Energetic particles

Mission

What are the expected outputs of the Expert Group?

• Provide feedback to Advocacy Groups by evaluating the scientific and technical accuracy of their ideas and initiatives.
• Evaluate the breadth of Advocacy Group input relative to the previously identified needs (ReNeW, 2015 PMI Workshop Report, etc...) and identify and solicit the community to suggest ideas to close remaining gaps

What will the Expert Group NOT do?

• Provide public-facing output on recommendations and prioritization of the various Advocacy Group initiatives

Visit the Frequently Asked Questions page for more information about the CPP process.

Getting Involved

Our Expert Group meets every Tuesday at 10 AM PT (1 PM ET). Zoom link is https://zoom.us/j/8584554155

Meeting minutes are available for Expert Group members.

This Expert Group is open to anyone willing to participate. You can officially sign up using this form, or contact the group Leaders listed above. You can get involved a little, or a lot, but we will ask for certain minimum amount of time (TBD) that can be devoted to this process to ensure we have the resources we need. Members can join throughout the process, but are encouraged to establish their interest early in order to fill and define our scope.

Topical Areas

To facilitate the evaluation of initiatives from Advocacy Groups, we have organized the EP Expert Group in the follow sub-topical areas and listed research needs. The sub-topics are meant to help guide perspective, i.e. from the sub-topic point of view, is the initiative under review technically feasible and will it address EP needs to make fusion energy work. The sub-topics will likely evolve as we evaluate Initiative Proposals.

Sub-topic: Theory/simulation

• Projections and operation space studies to avoid undesirable EP instabilities
• Integrated modeling
• Nonlinear dynamics (saturation, multi-mode, multi-scale)

Sub-topic: Experiments

• Measurements/data for model validation or EP control
• Control tools for EP driven instabilities – avoiding deleterious effects or inducing advantageous effects
• Diagnostics for EP profiles, losses

Sub-topic: Comprehensive Understanding of EPs in Burning Plasma Devices

• Alpha particle physics
• EP (alpha, NBI, RF generated) interaction with MHD (AEs, fishbones, tearing modes, sawteeth, etc.) and quantified consequences on fusion performance, heating, current drive, wall heating, etc.
• Effect of non-axisymmetric magnetic fields
• Runaway electrons

Membership

The following people are currently registered in this Expert Group (updated 8/5/2019):

• Richard Magee, Cami Collins - CPP Program Committee Members [April 2019-present]
• Mario Podesta, Donald Spong, Mike Van Zeeland, Eric Fredrickson, Boris Breizman, Nikolai Gorelenkov, Vinicius Duarte, Raffi Nazikian, Alessandro Bortolon, Yang Chen, Benedikt Geiger, Ryan Clary, Dylan Brennan, Vlad Soukhanovskii, Jeff Lestz, Neal Crocker, Tsuyoshi Akiyama, Jay Anderson, James Titus, Deyong Liu, Eric Bass, Matthias Knolker, Xiaodi Du, Samuel Lazerson, Elizabeth Tolman, David Smith, Matt Beidler, Aaron Bader, Matthew Flanders, Siddharth Gupta
• YOU! (sign up here)

Initiatives the Expert Group is Currently Evaluating

<table of the initiatives that we are currently providing feedback on>

Expert Group Output

Pre-Workshop #1 (Summary of EP Gaps)

Workshop #1 (evaluations of initiatives)

Workshop #2 (TBD)

Snowmass (TBD)

Provide Input to the Expert Group

There are multiple ways that you can provide input, and we would like to get as much feedback from the community as possible. You can

• Provide input through the submission forms on the expert groups website, which can be linked to your name or provided anonymously*
• Directly e-mail the Expert Group leaders and/or members who can share your concerns during our internal discussions
• Join the Expert Group and get involved directly - we understand you are busy and so can try to accommodate your participation

*The purpose of allowing anonymous input is to make sure people can provide evaluation and criticism of ideas that may be linked to their on-going research area and are worried that feedback negatively impact their career progression.