Nonlinear interaction and turbulence transition in the limiting regimes of plasma edge turbulence

Abstract

We study the nonlinear coupling mechanism and turbulent transition in magnetically confined plasma flows based on two representative limiting regime dynamics. The two-field flux-balanced Hasegawa–Wakatani (BHW) model is taken as a simplified approximation to the key physical processes in the energy-conserving nonlinear plasma flows. The limiting regimes separate the effects of finite non-adiabatic resistivity and extreme non-normal dynamics to enable a more detailed investigation on each individual aspect with the help of various mathematical tools. We adopt the strategy from the selective decay theory used for the simpler one-field system to develop new crucial a priori estimations in the two-field model framework. The competing effects from model dissipation, finite particle resistivity, as well as the nonlinear interaction with a zonal mean state to induce dual direction energy transports are characterized from the systematic analysis. Non-normal dynamics with aligned eigendirections is also shown to go through a sharp transition from turbulence to regularized zonal flows. The diverse phenomena implied from the limiting regime analysis are further confirmed from direct numerical simulations of the BHW model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

References

  1. 1.

    Balescu, R.: Aspects of Anomalous Transport in Plasmas. CRC Press, Cambridge (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Dewar, R.L., Abdullatif, R.F.: Zonal flowgeneration bymodulational instability. In: Denier J., Frederiksen J.S. (eds.) Frontiers in Turbulence and Coherent Structures. Proceedings of the COSNet/CSIRO Workshop on Turbulence and Coherent Structures in Fluids, Plasmas and Nonlinear Media, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia, 10–13 January 2006. World Scientific. https://doi.org/10.1142/6320

  3. 3.

    Diamond, P.H., Itoh, S., Itoh, K., Hahm, T.: Zonal flows in plasma—a review. Plasma Phys. Control. Fus. 47(5), R35 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Dimits, A.M., Bateman, G., Beer, M., Cohen, B., Dorland, W., Hammett, G., Kim, C., Kinsey, J., Kotschenreuther, M., Kritz, A., et al.: Comparisons and physics basis of tokamak transport models and turbulence simulations. Phys. Plasmas 7(3), 969–983 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Dorland, W., Hammett, G.: Gyrofluid turbulence models with kinetic effects. Phys. Fluids B Plasma Phys. 5(3), 812–835 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Hasegawa, A., Mima, K.: Pseudo-three-dimensional turbulence in magnetized nonuniform plasma. Phys. Fluids 21(1), 87–92 (1978)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Hasegawa, A., Wakatani, M.: Plasma edge turbulence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 50(9), 682 (1983)

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Horton, W.: Drift waves and transport. Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 735–778 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.71.735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Majda, A.J.: Introduction to Turbulent Dynamical Systems in Complex Systems. Springer, Berlin (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Majda, A.J., Holen, M.: Dissipation, topography, and statistical theories for large-scale coherent structure. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. A J. Issued Courant Inst. Math. Sci. 50(12), 1183–1234 (1997)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Majda, A.J., Qi, D.: Strategies for reduced-order models for predicting the statistical responses and uncertainty quantification in complex turbulent dynamical systems. SIAM Rev. 60(3), 491–549 (2018)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Majda, A.J., Qi, D.: Linear and nonlinear statistical response theories with prototype applications to sensitivity analysis and statistical control of complex turbulent dynamical systems. Chaos Interdiscip. J. Nonlinear Sci. 29(10), 103131 (2019)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Majda, A.J., Qi, D.: Statistical phase transitions and extreme events in shallow water waves with an abrupt depth change. J. Stat. Phys. 179, 1718–1741 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-019-02465-3

  14. 14.

    Majda, A.J., Qi, D., Cerfon, A.J.: A flux-balanced fluid model for collisional plasma edge turbulence: model derivation and basic physical features. Phys. Plasmas 25(10), 102307 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Majda, A.J., Shim, S.Y., Wang, X.: Selective decay for geophysical flows. Methods Appl. Anal. 7(3), 511–554 (2000)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Majda, A.J., Tong, X.T.: Intermittency in turbulent diffusion models with a mean gradient. Nonlinearity 28(11), 4171 (2015)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Majda, A.J., Wang, X.: Nonlinear Dynamics and Statistical Theories for Basic Geophysical Flows. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Numata, R., Ball, R., Dewar, R.L.: Bifurcation in electrostatic resistive drift wave turbulence. Phys. Plasmas 14(10), 102312 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Qi, D., Majda, A.J.: Predicting fat-tailed intermittent probability distributions in passive scalar turbulence with imperfect models through empirical information theory. Commun. Math. Sci. 14(6), 1687–1722 (2016)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Qi, D., Majda, A.J.: Linking the two-field dynamics of plasma edge turbulence with the one-field balanced model through systematic unstable forcing at low resistivity. Phys. Plasmas 26(5), 052108 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Qi, D., Majda, A.J.: Transient metastability and selective decay for the coherent zonal structures in plasma drift wave turbulence. J. Nonlinear Sci. 29(5), 2297–2339 (2019)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Qi, D., Majda, A.J.: Zonal jet creation from secondary instability of drift waves for plasma edge turbulence. Chin. Ann. Math. Ser. B 40(6), 869–890 (2019)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Qi, D., Majda, A.J.: Flux-balanced two-field plasma edge turbulence in a channel geometry. Phys. Plasmas 27(3), 032304 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Qi, D., Majda, A.J., Cerfon, A.J.: A flux-balanced fluid model for collisional plasma edge turbulence: numerical simulations with different aspect ratios. Phys. Plasmas 26(8), 082303 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Qi, D., Majda, A.J., Cerfon, A.J.: Dimits shift, avalanche-like bursts, and solitary propagating structures in the two-field flux-balanced Hasegawa-Wakatani model for plasma edge turbulence. Submitted to Phys. Plasmas. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.10554 (2020)

  26. 26.

