[Table of Contents]

Plasma and Fusion Research

Volume 6, 2103056 (2011)

Review Articles

Scientific and Computational Challenges of the Fusion Simulation Program (FSP)
William M. TANG
Princeton University, Plasma Physics Laboratory P.O. Box 451, Princeton, New Jersey 08543, USA
(Received 22 December 2010 / Accepted 4 February 2011 / Published 21 October 2011)

Abstract

This paper highlights the scientific and computational challenges facing the Fusion Simulation Program (FSP) - a major national initiative in the United States with the primary objective being to enable scientific discovery of important new plasma phenomena with associated understanding that emerges only upon integration. This requires developing a predictive integrated simulation capability for magnetically-confined fusion plasmas that are properly validated against experiments in regimes relevant for producing practical fusion energy. It is expected to provide a suite of advanced modeling tools for reliably predicting fusion device behavior with comprehensive and targeted science-based simulations of nonlinearly-coupled phenomena in the core plasma, edge plasma, and wall region on time and space scales required for fusion energy production. As such, it will strive to embody the most current theoretical and experimental understanding of magnetic fusion plasmas and to provide a living framework for the simulation of such plasmas as the associated physics understanding continues to advance over the next several decades. Substantive progress on answering the outstanding scientific questions in the field will drive the FSP toward its ultimate goal of developing the ability to predict the behavior of plasma discharges in toroidal magnetic fusion devices with high physics fidelity on all relevant time and space scales. From a computational perspective, this will demand computing resources in the petascale range and beyond together with the associated multi-core algorithmic formulation needed to address burning plasma issues relevant to ITER - a multibillion dollar collaborative experiment involving seven international partners representing over half the world's population. Even more powerful exascale platforms will be needed to meet the future challenges of designing a demonstration fusion reactor (DEMO). Analogous to other major applied physics modeling projects (e.g., Climate Modeling), the FSP will need to develop software in close collaboration with computers scientists and applied mathematicians and validated against experimental data from tokamaks around the world. Specific examples of expected advances needed to enable such a comprehensive integrated modeling capability and possible “co-design” approaches will be discussed.

Keywords

magnetic fusion energy, physics integration, high-performance computing, predictive simulation, experimental validation

DOI: 10.1585/pfr.6.2103056

Full Text

PDF format (402Kbytes) PDF Download

References

  • [1] W.M. Tang and V.S. Chan, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 47, R1 (2005).
  • [2] X. Garbet, Y. Idomura, L. Villard and T.H. Watanabe, Nucl. Fusion 50, 043002 (2010).
  • [3] D.A. Batchelor, M. Beck, A. Becoulet, R.V. Budny, C.S. Chang, P.H. Diamond, J.Q. Dong, G.Y. Fu, A. Fukuyama, T.S. Hahm, D.E. Keyes, Y. Kishimoto, S. Klasky, L.L. Lao, K. Li, Z. Lin, B. Ludaescher, J. Manickam, N. Nakajima, T. Ozeki, N. Podhorszki, W.M. Tang, M.A. Vouk, R.E. Waltz, S.J. Wang, H.R. Wilson, X.Q. Xu, M. Yagi and F. Zonca, Plasma Sci. Technol. 9, 312 (2007).
  • [4] W.M. Tang et al., “Scientific Grand Challenges: Fusion Energy Sciences and the Role of Computing at the Extreme Scale,” DoE-SC Peer-reviewed report on major workshop held March 18-20, 2009, Washington D.C. Final Publication PNNL-19404, 212pp (2010). Production support provided by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research and the Office of Fusion Energy Sciences, Washington, D.C. http://www.er.doe.gov/ascr/ProgramDocuments/Docs/FusionReport.pdf.
  • [5] W.W. Lee, Phys. Fluids 26, 556 (1983).
  • [6] W.W. Lee, J. Comput. Phys. 72, 243 (1987).
  • [7] Z. Lin, T.S. Hahm, W.W. Lee, W.M. Tang and R.B. White, Science 281, 1835 (1998).
  • [8] Z. Lin, T.S. Hahm, W.W. Lee, W.M. Tang and R.B. White, Phys. Plasmas 7, 1857 (2000).
  • [9] S. Ethier, W.M. Tang, R. Walkup and L. Oliker, IBM Journal of Research and Development 52, 105 (2008).
  • [10] L. Oliker et al, “Scientific Application Performance on Candidate PetaScale Platforms,” In Proc. IPDPS'07, Long Beach, CA, March 24-30, 2007.
  • [11] S. Ethier, W.M. Tang and Z. Lin, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 16, 1 (2005).
  • [12] L. Oliker et al., “Leading computational methods on scalar and vector HEC platforms,” In Proc. SC2005, Seattle, WA, Nov 12-18, 2005.
  • [13] L. Oliker, A. Canning, J. Carter, J. Shalf and S. Ethier, “Scientific Computations on Modern Parallel Vector Systems,” In Proc. SC2004, Pittsburgh, PA, Nov 6-12, 2004.
  • [14] J. Dongarra et al., “The International Exascale Software Project,” International Journal of High Performance Computing, Nov.2009, Vol.23, No.4, p.309-322; al; IESPRoadmap: http://www.exascale.org/mediawiki/images/2/20/IESP-roadmap.pdf (2010).
  • [15] R. Rosner et al., “The Opportunities and Challenges of Exascale Computing,” U. S. Dept. of Energy Office of Science, Summary Report of the Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC) Subcommittee, November, 2010, http://science.energy.gov/˜/media/ascr/ascac/pdf/reports/Exascale_subcommittee_report.pdf

This paper may be cited as follows:

William M. TANG, Plasma Fusion Res. 6, 2103056 (2011).