Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling

February 28, 2018 10:13 ws-book9x6 Magnetic helicity, spheromaks, solar corona loops, and astrophysical jets Q0151-main
page 207
Chapter 11
Magnetic Helicity, Spheromaks, Solar Corona Loops, and Astrophysical Jets Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Analysis of Driven Spheromaks:

Strong Coupling
by NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE on 05/05/18. For personal use only.
In this chapter we consider a spheromak tightly coupled to a helicity source

having specified λ. This situation is analogous to the thermodynamic
system in thermal contact with a constant temperature bath shown in
Fig. 8.1(b). The thermodynamic system comes to the same temperature as
the bath, has negligible temperature gradients, and negligible net heat flux
in equilibrium. The MHD system is similarly assumed to equilibrate to the
same λ as the source. However, we also permit the existence of a small
λ gradient and corresponding small helicity flux to make up for a small
distributed helicity dissipation. Existing spheromak experiments appear to
be too lossy to be characterized by this strong coupling model and are more
consistent with the weak coupling situation discussed in the next chapter;
in other words, the assumption of nearly uniform λ is not a good charac-
terization for existing experiments. It is nevertheless quite instructive to
analyze the strong coupling case because it can be solved in closed form
with modest effort and the solutions reveal important conceptual relation-
ships. Furthermore, it would be desirable to arrange an experiment to be
in the strong coupling regime if possible.
The analysis presented here differs in mathematical approach from the
methods used by Turner [169] and by Jensen and Chu [39], but the essen-
tial result is the same. Turner solved the inhomogeneous force-free equation
using a Green’s function method; Jensen and Chu expressed the inhomo-
geneous solution as a summation of the eigenfunctions of the homogenous
solution (this leads to the complication of a Gibbs phenomenon at the
boundary [134]). We also note that Dixon et al. [170] examined the in-
homogeneous problem in spherical geometry with non-axisymmetry taken
into account. Here we solve the inhomogeneous force-free equation directly
for arbitrary inhomogeneous boundary conditions assuming cylindrical ge-
ometry and axisymmetry.
207
page 208
208 Magnetic helicity, spheromaks, solar corona loops, and astrophysical jets
In the strong coupling situation, λ is imposed by the combination of

the gun bias flux and power supply current and it is assumed that the
configuration settles down to have the same λ everywhere. Relative helicity,
relative energy, and impedance are all dependent parameters. Because a
small amount of helicity dissipation has been assumed and the system is
stationary, one may imagine that after a steady state has been obtained, a
great deal of helicity has been injected into the system and a great deal has
been dissipated. The amount of helicity stored in the system self-adjusts to
be consistent with the requirements of the stationary state. In contrast, for
an isolated system, the helicity was set by initial conditions. Furthermore,

impedance only has meaning for a driven system, since impedance is the
ratio of the externally applied voltage to the current driven by this voltage.
Spheromak formation in a driven system occurs when the current flow-
ing along the field lines attached to the gun electrodes exceeds a threshold
determined by the bias flux and the geometry. When this threshold is ex-
ceeded, the field line topology changes discontinuously even though both
the magnetic field and the magnetic flux change continuously. The discus-
sion in this chapter does not take into account actual dynamics, finite beta,
or pressure gradients which turn out to be important in real situations.
The discussion pretends that the spheromak slowly evolves from one equi-
librium state to another when λ is changed whereas in reality, even a small
change in λ can instigate violent dynamics that are far from equilibrium.
Thus, the discussion here must always be understood as providing a hy-
pothetical framework giving insight into the direction the system “wants”
to go without explaining at all how this is achieved or even whether it is
achieved.
11.1 Force-free equilibria with open field lines
We consider an axisymmetric plasma contained by a cylinder of length h

and radius a; this arrangement is shown in Fig. 11.1. The end wall at
z = 0 corresponds to the coaxial gun and will be called the “gun end
wall”. The cylinder walls are flux conserving, but there is an annular gap
at radius rs in the gun end wall. Because of this gap, the gun end wall
is segmented, consisting of a central disk surrounded by an outer annulus.
This idealized model is topologically equivalent to coaxial gun spheromaks,
and in particular, the central disk and outer annulus correspond respectively
to the gun inner and outer electrode. The discussion here is highly idealized
because actual dynamics, pressure gradients, and flows are neglected; these
important realistic issues will be discussed in Chapter 17.
page 209
Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 209

Fig. 11.1: Experimental setup for a driven axisymmetric cylindrical spheromak.

Poloidal flux surfaces and direction of poloidal magnetic field are shown. For clarity,
the vacuum magnetic field outside of the plasma-filled cylinder is not shown.
A power supply having open-circuit voltage Vsrc and internal resistance

Rsrc is connected between the central disk and outer annulus. This power
supply drives a current Igun into the central disk and the return current
flows back to the power supply from the outer annulus. Because of the finite
internal resistance of the power supply, the voltage Vgun which appears
across the gap differs from Vsrc by the voltage drop Igun Rsrc .
An external coil creates a vacuum poloidal field Bzgun (r) which pene-
trates the gun end wall; the surface integral of this field gives the end wall
flux function
Z r
ψg (r) = 2π Bzgun (r)rdr. (11.1)
0
Any field line that enters the gun end wall also exits the gun end wall so
there is no net flux through the gun end wall, i.e., ψg (a) = 0. The gun
magnetic field Bzgun (r) reverses polarity at some radius rs ; for simplicity
we assume that the gun has been designed so that the gap is located where
this polarity reversal occurs. Thus all magnetic field lines that go from
the central disk into the cylindrical volume exit through the outer annulus.
The total flux intercepting the central disk is
Z rs
ψ̄ gun = ψg (rs ) = 2π Bzgun (r)rdr; (11.2)
0
page 210
this “gun flux” (also called bias flux) is equal in magnitude and opposite in
polarity to the return flux intercepted by the outer annulus.
The system is assumed to be in an axisymmetric relaxed state and so
will be described by the force-free equation with uniform λ, i.e.,
∇ × B = λB. (11.3)
Equation (11.3) implies that all dynamics has concluded and that there are
no pressure gradients or flows. Depending on imposed boundary conditions,
the solutions to Eq. (11.3) can have various topologies as shown in Fig. 11.2.
There are two distinct topologies for the field line projections shown in
Fig. 11.2, open and closed. Open field lines intercept the wall, closed field
lines do not. It is seen that closed field lines may or may not exist.
The parameter λ can be expressed in terms of the gun end wall boundary
conditions; this expression is determined by integrating the z component
of Eq. (11.3) over the central disk giving
µ0 Igun
λ= (11.4)
ψ̄ gun
Fig. 11.2: Sequence of poloidal flux toplogies as λ is increased from zero: (a) λ is zero
or very small, so that the field is either a vacuum field or else very nearly a vacuum field,
(b) the first flux extrema form giving closed field lines (o-points or equivalently magnetic
axes), (c) the region of closed field lines nearly fills up the volume, (d) λ is slightly above
the value producing a resonance so that a flipped spheromak is formed.
page 211
where
Z rs
Igun = 2π Jz (r)rdr (11.5)
0
is the current from the power supply.

