Status of TRANSP and PTRANSP

Nov. 2, 2009 D. McCune 1

Status of TRANSP and PTRANSP

Presented at APS-DPP 2009,

Nov. 2--6, 2009

*Supported by U.S. DOE Contract No. DE-AC02-09CH11466


Abstract – GP8.00051D. McCune, R. Andre, E. Feibush, M. Gorelenkova, K. Indireshkumar, C. Ludescher-Furth, L. Randerson, PPPL*, G. Bateman, A. Kritz, Lehigh University – This poster describes the status of TRANSP and PTRANSP code development and run production operations. Production rates continue to climb as new users and tokamaks are added; statistics will be shown, including utilization of the recently added TRANSP MPI capability. New code features include greatly expanded flexibility in specification of transport models for density, temperature, and angular momentum profile prediction in PTRANSP runs. A new replay option enables retrieval of sources from TRANSP analysis runs for PTRANSP validation. TRANSP / PTRANSP free boundary MHD modeling options have been enhanced. New RF modeling capabilities, such as the ability to model ICRF with full toroidal mode spectrum, have been added. NUBEAM upgrades include improvements to deposition atomic physics and loss orbit distribution capture. Fusion Grid post-processing of TRANSP results has been improved using extraction of SWIM-SciDAC Plasma State files from TRANSP archives. Opportunities for PTRANSP Support of SciDAC and FSP will be presented.

*PPPL work performed under auspices of DOE contract DE-AC02-76CH03073


TRANSP: Vision Statement

Provide a comprehensive end-to-end modeling

capability for magnetic confinement fusion energy experiments of today and

tomorrow.


Traditional TRANSP: Overview

Preliminary dataAnalysis andPreparation

(largely automated)

DiagnosticHardware

Experiments (Asdex-U, C-Mod, DIII-D, ITER, JET, KSTAR, MAST, NSTX)

20-50 signals {f(t), f(x,t)}Plasma position, Shape,Temperatures, DensitiesField, Current, RF andBeam Injected Powers.

TRANSP Analysis*:Current diffusion, MHD equilibrium, fast ions, heating, current drive;

power, particle and momentum balance.

TRANSP Analysis*:Current diffusion, MHD equilibrium, fast ions, heating, current drive;

power, particle and momentum balance.

Experiment simulationOutput Database

~1000-2000 signals{f(t), f(x,t)}

Visualization

Load RelationalDatabases

Detailed (3d) time-slice physics simulations: GS2, ORBIT, M3D… *FusionGrid TRANSP

on PPPL servers

Pre- and Post-processing at the experimental site… MDS+

MDS+


PPPL TRANSP Run Production*

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Completed Runs

FY-2005

FY-2006

FY-2007

FY-2008

FY-2009**

Fusion Grid TRANSPFusion Grid TRANSP

*Not shown in graphic: independent run production at JET site (approximately 1000 runs per year).**59 NUBEAM/TRANSP production runs with MPI, up to 16p.


PPPL TRANSP SERVICEFY-2005 – FY-2009 (Five Years)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Total Runs, by Tokamak

NSTX

MAST

DIII-D

Asdex-U

C-Mod

JET*

ITER

HL-2A

EAST

other*~4000 additional JET runs on JET production server over same period.

18003 Total Runs


FY-2009 PPPL TRANSP TeamName TRANSP PTRANSP SciDAC Other

R. Andre 70% 30%

Marina G. 100%

Kumar 65% 35%

McCune 25% 35% 20% 20%

Feibush 20% 15% 65%

Ludescher 80% 10% 10%

Randerson 60% 40%

Total FTE 4.2 0.75 0.70 1.35Color code: Physics, Visualization, Engineering/ Operational Support


TRANSP Staffing Level• Staff levels still insufficient:

– Cannot promptly meet short term code development requests of production users;

– Long term development projects have lagged.

• Main reason: production system support.– Trouble-shooting 100s of crashed runs.– Detailed answers to 1000s of user queries.

• New hire in FY-2009: Marina Gorelenkova.– Financed by experimental projects: big help.


A Cautionary Note for FSP• Production support very labor intensive!

• Immediate user needs take precedence.– FTEs for long term development = Total FTEs

less FTEs for support at best.– It’s worse than this, due to nature of support:

• Repeated interruptions;• Numerous short term, urgent, unplanned tasks;• User’s research dependent on speedy completion;• Highly disruptive to long term planning and effort.

• [P]TRANSP code development suffers.


Separate Production Support and Code Development Roles?

• Might work for a sufficiently large team.

• But, support personnel need knowledge similar to that of code authors.

• Trouble shooting crashed runs = response to user “beta testing” of research code.

• Integral part of “Validation & Verification”.

• Code developer involvement is important.


A Day in the Life: Oct. 20, 2009 (zero new lines of code)

• Detailed email exchange:– JET physicist query,

momentum balance terms. – TRANSP extracted Plasma

States for GYRO @ GA.– Ideas for NUBEAM

simulation of mode induced diffusion of fast ions.

