Control-Oriented Free-Boundary Equilibrium Solver for Tokamaks

A free-boundary equilibrium solver for an axisymmetric tokamak geometry was developed based on the finite difference method and Picard iteration in a rectangular computational area. The solver can run either in forward mode, where external coil currents are prescribed until the converged magnetic flux function ψ(R,Z) map is achieved, or in inverse mode, where the desired plasma boundary, with or without an X-point, is prescribed to determine the required coil currents. The equilibrium solutions are made consistent with prescribed plasma parameters, such as the total plasma current, poloidal beta, or safety factor at a specified flux surface. To verify the mathematical correctness and accuracy of the solver, the solution obtained using this numerical solver was compared with that from an analytic fixed-boundary equilibrium solver based on the EAST geometry. Additionally, the proposed solver was benchmarked against another numerical solver based on the finite-element and Newton-iteration methods in a triangular-based mesh. Finally, the proposed solver was compared with equilibrium reconstruction results in DIII-D experiments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Plasma
Published
2024-10-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/plasma7040045
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Magnetic confinement fusion research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.64
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Control-Oriented Free-Boundary Equilibrium Solver for Tokamaks

Brian Leard, T. Rafiq, Eugenio Schuster, Sai Tej Paruchuri et al.
4 citations
Plasma
Magnetic confinement fusion research
2.64
article

Control-Oriented Free-Boundary Equilibrium Solver for Tokamaks

Brian Leard, T. Rafiq, Eugenio Schuster, Sai Tej Paruchuri, Song Xiao, Zibo Wang
article en
4 citations

Abstract

A free-boundary equilibrium solver for an axisymmetric tokamak geometry was developed based on the finite difference method and Picard iteration in a rectangular computational area. The solver can run either in forward mode, where external coil currents are prescribed until the converged magnetic flux function ψ(R,Z) map is achieved, or in inverse mode, where the desired plasma boundary, with or without an X-point, is prescribed to determine the required coil currents. The equilibrium solutions are made consistent with prescribed plasma parameters, such as the total plasma current, poloidal beta, or safety factor at a specified flux surface. To verify the mathematical correctness and accuracy of the solver, the solution obtained using this numerical solver was compared with that from an analytic fixed-boundary equilibrium solver based on the EAST geometry. Additionally, the proposed solver was benchmarked against another numerical solver based on the finite-element and Newton-iteration methods in a triangular-based mesh. Finally, the proposed solver was compared with equilibrium reconstruction results in DIII-D experiments.

PlasmaVol. 7(4)
Lehigh University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Magnetic confinement fusion research
2.64
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.