The general solution to Eq. (11.3) is

B = λ∇χ × ∇z + ∇ × (∇χ × ∇z) (11.6)
where χ(r, z) is a scalar function satisfying the Helmholtz equation
∇2 χ + λ2 χ = 0; (11.7)
this solution may be verified by substituting Eq. (11.6) into Eq. (11.3). By
expressing Eq. (11.6) as
B = λ∇χ × ẑ + ẑ · ∇∇χ − ẑ∇2 χ
= λ∇χ × ẑ + ∇∂χ/∂z + ẑλ2 χ (11.8)
it is seen that
lim B = ∇∂χ/∂z (11.9)
λ→0
so the λ = 0 limit is indeed a vacuum field.

In order to solve Eq.
p (11.6) using the method of separation of variables,
we assume χ ∼ exp(± γ 2 − λ2 z) in which case Eq. (11.7) becomes
1 ∂ ∂χ
r + γ 2 χ = 0. (11.10)
r ∂r ∂r
Equation (11.10) is a Bessel’s equation of order zero and so χ has the form
√ 2 2
χ ∼ J0 (γr)e± γ −λ z . (11.11)
From Eq. (11.6) the components of the magnetic field are
∂2χ
Br = (11.12a)
∂r∂z
∂χ
Bφ = −λ (11.12b)
∂r
Bz = γ 2 χ. (11.12c)
It is assumed that no magnetic field lines intercept either the cylinder side
wall or the end wall at z = h; magnetic field lines intercept only the gun
end wall. Since the walls are all assumed to be flux conserving, these initial
conditions must hold at all times and so the boundary conditions which
must be satisfied by solutions to Eq. (11.3) are:
page 212
(1) Br (a, z) = 0,
(2) Bz (r, h) = 0,
(3) Bz (r, 0) = Bzgun (r).
Application of radial boundary condition:

Boundary condition 1 shows that the radial magnetic field vanishes at

r = a for all z. From Eqs. (11.11) and (11.12a) it is seen that this requires
J00 (γa) = 0. Since J00 (s) = −J1 (s) this means that γa is a root of J1 .
Denoting the nth root of J1 as x1n , the allowed values of γ are γn = x1n /a.
Application of axial boundary conditions:

Equation (11.12c) shows that χ must satisfy boundary conditions similar
to Bz and, in particular, χ must vanish when Bz vanishes and χ will be
finite when Bz is finite. Since boundary conditions 2 and 3 show that Bz
vanishes at z = h but can be finite at z = 0, we find it convenient to
introduce the axial function p
sinh γn2 − λ2 (z − h)
Sn (z, λ) = − p (11.13)
sinh γn2 − λ2 h
from which χ will be constructed. Sn has been defined to have the following
properties:
p
(1) Sn is a linear combination of exp(± γn2 − λ2 z) and so incorporates the
assumed axial dependence of χ.
(2) Sn (h, λ) = 0 and so incorporates the boundary condition Bz = 0 at
z = h.
(3) Sn (0, λ) = 1 in order to allow finite Bz at z = 0.
(4) When λ2 > γn2 then Sn (z) can be written in the equivalent form
p
sin λ2 − γn2 (z − h)
Sn (z, λ) = − p (11.14)
sin λ2 − γn2 h)
because sinh(ix) = i sin x.
(5) If λ2 ' γn2 then
(z − h)
Sn (z, λ) ' − (11.15)
h
showing that the transition from sinh-like behavior (concave) to sine-
like behavior (convex) is smooth and continuous as λ2 increases from
being smaller than γn2 to being larger. In this λ2 ' γn2 regime Sn (z, λ)
has the form of a descending straight line with value unity when z = 0
and value zero when z = h.
page 213
If λ2 > γn2 , then Sn is sine-like and becomes resonant when

(6) p
λ2 − γn2 h = mπ where m is an integer, but if λ2 < γn2 , then Sn
is sinh-like, never resonant, and in fact is a monotonically decreasing
function of z.
Thus the general form of χ satisfying the r = a and z = h homogeneous

wall boundary conditions is
∞
ψ̄ gun X
χ= cn J0 (γn r)Sn (z, λ) (11.16)
2π n=1
where the cn are coefficients to be determined from the inhomogeneous

boundary conditions at the z = 0 end wall. The constant factor ψ̄ gun /2π
has been inserted to make the cn dimensionless so that flux functions (to be
calculated later) will be normalized to the gun flux. From Eqs. (11.12a)–
(11.12c) the magnetic field components are
∞
ψ̄ gun X ∂Sn (z, λ)
Br (r, z) = − cn γn J1 (γn r)
2π n=1 ∂z
∞
ψ̄ gun X
Bφ (r, z) = λ cn γn J1 (γn r)Sn (z, λ)
2π n=1
∞
ψ̄ gun X
Bz (r, z) = cn γn2 J0 (γn r)Sn (z, λ) (11.17)
2π n=1
so that, as required, Br vanishes at r = a and Bz vanishes at z = h. The
cn may now be determined using boundary condition (3) and Eq. (11.17)
to give
∞
ψ̄ gun X
Bzgun (r) = cn γn2 J0 (γn r). (11.18)
2π n=1
We now use the first of the Bessel orthogonality relations derived in Ap-
pendix 2 (see also [171]),
Z a
a2 2
rJ0 (x1,n0 r/a)J0 (x1,n r/a)dr = [J0 (x1,n )] δnn0 , (11.19)
0 2
to solve for cn giving
R a gun
4π 0
Bz (r)J0 (x1n r/a)rdr
cn = 2 . (11.20)
[x1n J0 (x1n )] ψ̄ gun
The solution to Eq. (11.3) is now completely determined and depends on
just two quantities, Bzgun (r) and λ. The physical meaning of these quanti-
ties will now be discussed.
page 214
Bzgun (r) is established by the external coil shown schematically in

