7807</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UctKxEAQHETBdfUDvAU9x-15JJMcRXyBoODjGiaTzu642WSdmbjszZM_4B_6JU5cwYMIDd1NVxXV3YQcUjihQOXkHoAxLmXGGAClkG6RERVpHssM5DYZDeN4mO-SPeeeAYADkyPy_oTW1GvTTiOr1t4qHcrJRTefo_18-7hrVKvnUdOt0MazdWlNFeneWmx9VFnzitHSYmW0N13ropXxs8hhU8c6tMb5AVb3TROv1Cv-UXVm0Tfqm7pPdmrVODz4yWPyeHH-cHYV39xeXp-d3sSaC-HDAgpKEEJJYEJhLus0S0EmnCeJlDpLMp3zHNMqFxUrE1qmWCUJD_eodcKzko_J0Ua3c94UThuPehbMtqh9wQTNecYD6HgDWtrupUfni-eut23wVTAZfIiMhxgTukFp2zlnsS6W1iyUXRcUiuEnxZ-fBA7_4ajFcMsp_kr_z_oC7mGRcw</recordid><startdate>20221201</startdate><enddate>20221201</enddate><creator>Frank, S.J.</creator><creator>Lee, J.P.</creator><creator>Wright, J.C.</creator><creator>Hutchinson, I.H.</creator><creator>Bonoli, P.T.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6524-6149</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8414-6987</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4382-4515</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4276-6576</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000243824515</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000342766576</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000165246149</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000184146987</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221201</creationdate><title>Verifying raytracing/Fokker–Planck lower-hybrid current drive predictions with self-consistent full-wave/Fokker–Planck simulations</title><author>Frank, S.J. ; Lee, J.P. ; Wright, J.C. ; Hutchinson, I.H. ; Bonoli, P.T.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-37a0b044a7024ae97f686075335577c858c939e6d94d2b51b6ed553110fc538b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Deposition</topic><topic>Electric fields</topic><topic>Interference</topic><topic>Magnetic fields</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Physics</topic><topic>Plasma</topic><topic>Plasma physics</topic><topic>Ray tracing</topic><topic>Rescaling</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>Velocity</topic><topic>Wave diffraction</topic><topic>Wave spectra</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Frank, S.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, J.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wright, J.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hutchinson, I.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bonoli, P.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (United States)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Univ. of California, Oakland, CA (United States)</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>Journal of plasma physics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Frank, S.J.</au><au>Lee, J.P.</au><au>Wright, J.C.</au><au>Hutchinson, I.H.</au><au>Bonoli, P.T.</au><aucorp>Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (United States)</aucorp><aucorp>Univ. of California, Oakland, CA (United States)</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Verifying raytracing/Fokker–Planck lower-hybrid current drive predictions with self-consistent full-wave/Fokker–Planck simulations</atitle><jtitle>Journal of plasma physics</jtitle><addtitle>J. Plasma Phys</addtitle><date>2022-12-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>88</volume><issue>6</issue><artnum>905880603</artnum><issn>0022-3778</issn><eissn>1469-7807</eissn><abstract>Raytracing/Fokker–Planck (FP) simulations used to model lower-hybrid current drive (LHCD) often fail to reproduce experimental results, particularly when LHCD is weakly damped. A proposed reason for this discrepancy is the lack of ‘full-wave’ effects, such as diffraction and interference, in raytracing simulations and the breakdown of the raytracing approximation. Previous studies of LHCD using non-Maxwellian full-wave/FP simulations have been performed, but these simulations were not self-consistent and enforced power conservation between the FP and full-wave code using a numerical rescaling factor. Here, we have created a fully self-consistent full-wave/FP model for LHCD that is automatically power conserving. This was accomplished by coupling an overhauled version of the non-Maxwellian TORLH full-wave solver and the CQL3D FP code using the Integrated Plasma Simulator. We performed converged full-wave/FP simulations of Alcator C-Mod discharges and compared them with raytracing. We found that excellent agreement in the power deposition profiles from raytracing and TORLH could be obtained, however, TORLH had somewhat lower current drive efficiency and broader power deposition profiles in some cases. This discrepancy appears to be a result of numerical limitations present in the TORLH model and a small amount of diffractional broadening of the TORLH wave spectrum. Our results suggest full-wave simulation of LHCD is likely not necessary as diffraction and interference represented only a small correction that could not account for the differences between simulations and experiment.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0022377822001106</doi><tpages>23</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6524-6149</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8414-6987</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4382-4515</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4276-6576</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000243824515</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000342766576</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000165246149</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000184146987</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-3778 |
ispartof | Journal of plasma physics, 2022-12, Vol.88 (6), Article 905880603 |
issn | 0022-3778 1469-7807 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_osti_scitechconnect_2419383 |
source | Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
subjects | Deposition Electric fields Interference Magnetic fields Mathematical models Physics Plasma Plasma physics Ray tracing Rescaling Simulation Velocity Wave diffraction Wave spectra |
title | Verifying raytracing/Fokker–Planck lower-hybrid current drive predictions with self-consistent full-wave/Fokker–Planck simulations |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T16%3A56%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Verifying%20raytracing/Fokker%E2%80%93Planck%20lower-hybrid%20current%20drive%20predictions%20with%20self-consistent%20full-wave/Fokker%E2%80%93Planck%20simulations&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20plasma%20physics&rft.au=Frank,%20S.J.&rft.aucorp=Massachusetts%20Inst.%20of%20Technology%20(MIT),%20Cambridge,%20MA%20(United%20States)&rft.date=2022-12-01&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=6&rft.artnum=905880603&rft.issn=0022-3778&rft.eissn=1469-7807&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0022377822001106&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_osti_%3E2734448348%3C/proquest_osti_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2734448348&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0022377822001106&rfr_iscdi=true |