Czechoslovak Journal of Physics

, Volume 55, Issue 3, pp 341–348 | Cite as

Poloidal inhomogenity of the particle fluctuation induced fluxes near the LCFS at lower hybrid heating and improved confinement transition at the FT-2 tokamak

  • S. I. Lashkul
  • A. B. Altukhov
  • A. D. Gurchenko
  • E. Z. Gusakov
  • V. V. Dyachenko
  • L. A. Esipov
  • M. Yu. Kantor
  • D. V. Kouprienko
  • A. Yu. Stepanov
  • A. P. Sharpjonok
  • S. V. Shatalin
  • E. O. Vekshina
Article

Abstract

This paper deals with the new spectral and microturbulence experimental data and their analysis, which show that the radial electric field Er generated at the lower hybrid heating (LHH) in the FT-2 is high enough to form the transport barriers. The ETB is formed when LHH is switched off. The radial fluctuation-induced E × B drift flux densities near LCFS in SOL are measured at two different poloidal angles. For this purpose two Langmuir probes located at low and high field sides of the torus are used. Registration of the poloidal and radial components of the electric field and density fluctuations at the same time during one discharge permits to measure the poloidal asymmetry of the transport reduction mechanism of the radial and poloidal particle fluxes in the SOL. The absolute \(\tilde E_\theta\)θ fluctuation levels show dependence on the sign of Er shear. The modification of the microscale turbulence by the poloidal Er × B rotation shear ωE × B at the L-H transition near LCFS is also studied by X-mode fluctuation reflectometry. The new data were obtained by spatial spectroscopic technique.

Key words

plasma tokamak transport barrier microturbulence 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    J. Boedo et al.: Nucl. Fusion 40 (2000) 1397.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    D.L. Rudakov, J.A. Boedo, R.A. Moer et al.: Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 44 (2002) 717.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    S.I. Lashkul, V.N. Budnikov, et al.: Plasma Phys. Rep. 27 (2002) 1001.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    S.I. Lashkul et al.: Czech. J. Phys. 52 (2002) 1149.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    T. Kurki-Suonio et al.: Plasma Phys. Contr. Fusion 44 (2002) 301.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    V. Rozhansky and M. Tendler: Phys. Fluids B 7 (1992) 1877.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    T. Kurki-Suonio et al.: in 30th EPS Conf. on Contr. Fusion and Plasma Phys. 2003, ECA, Vol. 27, P-3.145.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    S.V. Shatalin, E.O. Vekshina, et al.: Plasma Phys. Rep. 30 (2004) 363.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    S.V. Shatalin et al.: in 30th EPS Conf. on Contr. Fusion and Plasma Phys. 2003, ECA, Vol. 27, P-3.175.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    S.I. Lashkul et al.: in 30th EPS Conf. on Contr. Fusion and Plasma Phys. 2003, ECA, Vol. 27, P-3.151.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    S.I. Lashkul, V.N. Budnikov, et al.: Plasma Phys. Contr. Fus. 44 (2002) 653.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    A.B. Altukhov et al.: in 30th EPS Conf. on Contr. Fusion and Plasma Phys. 2003, ECA, Vol. 27, P-4.170pd.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. Hasegawa and C.G. Maclennan: Phys. Fluids 22 (1979) 2122.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of Czech Republic 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. I. Lashkul
    • 1
  • A. B. Altukhov
    • 1
  • A. D. Gurchenko
    • 1
  • E. Z. Gusakov
    • 1
  • V. V. Dyachenko
    • 1
  • L. A. Esipov
    • 1
  • M. Yu. Kantor
    • 1
  • D. V. Kouprienko
    • 1
  • A. Yu. Stepanov
    • 1
  • A. P. Sharpjonok
    • 1
  • S. V. Shatalin
    • 2
  • E. O. Vekshina
    • 2
  1. 1.A.F. Ioffe Physico-Technical InstituteSt. PetersburgRussia
  2. 2.St. Petersburg State Polytechnical UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations