Hinton 1976

Theory of plasr~ia transport in toroidal confineraient systems
F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine

Fusion Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712
The dissipation induced by coulomb-collisional scattering provides an irreducible minimum, and thus a
useful standard for comparison, for transport processes in a hot, magnetically confined plasma. The kinetic
description of this dissipation is provided by an equation of the Fokker — Planck form. As in the standard
transport theory for a neutral gas, approximate solution of the Fokker — Planck equation permits the
calculation of transport coefficients, which linearly relate the fluxes of particles, energy, and electric charge,
to the density and temperature gradients, and to the electric field. The transport relations are useful in
studying the confinement properties of present and future experimental devices for research in controlled
thermonuclear fusion. The transport theory for a magnetized plasma (in which the Larmor radius is much
smaller than gradient scale lengths describing the plasma fluid) departs from the theory for a neutral gas in
several fundamental ways. Thus, transport coefficients for a magnetized plasma can be calculated even
when the collisional mean free path is much longer than the gradient scale length (as would pertain in
thermonuclear regimes). Such transport coefficients are generally nonlocal, being defined in terms of
averages over surfaces with macroscopic dimensions. Furthermore, when the mean free path is long, the
magnetized-plasma transport coefficients depend crucially upon the magnetic field geometry, the effects of
which must be treated at the kinetic level of the Fokker — Planck equation. The results display several novel
couplings between collisional dissipation and the electromagnetic field. The present review of magnetized-
plasma transport theory is intended to be as widely accessible as possible. Thus the relevant features of
magnetic confinement in closed (toroidal) systems, and of charged particles in spatially varying fields, are
derived, at least in outline, from first principles. Although consideration is given to "classical" transport in
which most field geometric effects are omitted, major emphasis is placed on the "neoclassical" theory
which has been developed over the last decade, Neoclassical transport coefficients are specifically relevant
to a magnetically confined plasma, rather than to just a magnetized plasma; their unusual features, such as
nonlocality and geometry dependence, become particularly important in the high temperature regime of
proposed thermonuclear reactors, The area of neoclassical theory which seems most complete —
its
application to axisymmetric tokamak-type confinement systems —
is correspondingly stressed.
CONTENTS 3. Drift- kinetic equation 260

I. Introduction 240 IV. Cla ssical and Collision-Dominated Transport 261
A. History 241 A. Introduction 261
B. Synopsis 242 B. Classical perpendicular transport 262
C. Collision operator 244 Particle Quxes 262
D. Conservation laws 245 2. Ener gy fluxes 263
E. Small mass-ratio approximations 245 C. Parallel transpor t 264
II. , Moment Equations 246 Kinetic equation 264
A. Definitions 246 2. Electron ver sion 264
B. Small gyroradius ordering 247 3. Ion version 265
i . Ref inements 247 4. Variational pr inc iple 265
2. Lowest-order consequences 247 D. Pf ir sch-Schluter transport 267
C. First-order equilibrium 248 Radial fluxes 267
i. . Conf inement geometry 248 2. Neoclassical transport coefficients 268
a. Flux coordinates 248 V. Kin etic Theory of Transport in Axisymmetric
b. Poloidal and toroidal fields 248 Sys tems 269
c. Flux-surface average 249 A. Small gyroradius expansion 269
2. Equilibr ium flow 249 El ectron-ion collision term 269
3. First-order stress 250 2. Ion-electron collision term 270
D. Sec ond-order fluxes 250 3. Maximal or dering 270
Classical diffusion 250 4. Perturbation expansion 270
2. Neoclassical transport 250 5. Second-order equations 272
E.Axisymmetric systems 251 B. Linear ized kinetic equations 272
Ampere's law 251 Coordinate system 272
2. Second-order fluxes 251 2. Transformation of the kinetic equations 273
3. Faraday's law 252 3. Transport coefficients 274
F. Entropy and heat production 252 4. Weak-coupling approximation 275
III. Guiding C enter Equations 253 Two ion-species problem 276
A. Basic formalism 253 C. General var iational principle 276
B. Drift surfaces 254 D. Banana r egime 278
C. Axisymmetric systems 254 1. Definitions 278
D. Diffusion 255 2. El ectron distribution function 278
Collisi, onal regime 256 3. Var iational princ iple 279
2. Collisionless r egimes 256 4. Lor entz model 280
3. Asymmetry 257 5. Ion distr ibution function 282
E. Distribution function 257 E. Collisional regime 282
1. Veloc ity coordinates 257 1. Introduc tion 282
2. Gyr ophas e dependenc e 258 Electron transport 282
Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976 Copyright 1976 American Physical Society 239
240 F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport
3. Ion transport word "collision" requires interpretation when applied

VI. Transport Coefficients for Large Aspect-Ratio to the shielded Coulomb interaction between particles in
Tokamaks 285 a plasma, ).
A. Geometry 285 This review is concerned with collisional transport in
B. Electron transport in the banana regime 285
Large aspect-ratio expansion 285
a magnetized plasma, that is, a plasma in which the
2. Effects of electron —electron collisions 286 Larmor frequency, describing charged particle gyration
C. Ion transport in the banana regime 288 around magnetic field lines, is much larger than any
1. Ion thermal conductivity 288 other characteristic frequency of interest. Since each
2. Ion parallel flow 289 charged particle in such a plasma is "tied" to the field
D. The banana-plateau tr ansition 291 line about which it gyrates, diffusion across the mag-
The plateau limit 291 netic field is possible only because of collisions, which
a. Electron tr ansport 291
b. Ion transport allow particles to migrate from one field line to another.
292
2. Variational calculation 293 Therefore, the diffusion rate in a magnetized plasma is
3. Boundary layer calculation 293 typically an increasing function of the collision frequen-
4. Lorentz model 294 cy (rather than a decreasing function, as in the case of
E. The plateau —collisional transi, tion 296 a neutral gas). Since magnetic inhibition of free stream-
El ectron tr ansport 296 ing is effective only in directions perpendicular to the
2. Ion transport 296 field lines, containment of a, quasi-equilibrium plasma,
3. Model like-par ticl e collision operator 296
F. Summary of results for times long enough for diffusion to be a significant
297
i. Electron fluxes 297
process, generally requires a toroidal confinement sys-
2. Ion fluxes 298 tem.
3. Weak-coupling approximation 299 It has long been recognized that collisional transport
4. Two ion species problem 299 is too slow to offer a serious impediment to controlled
VII. Closure of the Moment Equations 301 fusion, especially in view of the large dimensions typ-
A. Faraday's law 302 ical of proposed fusion reactors. This is mainly be-
B. Amper e's law 303 cause the Coulomb-collision frequency varies as the in-
C. Transport relations 303
D. Particle conservation law 304
verse cube of a typical particle speed; at thermonuclear
E. Energy conservation laws 304 temperatures, collisional effects become quite weak.
F . Adiabatic compr es sion 305 Furthermore, there are compelling experimental and
G. Summary 306 theoretical indications that "anomalous" transport pro-
Acknowledgments 306 cesses (resulting, for example, from microscopic plas-
Ref erenc es 306 ma turbulence) have, and may continue to have, a dom-
inant effect. The study of purely collisional transport
remains of interest, however, for the following rea-
I. INTRODUCTION sons:
A principal object of the controlled fusion program (i) Collisional transport predictions provide a stan-
(Post, 1956) is the containment of a thermonuclear pla. s- dard, against which both the observed diffusion, and the
ma by means of strong magnetic fields. Here, contain- theoretically predicted anomalous transport processes,
ment entails maintaining plasma temperatures in the can instructively be measured.
—
neighborhood of 10 K for a time depending upon the (ii) Recent theoretical calculations yield collisional
—
density of plasma ions long enough for appreciable transport coefficients which are surprisingly large
fusion reactions to occur. Hence the basic role of the (orders of magnitude larger than earlier predictions),
magnetic field is to provide thermal isolation between which depend upon the magnetic field configuration in a.
the plasma and the walls of the reactor vessel. previously unexpected manner, and which imply novel
Since experiments with magnetically confined plasma couplings between diffusion and the electromagnetic
began in the 1950's, a major obstacle in the way of con- field. These recent results are intrinsically interesting.
tainment has come from plasma instability, manifested (iii) The transport theory for a magnetically confined
either through violent bulk distortions of the discharge plasma represents a qualitative and fundamental depar-
column or through strong, fine-scale turbulence. How- ture from "cia,ssical" theories, such as the Chapman-
ever, during the last decade, and especially since the Enskog theory for a neutral gas (Chapman and Cowling,
introduction of the Tokamak confinement device (Artsi- 1952). In particular, only the former applies to the case
movich, 1972), the most serious instability problems in which the mean free path is longer than a character-
appear to have been ameliorated. Qne result has been istic dimension of the system. The resulting transport
a renewed interest in the fundamentally unavoidable equations are nonlocal: transport coefficients are de-
mechanisms for loss of containment: diffusion and heat fined in terms of integrals over certain surfaces, de-
conduction across the confining magnetic field, due to termined by the field geometry, which have dimensions
the thermal fluctuations present in even a perfectly comparable to those of the confining system. The re-
stable and quiescent plasma. The effects of such fluc- semblance between such a global transport theory and
tuations are described by a collision operator of the the Chapman-Enskog theory is therefore somewhat
Fokker-Planck form, which. will be considered pres- superficial. Yet the former also yields a closed set of
ently. We use the term colzisionaE transport in refer- equations, which determines the time evolution of the
ence to the resulting transport processes (of course the ion or electron density and temperature on each appro-
Re@. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 'l976

F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport 241
priately defined surface, even as, in response to trans- roidal plasma confinement has been presented by Artsi-
port, the surface configuration changes in time. movich (19'l2).
It is useful to distinguish two phases in the develop-
ment of magnetized-plasma transport theory. In the A. History
earlier, classical phase, the appropriate form of the In less than ten years, the theory of neoclassical
Fokker-Planck collision operator was established, and transport has acquired a vast literature. We survey the
then used to analyze transport properties both parallel major contributions here, assuming (conveniently, but
and perpendicular to the magnetic field. It is a char- only temporarily) that the rea. der is familiar with neo-
acteristic of classical transport theory that the spatial classical terminology.
variation of the magnetic field has no effect, at least at The kinetic theory of plasma transport in tokamaks
the level of the kinetic equation; classical transport co- was initiated by Galeev and Sagdeev(1968). They showed
efficients can be, and usually were, calculated for the that trapped particles, with "banana" orbits, are re-
case of a uniform field. The second phase of develop- sponsible for a significant enhancement of the calcu-
ment, which is now generally referred to as rseoelzz- lated diffusion coefficient and thermal conductivity, at
sieal, began in the 1960's, especially after the pioneer- very small values of collision frequency (i. e. , in the
ing work of Galeev and Sagdeev (1968). Neoclassical banana regime). ' The enhancement was explained qual-
transport theory is also based on the use of the Fokker- itatively on the basis of a random walk of the banana
Planck collision operator; it departs from classical orbits, mith a step size significantly larger than the
theory in recognizing that the magnetic field of a toroi- Larmor radius. Qaleev and Sagdeev also demonstrated
dal confinement system is necessarily nonuniform, and the existence of an intermediate collision frequency re-
that in the long mean-free-path regime appropriate to gime, in mhich the diffusion coefficient is independent
thermonuclear temperatures, the spatial variation of of collision frequency (the "plateau regime").
the field has crucial effects, which must be treated at Plasma diffusion in a stellerator was investigated by
the kinetic level. Galeev, Sagdeev, Furth, and Rosenbluth (1969). They
The crucial effects of field variation are particle found a maximum in the diffusion coefficient at low col-
trapping and the gradient-& and curvature drifts of gy- lision frequencies, due to the existence of "localized"
rating particles across field lines, resulting from grad- particles (Gibson and Taylor, 196'l; Gibson and Mason,
ual distortion of the Larmor orbit. Thus the magnetic 1968), with "superbanana" orbits.
inhibition of free particle motion, mentioned previously. , The neoclassical theory of plasma transport generated
has complementary weakness. Because it provides lo- considerable interest, because of its novel character
calization of charged particles in only two dimensions, and because of its possible importance in determining
it requires a toroidal system for containment; but the toroidal confinement properties. Kovrizhnykh (1969)
field curvature resulting from toroidicity leads to per- and Rutherford (1970) independently pointed out that the
pendicular drifts, i. e. , to a weakening of the original ion and electron diffusion rates should be equal and in-
inhibition. Neoclassical transport is a prominent result dependent of the radial electric field, in axisymmetric
of these weaknesses. It should be noted that, while clas- systems, such as tokamaks. Kovrizhnykh calculated
sical and neoclassical transport processes are additive, the transport coefficients for a variety of confinement
neoclassical effects are typically much larger; recall devices (tokamak, levitron, stellerator, and bumpy
the previous remark (ii). torus), and considered both weakly ionized and fully
The present review considers classical theory only ionized plasmas. The details of the calculations, for
briefly, for purposes of comparison and for complete- axisymmetric systems, are particularly clear in Ruth-
ness. A relatively comprehensive treatment of neoclas- erford's paper. Frieman (1970) considered diffusion in
sical theory is attempted. We have tried to make the general nonaxisymmetric systems. His paper contains
argument self-contained, and accessible to as wide an a derivation of the drift kinetic equation, which mas the
audience as possible, including researchers unfamiliar starting point for the Qaleev-Sagdeev calculation.
with plasma transport theory. Especially for the bene- Other neoclassical transport properties mere also
fit of the latter, we draw attention to the following pre- soon discovered. The effect of trapped electrons on the
vious reviews. Ohmic conductivity of a tokamak plasma, was consid-
The famous monograph of Spitzer (1967) discusses, ered by Hinton and Oberman (1969) who showed that, at
among other relevant topics, the nature of Coulomb low collision frequencies, the conductivity is reduced by
collisions in a plasma, and a number of classical trans- an amount proportional to the fraction of trapped elec-
port processes. More detailed treatments of the clas-' trons. The possibility of a new kind of pinch effect, due
sical theory, with extensive references, may be found to trapped particles, was discovered independently by
in Braginskii (1965) and Kaufman (1966). The micro- Ware (1970) and Galeev (1971). They pointed out that
scopic processes underlying neoclassical transport, as the toroidal electric field, which is necessarily present
related to field geometry, are considered by Kadomtsev in tokamaks, causes a radially inward motion of trapped
and Pogutse (1971), who also discuss a related class of particles, at a velocity which is much larger than the
plasma instabilities. Neoclassical transport is also
considered in a review by Galeev and Sagdeev (1975), The orders of magnitude of these coefficients in the high
and in a relatively elementary reviem by Hazeltine collision frequency regime had been worked out several years
—
(1975). Finally, a coherent if unfortunately somewhat earlier by Pfirsch and ScMutter (f962) and Shafranov (f965)
—
dated account of the e&Pemmental observations on to- from a fluid model.
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory of pIasma transport
Ex B drift in the classical pinch effect. The existence gimes by Tsang and Frieman (1975).
of a "diffusion driven" current ("bootstrap current" ) The banana regime analysis of Rosenbluth, Hazeltine
was predicted independently by Galeev (1971) [see also and Hinton (1972) was generalized to include noncircular
Sagdeev and Galeev (1970), and Galeev and Sagdeev cross section tokamaks, such as doublet (Ohkawa. , 1968)
(1971)] and Bickerton, Connor and Taylor (1971). The by Glasser and Thompson (1973). A further generaliza-
latter authors considered the possibility of a steady- tion, to include all collisionality regimes, was consid-
state "bootstrap" tokamak, in which the poloidal con- ered by Bernstein (1974). He generalized the variational
fining magnetic field would be provided by this "boot- principles used by Hinton and Rosenbluth (1973) to in-
strap" current, and in which the toroidal electric field clude arbitrary axisymmetric systems, and introduced
would be zero; this possibility was also considered in- a convenient inner-product formalism, which has been
dependently by Kadomtsev and Shafranov (1972). The adopted in this review.
physical origin of the bootstrap current is the banana In trying to present a coherent account of the subject
orbits of the trapped electrons, in the presence of a under review, we frequently use arguments quite differ-
density gradient. These result in a current along the ent from those of the original contributors. Yet we have
magnetic field lines, analogous to the classical diamag- attempted proper assignment of credit, not only to those
netic current due to particle gyration about the field authors mentioned in the brief history above, but to
lines. Through collisions with ions, these particles many others whose contributions have been significant.
become untrapped; through collisions with untrapped To those authors whose work is not included, we offer
electrons, the latter are "entrained. "
The result of our apologies; some omissions were necessary, in
these collisions is a current carried by untrapped elec- order that we might explore the chosen topics in some
trons. depth.
All of the calculations referred to used either simplified
collision operators to describe like-particle collisions, or B. Synopsis
used nonrigorous approximations to deal with the exact This review is concerned with the calculation of trans-
Fokker-Planck operators. The resulting numerical port coeff icients, f rom the Fokker- Planck equation, in
transport coefficients differed by as much as an order the small gyroradius limit. The transport coefficients
of magnitude from one paper to the next. Rosenbluth, linearly relate the fluxes (of particles, energy, and
Hazeltine and Hinton (1972) carried out an accurate and electric charge) to the thermodynamic forces (the pres-
systematic evaluation of the tokamak neoclassical coef- sure and temperature gradients for each charged par-
ficients, starting with the full Fokker- Planck collision ticle species in the plasma, and the electric field).
operator. By using a variational principle to treat the When combined with the exact conservation laws for
low collision frequency banana regime, the e'ffects of particles and energy, and with Maxwell's equations, the
like-particle collisions were included rigorously. Their linear transport relations provide a closed set of equa-
results are correct to lowest order in the inverse aspect tions, which predict the temporal evolution of the plasma
ratio, in the large aspect ratio, circular cross section fluid, from a properly chosen set of initial and boundary
case. conditions.
Although the correct transport coefficients were known The Fokker-Planck collision operator is introduced at
in the banana regime (Rosenbluth, Hazeltine and Hinton, the end of this section. In Sec. II, we postpone further
1972) and the plateau regime (Galeev, 1971), it was the kinetic analysis to consider the velocity moments of the
transition between these regimes which was thought to Fokker-Planck equation. The moment equations permit
be more relevant to the tokamak experiments of the late a relatively straightforward introduction of the small
1960's and early 1970's. Hinton and Rosenbluth (1973) gyroradius parameter (Sec. II.B). Then the toroidal na-
calculated the transport coefficients for a large aspect- ture of a magnetically confined plasma equilibrium—
ratio tokamak in the banana-plateau transitional regime. which is critical to neoclassical theory— can be estab-
They used numerical methods to make use of general- lished (Sec. II.C). We find that this equilibrium is nec-
izations of a variational principle due to Rutherford essarily dynamic, i. e. , it can exist only in the presence
(1970). The results showed that diffusion and thermal of significant, divergence-free, flows of particles and
conductivity coefficients increase monotonically with energy. A crucial averaging operator — the so-called
collision frequency, even in the plateau regime. —
flux surface average which is local with respect to mi-
None of the previous papers answered the question of nor toroidal radius, is introduced. We also derive con-
how the radial electric field is determined in the quasi- venient, perspicuous expressions for the cross-field
steady state of ambipolar diffusion in axisymmetric sys- particle and energy fluxes, and compare the classical
terns. Rosenbluth, Rutherford, Taylor, Frieman, and and neoclassical contributions (Sec. II.D). The changing
Kovrizhnykh (1971) studied this question for the banana character of diffusion, for different regimes of collision
regime. By going to fourth order in the gyroradius, frequency, is considered. These results are derived for
they obtained an equation which determines the time the case of a completely general confinement geometry;
rate of change of the toroidal plasma angular momen- simplifications permitted in the axisymmetric case, in
tum, in terms of radial diffusion of angular momentum. which the major toroidal axis is a symmetry axis, are
The radial electric field is thus determined, through its considered separately (Sec. II.E). Finally, the relevant
relation to the plasma toroidal angular velocity. This dissipation mechanisms are summarized, by considera-
question was also studied for the collisional regime by tion of the heat production rate (Sec. II.F).
Hazeltine (1974), and for the plateau and transitional re- As remarked previously, the slow drift motion of gy-
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April |976

F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport
rating particles —the so-called guiding center drift— species. The linearized kinetic equations so obtained
across the nonuniform confining field, plays a funda- are novel also in their more general and rigorous treat-
mental role in neoclassical transport. Hence in Sec. III ment of certain ion-electron coupling effects. Next, we
we adopt a microscopic viewpoint to review the relevant show that the kinetic equations can be obtained from a
conclusions of the guiding center theory. As in Sec. II, variational principle, which is valid independently of the
an initially general formalism (Secs. III.A, III. B) is later size of the collision frequency, i. e. , in both short and
specialized to the imports. nt case of axisymmetry (Sec. long mean-free-path regimes (Sec. V. C). As a result,
III. C). Once the character of the collisionless guiding variational expressions for the transport coefficients
center orbits is established, conventional random walk are obtained, in terms of integrals of the distribution
arguments are used to estimate diffusion coefficients function. A simpler variational principle is derived for
under various circumstances (Sec. III. D). (These argu- the long mean-free-path limit (Sec. V. D). In.the oppo-
ments provide useful understanding and their conclu- site, collision-dominated limit, the kinetic equations
sions are approximately correct; but it should be noted can be solved directly (Sec. V. E); one thus obtains, by
that the details of the simplified random walk picture a somewhat different argument, the axisymmetric ver-
are not always borne out by kinetic theory. ) Next we sion of the results of Sec. IV. D.
consider the predictions of guiding center- theory with In long mean-free-path regimes, the linearized kinet-
regard to the single-particle distribution function, ic equations involve a quite complicated average of the
f(x, v, f), describing the expected density of particles at already formidable Fokker-Planck collision operator,
the point (x, v) in phase space (Sec. III. E). This is shown so that rigorous solutions have been obtained only in
to consist of two parts, f
=f +f, with the following prop- certain limits. For example, if the ionic charge Z is
erties: fis determined by Larmor gyration, and yields very large, the electron collision operator reduces to a
f
classical transport, while is determined by guiding Lorentz gas operator (to lowest order in Z '), and the
center motion, as modified by collisions, and yields kinetic theory is analytically tractable; this case is con-
neoclassical transport. A small gyroradius approxima- sidered in Sec. V. D. A more generally important limit
tion to the Fokker-Planck equation —
the so-called drift is that of a "thin" (large aspect-ratio) torus, whose mi-
kinetic equation —
which f
must satisfy, is derived here. nor radius is much smaller than its major radius. This
Having established, in Secs. II and III, precisely which case is considered in Sec. VI; we show that, for suffi-
moments of the distribution function are required, we ciently small collision frequency, the distribution func-
begin in Sec. IV the actual calculation of transport coef- tion is localized in velocity space, in such a way that
ficients. The classical perpendicular transport problem the collision operator may be expanded in powers of the
is considered first, and solved by straightforwardly square root of the inverse aspect ratio. Since the low-
combining some of our previous results (Sec. IV. B). We est-order version resembles a Lorentz gas operator,
then turn to the problem of collisional transport parallel the kinetic equations are readily solved. The velocity
to the magnetic field (Sec. IV. C). The variational meth-
od used to treat this problem has some resemblance to
space region in which f is localized changes as the col-
lision frequency increases (while remaining smaller than
techniques used in later sections, to which it therefore it is in the collision-dominated regime, where f is not
provides a useful introduction. Furthermore, we show localized). Hence somewhat different analytical treat-
that the parallel transport equations are readily comments are required, for the nearly collisionless limit
bined with certain conclusions of Sec. II, to yield the (Secs. VI. B, VI. C), and for the regime of intermediate
neoclassical (cross-field) transport coefficients for an collisionality (Sec. VI. D). Results for the intermediate
arbitrary toroidal geometry, in the large collision fre- f
regime are affected by the behaviour of near a certain
quency limit (Sec. IV. D). boundary layer in velocity space. Explicit neoclassical
Unfortunately, under the experimental conditions typ- transport coefficients, which are rigorous in the con-
ical of most present and planned toroidal confinement text of the aspect-ratio expansion, are obtained for the
sy stems, these short mean-f ree-path results pertain to low-to-intermediate transitional regime by substituting
only a small fraction of the plasma volume. To treat a numerical solutions to the large aspect-ratio kinetic
less collision-dominated plasma (including, in particu- equations into the general variational formalism of Sec.
lar, a thermonuclear plasma), more sophisticated kine- V.
tic theory, based on the drift kinetic equation, is re- For the regime of intermediate to high collisionality
quired. This theory, specialized to the case of an axi- (Sec. VI. E) transport coefficients are obtained by numer-
symmetric system, is presented in Sec. V. Fir st we ical solution of the large aspect-ratio kinetic equations.
present a refined, and slightly modified, version of the Approximate, but very convenient, interpolation formu-
small gyroradius ordering of Sec. II. In the refined ver- las are then used to connect smoothly the numerical val-
sion, the electron to ion mass ratio is ordered with re- ues of the coefficients in the various collision frequency
spect to the gyroradius, in such a way as to allow the regimes. The final expressions for the transport coef-
maximum number of transport effects to be considered ficients may be found at the end of Sec. VI (Sec. VI. F).
simultaneously (Sec. V.A). The ordering yields an ex- In Sec. VII we return our attention to the moment equa-
pansion of the drift-kinetic equation in powers of the tions, which express the conservation of particles and
(poloidal) gyroradius. The expansion is treated slightly energy for each plasma species. The flux-surface aver-
unconventionally here (Sec. V. B), in order to unify as ages of these equations, describing transport in minor
much as possible the analysis of two transport prob- radius, are seen to involve the particle and energy flux-
lems: that of a pure plasma, with electrons and one es, and the electric current, in precisely the same
species of ion, and that of a plasma with several ion forms as were calculated from transport theory in Secs.

244 F. L. HInton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport
EV-VI. Then, to obtain a closed set of equations for the U„B(x) = x '(x' 5„~ —x„x~) .
plasma fluid, the conservation laws and transport rela-
tions are combined with Maxwell's equations. The elec- The Coulomb logarithm is formally given by
tromagnetic coupling is especially interesting, because lnA = In(9N), (1 4)
the explicit form of the flux-surface average depends
where N» 1 is the number of particles in a sphere of
upon the magnetic field configuration, which can change,
in general, on the same time scale as other processes
radius &» the Debye length.
Equation (1.2) was first derived by Landau (1936).
of interest. Thus the global nature of neoclassical
Chandrasekhar (1943) used a different argument to de-
transport profoundly affects the problem of closing the
rive a special case of Eq. (1.2), which was later ex-
set of moment equations. The closed set of equations
tended, somewhat, by Cohen, Spitzer and Routly (1950).
derived here differs from previously published ver-
Rosenbluth, MacDonald and Judd (1957) derived the ex-
sions, and is intended to be more generally convenient.
pression (for e,' = e,')
However, the closure problem is treated only in axisym-
metric geometry.
C, = —1", f, ' ——
82
f, BVcf 8VB
An exhaustive treatment of neoclassical transport the- ~ Vn Vn 2 Vo Vg
ory is not attempted in this review. In particular, we
consider only briefly the large literature concerning
transport in asymmetrical. confinement systems, such where I; =4ve'InA/m, ', and
as the stellerator. [Early work on transport in steller-
ators is reviewed by Galeev and Sagdeev (19'75).J /z, =Q (1+m./nz, ) d'v'f', (v )/~v —v ~, (1.6)
Transport coefficients for the asymmetrical case are
presented, in terms of averages involving the field ge-
ometry, only in the short mean-free-path regime. Our g=g 1 d'v'f (v')Iv —v'I
discussion of rotational relaxation is similarly incom-
plete, and several topics relevant to a contaminated
It is not hard to show that Eqs. (1.2) and (1.5) are equiv-
plasma, such as charge exchange effects, are barely
mentioned. Most of the omitted topics relate, in our alent; for many applications, the latter is more conven-
ient. The functions h, and g are called "Rosenbluth po-
tentials, " because they satisfy the differential equations
opinion, to elements of the theory which, although po-
tentially very important, have yet to be thoroughly and
rigorously developed.
Although the axisymmetric theory is developed, as
much as possible, in the context of arbitrary magnetic
geometry, this is mainly to emphasize the fact that the
transport theory does not depend upon any specific as-
sumptions concerning the magnetic field configuration.
Explicit numerical results are thus given only for the where (V, )' = &'/Bv &v, etc.
large aspect ratio, circular cross section case, which We review neither the derivations of Eq. (1.2) nor the
is most generally useful. attempts to derive improved operators [see the review
by Fried (1966)]. However, some comments on the val-
C. Collision operator idity of the Fokker-Planck formalism are appropriate.
A basic element in all derivations of the collision op-
All of the transport literature under review is based erator is that, because of the long-range nature of the
on the assumption that the distribution function f, (x, v, t) Coulomb interaction, the great majority of scattering
satisfies the Fokker-Planck equation, events result in quite small deflections: Av/v« l. In
the absence of coherent wave propagation, the effect of
&f /&t+v V f, +(e, /m, ) (E+c 'vxB) &f /&v =C, (f), many such deflections is to cause each particle to per-
form a random walk in velocity space; the correspond-
where e, is the charge and m, the mass of particles of ing evolution of the velocity distribution function is then
species a, E and B are, respectively, the (macroscopic) determined by an operator having the Fokker-Planck
electric and magnetic fields, and C, is the Fokker- form of Eq. (1.5).
Planck collision operator: Because the range of the "bare" Coulomb force is in-
finite, the accumulated effect of very small deflections
8,
is divergent, unless Debye shielding is taken into ac-
count. In its simplest form, this shielding —
the result
2ve.'e', , f. (v) sf, (v') of space-charge polarization —
appears in the Coulomb
ab logarithm: the Coulomb interaction is cut off at a dis-
tance corresponding to the Debye length. Thus a more
general expression for the Coulomb logarithm is given
by (Spitzer, 196'7; Braginskii, 1965)
(1.8)
Here, a sum over repeated Cartesian indices (n, P) is where & and ~ .
are, respectively, the largest and
lmpl leds and smallest values of the impact parameter for the class of
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 'l976

F. L. HInton and R. D. Hazelttne: Theory of plasma transport
scattering processes under consideration. Equation E. Small mass-ratio approximations

(1.4) is recovered by choosing & to be the Debye length The unlike-species (a Wb) collision operator can usu-
and &ml& to be the classical distance of closest approach, ally be simplified when the two species have disparate
for a particle moving at the thermal speed. This choice masses. For definiteness, consider first the case of
is suitable if the minimum deflection, caused by colli- electrons (a =e) being scattered by ions (b =i). The ba-
sions at impact parameter &,
exceeds the uncertainty sic simplifying assumption is that f; is strongly peaked-
in velocity implied by quantum mechanics (Marshak, eoncentrated in a narrow range of velocities compared —
1941). Thus quantum effects impose on 6 an upper to f, . It follows in particular that the unlike-species
limit, which becomes relevant for the case of electron contribution to the Rosenbluth potential g [Eq. (1.7)] may
scattering in a hot plasma. An expression for the Cou- be approximated by
lomb logarithm which includes these effects is given by
(Braginskii, 1965)
lnA = 23. 4 —1.15 logn+ 3.45 logT„ for T, & 50 eV;
=n;v(l —u; v/~'),
lnA =25. 3 —1.15logn+2. 3 logT„ for T, & 50 eV .
where n~ is the ion density, and u; is the ion flow veloc-
(l. 9) ity
Here n is the density in (cm) ', and T, is the electron
temperature measured in electron volts. nu~= d vv; v
The cutoff procedure as a whole ean be justified only
if the plasma is quiescent (i. e. , microscopically stable) which has also been assumed small compared to v, over
and if the Coulomb logarithm is large. For most plas- most of the domain of f, (v). Similarly approximating the
mas of thermonuclear interest, lnA is between 15 and ion contribution to Eq. (1.6), and substituting the results
20. into Eq. (1.5), we obtain
Of course, the Fokker-Planck operator cannot accu- C„~ (2ve41nA/m', —u;) (&f,/Bv) .
) n;(&/&v) ~
U(v (1.14)
rately describe the effects of large-angle deflections
(which are relatively rare, in so far as lnA»1). Oper- Here, terms of second- or higher-order in uq/v are to I I
ators which include large-angle scattering terms, and be neglected.

which require for their validity only A»1, have been These approximations can be made more explicit if w' e
constructed; this topic was reviewed by Kihara and assume that both distribution functions are nearly Max-
Aono (1971). wel, lian
Finally, the derivation of the Fokker-Planck equation (1.15)
assumes that in the absence of Coulomb interaction,
particle trajectories are straight. When the magnetic
field is so strong that the gyrofrequency, 0, is com- far =~ "ea +aexp(- ~ /+a )
parable to the plasma frequency, ~~, as can occur in ~
some confinement devices of interest, this assumption with v~ being the thermal speed and
is not strictly justified, The modification of the colli-
sion operator which is required to tr~at the case 0» ~~
has been considered [see, for example, Montgomery, If the temperatures of the two species are roughly com-
et al. (1974), and references cited therein]; it appears parable, and if u; is not much larger than v, „, , then the
+mdivis to replace the Debye length cut-
that a dominant effect ratio
off by a gyroradius cut-off, in the Coulomb logarithm. v, h; /ott„-(m, /m;)'~' «1
D. Conservation laws provides a natural small parameter, with respect to
which Eq. (1.13) represents a first order expansion.
A realistic collision operator must conserve particles, The linearized electron-ion collision operator is ob-
momentum, and energy. These conservation laws are tained by assuming uq/&~; -f, and retaining only first
expressed by the following relations between moments order, O(f), terms in Eq, (1.14). We find (Braginskii,
of C,~: 1965)
(1.10) C g
—I ll;
1
— —'U(v)'
& &f,
+
2u; v
fgI (1.16)
Here the l superscript refers to the linearization.
v [m~v Cgy Cyg] = 0 The first term of Eq. (1.16), which involves only the
(1.12)
electron distribution function, describes angular scat-
tering at fixed I vI, and vanishes if f, is isotropic
is because, in collisions with the much more massive
This.
It is easily verified, by straightforward
substitution and ions, the energy change of an electron is very small (of
Integrat&on by pax'ts that the colll, sion opex'atox' of Eq. order m, /mq). Thus neither Eq. (1.14) nor Eq. (1.16) is
(1.2) satisfies Eqs. (1.10)-(1.12). Other basic proper- sufficiently accurate for calculating the rate of energy
ties of the collision operator (e. g. , that it satisfies exchange between the two species.
Boltzmann's II theorem) are verified in later sections. Momentum exchange between ions and electrons is

246 F. L. Hinton and R„D. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport
relatively fast, and Eq. (1.16) is applicable. The mo- P = d'vmvv (2 2)

mentum exchange rate is measured by the electron-ion
"friction force, " the energy flux
Fe = d v
v'gpss~ Cet',
9=fd v('mu'/2'Ivf, (2.3)
After straightforward partial integration, Eq. (1.16) and the energy-weighted stress tensor
yields
d'v mv' 2 vv (2. 4)
F~= —+enqVS~ d V qv V + PQ~ne 7~ u~ (1.17)
Here
Of course n = f d vf i's the
stress tensor is to be distinguished
single-species density The
from the pressure
tensor,
provides a convenient measure (which becomes precise
for a Maxwellian f,) of the momentum exchange time.
I = d vpRv —u v —u (2 5)
Because typical relaxation processes associated with
similarly, the energy flux is to be distinguished from
electron-electron collisions also proceed at the rate the heat flux
v, . 7, is often called the electron collision time.
The small mass-ratio approximation to the ion-elec- —u
q= d v Bz 2 v —u v (2. 6)
t+on collision operator, C;„may be obtained in a sim-
ilar way. We again assume f, has the nearly Maxwellian We measure the temperature in energy units
form of Eq. (1.15), and neglect f, in calculating g from
Eq. (1.7). However, the contribution of f, to h; [Eq. P=nr Tr(P)/3,
= (2.7)
(1.6)] can be comparable, formally, to other terms in where p is the scalar pressure, and Tr denotes the
C;„so we must compute trace. Three moments of the Fokker-Planck operator
are also needed; these are the collisional momentum
ah (f)/ v-=—(I/I) f&'v'f, lv')f tv')v'(u')
exchange, or friction force
Here we have retained only the dominant term in
(v' —v( '. Equation (1.17) provides a relation &k;(f )/&v F= d3vmv C (2. 8)
=m; F,/I; n; I', —m; n, u; /I", n& T, m, . Hence, after
the collisional energy exchange
straightforwardly evaluating g(f, ~) and h;(f, ~), we ob-
tain the collision operator
C;, =
9= f S v(m/2) (v'—uPC(f); (2. 9)
and the collisional change in energy flux
(1.18)
6= d'v (m v'/2) v C( f) . (2. 10)
where T, =m, v,'„, /2. In Eq. (1.18), the first term, in
square brackets, determines the rate of energy ex- Making explicit the species subscript a, we recall that
change. The last term, involving F„ is responsible for the conservation of momentum and energy in collisions
momentum conservation, as in Eq. (1.11). require s
Finally, it is convenient to present here the form of
the like-species, lineaxized collision operator. Equa- (2. 11)
tions (1.2) and (1.15) readily yield
c'. = —
'
8 /. (vlfd'u /. lv )& 8(v — v')'' Q (Q, +F. u, ) =0. (2. 12)
-sf.(vg af, (v ) Now the even (~ v~' and v') moments of Eq. (1.1), which
(1.19)
O'U8 O'Ug express the conservation of particles and energy, re-
spectively, may be written as
II. MOMENT EQUATIONS
Bn/St+ V. (nu) = 0, (2. 13)
A. Oefinitions
(8/&t) 3p/2+ V'. Q = Q+u. (F +enE) . (2. 14)
To provide a framework for later discussion, we con-
sider here the velocity moments of Eq. (1.1). First we The odd (v and v'jv) moments, which express the con-
~
define, omitting species subscripts for convenience, the servation of momentum and of energy flux, respectively,
particle flux take the form
nu, =
(&/&t) mnu+ 0 P —en(E + c 'u xB) = F,
(2. 15)
(~ /& t ) Q+ V ~
R —(3/2) (e/m) Ep —(e/m) E P ~
the stress tensor —(e/mc) QxB =G. (2. 16)
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April '1976

Transport theory of a magnetically confined plasma One further refinement is of general importance. In
has the principal object of providing a closed set of low-P toroidal confinement systems, the magnetic field
equations for the time evolution of the densities and can be decomposed into poloidal (B~) and toroidal (Br)
pressures of each species in the plasma fluid. Thus '
components such that B =B~+B» with, typically
only the even moment equations appear in the final
closed set. The odd moment equations are useful main- IB,/B. I«1, (2. 23)
ly because they alone involve the magnetic field. Hence as shown in Sec. II.C, below. Hence we introduce the
an ordering argument based on the strong field limit can poloidal gyroradius
be understood at the fluid, rather than kinetic, level = v~/Qp, = eBp/mc,
pp Qp (2. 24)
only through consideration of Eqs. (2. 15) and (2. 16).
This strong field, or small gyroradius, ordering is and let
made precise in the following subsection. It is then
~~ =(B/Bp) 6 (2. 25)
used, with Eqs. (2. 13)-(2.16), to study the confined plas-
ma equilibrium, to provide physical understanding of Thus two measures of the gyroradius may be distin-
several transport processes, and to provide expressions guished for each plasma species. We adopt the strongest
for the cross-field fluxes which are significantly more version of Eq. (2. 19)
convenient than the definitions of Eqs. (2. 1) and (2. 3).
(2. 26)
B. Small gyroiadius ordering since this applies to most of the literature under review.
The subscripts are frequently omitted for the sake of
We denote the scale length for changes in macroscopic simplicity. However, we point out that certain steller-
parameters, such as the pressure, by ator experiments do not satisfy Eq. (2. 26), and that it is
t=-IvlnPI '; only marginally satisfied on some present tokamak de-
vices.
the thermal speed by
„—
v, = (2T/m)'
'. 2. Lowest-order consequences
and the transit frequency by As shown by kinetic argument in Sec. V, the order-
ings (2. 19)-(2.21) force the distribution functions to be
~= va /I (2. 17) approximately Maxwellian
measure of a particle gyroradius (I armor
A convenient
radius) is then
f -f~+ 0(~), (2. 27)
f„=-n,(m "v~) ' exp[- (v/v, h)'] . (2. 28)
=
p —v~/Q =mcv, h/(eB) . (2. 18)
Hence in lowest order each plasma species is described
The basic ordering assumption is that this length is by a density n, and a temperature T =mvt'h/2. [This cir-
much smaller than l: cumstance is so crucial to the linear transport process-
6—= p/l = &u/Q«1 . (2. 19) es under consideration that, if it could not be deduced
from the orderings, Eq. (2. 27) would be assumed to hold
We further assume anyway. ] Some elementary consequences are that
& 1nP/& t = 0(6'(u) (2. 20) (nu, Q, F,(P —Ip), [R —(5pT/2m) l]j=o(6), (2.29)
and where is the unit dyadic. From these results, and
I
cE/(Bv, „)= 0(6), (2. 21) from the definitions of Eqs. (2. 3) and (2. 6), it follows
that
where E is the electric field. Equation (2. 20), in which
P could be replaced by n, T, ete. , serves to identify the q =[Q —(5/2) pu][1+0(&)] . (2. 30)
(diffusion) time scale under consideration. It is assumed Note also that, in view of the slow time variation de-
that all faster processes have evolved to equilibrium. scribed by Eq. (2. 20), the electric field is predominantly
Equation (2. 21), called the dhift o~dexinI„serves to rule electrostatic
out certain rapid fluid motions associated with the case
cE/(Bv, „)=0(1) (magnetohydrodynamical ordering). (c/Bv, „) (E+ VC) =0(&'), (2. 31)
where 4 is the electrostatic potential.
Ref inernents We now turn to the odd moments, Eqs. (2. 15) and
Because of the small electron-to-ion mass ratio (2. 16). Using Eq. (2.29) to identify the zeroth-order
(m. /m;) &10 ', terms, we f ind
B [VP+enV4] =0(&),
it is occasionally useful to include the species sub-
scripts; we assume B [v(PT)+ePve ] =0(6) .
Hence
so that B vT =0(6), (2. 32)
6./6, - v,„;jv ~, —(m, /m;) ' ~' «1 . (2. 22) B V[nexp( —eC/T)] =O(6) . (2. 33)
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 4S, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

In combination with the quasi-neutrality condition 271 upon one traversal of the minor (major) toroidal cir-
cumf erence.
g e. n. =o, (2. 34) (iii) 0 and g are chosen such that the ratio B VO/
B V'f depends only on 4.
(iv) 4, 6 and f are chosen such that the metric de-
Eq. (2. 33) yields the constraints terminant
B Vn=O(&) =B VP, ~
(2. 35) 0 =-
ve (ve x vg) '
g(@ g) I I (2. 43)
B VC =0(5) . (2. 36)
is independent of &
C. First-order equilibrium Bg/eg = 0 . (2. 44)

1. Confinement geometry That these properties are compatible has been shown by
Hamada (1962) [see also Greene and Johnson (1961)],
Equations (2. 15) and (2. 16) provide the exact formulae
who imposed the stronger requirement g = constant, in-
nu~ =(mQ) n X[V P —F —enE +m(S/at) nu], (2. 37) stead of Eq. (2. 44).
'n X[V —G —(e/m) E (P —~ p It is convenient to consider here three specific real-
Q~ = Q R 1) +&Q/&t],
izations of the radial coordinate 4 . These are: the
(2. 38) poloidal flux (divided by 2v) enclosed by a, surface on
where 6:~ = nx(F
n = B/B and — xn)— . Notice that, in order hich lies the given point x
to compute these flows through 0(&"), we need evaluate
P(x) =(2w)
' d'x Ve B; (2. 45)
the expressions in brackets only through O(5" '). In pa. r-
ticular the perpendicular current
the enclosed toroidal flux
ea +a u~a (2. 39)
(2.46)
may be computed from Eqs. (2. 29) and (2. 37); we find, and the enclosed volume
through first order in ,
V(x) =- d'x . (2. 47)
J xB =AEVI', (2. 40)
where In each definition, the integration domain is the interior
of that flux surface which passes through x. The fluxes
(2.41) tP and @ can be put in the more familiar, although less
convenient, form of surface integrals by noting, for ex-
denotes the total plasma pressure. ample, Vg B = V (gB), applying Gauss' theorem, and
Equation (2.40), together with Ampere's law, using the multivalued nature of f. We see that the toroi-
dal flux is simply the flux of B through the surface 8
(2.42) shown in Fig. 1.
describes the equilibrium configuration of a magnetically Each of the quantities g, Q, and V provides an allow-
confined plasma. This configuration consists in general able radial coordinate, and we shall have occasion to use
—
of a sequence of nested toroids the magnetic surfaces, all three.
—
or flux surfaces (almost) each of which is covered
ergodically by a single field line. The innermost, de- b. Po!oldal and toroidal fields
generate toroid is called the magnetic axis (Kruskal and
Noting that B V@ = B Vg = V B = 0, and using Eqs.
~
Kul s rud1958, ) .
Gra, d (1967) has emphasized that the equilibrium rela-.
(2. 45) and (2.46), one can express B in terms of its flux
functions
tions need not possess solutions in general. The exis-
tence of solutions can be guaranteed only for the axisym- B =(2v) ' VQ XVO+V/XVg (2. 48)
metric case and, in an approximate sense, for near
axisymmetry. We therefore restrict our attention to Here, the first term is called the toroidal field B2, and
the second term the poloidal field B~. These fields are
configurations in which any asymmetries are sufficiently
tangent to the (not necessarily orthogonal) & and 0 coor-
weak to permit the existence of nested flux surfaces.
dinate lines, respectively. An equivalent expression is
a. Flux coordinates —
B& —Vf X V|tp, Br —
—qVJX Ve, (2.49)
Figure I shows a typical flux surface, the field line where the quantity
from which it is constructed, and the magnetic axis.
The directions of variation of so-called "flux coordi- q(0) =(2~) 'dy /de (2. 50)
nates" (4, 0, f) are also shown in the figure. The func- is the reciprocal of the rotational transform, and de-
tions 4 (x), e(x), and g(x) have the following properties. scribes the average pitch of the field lines: g is the
(i) 4', the radial coordinate, is constant on each flux number (not rational, in general) of toroidal circuits
surface. for one complete poloidal circuit, of a field line around
(ii) e(p), the poloidal (toxoidal) angIe, increases by the magnetic axis.

It can be seen that rational values of q correspond to g QH
surfaces which are not ergodically covered, the field

line reconnecting with itself after several circuits of the
torus. The breakdown of the assumed equilibrium con-
ditions on such exceptional surfaces need not be serious.
However, small, nearly integral values of q are danger-
ous, in low-&8 systems, with regard to fluid stability. magnetic axis field line
Hence q is called the safety factor; a stably confined,
low-P plasma must have (Kruskal, et al. , 1958; G. G. FIG. 1. . A toroidal flux surface, showing the directions of
Dolgov-Saveliev, et al. , 1960) variation of the flux coordinates, 4, 0, and &. The surface is
q&q,.„-& . (2. 51) covered ergodically by a single magnetic field line, a few
loops of which are indicated.
In fact the safety factor is as large as 4 at the maximum
radius in present toroidal devices.
The confinement geometry is further characterized by static potential are, in lowest order, constant on flux
a representative value of V6/Vt I, i. e. , the ratio of
I surfaces
major to minor toroidal circumference. This "aspect
ratio" is evidently larger than 1 and, in typical contemp- n, =n, (4) [1+0(5)], T. =T, (4) [1+0(5)j,
orary devices, as large as 5, (2.60)
I vol/I vol»1. (2. 52) E = —V C (e) [1+0(5)] .
Hence, as noted previously, the poloidal field is rela- Equations (2.29), (2.30), (2. 37), and (2. 38) then provide
tively small B~/Br «1.
I I
the following expressions for the first order perpendic-
ular flows
c. Flux-surface average
(nu~), =(mQ) 'nx(VP+enV4), (2. 61)
Most of the transport studies considered in this review
are nonlocal, in the sense that they relate a certain spa- q „=(5/2) (nt g) pnxVT (2. 62)
tial average of each particle flux, energy flux, etc. , to
the same average of the driving forces. The useful aver where the subscripts refer to the & ordering, i. e. ,
aging operation, called the flux-surface average and de- (nu&)„=0(5") .
noted by ( ), is defined to satisfy
These flows, which result from Larmor gyration, evi-
&B V6& =&V (Br)) =0, (2. 53) dently remain within the magnetic surface
for any function $(4', 0, g); and
(nu~), R =q~, R =0 . (2. 63)
(6& =5, (2. 54) According to Eq. (2. 20), the total first-order flows must
for any function P(4) which is constant on flux surfaces. be divergence free
In other words, ( ) is the normalized, radially local, V (nu}, = V q, =0 . (2. 64)
annihilator for B V. An explicit form, in terms of the
volume average over the infinitesimal volume At/' be- Equations (2. 61) —(2.64) can be satisfied only in the pres-
tween two neighboring flux surfaces, can be inferred ence of parallel "return" flows, which serve to maintain
from Eq. (2. 53) the presumed relatively slow variation of n, and T, .
In order to derive useful expressions for these parallel
(» fd'x &/=f
DV
d'x, (2. 55) motions, we note from Eq. (2. 63) that (nu, ), for example,
h, V
may be written as
(de/d» f=(u/ivy(& o:, (2. 56) (nu), =KB+K V/X VO (2. 65)
for some functions K and I6. Equation (2, 64) requires
where W is the area element on the flux-surface 0 which
can be any radial coordinate. g-'/' 8K/sg = -B VK,
Using Eq. (2. 55) and Gauss' theorem one can show that,
where g is the metric determinant of Eq. (2.43), here
for any vector F
specialized to the choice 4 =g. But Eq. (2. 61) implies
(V F) =(d/dV) (6 VV), (2. 5'7)
K = —(c/e) (dP/dg+en d4/dQ) g'/',
~
=(d4/dV) (d/d4) (dV/dC ) (r ~

V4). (2. 58)
which, according to Eq. (2.44), is independent of g.
It follows in particular that Hence, 8 V'K = 0, and the parallel flow is
(ve exÃ) =(v. (sx~)) =0. (2. 59) (nu»), =n (nu), = —(ngQ) 'I(dP/d&t&+end4/dP) +K(P)B,
(2. 66)
2. Equilibrium flow
where
Because of Eqs. (2. 32)-(2.36), and the ergodic property
of field lines, the densities, temperatures, and electro- I(g, 0, f) =g' V(&&XVO ~
B. (2.67)
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

A similar argument yields, for the parallel heat flow, is called the classical flux, and (Wimmel, 1970)
9')), = —(5/2) (mQ) 'IPdT/dy+I. (g) B . (2. 68) nuNc=- (mn)-'nx [v' (P —ip) —e(nE +zz c)] (2. 78)
While the functions K(P) and I(g) remain to be deter- is called the neoclassicaL flux. (This terminology, which
mined, Eqs. (2. 66) and (2. 68) are useful because all the is roughly conventional, assumes that both fluxes are
(0, f) dependence is given explicitly in terms of the field finally evaluated under the assumption of ordinary Cou-
geometr y. lomb collisions, as discussed in Sec. 1.)
Equation (2. 66) also provides the first-order current
J =K(HALI)B —c(dP/dg) g' Vrjr x VO 1. Classical diffusion
or To interpret the fldx nu„we may observe from Eq.
j~, = jC(g)B —c(I/B) dP/dP, (2. 70) (2, 61) that the gyration induced diamagnetic drifts for
oppositely charged species are in opposite directions.
where The resulting counter-streaming between ions and elec-
trons is accompanied by collisional friction,
If =+ e, IC. (2. 71) F~, = v„m, n, (u,„~ —u, , ) where v„. is the Coulomb colli-
sion frequency for electron-ion momentum exchange.
is a function of g only. Note that Eq. (2. 69) can also be (An additional contribution to F~, coming from the tem-
derived from Eq. (2. 40) and the quasi-neutrality condi- perature gradient, is irrelevant to the present, qualita-
tion tive, argument. ) Equation (2. 77) then yields a radial
flux nu, = —(v/Q)(mQ) '&P, and correspondingly a, clas-
(2. 72) sical diffusion coefficient (Rosenbluth and Kaufman,
1958)
3. F irst-order stress
Equation (2. 14) can be considered as the trace of the
more general moment
d'v mvv [Eq. (1.1)]. (2. 73)

D, = 2 v„.( /m)g, ' = v„. p,
where p, is the
T,
electron
', (2. 79)
gyroradius defined by Eq. (2.18).
Equation (2. 79) (which happens to be exact when T, =T,
has been derived for the case of electron diffusion, but
in fact in the case of a single ion species, it holds for
).
Without writing Eq. (2.73) any more explicitly, we note the ions as well. This is because collisional momentum
that it can be reduced to the form [see, for example, conservation, Eq. (2. 11), guarantees ambipolarity of
Chew, Goldberger and Low (1956)] the classical flux
11 x P + P x B = 0(5') .
Hence, in a coordinate system with one axis along B. the
g e, n, u„=0. (2. 80)
first-order stress must be diagonal. Notice that Eq. (2.61), and therefore Eq. (2. 79), re-
quire only
P =R~Pii + (~ —nn) P + 0(&'), (2. 74)
v&&Q,
where P, [ and P are, respectively, the parallel and per-
pendicular stresses. Equation (2.29) requires the stress i.e. , that the l. owest-order gyromotion be unperturbed
anisotropy to be at most first order in ~. by collisions. As shown in Sec. III, such nonrandom
This stress tensor describes a plasma in which the particle motion drives a non-Maxwellian perturbation
various directions of velocity in the plane perpendicular on the distribution function, f
—f~ = 0(&), and this per-
to B appear uniformly populated, when viewed on time turbation in turn drives F~.
scales long compared to the gyroperiod.
A similar argument yields, for the tensor R 2. Neoclassical transport
(2.75) In our definition the neoclassical flux has two sources,
P —ip and re +n «'.
The latter pertains mainly to mo-
D. Second-order floxes tion of the magnetic surfaces, and is discussed in Sec,
As suggested by Eqs. (2. 20) and (2.63), motion of par- II.E below. Here we consider the typically more impor-
ticles and energy across flux surfaces appears as a sec-
tant source, P —lp. It's form and origin depend upon the
ond-order process. While closed form expressions for size of the collision frequency: ahvays assuming v «Q,
the radial particle and energy fluxes can be obtained only we must also specify the relative magnitudes of v and ~.
In the collisional regime
by solving the kinetic equation, useful information is
nonetheless available at the fluid level.
Consider first the particle flux. Using Eqs. (2.37) and
(2.61), we may write the stress anisotropy is kept small by collisional ran-
domization,
nu~ =nu» +nu, +nuNc+ 0(&'), (2. 76)
(2.81)
where
but the mean free path is short enough to allow pressure
— '~xp
~u, = —(m~) (2. 77) variation
I-= o(5~/~), (2.82) ond is related to conservation of angular momentum,

and pertains to the form of the second order fluxes.
within the magnetic surface; indeed, in the nonuniform
magnetic field of a toroidal confinement system, such
't. Ampere's law
variation is required by the parallel equilibrium flows
of Eqs. (2.66) —(2.68) (Pfirsch and Schliiter, 1962). The We may assume that g and 0 vary orthogonally to the
resulting diamagnetic drift, (mA) nx V(P -P), is radial- ignorable coordinate g, whence
ly outward, and contributes to nuNc a particle flux, often
R'Vg =g'i'Vgx VQ, (2.86)
called the Pfirsch-Schliiter flux, which exceeds classi-
cal diffusion by a factor of roughly q'. where
An alternate explanation for Pfirsch-Schluter trans-
port, in terms of VB-drifts superimposed on the sto-
chastic motion of collision-dominated guiding centers, denotes the major radius, i.e. , the distance from the
is discussed in Sec. III, and the complete collisional axis of symmetry. From Eq. (2.67) we see that RVr B
transport problem for a torus is considered in Sec. IV. = I/R, so that Eq. (2.48) becomes
In collisionless regimes (v« ~), the particles move
freely along field lines to maintain P =P, but an even B =IV g+VgxV$. (2.87)
larger enhancement of diffusion results from the stress Now consider Ampere's law, Eq. (2.42). The radial
anisotropy. The underlying mechanism which supports component requires
P„—P = 0(6) is again the VB-drift, which in this case
perturbs fusee particle motion, as discussed in Sec. III. BI/Be =0, (2. 88)
The kinetic theory appropriate to collisionless regimes i. e. , that I is a function of g only; the resulting simpli-
is presented in Sec. V. fication of Eqs. (2.66) —(2.68) and (2. 87) is significant.
Notice that in both collision frequency regimes nuNC The Poloidal component relates I(g} to the function K(g)
can be related to magnetic field inhomogeneity. Thus in of Eq. (2. 71)
a uniform system (not a confinement system! ), it may
be assumed that dI/dq = —(4 v/c)K(g) . (2.89)
P- lp =nE+nV4=0, Finally, the toroidal component of Ampere's law can be
reduced to the form (Grad and Rubin, 1958; Laing,
and only classical transport deed by present. An obvious et al. , 1959; Shafranov, 1958)
inference would seem to be that neoclassical transport
R'V (R 'Vg) = IdI/dg —4—mR'dI'/dg. (2.90)
vanishes in the infinite aspect ratio limit, in which a
torus becomes a straight cylinder. However, this turns This relation is frequently used to determine the equilib-
out-to be correct only if the safety factor q also vanishes rium flux surface geometry, g(x).
in the limit. Thus, even for very large aspect ratio,
neoclassical effects remain strong, so long as Eq. (2. 51) 2. Second-order fluxes
holds.
Similar comments apply to the energy flux. Thus Eq. In the flux surface averages of the even moment equa-
(2. 38) may be written as tions, the particle and energy fluxes enter only through
their averaged, radial components, (nu Vg) and
=Qi~+Q. +Q~c+ o(6')
Q~ (2.83) (Q Vg), respectively [recall Eq. (2. 57)]. We could com-
where Q, =q, + (5/2)Pu, [cf. Eqs. (2. 30) and (2.62)j, pute these averages for the axisymmetric case by spe-
and cializing our previous formulae, Eqs. (2. 76) and (2.83),
but it is simpler to proceed directly from the moment
Q, ==—Q 'nxG, (2.84) equations, Eqs. (2.15) and (2. 16) (Hazeltine, 1975).
Consider first the particle flux. Conservation of angu-
Q NC =—0 'nx V ~ R —
—5 p
2 m
—
Ti —
5—e PB
(PE+PV4) lar momentum suggests that we multiply Eq. (2;15) by
(c/e)R'Vg and perform the average; observe that
(2.85)
(R2Vg V P) =(V (R'Vg P}) =
~
dy
(P') (2.91)
are the classical and neoclassical contributions, re-
where
spectively.
F ~ VV = O(52), (2. 92)
E. Axisymmetiic systems and we have used Eqs. (2.57) and (2. 74). The remaining
The transport theory for a rigorously axisymmetric terms in Eq. (2.15) yield simply
torus is relatively complete, not only because of its
(nu Vg) = —(c/e) (R2Vg (F + enE)) + O(5') . (2. 93)
comparative theoretical simplicity, but also because this
is the more relevant case: asymmetry is purposefully This expression contains both classical and neoclassi-
minimized in the design of most present confinement cal contributions. These may be distinguished by noting
systems. Axisymmetry provides essentially two sources from Eq. (2.77) that
of simplification in. our previous formulae. The first is
&nu. . Vy& =-(c/e)&R'Vg F ), (2. 94)
related to the axisymmetric version of Ampere's law,
and pertains mainly to the plasma equilibrium. The sec- and therefore that

(nu„c V() = —(c/e)(R'V

~
t ~
(Fj, + enE)) . (2. 95) g =-RA. r, (2. 105)
Thus (aside from the Er =Rang E terms, which shall be where A. ~—= A&g ~ A is the toroidal component of the vec-
interpreted later), the classical and neoclassical fluxes tor potential. Note that with this choice g vanishes not
are closely analogous: the first is driven by perpen- on the magnetic axis, as Eq. (2.45) would suggest, but
dicular friction just as the second is driven by parallel rather on the symmetry axis. In fact RA~ measures the
friction. The more fundamental analogy, between the poloidal flux ou»i«a given flux surface. This circum-
gyromotion giving classical transport and the guiding stance has no effect on our previous analysis, which in-
center motion giving neoclassical transport, is con- volved only the spatial dependence of P.
sidered in Sec. III. The velocity u, of a flux surface may be defined by
Notice that the parallel component of Eq. (2.15), with
Bg/Bt+u, ~
Vg =0, (2.106)
Eq. (2. 74), requires
since only the radial flux surface motion is physically
Ep+ en'(( =n VPg —(P(i —P )n VB/It
A A
(2. 96)
s ignif icant. The relation
In this way, the stress anisotropy and poloidal pressure
u, . Vg = cRFr— (2.107)
variation, which were previously emphasized, enter into
Eq. (2. 95). In fact, using Eq. (2. 96) and the relations provides a useful interpretation of the E~ term in the
radial particle flux. Thus Eq. (2. 93) may be written as
nx V ~
P =nx VP, +(P„—P~)nx (n V)n, (2. 97)
(n(u —u, ) Vq) = —(c/e)(RFr) + 0(&'),
~
(2.108)
n XE = IF~~ +R—
R Vg ' E, (2. 98)
and we see that radial diffusion, relative to a poloidal
the equivalence of Eqs. (2. 78) and (2. 95) can straight-
flux surface, is proportional to the friction force.
forwardly be demonstrated (Bernstein, 1974). We omit
It is instructive to consider a third version of Eq.
the details.
(2. 93). If we use Eq. (2. 98) to express the toroidal elec-
Note also that in an axisymmetric system, collisional
tric field RVg E = —c 'RVg. BA/Bt in terms of its com-
momentum c onser vation guar ante es ambipolar ity of the
ponents perpendicular and parallel to B, we obtain
total second-order particle flux (Kovrizhnikh, 1969;
Rutherford, 1970) (nu ~
vg) = (vg nB 'n x BA/Bt)
+I(nA 'n BA/Bt) —(c/e)(RFr) . (2. 109)
g e, (n.u, ~
Vg ) = 0; (2. 99)
1«his f»m the dissipationless flux (Fr =0) is most eas-
compare Eq. (2.80). ily understood. Note that a lowest-order equilibrium
Finally, we consider the energy flux. The same mani- without friction can exist only if n BA/Bt also vanishes,
pulations used to derive Eq. (2.93) yield, when applied since otherwise charged particles would be accelerated
to Eq. (2. 16), the expression indefinitely. Hence, in the limit of no dissipation, only
the first term of Eq. (2. 109), giving the inductive Ex 8
(q Vg) = —(c/e)(R'Vg (mG+5ePE/2)) + 0(&'),
~ ~
drift, survives, and Eq. (2. 109) becomes the statement

(2.100) of "frozen" field lines, as in ideal magnetohydrodynam-
where G is given by Eq. (2. 10). The classical and neo- ics.
classical contributions are, respectively, With dissipation, on the other hand, Eq. (2. 98) shows
that the velocity u, Vg/~ Vg~= cFr/B~ is typic—
~
ally much
(q, Vy) = (c/e)(R'-Vg mG, ), (2. 101) faster than an ordinary E x B drift (Klima, 1965).
(q„Vy) =-(c/e)(R'Vg (mC, +5PE/2)) . (2.102) Similar remarks pertain to the energy flux of Eq.
(2. 100), which may be written in the form
3. Faraday's law ((q —(5/2)pu, ) Vy) = —(c/e)(R'VK mG)+ 0(&') .
~ ~
Faraday s law (2.110)

VxE=-c 'BB/Bt, (2.103)
F. Entropy and heat production
is important primarily for a tokamak plasma, in which
the poloidal magnetic field, being supported by plasma The lowest-order entroPy den&ity is defined, at the
current, can change on the diffusion time scale. Hence fluid level, by
the consequences of Eq. (2. 103) have been studied ex- s. = ln(T~'/n. )
tensively only in axisymmetric geometry.
The poloidal and toroidal components of Faraday's (we suppress the over-bars: T, =T, , etc. ). Since the
law are needed to describe magnetic field diffusion, and entropy flux is n, s, u, +q, /T„ the rate of collisional en-
therefore to obtain a closed set of transport equations; tropy production is given by
this matter is considered in Sec. VII. Here we consider 0, =—(B/Bt)n, s, +V ~
(n, s, u, yq, /T, ) . (2.111)
only some simple consequences of the radial component.
From Vg VxE =B VRZr and Vg BB/Bt = —B VBg/Bt
~ It can be said that the object of transport theory is a suf-
we have B. V (cRFr —Bg/Bt) =0. We may therefore take ficiently explicit evaluation of 0, . A more useful, re-
lated quantity is the rate of heat production
Bg/Bt =cREr, (2. 104)
ol
Rev. IVIod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

F. L. Hlnton and R. D. Hazeltlne: Theory of plasma transport 253
After substituting the conservation laws, Eqs. (2.13) and Note that in Eq. (3.1) we measure p, in a fixed reference
(2. 14), into Eq. (2. 111), and using Eq. (2. 30), we obtain frame, rather than in one moving with the E x B drift.
This reflects our choice of the drift ordering, Eq. (2. 21),
e, =-u, VP, /T, —q, VT, /T', rather than the magnetohydrodynamical ordering, cE/II
+ Q, /T. +u. (F, + e.n, E)/T.
~
. (2.112) '
vg„. Note al s o that the dr if t order ing, with Far aday s
law, requires only d lnB/dt = O(«u); but the stronger
Therefore, using Eqs. (2. 11) and (2. 12), we have
assumption
~ =-gfu, VP, +q, VT/T I+5 E. (2.113) d lnB/dt = 0(&'cu)
a
which is implied by Eq. (2.20), is more relevant to
In this form, the irreversible nature of ~ is apparent:
transport theory, and is adopted here.
Eq. (2. 113) has the characteristic form of a sum of The equation of motion
products of forces (VP„VT,/T„E) and fluxes (u„q„T).
Next, we specialize to an axisymmetric system, and
consider the flux-surface average of &. After making [E (x, I ) + c ' v B (x, I)] && (3.6)
use of Eqs. (2. 69), (2.86), (2. 89), and (2. 93), we obtain
can be written in terms of p, , e, and &, with the result
{K) = —g((q, Vg) d lnT. /dP+ (c/e, ){RIr. )n. 'dp. /dy} (3.7)
a
—(e/4~){E a}dI/dy. (2. 114)
dc e d4
Here, the first term requires no interpretation. The (3.8)
second term involves the radial particle flux, relative
to the moving poloidal flux surface, as shown by Eq.
(2. 108). To understand the last term of Eq. (2. 114), note
=Q+e, . +, +XV
Vj
v~,
dt
—
m
E, (3 9)
that the Poynting flux relative to the poloidal flux sur- where, on the right-hand sides, d/dt=— s/st+v V. ~
face is given by (c/4v)[E + c 'u, B] B, wher e u, is the

&& &&
Equations describing the motion of the guiding centey.
flux surface velocity of Eq. (2. 106). Averaging the radi- (g. c.) are obtained by averaging Eqs. (3.6) —(3.9) over a
al component over a flux surface, and using Eq. (2. 107), gyroperiod. 2 Vfe first define the instantaneous g. c. posi-
we obtain tion R, of a particle at the point x, by
(c/4n){[(E+c 'u, &B)xB] Vy) =(cl/4m)(E~~II) .
~
(3.10)
(2.116) where p is the gyroradius vector
Hence the last term of Eq. (2.114) is simply the product p =Bxvi/Q . (3.11)
of the relative Poynting flux and its corresponding
"force, " d lnl/d( .
Thus, the electric field enters our final results only dR ~ ctp
through (E~~B} and, implicitly, through u, Vg = cREr. — dt (3 12)
~
dt
It shall be seen in later sections that this circumstance
is characteristic of an axisymmetric confinement sys- Next, the gyrophase average of any function f is defined
tem (even when slightly different choices of fluxes and by
forces are found more convenient}. Note in particular
that the electrostatic potential does not appear, because f $(&t/2~)f, = (3.13)
of Eq. (2.53).
the integral being performed at constant p. , e, x, t. The
III. GUIDING CENTER EQUATIONS g. c. velocity is givenby the average of Eq. (3.12),
v~, = dR/dt =v, —dp/—dt. (3.14)

A. Basic formalism i
For small gyroradius, the particle velocity, v =v~~+v, After substituting Eq. (3.11}into Eq. {3.14), and using
is most conveniently parametrized in terms of the mag- Eqs. {3.7) —(3.9), we find
netic moment —
—n(v()+ +vg, (3.16)
vgc v())
g = v'/2a, where
the energy v I) = (v~/2Q) n ' V x n, (3.16)
e = v'/2+e4/I, (3.2)
and the gyrophase angle, v~ =cE &n/II+n&& (/J VR+ v~~&z V~Ã+ V~~ Bn/at)/Q (3.17)
=-tan '(v e, /v e, ),
g
~ ~
(3.3) 2A lucid treatment of the averaging is presented by Banos
where the unit vectors e, and e, are chosen to make (1967) who however, uses the magnetohydrodynamical order-
(n, , e„e,) a right-handed orthogonal triplet at each point. ing. More extensive treatments of the g. c. theory Inay be
Thus found in, for example, Northrop (1963) Hastie et al. (1967),
and Morosov and Solov'ev (1966); the last of these is most
v = (2pB)'~'[e, cosf —e, sing]. (3.4) relevant to transport theory.

are, respectively, the parallel and perpendicular g. c. formally similar to Eq. (3.18). To pursue this analogy,
drifts. The first term of Eq. (3.17) is the familiar E x B one presumes the existence of a function 4~(x, p, , e)
drift, the second term is called the gradient-B drift, s atisf y ing
and the third term is called the curvature drift. The
third and fourth terms together comprise the "accelera-
Bg. VC'~ =0, (3.28)
tion drift, " in the terminology of Northrop (1963). The analogously to 8 V4 =0. The surfaces corresponding
various perpendicular drifts may be understood in terms to fixed values of p, , e, and 4 „are called drift surfaces;
of distortions of the gyro-orbit; see, for example, Eq. (3.28) states that the first order g. c. motion is con-
Rosenbluth and I ongmire (1957). fined to a single drift surface, just as the zeroth-order
Equations (3.15)—(3.17) are exact. The small & as- motion is confined to a single flux surface.
sumption enters in the statement that when viewed on While the family of trajectories 8+(p. , e) are generally
time scales long compared to the gyroperiod, the exact well-defined, the existence of drift surfaces ean be
particle trajectory may be approximated by v, . guaranteed only for confinement geometries possessing
Thus the lowe st- order g. c. mot ion consists of a appropriate symmetry. Then 4+ appears as the dynami-
streaming along the magnetic field lines. cal invariant, in a g. c. Lagrangian sense, corresponding
to the ignorable coordinate (Morosov and Solev'ev,
vg, =nv I, [1+ O(&)], (3.18)
1966). In an axisymmetric toroidal system, for exam-
where ple, 4+ is realized as the gyrophase-averaged, canoni-
v II = ~[2 (e —p. B —e 4'/m) p~' (3.1 9)
.
cal angular momentum. We consider this case in further
detail.
In a nonuniform field, even this motion displays inter-
esting features, because Eqs. (3.7) and (3.8) imply C. Axisymrnetric systems
dy/dt =-(Iu, /B) aB/at, (3.20) The predominant magnetic field variation in an axisym-
dc/dt =(e/m)[a4/at — c 'vIIn aA/at], (3.21) metric (or nearly axisymmetric) toroidal system re-
sults from
i.e. , that the averaged changes in and e are relatively jU,
small. Hence a particle with sufficiently large perpen- (3.29)

dicular energy will be "trapped" — confined to regions where R is the major radius [cf. Eq. (2.87)].
of the magnetic surface in which p. B(x) &e —eC'(x)/m. With regard to the zeroth-order g. c. motion, Eq.
The first-order drift terms ean be conveniently sim- (3.29) implies that trapped particles reside mainly in
plified, for the important case of small I6=8wP/B'. As- the outer (larger R) regions of the torus. With regard
suming P = O(~) we find from Ampere's law and Eq. (2.40) to the fir st-order motion, it implies that the drift due to
that magnetic field inhomogeneity is approximately vertical:
n Vn —V~B/B = 4 vVP /B2 = O(P), (3.22) positively (negatively) charged particles drift down-
wards (upwards), as can be seen from Eq. (3.17). These
so that the curvature and &B drifts may be combined. facts determine the character of g. c. orbits in a torus.
Similarly, n Vxn = O(I3), assuming VII/d~ -1. Finally,
~ Notice in particular that when projected onto the (4', 8)-
treating the time derivatives in Eq. (3.17) as second plane, the orbits appear to be closed, as shown in Fig.
order, and recalling from Eq. (2. 31) that the electric 2. (Morosov and Solov'ev, 1966; Berk and Galeev,
field is mainly electrostatic, we find that Eq. (3.17) may 1967). The net radial drift, after one bounce (trapped
be written as particle), or one poloidal circuit around the magnetic
axis (untrapped particle), is zero, because in the pres-
v„=nvII+vu+ O(5'), (3.23) ence of 8~ ~ 0, the g. c.'s lowest-order motion causes it
where to spend equal times above the magnetic axis (where an
—— nxV(vII/O) electron, say, drifts radially outward) and below the
v~ vII . (3.24) magnetic axis (where an electron drifts inward).
Here the gradient is to be performed at constant p. and The collisionless orbits remain within a fixed distance
e, using Eq. (3.19). This result was apparently first of a single flux surface essentially because they are
obtained by Alfven (1950). confined to surfaces of constant canonical angular mo-
mentum, A'Vg (mv+eA/c). Recalling Eq. (2.105), we
B. Drift surfaces may write this constraint as
Following Morosov and Solov'ev (1966), we may in- P —cmv r R/e = const. , (3.30)
troduce the modified vector potential where v~ =A&P v is the toroidal velocity. A gyrophase
A~ =A+ v, I 8/0, (3.25) average provides the useful drift surface label
with corresponding f ield 4'+ =g —IvII/0+0(&'), (3.31)
Bg —V &&Ay. (3.26) where I is defined by Eq. (2.87), and we have recalled
Eq. (3.18).
Then Eq. (3.23) becomes (with the consistent neglect of .
Now consider the equation v~, V4~ =0, which defines
small P corrections)
the drift surface. The first order terms come from
vgc (B4/B)vll I (3,27) vI, n. V+~ and vo Vg; we find
Rev. IV!od. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

vn ~
Vy = I v ~ ~ V(v~~/Q)+ 0(&') .
~~
(3.32) '+ell —untrapped orbit
~ VllO ~O~
The agreement between this expression, which holds for
any P, and the axisymmetric version of Eq. (3.24), which Magnetic surface
assumes P = 0(&), may seem surprising. But Eq. (3.24)
omits only a term proportional to n&& VP, as shown by
Eq. (3.22), and axisymmetry implies Vg nx VP
In VP = 0(6), for any P, as noted in Eq. (2. 35).
-~
ell- trapped orbits:
A more interesting result follows from the exact in-
variant of Eq. (3.30): { Vila & o~
~ Vila»~
dg/dt = (cm/e) d(Rv r)/dt, (3.33)
where the derivative is taken along the particle trajec-
tory. Considering only the trapped particles, we inte- FIG. 2. Trapped and untrapped guiding center orbits, in an
grate Eq. (3.33) between two successive times t, and t, axisymmetric system, projected onto a constant-& plane. The
at which ~ ~ vanishes, and obtain dashed line is the projection of the magnetic surface to which
each orbit shown is tangent; the parallel velocity at the posi-
tion of that magnetic surface is labeled v()p, The signs indi-
g(t, ) —y(t, ) = (sq/~t+v Vq)(t, —t, ) =0, (3.34) . cated for v correspond to a positively charged particle,
~~0
when the toroidal magnetic field and current are in the direc-
where the overbar denotes an orbital average. Equation tion out of the paper. The designations "well-untrapped" and
(2.106) then provides the result "well-trapped" refer to the cases (v~~o && ~v(DoB/B)' and )
)v~~&
~
«v ~o(DB/B)t'~, respectively, while "marginally
v cREr ~—
Vg =u, Vg = (3.35) trapped" refers to the case )v~~0 ] R v~o(AB/B)'~ .
Hence, the trapped particles remain, on the average,

tied to the poloidal flux surface, even as this surface ar = (a, /B, )a(v~~/Q),
moves in response to toroidal electric fields. The re-
sulting cEr/B~ inward motion ("trapped particle pinch —Q~ (Av () + v () 0/R) ~
effect"), which bears significantly on transport in a where Q~ =eB~/mc is the poloidal gyrofrequency, bv, ~
tokamak, was discovered by Ware (1970) and indepen- is to be determined from Eq. (3.19), and we have ap-
dently by Galeev (1971). proximated, for large aspect ratio
In Sec. II we pointed out that, without collisions, the
induced, parallel electric field must be presumed to ~t II/ai=t R/R =a/R«1, (3.37)
vanish [cf. the discussion concerning Eq. (2. 109)]. In where a is the minor radius of the torus. Equation
this case the velocity u, coincides with an E &&B drift in (3.36) further simplifies in the following two regions of
the induced electric field [recall Eq. (2. 98}], and Eq. phase space. (i) For the far untrapped particles with
(3.35) appears trivial. It is not trivial because it re- small p. , Eq. (3.19) yields ~Av~~~ vthQ/R, whence
mains approximately correct in the presence of colli-
sions, when. u, is typically much faster than the E &B zr = p~(a/R), v~ «v~~, (3.38)
drift, provided the collision frequency is sufficiently where p~ is the gyroradius in the poloidal field. (ii} For
small (Rutherford, et at. , 1970). This surprising cir- the trapped and nearly trapped particles we find 4m~~
cumstance can be thoroughly explained only from the —vth(a/R)'I' and therefore
kinetic considerations of Sec. V. However, a partial
explanation is possible here. Note first that, when act- ar = p~(a/R)'/' v —v . (3.39)
ing on the untrapped particles, the (parallel components
of the) accelerating toroidal electric field and deceler- Hence these particles make the largest excursions.
That the g.c. excursion is proportional to p~, rather than
ating toroidal friction force tend to balance. Untrapped
particles therefore experience, roughly, only the rela- p, was first noted by Tamm (1 959).
The trapped particle g. c. orbits have been named
tively slow E&&B drift; see Eq. (2.109). For the trapped
banana orbits (Furth and Rosenbluth, 1969), for reasons
particles, on the other hand, the parallel electric field,
evident from Fig. 2, and the trapped (or nearly trapped)
which always acts in the same direction, cannot be ba-
lanced by the parallel friction force, which changes
particle excursion width
direction each time the trapped particle is reflected. b. , = p~(a/R)'/' (3.40)
The kinetic analysis of Sec. V shows that for these par-
ticles the effect of friction, when averaged over the is called the banana width.
collisionless orbit, is so small that Eq. (3.35) remains
D. Dif fusion
roughly valid.
Equation (3.31) may be used to estimate the radial ex- The preceding discussion neglects the microscopic
cursion of a g. c. from a given flux surface. I, et 6 de- f Coulomb interaction between particles. Such "colli-
note the change in f
which occurs on the lowest-order sions" change each particle's energy and magnetic mo-
orbit. Then A4~ =0 implies that the poloidal flux change ment, causing diffusion in both velocity- and coordinate-
associated with the excursion is A/ =Id, (v~~/Q); the ex- space. As noted in Sec. II, the character of this diffu-
cursion in minor radius, r, is Ar =b. g/~VQ~ or sion depends upon the size of the collision frequency.
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1S76

1. Collisional regime where AB measures the field variation which causes

In. the collision frequency range Q +», » ~, free par-
the trapping, and we have noted, from Eq. (3.19), that
the trapped particle region in velocity space is described
ticle motion occurs only on the short time-scale of the
by b, O =— (b. B/B)''; see Fig. 3.
gyroperiod. After a time v, ', before a particle has
In other words, a trapped particle remains on a given
traversed any appreciable distance along the field line
about which it is gyrating, the particle's p. and & will
collisionless orbit only for a time (orbit correlation
have diffused sufficiently for an effective 90 scattering.
time) v, ', so that trapped particle orbits are actually
This results in a random perpendicular displacement
traversed only when
of the g. c. orbit by a distance p. The classical diffusion Vg & (dg, (3.47)
coefficient given by Eq. (2, 79) then follows from the
where m, is the bounce frequency of the collisionless
general random walk formula
trapped particle motion, i.e. , the trapped particle veloc-
D = (collision frequency) x (step-size)'. (3.41) ity (b, B/B)'~'v, „divided by the connection length
As noted previously, classical transport occurs in. all co~ = (AB/B)'~' v, „/qR . (3.46)
co11ision-frequency regimes.
Similarly, the form of the untrapped orbits is pertinent
Qf course the ~-time-scale free particle orbits con-
only if
sidered previously are not relevant in the collisional
regime, in which the g. c. motion is predominantly sto- V~&COz q (3.49)
chastic. However, the &co-time-scale g. c. drift remains where
significant, in that the &B forces, like an electric field
in a resistive medium, aet to superimpose an overall cor = vth/qR (3.50)
drift motion on the g. e. random walk. To see how this is the untrapped particle transit frequency.
drift leads to spatial diffusion, recall that it is radially It follows that in the case AB«R, as in a large as-
inward for an electron (for example) in the lower half of pect-ratio torus, two small-collision-frequency regimes
the torus, and radially outward for an electron in the may be distinguished (Galeev and Sagdeev, 1968): the
upper half. Let T be the time for a g. c. to diffuse along banana, or collisionless regime, in which
a field line, half way around the magnetic axis; the g. c.
then reverses the direction of its mean drift after each v, /u) r & (aB/B)'~', (3.51)
interval T, and thus performs a radial random walk with and the plateau, or intermediate regime, in which
step-size UD~ and effective collision frequency 7 . The
resulting diffusion coefficient is (~B/B)~~~ & (v, /cu ) &1 . (s. 52)
—O~T. In certain geometries, a more detailed classification
D (3.42)
can be useful. For example, in a stellerator, there are
Vfe may estimate the diffusion time, 7, by noting that two measures of 4B, due, respectively, to the helical
the random walk along the field lines is characterized and toroida1. field perturbations. Furthermore, some
by a step-size v, „/v, , the classical mean free path. stellerator studies (Galeev, et a/. , 1969) have con-
Hence, after a time t, the g. c. will have diffused a dis- sidered regimes o= even smaller collision frequency, in
tance (u, „/v, )(v, t)~'; it will have traversed the magnetic which Bv,/b, B is comparable to the toroidal drift fre-
axis when this distance is comparable to the "connection quency ~D = && vo, associated with the periodic motion
~
length" qR (where q is the safety factor and R the major of trapped banana orbits (superbanana diffusion). How-
toroidal radius). Therefore q'R' = (v,'„/v, )i; with ever, with the neglect of such extremely collisionless
u~ = pu, „/R, Eq. (3.42) provides the Pfirsch —Schliiter effects, the classification outlined above is quite gen. —
coefficient erally adequate [see, for example, Connor and Hastie
D q2p2 p q2D (3.43) (1974)] .
We now estimate (neoclassical) diffusion coefficients
for these two regimes, specializing first to the axisym-
2. Col l I sl on I ess reg I m Bs metric, large aspect ratio case.
In the banana regime, the dominant contribution to
Let 8 be the pitch angle of the gyro-orbit
diffusion comes from the trapped and nearly trapped
sin'0 = 2pB/u'. (3.44) particles, whose g. e. 's make the largest radial exeur-
In a random walk description, the change in 6 due to
sions. In Fig. 4 we show two electron orbits, both of
which pass through the point E'. (Although banana orbits
Coulomb scattering is proportional to the square-root of
the time. Since the classical collision frequency, v, ,
are depicted, the following argument applies equally to
nearly trapped particles with small v~~. ) Because the
pertains to roughly 90 changes in 0, the collision fre-
orbits are being traversed in opposite directions, one
quency for some arbitrary change AO is
lies inside the indicated flux surface and the other lies
(3.45) outside. It is clear that a reversal of the g. c. parallel
For example, the collision frequency for scattering a velocity at I' induces a radial step of the orbit center by
a distance -~~. From Fig. 3, we see that pitch angle
diffusion by as little as Ae = (a/R)' ' is sufficient for
magnetically trapped particle onto an untrapped orbit is
roughly
such reversals, which therefore occur with frequency
v, = (B/aB) v„ (3.46) Hence the trapped particle diffusion coefficient is
P~ev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

F. L. Hinton and R. l3. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport 257
v, 6', ; since trapped particles comprise a fraction

(a/R)'~' of all the particles, the banana. diffusion coeffi-
cient is roughly
68- {z er B) /2
D = (a/R)''v a'
(~/R )1/2 p p2 (3.53)
where the second form follows from Eqs. (3.40) and
(3.46). The banana coefficient exceeds D, by as much as
two orders of magnitude in typical tokamak devices, be-
cause p~» p. FIG. 3. Trapped and untrapped regions of velocity space, in
In the plateau regime, collisions are too frequent for terms of the parallel (v!!) and perpendicular (vj} velocities.
undisturbed banana motion, but the collisionless g. c. The trapped region is shaded; it occupies the region outside
of a cone whose angle depends upon the field variation,
motion of particles with smaLL v, ! remains significant. as indica, ted.
Consider the class of "resonant" particles with v!!& v„
where the speed uo is to be determined (Stringer, 1970).
From Eq. (3.45), the effective collision frequency for v~/v„, and they comprise a fraction (b/R)'~' of al]. the
particles. Hence our usual argument yields the diffu-
scattering particles out of this class is roughly sion coefficient
v(v, ) = (v, „/v, )'v, . (3. 54)
(3.58)
v(v, ) & v~~/qR, (3.55)
appropriate to the banana regime
then resonant particles will suffer effective collisions
before they are able to sample upper and lower halves
of the torus. The uncompensated radial drift of such in an asymmetric system (Gibson and Mason, 1969;
particles, between effective collisions, leads to a ran- Galeev, et al. , 1969; Frieman, 1970; Hazeltine and
dom walk with step-size v~/u(U, ). The corresponding Rosenbluth, 1972; Connor and Hastie, 1974). As re-
diffusion coefficient is marked previously, diffusion across the asymmetrical
(3.56) confining field of a stellerator is more complicated, in
that several low collision frequency regimes can be dis-
since only a fraction v, /u, „of all the particles are reso- tinguished. A detailed discussion of g. c. orbits and dif-
nant in this sense. Finally, Eqs. (3.54) and (3.55) imply fusion in stellerator geometry may be found in the re-
u, /qR = v, (v, „/v )2, so that Eq. (3.56) reduces to the view of Kadomtsev and Pogutse (1971), and in the re-
plateau diffusion coefficient view of Galeev and Sagdeev (1975).
A serious disadvantage of asymmetry, with regard to
Dp = U~/(dr (3.57)
transport in a high temperature, nearly collisionless
so-called because it it independent of v, . plasma, is evident from the &, ' behavior of D~.
In experimentally realistic geometries true plateau
behavior does not occur, because the necessary inequal- E. DISCI'lbUtlQA fUAGtlOA
ities, (3.52), cannot simultaneously be satisfied very
strongly unless the aspect ratio is extremely large. 1. Velocity coordinates
Thus, for typical aspect ratios, the diffusion coefficient It is generally convenient to express the distribution
increases monotonically with &, and only a mild flat- function, f, in terms of the velocity variables (p. , e, &),
tening is observed in the regime of Eq. (3.52) (Hinton defined by Eqs. (3.1)-(3.4). Some technical properties
and Rosenbluth, 1973). The plateau argument nonethe-
of the transformation v- (p. , e, g) are considered here.
less provides a useful estimate for this regime. First note that the variables (g, e, g) do not determine
3. Asymmetry
magnetic field perturbation 5(&) «R
1
An asymmetrizing
l
has no effect on the form of the diffusion coefficients, I flux
as estimated above, for the collisional or plateau re- I surface
gimes. However the banana formula, Eq. (3.53), depends l
upon the periodic nature of the collisionless orbits, !
which pertains only in the axisymmetric case. In gener-
symmetry
al, we must consider particles trapped by local maxima
of b. Because the g. c. orbits of such "localized" parti-
cles (Gibson and Mason, 1969) may be confined to the
upper or lower halves of the torus, they drift away from FIG. 4. Two banana orbits, both of which pass through the
the magnetic surface, between effective collisions, in. a same point, &, on a flux surface, but which differ in the di-
manner similar to resonant particles in the plateau re- rection in which they are being traversed, at H. A small-
gime. The effective collision frequency for localized angle collision at 2, .which causes a change in the sign of v!!,
particles is v~ = (R/b)v„ their step-size is roughly leads to a radial step of the orbit center.

v uniquely, because the sign of v~~ is not specified [cf. surface, i.e. , ~, depends only on 4. Explicitly,
Eq. (3, 19)]. One must therefore introduce the additional, (3.67)
discrete variable
where R is the smallest distance between the sym-
(3.69)
metry axis and the flux surface under consideration. The
Evidently v is a constant of the motion for untrapped par- size of the trapped region still depends upon position,
ticles, but not for trapped particles, whose parallel through A. . The bounce surface, S~(A), consists of points
velocities change sign at each "bounce. " The signifi- . such that
cance of this fact can be appreciated after the trapped
R =XI . (s.66)
and untrapped regions of velocity space have been more
explic itly distinguished. Finally, we take note of the Jacobians for the two
In general, the distinction between trapped and un- velocity- coordinate systems prese nted above:
trapped regions must be made relatively to a specific
field line, about which a particle with given (p, , e) is d v=B djLdcdg Ull (s.69)
gyrating. (The gyrophase f is clearly irrelevant to ques- G
tions of trapping. ) If q„or c —p, B(x) —eC'(x)/m, can vanish where the integration domain is given by eC'/m & e &~,
for points x on a chosen field line, then p. and e are in 0& p. & (e —eC/m)/B; and
tQe trapped region relative to that field line. The points
at which oil vanishes will be called bounce points, and d'v =Bg dA. dude (3.70)
denoted by x, . The set of all bounce points, correspond-
ing to different field lines but to the same values of p, where the integration domain is given by 0 & u & ~,
and c, is called the bounce surface and denoted by 0&A. &A .
S, (p. , e) —
= (xl e —p, B(x) = e4 (x)/m}. (s. 60)
f
Since the value of at points x, on the bounce surface 2. Gyrophase dependence
measures the number of particles being reflected at x„
we must have
We now consider the dependence of upon the gyro- f
phase angle g. Recalling the gyrophase average of Eq.
f(x„p., e, v=+1)= f(x~, p, , e, (x= —1), (s.61) (3.13), we define a function by f
for all (p, , c) in trapped regions. Equation (3.61) may be f(x, p, e, g, t) = f(x, p, , e, t)+ f(x, p. , e, g, t) . (3.71)
considered as a boundary condition, in the sense that,
for fixed p. and e, the bounce surface constitutes a An approximate expression for is easily derived. We f
boundary of the domain of definition of f.
Of course the
note that, in the presence of rapid gyration, can satis- f
fy the assumed orderings,
v dependence of f
is not constrained in untrapped re-
gions. S lnf/St «0, lV infl«p-', (3. 72)
We have already noted [Eq. (2. 36)] that the electro-
only if it is nearly constant on the gyrotrajectory
static potential is nearly constant along B. For particles
with large ionic charge, g»1, the variation of potential f(x, p, &, K, t) =a(x —p(K), p. , &, t),
erterI, y along field lines remains important (Hazeltine,
where x —p =R, the position of the g. c., and p is given by
et al. , 1974), but more typically,
Eq. (3.11). A first-order Taylor expansion of the func-
v„V(e@/m) «vg, V(p, B) . ~
(s.62) tion g provides f
=g(x, p, , e, t) and =-p V But f ~
f. f
must be nearly Maxwellian, so we have
In this case the kinetic energy is a lowest-order con-
stant of the motion, and the variables (&, w, r), where f, = p'Vfu+O(6— '). (3.73)
A, = p. /w, l8 =E' —e4/m = v /2 (s.63) Later in this section, we outline the derivation, from
are most convenient. Since kinetic theory, of the more accurate expression
v = 0'[2 to (1
~[
—XB)]' (s.64) f = —p Vf+p Bf
8ji B
—pVB+v
1
ll
n'Vn+v ll
BB.
at
—e E—
nZ
the trapped and untrapped velocity space regions are
given by ~ »»,
and 0 & ~ & ~, , respectively. Here +
Bf e sA
96 Rzc Bt
(s.66)
is the largest A, for which f(x, A, , w) is defined, and the (s. 74)
critical & for trapping is
where A is the vector potential, p =p/p, and v =v /v
~c=Bmax ~
(s.66) It is instructive to compute the perpendicular particle
where B,
„ is a local maximum of B occurring on a given flux from Eqs. (2.1) and (3.74)
field line.
As an example, we consider the axisymmetric geom- d'vv~ f= d'vvi f. (3.75)
etry of Eq. (2.87), with B =Br. The ergodic property of
field lines then implies that the distinction between After considerable manipulation, using Eqs. (3.4),
trapped and untrapped regions is uniform on each flux (3.61), and (3.69), one obtains
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, Aprii '1976

For the case of an axisymmetric system such refined

d'vv~ f= d v(vv +vg)f VxM, (s. 76)
f
calculation of can be obviated by use of the general-
ized collisional moment prescription, Eq. (2. 95), for
where v~ and v~~,given by Eqs. (3.17) and (3.16), are, which the first-order correction f„= 0(&) is sufficient.
respectively, the perpendicular and parallel g. c. drifts, However, we shall see that this prescription is advan-
and tageous mainly in the banana regime. For arbitrary
M = c P~n/eB (3.'77) geometry and collision frequency, Eq. (3.81) provides
the general formula for calculating neoclassical diffu-
is the (single species) plasma magnetization. The g. c. sion.
flux, given by the first term on the right-hand side of The g. c. flux differs from nu~ also by the curl of the
Eq. (3.'76), may be evaluated by substitution from Eqs. magnetization. This term i. s easily interpreted [see,
(3.16) and (3.17). Neglecting the O(&~) time derivative for example, Spitzer (1967), p. 30ff. ] in terms of the
term, we obtain net circulation of gyrating particles; it is irrelevant to
particle conser vation, since V V & M = 0. But the mag-
~
d'v f (vD+v~, ) =cnE xB/B'+ (c/eB)(P (nx VB)/B netization can enter the energy conservation law, as
shown below.
+ P))(V x n)
Finally, it is instructive to consider the lowest-order
+ P~(Vxn)~~]. ,
flow. Substituting Eq. (3.73) into Eq. (3.75) we quickly
find
(s. 78)
where (s. as)
(Vxn)~ =nxKVxn)xn] =nxn Vn. ~
(3.79) where the right-hand side is the diamagnetic (and elec-
We interpret the perpendicular fluxes of Eqs. (3.76) trostatic) drift given by Eq. (2.61), and we have recalled
and (3.78) by comparison with the rigorous flux, nu Eq. (2. 36). Thus, as remarked in Sec. II, this first-
obtained from the moment equation, Eq. (2. 37). Through order flow is a result of I armor gyration. Similarly,
O(&'), the latter may be written as
Jl d'v(vD +v~, ) fu =nu~, + V x M, , (s.a4)
nu~ =cnE x 8/B'+(c/eB)7P~(nxVB)/B+ P~Vxn
+ (P~~ P )nx (n V)n]' where M, =cjn/eB is the lowest-order magnetization.
We next turn our attention to the energy flux, Q~. By
+nu, —VxM, (3.80) manipulations similar to those used in deriving Eq.
where nu, is the classical flux given by Eq. (2. 77), and (3.81), we find
we have used Eq. (2. 74) for the stress. From Eqs.
(3.78)-(3.80) we conclude d'v f (m v'/2)(vv + v ~~) = @~ —Q, + V x (mcBR ~/eB')
d v(v~+v„) f =nu —nu, +VxM, (3.81) —c P~ n x V 4/B, (3.85)

and therefore, from Eq. (3.76) where Q, is the classical perpendicular energy flux, and
R~ is defined by Eqs. (2.4) and (2. 75). The first three
J
'
d'vv~ f =nu~ —nu, . (s.82) terms on the right-hand side of Eq. (3.85) are closely
analogous to those on the right-hand side of Eq. (3.81),
Hence the g. c. results, Eqs. (3.15) and (3.74), are not and only the last term, which apparently describes an
sufficiently accurate to describe classical collisional electrostatic transport of energy, requires comment. It
transport. This is not surprising, because the collision enters the energy conservation law through its diver-
frequency does not appear explicitly in either Eq. (3.15) gence; notice that
or Eq. (3.74). The O(v&') terms in which produce nu,f cP, nx V4/B = ed@ V xM,
V ~ ~
(3.86)
have been evaluated by Rosenbluth and Kaufman (1958),
for the case of a uniform magnetic field. Alternatively, using Eq. (3.77). Hence the last term of Eq. (3.85) takes
the classical transport coefficients may be evaluated into account electrostatic energy changes, enu V4, ~
from moments of the collision operator, Eqs. (2.77) and associated with the plasma magnetization. From Eq.
(2.84). In Sec. IV, we show that this method yields the (2. 59) we observe that the lowest-order potential C'(4)
same results, and requires knowledge of only the low- cannot contribute to the flux surface average of Eq.
est-order f, given by Eq. (3.'73). (3.86). In fact, in most theoretical treatments the
On. the other hand, neoclassical transport is fully in- poloidal variation of @ turns out to be so small that the
cluded in Eqs. (3.81) and (3.82); the relevant collisional last term of Eq. (3.85) is omitted.
effects enter implicitly, through non-Maxwellian correc- The lowest-order energy flux is
tions to f.
In other words, while classical transport,
which results from collisional interaction with the gyro- d'v va+v~j ~= ~&+V& 2 3 87
motion, is neglected in Eq. (3.74) for neoclassical f,
transport, which results from collisional interaction where Q» is given by Eq. (2.62), and we have recalled
with the g. c. motion, can be included, in principle, by Eq. (2.29).
sufficiently accurate calculation of f. In conclusion, we have shown that the solution to the

«&+&«& transport problem is given implicitly by Eqs. and Eq. (3.90) by

(2. 77), (2.84), and (3. 73). We have also derived general
expressions for the neoclassica/ particle and energy
& *(f +f"') =o (3.9s)
fluxes, Eqs. (3.81), and (3.85), in terms of the gyro- The superscript on f "' indicates
that Eq. (3.92) results
phase-averaged distribution function In an idealized f. from Eq. (3.91) after one recursion; f
&" differs from a
geometry with uniform magnetic field, = f~, and the f first-o«e~ solution to Eq. (3.91) in so far as we retain
only radial transport is classical [cf. Eqs. (2.59), (2.63), second- and higher-order terms in & * f
(3.84), and (3.87)]. But in the necessarily nonuniform Note that the collisional part of ~ * is bilinear, and in-
field of a toroidal confinement system, g. c. motion volves the distribution functions f, for species other than
across the density and temperature gradients produces that to which f
refers. In Eq. (3.92), we implicitly as-
non-Maxwellian corrections to f, which are typically sume that f„
like f, is replaced by its gyrophase aver-
first order in the Pal»dal gyroradius, and which yield age on the right-hand side. Then, since
neoclassical transport. Hence a fundamental task of
transport theory is the solution of the drift-kinetic equa- c(f, f.) = c(f, f.),
tion, which determines f. the collisional contribution to Eq. (3.92) vanishes. To
obtain the 0(v&') terms in f, and thus to compute clas-
3. 0 rif t-kinetic equation sical transport coefficients from Eq. (2.1), a second re-
cursion is required. Since Eqs. (2. 77) and (2.84) pro-
The drift-kinetic equation is the Fokker —Planck equa-
vide a much simpler prescription for classical trans-
tion, ordered in the gyroradius and averaged over the
gyrophase. Formal derivations have been presented by, port, we do not consider the second recursion here.
Using Eqs. (3.7)-(3.9) and (3.20) —(3.21) for the right-
for example, Hastie, et al. (1967), Rutherford and Frie-
hand side, we can integrate Eq. (3.92) straightforwardly,
man (1968), Frieman (1970), Hazeltine (1973), and
Glasser and Thompson (1973). The derivation outlined to obtain the result given by Eq. (3.74). The general
here follows the recursive procedure of Hazeltine
form of the drift-kinetic equation for is obtained byf
substituting Eq. (3.74) into Eq. (3.93). Here, we restrict
(1973). our attention to a simpler version, which is most perti-
In terms of the velocity variables (g, e, g), Eq. (1.1)
nent to transport theory. First, we keep terms only
can be written as
through 0(&'). Second, we assume
Bf
( ) f 8 f dP, Bf dEBf' p= 0(&) (3.94)
so that Eqs. (3.22) —(3.24) are applicable. We then ob-
(3.88) tain
where v~~ =na~v, is given by Eq. (3.19), v~ is given by v((A v)(n'Vxn Bf
~~
Eq. (3.4), and dp/dt, de/d, t and dg/dt are given by Eqs. f/St+ (v, n+v„) Vf +
i
~
n ~
V
B
(3.7)—(3.9). Note that all terms in Eq. (3.88) are at most
of order =&0, except the 0 term in dt/dt
cu To em. pha- + (de/dt)g, Bf/Be =Q(f, f), (3.95)
size this, and to simplify notation, we introduce the where
operator ~*, defined by
(de/dt)g, =de/dt+ p. ea/—
at
Bf s f
djl Bf de
( ) = (e/m)aC /st+ BR/at —(e/mc)v~~ n BA/Bt,
Bt 9p, dt
~
p
(3.96)
using Eq. (3.21).
Equation (3.95) is easily interpreted. The coefficient
Then we have
of Vf is the g. c. velocity; the coefficient of af/eg dis-
'dfls& =6 * f (s. 89) plays the well-known (Hastie, et a/. , 1968) departure of
p, from the exact, adiabatically nvariant, magnetic mo-
~,
which implies
ment; and the coefficient of Bf/Be, given by Eq. (3.96),
5gf-0 (s.90) is the rate of change of energy of a g. c. with magnetic
moment p. and velocity v„=v~~[1+ 0(&)]. Thus appears f
in Eq. (3.95) as the phase-space distribution of g. c. 's.
9
Qgf Qgf To further simplify the equation, we begin by observ-
(3.91)
Bg ing that the coefficient of Bf/Bp, is second order in &,
since n Vxn =n Vxl3/R- p-6. From consideration of
~
where the overbar indicates a gyrophase average, as in

the zeroth-order terms in Eq. (3.95),
Eq. (3.13).
At this point the small gyroradius approximation is (3.97)
introduced. Inferring from Eq. (3.89) that
where the subscript refers to the & ordering, it will be
f-=f -f =0(5), shown in Sec. V that fo must be a Maxwellian, as anti-
cipated in Eq. (2. 27). Hence the Bf/Bp, term is 0(6') and
we replace Eq. (3.91) by
negligible.
(1 &/s
sf g (s. 92) With regard to the coefficient of Bf/Be, we first recall

Eq. (2. 31), which implies and by requiring Eq. (2.27) to hold,
we find that
(e/mc) v([n ~
BA/Bt = 0(&(o u,'„) . (s. 98) f —
=f~(4, &) +g(0, p, &) (»[[/&)Bfd(/Bp, (3.104)
With regard to the BB/Bt term in Eq. (3.96), it must where the function g, which must be constant on flux
be noted that our previous estimate, Eq. (3.5), does not surfaces, represents an 0(&) correction to the Maxwel-
take 'nto account the low-P assumption of Eq. (3.94). lian.
Thus, restricting our attention to situations in which It turns out that Eq. (3.104) accurately describes the
changes in the external current occur much more slowly first-order distribution function even in the presence of
than changes in the plasma current, and noting, from collisions (Rutherford, 1970). Of course, solution of
Eq. (2.40), that the plasma current contr'ibutes to B only the first-order drift-kinetic equation, including colli-
in order P, we have sions, is required to determine the function g.
- pB Inp/Bt The main content of Eq. (3.104) is that the first order
B lnB/Bt = 0(p&'cu) . (3.99) distribution function. can depen. d upon the poloidal angle
Hence for second-order accuracy, the BB/Bt term in 0 only through the v[[/0 factor appearing in the last
Eq. (3.96) may be neglected. term. In this sense, Eq. (3.104) is similar to Eqs.
In axisymmetric systems, a more explicit and instruc- (2.66), (2.68), and (2.88) for the first-order flows,
tive derivation of Eq. (3.99) is possible. We observe which were derived from consideration of the moment
from the equilibrium relation, Eq. (2. 90), that equations. Indeed, after substituting Eq. (3.104) into the
definitions, Eqs. (2.1), (2. 3), and (2.6), of the particle
B', = ~Vy/R('-&, and heat fluxes, and using Eq. (3.69), we find that Eqs.
whence (2.66) and (2.68) are reproduced; the flux functions K(g)
and 1.(g) appear in this way as integrals of g (Hazeltine,
(3.100) et al. , 1973)
Since B~, which is driven mainly by external currents,
is nearly constan. t, we have K (d ) = 2 n gaJ d d d E d, (s.lo5)
= Br —
(1 + B~~/B~~) —B (Bq/B2r ), — /(d) = 2m
got ddd~ m[s —ed/m —(5/2)T/m]d
and the ordering of Eq. (3.99) follows. Equation (3.100) (3.106)

is often expressed in terms of the "poloidal P, "
The last term of Eq. (3.104)
—8 vP/B2
l[~ = -1. (3.101)
(» [[/&)Bf„/B(I/ = (Br R v, h)/(&I V[['/I) ' I Vfddl
note that this provides an alternative explanation, for
axisymmetric systems, of Eq. (2.23).
-p Ivf I, (s.los)
We have reduced Eq. (3.95) to the drift-kinetic equa- resembles the lowest-order f,
as given by Eq. (3.'l3),
tion with the important difference that the gyro-excursion p
is replaced by the radia1. g. c. excursion. -p~» p. Note
Bf/Bt+ (v([n+v, ) ~
V f that while p~«l, the poloidal dimensions of the g. c. or-
+ [(e/m) C'B/ t—
B(e/mc) v [[ n . B A/B f
t] Bf/B c = C (f, ) . bit, as shown in Fig. 2, are comparable to the dimen-
sions of the confining system. That is, the collision-
(3.102) less g. c. orbit, unlike the gyro-orbit, carries a particle
This version provides the starting point for the kinetic ever macroscopic distances. It is for this reason that
theory of Secs. IV and V. the neoclassical transport equations are not local: in
We conclude this section by considering the form that general, only the flux surface average of, for example,
the drift-kinetic equation acquires when it is written in the particle flux, can be related to corresponding aver-
terms of the modified vector potential, A+. Neglecting ages of the density and temperature gradients. Neo-
the Bf/Bp. term, we find from Eqs. (3.25), (3.26), and classical tran. sport theory is medially local, of course,
(3.95) tha. t because the radial width of the excursion is presumed
small. Finally, a radially local theory is sufficient
Bf/Bt + (v([/B)[ Bd, v f —Q(BAg/Bt)Bf/Bc] = C (f, f) . because the basic macroscopic variables (n and T) are
nearly constant on flux surfaces.
(3.103)
A collisionless steady state is evidently described by IV. CLASSICAL AND COLLISION-DOMINATED
f
Bd, ~ V (x, p. , e) =0, the statement that is constant on f TRANSPORT
drift surfaces. For axisymmetric systems, we choose
4'd, of Eq. (3.31) as the drift-surface label; the collision- A. Introduction
less steady state is then characterized by
In this section we begin the calculation of transport
f,(x, p. , e) = S((l[ —Xv((/Q, p, e), coefficients, restricting our attention to the collisional
where F is an arbitrary function. of its arguments.
regime, in which the mean free path v, „/v is much'short-
For er than a macroscopic length L. The kinetic theory for
small poloidal gyroradius we may expand
this regime closely resembles the standard Chapman-
f
= F(Q, p, , e) —(Iv /Q)BS/Bg+ 0(&'), Enskog theory (Chapman and Cowling, 1952), which also
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, Na. 2, Part l, April 1976

F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory ot plasma transport
«
assumes v, „/v I, and, in the sense described at the end mentum of that species. Thus only the unlike-species
of Sec. III, is nearly local. Thus the flux-surface geom- collision operator enters Eq. (4. 1). For simplicity, we
etry must be considered (to obtain the average particle consider the case of a single ion species, and calculate
or energy flux across a surface) only at the fluid, rather the friction force exerted on the electrons
than at the kinetic, level. This partial decoupling of
collisional and geometrical considerations is in sharp F„=Jl d'vm, v, C„(f„f,). (4. 3)
contrast to the kinetic theory for collisionless regimes,
in. which a relatively complicated, flux-surface-aver- As noted in Sec. II, to compute the flux through 0(&'),
aged, version of the drift-kinetic equation must be only the 0(&) form of F is required. We therefore ex-
solved. pand
Hence the perpendicular transport problem for the
collisional regime is comparatively simple, and only in fa = fa~ + fai + ' ' ' &
this regime have exact transport coefficients, for arbi- where f, ~ is a Maxwellian, as in Eq. (2. 28), and f, = 0(5)
trary toroidal geometry, been calculated. can be decomposed into its gyrophase-averaged and
For convenience, we begin this section by calculating gyr ophase- dependent parts
the classical perpendicular transport coefficients. How-
ever, it should be recalled that classical transport al- f$ f] fj
ways occurs (so long as Q~& v), and that the same clas- The corresponding expansion of the collision operator
sical results pertain in all collision frequency regimes. is written as
We next consider, in Sec. IV. C, the classical Parallel
transport problem. While this topic has definite intrin- c., (f., f,) = c„(f,„,f, )+c'„(f,)+ 0(&'), (4.4)
sic interest, it would be beyond the subject of this re- where C' denotes the linearized operator
view if it did not bear on the problem of neoclassical,
perpendicular transport. Indeed, from the discussion c.', (f, ) = c.,(f, ~, f~, ) + c., (f.„f, „). (4. 5)
of collisional transport in Sec. III, it is evident that the
neoclassical (Pfirsch —Schluter) enhancement of colli- The first term of Eq. (4.4) vanishes in general only if
sion-dominated transport depends upon diffusion and heat all plasma species have the same temperature
conduction in the direction of the magnetic field.
Finally, in Sec. IV.D, we combine the results for the
C.~(f.~, fute) = (&. —7'&) &(I vl) . (4 6)
parallel transport problem with some conclusions of The specific form of the function P, is not required
Sec. II, to obtain the neoclassical transport coefficients here. We need only observe that, since the collision
for a general toroidal geometry. operator is rotationally symmetric —
it does not involve
a preferred direction in velocity space and since the —
B. Classical perpendicular transport Maxwellians are similarly independent of direction, 6
We have already noted that, in a toroidal confinement can depend upon only the magnitude of the velocity.
system, classical transport typically presents only a Hence the first term of Eq. (4.4) cannot contribute to the
small correction to neoclassical transport. Hence the integral of Eq. (4. 3).
following discussion, which is mainly intended to illus- The rotationally symmetric property of the linea+ized
trate some remarks of previous sections, is brief, and collision operator implies that, for example,
only the major results are presented. More detailed
discussions of classical transport may be found in, for C'(gsin&) ~ sing,
example, the reviews of Kaufman (1966) and Braginskii for any function g which is independent of the gyrophase
(1965). Hence, after recalling Eq. (3.69), we see that the
perpendicular friction force comes entirely from f„and
Particle fluxes „a,
f, nd we have.
By our definition, Eq. (2. 77), the classical perpendicu-
lar particle flux is proportional to the perpendicular F~, = d'vm, v C,', (f, )+0(&'). (4. 7)
friction force
Note, by a similar argument, that the Paralle/ friction
F~~ = d v ~~v~Cg . force involves only : f,
Here E))e c/ v ~g UI[ C~~ y
+ 0 (4.8)
c. = g c., (f., f,) Equations (4. 7) and (4.8), when considered together with
Eqs. (2. 94) and (2.95), make explicit the previously
is the bilinear Fokker-Planck collision operator, and emphasized relation between classical transport, re-
v~ is given by Eq. (3.4). Any momentum-conserving sulting from gyro-oscillation (f ), and neoclassical
collision operator must satisfy transport, which results from g. c. motion ( ). f
We next calculate F~, explicitly, using the lowest-
d~v m, vc„(f„f, ) = 0, (4.2) order f, given by Eq. (3.73) and the small mass-ratio
collision operator given by Eq. (1.16). After substituting
since like-species collisions cannot change the bulk mo- the latter into Eq. (4. 3), we obtain

m In,. 8 Sf„2m, u; v Here we have noted that the collision operator must be
Galilean invariant. Since, as noted previously, the
right-hand side of Eq. (4.17) cannot contribute to the
(4. 9) friction force, we have shown that the electrostatic po-
tential cannot appear in the classical particle flux. This
The first term here, coming from C«(f„,f, ~), ay be m. conclusion is evidently independent of the specific form
simplified by integrating by parts, twice, and using the of the collision operator, provided C„. is Galilean in-
identity variant and rotationally symmetric. In particular, the
=-2v/v'. conclusion does not depend upon any small mass-ratio
s/sv u (4. 10)
expansion.
The integral of the second term, which comes from After substituting Eq. (4.14) into Eq. (2. VV), we obtain
C,';(f, ~, f, , ), is straightforward to evaluate, because of the classical perpendicular particle flux (Rosenbluth
the rotational symmetry of f, ~. Thus Eq. (4. 9) reduces and Kaufman, 1958)
to
nu„=-(m, Q,'v, ) '(V P —'n, V T, )—
, (4. 18)
v. ' v,'„, '+ (m. m. /7, )u, ,
F„=—(Sm'~'/4)m. J d'u/. , v, v =nu, ,
The first term of Eq. (4. 18) has been interpreted in Sec.
(4.19)
(4. 11)
II; a physical interpretation of the second, temperature
Here gradient term may be found in the review of Braginskii
(1965). It will be recalled that the ambipolarity condi-
Te vthe ~e (4. 12) tion of Eq. (4.19) follows from collisional momentum
]6&&/2 ~2&4+ lnA
i
conservation.
is the electron-ion momentum exchange time (or "elec-
tron collision time") and u, ~ is the first-order ion per-
pendicular velocity, given by Eq. (2. 61) (the 1-subscript 2. Energy floxes
is suppressed). From Eqs. (3.11) and (3.73) we have According to Eqs. (2.10) and (2.84), the classical
energy flux is proportional to the collision operator mo-
nx Vf. „, ment
where IQ, ~= eel/m, c (e&0), and the gradient to be taken d'v(mv'/2) v, C'(f, ) .
at constant energy
As in the case of diffusion, only the linearized operator
V f I = f, „[Vln P, + (v'/v, '„, —5/2)V lnT, —eV C/T] . a.ppears. But unlike the diffusion case, both like and
unlike species collisions contribute. In particular, ion
(4. 13)
thermal conduction is dominated by the effects of ion-
The integral in the first term of Eq. (4.11) is now read- ion collisions; to lowest order in (m, /m, . )'/', we have
ily evaluated, and after substitution from Eq. (2.61) we
f lnd G~= d v~ ~ v 2 vjC ~ ~
(4.20)
F =,
Q,
nx [VP —', n, VT, ],-
7-, I
,
I
(4.14) Since the like-particle collision operator. must vanish
when acting on a displaced Maxwellian [c.f. Eq. (4.17)],
since Q, = —Zm, Q, /m, , for ions with charge Ze. Recall it is clear that only the temperature gradient term in
that P = Q, P, is the total pressure. f„contributes to G~,. : to this order in the mass ratio,
An important feature of Eq. (4.14) is that the electro- the classical ion energy flux is driven solely by the ion
static potential does not appear. Since this fact has not temperature gr adient.
always been appreciated, we provide an alternate deri- The corresponding electron moment, on the other
vation. Suppose VP, = VP,. = V'T, =0. Then the electron hand,
distribution function may be written as
f, =2f, //(v~ ui /v, („, (4. 15) G~, = d'v nz, v' 2 v~ C,', „+C,',- (4.21)
where involves both like- and unlike-species collisions, so that

both temperature and pressure gradient terms can be
u, = enx V@/m, ~Q, ~
. expected to enter the classical perpendicular energy
Equation (4.15) gives the first-order form of a Maxwel- flux. Of course the electrostatic potential gradient can-
lian which is displaced in perpendicular velocity, i.e., not enter, for precisely the same reasons that it dis-
appears from the friction force.
/v, '„+ O(6')] .
f~(v u) = f„(v)[1 + 2v u— (4. 16)
~
The evaluation of the integrals in Eqs. (4.20) and (4. 21)

Furthermore, it can be seen that (for VP =0) the two is lengthy, because of the complicated form of the like-
species are subject to the same displacement u~, =u,- species collision operators. We present only the re-
=u. Hence the integrand of Eq. (4. V} involves the quan- sulting fluxes, as given (in somewhat different forms) by
tity Kaufman (1966}or Braginskii (1965)
C„. (f,„(v —u)~ f;///(v —u)) =C„(f,((f, f(„). (4. 17) Q„=-2(m, Q',. 7, ) 'p, V, T, , (4.22)

,
F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory ot plasma transport
Q„= —(I, 027, ) '[0.91p,V~T, —T, V~P) . (4. 23) (4. 28)
in Eq. (4.22), T, is the ion-ion collision time, defined
by
From Eq. (3.97), we see that f~ must be constant
along field lines, so that parallel gradients of n and T
T =3.m' 'T~'/47r' 'z e n ln A (4.24) enter the kinetic theory through f, . To estimate the
The numerical coefficient in the first term of Eq. (4.23) steepness of these gradients, we consider the parallel
pertains only to the case of unit ionic charge; the value force balance law, Eq. (2. 96). In the collision-domi-
of this coefficient for other values of Q may be found in nated case, the stress is nearly isotropic, so we have
Braginskii (1965). &
A
' &P' =-&IIP=&iI+ «&ii (4. 29)
Equations (4.18), (4. 19), (4.22), and (4.23) complete
the solution to the classical perpendicular transport = O(6~-'), (4. 30)
pr oblem. Notice that: because ~ v [recall Eqs. (2.81) and (2.82)]. It follows
E~~
that we should allow for an n =-1 term in the series of

(i) The dominant cross-field transport process is ion
thermal c onduction. Indeed, Eq. (4.28)
Q, ,
—(m,. /m, )"' Q. . . (4. 25) f =f '+f '+' (4. 31)
while For a maximal ordering, the parallel electric field
term in Eq. (3.102) is also treated as O(66 '). More
Qec Pe +ec Ps +ic (4.26)
specifically, we assume
The ordering of Eq. (4.25} is not surprising, because we
would expect Q„/Q„- (p2/p2)(v, /v, . ), and Eqs. (2.18), (e/mc)v, ~6 'dA/st = O(5a '~U~}, (4. 32)
(4. 12), and (4.24) yield (p',. /p', )(v, /~, . ) —(m,. /m, )'~'. How- as a refinement of Eq. (3.98). [In small collision fre-
ever, the disparity between the ion energy flux and the quency regimes, Eq. (4. 32} is restrictive, and excludes
other cross-field fluxes yields two distinct time scales electron runaway effects. See Sec. V. ]
for collisional dissipation; if T, 4T, , some delicacy is Turning our attention now to Eq. (3.102), we change
required to obtain equations which simultaneously de- the energy variable, for convenience, from e to zo =e
scribe processes occurring on both time-scales. This —eC'/m. This transformation yields
matter is considered in detail in Sec. V.
(ii) to lowest order in the mass ratio, Q, , involves
~f/&t+ (&ii +~v~)'&f + ~/mEii&ii fs/sw =C(f f }
only &T, The reason for this has been discussed pre- (4. 33)
viously. Of course there is a correction term, Q, , ~
where the time and space derivatives are taken at con-
-Q„, which involves the other gradients; to our knowl- stant p. and m. The first-order version is evidently
edge, this correction has not been calculated.
It shall be seen that remarks similar to (i) and (ii) v~~n &f, -C'(f, ) =-v„'Vf„+eE~ f„/T, (4. 34)
also apply to the neoclassical fluxes. where C' is the linearized operator defined by Eq. (4.5).
Before expanding Eq. (4. 34) i.n 6, it is convenient to
C. Parallel transport recall, from Sec. I, some properties of the linearized,
unlike species, collision operators.
1. Kinetic equation
The basic kinetic equations describing classical paral- 2. Electron version
lel transport can be derived from the Fokker-Planck
The operator C,', is given, to low'est order in the mass
equation (Braginskii, 1965), even in the absence of a
ratio, by Eq. (1.16). When the distribution functions are
magnetic field (Cohen, Spitzer and Routly, 1950). For
independent of gyrophase, as in Eq. (4. 33), this expres-
reasons of consistency, our derivation proceeds from
sion reduces to
the drift-kinetic equation, Eq. (3.102).
All derivations are based upon an ordering in the (~)I&f ~ +»ii(~alii/~h )f u] (4. 33)
Chapman-Enskog parameter —
the mean free path di-
vided by the scale length —
which is denoted by
where 7, is given by Eq. (4.12)
6 = &u/v «1 (4. 27)

= (3 gr'~'/4v, ) (u, /v
v„. — „, )', (4. 36)
an. d we have noted that
where ~ = v, „/l is the transit frequency, and v is the
collision frequency. Of course small A corresponds to
the collisional regime of neoclassical transport theory.
d vvf =BgQq (B. t (4.37)
The gyrophase-averaged distribution function is to be
The operator g describes pitch-angle scattering of elec-
expanded in terms of the two small parameters, & (the
trons by the much more massive ions. In terms of the
gyroradius parameter), and 4. Since only the first-
cosine of the pitch angle
order terms in & are needed here, ere write
= vp/U (4. 38)
f =f~+fi, 8,
where f~ is the usual Maxwellian, and f, is further & = 2 (&/& &)(I —8)(&/& 5) .
expanded (4. 39)
Rev. IVlod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

Equations (4. 35)-(4.39) are written for the case of a confined, quiescent plasma, we show in Sec. V that
single-ion species with charge ge; however, if all ion -u e
u.j e (4.49)
species have (to sufficient accuracy) the same parallel il ll
flow velocity u,. ii, then the equations remain correct for Therefore, for the purposes of this review, the parallel
any number of ion species, provided we make the re- flow terms may be omitted; we thus obtain from Eq.
placement (4.47)
n g ~ n ~
g ~ C~(a.') = f.uv Il(8+II/T. +II. Va. '),
which becomes, after substitution from Eq. (4.48),
jn Eq. (4.12). The quantity
g ff n~ g] n (4.40)
v'
C'(g, )o=f, v A, v — 5 A, +, (4.50)
the
—
Here the "forces" A. „, which drive the electron distribu-
is called the "effective g." tion away from equilibrium, are given by
Note that the electron-ion collision operator contains
a term, proportional to u, ll, which is independent of f„. A, =VII lnp, + ezII/T. , (4. 51)
The convenient way to treat this inhomogeneous term is
to introduce a function g'„defined by
2 =&ii »&. ~ (4.52)
2u,.2'ii v
fel = feN + 8'e (4.41) we have suppressed the subscripts of Eq. (4.48), with
Vthe
the understanding that A„= O(&A '). The solution to Eq.
Equations (4.35) and (4. 39) then imply (4. 50) is considered later.
' ; .
C. (f, ) = ~.; &g. . (4.42)
3. l on version
Evidently g, represents the electron distribution function
as measured in the rest frame of the ions [recall Eq. The collision operator describing the effect on the ion
(4. 16)]. Since distribution function of scattering by electrons (or by
relatively light ions) is given by Eq. (1.18). For small
.
C. (f.„(v u), f.„(v —u)) =o, — (4.43) mass ratio and f;, l- f„l, the dominant. term is
l l
to all orders in u/v, h„we have C,', (f) = (E„~V II/p, )f, . (4. 53)
Cee (2&II V II Vthe feII) = 0 . (4 44) where E, is the parallel component of the ion friction
li
Vfe therefore introduce the notation force. Evidently a transformation of the form of Eq.
(4.41) is not useful for the ion kinetic equation, which is
(4.45) therefore written in terms of f, , In other respects the
i.e. , C,', is the homogeneous electron collision operator, reduction of the ion kinetic equation for parallel trans-
corresponding to the case u,. =0. Equation (4.42) implies port proceeds analogously to the electron case. In par-
that ticular, the dominant perturbation to the ion distribution
,', has the form given by Eq. (4.48), so the
f,
c,'(f, .
) = c,'. (g;), (4.46)
function,
O(&b. ') version of Eq. (4. 34) becomes, in this case
so that Eq. (4. 34) becomes
VII n Vg, —C~(g) = eVII EII f, II/T,
A
— —ve Vf, II
c,', (f;, ) = c,' , (f, , ). -.
+ f IIVII VII lnpI +
v2
2
—
— Vll lnT. —eFII/TI
—f &V II
& V(2RIII V II/Vshe) (4.47) thi
After the function g, = O(&f, ~) is expanded in b. (4. 54)

&e = &e + &e+'
where the first term on the right-hand side is given by
we find that Eq. (4.47) has one term of order A ' Eq. (4.53). Because of Eq. (4. 29), this term cancels
with the EII and VIIP, terms in Eq. (4. 54), which therefore
becomes
This can be satisfied only by a perturbed Maxwellian
C!,(f', , ) = f, „VII(v'/v, '„, —5/2)A, , . (4. 55)
~p. ~T V 5 2RelIV
2
+ II
(4.48) with
Po To Vt»e Vthe
With regard to the O(&A ') terms in Eq. (4.47), observe 9, =— Vii lnT; . (4. 56)
first that from Eq. (3.24) This relation describes ion parallel heat conduction.
v, . Vf„= O(&~0) + O(&'~-') . 4. Variational principle
Hence the g. c. drift is irrelevant in this order. The
%e have reduced the kinetic equations for both species
parallel flow terms would contribute if we assumed to the general form
u, il-u, , l-~D; in this way classical viscosity coeffi-
cients could be computed. However, for a toroidally c'(f) =q(v, (), (4. 57)

where C' is a linearized, homogeneous, Fokker —Planck (4. 55), omit the collisional energy exchange term, com-
collision operator, f
is the function to be determined, ing from lnf~. The result is (8S/Bt), =S.
and Q is a. given function of u and f, = v()/1). Because spe- That the entropy production be positive (Boltzmann's
cial cases of Eq. (4. 57) were first solved by Spitzer and "H-theorem" ) is guaranteed by the self-adjointness
collaborators (Cohen, Spitzer and Routly, 1950; Spitzer property
and Harm, 1953), it is often referred to as the "Spitzer
problem. " In the special case of Eq. (4. 50) with V))P,
(4.63)
=V)(T, =0, the solution is called the SPitzew function, and Equation (4.63) is readily verified from the definitions
denoted by v() E((f2 of the operators C,'. ; and C,'o.
Now consider the first order variation of the function
(4. 56)
Oe( I)f2 ) )lfeM/ e ~
f
[6l]. Letting g= +&f in Eq. (4.61), and using Eq. (4.62),
Spitzer's method of solution was based on numerical in- we find
6[61] =26[6 ] - 5[6]
tegration; the function f2, tabulated by Spitzer and
Harm (1953), is nearly exact.
Braginskii (1965) has solved Eq. (4.57) analytically, by where 6[6'] =6'[6f] and, according to Eq. (4.63)
expanding f
in a (truncated) series of Laguerre poly-
nomials in v (we shall see that the (-dependence of is f
readily determined, because of the rotational symmetry It immediately follows from Eq. (4. 57) that [6t] is varia-
of C'). This method is found to give quite accurate re- tion al,
sults, at least with regard to the relevant velocity mo-
(4.64)
ments of f.
A third method for solving the Spitzer problem, pre- Furthermore, by considering the second-order varia-
sented by Robinson and Bernstein (1962), is based on a, tion of [6l], one can show that [(R] ~(R, i.e. , the varia-
variational principle. We outline the variational pro- tional principle is rnaxsmal.
cedure here, because it resembles, in some respects, It is instructive to evaluate (R for the specific cases of
techniques used in neoclassical theo'ry, and thus pro- Eqs. (4. 50) and (4. 55). Using Eqs. (4.41) and (5.62), we
vides a useful introduction to the analysis of Sec. V. have, for the electron case,
[See also Kaufman (1960).] v2 5
Since Robinson and Bernstein allowed for arbitrary
relative magnitudes of the collision frequency and gyro- the
frequency, they considered a kinetic equation more

complicated than Eq. (4. 57). For a special case )f 0»
of interest here, the variational principle is obtained
as follows. For arbitrary functions g, (1), $) and g2(v, (),
=A, J((/e Aq(), /T, — (4.65)
we define the functionals where ~~~ and q~~, are the parallel electric current and
parallel electron heat flux, respectively, and we have
(4. 59) recalled Eq. (2. 30). Similarly, for the ion entropy pro-
duction rate we find
(4.60) 6l. = —A. q(). /Z . (4.66)
Hence the two entropy production rates are given by the
usual products of forces (A„A„A;) and fluxes (—&()/e,
(4.61) q(„/T„q(),-/T, ). Since the solutions to Eqs. (4. 50) and
(4. 55) must be linear functions of the relevant forces,
there must exist transport coefficients, K „, which
We denote the exact solution to Eq. (4. 57) by f, and
linearly relate the fluxes to the forces. These coeffi-
distinguish the functional evaluated at
= S[f,
f
by omitting the c ients ar e def ined by
brackets: 6— f],
etc. Note that Eq. (4.57) implies
(4.62)
&()/e =K„A, +K,2A2, (4.67)
The quantity 8 may be recognized as the rate of irre- e 12 1 22A2 s (4.66)

versible entropy production. Indeed, starting with the q(),. /r, . = —K,. A, (4.69)
kinetic definition of entropy,
Here we have taken note of the Onsager symmetry rela-
dv ln tion [see, for example, DeGroot and Mazur (1962)],
K~2 =K2~, (4. 70)
retaining only the collisional term in Bf/Bt, and recalling
Eq. (1.10), we find that which is implied by Eq. (4.63). Thus Eqs. (4. 65) and
(4.66) may be expressed as
(4. 71)
We then expand f = f~+ f, and, for consistency with the S, =K~~A~ + 2K~2A. , A. 2 +K22A. 2 . (4. 72)
small mass-ratio approximation of Eqs. (4. 50) and To outline the variational procedure for approximate

evaluation of the transport coefficients, we consider first TABLE I. A comparison of the parallel transport coefficients,
the ion Spitzer problem given by Eq. (4. 55). The solu- K~ as evaluated by Spitzer and Harm (1 953), by Braginskii
tion, f„
is represented by a trial function f~; for exam- (1965), and by the variational procedure outlined in the text.
Only the case of Z, ff =1 is included.
ple
f~ =a, v'(1+a, v')g, (4. 7s) Spit zer- Har m Br agin s k1 1 V ar iational
where a, and a, are variational parameters. We then 1.975 1.96 1.91

use Eqs. (4.59) —(4.61) to express [(R;] in terms of the a„; Kgp 1.381 1.39 1.42
because the variational quantity is normalized, only a, K2p 4.174 4. 15 4.13
f inally appears
(4. 74) so that the various Legendre components of Eq. (4. 57)
After maxlmlz1ng with respect to 02~ we obtain decouple, and we need only solve
c'(s„' p„}= q„p„, n = 0, 1, . . . (4.a 0)
for E„. Equations {4.50) and (4.55) involve only Q, P„
Because the exact distribution. function has in general a and therefore only F, P„as in Eq. (4. 73). (A P, compo-
more complicated v dependence than f„, the coefficient nent would appear, had we allowed for larger flow ve-
K,. will differ from K, But because the quantity (R;(a2) locities. )
is variational, the difference must be second order in
D. Ptirsch-Schluter transport
(4. 75) Pfirsch and Schliiter (1962) first demonstrated the neo-
To our knowledge, the exact K,. has not been calculated. classical enhancement of radial transport in the colli-
Braginskii's expansion method yields the result sional regime (b. «1). This early treatment, based on
previous work of Kruskal and Kulsrud (1956), used fluid
K, =3.9n; T, v;/m;; equations, with an approximate model for the magnetic
field geometry. Some temperature gradient effects were
the variational procedure, using Eq. (4. 73), reproduces omitted. Similarly approximate results were later ob-
this value precisely. tained from kinetic theory by, for example, Rutherford
To evaluate a moment of f„other than q~~„ the coeffi- (1970} and Frieman (1970). The fluid treatment was re-
cient a, would be needed. This can be found from Eq. vived by Hazeltine and Hinton {1973)who retained the
(4.62). Note, however, that the accuracy indicated in temperature gradient terms and allowed for a general,
Eq. (4. 75) need not apply when a trial function is used axisymmetric field geometry. Equivalent results were
to calculate nonvar iational quantities. later obtained by Bernstein (1974). Hence the argument
Of course similar remarks pertain to the electron presented here, which generalizes the Hazeltine-Hinton
Spitzer problem. After choosing a trial function f~„ calculation to allow for asymmetry in the confining field,
we calculate the maximal @. „as
a quadratic form in is close in spirit to the original Pfirsch-Schluter treat-
A, and A, The variational transport coefficients K „~ ment.
may then be obtained by comparison with Eq. (4. '72}. In
Table I, the results of such a calculation are compared
to those of Spitzer and Harm (1953), and Braginskii
1. Radial fluxes
(1965); for this case, an electron trial function having %e begin by deriving convenient expressions for the
the form given by Eq. (4. 73) was used. The numbers radial particle and energy fluxes. The analysis of the
& „ listed in the table are related to the transport coef- previous subsection shows that, through first order in
ficients by &, each species in a collision-dominated plasma is de-
scribed by a scalar pressure:
(4. 77)
P —~p, (tp, 8, &) = 0(& ), for a «1, (4.61)
Table G presents the Spitzer-Harm electron transport
coefficients for several values of g, ff. The classical where l is a unit tensor and we recall
parallel electrical conductivity is called the Spitzer con- (4.62)
ductivity, and denoted by o~~. Equation (4.67) shows that
Similarly
o = e'K» /T, = g, e 'w, n, /m, . (4. 76)
R, —t (5/2) p, T, /m, = 0(6') .
~~ ~
(4.as)
Finally, we note that the g dependence of f„, as given
in Eq. (4. 73), is exact. This can be seen by expanding
f and Q in series of Legendre polynomials, P„(g) (P~ =1, TABLE II. The Spitzer —Harm transport coefficients K~, for
several values of the effective ionic charge &,ff.
P, = g, etc. )
eff jeff jeff
1.98 2 32 2. 67 3.39
Rotational symmetry of the collision operator implies K(2 1.38 2.05 2.91 5.16
4. 17 6.75 10.01 20. 32
(4.79)

These equations permit a straightforward generalization radial fluxes of interest. The two ion species case, in
of Eqs. (2.93) and (2. 100) to the non-axisymmetric case. which one species is much more massive than the other,
Considering first the radial particle flux, we multiply the can be treated by a closely analogous argument (Ruther-
momentum conservation law, Eq. (2. 15), by ford, 1974).
—(c/e)g''&Qx&0 = (c/e)g q Br 4. 84 2. Neoclassical transport coefficients
where g is the metric determinant of Eq. (2. 43) and q is
In order to obtain transport equations from Eqs.
the safety factor of Eq. (2. 50). In view of Eq. (4.81), the
(4.89) —(4. 91), we must express the parallel gradients
stress tensor term is given to sufficient accuracy by (A.„A, and A,. ) in terms of radial gradients (dP/dg and
g'~2%(x VO ~
VP = g~ 2V) x %8 V( &P/9(
~
dT/dP) and the electric field. But our previous results
= &p/&r.
make this task very simple. Consider first the neoclas-
sical ion heat flux of Eq. (4.91). According to Eq. (4. 69),
The flux-surface average of this term vanishes because the Pm&/lel ion heat flux is
of Eq. (2.44), and, since,
g ~ VgxVO'uxB =u'Vg, to lowest order in ~ and &. Qn the other hand, it was
we obtain the lowest-order radial particle flux shown as Sec. II that this flux must have the general
fol m
(nu Vg) = —(c/e)q '(g'~'Br (F+enE))
~
(4.85)
in close analogy to Eq. (2. 93). The classical particle q~~,
= c/Zea)Ip; dT;/dq+I,
(5/2)(— (y)a.
flux, Therefore
(nu ~
ig)
(c/e)—
=q '(g'~'Br F, ), ~
(4. 86) A, =(5/2)(c/Zea)K, 'In, dT, /dq+. L, .(q) B/K, T, 4. 93)
(.
could be computed, for a given field geometry, from The function L, (g) can now be determined by observing
Eq. (4. 14). We restrict our attention here to the neo- that Eqs. (2. 53) and (4. 56) require
classical contribution, which is typically much larger.
Recalling Eq. (2.67), which may be written as (A,. a)=o
I($, O, g}=q g' B'B (4.87)
'
thus
we find that Eq. (4.85) yields A, = (5/2)(c/gea)K, 'n, dT, /dg[I —B'(I)/(B2)] . (4. 94)
(nu„c Vg) = —(c/e)(I(F~~/B+ enBr E/Br B)) . (4.88) Equations (4. 76) and (4.91) then provide the neoclassical
ion heat flux
Finally, we specialize to the electron version of Eq.
(4.88). Parallel momentum balance [Eq. (4.29)] then re- (q, Nc Vg) = —1.6(c/Z e)'(nz, . /7, . )P,. dT,. /dg
~
quires E~~, =P, A„where A, is defined by Eq. (4. 51), so

we have
~
[(I~/B2) (I)~/(gP)] (4. 95)
7g) = (c/e)P, (IA, /B) —cn, (Br E/Br B) . The axisymmetric version of this result, as first ob-
(nunc ~ ~
tained by Maschke (1972), differs only in that the I'

