Paper detail

Sandpile modelling of pellet pacing in fusion plasmas

Sandpile models have been used to provide simple phenomenological models without incorporating the detailed features of a fully featured model. The Chapman sandpile model Chapman et al Physical Review Letters 86, 2814 (2001) has been used as an analogue for the behaviour of a plasma edge, with mass loss events being used as analogues for ELMs. In this work we modify the Chapman sandpile model by providing for both increased and intermittent driving. We show that the behaviour of the sandpile, when continuously fuelled at very high driving, can be determined analytically by a simple algorithm. We observe that the size of the largest avalanches is better reduced by increasing constant driving than by the intermittent introduction of `pellets' of sand. Using the sandpile model as a reduced model of ELMing behaviour, we conject that ELM control in a fusion plasma may similarly prove more effective with increased total fuelling than with pellet addition.

preprint2019arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.