On the merits of heating and current drive for tearing mode stabilization

Abstract

Neoclassical tearing modes (NTMs) are magnetohydrodynamic modes that can limit the performance of high β discharges in a tokamak, leading eventually to a plasma disruption. A NTM is sustained by the perturbation of the ‘bootstrap’ current, which is a consequence of the pressure flattening across a magnetic island. Control and suppression of this mode can be achieved by means of electron cyclotron waves (ECWs) which allow the deposition of highly localized power at the island location. The ECW power replenishes the missing bootstrap current by generating a current perturbation either inductively, through a temperature perturbation (electron cyclotron resonance heating), or non-inductively by direct current drive (electron cyclotron current drive). Although both methods have been applied successfully to experiments showing a predominance of ECRH for medium-sized limiter tokamaks (TEXTOR, T-10) and of ECCD for mid-to-large-sized divertor tokamaks (AUG, DIII-D, JT-60), conditions determining their relative importance are still unclear. We address this problem with a numerical study focused on the contributions of heating and current drive to the temporal evolution of NTMs as described by the modified Rutherford equation. For the effects of both heating as well as current drive, simple analytical expressions have been found in terms of an efficiency fore-factor times a ‘geometrical’ term depending on the power deposition width wdep, location and modulation. When the magnetic island width w equals the width of the deposition profile, w ≈ wdep, both geometric terms are practically identical. Whereas for current drive the geometric term approaches a constant for small island widths and is inversely proportional to (w/wdep)2 for large island widths, the heating term approaches a constant for large island widths and is proportional to (w/wdep) for small island widths. For medium-sized tokamaks (TEXTOR, AUG) the heating and current drive efficiencies are of the same order of magnitude, whereas in a future, large reactor like ITER the current drive efficiency is expected to be significantly larger.