pith. sign in

arxiv: 1906.12137 · v1 · pith:HYGWYB72new · submitted 2019-06-28 · ⚛️ physics.plasm-ph

Simulating the nonlinear interaction of relativistic electrons and tokamak plasma instabilities: Implementation and validation of a fluid model

V. Bandaru , M. Hoelzl , F.J. Artola , G. Papp , G.T.A. Huijsmans This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 13:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.plasm-ph
keywords runaway electronstokamakdisruptionsMHDfluid modelJOREKvertical displacement eventplasma instabilities
0
0 comments X

The pith

A fluid model for runaway electrons is implemented in JOREK to simulate their nonlinear interaction with tokamak plasma instabilities during disruptions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents a fluid model that represents runaway electrons as a separate species generated by the Dreicer mechanism and growing through avalanche. This species is advected mainly along magnetic field lines with ExB drifts and coupled to the thermal plasma through currents in the nonlinear MHD code JOREK. The goal is to capture the self-consistent evolution of runaway electrons and plasma instabilities in disruption scenarios. Validation against a one-dimensional code and application to an ITER vertical displacement event demonstrate the model's ability to reveal how including runaway electrons alters the plasma dynamics. This matters because disruptions in fusion devices can produce intense runaway electron beams that threaten the machine.

Core claim

The model considers runaway electrons as a fluid species with initial seed from the Dreicer source that grows by avalanche. Advection is primarily along field lines plus ExB drift. Implemented in JOREK with Bezier finite elements and current coupling. Benchmarked with the GO code on artificial thermal quench in circular plasma. Applied to axisymmetric cold vertical displacement event in ITER plasma, showing significantly different dynamics with and without runaway electrons.

What carries the argument

The runaway electron fluid species with Dreicer and avalanche sources, advected along field lines and ExB, coupled to MHD via current in the JOREK code.

If this is right

  • The implementation allows self-consistent simulation of nonlinear RE-MHD interactions during disruptions.
  • Benchmarking with GO code validates the model on a thermal quench scenario.
  • Application to ITER VDE shows that runaway electrons change the plasma evolution dynamics.
  • The code is suitable for studying MHD-RE interactions in disruption-relevant plasmas.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Additional runaway source mechanisms can be incorporated into the fluid framework as noted.
  • The current limitation on achieving light-speed velocities suggests future numerical improvements could enable more realistic simulations.
  • This fluid approach could be tested against kinetic models for specific instability types.
  • Insights from such simulations may inform runaway electron mitigation techniques in tokamaks.

Load-bearing premise

Runaway electrons can be represented adequately as a fluid species whose main motion is along field lines with ExB drift.

What would settle it

Simulation results that diverge from experimental measurements of runaway electron current or from a full kinetic simulation during a disruption event.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.12137 by F.J. Artola, G. Papp, G.T.A. Huijsmans, M. Hoelzl, V. Bandaru.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Runaway electron number density nr at time t = 0. localized nr distribution is not typically encountered in experiments, and would constitute a much more stringent test case for parallel RE advection than a case in which nr is approximately uniform within a closed flux surface. The values of the safety factor q for the equilibrium varies between q = 1.3 at the axis to q = 3.6 at the plasma edge. Such a rad… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Runaway electron number density nr for the pure advection test case after time t = 2 (normalized) with a parallel advection velocity ca = c (f = 1) with a) No stabilization and b) TG2 stabilization, fTG = 0.25. Although very advantageous, it can however be observed that the use of TG2 cannot obviate the use of small timesteps for ca ∼ c. Hence, for prac￾tical applications, it would be feasible to achieve R… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: a) Time evolution of the total plasma current [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: a) Profile of the safety factor q considered for the internal kink case. b) Linear growth rate of the resistive internal kink (1, 1) mode as a function of the normalized resistivity at various initialized fractions of runaway current. Here, Alfv´en time τA = a √µ0ρ0/B and γ is the growth rate in SI units. applied to follow its linear growth. Computations were performed using a 80×46 poloidal grid with loca… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Normalized resistivity η/ηaxis as a function of the normalized poloidal magnetic flux ψN . An RE advection velocity ca = 10−4 c and a small value of the diffusion coefficient for RE density, D⊥,r = 10−8 (normalized units) was used for nu￾merical reasons. A constant viscosity µ = 3.9 × 10−4 kgm−1 s −1 was used. The effect of the poloidal field coils, central solenoid, and the vacuum vessel on the plasma res… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: a) Evolution of plasma currents over time for the axisymmetric VDE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Evolution of the q-profile over time for the axisymmetric VDE simu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Poloidal kinetic energy (in normalized units) of different toroidal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: n = 1 and n = 2 modes of the normalized electric potential u during the non-linear phase of the mode growth at t = 8.6 ms. a) Without REs. b) With REs. compared to the (m, n) = (2, 1) mode which is dominant in the case without REs, as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

