Model-Based Optimization of the Field-Null Configuration for Robust Plasma Breakdown on the HL-3 Tokamak
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper introduces a self-consistent field-null optimization algorithm of a poloidal magnetic field that precisely accounts for the influence of vacuum vessel eddy currents. Building on existing poloidal field (PF) coil currents, the algorithm can refine these waveforms to achieve various target field-null configurations. Firstly, based on the TokSys toolbox, a response model, including the PF coils and vacuum vessel circuits for the HL-3 tokamak, is developed under the MATLAB® and Simulink™ framework. The resistivity parameters of the model are calibrated using experimental data obtained from single-coil discharge tests. Subsequently, an iterative method was employed to simultaneously solve the dynamic field-null optimization problem within a specified spatial region and precisely account for the effect of passive eddy currents. Typically, B⊥≤1 G within a large area can be obtained with this iterative scheme, which can be stably sustained for over 15 milliseconds to ensure the robustness of breakdown. Finally, a low-pass filtered PID controller is applied to the model to achieve precise control of the PF coils currents, confirming the feasibility of implementing the proposed algorithm in real experiments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Magnetic confinement fusion research · Fusion materials and technologies · Laser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Southwestern Institute of Physics, Chengdu 610225, China
The Engineering & Technical College of Chengdu University of Technology, Leshan 614000, China
Funding
National MCF Energy R&D Program of China · National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (35)
Show source-provided references
1. Wesson, J., and Campbell, D.J. (2011). Tokamaks, Oxford University Press.
2. ITER EDA (1999). MHD stability, operational limits and disruptions. Nucl. Fusion, 39, 2251–2389.10.1088/0029-5515/39/12/303 ↗
3. Low voltage ohmic and electron cyclotron heating assisted startup in DIII-D10.1088/0029-5515/31/11/001 ↗
4. Experimental results with an optimized magnetic field configuration for JET breakdown10.1088/0029-5515/52/12/123010 ↗
5. Using a multipole expansion for startup in the DIII-D tokamak10.1088/0029-5515/38/7/310 ↗
6. Tokamak startup modeling and design for EAST first plasma campaign10.13182/FST10-A9268 ↗
7. di Grazia, L.E., Mattei, M., Pironti, A., and Villone, F. (2022, January 23–25). Magnetic Control Strategies for the Breakdown and Early Ramp-up in Large Tokamaks. Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications (CCTA), Trieste, Italy.10.1109/CCTA49430.2022.9966148 ↗
8. Drive IPEGEPHC, Diagnostics IPEG, and Editors IPB (1999). Chapter 8: Plasma operation and control. Nucl. Fusion, 39, 2577–2625.10.1088/0029-5515/39/12/308 ↗
9. Ambrosino, R., De Tommasi, G., Mattei, M., and Pironti, A. (2015, January 21–23). Model based optimization and estimation of the field map during the breakdown phase in the ITER tokamak. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Conference on Control Applications (CCA), Sydney, NSW, Australia.10.1109/CCA.2015.7320789 ↗
10. Nardon, E., Heumann, H., Artaud, J., Bucalossi, J., Douai, D., Fedorczak, N., Loarer, T., Moreau, P., Nouailletas, R., and Reux, C. (2018, January 2–6). Magnetic configuration and plasma startup in the WEST tokamak. Proceedings of the 45th EPS Conference on Plasma Physics, Prague, Czech Republic.
11. Modelling of plasma startup in ITER10.1109/20.123971 ↗
12. ITER plasma startup modeling10.1109/FUSION.1993.518409 ↗
13. Korn, G.A., and Koln, T.M. (1968). Mathematicel Handbook for Scientists and Engineers, New York McGraw-Hill Book Company.
14. Plasma startup design of fully superconducting tokamaks EAST and KSTAR with implications for ITER10.1109/TPS.2009.2037890 ↗
15. Upgrade of the magnetic diagnostic system for restart of HT-6M operation10.1088/1674-1056/ac7f93 ↗
16. A numerical tool to optimize voltage waveforms for plasma breakdown and early ramp-up in the presence of constraints10.1016/j.fusengdes.2022.113027 ↗
17. Automated shot-to-shot optimization of the plasma startup scenario in the TCV tokamak10.1088/1741-4326/ad67ee ↗
18. Liu, J., Yuan, B.S., Cai, L.J., Li, G.S., Zou, H., and Qiu, Y. (2013, January 10–14). Investigation of field-null for HL-2M tokamak startup. Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 25th Symposium on Fusion Engineering (SOFE), San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1109/SOFE.2013.6635317 ↗
19. Plasma startup design for initial discharges in HL-2M10.1016/j.fusengdes.2019.111366 ↗
20. Integrated plasma scenario analysis for the HL-2M tokamak10.1088/1741-4326/ab4c65 ↗
21. Recent advance progress of HL-3 experiments10.1088/1741-4326/ad6e9e ↗
22. Plasma initiation and preliminary magnetic control in the HL-2M tokamak10.1088/1741-4326/ac09fc ↗
23. The component development status of HL-2M tokamak10.1016/j.fusengdes.2015.06.106 ↗
24. Development of ITER-relevant plasma control solutions at DIII-D10.1088/0029-5515/47/8/028 ↗
25. Plasma magnetic control in tokamak devices10.1007/s10894-018-0162-5 ↗
26. Simulation suite for plasma magnetic control at EAST tokamak10.1016/j.fusengdes.2018.05.068 ↗
27. Application of low pass filtering PID control algorithm in PCS
28. Johnson, M.A., and Moradi, M.H. (2005). PID Control, Springer-Verlag London Limited.10.1007/1-84628-148-2 ↗
29. Design and implementation of digital control system based on PAC architecture for large-capacity pulse power supply10.1109/TPS.2019.2951434 ↗
30. Disruption prediction with artificial intelligence techniques in tokamak plasmas10.1038/s41567-022-01602-2 ↗
31. Implementing deep learning-based disruption prediction in a drifting data environment of new tokamak: HL-310.1088/1741-4326/ada396 ↗
32. Magnetic control of tokamak plasmas through deep reinforcement learning10.1038/s41586-021-04301-9 ↗
33. Avoiding fusion plasma tearing instability with deep reinforcement learning10.1038/s41586-024-07024-9 ↗
34. Fuzzy-neural approaches to the prediction of disruptions in ASDEX upgrade10.1088/0029-5515/41/11/321 ↗
35. Intuitionistic fuzzy divergence for evaluating the mechanical stress state of steel plates subject to bi-axial loads10.3233/ICA-230730 ↗