Author/Authors :
Kugel، نويسنده , , H.W. and Maingi، نويسنده , , R. and Bell، نويسنده , , M. E. Gates، نويسنده , , D. and Hill، نويسنده , , K. and LeBlanc، نويسنده , , B. and Mueller، نويسنده , , Kelly D. E. Kaita، نويسنده , , R. and Paul، نويسنده , , S. and Sabbagh، نويسنده , , S. R. Skinner، نويسنده , , C.H. and Soukhanovskii، نويسنده , , V. and Stratton، نويسنده , , B. and Raman، نويسنده , , R.، نويسنده ,
Abstract :
Density control in NSTX, involves primarily controlling impurity influxes and recycling. We have compared boronization on hot and cold surfaces, varying helium glow discharge conditioning (HeGDC) durations, helium discharge cleaning, brief daily boronization, and between discharge boronization to reduce and control spontaneous density rises. Access to Ohmic H-modes was enabled by boronization on hot surfaces, however, the duration of the effectiveness of hot and cold boronization was comparable. A 15 min HeGDC between discharges was needed for reproducible L–H transitions. He discharge conditioning yielded slower density rises than 15 min of HeGDC. Brief daily boronization followed by a comparable duration of applied HeGDC restored and enhanced good conditions. Additional brief boronizations between discharges did not improve plasma performance, if conditions were already good. Between discharge boronization required increases in the NSTX duty cycle due to the need for additional HeGDC to remove codeposited D.
Keywords :
Wall conditioning , Glow discharge cleaning , Impurity control , Discharge cleaning