Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Definition of Q in unstable Paux<0 regions revisited? #25

Open
pabloprf opened this issue Feb 21, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Definition of Q in unstable Paux<0 regions revisited? #25

pabloprf opened this issue Feb 21, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed

Comments

@pabloprf
Copy link

After an intense whats-going-on! session with Audrey today we realized there might be better ways to define Q in the region of Paux<0.
In this line, Q is defined as Pfusion/Plaunched

return _ignition_above_threshold(P_fusion / P_launched)

Assuming perfect absorption, Pexternal=Plaunched.
Pexternal comes from Pin-Palpha, and with the separated calculation of Pohmic, this may lead to situations of Paux<0 (if Pohmic is higher than Pexternal). The meaning of this is that the point is not in power balance, dW/dt (ignored in POPCONs) would be positive, then raising the temperature at constant density until a stable point (Paux=0) is found.

On the other hand, the calculation of Q will use a Pexternal which is lower than the "naturally ocurring" Pohmic, thus biasing the Q contours and having them artificially high in that region.
While this is solved by using a constraint of the type Paux>0 when defining an operational window (as in the PRD template), if one doesn't use this constraint, an optimizer that tries to find the maximum Q will drive the system towards that region always.

A suggestion to improve the definition of Q is to define it as Pfusion/max(Pohmic, Plaunched), instead of Pfusion/Plaunched.
There might be better ways to define this, but this may work.

Thoughts @tbody-cfs @hassec ?

@djbattagl
Copy link

@pabloprf I think the proposed solution is fine. Another option is to define Q to be zero when Paux < 0. Another option is to have optimization algorithm penalize solutions when Paux < 0.

@pabloprf
Copy link
Author

Yes, that's also fine. I guess it's a decision on how dW/dt is accounted for in the fusion gain calculation. However, even if dW/dt is substracted in the denominator of Q, my concern is that POPCONs should be dealing with stationary solutions, and the points with Paux<0 aren't.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 2, 2024

This issue has not seen any activity in the past 60 days. It is now marked as stale and will be closed in 7 days if no further activity is registered.

@hassec hassec added enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed and removed no-issue-activity labels Aug 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants