This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Turbulent transport and heating of trace heavy ions in hot, magnetized plasmas

M. Barnes mabarnes@mit.edu Plasma Science and Fusion Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA    F. I. Parra Plasma Science and Fusion Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA    W. Dorland Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20740, USA
Abstract

Scaling laws for the transport and heating of trace heavy ions in low-frequency, magnetized plasma turbulence are derived and compared with direct numerical simulations. The predicted dependences of turbulent fluxes and heating on ion charge and mass number are found to agree with numerical results for both stationary and differentially rotating plasmas. Heavy ion momentum transport is found to increase with mass, and heavy ions are found to be preferentially heated, implying a mass-dependent ion temperature for very weakly collisional plasmas and for partially-ionized heavy ions in strongly rotating plasmas.

turbulence, plasma, heating, impurities, gyrokinetics
pacs:
52.20.Hv,52.30.Gz,52.65.-y

Introduction.

Heavy ions are present in hot, magnetized plasmas both in laboratory experiments and in nature. These heavy ions are often trace, i.e., their densities are small enough that they have only a small direct effect on the bulk plasma dynamics. Nonetheless, trace heavy ions are important in numerous contexts: main ion properties are often inferred from heavy ion measurements because heavy ions radiate more readily islerPPCF94 ; accumulation of heavy ions leads to dilution and increased radiative energy losses in magnetic confinement fusion meserveyNF76 ; tokarNF97 ; and temperature measurements of minority ions in space and astrophysical plasmas indicate the existence of a novel heating mechanism schmidtGRL80 ; collierGRL96 ; kohlSP97 .

Considerable effort has gone into understanding the particle transport of trace heavy ions, or impurities, in the context of magnetized toroidal plasmas for fusion. In particular, the scaling with charge number ZZ and mass number AA of the impurity particle flux were predicted with a quasilinear fluid model and found to be in relatively good agreement with numerical and experimental results angioniPRL06 ; angioniPPCF09 . However, little to no work has been done on impurity momentum and energy fluxes or for turbulent heating of impurities. The latter may play a role not only in fusion plasmas, but also in the context of astrophysical plasmas, where the temperature of minority ions has been observed to increase with increasing ion mass schmidtGRL80 ; collierGRL96 ; kohlSP97 . Cyclotron heating cranmerApJ99 and stochastic heating via large-amplitude fluctuations chandranApJ10a have been proposed as possible explanations for this mass dependence. The turbulent heating mechanism described here provides an alternative explanation for the mass dependence of the minority ion temperature that is present even for low frequency, low amplitude fluctuations.

In this Letter we use local, nonlinear, δf\delta f-gyrokinetic theory cattoPP78 ; friemanPoF82 ; howesApJ06 to provide scaling predictions for trace heavy ion particle, momentum, and energy fluxes, as well as turbulent heating in hot, magnetized plasmas. This approach has already proven successful in determining scalings of temperature-gradient driven turbulence in tokamaks barnesPRL11b . We consider an inhomogeneous, axisymmetric plasma rotating toroidally at angular frequency ωϕ\omega_{\phi}, immersed in a curved, inhomogeneous magnetic field. To simplify our analysis, we restrict our attention to a region of plasma with rotation speed well below the ion sound speed but with a strong rotation gradient. We also consider only moderate values of β=8πp/B21\beta=8\pi p/B^{2}\lesssim 1, where pp is the mean plasma pressure and BB is the mean magnetic field magnitude. This is directly applicable to toroidal confinement experiments in magnetic confinement fusion, but the scaling laws we obtain are general: they do not change for a stationary, homogeneous plasma slab and therefore also pertain to various space and astrophysical plasmas.

Gyrokinetic turbulence.

The δf\delta f-gyrokinetic theory is obtained by performing an asymptotic expansion in the small ratio of the Larmor radius, ρ\rho, to system size, LL, and averaging over the fast Larmor motion of particles. It is valid for low-amplitude turbulence with time scales long compared to the Larmor frequency, Ω\Omega, and spatial scales comparable to ρ\rho and LL in the directions across and along the mean magnetic field, respectively. While initially developed for magnetic confinement fusion plasmas, δf\delta f-gyrokinetics can also be applied to small-scale turbulence in the solar wind, solar corona, accretion disks, and galaxy clusters  howesJGR08 ; schekApJ09 .

