xox/paper_neutralcalibration_op2.1
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

save accumulated changes

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Georg Schlisio
2023-06-30 14:39:53 +02:00
parent 99741d0f22
commit 3c8abaf14b
2 changed files with 23 additions and 48 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

BIN
manuscript.pdf
View File

Binary file not shown.

69
manuscript.tex
View File

@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik,Boltzmannstra{\ss}e 1, Garching, Germany
\affiliation{ \affiliation{
Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, Wendelsteinstra{\ss}e 1, 17491 Greifswald, Germany Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, Wendelsteinstra{\ss}e 1, 17491 Greifswald, Germany
} }
\author{} \author{PRELIMINARY AUTHOR LIST}
\affiliation{ \affiliation{
Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, Wendelsteinstra{\ss}e 1, 17491 Greifswald, Germany Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, Wendelsteinstra{\ss}e 1, 17491 Greifswald, Germany
} }
@@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ From the ideal gas law we get the volume $V$ with the pressure difference $p$ an
V = \frac{n k_b T}{p} . V = \frac{n k_b T}{p} .
\end{align} \end{align}
A well characterized test volume with \SI{0.392116}{\liter} was filled with Argon gas up to a pressure of \SI{00}{\milli\bar} and left for temperature equilibration. %TODO value A well characterized test volume with \SI{0.392116}{\liter} was filled with Argon gas up to a pressure of \SI{00}{\milli\bar} and left for temperature equilibration. %TODO value
Subsequently the test volume, attached to the DRGA diagnostic, was expanded into the diagnostic and, through the open gate valve, into the PV, where the resulting pressure was observed with a capacitance manometer. Subsequently the test volume, attached to the DRGA diagnostic \cite{Schlisio2019}, was expanded into the diagnostic and, through the open gate valve, into the PV, where the resulting pressure was observed with a capacitance manometer.
% volume temperature was checked with a IR camera\footnote{Bosch Professional GTC400 C} % volume temperature was checked with a IR camera\footnote{Bosch Professional GTC400 C}
@@ -236,7 +236,8 @@ For the expansion method, a well characterized test volume of was filled with N
\subsection{Injection method} \subsection{Injection method}
For the injection method, a mass flow controller (MFC, MKS GE50A) with a fullscale of \SI{5000}{sccm} was used at an injection rate of 9 mbar l / s for 120s, resulting in a pressure increase of about 1 Pa. The PV volume is then calculated by For the injection method, a mass flow controller (MFC, MKS GE50A) with a fullscale of \SI{5000}{sccm} was used at an injection rate of \SI{9}{\milli\bar\liter\per\second} for \SI{120}{\second}, resulting in a pressure increase of about \SI{1}{\pascal}.
The PV volume is then calculated by
\begin{align} \begin{align}
\nu = Q \cdot \frac{T}{p} \nu = Q \cdot \frac{T}{p}
\end{align} \end{align}
@@ -247,18 +248,17 @@ The measured pressure was corrected for the leak rate, which was assumed to be l
\begin{tabular}{ccccc} \begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\textbf{method} & \textbf{W7-X program} & \textbf{Gas type} & \textbf{volume (l)} & \textbf{uncertainty (l)} \\ \textbf{method} & \textbf{W7-X program} & \textbf{Gas type} & \textbf{volume (l)} & \textbf{uncertainty (l)} \\
\hline \hline
expansion \\ expansion & - & Ar & 116 842 & 1 076 \\
expansion \\
expansion total & & & xxx & xxx \\
\hline \hline
injection & DCH\_20230414-event2 & N2 & 109 672 & 2036 \\ injection & DCH\_20230414-event2 & N2 & 109 672 & 2 036 \\
injection & DCH\_20230414-event3 & N2 & 107 780 & 167 \\ injection & DCH\_20230414-event3 & N2 & 107 780 & 167 \\
injection & DCH\_20230414-event4 & N2 & 107 786 & 251 \\ injection & DCH\_20230414-event4 & N2 & 107 786 & 251 \\
injection & DCH\_20230419-event1 & He & 110 697 & 319 \\ injection & DCH\_20230419-event1 & He & 110 697 & 319 \\
injection & DCH\_20230419-event2 & H2 & 107 307 & 132 \\ injection & DCH\_20230419-event2 & H2 & 107 307 & 132 \\
injection total & & & 107 795 & 92 \\ injection total & - & - & 107 795 & 92 \\
\hline \hline
Grand total & & & & Grand total & - & - & &
\end{tabular} \end{tabular}
\caption{} \caption{}
@@ -271,27 +271,29 @@ The obtained data was averaged over the plateau time of 10 s and individually fi
\section{NBI box volume and pumping speed} \section{NBI box volume and pumping speed}
The W7X NBI consists of two practically identical systems, NI20 and NI21, [reference] which feature a large UHV volume with included Titanium getter pump. The W7X NBI consists of two practically identical systems, NI20 and NI21, [reference] which feature a large UHV volume with included Titanium getter pump.
The box volume was determined in an expansion experiment, where the PV was filled with He up to a pressure of 9.7621e-03 mbar and subsequently expanded into the NI20 system by opening the gate valve. The box volume was determined in an expansion experiment, where the PV was filled with He up to a pressure of \SI{9.7621e-03}{\milli\bar} and subsequently expanded into the NI20 system by opening the gate valve.
After equilibration, a pressure of 7.7213e-03 mbar was measured, yielding an NBI box volume $V_{NBI} = 0.2643 * V_{PV} = \SI{28.4910}{\cubic \meter}$. After equilibration, a pressure of \SI{7.7213e-03}{\milli\bar} was measured, yielding an NBI box volume $V_{NBI} = 0.2643 * V_{PV} = \SI{28.4910}{\cubic \meter}$.
