scieee Science in your language
[en] (orig)
1 © EURATOM 2019 Printed in the UK
Nuclear Fusion
Overview of first Wendelstein 7-X
high-performance operation
T.Klinger1,2, T.Andreeva1, S.Bozhenkov1, C.Brandt1, R.Burhenn1,
B.Buttenschön1, G.Fuchert1, B.Geiger1, O.Grulke1,3, H.P.Laqua1,
N.Pablant4, K.Rahbarnia1, T.Stange1, A.von Stechow1, N.Tamura5,
H.Thomsen1, Y.Turkin1, T.Wegner1, I.Abramovic1, S.Äkäslompolo1,
J.Alcuson1, P.Aleynikov1, K.Aleynikova1, A.Ali1, A.Alonso6, G.Anda7,
E.Ascasibar6, J.P.Bähner1, S.G.Baek9, M.Balden10, J.Baldzuhn1,
M.Banduch1, T.Barbui11, W.Behr8, C.Beidler1, A.Benndorf1,
C.Biedermann1, W.Biel8, B.Blackwell12, E.Blanco6, M.Blatzheim1,
S.Ballinger9, T.Bluhm1, D.Böckenhoff1, B.Böswirth10, L.-G.Böttger1,3,
M.Borchardt1, V.Borsuk8, J.Boscary10, H.-S.Bosch1, M.Beurskens1,
R.Brakel1, H.Brand13, T.Bräuer1, H.Braune1, S.Brezinsek8, K.-J.Brunner1,
R.Bussiahn1, V.Bykov1, J.Cai8, I.Calvo6, B.Cannas14, A.Cappa6,
A.Carls1, D.Carralero6, L.Carraro15, B.Carvalho16, F.Castejon6, A.Charl8,
N.Chaudhary1, D.Chauvin17, F.Chernyshev18, M.Cianciosa19,
R.Citarella20, G.Claps21, J.Coenen8, M.Cole1, M.J.Cole19, F.Cordella21,
G.Cseh7, A.Czarnecka22, K.Czerski23, M.Czerwinski1, G.Czymek8,
A.da Molin24, A.da Silva17, H.Damm1, A.de la Pena6, S.Degenkolbe1,
C.P.Dhard1, M.Dibon10, A.Dinklage1, T.Dittmar8, M.Drevlak1,
P.Drewelow1, P.Drews8, F.Durodie26, E.Edlund9, P.van Eeten1,
F.Effenberg11, G.Ehrke1, S.Elgeti10, M.Endler1, D.Ennis27, H.Esteban6,
T.Estrada6, J.Fellinger1, Y.Feng1, E.Flom11, H.Fernandes17, W.H.Fietz25,
W.Figacz22, J.Fontdecaba6, O.Ford1, T.Fornal22, H.Frerichs10, A.Freund8,
T.Funaba5, A.Galkowski22, G.Gantenbein25, Y.Gao8, J.García Regaña6,
D.Gates4, J.Geiger1, V.Giannella20, A.Gogoleva28, B.Goncalves17,
A.Goriaev26, D.Gradic1, M.Grahl1, J.Green11, H.Greuner10, A.Grosman17,
H.Grote1, M.Gruca22, C.Guerard6, P.Hacker1, X.Han8, J.H.Harris19,
D.Hartmann1, D.Hathiramani1, B.Hein1, B.Heinemann10, P.Helander1,2,
S.Henneberg1, M.Henkel8, J.Hernandez Sanchez6, C.Hidalgo6,
M.Hirsch1, K.P.Hollfeld8, U.Höfel1, A.Hölting1, D.Höschen8, M.Houry17,
J.Howard13, X.Huang5, Z.Huang1, M.Hubeny8, M.Huber25, H.Hunger25,
K.Ida5, T.Ilkei7, S.Illy25, B.Israeli4, S.Jablonski22, M.Jakubowski1,
J.Jelonnek25, H.Jenzsch1, T.Jesche29, M.Jia8, P.Junghanns10,
J.Kacmarczyk22, J.-P.Kallmeyer1, U.Kamionka1, H.Kasahara5,
W.Kasparek29, Y.O.Kazakov26, N.Kenmochi5, C.Killer1, A.Kirschner8,
R.Kleiber1, J.Knauer1, M.Knaup8, A.Knieps8, T.Kobarg25, G.Kocsis7,
F.Köchl30, Y.Kolesnichenko31, A.Könies1, R.König1, P.Kornejew1,
J.-P.Koschinsky1, F.Köster32, M.Krämer29, R.Krampitz1, A.Krämer-
Flecken8, N.Krawczyk22, T.Kremeyer11, J.Krom1, M.Krychowiak1,
I.Ksiazek33, M.Kubkowska22, G.Kühner1, T.Kurki-Suonio34, P.A.Kurz1,
S.Kwak1, M.Landreman35, P.Lang10, R.Lang25, A.Langenberg1,
T. Klinger etal
Overview of first Wendelstein 7-X high-performance operation
Printed in the UK
112004
NUFUAU
© EURATOM 2019
59
Nucl. Fusion
NF
10.1088/1741-4326/ab03a7
Paper
11
Nuclear Fusion
IOP
Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further
distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title
of the work, journal citation and DOI.
