ITER will operate at low pedestal collisionality (?*eeped) and high separatrix density (n esep). The ITER pedestal collisionality is supposed to be sufficiently low (?*eeped<1) that the pedestal will be limited by the peeling instabilities, rather than ballooning instabilities. Most of the present days machines, in particular in Europe, tend to operate at higher pedestal collisionality, with the ELMs typically triggered by the balloning modes. While pedestal physics has been well studied at the ballooning boundary, so far information on the pedestal behaviour at the peeling boundary has been described mainly from DIII-D [1]. The aim of this work is to investigate the pedestal behaviour at the peeling boundary in TCV, with particular emphasis to the pedestal structure, pedestal stability and their links with pedestal density and separatrix density. The use of both neutral beam heating and ECRH heating in TCV at Ip=150kA, Bt=1.4T has allowed to reach a low collisionality regime characterized by ?*eeped?0.1-0.9, both at low and at high triangularity. Figure 1 shows the pedestal electron pressure (peped) and density (neped) for the low ?*eeped / high-? plasma #71472 (red square). The blue data show the corresponding pedestal pressure predicted with the Europed code [2] and the corresponding most unstable mode. The experimental pedestal is close to the peeling boundary, as shown by the fact that the most unstable mode has a rather low toroidal number (n=7). The work will investigate the change of the pedestal structure and of the pedestal stability with increasing n eped and with increasing n esep. The work will also highlight the difference at the peeling boundary between high and low triangularity. The investigation, in particular the role of n esep, is particularly useful to test the pedestal predictions in ITER-relevant regimes.
Pedestal structure and stability at low collisionality in TCV
Frassinetti L.; Labit B.; Dunne M.; Merle A.; Nystrom H.; Saarlema S.; Vianello N.; TCV Team
Related products
-
46th European Physical Society Conference on Plasma Physics (EPS 2019), pp. 1 - 4 , Milan, Italy , 8-12 July 2019 Year: 2019
MHD Dynamics and Error Fields in the RFX-mod2 Reversed field Pinch
Bettini P.; Cavazzana R.; Marchiori G.; Marrelli L.; Spizzo G.; Voltolina D.; Zanca P.
-
47th EPS Conference on Plasma Physics, EPS 2021, pp. 593 - 596 , Virtual Conference , 21-25 June 2021 Year: 2021
Multicode turbulence simulations of diverted TCV plasmas and detailed validation against the experiment
Oliveira D.S.; Body T.; Galassi D.; Theiler C.; Laribi E.; Tamain P.; Stegmeir A.; Ricci P.;
Zholobenko W.; Giacomin M.; Bufferand H.; Boedo J.A.; Ciarolo G.; Colandre C.; Oliveira H.; Fourestey G.; Gorno S.; Imbeaux F.; Jenko F.; Naulin V.; Offeddu N.; Reimerdes H.; Serre E.; Tsui C.K.; Varini N.; Vianello N.; Wiesenberger M.; Wüthrich C.; the TCV Team -
46th European Physical Society Conference on Plasma Physics (EPS 2019), pp. 1 - 4 , Milan, Italy , 8-12 July 2019 Year: 2019
A real case of complex network controllability: the NIO1 ion beam source
Ferron N.; Antoni V.; Agostinetti P.; Barbisan M.; Cavenago M.; Chitarin G.; Delogu R.; Pimazzoni A.; Poggi C.; Sartori E.; Serianni G.; Suweis S.; Ugoletti M.; Veltri P.
-
46th European Physical Society Conference on Plasma Physics (EPS 2019), pp. 1 - 4 , Milan, Italy , 8-12 July 2019 Year: 2019
Tomographic reconstruction of the visible emission of NIO1 negative ion beam
Ugoletti M.; Agostini M.; Brombin M.; Pasqualotto R.; Serianni G.
English
Italiano