Analysis of the ASDEX Upgrade 3-strap antenna with TOPICA code: Curved vs. flat 3D geometry

Before the 2015/2016 experimental campaign, the ASDEX Upgrade (AUG) 2-strap ICRF antennas with tungsten-coated limiters were replaced by 3-strap antennas. The main goal of the 3-strap launcher was to reduce the release of tungsten (W) in order to improve the ICRF operation, which appeared to be trou...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Milanesio Daniele, Maggiora Riccardo, Bobkov Volodymyr
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: EDP Sciences 2017-01-01
Series:EPJ Web of Conferences
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201715703034
_version_ 1828918577024991232
author Milanesio Daniele
Maggiora Riccardo
Bobkov Volodymyr
author_facet Milanesio Daniele
Maggiora Riccardo
Bobkov Volodymyr
author_sort Milanesio Daniele
collection DOAJ
description Before the 2015/2016 experimental campaign, the ASDEX Upgrade (AUG) 2-strap ICRF antennas with tungsten-coated limiters were replaced by 3-strap antennas. The main goal of the 3-strap launcher was to reduce the release of tungsten (W) in order to improve the ICRF operation, which appeared to be troublesome after the all-W wall installation [1]. In this paper, we analyse the behaviour of the 3-strap antenna with the help of TOPICA code [2], a numerical tool able to take into account a realistic antenna geometry and an accurate plasma description. By loading an experimental plasma profile from the AUG campaign, we characterize the antenna both in terms of input parameters and of radiated fields. In particular, we compare TOPICA results obtained with a simplified 3D flat model adopted during the design phase with the exact 3D curved geometry installed on the AUG experiment. In particular, the curved model predicts a lower coupling to plasma and higher RF electric fields with slightly different distribution in front of the launcher. The capability to include a fully 3D curved model is of great importance to correctly account for all geometrical effects on the antenna performances. The advantages and disadvantages of both geometrical representations are eventually outlined, trying to estimate how the curvature of the antenna can affect code predictions. Comparisons between measured experimental results and simulated ones are presented in [8].
first_indexed 2024-12-13T21:12:46Z
format Article
id doaj.art-07e207a035114eef8467da4679f746ef
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2100-014X
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-13T21:12:46Z
publishDate 2017-01-01
publisher EDP Sciences
record_format Article
series EPJ Web of Conferences
spelling doaj.art-07e207a035114eef8467da4679f746ef2022-12-21T23:31:19ZengEDP SciencesEPJ Web of Conferences2100-014X2017-01-011570303410.1051/epjconf/201715703034epjconf_rfppc2017_03034Analysis of the ASDEX Upgrade 3-strap antenna with TOPICA code: Curved vs. flat 3D geometryMilanesio DanieleMaggiora RiccardoBobkov VolodymyrBefore the 2015/2016 experimental campaign, the ASDEX Upgrade (AUG) 2-strap ICRF antennas with tungsten-coated limiters were replaced by 3-strap antennas. The main goal of the 3-strap launcher was to reduce the release of tungsten (W) in order to improve the ICRF operation, which appeared to be troublesome after the all-W wall installation [1]. In this paper, we analyse the behaviour of the 3-strap antenna with the help of TOPICA code [2], a numerical tool able to take into account a realistic antenna geometry and an accurate plasma description. By loading an experimental plasma profile from the AUG campaign, we characterize the antenna both in terms of input parameters and of radiated fields. In particular, we compare TOPICA results obtained with a simplified 3D flat model adopted during the design phase with the exact 3D curved geometry installed on the AUG experiment. In particular, the curved model predicts a lower coupling to plasma and higher RF electric fields with slightly different distribution in front of the launcher. The capability to include a fully 3D curved model is of great importance to correctly account for all geometrical effects on the antenna performances. The advantages and disadvantages of both geometrical representations are eventually outlined, trying to estimate how the curvature of the antenna can affect code predictions. Comparisons between measured experimental results and simulated ones are presented in [8].https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201715703034
spellingShingle Milanesio Daniele
Maggiora Riccardo
Bobkov Volodymyr
Analysis of the ASDEX Upgrade 3-strap antenna with TOPICA code: Curved vs. flat 3D geometry
EPJ Web of Conferences
title Analysis of the ASDEX Upgrade 3-strap antenna with TOPICA code: Curved vs. flat 3D geometry
title_full Analysis of the ASDEX Upgrade 3-strap antenna with TOPICA code: Curved vs. flat 3D geometry
title_fullStr Analysis of the ASDEX Upgrade 3-strap antenna with TOPICA code: Curved vs. flat 3D geometry
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of the ASDEX Upgrade 3-strap antenna with TOPICA code: Curved vs. flat 3D geometry
title_short Analysis of the ASDEX Upgrade 3-strap antenna with TOPICA code: Curved vs. flat 3D geometry
title_sort analysis of the asdex upgrade 3 strap antenna with topica code curved vs flat 3d geometry
url https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201715703034
work_keys_str_mv AT milanesiodaniele analysisoftheasdexupgrade3strapantennawithtopicacodecurvedvsflat3dgeometry
AT maggiorariccardo analysisoftheasdexupgrade3strapantennawithtopicacodecurvedvsflat3dgeometry
AT bobkovvolodymyr analysisoftheasdexupgrade3strapantennawithtopicacodecurvedvsflat3dgeometry