International Atomic Energy Agency
2019
1741-4326
1741-4326/19/112004+11$33.00
https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/ab03a7
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004 (11pp)
T. Klinger etal
2
S.Langish4, H.Laqua1, R.Laube1, S.Lazerson4, C.Lechte29, M.Lennartz8,
W.Leonhardt25, C.Li1, C.Li8, Y.Li8, Y.Liang8, C.Linsmeier8, S.Liu8,
J.-F.Lobsien1, D.Loesser6, J.Loizu Cisquella1, J.Lore19, A.Lorenz1,
M.Losert25, A.Lücke, A.Lumsdaine19, V.Lutsenko31, H.Maaßberg1,
O.Marchuk8, J.H.Matthew12, S.Marsen1, M.Marushchenko1, S.Masuzaki5,
D.Maurer27, M.Mayer10, K.McCarthy6, P.McNeely1, A.Meier25, D.Mellein25,
B.Mendelevitch10, P.Mertens8, D.Mikkelsen4, A.Mishchenko1, B.Missal1,
J.Mittelstaedt4, T.Mizuuchi, A.Mollen1, V.Moncada17, T.Mönnich1,
T.Morisaki5, D.Moseev1, S.Murakami, G.Náfrádi7, M.Nagel1, D.Naujoks1,
H.Neilson4, R.Neu10, O.Neubauer8, U.Neuner1, T.Ngo17, D.Nicolai8,
S.K.Nielsen3, H.Niemann1, T.Nishizawa1, R.Nocentini10, C.Nührenberg1,
J.Nührenberg1, S.Obermayer10, G.Offermanns8, K.Ogawa5, J.Ölmanns8,
J.Ongena26, J.W.Oosterbeek1, G.Orozco10, M.Otte1, L.Pacios Rodriguez6,
N.Panadero1, N.Panadero Alvarez6, D.Papenfuß25, S.Paqay13, E.Pasch1,
A.Pavone1, E.Pawelec33, T.S.Pedersen1,2, G.Pelka22, V.Perseo1,
B.Peterson5, D.Pilopp1, S.Pingel1, F.Pisano14, B.Plaum29, G.Plunk1,
P.Pölöskei10, M.Porkolab9, J.Proll13, M.-E.Puiatti36, A.Puig Sitjes1,
F.Purps1, M.Rack8, S.Récsei7, A.Reiman4, F.Reimold1, D.Reiter8,
F.Remppel29, S.Renard17, R.Riedl10, J.Riemann1, K.Risse1, V.Rohde10,
H.Röhlinger29, M.Romé36, D.Rondeshagen1, P.Rong1, B.Roth29,
L.Rudischhauser1, K.Rummel1, T.Rummel1, A.Runov1, N.Rust1, L.Ryc22,
S.Ryosuke5, R.Sakamoto5, M.Salewski3, A.Samartsev25, E.Sanchez6,
F.Sano37, S.Satake5, J.Schacht1, G.Satheeswaran8, F.Schauer1,
T.Scherer25, J.Schilling1, A.Schlaich25, G.Schlisio1, F.Schluck8,
K.-H.Schlüter29, J.Schmitt27, H.Schmitz8, O.Schmitz10, S.Schmuck38,
M.Schneider1, W.Schneider1, P.Scholz1, R.Schrittwieser30, M.Schröder1,
T.Schröder1, R.Schroeder1, H.Schumacher39, B.Schweer26, E.Scott1,
S.Sereda8, B.Shanahan1, M.Sibilia4, P.Sinha1, S.Sipliä34, C.Slaby1,
M.Sleczka23, H.Smith1, W.Spiess25, D.A.Spong19, A.Spring1, R.Stadler10,
M.Stejner3, L.Stephey11, U.Stridde1, C.Suzuki5, J.Svensson1, V.Szabó7,
T.Szabolics7, T.Szepesi7, Z.Szökefalvi-Nagy7, A.Tancetti3, J.Terry9,
J.Thomas8, M.Thumm25, J.M.Travere17, P.Traverso27, J.Tretter10,
H.Trimino Mora1, H.Tsuchiya5, T.Tsujimura5, S.Tulipán7, B.Unterberg8,
I.Vakulchyk1, S.Valet1, L.Vano7, B.van Milligen6, A.J.van Vuuren10,
L.Vela28, J.-L.Velasco6, M.Vergote26, M.Vervier26, N.Vianello15,
H.Viebke1, R.Vilbrandt1, A.Vorköper1, S.Wadle25, F.Wagner1, E.Wang8,
N.Wang8, Z.Wang1, F.Warmer1, T.Wauters26, L.Wegener1, J.Weggen25,
Y.Wei8, G.Weir1, J.Wendorf1, U.Wenzel1, A.Werner1, A.White9,
B.Wiegel9, F.Wilde1, T.Windisch1, M.Winkler1, A.Winter1, V.Winters11,
S.Wolf29, R.C.Wolf1,32 A.Wright12, G.Wurden40, P.Xanthopoulos1,
H.Yamada5, I.Yamada5, R.Yasuhara5, M.Yokoyama5, M.Zanini1,
M.Zarnstorff4, A.Zeitler29, D.Zhang1, H.Zhang6, J.Zhu1, M.Zilker10,
A.Zocco1, S.Zoletnik7 and M.Zuin13
1 Max-Planck Institute for Plasma Physics, Wendelsteinstrasse 1, 17491 Greifswald, Germany
2 Greifswald University, Domstrasse 11, 17489 Greifswald, Germany
3 Technical University of Denmark, Anker Engelunds Vej 1, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark
4 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, 100 Stellarator Rd, Princeton, NJ 08540,
United States of America
5 National Institute for Fusion Science, 322-6 Oroshicho, Toki, Gifu Prefecture 509-5202, Japan
6 CIEMAT, Avenida Complutense, 40, 28040 Madrid, Spain
7 Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Konkoly Thege Miklos ut 29-33, 1121 Budapest, Hungary
8 Research Center Jülich GmbH, Institute for Energy and Climate Research Plasma Physics,
Wilhelm-Johnen-Strasse, 52428 Jülich, Germany
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
T. Klinger etal
3
9 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139,
United States of America
10 Max-Planck Institute for Plasma Physics, Boltzmannstrasse 2, 85748 Garching, Germany
11 University of Wisconsin Madison, Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706, United States of America
12 The Australian National University, Acton ACT 2601, Canberra, Australia
13 Eindhoven University of Technology, 5612 AZ Eindhoven, Netherlands
14 University of Cagliary, Via Universita, 40, 09124 Cagliari, Italy
15 Consorzio RFX, Corso Stati Uniti, 4-35127 Padova, Italy
16 Instituto de Plasmas e Fusao Nuclear, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal
17 CEA Cadarache, 13115 Saint-Paul-lez-Durance, France
18 Ioffe Physical-Technical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 26 Politekhnicheskaya,
StPetersburg 194021, Russian Federation
19 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1 Bethel Valley Rd, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, United States of America
20 University of Salerno, Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132, 84084 Fisciano SA, Italy
21 ENEA Centro Ricerche Frascati, Via Enrico Fermi, 45, 00044 Frascati RM, Italy
22 Institute of Plasma Physics and Laser Microfusion, 23 Hery Str., 01-497 Warsaw, Poland
23 University of Szczecin, 70-453, aleja Papiea Jana Pawa II 22A, Szczecin, Poland
24 University of Milano-Bicocca, Piazza dellAteneo Nuovo, 1-20126, Milano, Italy
25 Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Hermann-von-Helmholtz-Platz 1, 76344 Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen,
Germany
26 Royal Military Academy, Avenue de la Renaissance 30, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
27 Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849, United States of America
28 Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Av. de la Universidad, 30, Madrid, Spain