Fig. 11.1 and is constant in time so the cn are also constant. We consider a
time-dependent problem, but with the time-scale for changes in current so
slow that the system is always in a force-free relaxed state. Thus, creating
a spheromak involves ramping up the current Igun on a time scale slow

compared to any plasma instabilities, so that the plasma evolves through
a sequence of relaxed states. The use of the wording “plasma evolves” is
a convenient shorthand for discussing how the various mathematical solu-
tions depend on λ. However, this dependence must be understood to be
misleading with respect to real situations, because a real plasma does not
slowly evolve from one force-free state to another but instead goes through
a series of violent, dynamic behaviors in order to relax to any given force-
free state. A rough analog would be consideration of the patterns obtained
when dropping a glass bottle of colored liquid from a sequence of heights;
the patterns depend on the height but one cannot think of one pattern
being an equilibrium that slowly evolves into another equilibrium.
Since ψ̄ gun is constant (because Bzgun is constant), λ is proportional to
Igun and the slow increase of Igun causes the plasma to evolve through a
sequence of equilibria with successively larger λ. Each equilibrium is a dis-
tinct relaxed state described by Eq. (11.3). It must be emphasized that as
in the glass bottle dropping example given above there is no presumption
that the magnetic topology evolves smoothly as λ increases; in fact, discon-
tinuous bifurcations of field line topology can and do occur as λ increases.
These discontinuous changes are analogous to the phase transformation
which can occur in a thermodynamic system when temperature is changed.
For example, thermodynamic equilibria can freeze or melt for slight changes
in temperature; complex non-equilibrium dynamics produce these changes.
The reconnection processes which create the closed flux surfaces of a re-
laxed MHD state correspond approximately to the non-equilibrium dynam-
ics which produce a thermodynamic phase transformation. Examples of
actual non-equilibrium dynamics that occurs are discussed in Chapters 17,
18, and 19.
When λ = 0, the plasma is current-free and B(r, z) is a vacuum field. As
λ is increased above zero, currents start to flow in the plasma, and for small
λ the magnetic field differs only slightly from the initial vacuum field. Thus
for small λ, all field lines start at the central disk, enter the plasma volume,
turn around inside, and then exit through the outer annulus. In other
words, when λ is small, all field lines are open and deform continuously as
λ is increased.
page 215
When λ increases to the point that it exceeds a particular γn , the as-

sociated Sn function changes from being sinh-like to being sine-like; at this
point the magnetic topology associated with γn starts changing. These
changes are best examined using the poloidal flux function introduced in
the next section.
11.2 Flux surfaces
Because axisymmetry is assumed here, the magnetic field derived in the

previous section has an associated flux function (if the configuration had
been non-axisymmetric, then the solution to the Helmholtz equation would
also be non-axisymmetric and typically, flux functions would not exist).
Since
1 1
Bpol = ∇ψ × ∇φ = ∇ × (ψ∇φ) (11.21)
2π 2π
and from Eq. (11.3)

1
Bpol = ∇ × Btor (11.22)
λ
it is seen that
λψ
Btor = ∇φ. (11.23)
2π
Thus the total magnetic field B = Bpol + Btor can be expressed in terms
of the poloidal flux function ψ(r, z) as
1
B= (∇ψ × ∇φ + λψ∇φ) ; (11.24)
2π
where ψ(r, z) is as defined in Sec. 2.8.
Comparison of Eq. (11.12b) and Eq. (11.23) shows that
∂χ
ψ = −2πr ; (11.25)
∂r
thus Eq. (11.16) immediately gives
∞
X
ψ(r, z) = ψ̄ gun cn γn rJ1 (γn r)Sn (z, λ). (11.26)
n=1
It is clear that ψ vanishes at both r = 0 and r = a. The vacuum flux
satisfying the same boundary conditions as the actual flux is found by
simply setting λ to zero; i.e.,
∞
X
ψvac (r, z) = ψ̄ gun cn γn rJ1 (γn r)Sn (z, 0). (11.27)
n=1
page 216
For reference purposes, it is convenient to write Eq. (11.26) in the form

∞
X
ψ(r, z) = ψ̄ gun cn γn Ψn (r, z) (11.28)
n=1
where
Ψn (r, z) = rJ1 (γn r)Sn (z, λ) (11.29)
is the flux eigenfunction associated with the radial mode number n.
Because B·∇ψ = 0, the projections of magnetic field lines in the r, z
plane are simply contours of constant ψ. Thus, all that is needed to under-
stand the field topology is to investigate the level contours of ψ; these are
the poloidal flux surfaces.
We now consider what happens as λ = µ0 I/ψ̄ gun is slowly increased
from zero. Figures 11.3 and 11.4 show how S1 changes as λ is increased;
note the different vertical scales for these two figures. Figures 11.5 and
11.6 show contour and altitude plots of the flux associated with the n = 1
mode, i.e., plots of Ψ1 (r, z) as defined by Eq. (11.29). The condition for
Fig. 11.3: S1 profiles for λ increasing from 0 to 1.10; note highly nonlinear dependence
on λ. Here h/a = 1.5 has been assumed.
page 217

Fig. 11.4: When λ increases from 1.13 to 1.15, there is a resonance in S1 . When λ
is above the critical value to give this resonance, S1 is bipolar which corresponds to
a flipped spheromak. Note the substantial change in vertical scale compared to the
previous figure.
closed field lines (i.e., closed flux surfaces) is simply that Ψ1 (r, z) should
have an extremum (O-point) somewhere in the interior region 0 < r < a,
0 < z < h. This O-point corresponds to a magnetic axis. Since Sn provides
the z-dependence of the flux function Ψn (r, z), closed field lines do not exist
if all the Sn (z, λ) are monotonically decreasing functions of z (although
rJ1 (γn r) has extrema in the radial direction, an O-point requires extrema
in both radial and axial directions). When λ < γ1 , all the Sn are sinh-like
and therefore monotonically decreasing functions of z; thus all field lines
are open when λ < γ1 .
As λ is increased, S1 will be the first of the Sn to become sine-like, then
S2 , etc. By itself, a sine-like Sn is insufficient for ψ to have an extremum;
for example when λ is just slightly larger than γn , Sn is sine-like but is
nearly a straight line having a value of unity at z = 1 and a value of zero
at z = h. As λ increases, Sn develops an upward bulge and only when
∂Sn /∂z = 0 does Sn have a local maximum. From Eq. (11.14) it is seen
p
that ∂Sn /∂z ∼ cos 2 2
λ − γn (z − h) and since z − h is negative this first
page 218
Fig. 11.5: Contours of flux function Ψ1 (r, z) for sequence of increasing λ; the cylinder
has h/a = 1.5 and horizontal axis is z/a while the vertical axis is r/a. The lower right
contour shows a flipped spheromak.
extremum occurs when

p π
λ2 − γn2 (z − h) = − (11.30)
2
corresponding to
π
zext = h − p . (11.31)
2 λ − γn2
2
For very large λ, zext → h and zext becomes smaller as λ is reduced. The
extremum will be at z = 0+ when
r
π2
λ = γn2 + 2 . (11.32)
4h
and will move towards larger z as λ is increased. The extremum reaches
the axial midpoint z = h/2 when
r
π2
λ = γn2 + 2 (11.33)
h
and when λ slightly exceeds this value, Sn passes through zero at z = 0+ .
Because Sn was defined to be unity at z = 0, this forces Sn to become very
page 219

