Search

The next generation fusion machines are likely to face enormous heat exhaust problems. In addition to summarizing major issues and physical processes connected with these problems, we discuss how advanced divertors, obtained by modifying the local geometry, may yield workable solutions. We also point out that: (1) the initial interpretation of recent experiments show that the advantages, predicted, for instance, for the X-divertor (in particular, being able to run a detached operation at high pedestal pressure) correlate very well with observations, and (2) the X-D geometry could be implemented on ITER (and DEMOS) respecting all the relevant constraints. A roadmap for future research efforts is proposed.

A major challenge facing the design and operation of next-step high-power steady-state fusion devices is to develop a viable divertor solution with order-of-magnitude increases in power handling capability relative to present experience, while having acceptable divertor target plate erosion and being compatible with maintaining good core plasma confinement. A new initiative has been launched on DIII-D to develop the scientific basis for design, installation, and operation of an advanced divertor to evaluate boundary plasma solutions applicable to next step fusion experiments beyond ITER. Developing the scientific basis for fusion reactor divertor solutions must necessarily follow three lines of research, which we plan to pursue in DIII-D: (1) Advance scientific understanding and predictive capability through development and comparison between state-of-the art computational models and enhanced measurements using targeted parametric scans; (2) Develop and validate key divertor design concepts and codes through innovative variations in physical structure and magnetic geometry; (3) Assess candidate materials, determining the implications for core plasma operation and control, and develop mitigation techniques for any deleterious effects, incorporating development of plasma-material interaction models. These efforts will lead to design, installation, and evaluation of an advanced divertor for DIII-D to enable highly dissipative divertor operation at core density (n e/n GW), neutral fueling and impurity influx most compatible with high performance plasma scenarios and reactor relevant plasma facing components (PFCs). This paper highlights the current progress and near-term strategies of boundary/PMI research on DIII-D.

It is found that the X-divertor (XD) configuration (Kotschenreuther et al 2004 Proc. 20th Int. Conf. on Fusion Energy (Vilamoura, Portugal, 2004) (Vienna: IAEA) CD-ROM file [IC/P6-43] www-naweb.iaea.org/napc/physics/fec/fec2004/datasets/index.html, Kotschenreuther et al 2006 Proc. 21st Int. Conf. on Fusion Energy 2006 (Chengdu, China, 2006) (Vienna: IAEA), CD-ROM file [IC/P7-12] www-naweb.iaea.org/napc/physics/FEC/FEC2006/html/index.htm, Kotschenreuther et al 2007 Phys. Plasmas 14 072502) can be made with the conventional poloidal field (PF) coil set on ITER (Tomabechi et al and Team 1991 Nucl. Fusion 31 1135), where all PF coils are outside the TF coils. Starting from the standard divertor, a sequence of desirable XD configurations are possible where the PF currents are below the present maximum design limits on ITER, and where the baseline divertor cassette is used. This opens the possibility that the XD could be tested and used to assist in high-power operation on ITER, but some further issues need examination. Note that the increased major radius of the super-X-divertor (Kotschenreuther et al 2007 Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 53 11, Valanju et al 2009 Phys. Plasmas 16 5, Kotschenreuther et al 2010 Nucl. Fusion 50 035003, Valanju et al 2010 Fusion Eng. Des. 85 46) is not a feature of the XD geometry. In addition, we present an XD configuration for K-DEMO (Kim et al 2013 Fusion Eng. Des. 88 123) to demonstrate that it is also possible to attain the XD configuration in advanced tokamak reactors with all PF coils outside the TF coils. The results given here for the XD are far more encouraging than recent calculations by Lackner and Zohm (2012 Fusion Sci. Technol. 63 43) for the Snowflake (Ryutov 2007 Phys. Plasmas 14 064502, Ryutov et al 2008 Phys. Plasmas 15 092501), where the required high PF currents represent a major technological challenge. The magnetic field structure in the outboard divertor SOL (Kotschenreuther 2013 Phys. Plasmas 20 102507) in the recently created XD configurations reproduces what was presented in the earlier XD papers (Kotschenreuther et al 2004 Proc. 20th Int. Conf. on Fusion Energy (Vilamoura, Portugal, 2004) (Vienna: IAEA) CD-ROM file [IC/P6-43] www-naweb.iaea.org/napc/physics/fec/fec2004/datasets/index.html, Kotschenreuther et al 2006 Proc. 21st Int. Conf. on Fusion Energy 2006 (Chengdu, China, 2006) (Vienna: IAEA) CD-ROM file [IC/P7-12] www-naweb.iaea.org/napc/physics/FEC/FEC2006/html/index.htm, Kotschenreuther et al 2007 Phys. Plasmas 14 072502). Consequently, the same advantages accrue, but no close-in PF coils are employed.

Relying on coil positions relative to the plasma, the “Comment on ‘Magnetic geometry and physics of advanced divertors: The X-divertor and the snowflake’ ” [Phys. Plasmas 21, 054701 (2014)], emphasizes a criterion for divertor characterization that was critiqued to be ill posed [M. Kotschenreuther et al., Phys. Plasmas 20, 102507 (2013)]. We find that no substantive physical differences flow from this criteria. However, using these criteria, the successful NSTX experiment by Ryutov et al. [Phys. Plasmas 21, 054701 (2014)] has the coil configuration of an X-divertor (XD), rather than a snowflake (SF). On completing the divertor index (DI) versus distance graph for this NSTX shot (which had an inexplicably missing region), we find that the DI is like an XD for most of the outboard wetted divertor plate. Further, the “proximity condition,” used to define an SF [M. Kotschenreuther et al., Phys. Plasmas 20, 102507 (2013)], does not have a substantive physics basis to override metrics based on flux expansion and line length. Finally, if the criteria of the comment are important, then the results of NSTX-like experiments could have questionable applicability to reactors.

Advanced divertors are magnetic geometries where a second X-point is added in the divertor region to address the serious challenges of burning plasma power exhaust. Invoking physical arguments, numerical work, and detailed model magnetic field analysis, we investigate the magnetic field structure of advanced divertors in the physically relevant region for power exhaust - the Scrape-Off Layer (SOL). A primary result of our analysis is the emergence of a physical "metric", the Divertor Index DI, that quantifies the flux expansion increase as one goes from the main X-point to the strike point. It clearly separates three geometries with distinct consequences for divertor physics - the Standard Divertor (SD, DI = 1), and two advanced geometries: the X-Divertor (XD, DI > 1) and the Snowflake (SFD, DI < 1). The XD, therefore, cannot be classified as one variant of the Snowflake. By this measure, recent NSTX and DIIID experiments are X-Divertors, not Snowflakes., From Institute for Fusion Studies, The University of Texas at Austin. 34 pages, 16 figures, 2 tables