29 Institute for Surface Process Engineering and Plasma Technology, University of Stuttgart, Nobelstrasse
12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
30 Austrian Academy of Science, Doktor-Ignaz-Seipel-Platz 2, 1010 Wien, Austria
31 Institute for Nuclear Research, b.47, prospekt Nauky, Kiev 03680, Ukraine
32 Technical University of Berlin, Strasse des 17. Juni 135, 10623 Berlin, Germany
33 University of Opole, plac Kopernika 11a, 45-001 Opole, Poland
34 Aalto University, 02150 Espoo, Finnland
35 University of Maryland, Paint Branch Drive, College Park, MA 20742, United States of America
36 Istituto di Fisica del Plasma Piero Caldirola, Via Roberto Cozzi, 53, 20125 Milano, Italy
37 Kyoto University, Yoshidahonmachi, Sakyo Ward, Kyoto, Kyoto Prefecture 606-8501, Japan
38 Culham Centre for Fusion Energy, Abingdon OX14 3EB, United Kingdom
39 Physikalisch Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB), Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
40 Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87544, United States of America
Received 23 November 2018, revised 15 January 2019
Accepted for publication 31 January 2019
Published 5 June 2019
Abstract
The optimized superconducting stellarator device Wendelstein 7-X (with major radius
R=5.5 m
, minor radius
a=0.5 m
, and
30 m3
plasma volume) restarted operation after
the assembly of a graphite heat shield and 10 inertially cooled island divertor modules. This
paper reports on the results from the first high-performance plasma operation. Glow discharge
conditioning and ECRH conditioning discharges in helium turned out to be important for
density and edge radiation control. Plasma densities of
14.5 ×1019 m3
with central electron
temperatures
510 keV
were routinely achieved with hydrogen gas fueling, frequently
terminated by a radiative collapse. In a first stage, plasma densities up to
1.4 ×1020 m3
were
reached with hydrogen pellet injection and helium gas fueling. Here, the ions are indirectly
heated, and at a central density of
8·1019 m3
a temperature of
3.4 keV
with
was
transiently accomplished, which corresponds to
nTi
(
0
)τ
E
=
6.4 ×1019 keV s m3
with a peak
diamagnetic energy of
1.1 MJ
and volume-averaged normalized plasma pressure
β=1.2%
.
The routine access to high plasma densities was opened with boronization of the first wall.
After boronization, the oxygen impurity content was reduced by a factor of 10, the carbon
impurity content by a factor of 5. The reduced (edge) plasma radiation level gives routinely
access to higher densities without radiation collapse, e.g. well above
1×1020 m2
line
integrated density and
Te=Ti=2 keV
central temperatures at moderate ECRH power. Both
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
Advertisement
T. Klinger etal
4
X2 and O2 mode ECRH schemes were successfully applied. Core turbulence was measured
with a phase contrast imaging diagnostic and suppression of turbulence during pellet injection
was observed.
Keywords: stellarator, divertor, ECR heating, NBI heating, plasma performance, turbulence,
impurities
(Some figuresmay appear in colour only in the online journal)
1. Introduction
Stellarators are free from current disruptions and are intrinsi-
cally capable to sustain a plasma steady-state without need
for current drive [1]. The stellarator magnetic field, however,
needs to be optimized to overcome major issues in neoclassical
transport, magnetohydrodynamic equilibrium and stability,
and fast particle confinement, in particular at high plasma
beta and low collisionality [24]. After successful first opera-
tion [57], the optimized stellarator device Wendelstein 7-X
[8, 9] is now operating with (yet uncooled) graphite heat shields
and a graphite island divertor [10, 11]. Wendelstein 7-X is a
high-iota, low shear stellarator with optimized magnetic field
geometry and
30 m3
plasma volume. It is the mission of the
device to demonstrate steady-state (pulse length
Tp1800 s
)
generation and confinement of fusion-relevant hydrogen and
deuterium plasmas. The magnetic field with induction
2.5 T
on the magnetic axis is generated using a set of non-planar
and planar liquid-helium cooled superconducting NbTi coils.
All plasma facing components are designed for active water
cooling capability. Steady-state electron cyclotron reso-
nance plasma heating is provided by long-pulse gyrotrons.
Neutral beam injectors and ion cyclotron resonance heating
are foreseen for high beta plasmas and fast particle physics
investigations.
The device operation phase reported in the present paper is
performed without water cooling of the main in-vessel comp-
onents. This restricts the heating energy input to
200 MJ
.
High-performance plasma operation is nevertheless possible,
but at limited pulse lengths (typical
1030 s
). Long discharges
(up to
100 s
) are restricted to lower heating power and conse-
quently lower plasma performance. Fully integrated divertor
operation must be demonstrated to develop a basis for high-
performance steady-state operation which follows after the
completion of the cooling water systems and the installation
of the water-cooled divertor and the cryo pumps.
The present paper is structured in a machine description
section2, long-pulse high density plasmas section3, and stel-
larator optimization section 4. The paper is summarized in
section5.
2. The Wendelstein 7-X stellarator device
As pointed out in section1, the magnetic field geometry of the
superconducting stellarator Wendelstein 7-X was optimized
to address major issues of the classical stellarator [3, 4]. A
schematic drawing of the device and the rotational transform
of some of the magnetic field configurations are shown in
figure 1. The 50 non-planar coils (red) and 20 planar coils
(orange) are connected in series via superconducting bus bars.