Fig. 11.6: Contours of flux function Ψ1 (r, z) for sequence of increasing λ; the cylinder
has h/a = 1.5 and horizontal axis is z/a while the vertical axis is r/a. The lower right
contour shows a flipped spheromak.
large (resonant) when the extremum is near h/2. Resonance occurs because
the denominator in Eq. (11.14) vanishes when λ satisfies Eq. (11.33).
Although this sequencing of Sn is true for all the n modes, resonant
behavior happens first for the n = 1 mode. Thus, as λ increases from zero,
the behavior of λ with respect to γ1 is the dominant consideration.
p There
is a flipping of the resonance when λ is in the vicinity of γ12 + π 2 /h2 . To
see this, consider S1 at z = h/2, i.e.,
p
sin γn2 − λ2 h/2
S1 (z, λ) = p . (11.34)
sin γn2 − λ2 h
p
Having λ ' γ12 + π 2 /h2 corresponds to the argument of the sine function
in the numerator being π/2 so the numerator has a value of unity. However,
if the argument of the sine function in the numerator is π/2, then the argu-
ment of the sine function in the denominator is π and so the denominator
is zero so S1 is resonant. If λ is a little smaller than this resonant value,
page 220
p
i.e., λ = γ12 + π 2 /h2 − ε then the denominator
p is small and positive so
S1 will be large and positive, but if λ = γ12 + π 2 /h2 + ε then S1 will be
large and negative and because S1 = 1 at z = 0 there will have to be a
zero-crossing of S1 at z = 0+ . Since the poloidal flux is proportional to S1
it is clear that when there is an extremum (i.e., an O-point or, equivalently,

a magnetic axis), the flux is larger at the extremum than at the gun.
If the gun dimensions are small compared to a, i.e., Bzgun (r) is finite
over a region small compared to a, then the Bessel transform of Bzgun (r)
will contain a broad cn spectrum and so the proportion of the spectral
power contained in c1 will be small. Nevertheless, as λ is increased from

zero, the first Sn to become resonant will still be S1 because this has the
smallest value of γn . Thus, no matter what the specific radial dependence of
ψ gun (r) happens to be, all guns will dominantly excite S1 as λ is increased
from zero provided there is the slightest amount of c1 . When λ is small (so
that all the Sn are sinh-like) the Sn with large n decay rapidly with z and
so the fields will be concentrated near the gun. p Then, as λ is increased, the
fields abruptly fill the volume as soon as λ ' γ12 + π 2 /h2 . This sudden
filling occurs because when λ approaches this critical value, S1 has sine-like
behavior and unlike the sinh function with its exponential behavior, the sine
function fills up the volume. The behavior of the flux will be very sensitive
in this region and as seen from Fig. (11.4) and from the denominator in
Eq. (11.14), the bulk of the flux has reversed polarity for further small
increase in λ. When this occurs, all fields also reverse polarity, but the
helicity remains the same since helicity is related to the product of poloidal
and toroidal fields.
This resonant buildup of flux and then flipping is shown in Figs. 11.5
and 11.6; the former is a contour plot of flux, while the latter is a surface
plot of the same flux. In each of these figures, λ/γ1 is increased through a
sequence of nine values and the corresponding
p flux profile is plotted. The
critical value for flipping is λ/γ1 = 1 + π 2 a2 /x211 h2 = 1.14 for the ratio
h/a = 1.5 which has been usedp here.
Specifically, for λ/γ1 = 1 + π 2 a2 /x211 h2 −ε, the topology will be closed
flux surfaces surrounded by a few open flux surfacesp(cf. Fig. 11.2(c) and
lower middle contour in Fig. 11.5), while for λ/γ1 = 1 + π 2 a2 /x211 h2 + ε
the topology will be open flux surfaces separated from the gun by a sep-
aratrix at the z location where S1 vanishes (cf. Fig. 11.2(d) and lower
right contour in Fig. 11.5). The former case corresponds to a spheromak
surrounded by open field lines (i.e., the λ/γ1 = 1.13 case in Figs. 11.5
page 221
and 11.6), while the latter case corresponds to a flipped spheromak (i.e.,
the λ/γ1 = 1.15 case in Figs. 11.5 and 11.6). Both flipped and unflipped
spheromaks were observed [88] in the CTX spheromak, but it should be
stated that the flipped spheromaks were not interpreted in terms of the
model presented here.

Yee and Bellan [172] have made high speed photographs of the plasma
emerging from a magnetized coaxial plasma gun. These photos can only
be compared qualitatively to the model presented here because (i) there
was no flux conserver for these photographs, so the bulging flux tubes had
no wall to push against and (ii) the system was not filled with plasma, so
that λ was non-uniform and maximum in the vicinity of the gun. Example
photographs shown in Fig. 11.7 indicate the beginnings of a toroidal twist
to the poloidal flux tubes emanating from the center electrode and bending
back to the outer electrode. More recently, it has been realized that these
photos are showing a plasma jet and not a slow evolution from one force-free
state to another. MHD-driven plasma jets are the subject of Chapter 17.
Fig. 11.7: Poloidal flux bulging outwards from a coaxial magnetized plasma gun as gun
current increases with time (plasma breakdown at t = 0); the flux tubes start to swirl
because of the toroidal magnetic field produced by the increasing poloidal current (from
Yee and Bellan [172]).
page 222
11.3 Safety factor variation with lambda
The safety factor q(ψ) only has meaning for closed flux surfaces and so
it only makes sense to consider q when λ has exceeded the threshold for
the first closed flux surfaces to form. In Sec. 9.3 it was shown that for a
cylindrical zero-beta force-free

p equilibrium the poloidal flux has dependence
ψ(r, z) ∼ γ1 rJ1 (γ1 r) sin λ2 − γ12 (z − h) and the safety factor is given
by Eq. (9.37) which we repeat below for convenience,
1
qaxis = p . (11.35)
x01 1 − γ12 /λ2
This functional form shows that qaxis decreases with increasing λ. Equa-
tions (11.32) and (11.33) show that for closed flux surfaces λ/γ1 lies in the
range
π 2 a2 λ2 π 2 a2
1+ 2 2
< 2 <1+ 2 2 (11.36)
4x11 h γ1 x11 h
where the lower limit corresponds to the formation of the first closed flux
surface and the upper limit corresponds to approaching the first resonance.
This range is parameterized by the ratio h/a and for larger h/a the extent
of the range is smaller. Figure 11.8 plots qaxis (λ/γ1 ) from Eq. (11.35) for
four different values of h/a and shows how qaxis decreases as λ increases
and also that for h/a smaller than the tilt stability condition, qaxis passes
through unity as λ is increased. Thus, one would expect to see m = 1,
n = 1 mode activity develop on the magnetic axis as λ is increased (here
m, n are the mode numbers of an MHD fluctuation).
11.4 Flux amplification
A curious feature (first observed experimentally by Alfvén et al. [8] and

by Lindberg et al. [9]) is that the poloidal flux in the flux conserver can
exceed the poloidal flux imposed by the external coil. While this seems
to violate the concept of flux conservation, it is not a cause of concern
because no promise of continuous evolution of topology has been made.
Flux amplification is immediately evident in p Fig. 11.6 from the resonant
behavior of the peak of ψ as λ approaches γ12 + π 2 /h2 . In fact, in order
to have closed field lines, it is essential for the poloidal flux inside the volume
to exceed its value
p at the gun (i.e., at z = 0). Flux amplification begins
when λ exceeds γ12 + π 2 /4h2 , the condition for a local flux maximum to
first occur. If there is no maximum then the flux decays monotonically
page 223
September 14, 2017 16:42 World Scientific Book - 9in x 6in swp0000