For the simulation of disruptions in tokamak fusion plasmas, a fluid model describing the evolution of relativistic runaway electrons and their interaction with the background plasma is presented. The overall aim of the model is to self-consistently describe the nonlinear coupled evolution of runaway electrons (REs) and plasma instabilities during disruptions. In this model, the runaway electrons are considered as a separate fluid species in which the initial seed is generated through the Dreicer source, which eventually grows by the avalanche mechanism (further relevant source mechanisms can easily be added). Advection of the runaway electrons is considered primarily along field lines, but also taking into account the ExB drift. The model is implemented in the nonlinear magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) code JOREK based on Bezier finite elements, with current coupling to the thermal plasma. Benchmarking of the code with the one-dimensional runaway electron code GO is done using an artificial thermal quench on a circular plasma. As a first demonstration, the code is applied to the problem of an axisymmetric cold vertical displacement event in an ITER plasma, revealing significantly different dynamics between cases computed with and without runaway electrons. Though it is not yet feasible to achieve fully realistic runaway electron velocities close to the speed of light in complete simulations of slowly evolving plasma instabilities, the code is demonstrated to be suitable to study various kinds of MHD-RE interactions in MHD-active and disruption relevant plasmas.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents a fluid model for relativistic runaway electrons implemented in the JOREK nonlinear MHD code. The model includes Dreicer and avalanche sources for RE generation, advection along field lines and ExB drift, and current coupling to the thermal plasma. It is benchmarked against the GO code using an artificial thermal quench on a circular plasma and demonstrated on an axisymmetric cold vertical displacement event in an ITER plasma, showing different dynamics with and without REs. The aim is to self-consistently describe the nonlinear coupled evolution of REs and plasma instabilities during disruptions, with the caveat that realistic RE velocities near c are not yet feasible in full simulations.

Significance. If the reduced-velocity approximation can be shown not to distort the coupling, this would provide a useful tool for studying RE-MHD interactions in tokamak disruptions. The benchmarking against GO and the ITER VDE demonstration are positive, but the absence of quantitative validation metrics limits the immediate impact.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim of self-consistent nonlinear coupled evolution requires that the parallel velocity enters the current and instability drive terms. The paper explicitly states realistic v ~ c is not yet feasible; the reduced speeds used therefore alter the effective RE current density and its back-reaction on the MHD fields, so the demonstrated differences in the ITER VDE case may not reflect the true coupled dynamics.
  2. [Benchmarking] Benchmarking description: the comparison with the GO code on an artificial thermal quench reports no quantitative error metrics, mesh convergence data, or analysis of how fluid closure assumptions affect the results, weakening support for the implementation's accuracy on the central claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would be clearer if it stated the specific reduced advection speeds employed in the simulations.
  2. Figure captions should explicitly describe what is being compared in the with/without RE cases for the VDE demonstration.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments. We address each major point below, agreeing where the manuscript can be strengthened and clarifying the scope of our claims where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim of self-consistent nonlinear coupled evolution requires that the parallel velocity enters the current and instability drive terms. The paper explicitly states realistic v ~ c is not yet feasible; the reduced speeds used therefore alter the effective RE current density and its back-reaction on the MHD fields, so the demonstrated differences in the ITER VDE case may not reflect the true coupled dynamics.

    Authors: We agree that the reduced parallel velocity approximation necessarily alters the magnitude of the RE current density and the quantitative strength of its back-reaction on the MHD fields. The manuscript already states that realistic velocities near c are not yet feasible in full simulations. The ITER VDE demonstration is presented as an illustration of qualitative differences that arise when REs are included, rather than a quantitative prediction of real-device dynamics. We will revise the abstract and the relevant discussion sections to explicitly qualify the self-consistent coupling as being demonstrated under the reduced-velocity approximation and to temper the central claim accordingly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Benchmarking] Benchmarking description: the comparison with the GO code on an artificial thermal quench reports no quantitative error metrics, mesh convergence data, or analysis of how fluid closure assumptions affect the results, weakening support for the implementation's accuracy on the central claim.

