Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:27:36.762Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Progress of open systems at Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2024

P.A. Bagryansky*
Affiliation:
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk, 630090 Russia
*
Email address for correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract

This paper is based on a report at the 2nd International Fusion Plasma Conference & 13th International Conference on Open Magnetic Systems for Plasma Confinement (iFPC & OS 2023), August 21–25, 2023, Busan, Korea and provides a brief overview of the status of work at the Budker Institute on the study of hot plasma confinement in open-type magnetic traps with a linear axisymmetric configuration. The main attention is paid to key problems: magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) stability in regimes with extremely high relative pressure, longitudinal electronic thermal conductivity, stability with respect to the development of kinetic modes and transverse transport. This paper provides an overview of the methods we are developing to address these problems, the experimental and theoretical results achieved and plans for future development. The last section of the article provides brief information about the preliminary design of the gas-dynamic multiple-mirror trap device, the development of which has been completed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

1 Introduction

Research in the field of controlled nuclear fusion at the Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics (BINP, Novosibirsk, Russia) are focused on the development of open-type magnetic traps – mirror cells with a linear axisymmetric configuration (see figure 1). Even in the pioneering works (see, for example, Post Reference Post1958) it was shown that, in the simplest configuration, a mirror cell can provide a fusion gain factor $Q \sim 1$ for the deuterium-tritium (DT) fusion reaction. But this cannot be exceeded due to a high level of axial losses of particles and energy. At this level of $Q$, the mirror cell can only be considered as a neutron source.

Figure 1. Schematic view of a mirror cell in its simplest configuration: 1 – magnetic trap; 2 – mirror plug; 3 – expander; 4 – neutral beams.

To increase the gain factor $Q$, it is necessary to reduce radically the level of axial losses. This can be achieved in principle in two ways: through additional magnetic sections attached at the ends to the mirror cell and capable of reducing many times axial flows of particles and energy, or in some way radically improving plasma confinement in the trap itself. In past years, a number of methods for such improvement were proposed and investigated: ambipolar, multiple-mirror and gas-dynamic traps, a trap with a rotating plasma and others. A detailed review of past research can be found in Post (Reference Post1987).

Currently, the BINP is developing two approaches to improving plasma confinement in an open-type magnetic trap (Bagryansky, Beklemishev & Postupaev Reference Bagryansky, Beklemishev and Postupaev2019). One of these approaches is associated with the use of multiple-mirror sections (Burdakov & Postupaev Reference Burdakov and Postupaev2018), including helical ones (Beklemishev Reference Beklemishev2016b), where collective effects play a key role in limiting the flow of particles and energy. The other assumes a transition to the diamagnetic confinement mode (Beklemishev Reference Beklemishev2016a), when the magnetic field inside the plasma column becomes close to zero, and the relative plasma pressure tends to unity ($\beta \rightarrow 1$). These approaches are used in the development of a project for a gas-dynamic multiple-mirror trap (GDMT) (Skovorodin et al. Reference Skovorodin, Chernoshtanov, Amirov, Astrelin, Bagryanskii, Beklemishev, Burdakov, Gorbovskii, Kotel'nikov and Magommedov2023), which should become a demonstrator of the technologies necessary for the development of nuclear fusion reactors based on an open-type magnetic trap with a linear axisymmetric configuration.

Experimental support for the GDMT project is carried out at several relatively small research facilities: gas-dynamic trap (GDT) (Ivanov & Prikhodko Reference Ivanov and Prikhodko2013), GOL-NB (Postupaev et al. Reference Postupaev, Batkin, Burdakov, Burmasov, Ivanov, Kuklin, Lykova, Melnikov, Mekler and Nikishin2022), SMOLA (Sudnikov et al. Reference Sudnikov, Ivanov, Inzhevatkina, Larichkin, Lomov, Postupaev, Tolkachev and Ustyuzhanin2022) and compact axisymmetric toroid (CAT) (Bagryansky et al. Reference Bagryansky, Akhmetov, Chernoshtanov, Deichuli, Ivanov, Lizunov, Maximov, Mishagin, Murakhtin and Pinzhenin2016), where key problems associated with the development of the project are studied. These key issues include the following:

  • MHD stability of plasma with high relative pressure in an axisymmetric mirror cell;

  • stability with respect to kinetic modes associated with the anisotropy of the distribution function of confined ions;

  • axial particle flow and axial thermal conductivity;

  • transverse transport.

This paper provides a brief overview of the methods we are developing to address these problems, the experimental and theoretical results achieved and plans for future development. The last section of the article provides brief information about the preliminary design of the GDMT, the development of which has beencompleted.

2 Status of work and methods being developed to solve key problems

A significant part of the research aimed at solving the key problems identified above was carried out using a GDT installation (Ivanov & Prikhodko Reference Ivanov and Prikhodko2013). Therefore, before proceeding directly to the description of the results of these studies, we provide a brief description of this device.

2.1 The GDT device

The GDT device is an axisymmetric mirror machine with a high mirror ratio $R=35$ and a distance between the mirrors of 7 m (see figure 2).

Figure 2. The GDT device: 1 – magnetic system coils; 2 – mirror plugs; 3 – expansion tanks; 4 – initial plasma generator; 5 – neutral beam injectors; 6 – waveguides of the ECR heating system; 7 – plasma column.