We use (𝐑,μ,ε\mathbf{R},\mu,\varepsilon) as our coordinate system, where 𝐑\mathbf{R} is the position of the center of a particle’s Larmor orbit, ε=mv2/2\varepsilon=mv^{2}/2 its kinetic energy, and μ=mv2/2B\mu=mv_{\perp}^{2}/2B its magnetic moment, with mm its mass and vv its speed. The subscripts \perp and \parallel are used to denote the components perpendicular and parallel to the mean magnetic field, respectively, with the magnetic field magnitude given by BB. With this choice of coordinates, the electromagnetic gyrokinetic equation governing the evolution of the fluctuating piece of the distribution function, δfs\delta f_{s}, is

DgsDt+𝐑˙s(gs+ZseχsTsFM,s)<C[δfs]>s=𝐯χs(FM,s+RωϕmsvTsFM,s),\begin{split}\frac{Dg_{s}}{Dt}&+\dot{\mathbf{R}}_{s}\cdot\nabla\left(g_{s}+\frac{Z_{s}e{\left<\chi\right>}_{s}}{T_{s}}F_{M,s}\right)-\big{<}C[\delta f_{s}]\big{>}_{s}\\ &=-{\left<\mathbf{v}_{\chi}\right>}_{s}\cdot\left(\nabla F_{M,s}+R\nabla\omega_{\phi}\frac{m_{s}v_{\parallel}}{T_{s}}F_{M,s}\right),\end{split} (1)

where gs=δfs+ZseFM,s(Φχs)/Tsg_{s}=\delta f_{s}+Z_{s}eF_{M,s}(\Phi-{\left<\chi\right>}_{s})/T_{s}, .s{\left<.\right>}_{s} denotes an average over Larmor angle at fixed 𝐑s\mathbf{R}_{s}, χs=ΦvδA/c+0μs𝑑μsδB/Zses{\left<\chi\right>}_{s}={\left<\Phi-v_{\parallel}\delta A_{\parallel}/c+\int_{0}^{\mu_{s}}d\mu_{s}^{\prime}\delta B_{\parallel}/Z_{s}e\right>}_{s} 111The fields Φ\Phi, δA\delta A_{\parallel}, and δB\delta B_{\parallel} are independent of Larmor angle at fixed particle position, 𝐫\mathbf{r}, but not at fixed 𝐑=𝐫+𝐯×𝐛^/Ω\mathbf{R}=\mathbf{r}+\mathbf{v}_{\perp}\times\mathbf{\hat{b}}/\Omega. Thus care must be taken to specify which spatial coordinate is held fixed for velocity integration. The μ\mu-integral contained in χ{\left<\chi\right>} is performed at fixed 𝐑\mathbf{R}, but all other velocity integrals in this Letter are performed at fixed 𝐫\mathbf{r}., Φ\Phi is the fluctuating electrostatic potential, δA\delta A_{\parallel} and δB\delta B_{\parallel} are the parallel components of the fluctuating magnetic vector potential and magnetic field, respectively, ZsZ_{s} is the charge number, ee the proton charge, cc the speed of light, TsT_{s} the mean temperature, FM,sF_{M,s} is a stationary Maxwellian distribution of velocities in the frame rotating with velocity 𝐮=R2ωϕϕ\mathbf{u}=R^{2}\omega_{\phi}\nabla\phi, ϕ\phi is the toroidal angle, RR the plasma major radius, D/Dt=/t+𝐮D/Dt=\partial/\partial t+\mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla, 𝐑˙s=𝐯+𝐯M,s+𝐯χs\dot{\mathbf{R}}_{s}=\mathbf{v}_{\parallel}+\mathbf{v}_{M,s}+{\left<\mathbf{v}_{\chi}\right>}_{s}, with 𝐯M,s=𝐛^/Ωs×(v2𝐛^𝐛^+v2B/2B)\mathbf{v}_{M,s}=\mathbf{\hat{b}}/\Omega_{s}\times(v_{\parallel}^{2}\mathbf{\hat{b}}\cdot\nabla\mathbf{\hat{b}}+v_{\perp}^{2}\nabla B/2B) the drift velocity due to a curved, inhomogeneous mean magnetic field and 𝐯χs=c𝐛^×χs/B{\left<\mathbf{v}_{\chi}\right>}_{s}=c\mathbf{\hat{b}}\times\nabla{\left<\chi\right>}_{s}/B the drift due to the fluctuating electromagnetic fields, 𝐛^\mathbf{\hat{b}} the unit vector along the mean magnetic field, Ωs=ZseB/msc\Omega_{s}=Z_{s}eB/m_{s}c the Larmor frequency, and CC describes two-particle Coulomb interactions. Plasma species is indicated by the subscript ss, which we henceforth drop unless it is needed to avoid ambiguity.