    St-Onge, D. (2017). On non-local energy transfer via zonal flow in the Dimits shift. J. Plasma Phys. 83(5), 905830504. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022377817000708

  27. 27.

    Wakatani, M., Hasegawa, A.: A collisional drift wave description of plasma edge turbulence. Phys. Fluids 27(3), 611–618 (1984)

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Zhu, H., Zhou, Y., Dodin, I.: Theory of the tertiary instability and the Dimits shift from reduced drift-wave models. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124(5), 055002 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research of A.J.M. is partially supported by the Office of Naval Research N00014-19-1-2286. D.Q. is supported as a postdoctoral fellow on the Grant. On behalf of both authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Di Qi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

A The most likely state of the two-field BHW model from the variational principle

A The most likely state of the two-field BHW model from the variational principle

The physicists’ selective decay principle [15] states that the long time behavior of the system reaches the states with minimized energy in a given constant energy. However, from the enstrophy and energy Eqs. (23) and (24) for the limiting model \(\kappa =0\) implies that the energy will decay in a much faster rate compared with a relatively constant enstrophy in the case with a dominant adiabaticity factor \(\alpha \). For both cases, the selective decay state can be discovered by computing the critical solution under the variational principle. Here, we propose to compute the selective decay states directly through the Lagrangian multiplier method. This may offer us some intuition about the structures in the group of admissible solutions. The strategy is generalized from the basic variational method approach detailed in Section 4 of [21] for the one-field HM model.

Directly from the definition (12), the total energy and enstrophy for the BHW model can be found as

$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned}E\left( \varphi ,n\right) =&\frac{1}{2}\int \left( \left| \nabla \varphi \right| ^{2}+n^{2}\right) ,\\ W\left( \varphi ,\tilde{n}\right) =&\frac{1}{2}\int \left( \varDelta \varphi -\tilde{n}\right) ^{2}. \end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$

In the two-field BHW model, energy and enstrophy should be determined by both electrostatic potential \(\varphi \) and density fluctuation n. The variational principle here is to find the extrema of the energy E given a constant enstrophy W. According to the Lagrangian multiplier method, we need to solve the following variational relations with \(\varGamma \) as the Lagrangian multiplier

$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned} \frac{\delta E}{\delta \varphi }&=\varGamma \frac{\delta W}{\delta \varphi },\\ \frac{\delta E}{\delta \tilde{n}}&=\varGamma \frac{\delta W}{\delta \tilde{n}}. \end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$
(A.1)

The variational derivatives for the quadratic functionals W and E can be first computed directly as

$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned}\frac{\delta W}{\delta \varphi }&=\left( \varDelta ^{2}\varphi -\varDelta \tilde{n}\right) , \quad \frac{\delta W}{\delta \tilde{n}}=-\left( \varDelta \varphi -\tilde{n}\right) ,\\ \frac{\delta E}{\delta \varphi }&=-\varDelta \varphi , \quad \frac{\delta E}{\delta \tilde{n}}=\tilde{n}. \end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$

Substituting the above derivatives back to the Euler–Lagrangian equations (A.1), we find the critical state solution \(\left( \bar{\varphi }^{*},\tilde{\varphi }^{*},\tilde{n}^{*}\right) \) in the following relations:

$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned} \partial _{x}^{2}\bar{\varphi }^{*}&=-\varGamma \partial _{x}^{4}\bar{\varphi }^{*}=0,\\ \varDelta \tilde{\varphi }^{*}&=-\varGamma \varDelta \left( \varDelta \tilde{\varphi }^{*}-\tilde{n}^{*}\right) ,\\ \tilde{n}^{*}&=-\varGamma \left( \varDelta \tilde{\varphi }^{*}-\tilde{n}^{*}\right) . \end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$

For convenience, we separate the zonal and fluctuation components in the state variables. The first equation above for the zonal state implies a constant zonal velocity \(\bar{v}=V_{0}=\mathrm {const.}\) Notice that the additional constant zonal profile will not alter the solution structure since the BHW model is Galilean invariant [24]. Then, the critical solution goes to a purely fluctuation state satisfying

$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned} \varDelta \tilde{\varphi }^{*}&=\varDelta \tilde{n}^{*},\\ \varDelta ^{2}\tilde{\varphi }^{*}&=\left( 1-\varGamma ^{-1}\right) \varDelta \tilde{\varphi }^{*}. \end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$
(A.2)

This gives the HM state (18) with the density fluctuation converging to the electrostatic potential in a single constant wavenumber \(k=\left| \mathbf {k}\right| \)

$$\begin{aligned} \tilde{\varphi }^{*}=\tilde{n}^{*}=\sum _{k^{2}=\varGamma ^{-1}-1}\hat{\varphi }_{\mathbf {k}}^{+}e^{i\mathbf {k\cdot x}}, \end{aligned}$$
(A.3)

and the permitted Lagrangian multiplier \(\varGamma <1\). The critical exact solution also implies the corresponding Dirichlet quotient (25)

$$\begin{aligned} \varLambda =\frac{W}{E}=\varGamma ^{-1}. \end{aligned}$$

Combined with the monotonically decreasing \(\varLambda \) due to the resistivity effect (29), we see the solution is driven to the critical point (A.3) with the minimum permitted value of \(\varGamma \). The final permitted selective decay state is the single-mode solution with the largest resolved wavenumber. The variational principle predicts the same smallest scale state from the reversed selective decay due to the particle resistivity.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Qi, D., Majda, A.J. Nonlinear interaction and turbulence transition in the limiting regimes of plasma edge turbulence. Res Math Sci 7, 22 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40687-020-00219-2

Download citation