The magnetic field in the central plane is 0.35 T. An arc-type plasma generator creates the initial plasma. The main means of heating is a neutral beam system, consisting of eight modules with a total power of up to 5 MW and an operation time of 5 ms. The energy of neutral deuterium atoms is 22–25 keV. Under conditions of heating by neutral beams, the plasma density lies in the range $(1\unicode{x2013}5)\cdot 10^{19}\ {\rm m}^{-3}$, the electron temperature reaches 250 eV. When auxiliary electron cyclotron resonance (ECR) heating is used, the electron temperature reaches $\sim 900$ eV (Bagryansky et al. Reference Bagryansky, Anikeev, Denisov, Gospodchikov, Ivanov, Lizunov, Kovalenko, Malygin, Maximov and Korobeinikova2015a,Reference Bagryansky, Shalashov, Gospodchikov, Lizunov, Maximov, Prikhodko, Soldatkina, Solomakhin and Yakovlevb). The ECR heating is carried out by two gyrotrons with a total power of $\sim 800$ kW, a frequency of 54.5 GHz and an operation time of up to 10 ms. The time sequence of operation of the main systems of the GDT device during the plasma discharge is organised as follows:

  • the magnetic system turns on and the magnetic field reaches the required values;

  • then the plasma generator is turned on and within 4 ms the trap is filled with warm target plasma;

  • 0.5 ms before the end of the plasma generator operation, the neutral beam system is turned on, and operates for 5 ms;

  • in the process of neutral beam injection, the balance of warm plasma particles is maintained by injection of hydrogen or deuterium gas into the peripheral region of the plasma column using two gas boxes located near magnetic plugs.

2.2 Key problem 1 – MHD stabilisation of plasma in steady state under conditions of high $\beta$ and significant limitation of axial losses

It is well known that the axisymmetric magnetic configuration of the mirror cell is not favourable for ensuring MHD stability of the plasma. To suppress transverse plasma losses associated with the development of MHD instabilities, we use the vortex confinement method (Beklemishev et al. Reference Beklemishev, Bagryansky, Chaschin and Soldatkina2010), which has proven itself well in experiments at the GDT facility. To implement vortex confinement, it is necessary to create a zone of differential plasma rotation in the radial peripheral zone of the plasma column. This is achieved by applying an electrical bias to the electrodes of the sectioned plasma absorber (see figure 3). In this case, a potential jump and differential rotation occur in the peripheral region of the plasma column due to $E\times B$ drift in crossed electric and magnetic fields. A necessary condition for the implementation of vortex confinement is also the effect of finite Larmor radius (FLR) effects (Rosenbluth, Krall & Rostoker Reference Rosenbluth, Krall and Rostoker1962). Differential rotation, together with the action of FLR effects, modifies the convective motion of plasma during the development of MHD modes, transferring MHD oscillations to a saturation mode with closed flow lines in the cross-section of the plasma and small oscillation amplitudes relative to its radius (Prikhodko et al. Reference Prikhodko, Bagryansky, Beklemishev, Kolesnikov, Kotelnikov, Maximov, Pushkareva, Soldatkina, Tsidulko and Zaytsev2011).

Figure 3. Method for implementing of vortex confinement.

The use of the vortex confinement method makes it possible to achieve relative pressure values up to $\beta =8{\rm \pi} \cdot P_{\perp }/B^2_v \approx 0.6$ (Simonen et al. Reference Simonen, Anikeev, Bagryansky, Beklemishev, Ivanov, Lizunov, Maximov, Prikhodko and Tsidulko2010), where $P_{\perp }$ is the transverse plasma pressure and $B_v$ is the vacuum magnetic field. An obvious disadvantage of vortex confinement is the need for direct electrical contact of the plasma with the absorber electrodes. If the plasma flow into the expander is severely suppressed, the electrical contact may be broken. Thus, the use of vortex confinement becomes problematic when implementing plans to limit axial losses in order to maximise the power gain $Q$ for potential fusion applications.

The solution to this problem is planned in two steps:

  1. (i) Transition to high beta mode using vortex confinement.

  2. (ii) Suppression of losses during the development of MHD instabilities due to the interaction of diamagnetic currents in the plasma with image currents in conducting structures surrounding the plasma.

The results of a recent analysis by Kotelnikov, Prikhodko & Yakovlev (Reference Kotelnikov, Prikhodko and Yakovlev2023) predict the effectiveness of this method of MHD stabilisation, starting from the $\beta$ values achievable using vortex confinement.

The first steps in this direction have already been taken:

  • The magnetic configuration was changed in such a way that the volume of the region occupied by hot ions was reduced by approximately half compared with the previously used basic magnetic configuration. In addition, the density of the warm target plasma was optimally increased to achieve the values of the captured power of atomic beams at which the plasma diamagnetism reached its maximum value. These measures made it possible to achieve an average beta value $\langle \beta \rangle = 20\,\%$.

  • Motional Stark Effect (MSE)-diagnostics (Lizunov et al. Reference Lizunov, Den Hartog, Donin, Ivanov and Prikhodko2011; Lizunov, Donin & Savkin Reference Lizunov, Donin and Savkin2013) were prepared to measure the radial profile of the magnetic field inside the plasma and to calculate local $\beta$ values.

  • A system of magnetic probes located outside the plasma column was also prepared for measuring the distribution of the magnetic field associated with diamagnetic currents inside the plasma.

Further steps in this direction are planned in the near future:

  • Operation time of neutral beam injection (NBI) will be increased from 5 to 10 ms in order to further increase the plasma diamagnetism.

  • A recently upgraded microwave heating system will be used to increase $\langle T_e \rangle$, the plasma diamagnetism and $\langle \beta \rangle$.

  • In modes with the maximum achieved value of diamagnetism, measurements will be made of the radial profiles of the magnetic field inside the plasma and the distribution of the magnetic field associated with diamagnetic currents near the plasma boundary.

  • Using the results of Kotelnikov et al. (Reference Kotelnikov, Prikhodko and Yakovlev2023) and the results of measurements, conductive structures surrounding the plasma with an optimal shape for MHD stabilisation will be designed.

  • Conductive structures will be fabricated and assembled at the GDT facility.

  • The efficiency of this method of MHD stabilisation will be studied in a real experiment.

