Plasma and Fusion Research

Volume 11, 1403104 (2016)

Regular Articles

Kinetic Modelling of Divertor Fluxes during ELMs in ITER and Effect of In/Out Divertor Plasma Asymmetries
Masanari HOSOKAWA, Alberto LOARTE, Guido T.A. HUIJSMANS, Tomonori TAKIZUKA1) and Nobuhiko HAYASHI2)
ITER Organisation, Route de Vinon sur Verdon, CS 90 046, 13067 St Paul Lez Durance Cedex, France
Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan
National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Naka, Ibaraki 311-0193 Japan
(Received 21 April 2016 / Accepted 14 June 2016 / Published 19 August 2016)


Particle and energy fluxes to the plasma facing components (PFCs) during edge localized modes (ELMs) are expected to unacceptably shorten the PFCs lifetime in ITER. In order to understand the consequences of kinetic effects of ELMs to PFCs, PARASOL simulations have been carried. Initial 1-D simulations showed that both the in/out asymmetry of divertor parameters before ELMs as well as the magnitude of the ELM energy loss itself have an influence on the in/out asymmetry of the ELM divertor fluxes with the total energy deposited at the divertor being larger at the hotter/lower recycling divertor. The role of the thermoelectric current (ISOL) has been studied with further 1-D simulations in which decreasing ISOL leads to an increase of the ELM power deposition at the colder/higher recycling divertor but the degree of in/out asymmetry is smaller than in the experiment. PARASOL-2D simulations have been carried out to study the effects of plasma drifts on the asymmetries of ELM energy and particle transport. It shows that for the favourable ∇B direction the ELM energy flux is predominantly deposited at the inner divertor while for the unfavourable ∇B direction it is at the outer divertor, which is in agreement with experimental findings.


scrape-off layer, divertor plasma, particle-in-cell simulation, edge localized mode, thermoelectric current

DOI: 10.1585/pfr.11.1403104


  • [1] A. Loarte et al., Nucl. Fusion 54, 033007 (2014).
  • [2] G.T.A. Huijsmans and A. Loarte, Nucl. Fusion 53, 123023 (2013).
  • [3] T. Takizuka, Plasma Sci. Technol. 13, 316 (2011).
  • [4] M. Hosokawa, A. Loarte, G.T.A. Huijsmans, T. Takizuka and N. Hayashi, Proc. 41st EPS Conf., paper P5.003 (Berlin, Germany, 2014).
  • [5] T. Takizuka, K. Shimizu, N. Hayashi, M. Hosokawa and M. Yagi, Nucl. Fusion 49, 075038 (2009).
  • [6] T. Takizuka and H. Abe, J. Comput. Phys. 25, 205 (1977).
  • [7] T. Takizuka and M. Hosokawa, Contrib. Plasma Phys. 46, 698 (2006).
  • [8] T. Takizuka and M. Hosokawa, Trans. Fusion Sci. Technol. 51, 271 (2007).
  • [9] T. Takizuka, N. Oyama and M. Hosokawa, Contrib. Plasma Phys. 48, 207 (2008).
  • [10] D. Tskhakaya et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 390-391, 335 (2009).
  • [11] R.A. Pitts et al., Nucl. Fusion 47, 1437 (2007).
  • [12] D. Tskhakaya et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 415, S860 (2011).
  • [13] D. Tskhakaya et al., Theory of Fusion Plasmas, Societa Italiana di Fisica, Bologna, Italy, 97 (2004).
  • [14] A.S. Kukushkin et al., Nucl. Fusion 49, 075008 (2009).
  • [15] A. Loarte et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 401-405, 463 (2015).
  • [16] A. Loarte et al., Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 44, 1815 (2002).
  • [17] T. Eich et al., J. Nucl. Mater. 363-365, 989 (2007).