7th Workshop on Fusion Data Processing Validation and Analysis Frascati 2012 Procedure and results...

7th Workshop on Fusion Data Processing Validation and Analysis Frascati 2012

Procedure and results of the validation of the real time

EQUINOX code on JET

D. Mazon1

B.Faugeras2, J. Blum2, C. Boulbe2, A. Murari3,

1

23


Latest information about EQUINOX at JET

• The updated version of the EQUINOX code has been installed with success at JET in mid December 2011.

• All the 2012 pulses (with new ITER Like Wall (ILW) are now automatically treated using magnetics and polarimetry as constraints (MSE has not been available so far).

• Calculation time is about 50ms• Statistics are now easily produced and are being

presented in the following


Methodologies of validationGlobal comparisons (full database)

• Comparison of global parameters – with the off line EFIT magnetic equilibrium reconstruction (constrained only by magnetics,

the only one produced automatically with the always the same parameters)– with the real time Beta li code which computes those quantities from magnetic

measurements• Comparison of the geometry parameters

– with the FELIX code which computes the plasma last closed magnetic flux surface (solve the Grad Shafranov equation in vacuum), highly reliable and used for shape control and vertical stabilisation.

Specific comparisons (on limited statistics)

• Comparion of EFIT/EQUINOX q profiles • Comparison with MHD markers when available• Comparison with the direct solver PROTEUS

In order to estimate the accuracy of this comparison the estimation of the error bars has been investigated


EQUINOX validation•A database of ~100 shots covering all JET parameters (density,

temperature, triangularity, BT, Ip…) has been built with the 2012 pulses (from pulse #81510 up to #82654)

•1<Ip<2.5MA 1<BT<2.65T 0.06<d<0.4•Includes all JET actual scenarios (high bp are not yet produced

with new ILW but previous statistics on former shots revealed that EQUINOX is doing well with high bp scenarios)

•All data have been carefully checked (calibration factors, fringe jumps, …) and EFIT reconstruction performed without internal measurements

•EQUINOX is running with polarimetry constrainst (4 chords are used)

•MHD analysis of some pulses has been performed (in particular for the rational surfaces)


Polarimetry layout

Chords 3, 5, 7 and 8 are used in the RT EQUINOX reconstruction


EQUINOX validation•A database of ~100 shots covering all JET parameters (density,

temperature, triangularity, BT, Ip…) has been built with the 2012 pulses (from pulse #81510 up to #82654)

•1<Ip<2.5MA 1<BT<2.65T 0.06<d<0.4•Includes all JET actual scenarios (high bp are not yet produced

with new ILW but previous statistics on former shots revealed that EQUINOX is doing well with high bp scenarios)

•All data have been carefully checked (calibration factors, fringe jumps, …) and EFIT reconstruction performed without internal measurements

•EQUINOX is running with polarimetry constrainst (4 chords are used)

•MHD analysis of some pulses has been performed (in particular for the rational surfaces)


EQUINOX validation using all the databaseGlobal parameters

Compare EQUINOX results of global and local quantities with inter-shot EFIT in particular: plasma volume, Ip, q95, q0, li. p, Rx, Zx, ROG, RIG …

Shafranov Shift Volume


EQUINOX validation using all the databaseGlobal parameters

Compare EQUINOX results of geometrical quantities with Felix

ZX RX


Example of comparison for one particular pulse #81991 (6MW NBI applied at 52s to 59.3s, Ip=2MA BT=2.9T)

Ip Rax

Zax

RX

ZX

Shafranov Shift


Compare FELIX, EFIT, EQUINOX

RIG (ROG): Right Inner (Outer) Gap (equatorial distance between separatrix and vessel at the right hand side)

RIG ROG

RIG ROG


Validate the density profile by comparing EQUINOX//EFIT/Interferometry

Chord 7 Chord 6

Chord 3Chord 8


Make an evaluation of the sensitivity of the code to the magnetics measurement errors

(random variation: up to 1% of the original input values)

At a given time:100 variation of the original magnetic set measurements were used to

produce 100 equilibria, then standard deviation from the original outputs are computed

This has been performed for several pulses at all considered times

bli

q0 ROG


EQUINOX validation using a limited number of old pulses of a previous database perfectly analysed for MHD

activity and EFIT+pola reconstruction)Compare q profiles at time where

MHD activity is identified)

EQUINOX constraint with Polarimetry

Very good agreementVery good agreement!

Compare q profiles EFIT/EQUINOX at particular time of interest (q target,

MHD modes…)wtih and without polarimetry


EQUINOX validation using a limited number of new pulses of a previous database perfectly analysed for MHD

activity and EFIT+pola reconstruction)Compare q profiles at time where

MHD activity is identified)

EQUINOX constraint with Polarimetry

Very good agreementVery good agreement!

Compare q profiles EFIT/EQUINOX at particular time of interest (q target,

MHD modes…)wtih and without polarimetry


Use of Proteus which provides inputs for EQUINOX (flux and derivative of flux at particular nodes of the grid boundary) and compare with the

outputs of EQUINOX

(EQUINOX without polarimetry)

PROTEUS EQUINOX

Ip 2e6 2e6

rmag 3.0620 3.0691

zmag 0.2972 0.2983

psia -0.2896 -0.3468

rx 2.5310 2.5279

zx -1.4180 -1.4248

psib -1.0588 -1.0605

betap 1.9050 1.7846


PROTEUS EQUINOX

Li 0.7470 0.7095

Q0 1.1550 1.8256

Q95 5.4710 5.3508

Trianu 0.4290 0.4075

Trianl 0.3720 0.3861

Vol 74.7080 74.3860

Surf 4.2520 4.2329

Perimeter 8.2750 7.9232

rgeom 2.8725 2.8726

Very good agreement except on the magnetic axis (due to lack of information)


Conclusions and perspectives•Strategy of validation and database are in place•Input data fully validated•Equinox outputs have been validated on a 100 pulses

database and a very good agreement with EFIT and FELIX has been observed•Fine tuning and optimisation of the regularisation term has

been done•Implementation of Motional Stark Effect (MSE) constraints

ready •An off line EQUINOX code will be prepared for refining the

RT analysis•Should motivate lots of activity at JET around the real-time

control of the current density profile


Many thanks to all the persons who helped at any stage in the realisation of this project in particular

, D. Valcarcel, R Felton, F. Piccolo, M. Baruzzo, P de Vries, A.Boboc, M.Brix, P. De Vries, S.Sharapov, L. Zabeo, S. Gerasimov, …

Thanks for your attention!

Acknowledgements

7th Workshop on Fusion Data Processing Validation and Analysis Frascati 2012 Procedure and results...

Documents

Transcript of 7th Workshop on Fusion Data Processing Validation and Analysis Frascati 2012 Procedure and results...