2.3 Key problem 2 – stable confinement with respect to kinetic modes

As already noted in the introduction, since the times of the classics it has been known that Coulomb kinetics predicts the maximum value of power gain for a reactor based on a simple mirror cell at the level of $Q \approx 1$. For example, calculations presented in Yurov & Prikhodko (Reference Yurov and Prikhodko2016a) predict $Q = 1.35$ for the synthesis of D–T $\rightarrow ^4{\rm He}(3.5\ {\rm MeV}) + n(14.1\ {\rm MeV})$. With such a value of $Q$, the mirror cell could be efficient source of neutrons. However, the development of kinetic instabilities may prevent the achievement of such a value of $Q$.

The presence of a loss cone in phase space and associated anisotropy of the ion distribution function in the velocity space causes the generation of several types of electromagnetic waves in the plasma, which leads to an increase in the ion scattering rate into the loss cone and a radical decrease in the ion confinement time.

What we do know about kinetic instabilities from researches under the GDT program?

  1. (i) Alfvén ion cyclotron instability is well studied and a recipe for how to avoid its influence is known – oblique neutral beam injection (Zaytsev et al. Reference Zaytsev, Anikeev, Bagryansky, Donin, Korobeinikova, Korzhavina, Kovalenko, Lizunov, Maximov and Pinzhenin2014).

  2. (ii) The global acoustic mode does not lead to noticeable losses (Skovorodin, Zaytsev & Beklemishev Reference Skovorodin, Zaytsev and Beklemishev2013).

  3. (iii) Drift cyclotron loss-cone instability (DCLC) is being actively investigated theoretically and experimentally.

According to the results of numerous studies in past years (Post Reference Post1987), DCLC poses the greatest danger to ion confinement in a mirror cell. In a number of works in past years (see, for example, Ioffe et al. Reference Ioffe, Kanaev, Pastukhov and Iushmanov1974; Kanaev & Yushmanov Reference Kanaev and Yushmanov1975; Kanaev Reference Kanaev1979), a method for DCLC stabilisation was proposed and justified. The stabilisation method consists in creating a population of ions with an isotropic distribution: $n_{isotr}/n\approx$ a few per cent is enough to suppress instability.

Using the results of numerical simulation (Yurov & Prikhodko Reference Yurov and Prikhodko2016b) for a neutron source (NS) based on a GDT (see figure 4), we will show how the use of this DCLC stabilisation method affects the power gain $Q$. In the NS model, intense heating of warm ions occurs due to collisions with hot ions. In this case, the frequency of Coulomb collisions of warm ions decreases and becomes insufficient to fill the loss cone, that is, their distribution function becomes anisotropic. To maintain an isotropic distribution, it is necessary to inject large flows of cold particles, which leads to an increase in longitudinal losses and a decrease in $Q$ to $\approx 4\,\%$ (Bagryansky et al. Reference Bagryansky, Ivanov, Kruglyakov, Kudryavtsev, Tsidulko, Andriyash, Lukin and Zouev2004). The search for the possibility of significantly increasing $Q$ in a NS based on GDT and, at the same time, avoiding the development of DCLC is currently the subject of our theoretical (Kotelnikov, Chernoshtanov & Prikhodko Reference Kotelnikov, Chernoshtanov and Prikhodko2017; Kotelnikov & Chernoshtanov Reference Kotelnikov and Chernoshtanov2018) and planned experimental studies.

Figure 4. Schematic view of a neutron source based on GDT: 1 – neutral beams (oblique injection); 2 – population of hot ions; 3 – warm ions with an isotropic distribution function; 4 – injected flow of cold particles.

2.4 Key problem 3 – axial energy confinement (axial thermal conductivity)

The problem of the longitudinal thermal conductivity of plasma in open traps has been studied theoretically in sufficient detail in a number of works in past years (see, for example Konkashbaev, Landman & Ulinich Reference Konkashbaev, Landman and Ulinich1978; Ryutov Reference Ryutov2004). Due to the special importance of this problem, we carried out a series of our own theoretical (Abramov et al. Reference Abramov, Gospodchikov, Shaposhnikov and Shalashov2019; Skovorodin Reference Skovorodin2019) and experimental (Soldatkina et al. Reference Soldatkina, Anikeev, Bagryansky, Korzhavina, Maximov, Savkin, Yakovlev, Yushmanov and Dunaevsky2017, Reference Soldatkina, Maximov, Prikhodko, Savkin, Skovorodin, Yakovlev and Bagryansky2020) studies, which demonstrated good agreement. Thus, the conclusion of previous works was confirmed that, with the correct design and operating mode, the expander is capable of limiting the longitudinal energy flow to a level corresponding to the energy $\varepsilon \approx 8kT_e$, which on average is transferred by one electron–ion pair leaving the trap. Here, $T_e$ is the electron temperature and $k$ is the Boltzmann constant. In this case, the influence on longitudinal losses of non-ambipolar effects associated with the electrical biasing on the plasma absorbers, which is used to organise vortex confinement, deserves special attention. Experiments in the near future will be devoted to studying this problem.

2.5 Key problem 4 – transverse transport

Although experiments at the GDT device currently demonstrate a lower level of transverse energy losses relative to axial ones, further research is necessary. This problem is closely related to the problem of maintaining the balance of warm ions as well as controlling the radial plasma density profile in order not only to minimise transverse losses, but also to achieve conditions under which the radial limiters are not subjected to excessive thermal loads. Let us recall that the balance of warm plasma particles in the GDT is maintained by gas injection into the peripheral region of the plasma column near magnetic mirrors and limiters (see figure 3). This leads to the fact that the plasma density near the limiters turns out to be comparable to the plasma density at the core of the column. To demonstrate the significance of this problem, let us estimate the energy flux density per limiter for a typical operating mode of a GDT device. According to measurement data, the plasma density near the limiter is $n \approx 10^{19}\ {\rm m}^{-3}$, and the electron temperature is $T_e \approx 50$ eV. Assuming that the temperatures of electrons and ions of warm plasma near the limiter are equal, the plasma is deuterium and that each electron–ion pair brings energy $\varepsilon \approx 8kT_e$ to the limiter, we calculate the energy flux density

(2.1)\begin{equation} q \approx nv_i\cdot8T_e \approx 45 \text{ MW m}^{{-}2}. \end{equation}

It can be seen that, even with such low values of $n$ and $T_e$, the energy flow to the limiter is unacceptably high.