– FMCFM module design for PTRANSP, FSP, etc.

– NUBEAM development planning (ADAS commit).

– SWIM progress report for FY-2009 for DOE.

• More emails:– NUBEAM failure in MST-

RFP simulations.– Diagnosis of TRANSP

output system failure, 160GB ITER file (output time step too small).

– NSTX physicist query, fast ion trapping definition.

– Help sought, debug DIII-D “Coppi-Tang” predictions.

– Cursory review, two co-authored papers.

– Join FSP “frameworks” email list.


New for Users This Year• Fusion Grid NUBEAM, MPI up to 16p:

– ADAS atomic physics: state excitation effects on neutral beam deposition.

– New current shielding option: Y.R. Lin-Liu, F.L. Hinton, Phys. Plasmas 4 (1997) 4179.

– New outputs @ times of interest OUTTIM(…):• Both GC & FLR computed slowing down ion fb(…);• Detailed deposition distribution function data;• Distribution data on lost orbits.• All available using GET_FBM.

• Same NUBEAM in SciDACs: CSWIM, FACETs– MPI Scaling to ~1024p, 1-4000 ptcls/cpu.


New for Users This Year• NUBEAM_Fgen – see C. Stark, JP8.0060:

– Replay NUBEAM calculation over short time window; produce data file for GET_FBM.

– ElVis (Fusion Grid) User Interface;– Start from any existing NBI TRANSP run, any time of

interest; replay using Plasma States…– Choose particle statistics (NPTCLS);– Choose number of CPUs up to 16;– SULI summer project.

• PTRANSP Free Boundary MHD equilibrium– Details below…


New for Users This Year• Plasma State based heating and current

drive source replay:– TRANSP rerun using sources from prior run.– Sample application (PTRANSP): test transport

model variations, holding sources fixed.

• “Steerable” namelist quantities.• Two production versions: tshare & pshare:

– Latest code in tshare; tested version in pshare.

• Prompt input data error checking– At job queuing time; save queue waits.


Technical Progress (Code Not Ready for Users)

• New RF-related Modules:– MPI-TORIC, GENRAY, CQL3D.– See GP8.00052 (next door).– TORIC Toroidal Mode Spectrum is available.

• PTRANSP– Density prediction: tested, some aspects OK, still

needs work.– Control Upgrades (being implemented):

• Choice of solver algorithm• Choice of summed transport models • Axial, Confinement & Edge plasma regions…

1 1 2 2 ...c M c M


Details: ADAS in NUBEAM

Figure from “ADAS in Fafner and TRANSP/ NUBEAM” – Michael Kraus et al, October 2009 ADAS Workshop.

Asdex-U 17847n(0) ~ 1.2e20 m**-3NBI source #1

• ADAS atomic physics – correction for atomic state excitation – now available in NUBEAM for H-isotope neutral beams• Significant change from ground state for high target densities (shown).• Improvement over legacy excitation model Janev, C.D. Boley, D.E. Post, Nucl. Fusion Vol. 29, No. 12, pp.

2125-2140 (1989)

Collaboration: PPPL & IPP/Garching


Details: Isolver Free Boundary Solver• Isolver is a free boundary equilibrium solver originally written by J. Menard in IDL

and rewritten in Fortran for use in TRANSP/PTRANSP.• Development of free boundary capabilities proceeding in stages:

– EFIT analysis: Completed• Isolver analyzes psi(R,Z) from EFIT time slices used as input to TRANSP to find flux surface

representation, separatrix, X points, …

– Least squares coil currents (original Isolver mode): Completed• Isolver determines the poloidal field coil currents which will best match a prescribed

boundary.

– Measured coil currents: 70% Complete• Isolver uses the measured poloidal field coil currents along with a feedback circuit to keep

the plasma centered in the vessel.

– Passive structures: 30% Complete• The measured poloidal field coil currents are used along with a circuit equation to include the

currents induced in the nearby passive structures.

– Flux Diffusion: To Be Done• The poloidal field diffusion equation, which is used to evolve the plasma q, is coupled to the

equilibrium solver.• The poloidal field coil currents are driven through a circuit equation to best match the

measured coil currents.

– Plasma current prediction: To Be Done• The plasma current is predicted from the circuit equation.• The drive voltage of the ohmic coils is chosen to match a prescribed plasma current

waveform.


Isolver: EFIT Analysis

• EFIT psi(R,Z,t) slice data is input to TRANSP/PTRANSP

– LEVGEO=8 mode in TRANSP/PTRANSP for prescribed equilibrium data.

– New NLPSIRZ_FLUX=.TRUE. mode uses psi(R,Z,t) input to evaluate flux surfaces.

• Isolver determines flux surface based on location of X points and limiter surface.

– Flux surface representation returned to TRANSP/PTRANSP is displaced in from separatrix to avoid singularities.

