Heat pulse propagation measurements and experiments with equal electron- and ion-scale turbulence drive on the optimized stellarator Wendelstein 7-X
ORAL
Abstract
The advanced stellarator Wendelstein 7-X (W7-X) [1] is optimized to have reduced neoclassical transport in comparison to a classical stellarator [2], and the electron heat transport in W7-X has been measured to be significantly higher than the neoclassical level during its first high-performance operation phase with an inertially cooled island divertor [3-4]. In experiments with significant electron-scale turbulence drive, where electron-ion temperature ratios are large, the experimental electron heat transport measured in the core of W7-X is comparable to that predicted from electron temperature gradient mode driven turbulence [5]. In this contribution, experiments with comparable ion- and electron-scale turbulence drives will be presented, and the electron heat transport measured through heat pulse propagation experiments will be compared to results from nonlinear gyrokinetic calculations. In these experiments, the electron temperature gradient was controlled by varying the power deposition of heating applied at 30% and 50% of the plasma minor radius, similar to previous tokamak experiments [6-7]. In W7-X, the electron heat flux scales linearly with the temperature gradient where the ion- and electron- temperatures are similar, and the stiffness in the electron heat flux increases where the two temperatures diverge. These findings are consistent with predictions that ion-scale turbulence is dominant in W7-X when the drive for ion- and electron-scale turbulence is similar while electron-scale turbulence can be significant in W7-X otherwise [8].
*This work has been carried out within the framework of the EUROfusion Consortium, funded by the European Union via the Euratom Research and Training Programme (Grant Agreement No 101052200 — EUROfusion). Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Commission. Neither the European Union nor the European Commission can be held responsible for them.
–
Publication:[1] T. Klinger et al., Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 59 014018 (2017). [2] J. Nührenberg and R. Zille, Phys. Lett. A 129 113 (1988). [3] N. Pablant et al. Phys. Plasmas 25, 022508 (2018). [4] A. Dinklage et al. Nature Physics 14, 855-860 (2018). [5] G.M. Weir et al., Nucl. Fusion 61 056001 (2021). [6] J.C. Deboo et al. Phys. Plasmas 19, 082518 (2012) [7] F. Ryter et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 085001 (2005). [8] G.G. Plunk et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 035002 (2019).
Presenters
Gavin M Weir
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Authors
Gavin M Weir
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Pavlos Xanthopoulos
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
J A Alcusón
University of Córdoba
Universidad de Córdoba
Golo Fuchert
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Olaf Grulke
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Matthias Hirsch
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics, Greifswald, Germany
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Andreas Langenberg
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik
Samuel A Lazerson
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik
Max-Planck-Institut fur Plasmaphysik
Sara V Mendes
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Novimir A Pablant
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
Ekkehard Pasch
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Josefine H Proll
Eindhoven Unviersity of Technology
Kian Rahbarnia
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics, 17491 Greifswald, Germany