A solution to the problem may be to change the cold particle injection method to maintain a balance of warm plasma particles. If we abandon injection into the peripheral region of the plasma column and implement injection directly into the internal region, then we can assume that, in this way, it will be possible to minimise the plasma density near the limiter and, accordingly, the thermal loads. We are currently considering two ways to implement such an injection:

  1. (i) injection of neutral beams of low energy;

  2. (ii) injection of high-energy plasma jets with a frequency of $\sim 1$ kHz.

The development of low-energy neutral beam injectors is included in the GDT research program. Beams with an energy of ${\approx }1$ keV and an equivalent current of ${\approx }100$ A are supposed to be formed according to the ‘acceleration–deceleration’ principle (Pincosy & Turner Reference Pincosy and Turner1987). Currently, the corresponding technology is being tested at a special stand.

To implement the second method of particle injection it is required to develop an injector with a gas efficiency of ${\sim }1$ and a pulse repetition rate of ${\approx }1$ kHz, which will ensure the flow of cold particles into the internal region of the plasma column at a level of several kA.

Figure 5 shows a possible implementation of this type of injection from the expander side. Currently, testing of the high-energy plasma jet injector on the stand has been completed and preparations are underway for its use at the GDT device. The injector is a coaxial system designed on the principle of a Marshall gun (Marshall Reference Marshall1960) and capable of generating a jet of hydrogen or deuterium plasma with a density of $10^{21}$$10^{22}$ m$^{-3}$, a speed of $\approx 100\ {\rm km}\ {\rm s}^{-1}$ and a duration of 20 $\mathrm {\mu }$s.

Figure 5. Possible method of injection of a high-energy plasma jet from the expander side: 1 – central cell; 2 – central cell coils; 3 – mirror plug coils; 4 – plasma absorber; 5 – expander tank; 6 – plasma gun.

3 Our approaches to improve axial confinement

In Beklemishev (Reference Beklemishev2016a), within the framework of magnetic hydrodynamics, the equilibrium of plasma in a GDT is considered under the condition $\beta \rightarrow 1$, that is, when the magnetic field inside the plasma column is $B\rightarrow 0$. Let us recall that, in the opposite case, when $\beta \ll 1$, the characteristic time of particle confinement relative to longitudinal losses in a GDT is given by a simple gas-dynamic estimate (Mirnov & Ryutov Reference Mirnov and Ryutov1979)

(3.1)\begin{equation} \tau_{{\parallel} gdt} = \frac{RL}{2v_i}, \end{equation}

where $R = B_m/B_v$ is the mirror ratio, that is, the ratio of the magnitude of the magnetic field in the mirror to the value of the vacuum field in the central plane of the trap, $L$ is the length of the trap and $v_i$ is the thermal velocity of the ions. Formally, as $\beta \rightarrow 1$, the mirror ratio tends to infinity, but in fact, confinement in this limit is determined by the thin layer (see figure 6)

(3.2)\begin{equation} \tau_E \propto \sqrt{\tau_{{\perp}}\tau_{{\parallel}}} = \sqrt{\frac{4{\rm \pi}\sigma a^2}{c^2}\cdot\tau_{{\parallel}}} = \frac{a}{\lambda}\tau_{{\parallel}}. \end{equation}

Here, $\tau _{\perp }$ and $\tau _{\parallel }$ are the characteristic particle confinement times relative to transverse and longitudinal losses, $\sigma$ is the transverse conductivity of the plasma, $a$ is the radius of the plasma column and $\lambda$ is the thickness of the transition layer. In the magnetic hydrodynamics approximation

(3.3)\begin{equation} \lambda=\frac{c}{2}\sqrt{\frac{RL}{{\rm \pi}\sigma v_i}}. \end{equation}

It is important to note that the radius $a$ is determined by the energy stored in the plasma, which in the case of $\beta \rightarrow 1$ corresponds to the energy of the vacuum magnetic field in the volume occupied by the plasma. That is, $a$ has a certain value and depends on the heating power of the plasma and its energy lifetime.

Figure 6. Schematic representation of a diamagnetic trap.

With classical transverse and gas-dynamic axial losses, this confinement scaling is sufficient to fulfil the Lawson criterion in a trap 30 m long, with a radius of 1 m at a field of 10 T with an order of magnitude margin for DT fusion.

Analysis of the confinement of individual particles in such a diamagnetic trap gives a much more complex picture. Work (Chernoshtanov Reference Chernoshtanov2022) considers three types of particles whose confinement is determined by the sign of the azimuthal angular momentum:

  1. (i) $P_\theta < 0$ (motion in the direction of cyclotron rotation) – absolute confinement;

  2. (ii) $P_\theta > 0$ with the conservation of the adiabatic invariant associated with a large difference in the times of reflection from the mirrors and the ‘walls of the magnetic bubble’ – the confinement is determined by the characteristic time of violation of the adiabaticity of the motion;

  3. (iii) $P_\theta > 0$ in the absence of conservation of the adiabatic invariant – chaotic motion and the minimum confinement time $\tau \sim R_v\cdot \tau _b$, where $R_v$ is the mirror ratio in the vacuum field, and $\tau _b$ is the time of flight from plug to plug.

A rough estimate for randomly moving particles (case 2) shows that a strongly collisional Maxwellian plasma with $T = T_e = T_i$ predicts significant improvement in comparison with $\tau _{\parallel gdt} \sim R_vL/(2T/m_i)^{1/2}$

(3.4)\begin{equation} \tau = \frac{a}{\lambda}\tau_{{\parallel} gdt}, \end{equation}

where $\lambda \sim \rho _i$ is the ion gyro-radius.