By definition, the trace ions considered here do not contribute to the fields. They are instead determined solely by the electron and main ion dynamics through the low-frequency Maxwell’s equations, supplemented by the quasineutrality constraint:

0\displaystyle 0 =sZsd3𝐯δfs,\displaystyle=\sum_{s}Z_{s}\int d^{3}\mathbf{v}\ \delta f_{s}, (2)
2δA\displaystyle\nabla_{\perp}^{2}\delta A_{\parallel} =4πcsZsed3𝐯vδfs,\displaystyle=-\frac{4\pi}{c}\sum_{s}Z_{s}e\int d^{3}\mathbf{v}\ v_{\parallel}\delta f_{s}, (3)
δB\displaystyle\nabla_{\perp}\delta B_{\parallel} =4πcsZsed3𝐯(𝐛^×𝐯)δfs,\displaystyle=\frac{4\pi}{c}\sum_{s}Z_{s}e\int d^{3}\mathbf{v}\left(\mathbf{\hat{b}}\times\mathbf{v}_{\perp}\right)\delta f_{s}, (4)

where Φ\Phi enters Eqs. (2-4) through the definition for δf\delta f given below Eq. (1).

With gg and {Φ,δA,δB}\{\Phi,\delta A_{\parallel},\delta B_{\parallel}\} specified by Eqs. (1-4), one can evaluate the turbulent heating,

HZeχ((𝐯+𝐯M)gC[δf])ΛΠωϕr,H\equiv Ze\left<\chi\left(\left(\mathbf{v}_{\parallel}+\mathbf{v}_{M}\right)\cdot\nabla g-{\left<C[\delta f]\right>}\right)\right>_{\Lambda}-\Pi\frac{\partial\omega_{\phi}}{\partial r}, (5)

and the turbulent fluxes,

Γ\displaystyle\Gamma =<δf𝐯χr>Λ,\displaystyle=\bigg{<}\delta f{\left<\mathbf{v}_{\chi}\right>}\cdot\nabla r\bigg{>}_{\Lambda}, (6)
Q\displaystyle Q =<εδf𝐯χr>Λ,\displaystyle=\bigg{<}\varepsilon\ \delta f{\left<\mathbf{v}_{\chi}\right>}\cdot\nabla r\bigg{>}_{\Lambda}, (7)
Π=mR2<δf(𝐯ϕ)𝐯χr>ΛZecR2(𝐛^ϕ)<δf(𝐯r)δA>Λ,\displaystyle\begin{split}\Pi&=mR^{2}\bigg{<}\delta f(\mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla\phi){\left<\mathbf{v}_{\chi}\right>}\cdot\nabla r\bigg{>}_{\Lambda}\\ &-\frac{Ze}{c}R^{2}(\mathbf{\hat{b}}\cdot\nabla\phi)\bigg{<}\delta f(\mathbf{v}_{\perp}\cdot\nabla r)\delta A_{\parallel}\bigg{>}_{\Lambda},\end{split} (8)

