Plasma and Fusion Research

Volume 12, 1403025 (2017)

Regular Articles

Extension of Numerical Matching Method to Weakly Nonlinear Evolution of Resistive MHD Modes
Masaru FURUKAWA and Shinji TOKUDA1)
Graduate School of Engineering, Tottori University, Tottori-shi, Tottori 680-8552, Japan
1)
Research Organization for Information Science and Technology, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo 140-0001, Japan
(Received 14 March 2017 / Accepted 1 May 2017 / Published 15 June 2017)

Abstract

We have extended “numerical matching method” to weakly nonlinear regime, which is relevant for the Rutherford regime of magnetic island evolution in normal magnetic shear plasmas as well as for reversed magnetic shear plasmas to which the Rutherford theory does not apply. The numerical matching method was developed for linear stability analyses of resistive magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) modes by utilizing an inner region with a finite width, that removes difficulties inherent in its numerical applications of the traditional matched asymptotic expansion. The extended method is applied to low-beta reduced MHD simulations of magnetic island evolution in cylindrical plasmas with normal and reversed magnetic shear profiles. The numerical results agree well with fully nonlinear simulation without using the matching method from the linear to weakly nonlinear regimes continuously. Since the nonlinear equation is solved only in the inner region of a finite width, the computational cost is reduced, which enables us to include more detailed physics effects. Our extended method therefore makes a significant contribution in the MHD analysis of magnetic island evolution beyond the restriction in the conventional Rutherford theory.

Keywords

magnetic island, nonlinear theory, matched solution using finite-width inner region, resistive magnetohydrodynamics

DOI: 10.1585/pfr.12.1403025

Full Text

PDF format (933Kbytes) PDF Download

References

  • [1] H.P. Furth, J. Killeen and M.N. Rosenbluth, Phys. Fluids 6, 459 (1963).
  • [2] P.H. Rutherford, Phys. Fluids 16, 1903 (1973).
  • [3] A.I. Smolyakov, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 35, 657 (1993).
  • [4] O. Sauter, R.J. La Haye, Z. Chang et al., Phys. Plasmas 4, 1654 (1997).
  • [5] R.J. La Haye, Phys. Plasmas 13, 055501 (2006).
  • [6] M. Furukawa, S. Tokuda and L.-J. Zheng, Phys. Plasmas 17, 052502 (2010).
  • [7] M. Furukawa and S. Tokuda, Phys. Plasmas 18, 062502 (2011).
  • [8] M. Furukawa and S. Tokuda, Phys. Plasmas 19, 102511 (2012).
  • [9] A. Pletzer and R.L. Dewar, J. Plasma Phys. 45, 427 (1991).
  • [10] A. Pletzer, A. Bondeson and R.L. Dewar, J. Comput. Phys. 115, 530 (1994).
  • [11] S. Tokuda and T.Watanabe, J. Plasma Fusion Res. 73, 1141 (1997).
  • [12] S. Tokuda, Nucl. Fusion 41, 1037 (2001).
  • [13] H.R. Strauss, Phys. Fluids 19, 134 (1976).
  • [14] H.R. Strauss, Phys. Fluids 20, 1354 (1977).
  • [15] W.A. Newcomb, Ann. Phys. 10, 232 (1960).
  • [16] D.P. Brennan, E.J. Strait, A.D. Turnbull, M.S. Chu, R.J. La Haye, T.C. Luce, T.S. Taylor, S. Kruger and A. Pletzer, Phys. Plasmas 9, 2998 (2002).
  • [17] M. Furukawa, The 32th Annual Meeting, the Japanese Society of Plasma and Nuclear Fusion Research, 2015, 26aE02P.