Unfortunately, the solution of the kinetic problem of plasma confinement in a diamagnetic trap by analytical methods does not seem possible. In these circumstances, we are planning work in two directions:

3.0.1 Supporting experiment CAT

The CAT (compact axisymmetric toroid) experimental device is being developed to solve the following problems:

  • testing technologies of a confinement and stabilisation of the plasma with $\beta \rightarrow 1$;

  • validation of developed computational codes;

  • proofing technique of the field-reversed configuration formation due to injection of powerful neutral beams.

The CAT is an axisymmetric mirror cell with a relatively small volume (${\sim }10$ l), distance between mirrors $L = 0.6$ m, magnetic field in the central plane $B = 0.2$ T and mirror ratio $R = 2$ (see figure 7). A special generator with an electric-arc gas discharge creates the target plasma. It is assumed that two neutral beams will be injected into the target plasma at an angle of $90^\circ$ to the axis of the mirror cell. The energy of neutral beams of hydrogen or deuterium is 15 keV, the equivalent current is $2\times 120$ A and the equivalent current density at the plasma boundary is 3.5 A cm$^{-2}$.

Figure 7. The CAT: a – side view; b – front view; 1 – target plasma generator; 2 – neutral beam injectors; 3 – plasma transport section; 4 – hot ion plasmoid; 5 – mirror coils; 6 – neutral beam dumps.

The status of the device commissioning work is as follows:

  • work on the generation of target plasma with optimal parameters is completed;

  • neutral beam modules are fully assembled;

  • installation and adjustment of power supply systems for atomic injectors is being completed;

  • commissioning of the device in full is scheduled for the beginning of 2024.

3.1 Multiple-mirror systems

3.1.1 The GOL-NB experiment

The idea of plasma confinement in multiple-mirror magnetic systems was proposed in the early seventies of the last century (Budker, Mirnov & Ryutov Reference Budker, Mirnov and Ryutov1971; Logan et al. Reference Logan, Lichtenberg, Lieberman and Makhijani1972). Figure 8 explains the principle of plasma confinement in such systems. If the ion mean free path $\lambda _i$ is less than the trap length $L$, but greater than the corrugation scale $l$, the plasma flow becomes diffusive. In the thermonuclear temperature range, paired Coulomb collisions provide the required dissipation rate at extremely high densities $\sim 10^{22}\unicode{x2013}10^{23}$ m$^{-3}$. Therefore, initially the concept of a multiple-mirror reactor assumed a pulsed mode of operation.

Figure 8. Schematic view of a multi-mirror magnetic plasma confinement system.

In experiments on the GOL-3 multiple-mirror trap (Astrelin, Burdakov & Postupaev Reference Astrelin, Burdakov and Postupaev1998), improved ion confinement was discovered at a moderate density of ${\sim 10^{20}\unicode{x2013}10^{21}}$ m$^{-3}$. Improved confinement at moderate plasma densities indicates anomalous ion scattering, which is interpreted as a result of interaction with collective plasma oscillations at the bounce frequency of the corrugation cells. This circumstance opens the way to the use of multiple-mirror sections in a stationary reactor to limit longitudinal losses of particles and energy.

The mission of the GOL-NB device (Postupaev et al. Reference Postupaev, Batkin, Burdakov, Burmasov, Ivanov, Kuklin, Lykova, Melnikov, Mekler and Nikishin2022) is direct demonstration of multiple-mirror confinement in a steady state mode under the condition when the ion path length relative to Coulomb scattering $\lambda _{ii\text { Coulomb}} \gg L$. The GOL-NB (see figure 9) is an axisymmetric mirror cell with additional magnetic sections connected to the ends. Additional sections are solenoids consisting of a set of individual coils that have independent power sources. By controlling the currents in the coils, it is possible to implement within the sections both a longitudinal field profile close to uniform and a multiple-mirror configuration (see figure 9b).

Figure 9. The GOL-NB installation. a – Top view of the device: 1 – central cell; 2 – additional sections; 3 – expander tank; 4 – neutral beam injectors; 5 – neutral beam dumps; 6 – vacuum pumps. b – Magnetic field configurations with solenoidal and multiple-mirror shape.

The status of the device at the time of writing this text is as follows:

  • target plasma with $n \approx 3\times 10^{19}$ m$^{-3}$ and $T = 5\unicode{x2013}10$ eV is obtained;

  • neutral beam injectors have been commissioned ($U = 25$ keV, $P_{\varSigma } \approx 1,1$ MW);

  • plasma stabilisation system (edge-biasing) has been worked out.

In the near future, work will be continued in the following directions:

  • study and optimisation of the physics of plasma heating by neutral beams;

  • study of fast ion population parameters;

  • implementation of a multiple-mirror configuration and studying the effectiveness of limiting longitudinal losses by multiple-mirror sections;

  • development of auxiliary heating systems (ICRH ion cyclotron resonance heating).

3.1.2 Helical mirror SMOLA

The idea of a multiple-mirror magnetic system with a helical configuration to limit longitudinal particle flows and plasma energy is based on plasma rotation in a helical magnetic field (Beklemishev Reference Beklemishev2016b). Figure 10 illustrates a possible design of a mirror cell with screw multi-mirror sections. Plasma rotation occurs due to $E\times B$ drift in crossed electric and magnetic fields. The radial electric field inside the plasma is created by an electrical bias on radially sectioned electrodes located in the area of the expanders. In a rotating reference frame, plasma is influenced by running mirror cells. Running mirror cells transfer momentum to the particles trapped between them. Friction between trapped and passing particles causes plasma to be ‘pumped’ along the system back into the trap. In this case, the movement of trapped particles is accompanied by radial drift. The advantage of such a helical system compared with a conventional multiple-mirror system is the more efficient confinement predicted by the theory and the ability to control radial drifts. In addition, the counter flow of trapped ions can stimulate anomalous scattering, which leads to the formation of a population of trapped ions even in conditions of insufficient Coulomb collision frequency.

