D-shape cross-section of plasma in fusion reactors

In summary, the D-shaped cross section in modern fusion reactors such as ITER and DIII-D is more stable compared to a circular cross-section due to the 'D' configuration that wraps the plasma around the axis perpendicular to the toroid plane. This results in a gradient in the magnetic field which minimizes peak intensity and maximizes mean intensity. Additionally, variations in the magnetic field, such as those in D-shaped plasmas, can help stabilize instabilities. While there may not be a simple explanation for why D-shaped plasmas have improved stability, it is a well-documented phenomenon in the field of fusion research.
  • #1
Andropov
4
1
I was curious about why the plasma inside a modern fusion reactor (ITER, DIII-D) is modeled with a D-shaped cross section.

From what I've read, it is more stable that way, but WHY is it more stable than a similar plasma flow with a circular cross-section?

Thanks in advance (and sorry if I posted this in the wrong section, I hope not)
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
The 'D' configuration is nearly half of an 'O', and the plasma is 'wrapped' around the axis perpendicular to the plane of the toroid. A toroidal plasma has a gradient in the magnetic field in the radial direction, with the toroidal/azimuthal field strongest at the inner surface on the horizontal plane formed by the major radius. Ideally, one minimizes the peak magnetic field intensity, so one can maximize the mean field intensity.
 
  • #3
Ok, thanks! That was exactly what I wanted to know.
 
  • #4
Astronuc said:
Ideally, one minimizes the peak magnetic field intensity, so one can maximize the mean field intensity.

This really isn't that big of a concern, especially in the context of stability. In fact, gradients in the magnetic field lead to magnetic shear which stabilizes many instabilities. To a certain extent variations in the magnetic field are desirable.

I'm not sure if there is an intuitive explanation as to why D shaped plasmas have improved stability. But its true that they have improved stability with regards to a number of different types of instabilities. I'll look at Freidberg's book and see if he gives a simple explanation.
 

1. What is a D-shape cross-section of plasma in fusion reactors?

A D-shape cross-section of plasma in fusion reactors refers to the shape of the plasma (a state of matter consisting of ionized gas) in a fusion reactor. The D-shape refers to the flattened, elongated shape of the plasma, resembling the letter D. This shape is necessary for efficient fusion reactions to occur.

2. Why is a D-shape cross-section preferred in fusion reactors?

The D-shape cross-section is preferred in fusion reactors because it allows for better control and confinement of the plasma. This shape also reduces the instabilities that can occur in the plasma, making it easier to sustain fusion reactions.

3. How is the D-shape cross-section achieved in fusion reactors?

The D-shape cross-section is achieved by using specialized magnets to shape and control the plasma. These magnets create a strong magnetic field that keeps the plasma in the desired D-shape and prevents it from touching the walls of the reactor.

4. Are there any disadvantages to using a D-shape cross-section in fusion reactors?

One potential disadvantage of using a D-shape cross-section is that it requires more complex and expensive magnet systems. However, this is necessary for efficient and stable fusion reactions to occur.

5. Are there any other shapes of plasma used in fusion reactors?

Yes, there are other shapes of plasma used in fusion reactors, such as circular and triangular. However, the D-shape has been found to be the most efficient and stable shape for fusion reactions. Scientists are also exploring other shapes, such as the snowflake shape, for potential benefits in fusion reactions.

Similar threads

  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
845
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
29
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
28
Views
26K
  • Nuclear Engineering
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
Back
Top