Fig.Fig. 11.8:
11.8: Dependence
Dependence of of
qaxis
on on
. λ.
from the gun. Hsu and Bellan showed in an experiment [77] that the kink
11.4 Flux amplification
instability provides a mechanism for flux amplification. The kink causes
an initial axial
A curious current
feature to wind around
(first observed the axisbyhelically
experimentally Alfvén et with handedness
al.[8] and
such that theet initial
by Lindberg al.[9]) axial
is thatmagnetic fieldflux
the poloidal is enhanced. Since thecan
in the flux conserver current
becomes
exceed theless axial and
poloidal flux more azimuthal
imposed as a result
by the external coil.of While
this winding,
this seemsthere is
atodiminution
violate theofconcept of flux conservation,
the azimuthal it is notfield
(toroidal) magnetic a cause of enhancement
and an concern
because no promise of continuous evolution of topology has
of the axial (poloidal) magnetic field. This is a conversion of toroidal been made. flux
Flux amplification is immediately evident
into poloidal flux and so provides whatpappears in Fig.11.6 from the resonant
to be an amplification of
behavior of the peak of  as  approaches  21 +  2 2  In fact, in order to
the poloidal flux.
have closed field lines, it is essential for the poloidal flux inside the volume
to exceed its valuep at the gun (i.e., at  = 0). Flux amplification begins
11.5
when Relative
exceeds helicity
 21 +  2 42 , the condition for a local flux maximum to
first occur. If there is no maximum then the flux decays monotonically
Because
from the some fieldand
gun. Hsu linesBellan
are open,
showed theinrelative helicity[77]
an experiment defined in Eq.
that the kink(3.35)
must
instability provides a mechanism for flux amplification. The kink causes ac-
be used. This is because to avoid gauge ambiguity, the helicity
counting
an initial must
axial be madetowith
current windreference
around theto aaxis
vacuum magnetic
helically field satisfying
with handedness
the
suchsame
thatboundary
the initialconditions as thefield
axial magnetic actual field. TheSince
is enhanced. vacuumthe solution
current with
the prescribed
becomes boundary
less axial and more conditions
azimuthalisasjust the λof=this
a result 0 version
winding,ofthere
Eq. (11.24),
is
namely

1 ψvac
Bvac = ∇ψvac × ∇φ = ∇ × ∇φ (11.37)
2π 2π
where ψvac is the poloidal flux produced by the external coil.
page 224
Using Eq. (11.8) the vacuum magnetic field can also be expressed as
∂χvac
Bvac = ∇ . (11.38)
∂z
Since Bvac = ∇ × Avac using Eq. (11.37) it is seen that the vacuum vector
potential is
1
Avac = ψvac ∇φ + ∇g (11.39)
2π
where g is an arbitrary gauge function.

Using Bpol = ∇ × (2π)−1 ψ∇φ and Btor = ∇ × λ−1 Bpol it is seen

that the vector potential of the actual magnetic field is
1 1
A= ψ∇φ + ∇ψ × ∇φ + ∇f (11.40)
2π 2πλ
where f is another arbitrary gauge function.

The relative helicity defined by Eq. (3.35) may be computed using
Eq. (11.24) to give B and Bvac and Eq. (9.30) to give A and Avac so
that
Z
Krel = d3 r (B − Bvac ) · (A + Avac )
Z
1 1
= 2 d3 r (B − Bvac ) · (ψ + ψvac ) ∇φ + ∇ψ × ∇φ + ∇ (f + g)
4π λ
(11.41)
where f and g are gauge potentials for the actual and vacuum
fields Rrespectively. The term involving R 3 the gauge potentials is of the
3
form
R d r (B − B vac ) · ∇ (f + g) = d r∇ · [(B − Bvac ) · ∇ (f + g)] =
S
ds· [(B − Bvac ) (f + g)] and so vanishes because by assumption B =
Bvac on the bounding surface. Thus, on substituting for B and Bvac using
page 225
Eqs. (11.24) and (11.37) the relative helicity becomes

" #
1
Z (ψ + ψvac ) ∇φ
3
Krel = d r [∇ (ψ − ψvac ) × ∇φ + λψ∇φ] · 1
4π 2 + ∇ψ × ∇φ
λ
Z " 1 #
1 ∇ (ψ − ψ vac ) × ∇φ · (∇ψ × ∇φ)
= d3 r λ
4π 2 +λψ∇φ · (ψ + ψvac ) ∇φ
∇ψ λ2
Z
1 3
= d r ∇ (ψ − ψvac ) · 2 + 2 ψ (ψ + ψvac )
4π 2 λ r r

∇ψ

∇ · (ψ − ψvac ) 2
Z  r 
1 3

∇ψ 

= d r − − ∇ · .

(ψ ψ vac )
4π 2 λ

 r2 
2
λ
 
+ 2 ψ (ψ + ψvac )
r
(11.42)
The first term in the integrand of the last line becomes a surface inte-
gral which vanishes because ψ = ψvac on the surface. The zero-β Grad-
Shafranov equation from Eq. (9.61) is

1
r2 ∇ · ∇ψ + λ2 ψ = 0 (11.43)
r2
and using this in the second term in the integrand in the last line of
Eq. (11.42) gives
λ2 λ2
Z
1 3
Krel = d r (ψ − ψ vac ) ψ + ψ (ψ + ψvac )
4π 2 λ r2 r2
Z 2
ψ
= 2λ d3 r . (11.44)
2πr
Substituting for the ψ using Eq. (11.26) gives
!2
ψ̄ gun X
Krel = 2λ cn cm γn γm ×
2π n,m
Z
d3 rJ1 (γn r)J1 (γm r)Sn (z, λ)Sm (z, λ). (11.45)
The radial integral may be evaluated using the second Bessel orthogo-
nality relation derived in Appendix B, namely
Z a
a2 2
rJ1 (x1n r/a)J1 (x1m r/a)dr = [J0 (x1n )] δnm . (11.46)
0 2
page 226
Thus, the relative helicity is