Figure 10. Possible arrangement of a mirror trap with helical multiple-mirror sections.

To test experimentally the principle of helical confinement, a SMOLA device was developed (Sudnikov et al. Reference Sudnikov, Ivanov, Inzhevatkina, Larichkin, Lomov, Postupaev, Tolkachev and Ustyuzhanin2022), which is shown in figure 11. The components of the installation are: a plasma source, a confinement area (axisymmetric mirror cell), a transport section and an expander. The transport section can have the configuration of either a simple solenoid or a helical multiple-mirror system.

Figure 11. a – The SMOLA device; b – main experimental result: on the left – radial profiles of plasma density in regimes with straight and helical field in transport section; on the right – radial profiles of ion flux density in expander region in regimes with straight and helical field in transport section.

Figure 11 also shows the main experimental result obtained from the SMOLA set-up. It can be seen that, in the mode with a helical configuration of the transport section, the ion flow into the expander decreases by more than an order of magnitude compared with the solenoidal configuration. In this case, the plasma density in the confinement region increases significantly. Based on the results of experiments at the SMOLA installation, the following conclusions can be drawn:

  • Significant suppression of axial flux is achieved.

  • The effective mirror ratio exceeded $R = 10$.

  • A 1.6-fold increase in plasma density in confinement area was demonstrated.

  • The radius of the plasma jet decreases

  • A good agreement with the theory is shown.

Further research is aimed at studying the mechanisms of formation of a population of trapped ions under conditions of rare Coulomb collisions, as well as the development a next-generation installation, which will be a mirror cell with two screw sections at the ends.

4 Development of a conceptual design for the next generation facility

The facility being designed should provide a physical basis for thermonuclear systems: a NS and a future thermonuclear reactor based on open-type magnetic traps with a linear axisymmetric configuration. The facility will consist of a central section, multiple-mirror sections and plasma flow expanders (see figure 12). It is a step towards improving the GDT, for this reason it was called the GDMT. A detailed description of the GDMT project, its physical justification and the corresponding experimental research program are given in Skovorodin et al. (Reference Skovorodin, Chernoshtanov, Amirov, Astrelin, Bagryanskii, Beklemishev, Burdakov, Gorbovskii, Kotel'nikov and Magommedov2023).

Figure 12. Full-scale GDMT device.

The project is planned to be implemented in several stages.

  • The first stage involves the development of a central section with superconducting magnetic mirrors and expanders.

  • Multiple-mirror sections will be installed to replace single plugs in the next step.

Goals of the first stage:

  • Optimisation of the parameters of a NS based on an open-type magnetic trap with a linear axisymmetric configuration.

  • Implementation and study of the regime of diamagnetic plasma confinement with $\beta \rightarrow 1$.

  • Investigation of technologies for the operation of an open-type trap in a stationary confinement mode.

At the time of writing this text, the development of the preliminary design of the first stage GDMT has been completed. Figure 13 shows its three-dimensional model. Table 1 gives the key parameters of the device.

Figure 13. Three-dimensional model of first stage GDMT device: 1 - Cu coils; 2 – mirror plugs (HTSC high temperature superconductivity); 3 – expander tanks; 4 – neutral beam injectors; 5 – beam dumps.

Table 1. The key parameters of the first stage GDMT.

The magnetic plug assembly (see figure 14) was designed in collaboration with the SuperOx company (SuperOx 2023) using second-generation superconductors.

Figure 14. Three-dimensional model of the magnetic plug assembly: 1 – mirror coils (HTSC tape); 2 – transfer coils (HTSC current-carrying element).

The inner diameter of the superconducting plug coil is 240 mm, the inner diameter of the vacuum chamber in the magnetic plug is 200 mm.

The NBI system consists of eight modules. Each NBI module is designed to generate a beam of neutral hydrogen atoms with a particle energy of 30 keV and a beam power of 2.75 MW. Figure 15 represents a three-dimensional model of the module.

Figure 15. Three-dimensional model of the NBI module: 1 – plasma sources (4 pcs.); 2 – discharge chamber; 3 – magnetic wall; 4 – ion-optic system; 5 – neutraliser.

5 Conclusion

The Budker Institute conducts active research aimed at developing technologies necessary for constructing nuclear fusion reactors based on open-type magnetic traps with a linear axisymmetric configuration. The key problems of hot plasma confinement in such systems are studied using theoretical and numerical models, as well as experiments at four facilities. The results of these studies are used to justify the GDMT project – the next generation facility. Some of the key problems have already been largely resolved. These include problems of longitudinal electron thermal conductivity and MHD stabilisation of plasma in an axisymmetric mirror cell in regimes with high $\beta (\beta \sim 1)$. Solving other problems requires additional research, plans for which have been developed and are being implemented.

Acknowledgements

Editor Cary Forest thanks the referees for their advice in evaluating this article.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