where rr labels surfaces of constant mean pressure, aΛ=d3𝐫d3𝐯a/d3𝐫\left<a\right>_{\Lambda}=\int d^{3}\mathbf{r}\int d^{3}\mathbf{v}\ a/\int d^{3}\mathbf{r} is an integral over all velocity space and over a volume of width ww (ρwL\rho\ll w\ll L) encompassing the mean magnetic field line of interest, and Γ\Gamma, Π\Pi, and QQ are the particle, toroidal angular momentum, and energy fluxes, respectively. Note that the momentum flux defined in Eq. (8) does not include each species’ contribution to the Maxwell stress.

Table 1: Scalings, SS, for turbulent fluxes and heating
|dωϕdr|ZAvtiR2\ \ \left|\dfrac{d\omega_{\phi}}{dr}\right|\sim\dfrac{Z}{A}\dfrac{v_{ti}}{R^{2}}   |dωϕdr|ZAvtiR2\left|\dfrac{d\omega_{\phi}}{dr}\right|\ll\dfrac{Z}{A}\dfrac{v_{ti}}{R^{2}}\ \ |dωϕdr|ZAvtiR2\ \ \left|\dfrac{d\omega_{\phi}}{dr}\right|\gg\dfrac{Z}{A}\dfrac{v_{ti}}{R^{2}}\ \
g0g_{0} A1/2A^{1/2} or Z/A1/2Z/A^{1/2} Z/A1/2Z/A^{1/2} A1/2A^{1/2}
g1g_{1} 1 or Z/AZ/A 1 or Z/AZ/A 1
Γ\Gamma 1 or Z/AZ/A 11 or Z/AZ/A 1
QQ 1 or Z/AZ/A 11 or Z/AZ/A 1
Π\Pi AA or ZZ ZZ AA
HH Z2/AZ^{2}/A, AA, or ZZ Z2/AZ^{2}/A AA or ZZ

Expansion in A1/2A^{1/2}.

To obtain scaling laws for the turbulent fluxes and heating of trace heavy ions, we take ZA1Z\sim A\gg 1, dωϕ/drvti/R2d\omega_{\phi}/dr\sim v_{ti}/R^{2}, and expand g=g0+g1+g=g_{0}+g_{1}+... in powers of A1/2A^{1/2}. Here vtiv_{ti} is the main ion thermal speed. We restrict our attention to β=8πp/B21\beta=8\pi p/B^{2}\lesssim 1, and assume the collisional mean free path is sufficiently long that collisions may be neglected in our analysis. In what follows, we keep ZZ and AA dependences separate so that we can consider the subsidiary expansion A1/2ZAA^{1/2}\ll Z\ll A.

Because the heavy ions are trace, their space and time scales are those of the bulk plasma turbulence. Thus, ZZ and AA only enter Eq. (1) through explicit factors of mm, vvtv\sim v_{t}, and ZZ, as well as through gg itself. In what follows, we assume the ratio of the heavy ion to proton temperature is much smaller than AA, giving vtA1/2v_{t}\sim A^{-1/2}. The two lowest order equations in our expansion are thus

Dg0Dt+𝐯Eg0=ZeTFM𝐯ΦmvTFM𝐯ERωϕ,\displaystyle\begin{split}&\frac{Dg_{0}}{Dt}+{\left<\mathbf{v}_{E}\right>}\cdot\nabla g_{0}=-\frac{Ze}{T}F_{M}\mathbf{v}_{\parallel}\cdot\nabla{\left<\Phi\right>}\\ &\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ -\frac{mv_{\parallel}}{T}F_{M}{\left<\mathbf{v}_{E}\right>}\cdot R\nabla\omega_{\phi},\end{split} (9)
Dg1Dt+𝐯Eg1+(𝐯+𝐯A)g0=ZeFMT(𝐯MΦ+v2c𝐛^δA)mvTFM𝐯ARωϕ𝐯EFM,\displaystyle\begin{split}&\frac{Dg_{1}}{Dt}+{\left<\mathbf{v}_{E}\right>}\cdot\nabla g_{1}+\left(\mathbf{v}_{\parallel}+{\left<\mathbf{v}_{A}\right>}\right)\cdot\nabla g_{0}\\ &=-\frac{ZeF_{M}}{T}\left(\mathbf{v}_{M}\cdot\nabla{\left<\Phi\right>}+\frac{v_{\parallel}^{2}}{c}\mathbf{\hat{b}}\cdot\nabla{\left<\delta A_{\parallel}\right>}\right)\\ &\ \ \ \ -\frac{mv_{\parallel}}{T}F_{M}{\left<\mathbf{v}_{A}\right>}\cdot R\nabla\omega_{\phi}-{\left<\mathbf{v}_{E}\right>}\cdot\nabla F_{M},\end{split} (10)