(4.89) factors can be taken outside the flux-surface average;
Here we have recalled Eq. (2.35). recall Eq. (2.88).
A very similar argument yields, for the radial elec- The origin of the relation, Eq. (4. 94), between T V~~
tron heat flux and dT/dg, can be traced back to our diffusion-time
scale ordering, Eq. (2. 20). Thus, for example, an ex-
(q, „c Vg) = (5/2)(c/e)P, T, (I A, /B),
~
(4. 90) cessive variation of T,. along B, would induce an ion
where A, =n VT, /T„as in Eq. (4.52); and, for the radial parallel heat flux which could not be consistent with Eq.
ion heat flux (2.68), i.e. , with the assumed equilibrium condition
~ q,. =O(5').
(q, „, &tt') =-(5/2)(c/e)P; T;(I A;/B), (4. 91) Electron transport equations are obtained from Eqs.
where A. , =n V T,. /T,
~ (4. 89) and (4. 90) in a. similar way. Thus we combine
One consequence of Eq. (4.85), of course, is that the Eqs. (2. 70) and (2.68) of Sec. II
lowest-order particle flux is automatically ambipolar Jii = c(I/B) dP/dg +K(—
g)B,
(i.e. , ambipolar for any electrostatic field), even in the
presence of asymmetry, for ~«1. This can also be ~~
= (5/2)(c/e) (P, /B) dT, /dP + L, (g)a,
seen from Eqs. (4.29) and (4.89), since the former im-
plies with the electron parallel transport equations Eqs.
(4.67) and (4.68). After the geometrical identities,
6 vp=R. . v p a =0 (4. 92) (aA, ) =0, (aA, ) =e(Z a)/T. ,
through O(&A '); thus the total pressure is more nearly are used to eliminate K(P) and L, (P), we obtain
uniform on each flux surface than are the pressures of K„A., +K,~A2 = —(c/e) dP/dg[I/B —B(I )/(B') ]
the individual species. It follows that, in the case of a
single ion species, Eqs. (4.89)—(4. 91) provide all the + (eK„/T. )a(Z a)/(a'),
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April t976
K»A, +K»A2=. (5— /2)(c/e)n, dT, /dg[I/B —B(I &/(B'&] as previously estimated. The original Pfirseh-Schliiter
result ("Pfirsch —Schliiter factor") was slightly different,
+ (eSC„/T, )B(Z B)/(B'& . (4. 97)
Dp2 /D, = 2q2, because the early studies did not properly
These equations can be solved for the A. „, in terms of allow for' Vi) T,
the radial gradients and (E„B&. When the results are The large aspect-ratio, axisymmetric version of Eq.
substituted into Eqs. (4.89) and (4.90), we obtain the (4.95) can be obtained in a similar way; this result was
r adial transport equations first derived by Shafranov (1965).
c &0& =-(c/e)'( ./&. )[&I'/B'& — &I &'/(B'&)
Finally, we note that the relation between the parallel
and radial g2adienls, expressed by Eqs. (4.96) and
~
[(~»/~) dP/dg —', (~12/-~)n, d T, /d g] (4. 97), can (in the axisymmetric case) be used to obtain
similar relations between the parallel and radial fluxes.
+cn, [(I &(E B&/(B') —(IB ' E/B B&], In particular, the parallel current can be written in
(4. 98) terms of the radial particle and heat fluxes (Hazeltine
and Hinton, 1973). That such a relation also obtains,
approximately, in other collision frequency regimes„
(q, c ig& = —(5/2)(c/e)'(m, T, /7, )
~
was first pointed out by Ware (1973).
[&I'/B') —&I &'/(B') ] V. KINETIC THEORY OF TRANSPORT IN
~
[(5/2)(z„/z)n, dT, /dg —(e12/z) dP/dg]. AXISYIVIMETR IC SYSTEMS
(4. 99) A. Small gyroradius expansion
Here The kinetic theory of transport in toroidal systems is
2
(4.100) based on a generalization of the well-known Chapman-
K K11K22- K12 ~
Enskog. method in. the kinetic theory of gases (Chapman
and the &'s are given, for several values of ionic charge, and Cowling, 1952), in which the motion along field lines
in Table II. Again, the axisymmetrie case is obtained is not necessarily localized by collisions. The basis of
by taking J to be constant on flux surfaces. this kinetic theory is an expansion in powers of the
Note also that Eqs. (4.67) and (4. 96) provide the fol- Poloidal gyxoxadius p~, which measures the degree of
lowing expression for the parallel current localization in the direction perpendicular to a flux sur-
0'2 B(E2 B &/(B & c dP/dg[1 /B —(I &B/(B ] &
face.
We begin by rewriting the drift-kinetic equation. , Eq.
(4.101) (3.102), in terms of the independent variable e =—e
The first term here gives the Spitzer current, as modi- + (e/m)((C & —4) (instead of e) and i1
fied by toroidicity and V~~P effects. Note than an elec- sf — e B(4& Bf
trostatic field cannot contribute, because of Eq. (2. 53). Btl
+(vii+vu) If + . Vl Btl
+v2 E2 — =C(f
Bc f) ~
The second term, called the Pfixsch-Schlute2. or 2etuyn

current, is most easily understood in terms of the dis- (5. 1)
cussion of Sec. II.C.2: it maintains V' J =0 in the pres- In axisymmetric systems the second term, v, Vf, is of ~
ence of the diamagnetic current. The return current cannot order v, h(B~/B)/l, while the third term v2 Vf, is of
vanish (for nonuniform B), and will generally change order v, „p/l', and smaller than the second by a factor
sign across the plasma cross section. p~/l, where p~ =—pB/B~ is the poloidal gyroradius, men-
Equation (4.98) can be seen to agree with the estimate tioned in Sec. II. We choose the basic small parameter
of Sec. III, to be 5~,. —
= p~,. /l, the ion poloidal gyroradius divided by a
characteristic length (which may be the major or minor
use radius of the plasma). In this section, we use the as-
for large aspect-ratio, axisymmetric geometry. This sumption that B~/B«1, so that p&&~ p, and we may ex-
case is considered in Sec. VI; it is convenient to antici- pand the drift kinetic equation to any or der in p~.
pate some elements of the Sec. VI discussion here. %'e make a noncommittal choice of ordering for the
With B =Br =I/R, the flux-surface averages in Eq. like-particle collision terms, that these are of the same
(4.98) reduce to order as the term vt~ 7f. That is, the collision fre-
quency is of the same order as the bounce or transit fre-
(I 2/B2 (I )2/(B2 (Il2 (B-2 &-1 2~2
& & &
quency. Subsidiary expansions will be carried out later
where & is the minor radius of the flux surface, which for the limiting cases vl/v, „(B2/B) small (Sec. V.D) or
is assumed to be nearly circular. Using ~VJ~=B~Il, we large (Sec. V.E) compared with unity. Before expanding
find that the flux u~c. & is related to the density gradient f in powers of 6~„we must also choose the ordering of
dn, /dr by the Pfirsch-Schliiter diffusion coefficient E~], and specify the collision terms in more detail. We
make use of the fact that (m, /m, . )'2 is small, in order to
Dps =2(m, 02', ) '(~„/a)q2(T, +T, ), (4.102) simplify the unlike particle collision terms.
where the safety factor q is roughly given by
q = (r/Il)(Br/B2), for this geometry. Referring to Eq. 1. E lectron-ion col lision term
(4.18), we see that %'e recall that the linear ized electron. -ion. collision
DP2/D, = 2(@22/e)q2, operator is given by Eq. (1.16), to lowest order in

(m, /m, . )' '.

Only the gyrophase-averaged version will be (Dreicer, 1959). The order of magnitude of the electric
needed here field term in either the electron, or the ion, kinetic
equation, relative to the collision term is thus Ell/E„
Cei = ~ef
(")[~~8 + (2v Iliiill/vthe)feii] i —(m /rn )' '-&'. -&o', [where we have used &~ -&'.
where the electron-ion collision frequency is which follows from Eq. (5.8).] This may be treated as
a term of order &~„along with the drift term, in the
v„(v ) =—
(3 ii"~'/4~, ) (v, /v„, )', (5 3)
electron equation. In the ion equation, the E~I and E~~'
with terms are both or order &~2,
With the maximal ordering given by Eqs. (5.8) and
1/T, = —
', (2w)' '(n,. Z',. e' lnA/m', 'T+') (5.4)
(5.10), transport processes occur on two distinct time
and v, „,=— (2T, /m, )'2. The pitch-angle scattering operator scales. (1) Joule heating, temperature equilibration,
may be written either in terms of the cosine of the pitch and ion heat conduction occur at roughly the same rate,
angle ( (=vll/v), or in terms of & (=Iu. /iv), where p, is m /m Y, and are assumed to be approximately in ba-
the magnetic moment, and iv — = v'/2 lance, so that the temperatures change at a slower rate.
(2) Particle diffusion, due to electron —ion collisions,
(5. 5) and electron heat conduction, cause changes in the den-
sity and temperatures at the rate &~o, /T, —(m, /m, . )~'/r, .
A complicating feature of the maximal ordering is that
2. ion-electron collision term the rate &~2, /7„associated with the slow time scale,
The ion-electron collision term is given, to lowest- coincides with the rate &~, /r, , a.t which ion diffusion due
order in m, /m, , by Eq. (1.18). If f, and f, are Maxwel- to ion-ion collisions changes the ion density. Since the
lian (with different temperatures), this reduces to O(6~, ) contribution to the ion particle flux is not included
in Eq. (2.93), ambipolar diffusion is no longer guaranteed
,
C, = (rn, n,. /m, n, T, )(1 —T,./T, )(S/Sv) (v f;„), (5.6) on the time scale of electron diffusion. Thus, with a
which describes the temperature equilibration of the two maximal ordering the assumPtion of ambipolar diffusion
species. By linearizing Eq. (1.18) and averaging over must be made; in fact, as pointed out by Rosenbluth,
the gyrophase angle, we obtain the linearized operator et al. (1971), it determines the rate of change of plasma
v II (5. 7) toroidal angular momentum. This process is considered
ie belli fio/pio+ ie i
in Sec. VI.C. [Note also that once ambipolarity is as-
where EI~, is the friction force, and C,', is a term which sumed, Eq. (2.93) is again valid. ]
will not be needed. With the further assumption given In the equal temperature case (T, =T, ) this complica-
by Eq. (5.9), C,', is smaller than the first term in Eq. tion is readily avoided, since (m, /m, . )' ' need not be
(5. 7) by O(&„.). ordered in ~~, This case might be most relevant to
reactor-size experiments. The maximal ordering, how-
3. Maximal ordering ever, has the advantages of describing present experi-
ments more completely, and of yielding results which
The ordering of El, and (m, /m, . )'~' can be chosen by the are easily specialized to the equal temperature case.
following argument. We want the maximum number of
different processes, which determine the rate of change
of T, and T, , to be of the same order of magnitude. In 4. Perturbation expansion
particular, we do not want the temperature equilibration By writing an expansion of the form
to occur on such a short time scale that we are forced
to either set T, =T,- in the equations describing diffusion,
or to include the transient contribution to the diffusion
f =f. +f, +f, +
flux which is proportional to T, —T, Such an effect was for each species, where the different terms correspond
pointed out by Taylor (1961) in the context of classical to different powers of ~~, we obtain a sequence of equa-
diffus ion. tions from Eq. (5.1). The zeroth-order equations, ob-
The rate of change of ion temperature due to heat contained by keeping only the largest terms, are
duction is of order ~, /r, , while tha. t due to equilibration
is of order m, /m, . ~, -(m, /m, . )''/r, . Hence, we choose vII. &f„=C„(f„, f„)+C„(f„,f;,), . (5.11)
(m, /m, . )'~; —&2~, (5.8)
fio = Cii (fioifio) i (5.12)
The rate of change of electron temperature due to Joule
n, m, (u, —u,-)'/r, , which is of the
heating is of order
same order as the
only if we choose
equilibration rate, (m, /m;7, )n, T„' where C„and C„. are the like-particle collision terms,
given by Eq. (1.2), and C„ is the gyro-phase-averaged
version of Eq. (1.14) (the overbar, indicating the aver-
(u, —u,-~ - (T, /m, )'~'. age, will henceforth be omitted).
(5.9) A generalization of the well-known II-theorem can be
Since ~u, —u,. ~-eEIIT, /m, , this implies used to show that f,o and f, Dmust both be Maxw. ellian
E, l/E „-(m, /m, . )'~', (5. 10)
and constant on magnetic surfaces, as follows. We first
multiply Eq. (5.11) by log f, , and integrate over velocity
where E „-m, v~, /eT, is the order of magnitude of the space, making use of the Jacobian, Eq. (3.69). We ob-
field which would cause massive electron runaway tain

F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazettine: Theory of plasma transport 27't
B'V d v Olog
of the drift perpendicular to flux surfaces, the deriva-
tive of v~~ may be taken at constant m = v'/2 =e
—(q/m)(4'), i.e., we may use v, =[2(m —pB)P~' or
d'v log f, C„(f„,f, ) + d'v log f„C„(f,o, f, ,) . - v(1 —&&) ', where ~=g/w. We also use A, and v as
v~~—
~
(5.13) independent variables on the left-hand side of Eqs.

The usual II theorem for the Fokker-Planek collision (5.19) and (5.20), which become
term (Lenard, 1960) shows that
vie
' Vf., —C.'f., = »li ' V(v ii/I &.8 I) "—(e/T. ) v ii Ei~if« .
fd'v log f«cee(f, o, f«)-0, (5.14)
(5.21)
with equality only if f,o
is Maxwellian. Also, a straight-
forward integration by parts gives (assuming again vii
'
Vfg~ — Ivy —
—C;; fbi — V(vii/0)) (5.22)
v -v~, »u, )
where
d'v log f, oC„(f„,f, o) = — ' ' d'm
U(w)
Bw
" &0 (5 15)

Bf«B inn,
Bg Bg
„e T,
B (4')
Bg
v2
v'z,
3
2
B lnT,
Bg
~w
(5.23)
(where w =v —u, n) with equality only if f,o is isotropic
~, and
in the ion mean rest frame (the reference frame moving
with velocity u,. relative to the laboratory). By averag- Bf„' Blnn, o g,. e B(C) v' 3 BlnT,
ing Eq. (5.13) over a flux surface, using Eq. (2.53), we Btf) Bg T, BP v~,. 2 Bg
have (5.24)
= (2T/m)'~~. Also, C,'=—C,', +C,', The main prob-
with v, „—
d'v log f, o(C„+C, &) =0, (5.18)
lem of the kinetic theory is the solution of Eqs. (5.21)
from which it follows that f,o must be a Maxwellian, and (5.22).
with mean velocity equal to that of the ions, u,. n. The ~~
The analogy with the Chapman-Enskog method is made
electron. temperature may differ from the ion tempera- complete by consideration of the constr aints imposed by
ture, because Eq. (1.14) does not include the O(m, /m, . ) the second-order and third-order equations. By writing
temperature equilibration. term. A similar analysis of Eq. (5.1) to second and third order in &~, and by the op-
Eq. (5.12) allows us to conclude that f, is also Maxwel- eration of integration over velocity space and averaging
lian. Substitution into Eqs. (5.11) and (5.12) then shows over a magnetic surface, we obtain solubility conditions
that these Maxwellians must be constant along field in the form of surface-averaged moment equations.
lines (and hence constant on magnetic surfaces), at con- These equations determine the Q and t dependence of f,
stant g, ~. It follows that u, =0, to this order, since .
and f, o. They will not be written down here, because
-.
we have already written down the (somewhat more ac-
~,
(v —u, n)' would otherwise contain vt~, which is not con-

~~
stant along field lines, at constant p. , e. Hence, curate) moments of the exact Fokker-Planck equation,
Eqs. (2.13) and (2.14), which need only to be averaged
f,o =N, (m, /2wT, )~' exp( m, e/T, ), (5.17) - over a flux surface to yield the desired equations. This
f, O=N, (m, /2mT, )+2 e.xp. (. m, e/T, ), (5.18) topic will be pursued in more detail in Sec. VII.
We now give a physical interpretation of some of the
where N, =n, oexp[ e(& )/T—, ], N~ ——n,. expO[Z, . e(4')/T, ], above equations. If the time derivatives were replaced
with n,-~, n;o, T„and T, functions of g and t. Charge in Eqs. (5.11) and (5.12), their solutions would approach
neutrality requires that m, o =g,. n,.o.
The fir st- or der equations are
v~~ Vf., —(C.', +C.',. )f., = v, . Vf., —(e/T. -)v~~&, A„'
(5.19)
the Maxwellian steady states, given by Eqs. (5.17) and
(5.18), in a time of the order of the 90'-scattering colli-
sion time. The decay of small departures from these
steady states, is described by linear equations. In the
short mean-free-path limit, this decay is related to the
classical parallel transport processes, considered in
v~~ Vf —Cia fgi =— '
v~~ Vf~o ~ (5.20)
See. IV. Thus heat conduction makes the temperatures
where the superscript l denotes the linearized collision uniform on a magnetic surface, resistivity reduces the
operators. Qn the right-hand sides of these equations, relative parallel flow velocity to zero, and parallel vis-
the following expression for the drift velocity is to be cosity eliminates the parallel mass motion through re-
used [recall Eq. (3.24) or Eq. (3.32)] gions of spatially varying magnetic field strength.
vq=-v~~nxV(v~~/n) vq, A similar interpretation of the time-dependent version
of Eq. (5.20) can be given if the ion temperature gradient
= Iv n V(v)(/0),
I) is zero. In this sPecial case, the steady-state solution
where the spatial derivative acting on v~] is taken at con- ls
stant e, p. , neglecting the 0(&) term [contained in Eqs. = 2v zt
(3.24) and (3.32)] due to the variation of C' tangent to a

A. „, )]
the
fg. , (5.25)
flux surface. Then, since we only need the component where

272 F. L. Hinton and R. l3. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport
u= —I(v,'„,. /2n, . ) s inn,

- " + Z,
e 8 (4 )
(5.26) Galilean invariance, as in Eq. (4. 17), may now be used
to simplify the eollisional terms in Eq. (5.27), which
The relaxation of f;„ to this shifted Maxwellian, can be becomes
described in terms of the decay of poloidal rotation. ' —C»» lnT,.
Note that when Eq. (5.26) is used for the parallel veloc- vii V&»2 &»2 =-Ivii V(vii/&»)
lhi
ity component and combined with Eq. (2.61) for the per-
pendicular component, one obtains zero for the poloidal ii("'Z» «ii+ I ii; )f;./I »,
component u,. B~ =0. The rate of decay of the poloidal 2I(v il/
velocity is of the order of the ion —ion 90 -collision time.
In the collisional and plateau regimes, investigated by
Stlx (1 973), the dissipation mechanisms are magnetic
~
V(v /n, )(f, ,/v. '»)a( Il)/ay,
pumping (parallel viscosity) and Landau damping. ln the where u is given by Eq. (5.26). The first term on the
banana regime, Rosenbluth (1973) has obtained a similar right-hand side of the equation for g,-, comes from
decay rate, due to friction between trapped and un- v~. Vf, o, and . appears in the second-order theory when
trapped ions. the ion temperature gradient is small. The second term,
containing the electric field and frictional coupling
5. Second-order equations terms, is considered below. The third term, involving
Although we are primarily interested in the first-
order equations, the second-order ion equation is of
some interest:
).
vii Vf; —C'; » f; = -vq; Vf. i + v (n; Z, eEii + I'ii,. ) o/P,
'
+C, , (f, „f,,

ii
+ (m, n, /m, n,.7, )(1 —

. T, /T,
o.
). f
auE/s(, is due to the gradient of the toroidal angular
velocity. Recalling that u,. B~ =0, for small ion tem-
perature gradient, we see that u is related to the toroi-
dal velocity ur by u = (Rr/E)ur, and hence to the toroidal
angular velocity»vr ——ur/R by uB =I»dr. We do not con-
sider the effects of this third term, since they have not
been considered in the literature. We thus assume that
a(ufo')/a( =0; using Eq. (5.26) and neglecting aI/sp
[=O(P)], this condition may be written as
x, (vof,. ) —(af,. /st). ,
a inn, /aiIi+ (Z, e/T, )s (C )/a/ = const (5.28)
which corresponds to rigid body rotation: a»vr/ag =0.
,
The time derivative of f, is here taken at constant v,
The Eii and Ei, terms in Eq. {5.27) are of particular
and is to be evaluated using the solubility conditions, to
this order importance, especially in the case of two ion species,
which is considered later. We therefore find it con-
,
an, /at =0, venient to treat these terms as first ox'der, so that Eq.
(5.22) becomes
3 BT; 3 fPl; V
'0
2 Ot vii' Vf i —C,' (f ») =-Ivii V(vii/&;)Sf o/a»Ii
= 3(m. /m, . ~.) n. (T. , T, ), + vll(n' Z 'eEil ++il )f o/P»o ~ (5.29)
[where the second term may be rewritten, using Eq
This artifice makes it easy to obtain results for the two
(2. 58)]. Thus, the temperature equilibration term can-
ion species case, from the solution to the single ion
cels, and we have
species problem now under consideration.
vii
' Vf" —C'*.f». = -~u. ' Vf'i
—')f». - B. Linearized kinetic equations
+ (2/3P;, )(v'/v;. ;
1. Coordinate system
PPZ V
In this section, the linearized kinetic equations will be
transformed to a canonical form, given by Eqs. (5.80)
+ v (nio Zi eEII + +II»)f»o/pi
II 0 + Ci i (fil sf'1) and (5.81). Expressions appear on the right-hand sides
of these equations which also appear in the integrands
(5.27)
of the expressions for the fluxes. Transport coefficients
This equation has been solved in limiting cases, which appear naturally as inner products in this formalism,
are mentioned in Sec. VI.C. which was introduced by Bernstein (1974), and the On-
It is instructive to consider here the version of Eq. sager relations are then just the symmetry properties
(5.27) which is obtained when the ion temperature gra- of these inner products. The coupling of the kinetic
dient i s relatively small equations, for the two particle species, is also most
easily treated within this formalism.
9 lnT»/8 inn, = O(6~, ). At this point, it is convenient to introduce a poloidal
Then fi, is given by the shifted Maxwellian of Eq. (5.25), angle coordinate 0, which differs from the coordinate 8,
,
and it is convenient to express f, in terms of a second- introduced in Sec. II.C. Many formulae are simplified
order shifted Maxwellian by choosing 0 such that
f;. =(2viiu'/v;„)f;o+ Z;. . B &O=BP VO=k
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, Na. 2, Part I, April 1976

where 0 is independent of 8 (and f); This means that 6 v~ Vp = (BzJB~,) v „n V(v), /Q), (5.36)
may be obtained from a knowledge of the poloidal field
where we have used RB~ RpB~ Further, we write
'
'&
dE, (5.31) (5.39)
0
so that
where the integration path is tangent to the poloidal pro-
jection of a field line (on a plane of constant g). The re- Vp = (v), /Q~) n V(v, )k), (5.40 )
quirement that 0 increase by 2m on one poloidal circuit
where
around the magnetic axis implies that
Q, =— (eBo/mc)(Bp, /BT, ) = ego/mc (5.41)
is a typical value for the gyrofrequency in the poloidal
magnetic field. We shall usually use the approximation
Note that 0 is also related to the derivative with respect
B =Br, so that it =R/Ro.
to poloidal flux of the volume enclosed by a flux surface
dV d9 dip 2n
(5. 32) 2. Transformation of the kinetic equations
2w dg B V0 ~
and to the metric determinant of Eq. (2.43): k =g Rather than work with Eqs. (5.21) and (5.29), it is use-
The natural choice of & as the symmetry angle, in ful to transform them by introducing the functions II„II„
axisymmetric systems, requires that B VP =Br/R defined as follows (now using —e for the electron charge
which is not constant. Therefore, the local pitch of the and Z,. e for the ion charge}
field lines, B Vg/B VO, is not constant, i.e. , the field
~
lines are not "straight, " in these coordinates, in con-

trast to those used in Eq. (2.49). Vthe
The flux surface average, defined by Eq. (2.56), may
be written as + v)) f„B(E)) B&/(B'& +H, , (5.42)
(5. 33) v, 0
)
s lnp; Z,. e s(4&
Q~p Bp Tg sp
With the above choice of poloidal angle 8, this is simply
'~ dl'
(5. 34) +(Z, e/T, ) f o
0
.
P
[BE~ —B2(EgB&/(B~&]+Hi 1
In place of one of the flux coordinates g, Q, or V, as a, (5.43)

label for the flux surfaces, we shall use a coordinate p
where E~— = E), +F~„/n, Z, e is the "effective electric field"
,
which has the dimensions of length. This will make the
results easier to understand, since the dimensions of acting on the ions, allowing for friction with the elec-
various quantities (e.g. , diffusion coefficients) will be trons. The purpose of introducing the first term in Eq.
the physical ones. We define the effective minor radius (5.42) is to cancel the term proportional to u, ,), con-
coordinate p in terms of the toroidal flux Q by the rela- '„
tained in C, in Eq. (5.21}; recall Eqs. (4.41}-(4.46}.
tion In the second term in Eq. (5.42}, we have introduced
the integral of E]~ along a field line, and subtracted a
Q =BT, wp', (5.35) term proportional to the average (E), B&, to make the
where BT, is a constant, representative value of the integral single valued in 0. The purpose of these terms
toroidal field; in general, p is then a typical dimension is to eliminate the 8 dependence of E~I from the kinetic
of the magnetic surface cross section. It reduces to the equation, so that only the average (E))B& appears; note
usual minor radius coordinate in the large aspect ratio, that the electrostatic fieM makes no contribution to this
circular cross section case, as discussed in Sec. VI. average, from Eq. (2.53). The third term in Eq. (5.42)
The advantage of this particular definition, in terms of involves the Spitzer function, defined in Sec. IV f„,
toroidal flux, will become apparent in. Sec. VII.
We also define an effective Poloidal field magnitude
.
&.(v))f, ) -=(&. +~.;&)v))f. =(e/T. )v))f, . .
(5.44)
in terms of the minor radius coordinate p, by This is conventional, following Rosenbluth, Hazeltine
and Hinton (1972), and makes possible the exact solution
(5.36) for H, in the limit of a small fraction of trapped parti-
cles [see Sec. VI. B]. In Eq. (5.44) and below, we sup-
press the superscript E on the linearized collision. oper-
so that the poloidal field vector is ators; the subscript zero, identifying the homogeneous
B, = (", )(R,/R)B,
V .(,
t) . (5.37)
electron collision operator, is also omitted.
The introduction of the ion pressure gradient and
Here Ro is an arbitrarily chosen constant, a typical "radial" electric field, in Eq. (5.43), eliminates these
major radius, and e& is a unit vector in the toroidal from Eq. (5.29). The purpose of the other terms is to
direction. . The drift velocity component which is needed eliminate the 8 dependence of E][ and E~[,-.
is v~ Vp =v„~ VQ/(Sg/Sp), which can be written as
~
Thus the function II, satisfies the following equation

VHH CHHH = —vd, . Vp — lnp, +(T, /Z;T, )

8 lnP, . where
o., = v„~ Vp, a, = (v'/v, '„, —5/2)v„~ Vp (5.53)
+ (u'/v, '„, —5/2) ' f„ o'3 =v)) 'V (u))/lI)f. /f o .
o. =-(v))/l~~. pl) n' V(u))/~)
Op
—,V(, /l)f. .B,(E B&/(B'& (5.54)

—p;(T;/Z;T. )(u /'ill. ,l)n V(u /l)f. „
(5.45)
)6, = (20, ~/n, ov(2h, (k . '&)v))/k, P, = (u'/v, '„, —5/2. )v „. ~
Vp.
(5.55)
where p, ; is related to u,. by The forces have been chosen as follows
ll
8 9
v = (vv;/20 v)IV;//I— lnP, + (T;/Z;T, ) ln p, , (5.56)
„~(
Bp Bp
A, = Bp
lnT, , A„=B,(E B&/(B'&, (5.5V)
which follows from Eq. (5.43) and the definition of u, )),
with A„= —(T, /Z, T, )p, , (5.58)
d'v v)) H, =-
,
(n, u('„,./2n, .~)u,. /h. (5.47) A. „=—(n, Z, e. / m.
Q,. )(E B&/B, A„=
9
Bp
lnT, .
The fact that this parallel ion flow is proportional to B (5.59)
(=Bo/l() follows from the fact that it must be divergence- The driving term A. „. has been expressed as an inte-
less, since the other terms in Eq. (5.46) provide the gral of H, in Eq. (5.50); this equation can also be written
parallel return flows discussed in Sec. II. Note that the as
—
radial electric field B(4 &/sp has cancelled and does not
appear in Eq. (5.45).
The equation satisfied by the function II; is
A„= ((/H, )
f d'v H, q, (5.60)
Similarly, by using Eq. (5.47), the driving term A. „can

v))
' VH —C H = -vd ' Vp(u ~
/v(h —5/2) f () be expressed as an averaged moment of II,-
(5.48) A, = —(T /T, T I( f d'v H; d, '
(5.61)
The term (Ed, B&, which contains the friction force, can From the linearity of Eqs. (5.51) and (5.52), it follows
be expressed as an integral of Iz„as follows. By multi- that the right-hand sides of Eqs. (5.60) and (5.61) may be
plying Eq. (5.21) by m, v)) and integrating over all veloc- written as linear combinations of the six forces A. „„A.„,
ities, we obtain the parallel electron momentum equa- Then A„. and A. 4, may be eliminated, by expressing them
tion: in terms of the four independent forces A. A. A. 3„
and A. „.. Before doing this, we introduce the transport
„, „,
d'v m, v))v)) Vf„Fj)H —n, () eE)) . — coefficients.
We now multiply this equation by B and average over a

3. Transport coefficients
magnetic surface, integrating the left-hand side by The fluxes, or moments of the distribution function,
parts, to obtain [compare Eq. (2. 96)] which are needed to close the set of moment equations
[see Sec. VII for a more detailed discussion] are the
-m Bo dv ~vl)
'V v ll
k = EI] —n, oeElI B electron flux I;, the electron heat flux q„ the ion heat
flux q, , and an average of the parallel current density
= -n„e(E„B&, (5.49)
where the second equality follows from charge neutrality d vv VpII d'v cy, H, (5.62)
n, 0=Z,.n,.o. When Eq. (5.42) is substituted into Eq. (5.49),
one finds that on the left-hand side, may be re-
f„,
placed by II, . Thus q, /T. -=( f ds q ( v/ Vq/vq}Hvv , =
f d'vv, H.
d'v H, v„q(v„/q)) = (v„q/m, )(H„H)/H (5.50) (5.63)
of the four "thermodynamic forces"

After identification q;/T, . = d'v v„; Vp(v'/v~H, —5/2)H, . d v P2II&
A.„„and the two forces A. „,, defined below, the equations
for II, and II,. may be written in the following useful form (5.64)
4
vI)
~
VHe —C~ He = — ~„A„~ (5.51) ((d)) —~)).)/&& = -e d'v H, v))/& (5.65)
n=1
2 Here we have introduced the Spitzer current density, de-
v)) ~
VH,. —C,.» H, =-QP„A« f«, . (5.52) fined for present purposes as

= o B (Zii B)/(B'),
Jii, — These inner products are the transport coefficients, re-
ii
lating the fluxes to the forces.

where OII is given in Table II of Sec. IV. An approximate
We now eliminate the "forces" A„. and A4„which also
analytical expression for the Z, dependence is
appears as fluxes, according to Eqs. (5.60) and (5.61);
by substitutingEq. (5.69) into these equations, we find
(5.66)
A„. = (I/Z, . )g(~„g.) A„. , (5. v5)
We now show that Eq. (5.65) can be written in terms
of an integral of o, By using the definition of o., and
integrating by parts in the flux surface average, we A„= -(T, /Z, T, )g. (P„g„,. )A„, (5. 76)
n=J,
have
r These equations may be solved for A„. and A4„ in terms
d V 3 IIe Cl V V II
~ se eo VII VQe of the other A„'s, to give
where vII VII, may be replaced by C, II„using Eq. A. „=(1/Z; F) Q(a„g„,

n=l
)A„,
(5.51). Then the self-adjointness ProPexty of the linear-
ized collision operator C, = C„+v„. g, which is ex- —(& /g;T. i(o'. , )g„dI,
pressed by [recall Eq. (4.63)]
~)g(d (5.vv)
3
d'v(g, //. , )C, /, = f d'u(/, //. ,)C, g, , (5.6v) A, = . (T, lz, T-. F) (I/z, )(P„g„)g(
n=l
„g )A„.
enables us to write
+ (d„g.; )&.;I, (5. vs)
—f dv(e, // )c,(v~~f )
f dva, n, =—
where
From Eq. (5.44), the definition of f„, we have F =-1+ (Ti lz'; T.)(~„g. )(P„g;;). . (5. v9)
3 ~~ 1 — d'v v
~ When Eqs. (5.77) and (5.78} are substituted into Eqs.
d'i/n, 3 H,e
= -(e/T,e ) ~ ~
ii
I~
H,e (5.70)-(5.73), we finally have the four fluxes expressed
in terms of the four independent forces A] A2 A3„
therefore, from Eq. (5.65), and A„. We shall show in Sec. V.C that both inner prod-
1 ucts which appear. in Eq. (5.79) are negative, so that
T
i(d„—d„,)/gi=
f d'va, e. . (5.6s) E&1.
The transport problem has been reduced to solving for
Eqs. (5.62}, (5.63}, (5.64), (5.68) thus give the re- and the functions g„„g„;and calculating the transport coeffi-
quired fluxes in terms of simple integrals of H, and Ii, , cients in the form of inner products, g„,), (p, g„;). (o,
in which the functions a„o. appear. These are „e„P, The equations to be solved are obtained by-substituting
the same functions which multiply the forces A„„A„, on Eq. (5.69) into Eqs. (5.51) and (5.52)
the right-hand sides of Eqs. (5.51) and (5.52), and this
makes our choice of fluxes and forces consistent with il gne Ce gne +nfea~ (5.80)
Onsager symmetry of the transport coefficients Isee Vii
' ~gni —&ii gni = Pnfio) n=1(5.sl)
2
Sec. V.C].
From the linearity of Eqs. (5.51) and (5. 52), we may These equations may be solved variationally, as dis-
write their solutions in the form cussed in Subsection V.C. In the large aspect-ratio
limiting case, explicit analytical solutions may be ob-
4 2
He g gneAne ~ Hi QgnjAni ' (5.69) tained, as discussed in Sec. VI.
The required fluxes may then be written as linear com-