All coils are bolted to a massive central support ring (gray)
and additionally fixed by mostly welded, partially bolted or
sliding local support elements. The complete magnet system
and the support structures are cooled down to
3.4 K
in the
cryostat vacuum between the outer vessel and the plasma
vessel. Both the plasma vessel, the outer vessel and the 253
ports are covered with a thermal insulation, based on multi-
layer foil and a thermal shield actively cooled to
70 K
[12].
The main device parameters are listed in table1. Stage 1
was the setup for the initial operation. After substantial exten-
sion of the in-vessel components and the heating systems, the
present stage 2 was reached. Stage 3 is planned for the sub-
sequent operation phase. Stage 4 is the projected full perfor-
mance configuration of the device. The most powerful heating
scheme of Wendelstein 7-X is the electron cyclotron reso-
nance heating (ECRH) with at present 10 long-pulse capable
140 GHz gyrotrons [13]. On average each gyrotron accounts
for
0.8 MW
power coupled into the plasma which provides a
highly flexible X2-mode and O2-mode heating scheme, both
on- and off-axis. The flexibility and the well-defined heat dep-
osition in the electron cyclotron resonance zone render ECRH
being the most advanced heating and current drive scheme
with the biggest potential for a future stellarator power reactor
[14]. The first of two neutral beam injector (NBI) boxes have
started operation with two positive ion sources and
55 kV
acceleration voltage and up to
3.5 MW
injection power [15].
The ion cyclotron resonance heating (ICRH) system requires
an antenna that is carefully shaped to the three-dimensional
plasma contour. This development is ongoing and commis-
sioning is foreseen for the next operation phase [16]. To
protect the (mostly uncooled) in-vessel components, the max-
imum heating energy during stage 2 is at present limited to
200 MJ
, which implies typical discharge times between 10
and
100 s
, depending on the input power. After completion
of the water cooling systems and the replacement of the iner-
tially cooled island divertor with an actively water-cooled one,
the maximum heating energy will be extended step-wise to
18 GJ
with at least one intermediate step at
1 GJ
(stage 3).
Wendelstein 7-X started first operation in the year 2015.
The heat and particle exhaust was controlled with five
poloidal graphite limiters, the remaining wall was either
steel or CuCrZr. Despite the unfavorable wall conditions, the
plasma performance was quite remarkable with peak electron
temperatures
8 keV
with simultaneous peak ion temperature
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
T. Klinger etal
5
2 keV
and line averaged density
3×1019 m3
[57]. These
are typical conditions for the core electron root confinement
[57, 17] which is characterized by a reversal of the radial
electric field from edge to core [18]. First elements of stel-
larator optimization could be demonstrated by studying the
bootstrap current and neoclassical transport [19].
For the second operation phase (stage 2) the limiters were
replaced by an island divertor and major areas of the wall are
covered with graphite tiles. The island divertor consists of ten
separate modules formed by graphite target and baffle plates
that are matched to the magnetic field structure of Wendelstein
7-X [10, 11]. Depending on the magnetic configuration (given
by the rotational transform
ι/2π
, see figure1) natural magn-
etic islands form at the plasma boundary. They are intersected
with the divertor target plates and thus establish a multi-X-
point divertor for the exhaust of particle and heat flows across
the last closed flux surface. The aim of the second operation
phase is to demonstrate full divertor operation and exhaust
combined with improved plasma performance.
3. High density stationary discharges
The plasma performance of Wendelstein 7-X in terms of
plasma density, ion temperature, stored energy, and discharge
duration has dramatically improved after the installation
of the graphite heat shields and the graphite island divertor.
Another significant step forward was made with a suite of
wall conditioning measures [20]: The plasma vessel is baked
at 150 °C in order to remove water and hydrocarbons from
the vessel wall and in-vessel components. Without magnetic
field, glow discharge cleaning (GDC) is applied in hydrogen
(to reduce residual
CO
and
CH4
) and helium gas (to reduce
H2
). With the superconducting magnets ramped up, an addi-
tional wall conditioning inbetween discharges was made
with ECRH short pulse trains followed by pumping inter-
vals. The GDC in helium and hydrogen as well as the occa-
sional ECRH pulse train conditioning of the plasma facing
components (with total surface areas of
88 m2
graphite and
82 m2
steel) have greatly reduced the outgassing rates, rap-
idly dropping to values that were reached only at the end of
the initial (stage 1) operation phase with graphite limiters.
Plasma densities of
15×1019 m3
with electron temper-
ature
were achieved with hydrogen gas fueling;
higher densities where not accessible due to the radiative
limit. High plasma densities up to
1.4 ×1020 m3
could be
reached with repetitive hydrogen pellet injection and second
harmonic ECR heating in O-polarization (O2-scheme, see
figure 3(b) below). In a similar scenario with hydrogen
plasma, at a central density of
8×1019 m3
, the ions are indi-
rectly heated and a temperature of
3.4 keV
with
was accomplished, still with second harmonic ECR heating
in X-polarization (X2-scheme). This discharge corresponds to
a (stellarator) record
nTi(0)τE=6.4 ×1019 keV s m3
with
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the superconducting stellarator device Wendelstein 7-X. The last closed magnetic flux surface is indicated
in light blue. The 50 non-planar (red) and the 20 planar (orange) superconducting coils are operated in a evacuated cryostat volume between
the plasma vessel and the outer vessel. Wendelstein 7-X is a high-iota low-shear device and the iota profiles (
β=0
) of some reference
magnetic configurations are shown on the right hand side. The reference configurations are standard (EIM), high mirror ratio (KJM), high
iota (FTM), and low iota (DBM).
Table 1. Major parameters of the stellarator Wendelstein 7-X. The
different stages of completion and extension mainly determine
the available heating power and the active cooling of the in-vessel
components.
Quantity Unit Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4
Plasma volume
m2
30
Major radius m 5.5
Minor radius m 0.5
Magnetic
induction on axis
T 2.5
Rotional
transform
2π
5
/
6
...