References

Abramov, I.S., Gospodchikov, E.D., Shaposhnikov, R.A. & Shalashov, A.G. 2019 Effect of ion acceleration on a plasma potential profile formed in the expander of a mirror trap. Nucl. Fusion 59 (10), 106004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astrelin, V.T., Burdakov, A.V. & Postupaev, V.V. 1998 Generation of ion-acoustic waves and suppression of heat transport during plasma heating by an electron beam. Plasma Phys. Rep. 24 (5), 414.Google Scholar
Bagryansky, P.A., Akhmetov, T.D., Chernoshtanov, I.S., Deichuli, P.P., Ivanov, A.A., Lizunov, A.A., Maximov, V.V., Mishagin, V.V., Murakhtin, S.V., Pinzhenin, E.I., et al. 2016 Status of the experiment on magnetic field reversal at BINP. In AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1771. AIP Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagryansky, P.A., Anikeev, A.V., Denisov, G.G., Gospodchikov, E.D., Ivanov, A.A., Lizunov, A.A., Kovalenko, Y. V, Malygin, V.I., Maximov, V.V., Korobeinikova, O.A., et al. 2015 a Overview of electron cyclotron resonance plasma heating experiment in the gas-gynamic trap magnetic mirror. Nucl. Fusion 55 (5), 053009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagryansky, P.A., Beklemishev, A.D. & Postupaev, V.V. 2019 Encouraging results and new ideas for fusion in linear traps. J. Fusion Energy 38, 162181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagryansky, P.A., Ivanov, A.A., Kruglyakov, E.P., Kudryavtsev, A.M., Tsidulko, Y..A., Andriyash, A.V., Lukin, A.L. & Zouev, Y.N. 2004 Gas dynamic trap as high power 14 MeV neutron source. Fusion Engng Des. 70 (1), 1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagryansky, P.A., Shalashov, A.G., Gospodchikov, E.D., Lizunov, A.A., Maximov, V.V., Prikhodko, V.V., Soldatkina, E.I., Solomakhin, A.L. & Yakovlev, D.V. 2015 b Threefold increase of the bulk electron temperature of plasma discharges in a magnetic mirror device. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (20), 205001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beklemishev, A.D. 2016 a Diamagnetic ‘bubble’ equilibria in linear traps. Phys. Plasmas 23 (8).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beklemishev, A.D. 2016 b Radial and axial transport in trap sections with helical corrugation. In AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1771. AIP Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beklemishev, A.D., Bagryansky, P.A., Chaschin, M.S. & Soldatkina, E.I. 2010 Vortex confinement of plasmas in symmetric mirror traps. Fusion Sci. Technol. 57 (4), 351360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berendeev, E.A., Timofeev, I.V. & Kurshakov, V.A. 2024 Energy and charge conserving semi-implicit particle-in-cell model for simulations of high-pressure plasmas in magnetic traps. Comput. Phys. Commun. 295, 109020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budker, G.I., Mirnov, V.V. & Ryutov, D.D. 1971 Magnetic field corrugation effect on the expansion and cooling of a dense plasma. JETP Lett. 14, 212215.Google Scholar
Burdakov, A.V. & Postupaev, V.V. 2018 Multiple-mirror trap: a path from budker magnetic mirrors to linear fusion reactor. Phys. Uspekhi 61 (6), 582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chernoshtanov, I.S. 2022 Collisionless particle dynamics in diamagnetic trap. Plasma Phys. Rep.48 (2), 7990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ioffe, M.S., Kanaev, B.I., Pastukhov, V.P. & Iushmanov, E.E. 1974 Stabilization of cone instability of collisional plasma in a mirror trap. Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 67, 21452156.Google Scholar
Ivanov, A.A. & Prikhodko, V.V. 2013 Gas-dynamic trap: an overview of the concept and experimental results. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 55 (6), 063001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanaev, B.I. 1979 Stabilization of drift loss-cone instability (DCI) by addition of cold ions. Nucl. Fusion 19 (3), 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanaev, B.I. & Yushmanov, E.E. 1975 Investigation of instability of a collision plasma in a mirror trap. Sov. J. Expl Theor. Phys. 40, 290.Google Scholar
Konkashbaev, I.K., Landman, I.S. & Ulinich, F.R. 1978 Possibility of diminishing the electron heat flux from open traps. Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 74, 956964.Google Scholar
Kotelnikov, I.A. & Chernoshtanov, I.S. 2018 Isotopic effect in microstability of electrostatic oscillations in magnetic mirror traps. Phys. Plasmas 25 (8).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotelnikov, I.A., Chernoshtanov, I.S. & Prikhodko, V.V. 2017 Electrostatic instabilities in a mirror trap revisited. Phys. Plasmas 24 (12).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotelnikov, I., Prikhodko, V. & Yakovlev, D. 2023 Wall stabilization of high-beta anisotropic plasmas in an axisymmetric mirror trap. Nucl. Fusion 63 (6), 066027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lizunov, A.A., Den Hartog, D.J., Donin, A.S., Ivanov, A.A. & Prikhodko, V.V. 2011 Note: multi-point measurement of $|{\rm b}|$ in the gas-dynamic trap with a spectral motional stark effect diagnostic. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 82 (8).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lizunov, A., Donin, A. & Savkin, V. 2013 Note: spectral motional stark effect diagnostic for measurement of magnetic fields below 0.3t. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 84 (8).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, B.G., Lichtenberg, A.J., Lieberman, M.A. & Makhijani, A. 1972 Multiple-mirror confinement of plasmas. Phys. Rev. Lett. 28 (3), 144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, J. 1960 Performance of a hydromagnetic plasma gun. Phys. Fluids 3 (1), 134135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mirnov, V.V. & Ryutov, D.D. 1979 Linear gasdynamic system for plasma confinement. Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett. 5, 279280.Google Scholar
Pincosy, P.A. & Turner, W.C. 1987 Development of low-energy beams for fueling the central cell of a tandem mirror. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 58 (9), 15761588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Post, R.F. 1958 In Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy (Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Geneva, 1958), Vol. 32, p. 245, UN, New York.Google Scholar
Post, R.F. 1987 The magnetic mirror approach to fusion. Nucl. Fusion 27 (10), 1579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postupaev, V.V., Batkin, V.I., Burdakov, A.V., Burmasov, V.S., Ivanov, I.A., Kuklin, K.N., Lykova, Y. A, Melnikov, N.A., Mekler, K.I., Nikishin, A.V., et al. 2022 Start of experiments in the design configuration of the gol-nb multiple-mirror trap. Nucl. Fusion 62 (8), 086003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prikhodko, V.V., Bagryansky, P.A., Beklemishev, A.D., Kolesnikov, E.Y., Kotelnikov, I.A., Maximov, V.V., Pushkareva, A.N., Soldatkina, E.I., Tsidulko, Y.A. & Zaytsev, K.V. 2011 Low-frequency oscillations of plasma in the gas dynamic trap. Fusion Sci. Technol.59 (1T), 9497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenbluth, M.N., Krall, N.A. & Rostoker, N. 1962 Finite larmor radius stabilization of ‘weakly’ unstable confined plasmas. Tech. Rep. General Dynamics Corporation.Google Scholar
Ryutov, D. 2004 Axial electron heat loss from mirror devices revisited. Tech. Rep. Lawrence Livermore National Lab (LLNL).Google Scholar
Simonen, T.C., Anikeev, A., Bagryansky, P., Beklemishev, A., Ivanov, A., Lizunov, A., Maximov, V., Prikhodko, V. & Tsidulko, Y. 2010 High beta experiments in the gdt axisymmetric magnetic mirror. J. Fusion Energy 29, 558560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skovorodin, D.I. 2019 Suppression of secondary emission of electrons from end plate in expander of open trap. Phys. Plasmas 26 (1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skovorodin, D.I., Chernoshtanov, I.S., Amirov, V.K., Astrelin, V.T., Bagryanskii, P.A., Beklemishev, A.D., Burdakov, A.V., Gorbovskii, A.I., Kotel'nikov, I.A., Magommedov, E.M., et al. 2023 Gas-dynamic multiple-mirror trap GDMT. Plasma Phys. Rep. 49 (9), 10391086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skovorodin, D.I., Zaytsev, K.V. & Beklemishev, A.D. 2013 Global sound modes in mirror traps with anisotropic pressure. Phys. Plasmas 20 (10).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soldatkina, E., Anikeev, M., Bagryansky, P., Korzhavina, M., Maximov, V., Savkin, V., Yakovlev, D., Yushmanov, P. & Dunaevsky, A. 2017 Influence of the magnetic field expansion on the core plasma in an axisymmetric mirror trap. Phys. Plasmas 24 (2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soldatkina, E.I., Maximov, V.V., Prikhodko, V.V., Savkin, V.Y., Skovorodin, D.I., Yakovlev, D.V. & Bagryansky, P.A. 2020 Measurements of axial energy loss from magnetic mirror trap. Nucl. Fusion 60 (8), 086009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sudnikov, A.V., Ivanov, I.A., Inzhevatkina, A.A., Larichkin, M.V., Lomov, K.A., Postupaev, V.V., Tolkachev, M.S. & Ustyuzhanin, V.O. 2022 Plasma flow suppression by the linear helical mirror system. J. Plasma Phys. 88 (1), 905880102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SuperOx 2023 Available at: https://www.superox.ru. Accessed: 28.12.2023.Google Scholar
Yurov, D.V. & Prikhodko, V.V. 2016 a Optimization of a mirror-based neutron source using differential evolution algorithm. Nucl. Fusion 56 (12), 126003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yurov, D.V. & Prikhodko, V.V. 2016 b Optimization of a mirror-based neutron source using differential evolution algorithm. Nucl. Fusion 56 (12), 126003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaytsev, K.V., Anikeev, A.V., Bagryansky, P.A., Donin, A.S., Korobeinikova, O.A., Korzhavina, M.S., Kovalenko, Y.V., Lizunov, A.A., Maximov, V.V., Pinzhenin, E.I., et al. 2014 Kinetic instability observations in the gas dynamic trap. Phys. Scr. 2014 (T161), 014004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Schematic view of a mirror cell in its simplest configuration: 1 – magnetic trap; 2 – mirror plug; 3 – expander; 4 – neutral beams.