The getter pump pumping speed was determined with a similar experiment, but with Hydrogen instead of Helium. The getter pump pumping speed was determined with a similar experiment, but with Hydrogen instead of Helium.
The pressure drop after opening the gate valve was fitted with The pressure drop after opening the gate valve was fitted with
\begin{align} \begin{align}
p(t) = p_0 e^{-\frac{S}{V} \cdot t} + p_{base} p(t) = p_0 \, e^{-\frac{S}{V} \cdot t} + p_{base}
\end{align} \end{align}
Where P0 is the initial pressure, S the pumping speed, V the total volume of the system, and $p_{base}$ the observed base pressure after equilibration. Where $p_0$ is the initial pressure, S the pumping speed, V the total volume of the system, and $p_{base}$ the observed base pressure after equilibration.
\section{TMP pumping speed} \section{TMP pumping speed}
The TMP pumping speed was determined by a number of gas inj experiments… The TMP pumping speed was determined by a number of gas injection experiments…
\section{CVP pumping speed} \section{CVP pumping speed}
The CVP pumping speed was determined by a number of experiments for a set of gases: H2, He, N2, Ar, both with and without TMP. The CVP pumping speed was determined by a number of experiments for a set of gases: H2, He, N2, Ar, both with and without TMP.
% publication envisages by V. Haak
\section{QRT02 endoscope flushing} \section{QRT02 endoscope flushing}
The QRT02 endoscopes employ mirrors inside the PV, which are expected to receive some degree of material deposition. The QRT02 endoscopes employ mirrors inside the PV, which are expected to receive some degree of material deposition.
To minimize the deposition and keep reflectivity high, the endoscope in AEA31 was equipped with a hydrogen flushing system which constantly feeds a small stream of hydrogen over the mirrors into the PV. To minimize the deposition and keep reflectivity high, the endoscope in AEA31 was equipped with a hydrogen flushing system which constantly feeds a small stream of hydrogen over the mirrors into the PV.
As of OP2.1, this leak rate was measured to be \SI{3.63}{\milli\bar\liter\per\second} (QRT\_20230424-event3) by running the flushing system in an unpumped PV. As of OP2.1, this leak rate was measured to be \SI{3.63}{\milli\bar\liter\per\second} (QRT\_20230424-event3) by running the flushing system in an unpumped PV.
Due to the small injection rate, the measured pressure increase had to be corrected for the leak rate To maintain sufficient accuracy at the small injection rate, the measured pressure increase had to be corrected for the leak rate.
@@ -312,46 +314,16 @@ Due to the small injection rate, the measured pressure increase had to be correc
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{\label{sec:summary}Conclusions} \section{\label{sec:summary}Conclusions}
\begin{table}
% sorry for the hacky table…
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
scenario & \shortstack{experiment\\ID} & \shortstack{plasma\\duration} & \shortstack{total\\injected} & \shortstack{total\\removed} & \shortstack{net\\wall} & removed/injected \\
\toprule
\shortstack{Simple plasma \\ (section \ref{sec:basicplasma})} & 20180829.6 & \SI{4}{\second} & \num{ 3.23 } & \num{ 25.9 } & \num{ -22.7 } & 8.02 \\
\midrule
\multirow{2}*{
\shortstack{short term retention \\ (section \ref{sec:retention})}
} & 20180816.9 & \SI{15}{\second} & \num{ 37.6 } & \num{ 30.0 } & \num{ 7.60 } & 0.80 \\
& 20180816.10 & \SI{15}{\second} & \num{ 10.5 } & \num{ 47.3 } & \num{ -36.8 } & 4.50 \\
\midrule
\multirow{4}*{
\shortstack{long term retention \\ (section \ref{sec:100s})}
} & 20181017.15 & \SI{40}{\second} & \num{ 103 } & \num{ 95.9 } & \num{ 7.10 } & 0.93 \\
& 20181017.16 & \SI{53}{\second} & \num{ 89.2 } & \num{ 287 } & \num{ -198 } & 3.22 \\
& 20181017.17 & \SI{78}{\second} & \num{ 99.9 } & \num{ 344 } & \num{ -244 } & 3.44 \\
& 20181017.19 & \SI{100}{\second} & \num{ 129 } & \num{ 402 } & \num{ -273 } & 3.12 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:inout}
Overview of total injected and removed particles as well as net wall result, for all discussed experiments.
All particle numbers are given as \num{e20} $H_2$ molecules.
Last column shows ratio of injected and removed particle count for easier comparison.
}
\end{table}
\begin{acknowledgments} \begin{acknowledgments}
This work has been carried out within the framework of the EUROfusion This work has been carried out within the framework of the EUROfusion Consortium, funded by the European Union via the Euratom Research and Training Programme (Grant Agreement No 101052200 — EUROfusion). Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Commission. Neither the European Union nor the European Commission can be held responsible for them.
Consortium and has received funding from the Euratom research and
training programme 2014-2018 and 2019-2020 under grant agreement No
633053. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily
reflect those of the European Commission.
\end{acknowledgments} \end{acknowledgments}
\appendix \appendix
\nocite{*} \nocite{*}
\bibliography{aipsamp}% Produces the bibliography via BibTeX.
\begin{thebibliography}{10} \begin{thebibliography}{10}
@@ -370,6 +342,9 @@ U. Wenzel, et al., RSI (2019) % DOI https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5121203
\bibitem{Kremeyer2020} \bibitem{Kremeyer2020}
T. Kremeyer, et al., RSI (2020) % https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5125863 T. Kremeyer, et al., RSI (2020) % https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5125863
\bibitem{Schlisio2019}
G. Schlisio et al, RSI (2019) % DOI: 10.1063/1.5098125
\end{thebibliography} \end{thebibliography}
\end{document} \end{document}