where 𝐯E=c𝐛^×Φ/B\mathbf{v}_{E}=c\mathbf{\hat{b}}\times\nabla\Phi/B and 𝐯A=v𝐛^×δA/B\mathbf{v}_{A}=v_{\parallel}\mathbf{\hat{b}}\times\nabla\delta A_{\parallel}/B.

There are two possible scalings for both g0g_{0} and g1g_{1} due to a competition between terms with different AA and ZZ dependences in Eqs. (9) and (10). In particular, g0A1/2,Z/A1/2g_{0}\propto A^{1/2},\ Z/A^{1/2}, and g11,Z/Ag_{1}\propto 1,\ Z/A. By considering the limits |dωϕ/dr|(Z/A)vti/R2|d\omega_{\phi}/dr|\ll(Z/A)v_{ti}/R^{2} and |dωϕ/dr|(Z/A)vti/R2|d\omega_{\phi}/dr|\gg(Z/A)v_{ti}/R^{2}, the number of such scalings is reduced. The AA- and ZZ-scalings for g0g_{0} and g1g_{1} in these limits, as well as for the general case, are summarized in Table 1.

Flux and heating scalings.

If g0(v)g_{0}(v_{\parallel}) is a solution to Eq. (9), then g0(v)-g_{0}(-v_{\parallel}) is also a solution. Thus, 𝑑vg0{Φ,δA,δB}¯=0\overline{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dv_{\parallel}g_{0}\{\Phi,\delta A_{\parallel},\delta B_{\parallel}\}}=0, where the overline denotes a statistical average. As a result, g0g_{0} does not contribute to the lowest order (i.e., electrostatic) heating or particle and heat fluxes, Eqs. (5)-(7), whose integrands are otherwise even functions of vv_{\parallel}. Conversely, the lowest order momentum flux integrand has a component proportional to mvmv_{\parallel}, so Πmvtg0A1/2g0\Pi\sim mv_{t}g_{0}\propto A^{1/2}g_{0}. Using our scalings for g0g_{0}, we see that Π\Pi has competing terms scaling as ZZ and AA, respectively.

Note that Eq. (10) has a vv_{\parallel} symmetry that is opposite that of Eq. (9): if g1(v)g_{1}(v_{\parallel}) is a solution, then g1(v)g_{1}(-v_{\parallel}) is also a solution. Furthermore, for all higher order equations, one can show that the symmetry in vv_{\parallel} alternates between that of Eqs. (9) and (10). As a result, the only components of gg that contribute to the particle and heat fluxes and heating are g1g_{1}, g3g_{3}, etc. Using Eqs. (6) and (7), we have {Γ,Q}g1\{\Gamma,Q\}\sim g_{1}, which in the general case has competing terms scaling as Z/AZ/A and 11 (no ZZ or AA dependence), respectively.

