- Journal Home
- Volume 36 - 2024
- Volume 35 - 2024
- Volume 34 - 2023
- Volume 33 - 2023
- Volume 32 - 2022
- Volume 31 - 2022
- Volume 30 - 2021
- Volume 29 - 2021
- Volume 28 - 2020
- Volume 27 - 2020
- Volume 26 - 2019
- Volume 25 - 2019
- Volume 24 - 2018
- Volume 23 - 2018
- Volume 22 - 2017
- Volume 21 - 2017
- Volume 20 - 2016
- Volume 19 - 2016
- Volume 18 - 2015
- Volume 17 - 2015
- Volume 16 - 2014
- Volume 15 - 2014
- Volume 14 - 2013
- Volume 13 - 2013
- Volume 12 - 2012
- Volume 11 - 2012
- Volume 10 - 2011
- Volume 9 - 2011
- Volume 8 - 2010
- Volume 7 - 2010
- Volume 6 - 2009
- Volume 5 - 2009
- Volume 4 - 2008
- Volume 3 - 2008
- Volume 2 - 2007
- Volume 1 - 2006
Cited by
- BibTex
- RIS
- TXT
Accurate prediction of the sawtooth cycle [1] is an important test for nonlinear MHD codes. The sawtooth cycle in the CDX-U tokamak [2], chosen because its small size and low temperature allow simulation using actual device parameters, has been an important benchmark for the comparison of the M3D [3] and NIMROD [5] codes for the last several years. Successive comparisons have led to improvements and refinements in both codes. The most recent comparisons show impressive agreement between the two codes both on the linear instability and on the details of nonlinear cyclical behavior. These tests are somewhat idealized and do not yet agree quantitatively with the experimentally observed sawtooth period. We expect a second generation of CDX-U sawtooth benchmarks based on an analytically specified equilibrium, with source terms that show greater fidelity to the physical device, to produce better agreement.
}, issn = {1991-7120}, doi = {https://doi.org/}, url = {http://global-sci.org/intro/article_detail/cicp/7809.html} }Accurate prediction of the sawtooth cycle [1] is an important test for nonlinear MHD codes. The sawtooth cycle in the CDX-U tokamak [2], chosen because its small size and low temperature allow simulation using actual device parameters, has been an important benchmark for the comparison of the M3D [3] and NIMROD [5] codes for the last several years. Successive comparisons have led to improvements and refinements in both codes. The most recent comparisons show impressive agreement between the two codes both on the linear instability and on the details of nonlinear cyclical behavior. These tests are somewhat idealized and do not yet agree quantitatively with the experimentally observed sawtooth period. We expect a second generation of CDX-U sawtooth benchmarks based on an analytically specified equilibrium, with source terms that show greater fidelity to the physical device, to produce better agreement.