Multi-device analysis of energy loss duration and pellet penetration with implications for shattered pellet injection in ITER
A robust disruption mitigation system (DMS) requires accurate characterization of key disruption timescales, one of the most notable being the thermal quench (TQ). Recent modeling of shattered pellet injection (SPI) into ITER plasmas, using JOREK and INDEX, suggests long TQ durations (6–10 ms) and s...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
IOP Publishing
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Nuclear Fusion |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/add170 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850144379900002304 |
|---|---|
| author | G. Bodner N. Eidietis Z. Chen P. Heinrich J. Herfindal S. Jachmich G. Papp J. Kim M. Lehnen U. Sheikh I. Coffey O. Ficker S. Gerasimov V. Kachkanov C. Reux S. Silburn H. Sun the ASDEX Upgrade Team JET Contributors the EUROfusion Tokamak Exploitation Team |
| author_facet | G. Bodner N. Eidietis Z. Chen P. Heinrich J. Herfindal S. Jachmich G. Papp J. Kim M. Lehnen U. Sheikh I. Coffey O. Ficker S. Gerasimov V. Kachkanov C. Reux S. Silburn H. Sun the ASDEX Upgrade Team JET Contributors the EUROfusion Tokamak Exploitation Team |
| author_sort | G. Bodner |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | A robust disruption mitigation system (DMS) requires accurate characterization of key disruption timescales, one of the most notable being the thermal quench (TQ). Recent modeling of shattered pellet injection (SPI) into ITER plasmas, using JOREK and INDEX, suggests long TQ durations (6–10 ms) and slow cold front propagation due to the large plasma size. If validated, these predictions would have an impact on the desired pellet parameters and mitigation strategies for the ITER DMS. To resolve these questions, a database of SPI experiments from several small-to-large sized devices (J-TEXT, KSTAR, AUG, DIII-D, and JET) has been compiled under the auspices of the International Tokamak Physics Activity MHD, disruptions, and control topical group. Analysis of the energy loss duration (proxy for the TQ duration) with machine size is presented for both mixed neon/deuterium (Ne/D) SPI and pure deuterium (D) SPI. Several metrics for the energy loss onset (e.g. soft x-ray signal drop, ${I_{\text{p}}}$ dip, and radiation flash) were considered as the conventional metric, electron cyclotron emission, is often cut-off during SPI. Several scalings with different onset metrics showed an increase in energy loss duration with machine size. The energy loss duration was additionally shown to be a function of the ratio between the number of SPI neon atoms injected and the stored energy. Analysis of the pellet shard position relative to the cold front found that in larger devices, pellets are typically found inboard of the ${{q = 2}}$ surface at the energy loss onset. Lastly, the delay between the pellet shards hitting the ${{q = 2}}$ surface and the energy loss onset was additionally found to increase with machine size. This suggests that the pellet shards in large devices will penetrate faster and further than the cooling front. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-a5762c8df0794f06a167ee446c79acc4 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 0029-5515 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | IOP Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Nuclear Fusion |
| spelling | doaj-art-a5762c8df0794f06a167ee446c79acc42025-08-20T02:28:23ZengIOP PublishingNuclear Fusion0029-55152025-01-0165606601010.1088/1741-4326/add170Multi-device analysis of energy loss duration and pellet penetration with implications for shattered pellet injection in ITERG. Bodner0https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2497-9172N. Eidietis1https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0167-5053Z. Chen2P. Heinrich3https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1823-5257J. Herfindal4https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2846-597XS. Jachmich5G. Papp6https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0694-5446J. Kim7M. Lehnen8https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6043-8803U. Sheikh9https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6207-2489I. Coffey10O. Ficker11https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6418-9517S. Gerasimov12https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3793-7211V. Kachkanov13C. Reux14https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5327-4326S. Silburn15https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3111-5113H. Sun16https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0880-0013the ASDEX Upgrade TeamJET Contributorsthe EUROfusion Tokamak Exploitation TeamGeneral Atomics , San Diego, CA, United States of AmericaGeneral Atomics , San Diego, CA, United States of AmericaHuwang University of Science and Technology , Wuhan, ChinaMax Planck Institute for Plasma Physics , Garching, GermanyOak Ridge National Laboratory , Oak Ridge, TN, United States of AmericaITER Organization , St. Paul-lez-Durance, FranceMax Planck Institute for Plasma Physics , Garching, GermanyNational Fusion Research Institute , Daejeon, Korea, Republic OfITER Organization , St. Paul-lez-Durance, FranceÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne , Swiss Plasma Center, Lausanne, SwitzerlandUnited Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority , Culham Campus, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 3DB, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern IrelandInstitute of Plasma Physics of the Czech Academy of Sciences , Prague, Czech RepublicUnited Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority , Culham