4. Weak-coupling approximation
binations of all of the A„'s The above formalism is simplified considerably by an
approximation which we shall call the "weak-coupling
I; =Q (o.„g„,)A„, , (5.vo) approximation. "
The effect on the ions of collisions
n=g
with the electrons is contained in the "force" A„ in Eq.
(5.52); this equation becomes decoup/ed from the equa-
Ie/Te (~2i gne)Ane t (5. vl) tion for II, if we neglect A, i. If this is done, Eq. (5.73)
n'=
4 gives
(1/Te}(( Ii +lie)/~) =g(net
n=J,
gne)Ane ~ (5.v2)
~;/T; = (e., g„)A.. . (5.82)
while Eq. (5.76) yields
e;/T; =Q(P. , g.i)A. i . (5.73)
n=l = (T;/Z;T, ) p. ; = —(T-;/Z, T, )(P„g„)A„,
A„— (5.s3)
Here, following Bernstein (1974), we have introduced where A„. =s(lnT, . )/sp. These are the lowest-order re-
inner products, defined, for example, by
sults, in which the ion fluxes are unaffected by the elec-
(~„g. ) = ( . f ' a, d. .Ug (5.74)
tron forces, and the ion force A„. appears in the expres-
sions for the electron fluxes in a simple additive way,

through A. 4, . 8 8
A first correction to Eq. (5.82) may be obtained by A, = lnT, , A2~ = 1nT,
substituting Eq. (5.83) into Eq. (5.75); we obtain
Neglecting the effect of collisions with the electrons, the
(5.84) species "b" particle flux is given by the ambipolar con-
dition
with
3 Z. r. +~I =0-
A„= (1/Z;) Q(n„g„,)A„, The relations between the fluxes and forces are very
n=l.
similar to Eq. (5. 70)-(5.73)
—(»/&;»)(~. , z. .)(p„g,;)&.;I (5.s5)
l. =Q(n„g„.)A„. ,
Ily comparison with Eq. (5.77), we see that the weak-
coupling approximation is equivalent to assuming I' = I,
or, more precisely, V./&. =Q(n.
n=&
, g. )A. .. .
I' —1 =- (T, /Z2 T, )(n„g„)(p„g„.) «1. (5.88)
eb/7'b =Q
n=g
(P„g.b) A.b,
More specific conditions will be given in Sec. VI, for the
various collisionality regimes, after the transport coef- where the auxiliary forces A„and A», defined by
ficients have been obtained for the large aspect ratio Ass (+a b/Zb~ )I b Al b (+II +)/ b bb 0
case. We will find that the weak-coupling approximation
is satisfied, in the electron-ion problem, under most appear because of the frictional couP/ing of the two spe-
conditions. cies. [Note that, neglecting the effect of E)), there is no
force corresponding to A„, in Eq. (5.57); the force cor-
responding to A4, has therefore been labeled A„.] These
5. Two ion-species problem auxiliary forces are eliminated just as in the electron-
As a first step in the solution of the problem of trans- ion problem, to give
r. ~) —
port in the presence of impurities, we consider the z'
special case of one-imPuxity sPecies. We consider a re-
stricted problem, in which the two ion species have
A, .=-(Z.r, /Z, (p„g„)g(n„g„.)A„.
2
disparate masses. In this case, we may simply trans-

pose the results, for the inner products, from the elec-
tron-ion problem to the two ion species problem. 2'
I.et the two ion species be labeled "a" and "b, " and A„=-(Z./Z, ~) g(n„g„.)A„.
assume m, «mb. With the ordering m, /mb-&b, -&b'b, the n=1
fastest process is temperature equilibration, so that we
must assume T, =1;. Diffusion due to unlike-species
collisions occurs on a faster time scale than that due to
+ .
(&»/&») (~., z, ) ())„a. )&., I, .
like-species collisions, so only the first-order kinetic where
equations are needed. The analysis of the electron-ion
problem applies, with rn, replaced by nz„m. , by mb, -e - .
& -=1+ (z' &~/zb .
~.)(n. , g, )(P„a,b) -1 . '
by/, e, etc. There is a major difference between the problem of

The effect of collisions with the electrons is of higher- two ion species, and the electron-ion problem. In the
order, but couM be included by replacing E)) by E)) —F ))'/ former problem, the weak-coupling approximation is not
n, Z, e, where c denotes either a or b, and E~~' is the fric- generally valid, for the parameter ranges relevant to
tion of that ion species with the electrons. However, tokamak experiments, while in the latter problem, it is
this would necessitate solution of the electron kinetic generally valid. This question will be pursued further in
equation in the presence of two ion species, and wou1. d Sec. VI, after specific results for the transport coeffi-
complicate the results. Since the effect of these terms cients have been obtained.
on the particle and heat fluxes can be shown to be rela-
tively small, we shall replace EI~ by zero. By Onsager C. General variational principle
symmetry, we thereby also neglect the contribution to
the "bootstrap current" (see Sec. V. D) from friction be- The basis of the variational method for solving the
tween the two ion species. Although this contribution is kinetic equations, Eqs. (5.80) and (5.81), is the principle
not negligible (Connor, 1973), when one or both of the of minimum entropy production (Prigogine, 1961). In
ion species is in the banana regime, reliable results for order to illustrate the argument which leads to the actual
the numerical coefficients are not yet available. form of the variational principle without undue compli-
We therefore consider the three fluxes I; (the species cation, we consider the ion equation in the weak-coupling
"a" particle flux), q„and qb (the heat fluxes), and the approximation: Eq. (5.52) with A„= 0. The local rate
three forces of entropy P~oduction due to ion-ion collisions, has the
following form, when averaged over a magnetic surface
9 8 (or, more precisely, over the volume region between
A„= lnp. —(Z, Tb/zbT, ) lnp„. two nearby magnetic surfaces)

S, = — dvln )C;; d vH, C;;II,-
By expanding in the gyroradius, f, = f„+f„,with f;c We note that

Maxwellian and constant on a magnetic surface, we ob-
tain
J, +J =-S, , (5.92)
so that the entropy production associated with the even
S, = — O',-, ,- C, , and odd parts of II,. may be identified as —&, and — J,
respectively.
Since the collision term conserves particles and momen- The principle of minimum entropy production with the
tum, and has no effect on a shifted Maxwellian, the constraints given by Eq. (5.91), may be expressed by
transformation of Eq. (5.43) leads to the requirement that the functional
S-=—
e
i d'vtI, -C;; H; (5.87)

be stationary with respect to variations in H, , and that
'.
where H, = H, /.f, — .
,
Steady-state ion heat conduction is governed by the
law that [S,. ] is a minimum (where the square brackets be stationary with respect to variation. s in II, , where
indicate the functional of H;), subject to the constraints ~, and ~ are Lagrange multipliers. These variational
imposed by the guiding center drifts and the existence of principles give Euler equations for II,' which are con-
a nonzero temperature gradient. The subsystem consistent with the constraints, provided that ~, =2, & =-2.
sisting of the plasma between two nearby magnetic sur- By noticing that only [&a) contains both H, and H, , we
faces is maintained away from thermal equilibrium, may combine the two variational principles. The func-
since the drifts and the temperature gradient prevent tional
the distribution function from becoming a Maxwellian. (5.93)
If the subsystem were a closed system, its entropy
would increase to the maximum value consistent with the is thus station. ary with respect to independent variations
constraints of constant total number of particles and of II, and II; . In fact, by using the negative-definite
energy, and the distribution function would then be Max- property of the collision term
wellian. Aetua1. ly, the entropy increases indefinitely J «Q (5.94)
because a steady state difference is maintain, ed, between
the distribution function and the equilibrium Maxwellian. . (with equality if and only if H,'=—0), i. t
is easily shown
This difference must adjust so that the rate of increase that [S,] is maximal with respect to H, and minimal with
of entropy is as small as possible, however. respect to H, Its extremal value is given by Eq. (5.92),
The mathematical form of the const~ainfs, imposed by or
the temperature gradient and the guiding center motion,
may be expressed in the form of integrals obtained from S, = &D = -(q, /T, } (5.95)
Eq. (5.52). We first define the even and odd [in o
=sign(u~, )] parts of the distribution function using Eq. (5.91) and the definition of the heat flux, Eq.
'
H, =--.'[H,. (~ =+) +H,. (v = -)),
(5.84). From Eq. (5.94) we have S, &0, so that a positive
coefficient z, (the ion thermal conductivity}, defined by
(5.88)
H, = ,'[II, (o =+) —H, ((x=-—)]—. q, =-~,. (aT, /ap),
Then Eq. (5.52) yields the following equations for the odd may be obtained from the extremal value of the func-
and even parts of H tional [S,.]:
I" gl~ 7H; -Cg;H, =-vg; ' tp(~~/~~g —5/2)
+.
'f;„ S,. =~,. (s lnT, /ap)'.
This variational principle was first introduced by
(5.89)
re-.
Rutherford (1970) in a form which is somewhat differ-
Iv~, lie &H, —C„H,
+
=0. (5.90) ent, but equivalent to Eq. (5.93}.
+ A somewhat more convenient form of the variational
By multiplying Eqs. (5.89) and (5.90) by H, and H, principle is obtained when g„ is used in. place of II,. ; the
spectively, and averaging over a magnetic surface, we extremal value is then equal to the inner product
find the constraints to be
(P. , u;;) = ~;. -
J~ —J+ —JD =Q, er~+ J =Q, (5.91) All of the inner products required to obtain all of the
fluxes of both particle species may be calculated from
where the following variational expressions:
d'vII, + v, n VII,. lv"„'I =

(f g vlg, c,g„",—g, c,g„,
Ã I&el&'&z
—R'mc&n —8nYm +8'cmc&'n +Inc&m) (5.98)
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1S76

where c stands for either e or i, y„stands for either collision term in Eq. (5.80) or (5.81) may be treated
o, „or P„, and the superscripts a indicate the parity in o. formally as a small perturbation. For systems with ar-
[Note that the n„'s are all even, and P, is even, but P, bitrary aspect ratio (or an arbitrary fraction of trapped
is odd, so that o.„=ti2 =P, =0.] The errors in these particles) the effective collision frequency for trapped
variational expressions are quadratic in the errors in electrons is of the order of the momentum transfer fre-
the functions g„',. The diagonal (m =n) terms in the ma- quency v„. (v), defined by Eq. (5.4). The bounce fre-
trix [U '„] provide mini-max variational principles which quency is given roughly by
are useful in solving for the functions g„„g„,. The ex-
trema1. values of all of the variational expressions give ,
~, —(2m/I. ) ~ v,
the required inner products where I., (=2nqB) is
the connection length. The "bana-
"
na, or "collisionless" regime for the electrons is then
V&'„'=- d'v g„'. y -g„-, y-. (5. 97) defined by
which may be verified by substituting Eqs. (5.80) and

v„. qR/v «1. (5.100)
(5.81), written in terms of the even and odd parts, into The banana regime for the ions is defined similarly
Eq. (5.96). «1,
Since all of the cv„'s are even, we have, for the elec- v, , (v) qR/v (5.101)
tron inner products where v, , (v) is a 90-degree scattering collision fre-
quency [given, for example by Eq. (6.41)]. Although
these conditions are velocity dependent, the assumption
From the self-adjointness property of C„Eq. (5.67), it is usually made that they can be replaced by the equiva-
follows that Eq. (5.96) is symmetric in m and n, and lent conditions for particles with the thermal velocity,
therefore so are the extremal values v, „, or v~;. Actually, a more stringent condition is re-
quired, in order that Eq. (5.101) hold for all velocities
(5.98)
which contribute significantly to the transport processes.
These are the Onsagex relations, a consequence of the The results which are obtained, for this nearly colli-
self-adjointness of the collision operators, which is it- sionless regime, are dominated by the guiding-center
self a consequence of, microscopic reversibility (de motion. The diffusion and heat conduction results are
Groot and Mazur, 1962). Furthermore, from the nega. — consistent with a random walk argument, as given in
tive-definite property of the collision operators, and the Sec. III. New effects appear, due to the special proper-
fact that the n 's are even, it follows that the diagonal ties of these orbits, which are not present in the straight
matrix elements are negative magnetic field ease. These are the trapped particle
pinch effect and the "bootstrap" current.
(«., v„.[=-v! =
(f a «[ g ..c.g..
C. a'.'. + ".a. ] o.
In the ion case, the force (8, is even, but P, is odd.
2. E lectron distribution function
The self-adjointness of C;,- implies that t/z2 +2z but We begin the perturbation analysis of Eq. (5.80) by ex-
Eq. (5. 97) then implies anttsymmetry of the off-diagonal panding g„, in powers of v„-qR/v («1)
inner products g(0) +g(l) + o o o
(P„a„)= (P„a„). - (5, 99) The lowest-order equation, obtained by neglecting the
It should be evident that the diagonal matrix element collision term is then
corresponding to the even force P, is negative, as in the
electron case
"
v[, n Vg„(, = -o. „f„, (5.102)
where we have treated all of the n„'s uniformly, as being
of order unity in the collision frequency parameter. The
It is easily shown that the other diagonal matrix element special property of the ~„'s, for the axisymmetric case
is also negative considered here, is that they have the form v„n . V(. ).
We shall consider here only the n =1 equation in detail;
(p„g„.) = v t[' = (f
«'« [ g,',. c,
g„+ g, ; c z, ;() ~ « . g
the general solution of Eq. (5.102) is [recall Eq. (3.104)]
The fact, that all of the diagonal matrix elements are (5.103)
negative, corresponds to the definition of the forces as where
being positive in the direction opposite to the direction
of the fluxes which they drive [e.g. , diffusion due to a (5.104)
density gradient goes in the direction opposite to the The function 6„ is determined by the first-order equa-
density gradient]. This is due to the positive-definite tion
nature of the entropy production.
(5.105)
D. Banana regime
"
The unknown function gz', can be eliminated by the oper-
ation g d8%/v„, where the integration is a round trip be-
Definitions tween turning points (at which v„changes sign) for the
Vixen the effective collision frequencies of the trapped trapped particles (h;„~ XBO~ h,
„), or a complete cir-
particles are smaller than their bounce frequencies, the cuit around the minor circumference, for the untrapped

particles (0 ~KB, ~h;„); see Fig. 5. That this opera- X, Bo

tion annihilates g,", follows, in the trapped region, from Tl 0pp8d
Eq. (3.61); in the untrapped region it follows from re-
quiring that g,"e) be single valued. The function G„pro-
Boundary
Layer — (
; ~i ~~(~ ,
)I(8}
vides the freedom to satisfy these solubility conditions,
~
1
I I l
I I I
and is, in turn, determined by them: I
Untropped
" d68 v„h I
(5.106) I
VII ep
o, () } o,'() }
The perturbation analysis thus leads to a reduction of —Bounce Points
Eq. (5.80) (for n= 1) to this constraint equation, for a
function G„which is independent of 0. This analysis FIG. 5. Phase space, showing trapped and untrapped regions,
the boundary layer, and the trapped-particle bounce points.
was first carried out by Galeev and Sagdeev (1968).
The values 1+ e and l —e for hnl» and Am~ apply only to the
Very similar constraint equations may be obtained for large aspect-ratio, circular cross section case, where
the functions g„, g3„and g4„by following this same e = r/R, .
procedure. These constraint equations have not been
solved, in general, because of the complexity of the
Fokker-Planck collision terms. %'e will subsequently
82(x) dg~
give an explicit solution for a special case which is
tractable: the Lorentz model. v "~(x)
Io"
Aep
i~"' ")=' (5.111)
We now show that Eq. (5.106) is equivalent to a, vari- h;„~ LB~~ „(trapped). Since these equations are
ational principle (Rosenbluth, Ha. zeltine and Hinton,
for h,
equivalent to Eq. (5.106), the variational property of
1972) which is useful in obtaining approximate solutions.
We first note that Eq. (5.104) and the boundary condi-
"]
[Q,', has been demonstrated. That [Q,', has a. mini- "]
mum follows from the negative-definite property of the
tions imply that &„ is even in o, in the trapped region collision operator.
of phase space, since the odd part of g,'o' (and hence of A general property of G„ follows from Eqs. (5.111)
G„) must vanish at the trapped pa, rticle bounce points, and (5.110) (when summed over a) and the fact that the
,
& = II, (X), and also be independent of II. Thus, collision term preserves the parity in v [e.g. , C, (v„f,o)
G„(o' =+ ) —G„((r = —) = 0, f or I1,„&XB, & I1 „. 1S odd 111 (r]:
(5.10V) G„(o =+ ) + G„((r= —) = 0 for all X,
3. Variational principle i.e.,the function t"„ is odd in 0. It follows from Eq.
(5.107) that G„ is identically zero in the trapped parti-
The constraint equation, Eq. (5.106), is equivalent to cle region.
the requirement that the functional The variational expression for [Q,", '] may also be ob-
tained directly from Eq. (5.96). We note that g,', is first
(e) G~
2 77
) 3 v))k
IQ ep I
~
" ' v))k
IQ ep I " ") order in v, ~qR/v, and that the trial functions must satis-
fy the constraints of Eqs. (5.103) and (5.104), which im-
(5.108) ply the cancellation of g,'Jv„ln Vg„", and g,', a."„ to first
be a minimum, subject to the constraints of Eqs. (5.104) order. Therefore, sj.nce o.', =0, we have
and (5.107). To prove this, we note that variation of G„ [Q(e)] [y(e)]
and use of the sen-adjointness property of C„Eq.
neglecting terms quadratic in v„qR/v. Furthermore,
(5.67), gives from Eq. (5.9V), it follows that the extremal value is the
"d88 ~ VPg required transport coefficient, in this case the diffusion
6[Q,", '] = —
-
v'dv
fy & v II IA ep I ")' coefficient
(5.109) Q„- -(o(, g(.). (5.112)
where we have used The other transport coefficients may be obtained from
variational principles also:
~h
., 2lv ~'
~dy
d v=2+ I
vdv
vp
[Q.".'] =— J (5.113)
l
and interchanged the order of the X and ~ integrations.

The II limits of integration are the turning points )I, (A) , where g„",' is a solution of Eq. (5.102). By using
for the trapped particles, and +m for the untrapped par- —v„n V(v„y„),
a(„= (5.114)
ticles. By using the constraints of Eqs. (5.104) and
(5.10V) as applied to 5G„, Eq. (5.109} implies to define the functions y„, i.e. , y, = —&/l&, (,l,
d6+ y, = (v'/v', ~ —5/2}y„y, = f„/h, and y, = -1/hl+ pl the
v)) Ez
' solution of Eq. (5.102) is seen to be
It I ID I~ ") (5.110)
(5.115)
for 0~ XBo~ I1;„(untrapped) which holds for a =+ and
o. = —separately, and where &G„,/8)I=0. The extremal values of these func-
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1S76

280 F. L. Hinton and R. D. HazeItine: Theory of plasma transport
tionals are the transport coefficients: term. The first term on the right-hand side, of Eq.
(5.115) is the negative of the Spitzer distribution func-
tion [except for factors of E„and h, which are accounted
4. Lorentz model for in the definition of g3„Eq. (5.69).j Comparing with
We now consider the special case Z; 1, in which » Eq. (5.42), we may thus identify G~, with f„/E„, when
electron-electron all other driving terms except E„are absent. [For pur-
collisions may be neglected. A sim-
ple solution of the constraint equation, Eq. (5.106),
poses of interpretation, we ignore the distinction be-
tween E„and B(E„B)/(&').j The time-averaged effect of
may be obtained, in this case. The results are, pre-
sumably, qualitatively similar to those of the more gen-
collisions, on the difference between the distribution
function f„and the Spitzer function (proportional to E„),
eral case Z,. -1, although the latter have not been cal-
must be zero. For the trapped elect ons, the time-av-
culated, except for large aspect ratio. An analysis of
the I.orentz model for general geometry was first given eraged effect of &, is zero, since the work done by
~
on one-half of the bounce period is cancelled by the

by Rutherford (1970).
work on the other half. Thus, the distribution function
By using C, = v„Z, with v„. and 2 given by Eqs. (5.4)
and (5.6), the constraint equation, Eq. (5. 106), becomes f„must be zero for the trapped electrons; they are not
required to have a, net flow velocity (and hence a. net
momentum transfer to the ions), in order to balance the
electric field, since the time-averaged effect of the lat-
ter is zero. For the un' apped electxons, the distribu-
The integral /de equals 2m for untrapped particles, and tion function is not zero, since friction with the ions
zero for trapped particles. Hence, must approximately balance the electric field. The dif-
ference between the distribution function and the Spitzer
(5.116) function, as inferred from Eq. (5.117), thus tends to be
small for the well-untrapped electrons.
In order to calculate the transport coefficients, we
where H(x) =0 if x& 0 or 1 if x& 0. The function g~', is ~
must first express the inner products (n, g„,) in terms

obtained after one further integration. of the zexoth. -ox'de+ in collision frequency approxima-
This result can be interpreted in the following way. tions, the g„'0's. Since the o'. 's are even in o (= sign()
Eq. (5.103) gives a result of the guiding-center trajec- we have
tories passing through regions with different particle
densities. The distribution function would be constant
on a drift surface, in the absence of collisions, and this
leads to the first term on the right hand side, after ex- where we have noted that g„', ' does not contribute, being
panding in the poloidal gyroradius [c.f. Eq. (3.104)j. A an odd function. Next, we note that the u„'s may be
second term G„must be added, so that the time-aver- written in the form given by Eq. (5.114), and by inte-
aged effect of collisions on the distribution function is grating by parts in the ~ average, we obtain
zero, as is required for a steady state. The constraint
equation, Eq. (5.106) thus states that this time average,
over a particle bounce or transit, is zero, and this de-
d'v(v„y )v„n &g„'P . (5.118)
termines the function 6„.
For trapped particles, which Finally, we use the first-order equation, Eq. (5.105), to
spend the same amounts of time with g„&0 and g~, &0, write this as
the time-averaged effect of collisions on the collision- r
less term is zero, so we must also have „=0:
there (n~, g«) = — J' d vv~~ymC, g„', ' (5.119)
is no correction to the collisionless result that the dis-
tribution function is constant on a drift surface. For For the special case under consideration, when C,
&ntzapped particles, on the other hand, the only way in = v„Z, Eq. (5.119) becomes
which the time-averaged collision term can be zero is
for the distribution function itself to be nearly zero. (5.120)
Thus, the two terms on the right-hand side of Eq.
(5.116) tend to cancel; only for the trapped and nearly into which we may substitute the above expressions for
trapped particles is the difference between these two Bg„'0'/&X. After integrating in v, we obtain, e.g. ,
terms signif icant.
The following explicit solutions for the other g„', 's 3 pep
(n„g„)= —8n, ie I„, (5.121)
may be obtained in a similar way
where
(5.117)
(5.122)
where the y„'s are defined by Eq. (5.114). Remarks
similar to those given for the n=1 result, hold also for
the n=2 result. The n=3 and n=4 results give the ef-
h. ;„—
BX' (g)
fect of the parallel electric field and the friction due to
the ion flow term p;. The interpretation of these latter "hmin 1
'
1
two results is similar, so we shall only discuss the n =3 (6 '
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Val. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

where X' =—XBp The second expression for l, y was ob- 3 c 3 nepe~
tained by integrating by parts in A. ', and is a convenient ( 3 tg4e) 4 0~PO I33t (c'4, g4. ) = -8
Te
form for calculations with specific geometries; for the
case of large aspect ratio and circular cross section, (5.127)
discussed in Sec. VI, we have
I, = 1.38(2E) + O(C ) ( ., g..)=-—n,' e'&,Z'I. .
8
'ti' Bl e e
(5.128)
where e=—3'/R0 is the inverse aspect ratio. Although the
assumption of a single minimum in B is implicit in Eq. where I» is given by Eq. (5.123), and
(5.123), it is easily generalized to include multiple x'dh' ~ &min
trapped particle regions (in noncircular geometries) as ~ &min a'g (g)

pointed out by Frieman (1970).
The first expression for Iyy gives us information about (5.129)
the relative contributions to the integral which come
from different regions of phase space. [Recall that Eq. 1 -" X'dht "'~'" 1 (I/l13)3
33
(5.120) is a, result of calculating the inner product di- f14 ( @4 $ (g)
rectly with the fA'st oxdew (i-n collision frequency) part (5, 130)
of the distribution function, without integrating by parts
in X.] Besides the contributions from the trapped In the large aspect-ratio, circular cross section case,
(l1,„&X' ~h .,„) and untrapped (0 ~ X' &I1;„)regions, we have
there is a finite contribution from the boundary X =k;„ I13
- I33 - I11 = 1 38 (2 ~)1 i3 (5.131)
between these two regions. Mathematically, it arises
from differentiating the step function in Eq. (5.116), with error terms of order where e= r/A0. — t
3 ',
which gives a delta function 6(V —l1;„) in the integrand. In evaluating the integrals which contain o'. 3 (or y3),
This delta function is actually part of the first-order we have used the result that, for the Lorentz model, the
(in collision frequency) distribution function, which is solution of Eq. (5.44) is
even in v„. It represents the tendency for the margin- f„= (e/T, )f~/—v„. (for Z;» 1). (5.132)
ally trapped orbits to be overpopulated, due to the dis-
continuity in the diffusion flux (proportional to &g/&X) Note that the integrals containing m, , which determine
across the boundary X'= I1;„. [We thus see that the ran- the current density, Eq. (5.72), could also be obtained
dom walk picture of Sec. III is oversimplified. ] more directly by using Eq. (5.65). The latter evaluation
Actually, the banana regime approximation itself enables us to locate the current carriers in phase space.
breaks down near the trapping boundary. The small ex- We now attempt an interpretation of these results.
pansion parameter is not given by Eq. (5.100), in gen- The definition of the inner products is, of course, given
eral, but is v„.v 3(A, '), where w3 is the "bounce time, " by Eqs. (5.70)-(5.72), where the A„,'s are defined in
which becomes logarithmically infinite as A.' approaches Eqs. (5.56) —(5.58). In addition to the dependence on the
The marginally trapped particles are most sus- pressure gradients, the particle flux is linear in the
ceptible to perturbation by collisions; in fact, they make temperature gradient, the coefficient of proportionality
the predominant contribution to the particle diffusion, being (n„g„). This effect is similar to the effect of a
in the large aspect ratio limit. temperature gradient on the classical diffusion flux
When the boundary layer near A. ' = h;„ is treated more [c.f., Eq. (4.18)]. It is due to the velocity dependen-ce
accurately, (Hinton and Rosenbluth, 1973) important of the collision frequency v„. A parallel friction force .
corrections to the transport coefficients are obtained. arises because of the noncancellation of momentum,
The delta function is replaced by a function with a finite transferred to the ions, by electrons on banana orbits
width, of order (v„.tlat/v)'~3, which is also shifted away passing through regions of different temperatures.
from the trapping boundary, into the trapped region, by Tbe coefficient (a„g„) is just tbe electron thermal
an amount of this same order. This shift decreases the conductivity. The Onsager relation (~„g„)= (n„g„)
effective value of m, v„,. for the particles contributing to tells us that the pressure gradients also drive a heat
diffusion, and thus decreases the transport coefficients. flux, due to the velocity dependence of v„. .
This boundary-layer correction is discussed in more There is a radially inward particle flux driven by the
detail in Sec. VI.D. pa, rallel electric field, with the coefficient of propor-
All of the other transport coefficients may be obtained tionality (a„g„). This is the trapped particle pinch
by evaluating the integrals in Eq. (5.120). The results
"
effect, discovered independently by Ware (1970) and
are Galeev (1971). Its order of magnitude is consistent with
the simple argument given by Ware, that the flux is due
9 39 to the bounce-averaged drifts of the trapped particles,
(~. g3.) =16 nep,e p
nep2ep
(&3t g3e) —-32 (5.124) as discussed in Sec. III. The above remarks about the
role of the boundary layer apply here also, however;
in fact, for large aspect ratio, the flux is mainly the
(
3 nec
. g3e)=-4Il' .PO
3 ( .tg3e)=o (5.125) diffusion of the marginally trapped particles in the
boundary layer (Rutherford, et al. , 1970).
nep 2ep 9 nep2ep A similar effect in the heat flux is absent, in the Lo-
(+ltg4e) 8 + 13t ( 2t g4e) 16 + 13t (5.126) rentz model: note that (n»g3e) =0. In the corresponding
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April t976

integral expression given by Eq. (5. 120), the factor v„. " (v'/v'„„;
cancels out of the integrand, leaving an energy-depen- -(P., g. ;) = d'v —5/2) C, , g,'P . (5.135)
ip
dent term proportional to v (—,m, v' ——,T,). This inte-
grates to zero: the average electron energy carried in- The banana-regime variational principle is
ward in the trapped particle pinch effect is exactly —,'T, .
When the electron-electron collisions are included, (5.13 6)
there is no longer an exact cancellation.
Because of the Onsager relations, we have a term the minimum value of which is the thermal conductivity
proportional to the pressure gradients, in the parallel (5.137)
current density, whose coefficient is (n„g„)= (n„g„).
Such a. term was first pointed out by Galeev (1971), and In the case e = 1, the perturbation analysis is some-
independently by Bickerton, Connor and Taylor (1971). what different. The leading term is of order (v;;qR/v) ',
The corresponding current is called the "bootstrap cur- and satisfies
rent, " since it makes possible the idea of a "bootstrap
tokamak, "
operating in a steady state with E~= 0. This
possibility was first investigated by Blckerton et Ql, It is determined by the constraint equation
(1971), and independently by Kadomtsev and Shafranov
(1972). A limit, on plasma pressure in a tokamak, was
dOB
C iigii ', &
= 2QieBofio
2 ~&
&& B2dg
II i tbi {B2) ~t
also pointed out independently by Bickerton, et al. ,

(1971), and by Galeev and Sagdeev (1971). This limit where gB'd8 equals zero for the trapped ions, and 2w{B')
arises from the condition that the bootstrap current not for the untrapped ones. A variational principle is easily
violate the Kruskal-Shafranov criterion for magneto- constructed but will not be given here. The problem of
hydrodynamic stability, Eq. (2.51). determining the function g,'";", has not been considered
The origin of this 'bootstrap" current is in the banana in the literature. It is needed only to calculate (P„g„),
orbits of the trapped electrons. They set up a parallel which helps determine the forces &„-,&4, self-consis-
flow, in a manner analogous to the perpendicular diag- tently. It is not needed at all in the weak-coupling ap-
magnetic flow due to the particles gyrating around their proximation, which is most commonly used.
guiding centers. Actually, the untapped electors car- E. Callisional regime
ry most of the current, in the large aspect-ratio limit,
when the fraction of trapped particles is small. This is 1. I ntroduction
due to the fact that electron-ion collisions force the un- When the particle collision frequencies are much high-
trapped particle distribution to be continuous with the er than their bounce or transit frequencies, the collision
trapped distribution; the parallel flow set up by the ba- terms dominate the kinetic equations, Eqs. (5.80) and
nana orbits is retained, to some extent, by the trapped
(5.81). A perturbation method (Rutherford, 1970; Frie-
particles even after they have diffused into the untrapped man, 1970) which is similar to the Chapman-Enskog
region of phase space. method of the kinetic theory of gases, can then be used.
The terms in Eqs. (5.70)-(5.72) which are proportional Since the method is very similar to that used in Sec. IV,
to A4, may be interpreted as the result of the additional the discussion in this section wi1. 1 be somewhat brief.
friction on the electrons resulting from the ion flow We will see that more information can be obtained from
term proportional to p, ;, in Eq. (5.46). The coefficient the kinetic theory than was available using the macro-
(ue, ge, ) gives the reaction back on the ions, through scopic approach in Sec. IV.D.
friction with the electrons, and enters the self-consis-
tent determination of the forces &„., &e„Eqs. (5.75) and 2. E lectron transport
(5.76). We begin by expanding g„, in powers of v/v„. qR («1),
The coefficient of the parallel electric field in Eq. beginning with a term of order (v/v„qR), which is gen-
,
(5.72) is (n„g, ), which gives the reduction in the elec- erally necessary:
trical conductivity, due to the fact that the trapped elec-
trons cannot carry any of the Ohmic current. This re- g(-1)+ (o)+g(&)+. . .
sult was first obtained by Hinton and Oberman (1969). Equation (5.80) becomes, through the first three orders
5. Ion distribution function g(-1 ) 0 (5.138)
The perturbation analysis of Eq. (5.81), in the case e (0)
+ne vt
. cygne
( x)
r (5.139)
+=2, is very similar to that given for the electron equa-
t
tion. The constraint equation is found to be Ceg(ie =v(( ' &(gne +v(('4feo)& (5.140)
tl
(o)
Czi&2i =0r (5.13S) "
where Z„ is defined by Eq. (5.114). Equation (5.138) im-
plies that g„', is the perturbation of a Maxwellian due
to pressure and temperature perturbations
where -"
g„', = [a„+ (v'/v'„„, —5/2)f „]f . (5.141)
g2'P = —(v„h/A~e)(v2/v2„„; —5/2) f,o+ Go, , (5.134) Equation (5.139) is then the Spitzer problem [c.f., Sec.
with BG2;/88=0. The ion thermal conductivity is given, IV.C] and the parallel gradients of pressure and tem-
in terms of the solution of this equation, by perature drive parallel current and heat flows deter-

mined by its solution
VS gf7 g
/ 1 +g g V j Off + Kg 2 V }5 ff
[ f
d vv, ((v /v 1~ —5/2)g„= K12V((cE„+K22V, (b„
(5.143)
where the K „'s are the parallel transport coefficients, FIG. 6. Toroidal coordinate system, showing its relation to
defined by Eq. (4.77) and Table II. Equation (5.140) has the cylindrical coordinates R, Z, g.
solubility conditions which determine the function g„', ""
uniquely
After solving Eqs. (5.142) and (5.143) for V„a„and V„b„,
(5.144) with the left-hand sides of those equations given by Eqs.
(5.146) —(5.149), and substituting into Eq. (5.150), we ob-
tain
(5.145)
The solution of these differential equations may be writ-
.
(c'., g. ) = —— "~.(p'./, /7. ) [&k'& —&k '& '], (5.151)
ten as
r
(5.152)
d'vv„g„", ' = — d2vv', jy„ f„+k, (p)/k,
., g, .) —" . .'/,
II
( =— (p ) [(k'& —&k '& '] (5.153)

r
d'vv„(v'/v', —5/2)g„", '= — d'v(v'/v'„— 5/2)v'„yg
~
where p, ~ =2T,/m, ~Q,~~, and the tc's are given in Table

+ k2(p)/k, (5.147) II. When these expressions are substituted into Eqs.
(5.VO) and (5.V1), the results agree with the axisymmet-
where the functions k, (p) and k, {p) are determined by ric limit of Eq. (4.98) and (4.99), with I=—RoBro inde-
multiplying Eqs. (5.142), (5.143), (5.146), and (5.147) pendent of 6. [The terms involving the electric field,
by Il (~1/k) and averaging over a magnetic surface which appear in Eqs. (4.98) are not contained in I"„as
using Eq. (2.53) defined by Eq. (5.62), since that definition differs from
the left-hand side of Eq. (4.98).]
k, (p)(k &=
I
d'vv'„(y„/k) f„, (5.148) The factor in square brackets in Eqs. (5.151)—(5.153)
is positive, which can be seen by writing it as
(5, 149) ((k —k '(k & ')'&. This factor is smaller than the factor
I» which appears in Eq. (5.121), the banana regime dif-
Equations (5.142) and (5.143) may now be solved for V„a„ fusion coefficient; by multiplying the identity
and V'„b„, which uniquely determines g„', under the fur- ""
ther condition (a„& = 0 = (b„&. (~~k 4& & 2&2/(g& ( 1/2k 2 gl/2 ( &
)0
The effect of the guiding-center drifts, and the result-
ing perpendicular flows, contained in y, and y„ is to re- by A, and integrating over X, we find, on comparison
quire parallel return flows of particles and heat, de- with Eq. (5.123), that
'.
scribed by g,", Equations (5.144) and (5.145) express I» & 4, [(k'& —(k-'&-']
the requirement that the divergence of the net flows be
zero, to this order in the gyroradius. In a collision- Thus, the enhancement over classical diffusion is al-
dominated plasma, the existence of parallel flows re- ways greater in the banana regime than in the collisional
quires parallel gradients of pressure and temperature- regime (Rutherford, 1970). In the large aspect-ratio,
as given by Eqs. (5.142) and(5. 143). The flux-surface circular cross section case, discussed in more detail
averaged radial fluxes are then determined by these in Sec. VI, we find
parallel gradients. For example, when there are more
particles at the "top" of the magnetic surface (see Fig.
6) drifting up and hence a2vay from the magnetic axis where &=2/Ro«1, which is to be compared with the
than are at the "bottom" drifting tozvaxd the magnetic larger factor I» = 1.38(2 &)'/2.
axis, the radial surface-averaged particle flux is posi- The other inner products, with m or n equal to 3 or 4,
tive. are zero to this order in the collision frequency, since
The inner products may now be calculated using Eq. y2 and y4 are proportional to 1/k, and the right-hand
(5.118) with g„",-' replaced by g„',which is given by Eq. ", sides of Eqs. (5.146) and (5.14V) vanish identically. We
must therefore procede to higher-order. Since g,', "
(5.141)
=g4 "=0, the solution of Eq. (5.139) is
(~, g, ) =— d vv„y f [V, a„+ (v'/v1„, —5/2)V„b„] . g [c + (v /v1he 5/2)d lf
for n = 3 and 4; using the solubility condition for the
(5.150) equation for gne t we find cn=dn=0.

