Fluid and kinetic studies of tokamak disruptions using Bayesian optimization
Authors:
Ida Ekmark,
Mathias Hoppe,
Tünde Fülöp,
Patrik Jansson,
Liam Antonsson,
Oskar Vallhagen,
Istvan Pusztai
Abstract:
When simulating runaway electron dynamics in tokamak disruptions, fluid models with lower numerical cost are often preferred to more accurate kinetic models. The aim of this work is to compare fluid and kinetic simulations of a large variety of different disruption scenarios in ITER. We consider both non-activated and activated scenarios; for the latter we derive and implement kinetic sources for…
▽ More
When simulating runaway electron dynamics in tokamak disruptions, fluid models with lower numerical cost are often preferred to more accurate kinetic models. The aim of this work is to compare fluid and kinetic simulations of a large variety of different disruption scenarios in ITER. We consider both non-activated and activated scenarios; for the latter we derive and implement kinetic sources for the Compton scattering and tritium beta decay runaway electron generation mechanisms in our simulation tool DREAM [M. Hoppe et al 2021 Comp. Phys. Commun. 268, 108098]. To achieve a diverse set of disruption scenarios, Bayesian optimization is used to explore a range of massive material injection densities for deuterium and neon. The cost function is designed to distinguish between successful and unsuccessful disruption mitigation based on the runaway current, current quench time and transported fraction of the heat loss. In the non-activated scenarios, we find that fluid and kinetic disruption simulations can have significantly different runaway electron dynamics, due to an overestimation of the runaway seed by the fluid model. The primary cause of this is that the fluid hot-tail generation model neglects superthermal electron transport losses during the thermal quench. In the activated scenarios, the fluid and kinetic models give similar predictions, which can be explained by the significant influence of the activated sources on the RE dynamics and the seed.
△ Less
Submitted 5 July, 2024; v1 submitted 8 February, 2024;
originally announced February 2024.
Bayesian optimization of massive material injection for disruption mitigation in tokamaks
Authors:
Istvan Pusztai,
Ida Ekmark,
Hannes Bergström,
Peter Halldestam,
Patrik Jansson,
Mathias Hoppe,
Oskar Vallhagen,
Tünde Fülöp
Abstract:
A Bayesian optimization framework is used to investigate scenarios for disruptions mitigated with combined deuterium and neon injection in ITER. The optimization cost function takes into account limits on the maximum runaway current, the transported fraction of the heat loss and the current quench time. The aim is to explore the dependence of the cost function on injected densities, and provide in…
▽ More
A Bayesian optimization framework is used to investigate scenarios for disruptions mitigated with combined deuterium and neon injection in ITER. The optimization cost function takes into account limits on the maximum runaway current, the transported fraction of the heat loss and the current quench time. The aim is to explore the dependence of the cost function on injected densities, and provide insights into the behaviour of the disruption dynamics for representative scenarios. The simulations are conducted using the numerical framework DREAM (Disruption Runaway Electron Analysis Model). We show that irrespective of the quantities of the material deposition, multi-megaampere runaway currents will be produced in the deuterium-tritium phase of operations, even in the optimal scenarios. However, the severity of the outcome can be influenced by tailoring the radial profile of the injected material; in particular if the injected neon is deposited at the edge region it leads to a significant reduction of both the final runaway current and the transported heat losses. The Bayesian approach allows us to map the parameter space efficiently, with more accuracy in favorable parameter regions, thereby providing us information about the robustness of the optima.
△ Less
Submitted 24 February, 2023; v1 submitted 2 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