2 ∞ Z h
ψ̄ gun X 2
Krel =λ [cn x1n J0 (x1n )] dzSn2 (z, λ)
2π n=1 0
2 ∞
ψ̄ gun X 2
= [cn x1n J0 (x1n )] F (γn h, λh) (11.47)
4π n=1
where
" √ #
Γ2 − Λ2
cosh 1
F (Γ, Λ) = Λ √ √ − √ (11.48)
sinh2

Γ2 − Λ2 sinh Γ2 − Λ2 Γ2 − Λ2
gives the dependence of the relative helicity on Λ = λh and Γ = γh. If

Λ > Γ, then F can also be expressed using the relations sinh(ix) = i sin x,
cosh(ix) = cos x in the equivalent form
" √ #
1 cos Λ2 − Γ2
F (Γ, Λ) = Λ √ −√ √ . (11.49)
sin2 Λ 2 − Γ2 Λ2 − Γ2 sin Λ2 − Γ2
From Eq. (11.49) it is seen that F (Γ, Λ) has resonances whenever
Λ2 = Γ2 + m2 π 2 . (11.50)
The first and physically most important of these resonances occurs when
λ2 = γ12 + π 2 /h2 ; this resonance is at the λ of the Taylor state. Figure 11.9
plots F (5.75, Λ); the choice of Γ = 5.75 is relevant to the physically inter-
esting situation of h/a = 1.5 and γ1 = 3.83/a. The resonances are clearly
visible; also it is seen that F is antisymmetric with respect to Λ and so
Krel is similarly antisymmetric.
11.6 Relative energy
The magnetic energy relative to the vacuum field energy is
B2 B2
Z
Wrel = 3
d r − vac
2µ0 2µ0
Z
1
= d3 r (B − Bvac ) · (B + Bvac ) . (11.51)
2µ0
page 227

Fig. 11.9: Plot of F (5.75, Λ) showing how helicity resonantly depends on λ.
Substituting for B and Bvac this becomes

Z
1 3 ∇ (ψ − ψvac ) × ∇φ ∇ (ψ + ψvac ) × ∇φ
Wrel = d r ·
8π 2 µ0 +λψ∇φ +λψ∇φ
λ2 ψ 2
Z
1 3 1
= d r ∇ (ψ − ψ vac ) · ∇ (ψ + ψ vac ) +
8π 2 µ0 r2 r2
 
∇ (ψ + ψvac )
Z ∇ · (ψ − ψ vac )
1 r2
d3 r 
 
= 2 2 

2
8π µ0  ∇ (ψ + ψvac ) λ ψ
− (ψ − ψvac ) ∇ · +
r2 r2
λ2 ψ 2

∇ (ψ + ψvac )
Z
1 3
= d r − (ψ − ψ vac ) ∇ · + (11.52)
8π 2 µ0 r2 r2
where the surface integral from the first term in the third line vanishes
because ψ = ψvac on all bounding surfaces. Using Eq. (11.43) and (11.44)
this becomes
λ2 ψ 2 λ2 ψ 2
Z
1 3
Wrel = d r (ψ − ψvac ) 2 + 2
8π 2 µ0 r r
2 Z 2 2 Z
λ ψ λ ψψvac
= d3 r 2 − 8π 2 µ d3 r 2 2
µ0 (2πr) 0 8π r
" Z #
λ ψψvac
= Krel − λ d3 r 2 . (11.53)
2µ0 (2πr)
page 228
The integral in the last line of Eq. (11.53) is evaluated in a manner

similar to that used in Eqs. (11.44) to (11.49), namely
Z a P∞
2πrdr h
Z Z
ψψvac ψ̄ gun n=1 cn γn rJ1 (γn r)Sn (z, λ)
d3 r 2 = 2 dz P ∞
(2πr) 0 (2πr) 0 ×ψ̄ gun m=1 cm γm rJ1 (γm r)Sm (z, 0)
2 Ra
" #
ψ̄ gun X 0R
J 1 (γ n r)J1 (γ m r)rdr
= cn γn cm γm h
2π m,n × 0 dzSn (z, λ)Sm (z, 0)
2 ∞ Z h
ψ̄ gun X 2 2 2
= c x [J0 (x1n )] dzSn (z, λ)Sm (z, 0). (11.54)
4π n=1 n 1n
The z integral can then be evaluated using the hyperbolic trigonometric

identities cosh(x ± y) = cosh x cosh y ± sinh x sinh y and sinh (x ± y) =
sinh x cosh y ± cosh x sinh y to give
Z h √ √
Γ coth Γ − Γ2 − Λ2 coth Γ2 − Λ2
λ dzSn (z, λ)Sn (z, 0) = . (11.55)
0 Λ
Evaluation of Eq. (11.53) using Eqs. (11.47), (11.54) and (11.55) gives the
relative energy as
2 ∞
ψ̄ gun X 2
Wrel = [cn x1n J0 (x1n )] G(γn h, λh) (11.56)
8πhµ0 n=1
where
Γ2 p Λ2
G(Γ, Λ) = √ coth Γ2 − Λ2 − 2
√ − Γ coth Γ
Γ2 − Λ2 sinh Γ2 − Λ2
(11.57)
if Γ > Λ and
Γ2 p Λ2
G(Γ, Λ) = − √ cot Λ2 − Γ2 + 2 √ −Γ coth Γ (11.58)
Λ2 − Γ2 sin Λ2 − Γ2
if Λ > Γ.
Figure 11.10 plots G(Γ, Λ) as a function of Λ for Γ = 5.75; this plot can
be compared with Fig. 11.9. It √ is seen that Wrel is an even function of Λ
and has resonances when Λ = Γ2 + m2 π 2 in a fashion similar to Krel .
Each n mode will have its own set of resonances, but the resonance with
the lowest λ will be the one corresponding to x11 . Since dramatic behavior
occurs when λ approaches this first resonance, the first resonance is of most
interest. The quantity Λ = λh is an independent variable determined by
the gun current, gun flux, and the physical dimensions. If a very large λ
is imposed by the gun, then there will result a very large Wrel and only a
moderately large Krel because Wrel is approximately a factor of λ larger
than Krel .
page 229

Fig. 11.10: Plot of G(5.75, Λ) showing how magnetic energy resonantly depends on λ.
11.7 Gun efficiency
The external circuit can be changed by short circuiting (crowbarring) the

gap so that the inner disk is connected to the outer annulus. In this case
there is no longer external control over Igun and λ becomes a free parameter.
The system will then relax to the lowest allowed energy state, namely the
state with the smallest allowed λ for the given helicity. This is akin to the
isolated configuration described in Chapter 9, but differs slightly because
here there are still open field lines intercepting the end wall, whereas the
completely isolated configuration does not have open field lines. If the gun
had driven the system to a λ exceeding the lowest allowed λ for the given
helicity then substantial energy would have to be dissipated for the system
to relax to its lowest energy state.
Because helicity is conserved, the plasma retains whatever Krel it had at
the instant the gun was crowbarred; because Krel has resonances, λ can be
considered as a multi-valued function of Krel . When the gun is crowbarred
there will be a set of allowed λ’s for the given Krel and the system will
relax to the state with the lowest λ in this set. The lowest λ will always
be below the first resonance of Krel and will be the Taylor state; i.e. the
lowest energy for the helicity.
page 230
If the gun is designed to produce a driven configuration very similar to

the Taylor state (i.e., c1 is the predominant radial coefficient and λ is close
to the first resonance), then very little energy will be dissipated when the
gun is crowbarred and λ adjusts itself to the Taylor value. If not, then
substantial energy will have to be dissipated when the gun is crowbarred.

