Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-88psn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-24T06:13:40.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Transitioning to tokamak turbulence via states of increasing complexity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2025

Oliver J. Smith
Affiliation:
Centre for Fusion, Space and Astrophysics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 9JA UK
Ben F. McMillan*
Affiliation:
Centre for Fusion, Space and Astrophysics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 9JA UK
Chris C.T. Pringle
Affiliation:
Centre for Fluid and Complex Systems, Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB UK
*
Corresponding author: Ben F. McMillan, ben.mcmillan@gmail.com

Abstract

We provide a fundamentally new perspective on subcritical turbulence in plasmas, based on coherent structures, which are obtained and characterised via direct numerical solution. The domains where these coherent states exist appear to be closely connected to the those where related turbulent states can exist, so there may be a deep connection between the stability of these coherent structures and the domain where sustained turbulence is possible. In contrast to previous descriptions of turbulence in terms of a stochastic collection of linear waves, we present a fundamentally nonlinear representation based on more general classes of translating oscillatory nonlinear solutions. In turbulent tokamak plasmas, the transport can often be completely suppressed by introducing a background shear flow, whose amplitude is an important control parameter. As this parameter is decreased below a critical value, radially localised structures appear, becoming larger and more complex, in both gyrokinetic simulations and a simpler fluid model of the plasma. For the fluid model, we directly solve for a particular class of nonlinear solutions, relative periodic orbits, and determine their stability, thus explaining why these isolated structures appear in initial-value simulations. The increase of complexity as the flow shear is reduced is explained by a series of Hopf bifurcations of these nonlinear solutions, which we quantify via stability analysis. In gyrokinetic simulations, we are able to indirectly determine the underlying relative periodic orbits by imposing symmetry conditions on the simulations.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. (a) Density plot of heat flux (units of $c_s n_0 T_0 (\rho _s/R)^2$ versus radial position $x$ (in $\rho _s$ units) and time $t$ for a standard-box gyrokinetic simulation with $S=0.35$ initialised with a localised perturbation (details in § 3). (b) Density plot of turbulence intensity versus radial position $x$ and time $t$ in the plsma interchange model at $S=1.15$ (details in § 2.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Top: The RPOs identified in the PI model, plotted as circles, with their stability labelled by colour, with the time average (over one orbit) of the spatially averaged flux for a series of turbulent simulations at different $S$ in the $L=50$ sized box. The maximum and minimum flux (over time) of these orbits are represented using whiskers (note that these are not error bars). The envelope of the time evolution of an initial-value simulation is plotted as a light-blue region, and a smoothed average as the intermediate blue trace. Red labels (a) and (b) identify the RPOs plotted in figures 3(a) and 3(b) respectively. Bottom: spectral density of the same turbulent simulations against frequency and $S$.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Density plots of zonal electric field versus time and spatial position in the PI model for the travelling wave RPO at (a) $S=1.579$ and full RPO at (b) $S=1.441$ (see labelled positions on figure 2). Only part of the full ($L=50$) $x$-domain is shown.

Figure 3

Figure 4. (a) Density plot of electrostatic potential (in units of $T_0 \rho _s/e R$) at the outboard mid-plane verus radial ($x$) and binormal ($y$) coordinate for standard-box gyrokinetic simulations for $S=0.35$. This is the state at $t=250 a/c_s$ in this simulation (cf. Figure 1a). (b) Density plot of electrostatic potential at the outboard mid-plane versus radial ($x$) and binormal ($y$) coordinate for standard-box gyrokinetic simulations for $S=0.75$. In both cases the bursts are propagating in the positive $x$ direction.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Top: evolution of the flux versus shear in narrow-box (black) and standard-box (red) gyrokinetic simulations where the shear is slowly varied. The narrow-box scan is an downwards scan in shear, and the standard-box scan is upwards in shear to the first back transition to laminar. The standard-box simulation is restarted at higher shears where there are narrow shear windows with propagating turbulent puffs, outside which only laminar solutions were found. Bottom: density plot of spectral amplitude of flux versus shear $S$, and frequency, for the narrow-box gyrokinetic simulation with decreasing shear. Narrowband features in the spectrum are evident in the region $0.38 \lesssim S \lesssim 0.72$ where the dynamics consists of a single turbulent puff, but disappears above $S \sim 0.72$ where the propagating structure is a time-invariant TW.