What is the use for plasma pressure?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter rogerk8
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Plasma Pressure
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of plasma pressure in plasma physics, exploring its significance, applications, and relationship with other physical properties such as temperature and particle density. Participants examine the role of pressure in plasma confinement and its analogy to fluid pressure, while also questioning its practical implications in fusion research.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the utility of plasma pressure, suggesting it merely indicates that higher pressure requires increased particle density or temperature.
  • Another participant draws an analogy between plasma pressure and general pressure, emphasizing its importance in plasma confinement.
  • A participant discusses the relationship between pressure and force, noting that pressure can be both omnidirectional and directional, and relates this to magnetic confinement in Tokamaks.
  • Some participants highlight that plasma pressure is analogous to fluid pressure, which aids in understanding confinement requirements in fusion research.
  • Concerns are raised about the relationship between pressure and temperature, with participants noting that increased pressure does not always correlate with increased temperature.
  • Questions are posed regarding the specific pressure needed for plasma ignition and the implications of particle density on fusion processes.
  • One participant expresses a desire to understand the basic gas laws and their relation to plasma pressure, indicating a need for foundational knowledge in the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of understanding and agreement on the role of plasma pressure, with some acknowledging its importance while others remain unclear about its specific applications and implications in plasma physics. The discussion reflects multiple competing views and unresolved questions regarding the concept.

Contextual Notes

Some participants indicate limitations in their understanding of fundamental concepts related to pressure and plasma physics, suggesting a need for further study and clarification of basic principles.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in plasma physics, fusion research, and the underlying principles of pressure in physical systems, particularly those seeking to refresh or deepen their understanding of these concepts.

rogerk8
Messages
288
Reaction score
1
Hi!

I just wonder what's the actual use for

p=nkT≈nE_k[J/m^3]
when it comes to plasma physics?

What does p help us understand/enable?

While Ek is related to particle velocity and thus temperature, this "new" concept of pressure tells me nothing other than particle density will have to be increased (at the same T) for higher pressure.

Or you may see it as an increasement of v (and thus T) for higher p (at the same n).

Or a combination.

But what's the use?

Roger
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider analogy: what use is "pressure" in general?
i.e. think about plasma confinement.
 
To me pressure in general is force distributed over an area

p=F/A
but even here it sounds unneccesary to invent this concept because we all f.i know that if something has mass and is resting on something

F=mg
which is simple to comprehend because of F being a vector thus having both direction and magnitude. Calculating a resultant force is also simple.

But when it comes to pressure things suddenly becomes omnidirectional.

A useful consequence of pressure is however a drawing-pin's ability to penetrate rather hard materials due to it's pointed edge. But here we have pressure that actually has direction.

Pressure is therefore not only omnidirectional. It may have direction also while at the same time being defined as a scalar.

But I probably mix gas pressure and force pressure up.

Anyway, let's say force is omnidirectional in a magnetical confinement and begin with

F=q(E+vXB)
Then a high F affecting the limited area of the Tokamak plasma surface would yield a high plasma pressure.

While v is huge due to extreme temperatures, F is very high too.

So we have a situation where F is very high and acting upon a relitively small outer plasma surface.

This should mean that plasma pressure is very high indeed.

The little I've heard about Tokamaks however tells me that they often state "we need to get high pressure". But to me this is the same as saying that "we need high temperatures".

I simply do not get why they "circumvent" kinetic energy for pressure suddenly because the above reasoning seems equally true for temperature (or Ek).

Finally, would you mind providing me with a link where I can read more about this (I have read the Wikipedia article on pressure but will read it again)?

Or even better, talk to me and correct my wrongfulness.

Roger
PS
But of course we need to have a volume density of particles also otherwise we would not have a plasma at all. And the formulas for Ek only holds v & T.
 
Last edited:
For plasma pressure think: fluid pressure.
A high plasma pressure requires more effort in building confinement.
In fusion research the confinement is electromagnetic - so the bigger the plasma pressure the bigger the magnets you need to confine it just like a high pressure gas needs a thicker walled cylinder.

Pressure and temperature in a plasma are related of course - just as they are related in a gas.
But increased pressure is not always the same as increased temperature ... depends on the context.
Same with gas pressure.

Plasma pressure is useful for the same reason gas pressure is useful.

I think you will benefit from looking up college "introduction to plasma physics" courses.
If you do not have at least a beginning college background i math and physics you will want to back-fill the knowledge as you go. i.e.
http://silas.psfc.mit.edu/introplasma/
 
Simon Bridge said:
For plasma pressure think: fluid pressure.
Ok, plasma pressure equals fluid (which I recently have understood is the name for both gases and liquids) pressure.
A high plasma pressure requires more effort in building confinement.
In fusion research the confinement is electromagnetic - so the bigger the plasma pressure the bigger the magnets you need to confine it just like a high pressure gas needs a thicker walled cylinder.
I very much like your simple analogy.