Figure 1

Figure 2. The GDT device: 1 – magnetic system coils; 2 – mirror plugs; 3 – expansion tanks; 4 – initial plasma generator; 5 – neutral beam injectors; 6 – waveguides of the ECR heating system; 7 – plasma column.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Method for implementing of vortex confinement.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Schematic view of a neutron source based on GDT: 1 – neutral beams (oblique injection); 2 – population of hot ions; 3 – warm ions with an isotropic distribution function; 4 – injected flow of cold particles.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Possible method of injection of a high-energy plasma jet from the expander side: 1 – central cell; 2 – central cell coils; 3 – mirror plug coils; 4 – plasma absorber; 5 – expander tank; 6 – plasma gun.

Figure 5

Figure 6. Schematic representation of a diamagnetic trap.

Figure 6

Figure 7. The CAT: a – side view; b – front view; 1 – target plasma generator; 2 – neutral beam injectors; 3 – plasma transport section; 4 – hot ion plasmoid; 5 – mirror coils; 6 – neutral beam dumps.

Figure 7

Figure 8. Schematic view of a multi-mirror magnetic plasma confinement system.

Figure 8

Figure 9. The GOL-NB installation. a – Top view of the device: 1 – central cell; 2 – additional sections; 3 – expander tank; 4 – neutral beam injectors; 5 – neutral beam dumps; 6 – vacuum pumps. b – Magnetic field configurations with solenoidal and multiple-mirror shape.

Figure 9

Figure 10. Possible arrangement of a mirror trap with helical multiple-mirror sections.

Figure 10

Figure 11. a – The SMOLA device; b – main experimental result: on the left – radial profiles of plasma density in regimes with straight and helical field in transport section; on the right – radial profiles of ion flux density in expander region in regimes with straight and helical field in transport section.

Figure 11

Figure 12. Full-scale GDMT device.

Figure 12

Figure 13. Three-dimensional model of first stage GDMT device: 1 - Cu coils; 2 – mirror plugs (HTSC high temperature superconductivity); 3 – expander tanks; 4 – neutral beam injectors; 5 – beam dumps.

Figure 13

Table 1. The key parameters of the first stage GDMT.

Figure 14

Figure 14. Three-dimensional model of the magnetic plug assembly: 1 – mirror coils (HTSC tape); 2 – transfer coils (HTSC current-carrying element).

Figure 15

Figure 15. Three-dimensional model of the NBI module: 1 – plasma sources (4 pcs.); 2 – discharge chamber; 3 – magnetic wall; 4 – ion-optic system; 5 – neutraliser.