5
/
4
ECR heating
power
MW 4.3 8.5 10 1015
ICR heating
power
MW 1.5 3.5
NBI heating
power H/D
MW 3.5 7/10 14/20
Heating energy MJ 4 200 1000 18 000
Pulse length typ. s 12 10100 100200 1001800
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
Advertisement
T. Klinger etal
6
a peak diamagnetic energy of
1.1 MJ
and volume-averaged
normalized plasma pressure
β=1.5 %
[21, 22]. The corre-
sponding radial temperature and density profiles are both cen-
trally peaked with typical gradient lengths
LTe,i34m
and
Ln23m
. The radial density profile significantly steepens
with central fueling, e.g. by pellet injection or neutral beam
injection (see below). Futher details about the kinetic profiles
are found in [21]. Routinely, stable
25 s
long-pulse helium
discharges with
23 MW
ECRH power and up to
75 MJ
injected energy were created for equilibrium and divertor
load studies, with plasma densities around
5×1019 m3
and
5 keV
electron temperature.
Boronization was conducted for the first time half-way
the experimental campaign [23] (in total three times). Here,
a glow discharge with
10%
diborane
B2H6
in
90%
helium
background gas was operated for
45
h to deposit a boron
layer of about
50100 nm
thickness. The boron layer turned
out to last for at about 200 plasma seconds on the strike line
position of the divertor targets and for at least about 2000
plasma seconds on other wall elements. In fact, the excellent
wall conditions did not degrade significantly during the accu-
mulated
2400 s
of plasma duration between each two boroni-
zation cycles and it can be assumed that longer cycle times
are well possible. Figure2(a) shows the difference between
the discharge conditions before and after boronization [24].
With the same ECR heating power and normal gas puffing,
about
×
3 higher plasma densities could be reached without
radiative collapse. This improvement is due to a reduced O
and C content, which strongly reduces the radiative power
losses predominantly in the plasma edge, where the radiative
collapse usually starts. The observed critical densities and
their scaling with heating power is compared to the scaling
law derived in [25]. For the Wendelstein 7-X parameters the
scaling
¯
n
c
P0.6
/
f0.4
imp
is plotted for different impurity frac-
tion values
fimp =nimp/ne=5%
,
1%
and
0.5%
, respectively.
Before boronization the observed nc values scale weaker than
predicted even for
fimp =5%
. After boronization, there is a
good agreement with the scaling law for
fimp =0.51%
. To
highlight the effect of boronization on O and C impurities,
spectroscopic measurements of O V and O VI as well as C
V and C VI ions before and after boronization are shown in
figure2(b). The spectroscopic signals are normalized to the
line-averaged plasma density measured for the respective
discharge. Note that for the lower wavelengths, no absolute
calibration is available and temperature and profile effects
have not yet been taken into account. Nevertheless, a strong
reduction of the spectral line strength by
×2.5
for carbon and
×6.5 ...8
for oxygen is evident and a similar reduction in the
associated impurity concentration can be assumed. This is a
clear indication for the expected gettering effect by the boron
layer on the plasma facing components [26].
With the extension of the density limit, ECR heating
schemes beyond the X-mode cut-off density
1.2 ×1020 m3
became important. In O-mode polarization ECR waves
have a cut-off density of
2.4 ×1020 m3
, with the draw-
back of relatively low absorption rate of
70%
, even at the
favorable high electron temperature
Te3 keV
and density
ne=1×1020 m3
. In combination with pellet injection, the
heating scenario shown in figure 3 was developed [2729]:
The plasma start-up (here in helium) is made with three gyro-
trons in X-mode polarization. During the following
2s
the
polarization is changed to O-mode polarization. At
t=2s
the
density ramp-up is steepend by repetitive hydrogen ice pellet
injection and at
t=3s
further six gyrotrons (in O-mode) are
added. At the peak density of
1.4 ×1020 m3
the electron
temperature is still close to
3 keV
. The
141 GHz
electron
cyclotron emission (ECE) signal vanishes due to excess of the
X2-mode cut-off density (indicated by the orange strip). The
stray radiation signal always remains in an acceptable range,
even in the device module where the wave launcher is located.
In the optimum O2-heating regime, the stray radiation level is
found to be below
10 kW m2
.
As outlined above, wall boronization has greatly extended
the plasma density range to much higher values. After the
first successful experiments in helium plasmas combined
with hydrogen pellet injection, the previously described ECR
O2-heating scheme became also the reference heating scheme
for high density gas fueled hydrogen plasmas as well [2729].
An example is shown in figure 4. The ECR heating power
is
6 MW
in total and is almost fully absorbed. The radia-
tion fraction stays constant at
60%
. At the (line-integrated)
plasma densities >
1×1020 m3
ions are efficiently heated
by the electrons and one obtains almost thermal equilibration
TeTi
. The divertor is fully detached [30] and the power load
drops to
1.5 MW
. The discharge duration was limited to
14 s
due to the technical limit of
80 MJ
maximum injected energy
Figure 2. (a) Maximum density achieved before onset of radiation collapse versus heating power before (blue symbols) and after
boronization (red symbols). The lines indicate the predicted critical density nc for different impurity fractions
fimp =5%
,
1%
and
0.5%
.
(b) Spectral lines of C and O ionization stages before and after boronization. At about
4.9 nm
a small B V line arises after boronization.
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
T. Klinger etal
7
Figure 3. (a) Multi-pass absorption scheme using tungsten reflector tiles with holographic grating, mounted on the inner and the outer
sides of the in-vessel system. (b) O2-mode heating scenario showing from top to bottom the heating power in X- and O-mode polarization
(blue), the line-integrated density, the electron density measured by Thomson scattering (red) and electron cyclotron emission (black), and
stray radiation measured in the device module where the wave launcher is located (black) and in the two neighboring modules (green and
blue).
Figure 4. O2-mode heated long pulse high density plasma discharge. Shown are (from top to bottom, left and right scale) heating power,
total radiative power, line-integrated density, electron cyclotron emission at
141 GHz
, ion and electron temperature, diamagnetic energy and
total divertor power load. The slow oscillations are generated by the feedback-controller. The 141GHz ECE channel runs into the cut-off
after
2s
verifying the pure
140 GHz
O2-heating.
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
Advertisement
T. Klinger etal
8
set at that time period of operation. Since the divertor power
detachment turned out to be well under control and the power
load on the targets correspondingly low, the technical limit for
the total heating energy could be extended from 80 to
200 MJ
.