The first term in the heating expression, (5), is the Joule heating and is scaled up by an explicit factor of ZZ (arising from the current), while the second term is viscous heating. At lowest order, the Joule heating term gives H(Zvg0,Zg1)H\propto(Zv_{\parallel}g_{0},\ Zg_{1}), giving H(Z,Z2/A)H\propto(Z,\ Z^{2}/A). The viscous heating is proportional to Π(Z,A)\Pi\propto(Z,\ A). HH thus has competing terms scaling as Z2/AZ^{2}/A, ZZ, and AA, respectively. The scalings of the various fluxes and heating are summarized in Table 1.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 1: Normalized particle flux, (Γs/nsvti)(L/ρi)2(\Gamma_{s}/n_{s}v_{ti})(L/\rho_{i})^{2}, vs. mass number, AA, for cases with and without differential rotation, ωϕ\omega_{\phi}. The dashed line is a least-squares fit using our scaling predictions, given by 0.7+2.3/A-0.7+2.3/A and 0.41.6/x0.4-1.6/x for the left and right plots, respectively.

Minority ion temperature.

Integrating Eq. (5) by parts in time and using Eq. (1), the heating can be expressed as krommesPoP94 ; howesApJ06 ; abelRPP12

Hs=TsδfsFM,sC[δfs]Λ+(Qs32Γs)lnTsr+Γslnnsr.\begin{split}H_{s}&=-\left<\frac{T_{s}\delta f_{s}}{F_{M,s}}\ C[\delta f_{s}]\right>_{\Lambda}\\ &+\left(Q_{s}-\frac{3}{2}\Gamma_{s}\right)\frac{\partial\ln T_{s}}{\partial r}+\Gamma_{s}\frac{\partial\ln n_{s}}{\partial r}.\end{split} (11)

Our scalings indicate that HsH_{s} increases in magnitude with AA or ZZ, but Γs\Gamma_{s} and QsQ_{s} do not. The first term in Eq. (11) must thus dominate for AA or ZZ large. This term, which we identify as the collisional entropy generation, is positive definite when summed over species. We argue that it is also positive species by species for the low collisionalities considered here.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 2: Normalized heat flux, (Qs/nsTivti)(L/ρi)2(Q_{s}/n_{s}T_{i}v_{ti})(L/\rho_{i})^{2}, vs. mass number, AA, for cases with and without differential rotation, ωϕ\omega_{\phi}. The dashed line is a least-squares fit using our scaling predictions, given by 2.0+15/A2.0+15/A and 3.73.7/A3.7-3.7/A for the left and right plots, respectively.

The collision operator, CC, consists of a test-particle piece, which is a diffusion operator in velocity space, and a field-particle piece, which is an integral operator helander . Both contributions are inversely proportional to the collisional mean free path and thus small, except at small scales in the velocity space where large derivatives in the test-particle operator compensate abelPoP08 ; barnesPoP09 ; schekApJ09 . The test-particle operator should thus dominate in weakly collisional plasmas, and its diffusive nature ensures that its contribution to entropy generation is positive-definite.

Consequently, trace heavy ions must be heated by turbulence instead of cooled. For this heating process to subside, the trace ion temperature must become large enough to interfere with our large AA expansion. This happens when the heavy ion temperature exceeds the main ion temperature by a factor of AZA\sim Z. In this limit, the turbulent heating HH becomes comparable to the heat flux QQ so that HH is no longer required to be positive definite. Our theory thus predicts that heavy ions will be hotter than light ions by a factor of AZA\sim Z – but only if turbulent heating is larger than collisional temperature equilibration.

The collisional temperature equilibration of the main ions, ii, and a trace heavy ion species, ss, is s(8/3π)(Zs2/As)nsΔTsvti/λmfp\mathcal{E}_{s}\equiv(8/3\sqrt{\pi})(Z_{s}^{2}/A_{s})n_{s}\Delta T_{s}v_{ti}/\lambda_{\textnormal{mfp}}, where ΔTs=TsTi\Delta T_{s}=T_{s}-T_{i}, and λmfp\lambda_{\textnormal{mfp}} is the mean free path for collisions between the main ions. From Eq. (5), we estimate HsSnsTi(δni/ni)2vti/LH_{s}\sim Sn_{s}T_{i}(\delta n_{i}/n_{i})^{2}v_{ti}/L, where SS is the scaling of HH with AA and ZZ given in Table 1, and we have assumed eΦ/Tiδni/niδns/nse\Phi/T_{i}\sim\delta n_{i}/n_{i}\sim\delta n_{s}/n_{s}. The ratio of turbulent heating to collisional temperature equilibration is thus H/S(A/Z2)(λmfp/L)(δni/ni)2S(A/Z2)λmfp/vtiτEH/\mathcal{E}\sim S(A/Z^{2})(\lambda_{\textnormal{mfp}}/L)(\delta n_{i}/n_{i})^{2}\sim S(A/Z^{2})\lambda_{\textnormal{mfp}}/v_{ti}\tau_{E}, with τE\tau_{E} the characteristic time scale over which the equilibrium density and temperature vary.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 3: Normalized toroidal angular momentum flux, (Πs/minsLvti2)(L/ρi)2(\Pi_{s}/m_{i}n_{s}Lv_{ti}^{2})(L/\rho_{i})^{2}, vs. charge number, ZZ, and mass number, AA, for cases with and without differential rotation, ωϕ\omega_{\phi}. The dashed lines are least-squares fits using our scaling predictions, given by 0 and 1.7A5.1-1.7A-5.1 for the left and right plots, respectively. The fact that Π=0\Pi=0 for the case with dωϕ/dr=0d\omega_{\phi}/dr=0 is a consequence of a symmetry property of the gyrokinetic equation parraPoP11 .

Numerical results.

To test our predictions for the scalings of turbulent transport and heating, we employ the local, δf\delta f-gyrokinetic code GS2 dorlandPRL00 . We consider an axisymmetric system with sheared magnetic field lines mapping out nested toroidal surfaces with circular cross sections (known as the Cyclone Base Case dimitsPoP00 and parametrized using the Miller local equilibrium model millerPoP98 ). Each simulation is electrostatic and includes kinetic electrons, as well as kinetic main and trace heavy ions with a wide range of ZZ and AA values. The turbulence is driven by gradients in the mean ion and electron densities and temperatures, with R0(dlnn/dr)=2.2R_{0}(d\ln n/dr)=2.2 for the electrons and main ions, and R0(dlnT/dr)=6.9R_{0}(d\ln T/dr)=6.9 for all species, with R0R_{0} the major radius at the center of the constant pressure surface. The collision frequency is chosen small, R0/λmfp=0.003R_{0}/\lambda_{\textnormal{mfp}}=0.003, so that heavy ion collisions do not affect our scalings.

Two sets of simulations were carried out: one with a stationary plasma (dωϕ/dr=0d\omega_{\phi}/dr=0) and one with a differentially rotating plasma (dωϕ/dr=4.67vti/R2d\omega_{\phi}/dr=4.67v_{ti}/R^{2}). The simulation results are shown in Figs. (1)-(4). Data points for fluxes and heating at various ZZ and AA values are plotted as solid circles and fit using a least-squares analysis with the predicted lowest order ZZ and AA dependences, as well as the first order correction. In each case, the predicted scalings fit the data well. It should be noted that the momentum flux for dωϕ/dr=0d\omega_{\phi}/dr=0 is zero for all species due to a fundamental symmetry of the δf\delta f-gyrokinetic equation parraPoP11 .

Discussion.

We now discuss the implications of the trace heavy ion scalings derived in this Letter. First, the preferential heating of heavy ions should lead to large temperature disparities between different ion species in nearly collisionless plasmas. Many space and astrophysical plasmas are weakly collisional enough (i.e., (δn/n)2>L/λmfp(\delta n/n)^{2}>L/\lambda_{\textnormal{mfp}}) that turbulent heating should dominate over collisional equilibration, and preferential heating of heavy ions is indeed observed schmidtGRL80 ; collierGRL96 . However, for such low collisionalities the equilibrium can deviate strongly from the isotropic Maxwellian assumed in our analysis, which cannot consequently address the large T/TT_{\perp}/T_{\parallel} values observed in coronal holes and the fast solar wind kohlSP97 .

