A potentially serious impediment to the production of energy by nuclear fusion in large tokamaks, such as ITER [R. Aymar, V. A. Chuyanov, M. Huguet, Y. Shimomura, ITER Joint Central Team, and ITER Home Teams, Nucl. Fusion41, 1301 (2001)] and DEMO [D. Maisonner, I. Cook, S. Pierre, B. Lorenzo, D. Luigi, G. Luciano, N. Prachai, and P. Aldo, Fusion Eng. Des.81, 1123 (2006)], is the potential for rapid deposition of energy onto plasma facing components by edge localized modes (ELMs). The trigger for ELMs is believed to be the ideal magnetohydrodynamic peeling-ballooning instability, but recent numerical calculations have suggested that a plasma equilibrium with an X-point—as is found in all ITER-like tokamaks, is stable to the peeling mode. This contrasts with analytical calculations [G. Laval, R. Pellat, and J. S. Soule, Phys. Fluids17, 835 (1974)] that found the peeling mode to be unstable in cylindrical plasmas with arbitrary cross-sectional shape. Here, we re-examine the assumptions made in cylindrical geometry calculations and generalize the calculation to an arbitrary tokamak geometry at marginal stability. The resulting equations solely describe the peeling mode and are not complicated by coupling to the ballooning mode, for example. We find that stability is determined by the value of a single parameter Δ that is the poloidal average of the normalized jump in the radial derivative of the perturbed magnetic field’s normal component. We also find that near a separatrix it is possible for the energy principle’s δW to be negative (that is usually taken to indicate that the mode is unstable, as in the cylindrical theory), but the growth rate to be arbitrarily small.

1.
J.
Wesson
,
Tokamaks
(
Oxford University Press
,
Oxford
,
1997
).
2.
H.
Zohm
,
Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion
38
,
105
(
1996
).
3.
ITER Joint Central Team
,
ITER Home Teams
,
R.
Aymar
,
V. A.
Chuyanov
,
M.
Huguet
, and
Y.
Shimomura
,
Nucl. Fusion
41
,
1301
(
2001
).
4.
H. R.
Wilson
,
J. W.
Connor
,
A. R.
Field
,
S. J.
Fielding
,
R. L.
Miller
,
L. L.
Lao
,
J. R.
Ferron
, and
A. D.
Turnbull
,
Phys. Plasmas
6
,
1925
(
1999
).
5.
C. G.
Gimblett
,
R. J.
Hastie
, and
P.
Helander
,
Phys. Rev. Lett.
96
,
035006
(
2006
).
6.
S. Yu.
Medvedev
,
T. C.
Hender
,
O.
Sauter
, and
L.
Villard
,
Proceedings of the 28th EPS Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics
, ECA
2001
, Vol.
25A
, p.
21
.
7.
G. T. A.
Huysmans
,
Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion
47
,
2107
(
2005
).
8.
G.
Laval
,
R.
Pellat
, and
J. S.
Soule
,
Phys. Fluids
17
,
835
(
1974
).
9.
H. R.
Wilson
,
P. B.
Snyder
,
G. T. A.
Huysmans
, and
R. L.
Miller
,
Phys. Plasmas
9
,
1277
(
2002
).
10.
S.
Saarelma
(private communication,
2007
).
11.
D.
Lortz
,
Nucl. Fusion
15
,
49
(
1975
).
12.
J. W.
Connor
,
R. J.
Hastie
, and
H. R.
Wilson
,
Phys. Plasmas
5
,
2687
(
1998
).
13.
J. P.
Freidberg
,
Ideal Magnetohydrodynamics
(
Plenum
,
New York
,
1987
).
14.
See EPAPS supplementary material at http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3194270 for full detailed descriptions of the calculations outlined in this article.
15.
A. J.
Webster
and
C. G.
Gimblett
,
Phys. Rev. Lett.
102
,
035003
(
2009
).
16.
G.
Bateman
,
MHD Instabilities
(
MIT Press
,
Cambridge, Massachusetts
,
1980
).
17.
J. D.
Jackson
,
Classical Electrodynamics
(
Wiley
,
New York
,
1975
).
18.
A. J.
Webster
and
H. R.
Wilson
,
Proceedings of the Joint Varenna-Lausanne International Workshop on the Theory of Fusion Plasmas
, Villa Monastero—Varenna, Italy,
2002
, edited by
J. W.
Connor
,
O.
Sauter
, and
E.
Sindoni
(
Societa Italiana di Fisica
,
Bologna
,
2002
), p.
417
.
19.
Before continuing further we make some observations on the high-n ordering that for ξ=0 usually leads to ξ=(i/n)R2Bp2(ξψ/ψ). This analysis is used in the derivation of δW used in Sec. V onwards, and to derive the equations solved by ELITE (Ref. 9). The ordering implicitly assumes that ξψ/ψ(ξψ/Jχ)Jχ/ψ, which is the case in the plasma core where (1/Jχ)Jχ/ψ1 because ξψ/ψn1. Whereas a sufficiently large n can always be found to ensure (1/n)(ξψ/Jχ)Jχ/ψ1, and terms of this type will often be negligible order one contributions anyhow, future calculations would be improved by including them. For example ξ would then become ξ=(i/n)(R2Bp2/Jχ)(Jχξψ)/ψ. For the present we will continue to use the ordering employed by Connor et al (Ref. 12) that is also used to derive the equations solved by ELITE.
20.
A. J.
Webster
,
Phys. Plasmas
16
,
082503
(
2009
).
21.
D. D.
Ryutov
,
R. H.
Cohen
,
T. D.
Rognlien
, and
M. V.
Umansky
,
Phys. Plasmas
15
,
092501
(
2008
).
22.
Observe that we could have (incorrectly) argued that whereas γq/q0 at the separatrix, the plasma motion v=γξeγtγqξψqξψ does not. This argument is incorrect, however, because the linearized stability analysis requires that ξ1 always, and hence that ξψ1/|q|ψs where ψs denotes the plasma surface. Then we have γξ1/q0. The normalization of ξψ is discussed in detail in the  Appendix.
23.
A. J.
Webster
,
Phys. Plasmas
16
,
012501
(
2009
).

Supplementary Material

You do not currently have access to this content.