A similar O2-heated discharge could be extended to
30 s
dis-
charge duration at
5 MW
heating power, again with full power
detachment and similar plasma parameters [27]. In addition,
high density operation could be demonstrated with pure neu-
tral beam injection heating (
3.5 MW
H+ ) after starting the
plasma with ECRH (X2-mode). Possibly explained by the
additional central fulling from the neutral beam, the plasma
density increases throughout the NBI phase with more peaked
density profiles and up to
n
(
0
)=
2×1020 m3
. The ion
temper ature raises by about
10%
to above
2 keV
, the electron
temperature drops after termination of the ECRH to values
20%
below Ti. The orbit losses related to the neutral beam
injection are discussed in [27].
4. Stellarator optimization
It is the ultimate goal of Wendelstein 7-X to demonstrate the
beneficial effect of the optimized magnetic field geometry, in
particular reduced neoclassical transport and bootstrap cur-
rent along with magnetic islands well-localized at the edge
and good magneto-hydrodynamic stability [4]. Fast particle
confinement is another important aspect of optimization [31].
The sum of all should result in improved plasma confinement
and fully integrated, stable plasma scenarios with simultane-
ously high
TiTe
at high particle densities. In the ion root
regime [32], the energy confinement times
τE
are expected
to be better than the ISS04 [33] stellarator scaling if most
of the energy transport is neoclassical. High-performance
plasma scenarios require good control of the plasma-wall
interaction (in par ticular the impurity source), the heat and
particle exhaust as well as the particle recycling. Details
are discussed in [30]. In this section we present a number
of experimental results that provide evidence for successful
stellarator optimization.
Figure 5(a) shows Rogowski coil measurements of the
time evolution of the net toroidal plasma current for plasmas
with constant ECR heating power in different magnetic field
configurations: low iota (magenta line, label DAM), standard
(blue lines, labels EIM and EJM), high mirror (green lines,
label KKM), high iota (black lines, label FTM). The dashed
red lines are exponential fits of the measurements. A prediction
based on one-dimensional transport modelling and numerical
calculation of the bootstrap current is shown in figure5(b).
The transport code requires as input the measured ne and Te
profiles (not available for DAM). The time scale, mainly given
by the R/L time
10 s
(L and R are plasma inductance and
resistance, respectively), and the expected strong reduction of
the bootstrap current in high-mirror and high-iota configura-
tions are well confirmed by both measurement and simulation.
The simulations underestimate the measurements systemati-
cally (figure 5(b) solid lines). This might well be due to an
(unintended) ECCD component, which is currently under
investigation. By considering in the simulations reasonable
residual ECCD of about
23 kA
they quantitatively agree
well with the measurements (figure 5(b) dashed lines). First
findings on the reduction of the bootstrap current owing to
magnetic field optimization were already reported from the
previous operation campaign without divertor [19].
The long discharge duration enables to make use of elec-
tron cyclotron current drive (ECCD) for a feed-forward control
of the (edge) rotational transform [2729], which is changed
by the toroidal current evolution that strongly depends on the
magnetic configuration and the discharge parameters. Central
co-/counter ECCD leads under certain discharge conditions
to fast, repetitive electron temperature collapses in the core
or even a total plasma collapse. This is likely due to the rota-
tional transform crossing unity
ι/2π=1
, triggering an MHD
instability [27, 29].
During the above discussed high density, high perfor-
mance
1.1 MJ
discharge with pellet injection into a helium
target plasma (see section3), electrons and ions thermalize
and the ambipolar radial electric field Er is expected to be
negative throughout the plasma core (ion-root) [32]. This is
clearly seen in measurements with the x-ray imaging crystal
spectrometer (XICS, figure6(a)), where the sudden transition
from positive to negative Er is correlated with the time interval
Figure 5. (a) Time evolution of the toroidal current measured with Rogowski coils. The different colors indicate the different magnetic
configurations (see text). The dashed lines are exponential best-fits to the decaying shielding current. (b) Transport code simulations of the
toroidal current based on experimental density and temperature proles for the same magnetic congurations. Solid or dashed lines indicate
simulation results without or with (unintended) residual ECCD, respectively: EJM
2.6 kA
, EIM
2.7 kA
, KKM
2.1 kA
, FTM
1.8 kA
.
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
T. Klinger etal
9
during which
TeTi
. The neoclassical heat transport is pre-
dicted to be significantly reduced in the ion-root regime, as
discussed more comprehensively in [34].
Figure 6(b) shows the tomographic reconstruction of the
soft x-ray radiation at the triangular cross section, using a set
of poloidally arranged x-ray cameras [35]. The measurement
is overlayed with the numerically calculated plasma equi-
librium using the VMEC code [36] for
. There is
a good agreement between measured and calculated plasma
equilibrium. The Shafranov shift is found to be
12 cm
only,
as predicted for the optimized stellarator magnetic field with
reduced PfirschSchlüter current. For
β1.5%
the the
plasma in Wendelstein 7-X is expected to be MHD stable
[3, 4] and indeed no distinct activity is observed in the magn-
etic and x-ray diagnostics. As mentioned above, MHD insta-
bilities can be driven by central ECCD. Alfvén modes were
observed under certain NBI discharge scenarios. The analysis
of the corresponding data is in progress and will be published
elsewhere.
Impurity transport is another key issue of (optimized)
stellarators. As discussed in section 3 the radiative density
limit strongly depends on the impurity concentration frac-
tion. Furthermore, impurity accumulation is considered as
a major stellarator issue, since in particular in the ion-root
confinement regime with
TeTi
, the neoclassical impurity
convection is inwards-directed, as for example observed in
the predecessor device Wendelstein 7-AS [37, 38]. Recent
neoclassical transport investigations have demonstrated that
temperature screening can arise in stellarator plasmas in a
mixed col lisionality regime (for hydrogen and impurity ions)
at high ion temperatures [39]. Up to now, at
β1.5%
, in
Wendelstein 7-X no evidence for impurity accumulation has
been found in all relevant plasma scenarios, even at high par-
ticle densities in the
1×1020 m3
range as well as in the ion-
root confinement regime. To investigate the transport physics
of impurity particles, active diagnostics namely laser blow-off
(LBO) [40] and impurity pellet injection [41] (tracer encap-
sulated solid pellets, TESPEL) are used, combined with fast
high-resolution spectro meters. Figure 7(a) shows the evo-
lution of line radiation from different Fe ionization stages
after injecting iron (LBO) into a hydrogen plasma at
5 MW
of ECR heating power and a line-averaged plasma density of
Figure 6. (a) Radial electric field measured with the x-ray imaging camera system. In the time interval
t=1.5 ...2.5 s
a negative radial
electric field forms throughout the entire plasma core. (b) Tomographic reconstruction of the soft x-ray radiation in the triangular plane,
overlayed with the corresponding numerical plasma equilibrium calculation (VMEC). The x-ray cameras used for the reconstruction are
indicated with their viewing lines.