Magnetic confinement fusion plasmas typically have (δn/n)2<L/λmfp(\delta n/n)^{2}<L/\lambda_{\textnormal{mfp}} so that collisional temperature equilibration dominates over turbulent heating and all ions have the same temperature. However, for rotating plasmas our results indicate that the turbulent heating is enhanced by an additional factor of (A/Z)2(A/Z)^{2} relative to the equilibration. It may therefore be possible for heavy, partially ionized impurities to be heated by turbulence to temperatures significantly larger than the main ions.

Because the momentum transport of heavy ions is enhanced by AA, it can generate flows of order the ion thermal speed for densities as small as ni/An_{i}/A. In this limit, heavy ions could thus significantly alter bulk plasma momentum transport.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 4: Normalized heating, Hs(L/nsTivti)(L/ρi)2H_{s}(L/n_{s}T_{i}v_{ti})(L/\rho_{i})^{2}, vs. charge number, ZZ, and mass number, AA, for cases with and without differential rotation, ωϕ\omega_{\phi}. The dashed lines are least-squares fits using our scaling predictions, given by 1.1Z2/A1.81.1Z^{2}/A-1.8 and 1.1A+5.01.1A+5.0 for the left and right plots, respectively.

We thank S. C. Cowley, E. Quataert, and A. A. Schekochihin for useful discussions. M.B. was supported by a US DoE FES Postdoctoral Fellowship, F.I.P. was supported by US DoE Grant No DE-FG02-91ER-54109, and computing time was provided by HPC-FF (Jülich).

References

  • (1) R. C. Isler, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 36, 171 (1994).
  • (2) E. B. Meservey, N. Bretz, D. L. Dimock, and E. Hinnov, Nucl. Fusion 16, 593 (1976).
  • (3) M. Z. Tokar et al., Nucl. Fusion 37, 1691 (1997).
  • (4) W. K. H. Schmidt, H. Rosenbauer, E. G. Shelly, and J. Geiss, Geophys. Res. Lett. 7, 697 (1980).
  • (5) M. R. Collier et al., Geophys. Res. Lett. 23, 1191 (1996).
  • (6) J. L. Kohl et al., Solar Physics 175, 613 (1997).
  • (7) C. Angioni and A. G. Peeters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 095003 (2006).
  • (8) C. Angioni et al., Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 51, 124017 (2009).
  • (9) S. R. Cranmer, G. B. Field, and J. L. Kohl, Astrophys. J. 518, 937 (1999).
  • (10) B. D. G. Chandran et al., Astrophys. J. 720, 503 (2010).
  • (11) P. J. Catto, Plasma Phys. 20, 719 (1978).
  • (12) E. A. Frieman and L. Chen, Phys. Fluids 25, 502 (1982).
  • (13) G. G. Howes et al., Astrophys. J. 651, 590 (2006).
  • (14) M. Barnes, F. I. Parra, and A. A. Schekochihin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 115003 (2011), arxiv:1104.4514.
  • (15) G. G. Howes et al., J. Geophys. Res. 113, A05103 (2008).
  • (16) A. A. Schekochihin et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl 182, 310 (2009), arXiv: 0704.0044.
  • (17) J. A. Krommes and G. Hu, Phys. Plasmas 1, 3211 (1994).
  • (18) I. G. Abel et al., Reviews on Progress in Physics, submitted (2012).
  • (19) P. Helander and D. J. Sigmar, Collisional transport in magnetized plasmas (Cambridge University Press, 2002).
  • (20) I. G. Abel et al., Phys. Plasmas 15, 122509 (2008), arXiv:0806.1069.
  • (21) M. Barnes et al., Phys. Plasmas 16, 072107 (2009).
  • (22) W. Dorland, F. Jenko, M. Kotschenreuther, and B. N. Rogers, Phys. Rev. Lett 85, 5579 (2000).
  • (23) A. M. Dimits et al., Phys. Plasmas 7, 969 (2000).
  • (24) R. L. Miller et al., Phys. Plasmas 5, 973 (1998).
  • (25) F. I. Parra, M. Barnes, and A. G. Peeters, Phys. Plasmas 18, 062501 (2011).