    Authors: We accept that the benchmarking section would be strengthened by quantitative metrics. In the revised manuscript we will add relative error measures between the JOREK fluid model and the GO code for key integrated quantities (total current, RE density, and thermal energy) at selected times during the artificial quench. We will also include a short discussion of mesh convergence for the JOREK runs used in the benchmark and a brief assessment of the fluid closure assumptions and their expected influence on the comparison. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: model implementation validated externally

full rationale

The paper presents a fluid model for runaway electrons (Dreicer + avalanche sources, field-line + ExB advection, current coupling) implemented in JOREK, with benchmarking against the independent 1D GO code on an artificial thermal quench and demonstration on an ITER VDE case. No equations or results reduce by construction to fitted parameters defined from the same data. No self-citation is load-bearing for the central claim of self-consistent nonlinear evolution. The work is a numerical implementation with standard components, externally validated, and self-contained against benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract supplies no explicit free parameters, background axioms, or new postulated entities; the model is described at the level of source terms (Dreicer, avalanche) and advection assumptions already standard in the field.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5805 in / 1062 out tokens · 21254 ms · 2026-05-25T13:38:12.428443+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Hender, J

    T. Hender, J. Wesley, J. Bialek, A. Bondeson, A. Boozer, R. But- tery, A. Garofalo, T. Goodman, R. Granetz, Y. Gribov, O. Gruber, M. Gryaznevich, G. Giruzzi, S. G¨ unter, N. Hayashi, P. Helander, C. Hegna, D. Howell, D. Humphreys, G. Huysmans, A. Hyatt, A. Isayama, S. Jardin, Y. Kawano, A. Kellman, C. Kessel, H. Koslowski, R. L. Haye, E. Lazzaro, Y. Liu, ...

    work page 2007

  2. [2]

    V. A. Izzo, E. M. Hollmann, A. N. James, J. H. Yu, D. A. Humphreys, L. L. Lao, P. B. Parks, P. E. Sieck, J. C. Wesley, R. S. Granetz, G. M. Olynyk, D. G. Whyte, Runaway electron confinement modelling for rapid shutdown scenarios in DIII-D, Alcator C-Mod and ITER, Nuclear Fusion 51 (6) (2011) 063032

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Sommariva, E

    C. Sommariva, E. Nardon, P. Beyer, M. Hoelzl, G. Huijsmans, D. van Vugt, JET Contributors, Test particles dynamics in the JOREK 3D non-linear MHD code and application to electron transport in a disruption simulation, Nuclear Fusion 58 (1) (2018) 016043

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Sommariva, E

    C. Sommariva, E. Nardon, P. Beyer, M. Hoelzl, G. Huijsmans, JET Con- tributors, Electron acceleration in a JET disruption simulation, Nuclear Fusion 58 (10) (2018) 106022

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    H. Cai, G. Fu, Influence of resistive internal kink on runaway current profile, Nuclear Fusion 55 (2) (2015) 022001

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Matsuyama, N

    A. Matsuyama, N. Aiba, M. Yagi, Reduced fluid simulation of runaway electron generation in the presence of resistive kink modes, Nuclear Fusion 57 (6) (2017) 066038

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    G. T. A. Huysmans, O. Czarny, MHD stability in X-point geometry: sim- ulation of ELMs, Nuclear Fusion 47 (7) (2007) 659

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    Czarny, G

    O. Czarny, G. T. A. Huysmans, Bezier surfaces and finite elements for MHD simulations, Journal of Computational Physics 227 (16) (2008) 7423 – 7445

    work page 2008

  9. [9]

    Linear MHD stability studies with the STARWALL code

    P. Merkel, E. Strumberger, Linear MHD stability studies with the STAR- WALL code, arXiv:1508.04911 (2015). 21

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  10. [10]

    Hoelzl, P

    M. Hoelzl, P. Merkel, G. T. A. Huysmans, E. Nardon, E. Strumberger, R. McAdams, I. Chapman, S. G¨ unter, K. Lackner, Coupling JOREK and STARWALL codes for non-linear resistive-wall simulations, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 401 (1) (2012) 012010

    work page 2012

  11. [11]

    A. B. Rechester, M. N. Rosenbluth, Electron heat transport in a tokamak with destroyed magnetic surfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 38–41

    work page 1978

  12. [12]

    Connor, R

    J. Connor, R. Hastie, Relativistic limitations on runaway electrons, Nuclear Fusion 15 (3) (1975) 415

    work page 1975

  13. [13]

    Dreicer, Electron and ion runaway in a fully ionized gas, Nuclear Fusion 115 (2) (1959) 238

    H. Dreicer, Electron and ion runaway in a fully ionized gas, Nuclear Fusion 115 (2) (1959) 238

    work page 1959

  14. [14]

    Rosenbluth, S

    M. Rosenbluth, S. Putvinski, Theory for avalanche of runaway electrons in tokamaks, Nuclear Fusion 37 (10) (1997) 1355

    work page 1997

  15. [15]

    H. M. Smith, E. Verwichte, Hot tail runaway electron generation in tokamak disruptions, Physics of Plasmas 15 (7) (2008) 072502

    work page 2008

  16. [16]

    J. R. Mart´ ın-Sol´ ıs, A. Loarte, M. Lehnen, Formation and termination of runaway beams in ITER disruptions, Nuclear Fusion 57 (6) (2017) 066025

    work page 2017

  17. [17]

    A. Fil, E. Nardon, M. Hoelzl, G. T. A. Huijsmans, F. Orain, M. Be- coulet, P. Beyer, G. Dif-Pradalier, R. Guirlet, H. R. Koslowski, M. Lehnen, J. Morales, S. Pamela, C. Passeron, C. Reux, F. Saint-Laurent, Three- dimensional non-linear magnetohydrodynamic modeling of massive gas in- jection triggered disruptions in JET, Physics of Plasmas 22 (6) (2015) 062509

    work page 2015

  18. [18]

    Nardon, A

    E. Nardon, A. Fil, M. Hoelzl, G. Huijsmans, JET contributors, Progress is understanding disruptions triggered by massive gas injection via 3D non- linear MHD modelling with JOREK, Plasma physics and controlled fusion 59 (2017) 014006

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    Donea, A Taylor-Galerkin method for convective transport problems, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 20 (1984) 101– 119

    J. Donea, A Taylor-Galerkin method for convective transport problems, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 20 (1984) 101– 119

    work page 1984

  20. [20]

    Donea, L

    J. Donea, L. Quartapelle, V. Selmin, An analysis of time discretization in the finite element solution of hyperbolic problems, Journal of Computa- tional Physics 70 (1987) 463–499

    work page 1987

  21. [21]

    G. Papp, T. F¨ ul¨ op, T. Feh´ er, P. C. de Vries, V. Riccardo, C. Reux, M. Lehnen, V. Kiptily, V. Plyusnin, B. Alper, JET EFDA contributors, The effect of ITER-like wall on runaway electron generation in JET, Nu- clear Fusion 53 (12) (2013) 123017

    work page 2013

  22. [22]

    Eriksson, P

    L.-G. Eriksson, P. Helander, F. Andersson, D. Anderson, M. Lisak, Current dynamics during disruptions in large tokamaks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 205004. 22

    work page 2004

  23. [23]

    Krebs, F

    I. Krebs, F. J. Artola, C. R. Sovinec, S. D. Jardin, K. Bunkers, M. Hoelzl, N. M. Ferraro, Simulations of Vertical Displacement Events in tokamaks: A benchmark of nonlinear MHD codes, Nuclear Fusion (Submitted)

    work page

  24. [24]

    Tinguely, R

    R. Tinguely, R. Granetz, A. Berg, A. Kuang, D. Brunner, B. LaBom- bard, High-resolution disruption halo current measurements using Lang- muir probes in Alcator C-Mod, Nuclear Fusion 58 (1) (2017) 016005

    work page 2017

  25. [25]

    Artola, G

    F. Artola, G. Huijsmans, M. Hoelzl, P. Beyer, A. Loarte, Y. Gribov, Non- linear magnetohydrodynamic simulations of edge localised mode triggering via vertical position oscillations in ITER, Nuclear Fusion 58 (9) (2018) 096018

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Gribov, A

    Y. Gribov, A. Kavin, V. Lukash, R. Khayrutdinov, G. Huijsmans, A. Loarte, J. Snipes, L. Zabeo, Plasma vertical stabilisation in ITER, Nu- clear Fusion 55 (7) (2015) 073021

    work page 2015

  27. [27]

    D. I. Kiramov, B. N. Breizman, Force-free motion of a cold plasma during the current quench, Physics of Plasmas 25 (9) (2018) 092501

    work page 2018

  28. [28]

    Aleynikova, G

    K. Aleynikova, G. T. A. Huijsmans, P. Aleynikov, Linear MHD stability analysis of post-disruption plasmas in ITER, Plasma Physics Reports 42 (5) (2016) 486–494

    work page 2016

  29. [29]

    Freidberg, Ideal MHD, Cambridge University Press, 2014

    J. Freidberg, Ideal MHD, Cambridge University Press, 2014

    work page 2014

  30. [30]

    G¨ unter, K

    S. G¨ unter, K. Lackner, C. Tichmann, Finite element and higher order dif- ference formulations for modelling heat transport in magnetised plasmas, Journal of Computational Physics 226 (2) (2007) 2306 – 2316

    work page 2007

  31. [31]

    Generalized collision operator for fast electrons interacting with partially ionized impurities

    L. Hesslow, O. Embr´ eus, M. Hoppe, T. C. DuBois, G. Papp, M. Rahm, T. F¨ ul¨ op, Generalized collision operator for fast electrons interacting with partially ionized impurities, arXiv:1807.05036v2 (2018). 23

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018