In particular, if the driven λ is such as to excite a resonance associated with
a radial mode cn with n 6= 1 then all the energy associated with this higher
order mode will have to be dissipated in order to relax to the lowest energy
mode. This indicates that guns with radial dimensions much smaller than
a will be inefficient, because in such a case most of the gun energy will go
into driving modes with high n.
In reality, poorly matched guns will tend to drive large λ gradients,
much like a single small, hot fire in a large house will produce much larger
temperature gradients than a distributed, lower temperature heat source.
11.8 Gun impedance and load line
Equation (5.29) showed that the plasma impedance depended on both the
total magnetic energy and on the open flux. Thus the impedance of a
coaxial gun with uniform resistivity is
2µ0 η
Z= 2 (Wrel + Wvac ) . (11.59)
ψ̄ gun
When λ is small, current flows along the vacuum field lines and the
impedance ispcontrolled by the geometry of the vacuum field. However,
when λ → γ12 + π 2 /h2 the impedance becomes resonant because Wrel
becomes resonant.
In the driven system λ = µ0 Igun /ψ̄ gun is determined by the external
power supply via Igun and by the flux boundary condition imposed at the
gun end wall via ψ̄ gun . The manner in which Igun is determined depends
on whether the external power supply acts as a current source or a voltage
source. Because of the variable impedance of the spheromak, the same
power supply will behave either as a current source or as a voltage source
depending on the ratio of the spheromak impedance to the power supply
impedance. Typically, the power supply impedance Rsrc is designed so that
at small λ, the power supply impedance is much larger than the plasma
impedance. In this case the power supply behaves as a constant current
source so that Vgun = Igun p Z is proportional to the plasma impedance.
However, as λ approaches γ12 + π 2 /h2 so that Z starts to become resonant
page 231
and hence larger than Rsrc , the power supply can no longer function as a
current source. Now λ will adjust to a value consistent with both the
power supply impedance and plasma impedance. There will be voltage
spikes when λ is in the vicinity of a resonance because small changes in
current result in large changes in impedance.

In order to make a quantitative determination of the impedance we
now evaluate Wvac the energy associated with the vacuum field. We use
Eq. (11.38) and the property ∇2 χvac = 0 to express the vacuum energy as
Z
1
Wvac = d3 rBvac
2
2µ0
Z
1 1 1
= d3 r ∇ψvac × ∇φ · ∇ψvac × ∇φ
2µ0 2π 2π
Z
1 1
= d3 r ∇ψvac · ∇ψvac
8π 2 µ0 r2
Z
1 3 ψvac 1
= d r ∇· ∇ψvac − ψvac ∇ · ∇ψvac .
8π 2 µ0 r2 r2
(11.60)
Using Eq. (11.43) the last term vanishes and the first term can be expressed
as a surface integral so
Z
1 ψvac
Wvac = ds · ∇ψvac . (11.61)
8π 2 µ0 r2
However, ψvac = 0 on all surfaces except the z = 0 end wall and on this
surface ds = −2πrẑdr so
Z a
1 ψvac ∂ψvac
Wvac = − rdr . (11.62)
4πµ0 0 r2 ∂z z=0
Using Eqs. (11.27), (11.46) and this becomes

2 ∞
ψ̄ gun X

2 2 2 ∂Sn (z, 0)
Wvac =− c x [J0 (x1n )] Sn (z, 0) . (11.63)
8πµ0 n=1 n 1n ∂z z=0
However, from Eq. (11.13) it is seen that
sinh (γn (z − h))

Sn (z, 0) = − (11.64)
sinh (γn h)
page 232
so Eq. (11.63) becomes

2
c2n x21n [J0 (x1n )] ×
 
2 ∞
ψ̄ gun X
Wvac =−  γn sinh (γn (z − h)) cosh (γn (z − h)) 
8πµ0 n=1 2
sinh (γn h) z=0
2 ∞
ψ̄ gun X 2
= c2 x2 [J0 (x1n )] Γn coth Γn (11.65)
8πhµ0 n=1 n 1n
where Γn = γn h.
Combining Eqs. (11.56) and (11.65) it is seen that the total magnetic
energy is
Wtot = Wrel + Wvac
 p 
Γ2n coth Γ2n − Λ2
p
2 Γ2n − Λ2
∞
 
ψ̄ gun X 
2

= [cn x1n J0 (x1n )] 

8πµ0 h n=1

Λ2
 
−
 
sinh2 Γ2n − Λ2
p
(11.66)
and thus the impedance is
 p 
p
Γ2n − Λ2
 
∞
η X 2
 
Z= [cn x1n J0 (x1n )]  . (11.67)
 
4πh n=1
Λ2
 
−
 
sinh2 Γ2n − Λ2
p
The operating point of a given experiment is determined by the relative

magnitudes of the plasma impedance Z and the power supply impedance
Rsrc (cf. Fig. 11.1). From the point of view of the power supply circuit,
the voltage applied to the spheromak will be the source voltage Vsrc less
the drop across the series resistor, i.e.,
Vgun = Vsrc − Igun Rsrc . (11.68)
This provides a load-line description for the steady state gun current, since
we also have the plasma impedance relation
Vgun = Igun Z(Igun ). (11.69)
The actual steady-state operating point for Igun is where the Vgun provided
by the power supply circuit matches the value required by the spheromak.
This is found graphically by overlaying plots of Vgun v. Igun calculated from
page 233
both Eqs. (11.68) and (11.69) and identifying points of intersection; these
will be the places where both equations give the same voltage and current.
A convenient dimensionless parameter to use is
µ0 Igun
Λ = λh = h (11.70)
ψ̄ gun
so the source circuit relation can be written as
Vgun = Vsrc − Vdrop Λ (11.71)
where
ψ̄ gun Rsrc
Vdrop = (11.72)
hµ0
is the voltage drop across the power supply series resistance when Λ = 1.
The gun voltage can be written using Eqs. (11.69), (11.67), and (11.70) as
 p 
∞ p
Λ X 
2 Γ2n − Λ2

