Paper detail

Systematic errors in tokamak magnetic equilibrium reconstruction: a study of EFIT++ at tokamak COMPASS

Uncertainties and errors in magnetic equilibrium reconstructions are a wide-spread problem in interpreting experimental data measured in the tokamak edge. This study demonstrates errors in EFIT++ reconstructions performed on the COMPASS tokamak by comparing the outer midplane separatrix position to the Velocity Shear Layer (VSL) position. The VSL is detected as the plasma potential peak measured by a reciprocating ball-pen probe. A subsequent statistical analysis of nearly 400 discharges shows a strong systematic trend in the reconstructed separatrix position relative to the VSL, where the primary factors are plasma triangularity and the magnetic axis radial position. This dependency is significantly reduced after the measuring coils positions as recorded in EFIT input are optimised to provide a closer match between the "synthetic" coil signal calculated by the Biot-Savart law in a vacuum discharge and the actual coil signal. In conclusion, we suggest that applying this optimisation may lead to more accurate and reliable reconstructions of the COMPASS equilibrium, which would have a positive impact on the accuracy of measurement analysis performed in the edge plasma.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.