– Separate analysis is performed with boundary at separatrix to evaluate enclosed flux and self inductance Li.

• Available for any tokamak with EFIT and limiter data.

• For application to D3D, see Budny et al. APS poster JP8.00102, Tuesday afternoon session.


Isolver: Least Squares Mode• Fit coil currents to best match prescribed

boundary.• Coil currents can be adjusted freely, fixed to

measured data or constrained by measured data.• Coil geometry currently available for NSTX and

D3D.– D3D example in Budny, et al. JP8.00102 poster.

• ITER coil geometry awaits TRANSP/PTRANSP output pipeline upgrade to accommodate large amount of psi(R,Z,t) data.

Note: Ohmic coil current KK_OH left unconstrained and became nonzero only during the part of the shot where Isolver had difficulty finding a solution.

NSTX


Isolver: Measured Coil Currents Mode• Measured poloidal coil currents drive Isolver coil currents.• Feedback circuits position the plasma.

– Stabilizes plasma against vertical and horizontal motion.– Feedback circuit currents are added to measured coil

currents.– Prescribed boundary is used to identify feedback points for

centering the plasma.

Horizontal feedback point

Vertical feedback point

Horizontal feedbackcurrent source

Vertical feedbackcurrent source

DIII-D


Details: Updatable Namelist Variables

Time NBI ECH Total80-130 34 40 74

130-300 17 30 47300-400 17 15 32400-500 0 4 4

Namelist variables designated with tilda (“~”) in TRANSP’s port.spec are “updatable”. For example: beam and RF powers. Hypothetical application:

[main namelist] … … nantech=1 ! 1 gyrotron nbeam=2 ! 2 beams powech=0.0 pinja=2*0.0

~update_time = 80.0 powech=40.0e6 pinja=17.0,17.0

~update_time = 130.0 powech=30.0 pinja=0.0,17.0 … … [etc.]


Details: Running MPI NUBEAM

• In Namelist, set:– NBI_PSERVE = 1

• Command line job setup as before– tr_start <runid> [tshare]– It will ask you how many CPUs (Np)?– Note: Np > 16 likely to result in long queue

wait.

• In the near future:– NTORIC_PSERVE = 1 will be available.


ElVis/Java Fusion Grid Services

• Available Services*:– Nubeam_Fgen, get

fast ion distrib. fcn.– Get_fbm, view fast ion

distrib. fcn.– Cstate, view Plasma

State file.– Rplot, view TRANSP

run results.– ElFresco, compute

reflectometry

• Recent Changes:– Nubeam_Fgen,

Cstate, and Get_fbm are new.

– Rplot:• MDS+ run selector

panel;• Script editor;• Arrow Key command

line recall.

– Heavy use of ElFresco service.*partial list


ElVis/Rplot


I-phone Has an App for that…

TRANSP Fusion Grid Users can access these services…


Future Plans• Continue Run Production & Support.• Develop RF Modules with MPI.• Further Develop MPI NUBEAM.• Develop Free Boundary MHD Equilibrium.• Develop GUIs– ElVis/Java Services.• PTRANSP / FSP / SciDACs:

– PTRANSP winding down, much work needed.– Level of effort going forward is unclear.– Note: ITER task agreements need PTRANSP.


1d Transport Solver Compatible with PTRANSP, FSP, SciDACs…

Control Object(s):• Choice of Solver• Choice of Transport Models• Options

P0: Plasma State @t0• Past time step geometry• Past time step profiles

P1: Plasma State @t1• new geometry• new input profiles

• missing profiles => equations to solve

• new boundary conditions• sources (heating, fueling).

Portable S

olver M

odule FM

CF

M

Collection of transport models:• NCLASS• GLF23• MMM95• MMM08• TGLF• etc., etc.

New profiles

Current Status: PTRANSP generates P0 and P1

Question: Shall we build the rest of this?


Opportunity to Take Advantage of TRANSP Legacy

Plasma State Time Series from SciDAC/FSP SimulationIncludes Machine Description

TRANSP Namelist Time Dependent Equilibrium & Profiles & Sources

TRANSP Analysis

TRANSP Output Dataset

Access to Physics Modules that start with TRANSP data, including many first principles codes.

Question: Shall we build the rest of this?

Status: Replay Mode demonstrated transfer of sources from Plasma State time series.


Summary• Continued heavy research production use

of TRANSP and PTRANSP.• Continued Active Development Program

– But some developments are “behind schedule”.

• PTRANSP funding & work coming to end.– Some goals not met, but, continuation of

PTRANSP activity could help FSP & SciDACS.– ITER task agreements depend on PTRANSP.

• The current TRANSP staff is stretched thin, mainly due to production support.

Status of TRANSP and PTRANSP

Documents

transp analysis

status of transp

fusiongrid transp

mccunetraditional transp

transp archives

fusion grid transp

transp mpi capability

pppl transp teamcolor