Vgun = Vref [cn x1n J0 (x1n )]  (11.73)

4π n=1 Λ2

−
 
sinh2 Γ2n − Λ2
p
where
η ψ̄ gun
Vref = . (11.74)
µ0 h2
It is useful to normalize all voltages to Vref so that the gun voltage as
determined by the source circuit will be
V̄gun = V̄src − V̄drop Λ (11.75)
where a bar means that the voltage is normalized to Vref . Similarly, the
normalized gun voltage as determined by the spheromak physics is
∞ p !
Λ X 2 Γ2n coth Γ2n − Λ2 Λ2
V̄gun = [cn x1n J0 (x1n )] − .
sinh2 Γ2n − Λ2
p p
4π n=1 Γ2n − Λ2
(11.76)
The normalized voltage drop across the power supply series resistor is
Vdrop Rsrc h
V̄drop = = ; (11.77)
Vref η
this is approximately the ratio of the source impedance to the nominal re-
sistance of a simple unmagnetized plasma with linear dimensions of order
h. If this ratio is very large, then the source acts very much like a current
page 234
source, but if this ratio is very small then the power supply acts like a volt-
age source (often called a “stiff” source, since the output voltage is virtually
unaffected by the load). For a given cn spectrum, the non-dimensional oper-
ating point Λ is a function of Γn = γn h, V̄drop , and V̄src . Since the location
of the first resonance is usually the determining factor, the operating point
is just a function of three dimensionless parameters, namely Γ1 , V̄drop , and
V̄src .
This impedance model can be compared to extensive spheromak
impedance measurements made by Barnes et al. [173] (who proposed a
different model based on the gun being loaded by accelerated nozzle-like

flows and thus not being in a force-free equilibrium). In particular, for one
set of measurements (labeled the 1984c measurements in Ref. [173]), the
relevant independent parameters were:
η = 5 × 10−3 Ω-m
h = 0.6 m (nominal)
a = 0.7 m
Vs = 6 kV
ψ̄ g = 20 mWb
Rsrc = 6 mΩ
We will also assume that the gun design was such that the c1 coefficient
was dominantly excited. Thus, Eq. (11.20) becomes simply
ψ(r, z) = ψ̄ gun c1 γ1 rJ1 (γ1 r)S1 (z, λ). (11.78)
Since ψ̄ gun is the value of ψ(r, z) at z = 0, r = rs , it is seen that
1
c1 = ' 0.8 (11.79)
[xJ1 (x)]max
where [xJ1 (x)]max is where xJ1 (x) is at its first maximum (this is where
Bz reverses sign on the gun end wall).
Using these parameters gives Vref = 220 Volts so that the relevant
non-dimensional quantities are
V̄src = 27
V̄drop = 0.7
γ1 h = 3.3
Figure 11.11 plots V̄gun given respectively by Eqs. (11.75) and (11.76).
It is seen that the source load-line (straight line, Eq. (11.75)) crosses the
spheromak value Eq. (11.76) at more than one point. The left-most inter-
section would be a spheromak surrounded by open field lines, while the next
page 235

Fig. 11.11: Plot of normalized gun voltage as determined by intersection of load-line

from external circuit (downward sloping straight line) and plasma voltage (curve with
resonances). Horizontal axis is normalized current Λ = λh, vertical axis is V̄ = V /Vref .
two intersections would be flipped spheromaks, separated from the gun by

a separatrix located at a small finite z. Flipped spheromaks may not al-
ways be possible, since the second and third intersections will disappear if
the source load line becomes steeper as would happen if V̄src becomes very
large.
The left-most intersection gives Λ ≈ 4 and so reverting to dimensioned
variables, this predicts an operating point current of
ψ̄ gun
Igun = Λ = 100 kA (11.80)
µ0 h
a factor of two lower than the measured current of 200 kA. The reason for
this discrepancy is most likely the inadequacy of the constant λ model. In
reality the configuration has a λ gradient resulting in much more complex
physics. This situation is discussed in the next chapter.

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

February 28, 2018 10:13 ws-book9x6 Magnetic helicity, spheromaks, solar corona loops, and astrophysical jets Q0151-main

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks:

In this chapter we consider a spheromak tightly coupled to a helicity source

In the strong coupling situation, λ is imposed by the combination of

an isolated system, the helicity was set by initial conditions. Furthermore,

11.1 Force-free equilibria with open field lines

We consider an axisymmetric plasma contained by a cylinder of length h

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 209

Fig. 11.1: Experimental setup for a driven axisymmetric cylindrical spheromak.

A power supply having open-circuit voltage Vsrc and internal resistance

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 211

is the current from the power supply.

The general solution to Eq. (11.3) is

so the λ = 0 limit is indeed a vacuum field.

Application of radial boundary condition:

Boundary condition 1 shows that the radial magnetic field vanishes at

Application of axial boundary conditions:

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 213

If λ2 > γn2 , then Sn is sine-like and becomes resonant when

Thus the general form of χ satisfying the r = a and z = h homogeneous

where the cn are coefficients to be determined from the inhomogeneous

Bzgun (r) is established by the external coil shown schematically in

a spheromak involves ramping up the current Igun on a time scale slow

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 215

When λ increases to the point that it exceeds a particular γn , the as-

the next section.

11.2 Flux surfaces

Because axisymmetry is assumed here, the magnetic field derived in the

For reference purposes, it is convenient to write Eq. (11.26) in the form

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 217

extremum occurs when

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 219

it is clear that when there is an extremum (i.e., an O-point or, equivalently,

power contained in c1 will be small. Nevertheless, as λ is increased from

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 221

model presented here.

11.3 Safety factor variation with lambda

cylindrical zero-beta force-free

11.4 Flux amplification

A curious feature (first observed experimentally by Alfvén et al. [8] and

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 229

where g is an arbitrary gauge function.

that the vector potential of the actual magnetic field is

where f is another arbitrary gauge function.

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 225

Eqs. (11.24) and (11.37) the relative helicity becomes

Thus, the relative helicity is

gives the dependence of the relative helicity on Λ = λh and Γ = γh. If

From Eq. (11.49) it is seen that F (Γ, Λ) has resonances whenever

11.6 Relative energy

The magnetic energy relative to the vacuum field energy is

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 227

Fig. 11.9: Plot of F (5.75, Λ) showing how helicity resonantly depends on λ.

Substituting for B and Bvac this becomes

The integral in the last line of Eq. (11.53) is evaluated in a manner

The z integral can then be evaluated using the hyperbolic trigonometric

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 229

11.7 Gun efficiency

The external circuit can be changed by short circuiting (crowbarring) the

If the gun is designed to produce a driven configuration very similar to

substantial energy will have to be dissipated when the gun is crowbarred.

11.8 Gun impedance and load line

Analysis of Driven Spheromaks: Strong Coupling 231