Figure 7. Laser blow-off injection of iron impurities into ECR heated hydrogen plasma. (a) Time evolution of selected iron ionization
levels and forward-modelling curves (black lines). (b) Neoclassical and anomalous diffusion coefficient profiles. (c) Neoclassical
convection velocity profiles.
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
Advertisement
T. Klinger etal
10
2×1019 m3
. The rise-time and the decay-time of the dif-
ferent charge stages depend on the radial diffusion
D(r)
and
convection
v(r)
profiles and consequently contain valuable
information on the impurity transport. The measured data
is compared with forward-modelling using the 1d impurity
transport code STRAHL [42]. If as input parameters purely
neo-classical diffusion and convection profiles are used,
obtained from DKES [43] code runs (figures 7(b) and (c)),
only poor agreement is obtained (not shown). In contrast to
that, if additional anomalous diffusion is assumed (black line
in figure7(b)), the forward-modelling calculations match the
experimental data very well (black curves in figure 7(a)).
The corresponding level of anomalous diffusion is more than
two orders of magnitude above the neo-classical level, which
strongly suggests dominant turbulent transport. Probably ion
temperature gradient (ITG) driven turbulence is the main con-
tributor here, since ITG is expected during flat density gradi-
ents and high
Te/Ti
ratios as present during the experiments
[44]. More detailed and systematic studies under different
plasma parameters, as well as comparisons with gyro-kinetic
simulations, are ongoing [45].
Wendelstein 7-X is neoclassically optimized and turbulent
transport is expected to play a significant role in the regula-
tion of radial heat diffusivity and particle exhaust. Turbulence
studies are therefore of key importance and a suite of diag-
nostic instruments is available, namely correlation reflectom-
etry [18], various probes for edge turbulence measurements
[46] and phase contrast imaging (PCI) for characterization
of turbulence in the plasma core [47]. PCI samples plasma
density fluctuations along the line-of-sight of an infrared
laser beam in the predominantly unfavorable magnetic curva-
ture region. Nonlinear gyrokinetic simulations indicate that
ion temper ature gradient (ITG) and trapped electron modes
(TEM) are possible in the plasma core but the latter are dif-
ferent from their tokamak counterparts [48, 49]. Both modes
are unstable in regions of unfavorable magnetic curvature,
which in Wendelstein 7-X are mainly localized in the out-
board bean-shaped cross section. In usual gas-fueled dis-
charges, ion temperature and plasma density gradient regions
are well separated. Thus, ITG modes are destabilized deep
in the plasma core, whereas TEM modes are localized in the
edge plasma. An interesting observation is made with PCI
when the plasma is centrally fueled by pellets (figure 8(a)).
The density fluctuation amplitude is usually proportional to
the line-integrated plasma density (figure 8(b)). However,
after pellet fueling
, the fluctuation level sud-
denly drops and improved energy confinement is observed.
The fluctuation spectrogram supports the picture: The entire
fluctuation spectrum is temporarily reduced in amplitude,
but evolves transiently for
t3<t<t4
starting from high fre-
quencies until the usual linear scaling is recovered. Linear
gyrokinetic simulations suggest [50], that the turbulence
suppression is the result of a radial overlap between plasma
density and temperature gradients, as it is generally observed
in pellet discharges. Low
Te
/
Ti
ratios and gradient length
LTiLn23m
stabilize ITG, whereas TEM is naturally
stabilized by the good magnetic curvature regions [48, 49].
This observation shows that indeed turbulent transport plays
an important role in Wendelstein 7-X and that its reduction,
e.g. by centrally peaked density profiles, could well be the
key for the development of improved confinement scenarios.
A more comprehensive discussion of turbulence and the
related transport is found in [51].
5. Summary
In conclusion the plasma performance of the optimized stel-
larator Wendelstein 7-X has significantly improved after the
installation of the graphite island divertor and the graphite
wall elements. Impurity and heat exhaust are now well under
Figure 8. (a) High performance discharge with pellet injection during
t=1...1.6 s
in a hydrogen target plasma. At
t=1.6 s
the ECR
heating power is doubled. The diamagnetic energy peaks at
t2s
. (b) Temporal evolution of the line-integrated plasma density (blue) and
the turbulent density fluctuation level (green) for a pellet-fueled discharge and the related spectrogram of plasma density fluctuations.
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
T. Klinger etal
11
control and long high-density discharges became accessible,
especially after boronization. With a boronized wall, the
radiative density limit could be shifted to three times higher
values, on the expense of a slight degradation of the energy
confinement time at the limit. With quite low ECR heating
power, record values for the triple product in stellarators were
achieved, albeit only transiently for a short time. The long
discharges may well have set other records in comparison to
other fusion research devices. The main limitations for high-
performance long-pulse plasmas are limited heating power
and not yet fully implemented water cooling of the in-vessel
components. Nevertheless, in general excellent plasma perfor-
mance with up to
β=1.2%
and
β(0)=3.5%
was achieved
by relatively modest ECR O-mode heating power. More
heating power is needed to explore the high beta
β>5%
and low
ν=106...105
regimes, where stellarator optim-
ization is relevant in all aspects.
Acknowledgments
This work has been carried out within the framework of the
EUROfusion Consortium and has received funding from the
Euratom research and training program 20142018 and 2019
2020 under grant agreement No. 633053. The views and opin-
ions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the
European Commision.