The equation for g~",

' is therefore ductivity, and following the above method, we find
c g4 = —vii ' v(v i/Iz)feo/I& pl (P-. , g. ;) = o. 8;(p';, /;)[&~') —&Iz ') ']; (5. 161)
= 'p ——
-( '/lf1. ,I) v„(1/I )(— ') f, ,
(5.154) compare Eq. (4.95). The ion guiding-center drifts repre-
which is equivalent to Eq. (4.57) with the right-hand sent a perpendicular heat flux, which must be compensa-
= 2P —2. This equation has
side proportional to Pz(() — ted by a parallel heat flux, to make the total flux diver-
been approximately solved by Braginskii (1965). By gence free. In a collision-dominated plasma, this paral-
making use of his results, we find lel heat flux requires a parallel temperature gradient,
and this is directly related to the surface-averaged ra-
(n, g4, ) = =,' zi,'(T, /nz', Q2~) ([v„(1/Iz) ] '), (5.155) dial. heat transport, as given by Eq. (5. 161).
where zoo=0. 73n, T, 7, (for Z,. =1, for example) is the co- The function g,(o,-) is not uniquely determined, without
efficient of parallel electron viscosity. proceeding to higher-order in the short mean-free-path
Note that this transport coefficient decreases with in- expansion. An additional term, proportional to v„ gmay'
be present, without affecting the left-hand side of Eq.
f
creasing collision frequency. The same is true for the
coefficients (o'. , g~, ) for zzz = 1, 2, 3; we find, for example (5.158). This term is needed for the calculation of
(P„g„), and hence iz, , from Eq. (5.83) (in the weak-cou-
(n„g„)= 'zi,'(T,/I', f1,'~)((V„ injz)').
—,
(5.156) pling approximation), which helps determine the ion par-
For this reason, the contributions of the force &~, in the allel velocity, in Eq. (5.46). This problem was solved by
electron particle and heat fluxes, given by Eqs. (5.70) Hazeltine (1974). He used a variational method to solve
and (5.71), are negligible, of order (v„~7', /qA)2 com- Eq. (5. 159), for zz= 2, and then used the solubility condi-
pared with the terms containing &,g and &,g. Also for tion on the equation for g,",.' to determine g,' uniquely.
this reason, the ion heat flux driven by friction with the His result can be expressed as
electrons, given by Eqs. (5.84) and (5.85), is negligible ((v„in@)')
[we will find, subsequently, that (P„g2,), which appears ( 1Jl g2i) (5. 162)
((v b l)2)
(b 2)
in Eq. (5.85) is of order unity].
The equation for g3", ' is similar to Eq. (5.154), but has In the large aspect-ratio, circular cross section limit,
this reduces to (P„g„)= —2. 1.
—1/lQ, J replaced by the Spitzer function „on the right-
hand side. Its solution has not been determined,
f In the ~= 1 case, the solubility conditions correspond-
to our
knowledge. We note that, since f„-1/v, the coefficients ing to particle and energy conservation yield a, = c, = 0.
(n, g„), for zzz =1, 2, 4, must be proportional to T'„ The momentum conservation condition gives, upon rnul-
while (n„g„) must be proportional to &'„ in the colli- tiplying by B and averaging
sional regime. Consequently, the right-hand side of
Eq. (5.72) is negligible, in the collisional regime. &v„(1/b) d'vz'I', (()g,", ') = n,
J , (5. 163)
Equation (5. 158) for zz= 1 is equivalent to an equation sol-
3. Ion transport ved by Braginskii (1965). By making use of his results
After expanding in powers of z/v„qR(«1) where v, , is in Eq. (5. 163), we find the value of b, and finally obtain
the ion collision frequency for 90' scattering, Eq. (5.81) the inner product
becomes, through the first three orders (P„gf;. ")=a,n, ,b,
(5. 157)
(o) ~ '. &en~(-x) (5. 164)
~'sI-"n~ =v(t (5.158)
g (i) =v„'. vg„;
C (o)
(5. 1 59) where qp 0 96+ T,.7,- is the coefficient of parallel ion vis-
+P„f;o,
cosity.
where the P„are defined by Eq. (5. 55). The general solu- The friction force due to the electrons must be balan-
tion of Eq. (5. 157) is ced by a viscous ion stress, which requires a, nonuni-
g„'-, "=[ ~+b„„fi+.„( '/;. , —5/2)]f, „ (5. 160) form ion flow, represented by the b, term in Eq. (5. 1. 60),
as given by Eq. (5. 164). This ion flow, and the friction
so that Eq. (5. 158) is again a general Spitzer problem. which it leads to, causes the electrons to flow nonuni-
The conditions of solubility of this equation are B Va„ formly, resulting in an electron stress; the degree to
= B Vb„=0. The conditions of solubility of Eq. (5. 159)
~
which the electrons and ions are coupled, throughfric-
are different in the two cases e= 1 and v= 2, so we con- tional interaction is determined by I
—1 where E is de-
sider them separately. fined by Eq. (5. 79). Using Eqs. (5. 155) and (5. 164), we
We consider first the case zz= 2. Since 48, has the form find E —1 = zi,'/zl, ', the ratio of the parallel viscosity coef-
P, = v„zz V'(~
), the analysis is very similar to that for
~ ~ ~
ficients. For Z,- = jI. , for example
the electron thermal conductivity given above. The solu-
S' —1= 0. 54(nz, /zzz, )' '(T, /T, . )' '.
bility conditions which are obtained from conservation of
particles and energy, give a, = 0. The momentum con- The weak-coupling approximation (I' —1 «1) requires
servation condition yields b, =0; thus, as noted in Eq. (for the hydrogen mass ratio) T, /T; & 5, which is satis-
(4.49), the parallel flow velocity can not be large in the fied under most experimental conditions. Even if this
collision frequency parameter. Eq. (5. 158) for zz= 2 then condition were noi satisfied, the only change in the above
reduces to an equation solved by Braginskii (1965). By results would be the value of p, , which appears in Eq.
making use of his result for the parallel ion thermal con- (5.46).

VI. TRANSPORT GQE F F IGI ENTS FQR LARGE so that the coordinate 8, introduced in Sec. V. B, is rela-
ASP EGT- RATIO TQKAlVIAKS ted to ~ by
A. Geomet~ 8 = (d —A(Y/R, ) Sin% + O(6'). (6. 10)
The problem of specifying the coordinate system, in a We will continue to work with the coordinate 8; in fact,
concrete way, is greatly simplified in the large aspect- the -approximation
ratio limit
(6. 11)
q = x/Ro « i. (6. 1)
will be adequate.
Here y is the minor radius, and R, the major radius; The toroidal flux is given by
these will be defined subsequently. In this limit, many
m'+ O(e')
solutions of the flux surface equilibrium equations are (6. 12)
known, the most generally useful being given as follows so that the minor radius coordinate p, introduced in Sec.
(Shafranov, 1966). V. B, may be identified with x,
We define the toroidal coordinates y, (d, f in terms of
the usual cylindrical coordinates R, Z, f (see Fig. 6) by B. Electron transport in the banana regime
cosa, Z =+ sin~,
R= R, (x)+x 1. Large aspect-ratio expansion
where the function R, (x) gives the distance from the sym- In the large aspect-ratio limit, the solution of the ki-
metry axis to the center of the (circular) flux surface netic equations is simplified by making use of the small-
cross section whose minor radius is x. The distance to ness of the fraction of trapped particles, which is ap-
the magnetic axis is Ro(0) =Ro. The poloidal flux function proximately (2e)'~'. Assuming that
is then (2&)'i' «1, (6. 13)
r
dyBp. (~)+ O(e'), the trapped particle region of phase space is very nar-
y = R, (6.3)
0 row, consisting of the small range of pitch angles such
where Bpo(x) is the effective poloidal field magnitude, (the that 1 —&» XBo» 1+ &, where A. is the pitch-angle vari-
time dependence is not written explicitly here) which able, defined by Eq. (3.63). A variational method (Rosen-
must be related to the pressure gradient by bluth, Hazeltine and Hinton, 1972) can then be used to
calculate the transport coefficients exactly, in the limit
1 d / z 1
(6.4) of small e (and small collision frequency).
t- dt Bo d'v d'v We begin the analysis with the banana regime varia-
Here we have written the toroidal field as tional principle of Sec. V. D. We wish to minimize the
functional
B, = 1,(~)/R. (6. 5)
d
Equation (6.4) is the equation of pressure balance in a, [q„]-
(e) =—
) d 3vg„C, g„, (6. 14)
cylindrical plasma of circular cross section, and is a
consequence of the equilibrium equation, Eq. (2. 90), to subject to the constraint that g„has the form given by
zeroth order in &. A term of order & is not present in Eq. (5.103), where G, is independent of 8 and is an even
function of o (= —signv„) in the trapped particle region of
Eq. (6. 3) provided that Ro(x) satisfies
phase space. [Note that we have dropped the superscript
~Bp'0 [R', (y)/2]+ ~BE= 8mB (6. 6) (0); the functions g„and G, are here understood to be
zeroth order in collision frequency. ] The minimum val-
That is, the relative shift, of the flux surface centers is ue of [Q,", ] then gives the desired transport coefficient,
determined by the profiles of pressure and poloidal field. according to Eq. (5. 112).
In general, dRO/Ch= O(c), provided that P&— = 8nP/B, tbe '„ The function G„defined by
ratio of plasma pressure to poloidal magnetic pressure, ie = (vn@/'I +eg I )feo+ Gi (6. i5)
is not much larger than unity (it is typically somewhat
less than one, in present tokamak experiments). is assumed to have an expansion of the form
Neglecting terms of order &', the poloidal field is 1
(0)+ g(&)+. .. (6.i6)
therefore given by
where the superscript gives the order, in q',
of the
RPv~(&) derivative, XBG/81, in tbe trapped particle region. Be-
" R[1+ (dR, /d~) cosa)] ' cause of our assumption concerning the smallness of
this region in the A. direction (see Fig. 5) the predomi-
nant effect of the collision operator C, is contained in
where 0„, P„are unit vectors in the x and ~ directions, the X derivatives, i. e. , pitch-angle scattering is more
respectively. The magnitude of the poloidal field is important than the other collisional processes contained
~=Bp.(Br)[1 — (A~)(~ /R) cos(u] '+ O(e'), (6.8) in C, . To make use of this assumption, we write
G"' = -(v„m/I fl„l )f., + I "'. (6. 17)
where
The function 0' ' is assumed to be "localized" in X, in
A~/R, = -(~/ +RdR, /dr ), — (6.9) tbe sense that X&h'o'/&X is of order unity in the trapped
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April t976

region [much larger than vBIr(0)/Bv, which is O(q't')], I = 1.38(2~)'t ' (6. 25)
but is much smaller, of order &, in the untrapped re-
which is the large aspect-ratio limit of I», defined by
gion. The consistency of this assumption can be verified
Eq. (5. 123).
after the solution is obtained. By making use of Eq.
(1.19) for C, and expressing the velocity integral in Eq. By comparison with Eq. (5. 121), the effect of elec-
(6. 14) as a symmetrical quadratic form, we find that tron —electron collisions is seen to be an inc~ease, in
the value of the diffusion coefficient, by a numerical fac-
[Q "] — "'
=
dg
2n
d'vh' 'C")Ir(')+
e O(&) (6. 18) tor of 1.53 for S;=1, 1.26 for Z,. =2, etc. This may be
surprising, in view of the fact that neoclassical diffu-
where the first term on the right-hand side is of order sion, like classical diffusion, is due to unlike-species
&' ', and is the dominant term, containing the pitch- collisions. In the classical case, the form of the dis-
angle scattering part of C, : tribution function, which enters the integral for the (per-
pendicular) friction force, is not affected by like-species
C,"'=—(v„(v)+ v„(v))S. (6.19) collisions. In the neoclassical case, on the other hand,
The electron —ion term v„.Z was defined by Eqs. (5. 3) the distribution function which goes into the calculation
and (5. 5); the elect+on electr-on collision frequency for of the (parallel) friction force is quantitatively affected
pitch-angle scattering is defined by by electron —electron collisions, even though it is of ze-
roth order in the collision frequency.
(6. 20) In order to demonstrate this, we return to Eq. (5. 119),
and try to discover the distribution function g„which
where must be used in this expression. [Note that Eq. (6.23)
contains the pitch-angle scattering operator C,' ', rather
((x)-=(1 —, 1
2x' ex((x)(.
X
(6. 21) than the exact C„which appears in Eq. (5. 119).] A bet-
ter approximation to the function G is needed, so we re-
and v~, =(2T,/m, )'t'. The O(e) correction in Eq. (6. 18) turn to the exact constraint equation, Eq. (5. 106), and
contains
sidered here.
6"'+ ~ ~ ~
C;
as well as C, — (0) it will not be con- subtract from it the zeroth-order constraint equation,
Eq. (6. 22). To first order in the expansion of Eq. (6. 16),
By using Eq. (6.17) and the properties of G"' (that it we obtain
is independent ()f 9 and even in o in the trapped region), dOB
we may verify that minimizing the zeroth order part of (C G(1) C(1)I (0)) 0
[Q,' ], Eq. (6. 18) yields the zexoth olde~ const~ai-nt
equation, where C,"'—
ution of
= C, —C, "'. We define a function f, as the sol-
dgB C(0)
In„l
II
" + g(P) O (6. 22) f C (1 )Ir(0 ) (6.26)
By using this equation, Eq. (6.17) and the above-men- Then the first-order constraint equation becomes
tioned properties of G"', the minimum value of [Q'„"] B (y)
may be written as II
(.( 0(.() where Ir") —= G"' f„„which ca— n be assumed to be "local-

f ized" in the same sense as k"', and can be explicitly sol-
= -(o'„g, ), . (6. 23) ved for, in terms of
k' ', but is not "localized.
f„,. "
The function f~, is O(e't'), like
These functions are shown in
with an error which is O(e). This expression may be Fig. V
called a "variational expression" for the diffusion coef- Returning to Eq. (6. 23), we may write
ficient, —(n„g„), because of its derivation from the
functional [Q,", ]. C(0)I
e
(0) C eI (0) C(1)I
e
(0) C (I (0) +
e )
4e& f
so that Eq. (6.23) becomes the same as Eq. (5. 119) pro-
2. Effects of electron-electron collisions vided that, in the latter, we use the approximation
The diffusion coefficient is to be calculated using the g„= Ir (0) +f„,.

solution of Eq. (6.22); we note that this equation is the The "direct" calculation of Eq. (5. 119) therefore requires
same as that solved in the Lorentz-model ease, (exeept that the nonlocalized funtion f„,
be included, while the
that the factor v„ is replaced by v„. + v„). The solution "variational" calculation of Eq, (6.23) does not require
is therefore given by Eq. (5. 116). In the expression for it.
the inner product, Eq. (5. 120) we need only to replace
v„. by v„+ v„, in order to agree with Eq. (6.23). The
The function f,
contains the quantitative effects of
electron-electron collisions. This is clear because Eq.
integral over z can be carried out analytically and we (6.26) may be thought of as a generalized Spitzer prob-
find the diffusion coefficient to be lem, Eq. (5.44) with the right-hand side replaced by a
more complicated function of velocity. As with the Spit-
p',' ~
(o(„gr,) = , n, —
7
1+ 0.' 53 —I, (6.24) zer distribution, the stronger is the effect of electron—
g Z
electron collisions, relative to electron —ion collisions
where p,~, defined by Eq. (5. 122), is now called p, 0, and (measured by 1/8,.), the less distorted is the distribution
Rev. IVlod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 'l976

0.69(26} z
lg
O(E, }
XBo
I+K,
FIG 7. Banana regime distribution functions: (a} the "localized" function O'Oi [divided by vf o/~g„~] vs p„~o, for s=o. i,
f~~, defined by Eq. (6.26) [divided by the same factor]. Both are evaluated at 0=0, with the O(c) corrections
(b) the function
ignored. Also shown is (c) the smoothing of the function g&~ (=4 ) in the boundary layer, as described by the solution of Eqs.
(6.9O) and (6.91).
from a Ma~vvellian (centered at a. nonzero mean velocity, 1Pg38) ( 3!g4e)

of course). In order to clarify the meaning of the force = —1.46(1+0.67/Z, )E'"n, c/Bp„ (6. 31)
which drives the term f„, in the distribution function, we
multiply Eq. (6. 26) by m, v„and integrate over velocity
"' (n„g„)= (1.75/Z, )e'i'n, c/Bpo, (6.32)
space. We note that C, (and therefore f„,) is due to .
electron —electron collisions only: C, = "' C„-
C,",'. Since (n„g„)= —1.46(1+0. 34/Z, . )&''v„ /T, (6.33)
C„conserves momentum, we have In Eqs. (6.31) —(6. 33) the Z,. dependence is an approxi-
mate fit, using the 8, =1 and Z,. —~ results. For Z,. =1,
(6.27) the numerical results of Spitzer and Harm (1953) have
been used to evaluate the integrals. The conductivity
0'~(Z ) is given by Eq. (5.66).
The second term may be called the friction force on the
These results were generalized by Glasser and Thomp-
untrapped electrons, due to collisions with the trapped
son (1973) to arbitrary (noncircular) azisymmetric toroi-
ones; the equation states that this must be balanced by
dal systems. The large aspect-ratio limit was used, in
the untrapped electron friction with ihe ions, calculated
the form of the assumption of a small fraction of trapped
from f„,. The term f„,
is therefore driven by the friction
particles. The above results, in which the approximatiom
betueee trapped am( unstrapped electrons, and this fric-
of Eq. (5.131) was made, may be so generalized as fol-
tion is the origin of the electron-electron contribution to
the diffusion coefficient, Eq. (6.24). Such a contribution
lows. The coefficients (n„g„), (a„g„) and (n„g„)
should be multiplied by I»/1. 38(2&)'~'; (n„g„), (n„g„),
was first pointed out by Galeev and Sagdeev (1968).
(n„g~, ), and (n„g~, )should be multiplied by I»/1. 38
The other transport coefficients may be calculated in
(2E)' '; (~„gse), (&„g~,) and (n. , g4, ) should be multi-
a manner similar to that used for (n„g„). Again, the
electron —electron collisions make a contribution to the
plied by I»/1. 38(2e)'~'; here I», I», and I» are given
numerical coefficients; the results obtained by Rosen- by Eqs. (5.123), (5. 129), and (5.130).
The interpretation of these results is that the effective
bluth, Hazeltine and Hinton (1972) may be written as fol-
collision f requency has a contribution f rom collisions be-
lows
tween trapped and untrapped electrons, as well as from
. .
(~„g, ) =(~, g. ) =(~„g. ) .
—0.73(l+ 0 53/Z, )e'"n. ,p'„/&-„
collisions of trapped electrons with ions. The coefficient
(n„g„), which determines the trapped particle pinch ef-
= (6.28)
fect and-bootstrap current, increases when electron—
(&„g., =(~„g,.
) ) electron collisions are included. This makes it clear
= 1.10(1+0.41/Z, )e'i'n, ,' p/'s„ (6.29) that these effects are basically dependent for their exis-
tence upon collisions; although electron —ion collisions
(~„g„)=-2.37(1+0 43/Z, )e'"",p,'., /r„. (6.30) are sufficient, electron-electron collisions enhance the
«~. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

effects. In this connection, Kovrizhnykh (1970) has poin- C. IOA tl'BASPOI't IA th8 baAIA8 f89IAl8
ted out that the pinch effect coefficient for a weakly ion- 't. Ion thermal conductivity
ized plasma is smaller by roughly a factor & than in a
fully ionized plasma. This is due to the much stronger When the ions are in the banana regime, the calcula-
effect of velocity diffusion, in the latter. tion of the ion thermal conductivity —(p„g„) proceeds
The effective reduction in conductivity, given in Eq. in a way very similar to the calculations in the previous
(6. 33), is also enhanced by electron —electron collisions. subsection. The main difference is that the operator C;;
This is because the current-carrying untrapped electrons conserves momentum, while C, does not. The conse-
see the trapped electrons (in a time-average sense) as quences of this fact will become clear subsequently.
fixed scatterers, which are present in addition to the ion The banana regime var iational expression is given by
scatterers. The latter point has been discussed in a
physical way by Coppi and Sigmar (1973). [Q )= — fd vR' C (6.36)
One might be tempted to calculate the current density
directly from the definition, Eq. (5.65), since the odd (in where
o) part of H, is presumably given by Eqs. (5. 118) and A'„= —(v)(h/0;i) (v'/v, '„,. —5/2) f;() + G„ (6. 37)
(5.69) (Daybelge, 1971). This does not give the effect of
electron —electron collisions correctly, however. It is with G„ independent of 8, and' even (in v) in the trapped
necessary to include functions similar to introduced f„„ particle region. We use an expansion G„. =G +Q '
above in connection with the calculation of the diffusion +. , similar to Eq. (6. 16), and further assume
coefficient. This was first pointed out by Sigmar (1972),
and was demonstrated in a way similar to the above ana-
G'" =(v))Iz/& p) (v'/v(h; —y)f;. +Iz,
(6. 38) '",
lysis by Hazeltine, Hinton and Rosenbluth (1973). The where h; is "localized" in the same sense as was k„,
point is that, since the functions analogous to lz'0) and
(in the above analysis) are both O(e'~') they must both be
f, and y is a parameter to be determined. The lowest-
order variational expression is similar to Eq. (6. 18)
included in the "direct" calculation, Eq. (5.65). On. the
other hand, in the "variational" calculation [analogous (6.39)
to Eq. (6.23)] the X derivatives appear, and since &f„,/BX
is smaller than BIz' )/BA. by one order in E' ', f„, is not The zeroth-order collision operator is
needed. The inclusion of the Spitzer function in the CI;~ = v;;(v)Z, (6.40)
transformation Eq. (5.42), is necessary for obtaining this
"'
result, since the function h. would not otherwise have with the pitch-angle scattering operator given by Eq.
the property of "localization. " (5. 6), and
The electrical conductivity reduction coefficient,
(n„g„) has a numerical magnitude such that (for Z,. = 1) (6.41)
the effective conductivity
where v~, =(2T;/nz;)' ', Q(x) is given by Eq. (6.21), and
(6.34)
unphysically changes sign for aspect ratios less than 3 1/2T3/2 (6. 42)
about 4. In order to remedy this, the O(e) correction to i
(o.„g„) was calculated by Hazeltine, Hinton, and Rosen-

"' The zeroth-order constraint equation, obtained by re-
bluth (1973). They retained the operator C, in Eq. quiring that [Qz(,') j be minimized, is
(6. 14), and also the function analogous to f~, for the con-
ductivity problem; its contribution to the transport coef- C(o) I (o) () (6.43)
ficient was calculated. by using the variational principle
for Eq. (6.26). The final result obtained is (for Z,. = 1) By using this equation, Eq. (6. 37) and the properties of
v. &i = o„[1 —1.95&'~'+ 0.95']. (6.35) G„, we may write the minimum value as
In the limit &-1, a3.1 of the electrons are trapped, and
the effective electrical conductivity must go to zero.
Equation (6.35) agrees with this fact, even though the (6.44)
small e expansion should not be valid for e —l. [Note
that, in the Lorentz-gas approximation, Z, &&l, the which is the "variational" expression for the ion thermal
first correction to Eq. (6.34) is O(c'~'), and comes from conductivity.
The solution of Eq. (6.43) is
a more exact evaluation of Iyy than is given by Eq.
(6.25).]
The effective electrical conductivity was also calcula-
Bk v, /, thi y ) io
1
(
II(hm;„—ABO)
(() , (6. 45)
ted by Connor, Grimm, Hastie and Keeping (1973), using
a model like-particle collision operator. A large aspect- which may be substituted into Eq. (6.44).
ratio expansion was not used; they obtained an analytical Because of momentum conservation in C;;, the term
result which is valid for finite &. The accuracy of their proportional to y in Eq. (6.38) does not contribute to the
result was limited by the use of ihe model operator how- integral in Eq. (6.36), but determines how much of G(')
ever: the Spitzer conductivity, for example, was only is "localized. " By considering G ' to be a variational
reproduced to within 20%, for Z,. = 1. tz.ial function, with y as a parameter, we may calculate

y by minimizing Q», which is quadratic in y, as given where 0;, =Z; eB,/m;c. This poloidal rotation is a result
by Eq. (6.44) with Eq. (6.45). The value of y is then of collisions between trapped and untrapped ions, in the
found to be determined by presence of a temperature gradient.
The ion parallel flow velocity represents an additional
d3vv C(o) I, (0) =0 (6.46) source of friction on the electrons: the fourth electron
thermodynamic force is given by
This is equivalent to choosing y consistent with momen-
tum conservation (not automatically satisfied by the
pitch-angle scattering approximation CI; ). The numer-
ical value of y so obtained, and the minimum value of (6. 51)
') are
Q2[,
The O(e' ') correction may be neglected, since A„ is
y=1. 33, —(P„g„)=0.66n; . e'~'p', ()/~; (6.47) multiplied, in Eqs. (5.'lO)-(5. 72), by transport coeffi-
These same results can be obtained in a more straight-
cients which are themselves of order e' This force '.
forward way by replacing C;; by a model collision oper-
can be combined with A. „,
in the large aspect-ratio limit
because of the fact that n~ differs from a, only by terms
ator, suggested by Kovrizhnykh (1970), which consists
of order c. Hence,
of the pitch-angle scattering term C;; plus an ad hoc
momentum-conserving term. The details may be found (6.52)
in Appendix A of the paper by Rosenbluth, Hazeltine and
Hinton (1972). The Kovrizhnykh model operator can be and the Onsager relations, Eq. (5.98) imply further that
used to obtain the correct result, while other similar (6. 53)
operators can not [see, e. g. , Furth, el al. , (1970)] be-
cause it is self-adjoint, and therefore leads to a varia-
tional principle, which is equivalent to Eq. (6. 39).
In Eqs. (5.'lO)-(5. 72), therefore,
the same factor as A„,
„
A. is multiplied by
and we may use the combined
The ion thermal conductivity, as given by Eq. (6.47), force
is the result of pitch-angle scattering of trapped ions by
collisions with untrapped ones. [Recall, however, that A. „+%4,= —inn,
8
(1+ T;/Z; T,) + —lnT,
9
the marginally trapped particles make the dominant can-

tribution to the transport jThe ou. twardly diffusing ions +(T;/ZqT, ) (y —3/2) —lnT; (6. 54)
are mor e ener getic than the inwardly diffusing ones, r e-
sulting in a net energy flux outward. The constraint of and thus reduce the number of independent electron
zero net ion flux due to ion-ion collisions alone, ex- forces from four to three.
pressed in terms of momentum conservation by Eq. Again, using Eq. (6. 52), the ion force A„, given by Eq.
(6.46), affects the magnitude of the energy flux, through (5. 75), may be written as
the parameter y. The friction force of reaction on the
untrapped ions, due to collisions with the trapped ones,
produces a parallel flow, related to y in a way described
A„. = (1/Z, ) g ( a„g„,) A„, =—I",/Z, (6. 55)
in the follawing subsection.
The O(m, /m;)' ' correction to the ion heat flux is there-
fore
2. ion parallel flow
9'~ —T; (P„g )A =T (P, g ) I /Z (6. 56)
The term proportional to y in Eq. (6. 38) represents a
mean ion velocity parallel to the magnetic field, which is Using the Onsager relation ((6„g„.) = — (P„g„) and Eq.
related to the parameter p; defined by Eq. (5.46). Using (6.49), we have, finally
the weak-coupling approximation, we have p. ; (6. 57)
~ (P„g„)A„, where A„. — = (&/Bp) lnT;, and where the
inner product can be calculated directly from the defini- Thus, the effect of electron friction on the ions results
tion in an additional ion heat flux, which is proportional to
the ion flux I; (= I",/Z;).
=
(()„6„)— [6()v/v;„v,'„, (6 ')] f
— d'v 6'„} . (6v. 4~6) In addition to the term p; in the ion parallel velocity,
Eq. (5.46), there are also terms proportional to the ion
Using Eqs. (6. 37) and (6. 38), and neglecting terms of pressure gradient and the radial electric field. We shall
order e',
we find give an interpretation of these terms, in terms of guid-
ing-center orbits. Note that the ion parallel velocity is
(P„g„)= 5/2 —X, (6.49) approximately equal to the toroidal flow velocity of the
so that plasma, for large aspect ratio.
We first point out that the pressure gradient and radial
electric field terms in Eq. (5.46) are easily understood
(6. 50) in terms of the A"aPped ion banana orbits. We may write
&Inp;/&p = &Inn;/sp+slnT;/& p, and interpret the density
The ion poloidal velocity, obtained by combining Eqs.
and temperature gradient terms separately. A net flow
(2.61) and (5. 46), is proportional to ([(; of trapped ions, along field lines, occurs when there is
u)'&y/+p = p) U(~h; /2&60 4
a density gradient. This is because of the noncancella-
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 19?6

tion of the numbers of ions at a given value of r, with s;=-Qe'vg P,. v~) . ~
values of vI~ which are equal in magnitude but opposite

in sign, since these come from different average radial Thus, the toroidal angular momentum changes either by
locations, and hence from regions of different density. diffusion or because of the torque due to the J&&B force,
A similar effect occurs for the temperature contribution with the radial current flow. The relaxation of an arbi-
to the pressure gradient, where particles moving in one trary initial distribution, to that given by Eq. (5.43),
direction along B are more energetic than those moving occurs in a sufficiently short time (of order r;) that the
in the opposite direction. The radial electric field af- stresses may be neglected.
fects a single trapped ion by giving it a greater kinetic The relaxation of the distribution function results in a
energy on one half of its orbit than on the other half, radial current flow. This can be understood from Fig.
these being at different values of r, and hence at differ- 8, where we have plotted four typical untrapped ion or-
ent values of electrostatic potential energy. The uz, — bits, labeled A, B, C, and D. The effect of friction with
i apped ion contributions to Eq. (5.46) can not be so sim- the trapped ions is to populate-the D orbits at the expense
ply explained, however, and we must now consider col- of the A orbit population; the parallel flow velocity must
lisions between the trapped and untrapped ions. have the same direction everywhere on a magnetic sur-
Consider an initial state of the plasma, with no net an- face, which implies an inversion of the relative popula-
gular momentum, and no radial electric field. For sim- tions. Indicating the populations by I'(A), etc. , we then
plicity, assume also that there is no ion temperature have
gradient. In Eq. (5.46), choose p, ; =SinP;/Sp initially; E(B) &E(D) &Il(A) &X(C), (6. 59)
the toroidal mass flow velocity is then proportional to
& cos0, and is thus in opposite directions in opposite assuming a monotonic decrease in density away from the
halves of the plasma cross section. Next, consider the magnetic axis, uniform temperature, and zero radial
flow produced by the ion orbits, in the absence of colli- electric field. In addition to increasing the angular mo-
sions. The orbits of the untrapped ions, and the density mentum, this population inversion causes a net radial
gradient, produce a flow similar to that in the initial movement of the average ion position, and hence a radial
state. The txaPPed ions have a parallel flow velocity current.
which is unidirectional, but which is very small (of This radial current implies the buildup of a negative
order e' ') for large aspect ratio. The distribution func- radial electric field, which limits drastically the angu-
tion would then be discontinuous at the boundary between lar momentum buildup. We note that
the trapped and untrapped ions. Even a small rate of
ion-ion collisions implies a rapid smoothing of this dis- 4n(J Vg)+ —(E Vg) =c(V (BxVg)) =0 (6.60)
continuity, which leads to 'a unidirectional flow of uz-
t~aPPed ions. The resulting quasi-equilibrium distribu- and substituting this into Eq. (6. 58) gives
tion is given by the first two terms in Eq. (5.43); the .
(m; n; u; r R) + (E Vx) Q, B~,/4 mc = const. (6.61)
flow velocity is given by Eq. (5.46) with p, ; =0.
The relaxation of the distribution function can be ex- This is the statement of conservation of total angular
plained in terms of the decay of poloidal rotation. Since momentum in the plasma and the electromagnetic field.
the trapped ions have no net poloidal velocity, the effect By assuming the constant to be zero (from initial con-
of collisions with the untrapped ions is to reduce the po- ditions) and combining this equation with Eq. (5.46), us-
loidal velocity of the latter to zero also. The rate of de- ing u;2 =u;~~, we may eliminate the radial electric field:
cay of poloidal velocity by this process, was shown by 2
Uu.
Rosenbluth (1973) to be of order r; ' [given by Eq. (&~~~@) =
2&op
Pa + 0( e'), (6. 62)
(6.42)].
The unidirectional plasma flow, given by Eq. (5. 46), where
would represent a large net toroidal angular momentum, a =—
I +4mm, n; c'/R'„,
if the radial electric field were zero. Since angular mo-
mentum is conserved, there is an apparent paradox, is an effective dielectric constant. For typical tokamak
which was discussed by Sagdeev and Galeev (1970). Ac- parameters, &» 1, so the actual buildup of plasma to-
tually, the plasma angular momentum can change only roidal angular momentum by this process is negligible.
if the electromagnetic field angular momentum changes, A similar conclusion wa, s obtained by Stix (1973).
so that the sum is constant. A change in the plasma an- Qn a longer time scale, of course, the stress term in
gular momentum thus implies a change in the radial Eq. (6. 58) may not be neglected, and the diffusion of an-
electric field, and this affects the value of the toroidal gular momentum between flux surfaces determines the
flow velocity. The unidirectional flow is thereby held at toroidal flow velocity. [The radial current term in Eq.
a small value, as we shall now demonstrate. (6. 58) must then be zero, assuming approximate plasma
By adding the toroidal components of the electron and neutrality on the longer time scale. ] The plasma can
ion momentum equations, Eq. (2. 15), and using quasi- develop a net toroidal angular momentum by transferring
neutrality, we obtain an equation for the plasma toroidal angular momentum to the solid boundary which surrounds
angular momentum the plasma. The time dependence of the radial electric
field is thus determined, through Eq. (5.46). [On this
(6. 58) longer time scale, Eq. (6.62) no longer holds. ]
The stress term has been calculated by Rosenbluth,
where the stress is [c.f., Eq. (2. 91)] Rutherford, Taylor, Frieman, and Kovrizhnykh (1971).
Rev. IVlod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

