...
首页> 外文期刊>Nuclear fusion >Inter-code comparison benchmark between DINA and TSC for ITER disruption modelling
【24h】

Inter-code comparison benchmark between DINA and TSC for ITER disruption modelling

机译:用于ITER中断建模的DINA和TSC之间的代码间比较基准

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Results of 2D disruption modelling for validation of benchmark ITER scenarios using two established codes-DINA and TSC, are compared. Although the simulation models employed in those two codes ought to be equivalent in the resistive time scale, quite different defining equations and formulations are adopted in their approaches. Moreover there are considerable differences in the implemented model of solid conducting structures placed on the periphery of the plasma such as the vacuum vessel and blanket modules. Thus it has long been unanswered whether the one of the two codes is really able to reproduce the other's results correctly, since a large number of code-wise differences render the comparison task exceedingly complicated. In this paper, it is demonstrated that after the simulations are set up accounting for the model differences, a reasonably good agreement is generally obtained, corroborating the correctness of the code results. When the halo current generation and its poloidal path in the first wall are included, however, the situation is more complicated. Because of the surface averaged treatment of the magnetic field (current density) diffusion equation, DINA can only approximately handle the poloidal electric currents in the first wall that cross the field lines. Validation is carried out for DINA simulations of the halo current generation by comparing with TSC simulations, where the treatment of halo current dynamics is more justifiable. The specific details of each code, affecting the consequence in ITER disruption prediction, are highlighted and discussed.
机译:比较了使用两个已建立的代码DINA和TSC验证基准ITER情景的2D中断建模结果。尽管在这两个代码中使用的仿真模型在电阻时标上应该是等效的,但是在它们的方法中采用了完全不同的定义方程式和公式。此外,放置在等离子体外围(例如真空容器和橡皮布模块)的实心导电结构的已实现模型存在很大差异。因此,长期以来人们一直无法回答两个代码中的一个是否真的能够正确地再现另一个代码的结果,因为大量的代码差异使比较任务极为复杂。在本文中,证明了在建立了考虑模型差异的仿真后,通常可以获得相当好的协议,从而证实了代码结果的正确性。但是,如果包括第一层中的晕轮电流的产生及其极向路径,则情况就更加复杂了。由于对磁场(电流密度)扩散方程进行了表面平均处理,因此DINA仅能大致处理第一条穿过磁力线的壁中的极性电流。通过与TSC仿真进行比较,对晕电流产生的DINA仿真进行了验证,在TSC仿真中,对晕电流动力学的处理更为合理。突出并讨论了影响ITER中断预测结果的每个代码的具体细节。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Nuclear fusion》 |2014年第8期|083002.1-083002.19|共19页
  • 作者单位

    Naka Fusion Institute, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, 801-1 Mukoyama, Naka, Japan,Research Organization for Information Science and Technology, 2-4 Shirakata, Tokai-mura, Japan;

    Naka Fusion Institute, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, 801-1 Mukoyama, Naka, Japan;

    ITER-India, Institute for Plasma Research, Bhat, Gandhinagar, India;

    Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ, USA;

    NRC 'Kurchatov Institute', Institute of Tokamak Physics, 123182 Moscow, Russia;

    NRC 'Kurchatov Institute', Institute of Tokamak Physics, 123182 Moscow, Russia;

    Naka Fusion Institute, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, 801-1 Mukoyama, Naka, Japan;

    ITER Organization, Route de Vinon sur Verdon, 13115 St. Paul lez Durance, France;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);美国《生物学医学文摘》(MEDLINE);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    code benchmark; DINA; TSC; disruption; halo current; ITER;

    机译:代码基准;DINA;TSC;破坏晕电流国际热核实验堆;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号