G.P. Maddison et al 2009 Nucl. Fusion 49 125004 doi:10.1088/0029-5515/49/12/125004
G.P. Maddison1, A.E. Hubbard2, J.W. Hughes2, J.A. Snipes2,6, B. LaBombard2, I.M. Nunes3, M.N.A. Beurskens1, S.K. Erents1, M.A.H. Kempenaars1, B. Alper1, S.D. Pinches1, M. Valovič1, R. Pasqualotto4, A. Alfier4, E. Giovannozzi5 and JET EFDA contributors
Show affiliationsExperiments on the Alcator C-Mod and JET tokamaks with identical values of non-dimensional variables at the pedestal top are expected to have the same local plasma transport for a ratio >4 in absolute size and thus can help to clarify other effects in pedestal formation. At the high and low fields (7.9 T and 1.4 T, respectively) involved, natural-density H-modes on C-Mod were of conventional ELM-free type, while those on JET were steady but with only small, sporadic ELMs. Nevertheless, they remained close to a common regime and a good non-dimensional match at the edge was achieved for highest C-Mod densities spanned. Pedestal profiles were measured with a fine-resolution edge Thomson scattering diagnostic on C-Mod, plus a new high-resolution (HRTS) system on JET. Electron temperature widths on JET were estimated to lie between scaled C-Mod levels and somewhat broader fitted shapes. Density pedestal widths, however, were reliably found to be proportionally broader than on C-Mod, signalling an influence other than plasma transport in their formation. Edge particle sources were modelled for both devices with the 1D kinetic KN1D code and corroborated for JET using the 2D fluid-plasma/kinetic-gas EDGE2D-NIMBUS suite. Overlaying normalized profiles of ionization rates suggested density pedestal thicknesses were at least partly related to neutral-particle penetration. Such dependence implies their scaling is not Kadomtsev-like for the collisional, low-normalized-pressure conditions investigated, so precluding unambiguous scans versus dimensionless variables like normalized Larmor radius.
52.55.Fa Tokamaks, spherical tokamaks
Issue 12 (December 2009)
Received 19 March 2009, accepted for publication 29 September 2009
Published 26 October 2009
G.P. Maddison et al 2009 Nucl. Fusion 49 125004
A Yildiz et al 2009 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 21 485403
Ning Wu et al 2007 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 19 156224
Miloslav Znojil 2008 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 41 215304
Rakesh Voggu et al 2008 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 20 215211
A R Denton 2008 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 20 494230
Gregory P Lousberg et al 2009 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 22 125026
Mark Calleja et al 2008 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 20 255226
Dong-Lin Li et al 2009 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 42 225407
Zhu Bo et al 2009 Chinese Phys. Lett. 26 114102