Campus, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 3DB, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern IrelandUnited Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority , Culham Campus, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 3DB, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern IrelandCEA-IRFM , St. Paul-lez-Durance, FranceUnited Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority , Culham Campus, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 3DB, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern IrelandUnited Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority , Culham Campus, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 3DB, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern IrelandA robust disruption mitigation system (DMS) requires accurate characterization of key disruption timescales, one of the most notable being the thermal quench (TQ). Recent modeling of shattered pellet injection (SPI) into ITER plasmas, using JOREK and INDEX, suggests long TQ durations (6–10 ms) and slow cold front propagation due to the large plasma size. If validated, these predictions would have an impact on the desired pellet parameters and mitigation strategies for the ITER DMS. To resolve these questions, a database of SPI experiments from several small-to-large sized devices (J-TEXT, KSTAR, AUG, DIII-D, and JET) has been compiled under the auspices of the International Tokamak Physics Activity MHD, disruptions, and control topical group. Analysis of the energy loss duration (proxy for the TQ duration) with machine size is presented for both mixed neon/deuterium (Ne/D) SPI and pure deuterium (D) SPI. Several metrics for the energy loss onset (e.g. soft x-ray signal drop, ${I_{\text{p}}}$ dip, and radiation flash) were considered as the conventional metric, electron cyclotron emission, is often cut-off during SPI. Several scalings with different onset metrics showed an increase in energy loss duration with machine size. The energy loss duration was additionally shown to be a function of the ratio between the number of SPI neon atoms injected and the stored energy. Analysis of the pellet shard position relative to the cold front found that in larger devices, pellets are typically found inboard of the ${{q = 2}}$ surface at the energy loss onset. Lastly, the delay between the pellet shards hitting the ${{q = 2}}$ surface and the energy loss onset was additionally found to increase with machine size. This suggests that the pellet shards in large devices will penetrate faster and further than the cooling front.https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/add170disruption mitigationshattered pellet injectionthermal quenchdisruptionITER |
| spellingShingle | G. Bodner N. Eidietis Z. Chen P. Heinrich J. Herfindal S. Jachmich G. Papp J. Kim M. Lehnen U. Sheikh I. Coffey O. Ficker S. Gerasimov V. Kachkanov C. Reux S. Silburn H. Sun the ASDEX Upgrade Team JET Contributors the EUROfusion Tokamak Exploitation Team Multi-device analysis of energy loss duration and pellet penetration with implications for shattered pellet injection in ITER Nuclear Fusion disruption mitigation shattered pellet injection thermal quench disruption ITER |
| title | Multi-device analysis of energy loss duration and pellet penetration with implications for shattered pellet injection in ITER |
| title_full | Multi-device analysis of energy loss duration and pellet penetration with implications for shattered pellet injection in ITER |
| title_fullStr | Multi-device analysis of energy loss duration and pellet penetration with implications for shattered pellet injection in ITER |
| title_full_unstemmed | Multi-device analysis of energy loss duration and pellet penetration with implications for shattered pellet injection in ITER |
| title_short | Multi-device analysis of energy loss duration and pellet penetration with implications for shattered pellet injection in ITER |
| title_sort | multi device analysis of energy loss duration and pellet penetration with implications for shattered pellet injection in iter |
| topic | disruption mitigation shattered pellet injection thermal quench disruption ITER |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/add170 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT gbodner multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT neidietis multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT zchen multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT pheinrich multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT jherfindal multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT sjachmich multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT gpapp multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT jkim multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT mlehnen multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT usheikh multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT icoffey multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT oficker multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT sgerasimov multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT vkachkanov multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT creux multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT ssilburn multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT hsun multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT theasdexupgradeteam multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT jetcontributors multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter AT theeurofusiontokamakexploitationteam multideviceanalysisofenergylossdurationandpelletpenetrationwithimplicationsforshatteredpelletinjectioniniter |