Simplifying my equation above

F=q(vXB)
Where B is the strength of the confinement magnetic flux density.

Pressure and temperature in a plasma are related of course - just as they are related in a gas.
But increased pressure is not always the same as increased temperature ... depends on the context.
Same with gas pressure.
I kind of get this. By creating the pressure concept we have two variables (T&n) which may be changed "optionally".

And as I said in my PS I get that n needs to be there because if n=0 we actually have no plasma/gas at all.

So pressure is a useful concept all things considered.

But what I don't get is the actual use for pressure in this case. What does pressure enable? Other than as you have said, making it harder to confine the plasma.

Is there some limit to pressure where actual ignition of the plasma may occur?

In other words, how much pressure is needed for DT-fuel to ignite?

And why is 100 million degrees at the same time "determined"?

Which also would mean that we need a certain volume density for it all to ignite.

This I don't get because high density just means that the Hydrogen isotopes are closer to each other.

Plasma pressure is useful for the same reason gas pressure is useful.
This I obviously have to study some more.

I think you will benefit from looking up college "introduction to plasma physics" courses.
If you do not have at least a beginning college background i math and physics you will want to back-fill the knowledge as you go. i.e.
http://silas.psfc.mit.edu/introplasma/

Thank you very much for that link as well as your nice answer.

With regard to my stupid questions you may not believe this but I actually hold a Mater's degree in Electrical Engineering :smile:

The only excuse I have for my stupidity is that I graduated 18 years ago...

You should also be aware that I back then even took a couple of courses in Plasma Physics.

Since I have forgotten so much (or perhaps never understood) I am eager to refresh my knowledges.

Hope you still want to educate me!

Roger
 
But what I don't get is the actual use for pressure in this case.
The concept is used in the fluid model for plasma physics - the references I gave you go into detail. TLDR: it has the same basic use as in fluids.

What does pressure enable? Other than as you have said, making it harder to confine the plasma.
It enables an understanding of fluids to be used, in a modified form, to help you work with plasmas.
Just like understanding pressure in fluids helps you doing pretty much anything with fluids.

Since you have to manipulate a plasma using magnetic fields, you got to know about the pressures that will be pushing against the fields. It helps you understand the interaction in-bulk so you can tell where the plasma will go and how it will behave.

Aside:
Elect.Eng. is a different skill set to plasma physics and 18 years is a long time so I feel for you - things change. Your experience at post-grad level should allow you to bring yourself up to speed quite quickly using the lecture notes I gave you end of post #4. That part is like falling off a bicycle ... you'll get back into the rhythm easily.

Enjoy.
 
I will read the "Introduction to Plasma Physics" link you so nicely have provided and not disturb you again until I'm finished.

Yet I think my problem is basic understanding of the common gas law. So I think I will begin by reading my shoolar books about the pressure business. I seem to remember something about adiabatic processes but I only remember that

(pV)^\gamma=constant
or something the like.

Yet it doesn't really tell me anything. Just a formula :smile:

Finally, thank you for your encouragement!

Take care!

Roger
PS
I hope I don't need to learn rot and div again :smile:

Appendix:

F=m\frac{dv}{dt}=q(vXB)
v==v_0e^{jwt}
jwm=qB
using this imaginary part
w_c=\frac{qB}{m}
v==w_cr_L
r_L=\frac{mv}{qB}

and the area is thus

A=2\pi r_L*C_{iter}
where C is some 20m(?) which would give

A=40\pi r_L
And the magnitude of F above is

F=qvB
Playing with protons only with a B of 5T and a kT of 10keV (ref: the_wolfman)

E_k=\frac{m_pv^2}{2}≈kT

we have
v=\sqrt{2kT/m_p}

and thus
r_L=m_pv/eB=m_p\sqrt{2kT/m_p}/eB=\sqrt{2kTm_p}/eB

Now,
p=F/A=evB/A=e\sqrt{2kT/m_p}B/(2\pi r_L C_{iter})=e\sqrt{2kT/m_p}B/(2\pi C_{iter}\sqrt{2kTm_p}/eB )

getting rediculous...

p=e^2B^2\sqrt{2kT/m_p}/(2\pi C_{iter}\sqrt{2kTm_p})=e^2B^2/(2\pi C_{iter}m_p)=(1,6e^{-19}*5)^2/(2\pi*20*1,67e^{-27})≈3pPa

which also is independent of T :smile:
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
9K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K