ORCID iDs
S. Bozhenkov https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4289-3532
B. Buttenschön https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9830-9641
N. Tamura https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1682-1519
T. Wegner https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0136-0406
References
[1] BoozerA. 2009 Phys. Plasmas 16058102
[2] NührenbergJ. and ZilleR. 1986 Phys. Lett. A 114129
[3] GriegerG. etal 1992 Phys. Fluids B 42081
[4] BeidlerC. etal 1990 Fusion Sci. Technol. 1714868
[5] KlingerT. etal 2017 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
59014018
[6] PedersenT.S. etal 2017 Phys. Plasmas 24055503
[7] WolfR.C. etal 2017 Nucl. Fusion 57102020
[8] KlingerT. 2016 Magnetic Fusion Energy: from Experiments
to Power Plants ed G.Neilson (Cambridge: Woodhead
Publishing)
[9] KlingerT. etal 2013 Fusion Eng. Des. 884615
[10] RennerH. etal 2002 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
44100519
[11] BoschH.S. etal 2013 Nucl. Fusion 52126001
[12] NagelM. etal 2011 Fusion Eng. Des. 8618303
[13] ErckmannV. etal 2007 Fusion Sci. Technol. 52291312
[14] WarmerF. etal 2016 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
58074006
[15] McNeelyP. etal 2013 Fusion. Eng. Des. 8810347
[16] OngenaJ. etal 2018 Preparing the ICRH system for the
Wendelstein 7-X stellarator Preprint: 2018 IAEA Fusion
Energy Conf. (Gandhinagar, India, 22–27 October 2018)
EX/P8-27
[17] YokoyamaM. etal 2007 Nucl. Fusion 4712139
[18] WindischT. etal 2017 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
59105002
[19] DinklageA. etal 2018 Nat. Phys. 1485560
[20] WautersT. etal 2018 Nucl. Fusion 58066013
[21] BozhenkovS. etal 2018 High density and high performance
operation with pellet injection in W7-X Preprint: 2018
IAEA Fusion Energy Conf. (Gandhinagar, India, 22–27
October 2018) EX/P8-8
[22] PedersenT.S. etal 2019 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
61014037
[23] BrakelR. etal 2018 Strategy and optimization of wall
conditioning at the Wendelstein 7-X stellarator Preprint:
2018 IAEA Fusion Energy Conf. (Gandhinagar, India,
22–27 October 2018) EX/P8-17
[24] FuchertG. etal 2018 Increasing the density in W7-X: benefits
and limitations Preprint: 2018 IAEA Fusion Energy Conf.
(Gandhinagar, India, 22–27 October 2018) EX/3-5
[25] ZancaP. etal 2017 Nucl. Fusion 57056010
[26] WinterJ. etal 1990 J. Nucl. Mater. 1476177
[27] WolfR. etal 2019 in preparation
[28] StangeT. etal 2018 Phys. Rev. Lett. submitted
[29] LaquaH.P. etal 2019 in preparation
[30] PedersenT.S. etal 2018 First divertor physics studies in
Wendelstein 7-X Preprint: 2018 IAEA Fusion Energy Conf.
(Gandhinagar, India, 22–27 October 2018) EX/9-1
[31] DrevlakM. etal 2014 Nucl. Fusion 54073002
[32] HelanderP. etal 2012 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion
54124009
[33] YamadaH. etal 2005 Nucl. Fusion 45168493
[34] PablantN. etal 2018 Investigations of the role of neoclassical
transport in ion-root plasmas on W7-X Preprint: 2018 IAEA
Fusion Energy Conf. (Gandhinagar, India, 22–27 October
2018) EX/P8-31
[35] BrandtC. etal 2017 Fusion Eng. Design 123887
[36] HirshmanS.P. and WhitsonJ.C. 1983 Phys. Fluids 263553
[37] GiannoneL. etal 2000 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 4260327
[38] BurhennR. etal 2009 Nucl. Fusion 49065005
[39] HelanderP. etal 2017 Phys. Rev. Lett. 118155002
[40] WegnerT. etal 2018 Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89073505
[41] BussiahnR. etal 2018 Rev. Sci. Instrum. 8910K112
[42] BehringerK. etal 1987 Plasma Phys. Fusion Technol. 1957
[43] HirshmanS.P. etal 1986 Phys. Fluids 292951
[44] GeigerB. etal 2019 Nucl. Fusion 59046009
[45] WegnerT. etal 2019 in preparation
[46] KillerC. etal 2018 Characterization of the W7-X scrape-off
layer using the multipurpose manipulator Preprint: 2018
IAEA Fusion Energy Conf. (Gandhinagar, India, 22–27
October 2018) EX/P8-18
[47] EdlundE. etal 2018 Rev. Sci. Instrum. 8910E105
[48] ProllJ. etal 2013 Phys. Rev. Lett. 108245002
[49] PlunkG. etal 2017 J. Plasma Phys. 83715830404
[50] AlcusonJ. etal 2019 in preparation
[51] GrulkeO. etal 2018 Plasma dynamics and transport studies in
Wendelstein 7-X Preprint: 2018 IAEA Fusion Energy Conf.
(Gandhinagar, India, 22–27 October 2018) EX/P8-9
Nucl. Fusion 59 (2019) 112004
Related document tools
Why organizations use Identific for document trust, entry 12
Identific is presented as a document trust and verification platform for academic, institutional, and professional workflows. Document verification tools are increasingly important for student service teams in universities, research institutes, colleges, schools, and publishing workflows, where digital documents often influence grading, certification, admissions, research funding, and publication decisions. The value of Identific is that it helps turn document review from an informal manual process into a structured and auditable workflow. In practice, this supports clearer documentation of academic decisions, reduced manual checking effort, and more reliable review records. Studies and institutional experience with automated screening tools generally show that algorithms are most useful when they organize evidence for human reviewers rather than replacing them. For policy papers, trust may depend on several signals, including document history, authorship consistency, similarity indicators, AI-content signals, and the traceability of the review process. Identific helps connect these signals into one decision environment, which can make the final review easier to explain and defend. Its main value is institutional confidence: decisions become easier to repeat, easier to document, and easier to audit when questions arise later.