Non-linear MHD modelling of edge localized modes suppression by resonant magnetic perturbations in ITER
Authors: Becoulet M. , Huijsmans G.T.A. , Passeron C. , Liu Y.Q. , Evans T.E. , Lao L.L. , Li L. , Loarte A. , Pinches S.D. , Polevoi A. , Hosokawa M. , Kim S.K. , Pamela S.J.P. , Futatani S. , the JOREK Team  
Published: January 2022

Edge localized modes (ELMs) suppression by resonant magnetic perturbations (RMPs) was studied with the non-linear magneto-hydro-dynamic (MHD) code JOREK for the ITER H-mode scenarios at 15 MA, 12.5 MA, 10 MA/5.3 T. The main aim of this work was to demonstrate that ELMs can be suppressed by RMPs while the divertor 3D footprints of heat and particle fluxes remain within divertor material limits. The unstable peeling–ballooning modes responsible for ELMs without RMPs were modelled first for each scenario using numerically accessible parameters for ITER. Then the stabilization of ELMs by RMPs was modelled with the same parameters. RMP spectra, optimized by the linear MHD MARS-F code, with main toroidal harmonics N = 2, N = 3, N = 4 have been used as boundary conditions of the computational domain of JOREK, including realistic RMP coils, main plasma, scrape off layer (SOL) divertor and realistic first wall. The model includes all relevant plasma flows: toroidal rotation, two fluid diamagnetic effects and neoclassical poloidal friction. With RMPs, the main toroidal harmonic and the non-linearly coupled harmonics remain dominant at the plasma edge, producing saturated modes and a continuous MHD turbulent transport thereby avoiding ELM crashes in all scenarios considered here. The threshold for ELM suppression was found at a maximum RMP coils current of 45 kAt–60 kAt compared to the coils maximum capability of 90 kAt. In the high beta poloidal steady-state 10 MA/5.3 T scenario, a rotating QH-mode without ELMs was observed even without RMPs. In this scenario with RMPs N = 3, N = 4 at 20 kAt maximum current in RMP coils, similar QH-mode behaviour was observed however with dominant edge harmonic corresponding to the main toroidal number of RMPs. The present MHD modelling was limited in time by few tens of ms after RMPs were switched on until the magnetic energy of the modes saturates. As a consequence the thermal energy was still evolving on this time scale, far from the ITER confinement time scale and hence only the form of 3D footprints on the divertor targets can be indicated within this set-up. Also note, that the divertor physics was missing in this model, so realistic values of fluxes are out of reach in this modelling. However the stationary 3D divertor and particle fluxes could be simply extrapolated from these results to the stationary situation considering that a large power fraction should be radiated in the core and SOL and only about 50 MW power is going to the divertor, which is an arbitrary, but reasonable number used here. The 3D footprints with RMPs show the characteristic splitting with the main RMP toroidal symmetry. The maximum radial extension of the footprints typically was ∼20 cm in inner divertor and ∼40 cm in outer divertor with stationary heat fluxes decreasing further out from the initial strike point from ∼5 MW m−2 to ∼1 MW m−2 assuming a total power in the divertor and walls is 50 MW. The heat fluxes remain within the divertor target and baffle areas, however with rather small margin in the outer divertor which could be an issue for the first wall especially in transient regimes when part of the plasma thermal energy is released due to switching on the RMP coils. This fact should be considered when RMPs are applied with a more favorable application before or soon after the L–H transition, although optimization is required to avoid increasing the L–H power threshold with RMPs.