Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-6grmk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-05T15:18:00.345Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Radiative and continuum dampings of reversed shear Alfvén eigenmodes and perturbative analysis limitations for tokamaks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2024

N. N. Gorelenkov*
Affiliation:
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, P.O. Box 451, Princeton, NJ 08543-0451, USA
L. Yu
Affiliation:
School of Physics, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237, PR China
Y. Wang
Affiliation:
Institute for Fusion Theory and Simulation and School of Physics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, PR China
G.-Y. Fu
Affiliation:
Institute for Fusion Theory and Simulation and School of Physics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, PR China
*
†Email address for correspondence: ngorelen@pppl.gov

Abstract

A careful theoretical analysis of the excitation of Alfvén eigenmodes (AEs), such as TAE (toroidicity-induced AE) and RSAE (reversed shear AE), by superalfvenic energetic particles is required for reliable predictions of energetic ion relaxation in present day fusion experiments. This includes the evaluation of different AE damping mechanisms including radiative and continuum dampings which are the focus of this study. A recent comprehensive benchmark of different eigenmode solvers including gyrokinetic, gyrofluid and hybrid magenetohydrodynamics (MHD) has shown that employed models may have deficiencies when addressing some of them (Taimourzadeh et al., Nucl. Fusion, vol. 59, 2019, 066006). In this paper, we are studying the radiative and continuum dampings of RSAEs in details which were missing in hybrid NOVA/NOVA-C calculations to prepare a NOVA-C package with a substantial upgrade. Both dampings require the finite Larmor radius (FLR) corrections to AE mode structures to be accounted for. Accurately calculating different damping rates and understanding their parametric dependencies, we resolve the limitation coming out of the perturbative approach. In particular, here, the radiative damping is included perturbatively, whereas the continuum damping is computed non-perturbatively. Our comparison leads to the conclusion that the non-perturbative treatment of the unstable RSAE modes is needed to find the agreement with the gyrokinetic calculations. We expect that the RSAE mode structure modification plays a dominant role in determining the RSAE stability.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Linear stability analysis of $n=3\unicode{x2013}6$ RSAE eigenmodes observed in DIII-D shot $\#159243$ at 805 m (adopted from Taimourzadeh et al.2019). (a) Real frequencies of RSAE and (b) computed net growth rates, $\gamma _L$, by eight codes. The plot markers are diamond, star and circle for the gyrokinetic, kinetic-MHD hybrid and perturbative eigenvalue codes, respectively.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Pressure profiles of beam ions (blue), electrons (red) and thermal ions (green) of $\#159243$ DIII-D shot. The black line is the safety factor profile with the right vertical axis.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Alfvén continuum spectrum for toroidal mode number $n=4$ as found by KAEC and expressed in kHz.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Mode structure of $n=3$ RSAEs found by the KAEC code in DIII-D shot $\#159243$ under (a) the ideal MHD limit and (b) the limit of small FLRs, $\rho _i/a=5\times 10^{-4}$.

Figure 4

Figure 5. The same as in figure 4 but for $n=4$.

Figure 5

Figure 6. The same as in figure 4 but for $n=5$.

Figure 6

Figure 7. The same as in figure 4 but for $n=6$.

Figure 7

Figure 8. Mode structures of $n=4$ RSAEs found by the KAEC code in DIII-D shot $\#159243$ when ion FLR effects are included non-perturbatively: (a) $\rho _i/a=10^{-3}$, $\gamma /\omega = -0.0191$, $\omega /\omega _A= 0.14986$; (b) $\rho _i/a=2.5\times 10^{-3}$, $\gamma /\omega = -0.0168$, $\omega /\omega _A= 0.15029$; (c) $\rho _i/a=7\times 10^{-3}$, $\gamma /\omega = -0.0144$, $\omega /\omega _A= 0.15343$. Here, $\omega _A=2{\rm \pi} (478\,({\rm kHz}))$.

Figure 8

Figure 9. Mode structure of $n=4$ RSAE (shown here) is similar to that in figure 5 except that it is obtained for the kinetic term of the eigenmode equation (3.1) set to a smaller value: $\delta =2.5\times 10^{-8}$.

Figure 9

Figure 10. Real frequencies and the continuum damping rate of RSAEs with different toroidal mode numbers calculated using the resistive MHD formulations and the artificial resistivity parameter set to $\delta =2.5\times 10^{-8}$.

Figure 10

Figure 11. RSAE growth/damping rates with and without the radiative and continuum dampings as denoted. Dash-dotted blue line corresponds to the non-perturbative continuum damping of the modes shown in figures 4–7(b) as functions of their toroidal mode numbers $n$.