I
In addition to a toroidal viscosity, relating the stress to

the rate of strain Bu/&~, they obtained aterm which cou-
ples the rotation to the ion temperature gradient. Large
values, for the rotation velocity and electrostatic poten-
tial, were implied by their results. However, the time
necessary to establish such steady states was found to
'
be very long, of order e ' times the ion heat conduc-
tion time.
The loss of ion toroidal momentum, due to charge-ex-
change reactions, was considered by Sigmar, Clarke,
Neidigh, and Vander Sluis (1974). They found that a
steady state is reached on a time of order v, „' Magnetic
= [no(o „v)] ', where ~, is the charge-exchange cross
— Axis gnetic
„
section. The radial electric field is then determined, Surface
in terms of the density and temperature gradients. FIG. 8. Four typical untrapped ion orbits, illustrating the
The effect of nonaxisymmetric toroidal field ripples effects of collisions with the trapped ions: the parallel flow
on plasma rotation has been considered b'y Rosenbluth must be out of the paper at both circled points, which requires
(1973), Connor and Ha. stie (1973), and Tsang and Frie- more particles in D orbits than in A orbits. The density de-
creases away from the magnetic axis and is constant on a mag-
man (1975). They found a decay of toroidal rotation in netic surface, with the deficit in A orbits relative to D orbits
a few ion collision times, even with very small ripples. compensated by the greater number. of B orbits relative to C
A detailed discussion of this process, as well as the orbits, as given by E q. (6.59) .
other processes determining toroidal rotation, is beyond
the scope of the present review.
tion, in which the factor on the right-hand side is
D. The banana-plateau transition
sin 6I v'
(6.64)
'l. The plateau limit in. iz
The behavior of the transport coefficients, as functions We define a dimensionless collision frequency (which
of collision frequency, is of some interest, especially is a function of velocity v) by
because the condition for the banana regime cannot be
satisfied at all values of minor radius r, in a given
v=(v„+ v„) xB/B, v . (6.65)
plasma, even at high temperatures. At small values of The plateau regime limit is defined by Eq. (3. 52), or
~/Ro, we may approa. ch the limiting case in which the g3/'& «p«] (6.66)
diffusion coefficient, for example, becomes independent
of collision frequency. This is known as the "plateau (Recall that the banana regime limit is v«c3 ) The '.
"
regime, and was discovered by Galeev and Sagdeev assumption v«1 is necessary to ensure that the solu-
(1968). tion of Eq. (6. 63) is sufficiently well localized. In fact,
From the qualitative description given in Sec. III.D, we may estimate the localization width by comparing the
we expect that only a small ("resonant") range of par- first and third terms on the left-hand side: b, $ —v/(~g)',
ticle velocities is involved, so that the Fokker-planck or b, ( —v' '.
We introduce a "boundary-layer variable"
collision operators may be simplified as in the banana P, such that P -1 when v' ' (-
regime. %e assume that pitch-angle scattering domin- p=v &/
(6. 67)
ates in the like-particle collision terms, as well as in
the electron-ion collision term. This can be verified After neglecting terms of order v ', the equation be-
a Posteriori for the appropriate range of particle ener- comes
gies, although the "plateau regime" approximations are 8g~8 8 g18 1 9 g18
not valid for all particle energies, because of the ener- p 8 (~/V2/3) sing
2 BP 2 BP
gy-dependence of the collision frequency.
(e/v ) ("/I Qee I) sin8 f, o . (6.68)
a. Electron transport
We therefore begin with the electron kinetic equation, An expansion in the small parameter e/v' ' yields
Eq. (5. 80), in which the collision operator is to be re-
placed by C!0', given by Eq. (6. 19). It is more conven- g, .=- -'(~/v'') (v/I &.I) f, Im(g. 8"), (6. 69)
ient to use (8, g) as independent variables, rather than where g, is a solution of
(8, A), where $ =(1 —&B)' '.
By neglecting some terms
3 (d'g, /dp') —ipgo= —1.
of order e3, Eq. (5. 80) becomes
By extending the interval, in which go is defined, from
v(B„/xB) g
"' ——sin8(1 —(') —v ' '&p& v ' ' to —~&p&~, we may solve this equa-
tion by Four ier transformation. The solution which
——(v„+ v„) —(1 —P) "'= —n„ f,o . (6.63) tends to zero for IPI-™ is (Su and Oberman, 1968)
go = dt exp —Spy —I; (6.'l0)

In this subsection, we shall consider onl j the n = 1 equa- 0
6

2S2 F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport
It is easily verified that g, -1/p, for p»1, so that g„ b. ion transport

is indeed localized to a range of approximately AP-1, In solving the ion-kinetic equation, Eq. (5. 81), we must
or 4( —v' '. Although this range varies with v approxi- allow for the fact that the operator C;; conserves mo-
mately as v ', the coordinate perpendicular to the
mentum. Thus, when Eq. (5. 81) (for n =2) is written in
"boundary layer" is approximately the pitch-angle co-
a form analogous to Eq. (6.63), the mirror force term
ordinate (, for small v, and this justifies the pitch-an-
(proportional to e sin8) plays a significant role. Using
gle scattering approximation. the variables (8, (), we have
In order to calculate the "plateau regime" diffusion
coefficient, we must assume that all particle energies,
which contribute to the velocity integral in Eq. (5.74),
" —(rB/B, . '
v) C, ; g„. =-, ~ sin 8(l —(')
satisfy the plateau regime condition, Eq. (6.66). By (6.'7 8)
using the approximation where
1 Qo
1
d(Reg, =
Oo
dPReg, = z, P, =( —v'/v', +5/2) 0;A —
2
(1 y(') . (6.'79)
we obtain
Recalling that the 8 derivative is at constant (, we note
(n„g„)= -(w ' ~'/ )4'enp', ~(B, v, „ /rB), (6. 71) that a term (v(u ~~/v,'h;) f;, may be added to the function g„,
which is independent of collision frequency (and hence without contributing to the left-hand side of Eq. (6. '78),
independent of Z;). This result was first obtained by provided that Su„/&8=0. In order that this equation have
Galeev and Sagdeev (1968), by using a Krook model col- a solution at all, the right-hand side must be orthogonal
lision operator. [The numerical value is correctly given to the above null solution. That is, multiplication of Eq.
in the paper by Galeev (1971).] The above derivation, (6. 78) by v'( and integration over 8 and v yields the con-
using the pitch-angle scattering model, was first given straint
by Rutherford (19"70).
The other electron transport coefficients may be ob- 2 e d8sin8 d'v v' $(1 —P) " =0, (6.80)
tained in a very similar way; the results are
~/2
which serves to determine the arbitrary parameter u]].
(o„g„) = —-~ e'n, p,'~ (v, „, B,/rB), (6. 72) This parameter can be introduced, in terms of the pa-
rameter y just as in the banana regime [c.f. Eqs. (6. 3'7)
(6.73) and (6.38)]:
' e'(n, c/B~, ) (v, 7, B„,/rB), (6.81)
(u„g„) = —(0.26+0. 24/Z;) „,
(6.'74) where II; may be assumed to be localized. Substitution
' into Eq. (6. 78) and use of Eq. (6.40) for the collision
( og )3= —(0. 13+0.27/Z;) e'(n, c/B„,) (v,„,T, B,/rB), term gives
(a' gee) = —(O. ll+0 25/Zi) ~

.&2(vth v
(6.75)
Bpo/rB) a, ~/T, ,
~H; — — ~H; —2g
90 2 ES1I18(l ( ) 8( V —
~
8( (1
— $
~H;
) Bg
(6. 76) =(v'/v', „,. —y) —sin8 v (1+ P)

Qgp
f, o, (6.82)
where is given by Eq. (5. 66). [The inner products in-
o~~
volving o.~ or g~, are obtained by using Eqs. (6. 52) and where
(6. 53), as in the banana regime. ] In Eqs. (6. 74)-(6. 76), v= v;;(v) rB/B v . (6.83)
the Z; dependence is an approximate fit to the results for
Z; = 1 and Z; » 1. For Z; » 1, Eq. (5. 132) was used for Following the same method of analysis, as was used for
f„, while the Z, = 1 values were calculated using the sim- Eq. (6. 63), we find the approximate solution
ple approximation '
H; = —, (e/v' ') (v/0;~) (v'/v, '„, —y) f;, Im(goe' ), .
f„=—0 36(e/T, ) r, [(.v/v, „,)'+2v/vth, ] f„,
for Z; =1 . where g, is given by Eqs. (6.70), (6.67), and (6. 83).
(6. 77) Now the ion thermal conductivity may be calculated
The thermal diffusion coefficient, (o.„g„)and the ther- dt9 sand

mal conductivity, —(m„g„) are iridependent of collision Q,
2TI II, B
A
frequency, like the particle diffusion coefficient, (6. 84)
—(u„g„). The trapped particle pinch effect coefficient
(o.„g„), which is also the bootstrap current coefficient, where the factor 1+$' has
been replaced by unity, since
decreases with increasing collision frequency, as do the II; is loca, lized to small values of g. The value of y,
thermal pinch coefficient (o.„g„)and the conductivity which helps determine the numerical value of the ther-
correction coefficient, (o.„g„). The latter three coeffi- mal conductivity, is determined by Eq. (6. 80). After
cients represent effects which only exist for sufficiently integration by parts, and replacing 1 —3$' by unity, this
small collision frequencies, when guiding-center orbit becomes
effects dominate, so it is natural that they should ap-
proach zero at higher collision frequencies. dousing d'v v'tI; =0, (6.85)
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vo!. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

F. L. Hinton and R. D. Haze(tine: Theory of plasma transport
which is equivalent to the condition of zero ion flux, lute maximum of V„at the maximum possible rate.
when I+(' (in the expression for the drift velocity) is The value of V', ",' so obtained (using the arbitrary con-
replaced by unity. Comparing this with Eq. (6.84), we vergence criterion that the fractional change in I/'yy
see that the 2 in the integrand can be omitted; alterna- after one iteration, be less than 10 ) gave the numer-
tively, the & can be replaced by y, making the ion ther- ical values of the transport coefficients. These mere
mal conductivity quadratic in y, as in the banana regime calculated for three inverse aspect ratios, a=0. 01, 0.04,
variational calculation. The condition which determines and 0. 09, and for a range of values of collisionality,
y, Eq. (6. 85), is then equivalent to minimizing the ther- 10 '& v, & 10, where the electron collisionality param-
mal conductivity with respect to y. The results of carry- eter is defined as
ing out the integrals in Eq. (6.84) and determining y in —v 2 xBo/(B, v, z, q' ~'),
v~, = „, (6. 87)
this way, are
y=3, (P„g„)= ——,' v'~' e'n; p&'e(v, „B„/~.B) . (6.86) (the banana-plateau transition occurs nominally for
v„, -1). These results were then'fitted to analytical
The thermal conductivity given by this expression is formulas (which will be presented in Sec. VI. F) using
the result of scattering of "resonant" ions (in the sense the method of least squares.
described in Sec. III.D) by nonresonant ones. The fric- The starting point for the ion thermal conductivity cal-
tional force of reaction, back on the nonresonant ions, culation, is a variational principle equivalent to Eq.
produces a parallel f lorn related to y in the same may (6.82), which may be obtained by substituting Eq. (6.81)
as described in Sec. VI. C; Equations (6.49)-(6.51) of into Eq. (5. 96) for m=n=2, c=i, and using the pitch-
that section remain true in the plateau regime as well angle scattering operator, Eq. (6.40), on the localized
as the banana regime, with only the numerical values of function II;. The numerical method of calculation, using
y being different in the two regimes. Likewise, Eqs. the maximal variational principle, is the same as for
(6. 54) and (6.57) hold also in the plateau regime. the electron transport coefficients. The value of the
parameter y is obtained, as in the banana regime cal-
2. Variational calculation culation, by minimizing the ion thermal conductivity,
which is quadratic in y. Analytical formulas, obtained
The collision-frequency dependence of the transport from least squares fits to y and (P„g„), as functions of
coefficients, in the entire transitional range of collision ion collisionality, mill be presented in Sec. VI. F.
frequencies between the banana regime and plateau re- Analytical checks on the accuracy of the numerical
gime, is quite relevant to present experiments. This calculations, were made in the following way. We de-
dependence was calculated by Hinton and Rosenbluth fine the functions Q „(v) in terms of the variational ex-
(1973). They carried out a numerical solution of Eqs. pressions, Eq. (5.96), before integrating over particle
(6.63) and (6. 82) by a finite difference relaxation method, energy; for example,
which makes use of a maximal variational principle to
gain rapid convergence. The transport coefficients were
calculated from variational expressions, so that only the
localized parts of the distribution functions were needed,
and the pitch-angle scattering approximation mas ade-
quate. Good agreement was thus obtained with the ba- (6.88)
nana regime limiting values which had been calculated where v is defined as a function of & by Eq. (6.65).
analytically, as described in Secs. VI. B and C. (Since v appears in Eqs. (6. 63) and (6. 82) only as a pa-
The starting point for the calculation of the electron rameter, the matrix elements Q „ themselves provide
transport coefficients, is Eq. (5.96). The functions g„, variational principles for these equations. ) In the ba-
are assumed to be localized in the variable X, so that nana regime limit, v«e' ', Q»(v) must approach the
the collision operator can be replaced by the pitch-angle constant value (w/2) Ie ' ' =3.07 [where I is given by
scattering operator, Eq. (6. 19). [This variational prin- Eq. (6.25)]. In the plateau regime limit, e' '«v«1,
ciple is then equivalent to Eq. (6.63), when the trans- the function Q„(v) is given approximately by
formation to the variables (8, g) is made. ] Using the
pitch-angle scattering approximation, it is possible to vQ„(v) ~ (v' e'~'/8) [1+0.32(v/e' ') ~~'] (6.89)
eliminate the two functions g„, g, , (for n=1, for ex- where the factor in square brackets includes a correc-
ample) in favor of a single function C„. This function
is like a "potential, " in that both g,', may be derived
tion to the plateau limit. This was obtained by solving
Eq. (6.68) to one higher order in e/v' ', and substituting
from it by differentiation. the result into the variational principle. Good agree-
The variational principle, mhen expressed in terms of ment with these analytical results was obtained, as
this single function, is maximal. That is V,', has an shown in Fig. 9. Good agreement was also obtained mith
absolute maximum when the function C„satisfies the the result of a boundary layer calculation, mhich we
appropriate partial differential equation and boundary now describe.
conditions. This property was found to be quite useful,
in combination with a finite-difference relaxation meth-
od of solving the partial differential equations on a com- 3. Boundary layer calculation
puter. By choosing the relaxation parameter to maxi- Corrections to the banana regime result mere obtained,
mize V,', after each iteration, an increasing sequence by a careful treatment of the boundary layer between the
of values was generated, which converged to the abso- trapped and untrapped regions of phase space. As we
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 4S, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

F. L. Hinton and R. O. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport
1. 00- We evaluate this expression by using an approximate ex-

pression for the integrand, &g+„/&y = a&(x —P), where
n and 46 are determined by matching the resulting values
of the integrals
dx sg'„/s y, dx xsg,', /s y,
.50
to the exact value s, whic h can be obtained f rom Eq.
(6. 92). The result is
(6. 94)
1. 0 The main effect obtained from the boundary-layer solu-

tion is the shift of the maximum of the function g„, into
FIG. 9. The function v' Q&&(v'), defined by Eq. (6.88), [where the trapped particle region. Since ( is a decreasing
v = v/E3 and v is given by Eq. (6.65)] normalized to the
function of x, this reduces the value of I", Eq. (6. 93), by
plateau limiting value, /8. The dashed lines show the ba-
T(
nana regime limit, Q~~ =3.07, and the plateau limit v'Q&& an amount proportional to the shift. (The actual broad-
= 71 ~/8. The correction to the plateau limit given by Eq. (6.89), ening of the function g'„contributes negligibly. ) We thus
and the result of the boundary-layer calculation, Eq. (6.97), find the boundary-layer contribution to the diffusion co-
are also shown. efficient to be given by Eq. (6. 88), with
mentioned in Sec. V. D, the banana regime approxima- Q1i(v) I b&

=(v/2e'I') J, (6. 95)
tion becomes invalid near the trapping boundary. In where
order to treat this region properly, the following method
was used. dx(&(x - 1.21),
We define the functions f, by
1 14 I 0 93 I(v/~s /2)1/2 (6.96)
(6. 90)
Then the partial differential equations to be solved may with I 1.38(2
= c)' '.
In the banana regime limit v/e' ' 0, the predominant
be written approximately as
contribution to Q»(v) comes from the boundary layer.
sf, /s cp =+8'f, /sx', (6.91) [The result 1.14I can also be obtained from the delta-
where the independent variables x, y are defined by function term in Eq. (5. 123), which is centered at x=O. ]
The untrapped particle region contributes a small nega-
XBo = 1 —E'+2(v/77) x, p = v sin&/2
(2E) tive term, —0. 14I, to I, while the trapped contribution is
and the boundary layer is defined as the region xI -l. negligible, of order e' '. The entire correction to this
result, for finite v/e' ', comes from the shift of the
I
The solution of Eq. (6. 91) is to be obtained, with the

condition -O for
f, x-~
(in the trapped region), and boundary layer into the trapped region. The odd part of
with &f,/sx matched, for x-
—~ (in the untrapped reg- the distribution function g„can also be determined from
ion), to the expression obtained from Eq. (5. 116). The the solution of Eq. (6. 91). The result of the careful
boundary conditions at cp =+a correspond to particle treatment of the boundary layer is shown in Fig. 7: the
reflection for x&0, and periodicity in for x&0. The f, discontinuity, in the derivative is smoothed out; note the
solution of this mixed boundary-value problem was ob- shift in the maximum of the function.
tained by Hinton and Rosenbluth (1973) using the Wiener- By adding the untrapped particle contribution to Eq.
Hopf technique. The even part of g„ is given by the fol- (6.96), we obtain
lowing expression, within the boundary layer Q„(v) = (w/2c' ') I[1 —0.93(v/e'I')'I'] (6. 9'i)
for v/e' '«1.As shown in Fig. 9, this compares very
well with the results of the numerical variational calcu-
x Lexp[k'(y+ m)] —exp[ —
k '(y —v)] j, (6. 92) lation of Hinton and Rosenbluth (19'l3). As a result of
this boundary-layer correction, the diffusion coefficient
I
where U(k) =tanbark'/I (k), (k) is analytic and has no and the other transport coefficients are reduced by fac-
zeros in the lower half of the complex k plane, and is tors [1 —a „v~, '], where the a „are constants, and v„,
such that I(k) -zk'exp( —1.21ik) for 0-0. This is a is given by Eq. (6.8'7). These correction factors are in-
highly localized function, which was approximated by a cluded in the more general formulas presented in Sec.
delta-function in the banana regime analysis of Sec. V. D VI. F.
and VI. B.
The boundary-layer contribution to the diffusion coef-
ficient can be obtained by substituting Eq. (6.92) into Eq. 4. Lorentz model
(5. 118), in place of g~„' . The result is proportional to It is instructive to consider the solution of the Lorentz
the integral over v of
model kinetic equation for the whole range of collision
d~ ding
frequencies. We begin with the assumptions that Z; 1, »
8 q7 and that electron-electron collisions may be neglected

F. L; Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport 295
FIG. 10. Comparison of

vQ&&(v) with v+~E&&(v+„) for
e =10 . Plotted are (a)
log(v'Q&&) vs logv', where
v' = v/e (the dashed lines 0
are the banana, plateau, and
collisional regime asymptotic
values) and (b) log(v+, ~~~)
vs log v+e, where v+~ is de-
fined by Eq. (6.87).
at the outset. Then Eq. (6. 63), with v„=O, can be re- v only. The next-order equation is
—(') " =i(h

garded as being valid for all values of v, and can be
solved by the numerical method of Hinton and Rosen- 'v
— —
d( (1
dI (0)
dg
bluth (1973). The result of calculating Q„(v), defined
by Eq. (6. 88), from the solution so obtained, is shown which may be integrated to give
in Fig. 10, for a=0. 01. Also shown, for comparison, h&:& = h&. " g/zv . (6. 100)
is the function v„,K„{v„, ), defined in Sec. VI. F, which
is proportional to the diffusion coefficient —(n„n„) Finally, the equation
For this very small value of e, the function vQ» has a v(1 + ~ 2 )fen
plateau which is clearly identifiable. The result of in- d4
(1 g2)
d4
le
"
yah(0)
2In
tegrating over all velocities (and hence over all values
of v) is to make the function v~, K„(v~,) less flat in the yields a constraint which determines h, ,'~: by integrating
plateau regime than vQ„(v). Thus, a plateau is not really over the angular variable g from —1 to +1, and using
obtained, because the corrections from the low-energy Eq. (6. 100), we obtain
particles which are in the collisional regime become
large before all the higher-energy particles have as-
hI, '~ = —2 e(v ji Q,p i) v(v) f n . (6. 101)
ymptoted into the plateau regime. By substituting this result into Eq. (6. 98), calculating
For v jr' ' &0.2, the computed values of Q» agree well the diffusion coefficient —(o. „g„),
and comparing with
with those given by the analytical expression, Eq. (6. 9I). Eq. (6.88), we obtain Q„=(4w/3) e'~'. By carrying the
For v je ' & 500, the computed values agree well with analysis further, we obtain the more accurate result
another analytical result, Eq. (6. 102) which we shall now vQ„=(4m'/3) e'i2(v+1/5v), for v»1 . (6. 102)
derive: the collisional regime limit for the Lorentz
model. A somewhat situation now arises, when we
paradoxical
By making the substitution compa. re (1) the diffusion coefficient obtained by sub-
stituting Eq. (6. 102) tneglecting the O(1/v) term] into
g„=1m(h„e' ) (6.98) Eq. (6.88), with (2) the result of Sec. V. E, Eq. {5.151)
in Eq. (6.63), and neglecting terms of order e', we have specialized to the Lorentz limit, Z; 1. They do not »
agree: Eq. (6. 102) yields K» = e' ' (in the notation de-
(p)
dhj8 E'v(l + $ ) fen
(6.99) fined in Sec. VI. F) while Eq. (5. 151) yields K„=0.46e' '.
d( (1 dg 2IQ,~I Thus, the numerical result depends upon which of the
where v is defined in Eq. (6.65) with v„=O. In the limit two limits, v-~, Z;-,
is taken first.
v»1, we expand h„as follows: The physical reason for this nonuniform limit behavior
+I'" ~" . . is as follows. When electron-electron collisions are ne-
le +I le +.
le
=a'-'~
le y
glected at the outset, the electron distribution function
where the superscript gives the power of 1/v. Then, to will not approach a Maxwellian (in the absence of forces)
lowest order, we have in a finite length of time; the choice of a Max- f„as
(-1) wellian is thus not forced on us by the Lorentz model
18 kinetic equation. More to the point, the O(v) departure
dg
(] (2) dg
0
from the equilibrium distribution f„,
due to the require-
which implies that &, ,' is isotropic, i. e. , a function of ments of parallel current and heat flow in a torus, is

not forced to have the form of a Maxwellian with per- collisions conserve momentum. By expanding in powers
turbed (8-dependent) values of density and temperature. of
Thus, Eq. (6. 101) is not a perturbed Maxwellian, and
this is the reason for the numerical discrepancy in the
diffusion coefficient: in a sense, the result is a "non- and writing the 0 dependence of the first-order term ex-
equilibrium" diffusion coefficient. plicitly
We conclude that the numerical, results shown in Fig.
10 are unphysical in the large v limit for two reasons.
Firstly, the pitch-angle scattering representation of elec- we obtain
tron —electron collisions [contained in Q»(v) if v is given
by Eq. (6. 65)] is not adequate in the collision-dominated igh„—(xB/B~, v) C„h„=(v'/v, '„,. —y) ev(1+ (') f;, .
regime. We recognized this by specializing to the case 2Q;p
Z; »1. Secondly, even when Z; »1, the absence of any (6. 105)
process, which would tend to Maxwellianize the distri-
An approximate method of solution will be described
bution function, invalidates the results for the trans-
port coefficients. Thus, the numerical results of Hinton subsequently.
and Rosenbluth (1973) are useful only for the banana- The ion thermal conductivity is given by
plateau regime.
(P, r Z2i) = 2g f,
1
o 0
d' v —(v '/v,
2
'z; —5/2) (1 + P) Heh„
E. The plateau-collisional transition
(6. 106)
We now consider the regime of intermediate to high
The constraint, Eq. (6. 80), which determines y, may
collisionality, v~»1, where v„, is given by Eq. (6.87)
be written as follows, after integrating by parts
and v~; by a similar expression. In the large aspect-
ratio, circular cross section case which we are con- d'v v'(1 —3P) Reh„= 0 . (6. 107)
sidering, the 0 dependence of the distribution functions
is simply sinusoidal, so that only the dependence on the We note that the mirror force term (proportional to
velocity variables v, $ remains to be determined.
esin8) in Eq. (6. 82) has been neglected, in obtaining Eq.
(6. 105); it has been used in obtaining the constraint, Eq.
1. E ectron transport
I
(6. 107). In the intermediate-to-high collisionality re-
We begin with Eq. (6. 63), with the exact collision term gime, the majority of particles (the well-untrapped
C„ in place of the pitch-angle scattering term. By ex- ones) which contribute to diffusion are only slightly af-
panding in the inverse aspect ratio fected by the mirror force, so it can be treated as a
+(x) ++(2) +. .. perturbation. In the absence of any parallel magnetic
field gradient, however, the ion parallel flow velocity
and writing the 6 dependence of the first-order term would be arbitrary, corresponding to the choice of
explic itly reference frame. The small mirror force removes this
g~" = Im(h„, e'~), degeneracy, in a toroidal confinement system, and en-
ables the parallel velocity [and hence y, in Eq. (6. 81)]
we have (for n = 1, for example) to be uniquely determined.
ev(1+ P)
igg„, —(rB/B„,v) C,e 0„=
je — 2~g f«,
eo ~ (6. 103) 3. Model like-particle collision operator
~
where C, is given by Eq. (1.19). The expressions for the The above kinetic equations [Eq. (6. 103) and its n =2
inner products now involve integration only over velocity; and n =3 counterparts, and Eq. (6. 105)] were solved by
for example, the diffusion coefficient is Rawls, Chu, and Hinton (1975) by using a model like-
particle collision operator. Since this operator may be
-(o.„g„)=
Q„ Bo
2
d'v —(1+ $') Heh„,
2
(6. 104) generally useful, we give some of the details
C;;f;, =-~;, (~) [&f~, -f;, +~&(~ii/~, ~) Pf~.
I l
where Q«~ =eBO/m, c. We note that the exact solution of

)
Eq. (6, 103) would still be difficult, because of the com- + pf;, +s(v'/v', . —5/2) f;, ], (6.108)
plexity of the Fokker-Planck collision operator for elec- where Z is the pitch-angle scattering operator given by
tron-electron collisions. An approximate method of Eq. (5. 5). The collision frequency is a function of vel-
solution will therefore be discussed subsequently. ocity o, def ined here as
2. l on transport (6. 109)

We now consider Eq. (6.78) for the ion distribution
function g„.. As in the plateau limit, the substitution of where T; is given by Eq. (6.42), and
Eq. (6.81) leads to Eq. (6.82), but now the exact ion-ion
p(x) =-erf(x) —(2/m'i') xe
"' .
collision operator C;q must be retained. The value of y,
which appears in Eq. (6.81), is again determined by Eq. This particular function was chosen so that v;;(v), with
(6. 80), which is a consequence of the fact that ion-ion A. =1, gives the rate of slowing down of a test ion by col-

lisions with other ions (Trubnikov, 1965). The values of 1. E lectron fluxes
P and & were determined by using the corresponding
model electron-electron collision operator to solve the
Rather than fit the inner products g„,), it was (a,
found more convenient to fit a dimensionless set of elec-
classical parallel transport problem of Spitzer and tron transport coefficients K „, defined as follows
Harm (1953). By finding a best fit to the values of x„,
II.'„, and ~» given in Table II, for Z; =1, the values —(a„g, ) =n e (peel&e)A&» (6. 114)
P =0.96, A. =0. 55 were obtained. The parameters P, p,
2(au gee) = e
(aI& g3e) (pe e/ e) +(2 (6. 115)
and s are to be determined by the requirements of con-
servation of particle number, momentum, and energy
in like-particle collisions
. . .
—(a„g. ) —5(a„g. ) —~(a„g, ) = n. ~"(p'. e/~. ) ~„,
(6. 116)
(6. 110) —(a„g„)= e'/'(n, c/B„,) K», (6. 117)
—(a„g„)——,' (a „g„)= e' /'(n, c/B~, ) K», (6. 118)
It can be shown that this model collision operator is
self-adjoint and satisfies the II theoreme
A convenient method of solution of Eqs. (6. 103) and
—(a„g. ) = . ~"(~((/T. ) A;. . (6. 119)
where e =r/Bo, p', e =2m, T, c'/e'B~'„v'e is given by Eq.
(6. 105), with the model operator C„or C;;, involves
expansion of the unknown functions, h„and k„, in a
(5.4), and o(( is given by Eq. (5.66).
In terms of these coefficients, the electron transport
series of Legendre polynomials P,((). The expansion relations, Eqs. (5.70)-(5.72) may be written as follows,
coefficients satisfy recursion relations which can be
using the weak-coupling approximation and Eq. (5. 83)
solved by a computer, assuming the series to be trun-
I.
cated at a large value of l. The self-consistent solution 8
l2
for the parameters P, p, and s involves only the coef-
ficients of P, (() and P, (g), while the transport coeffi-
cients are obtained from the coefficients of P, (g) and —K, n, e'/'c(E„/h)/B, , (6. 120)
P, (().
The numerical results obtained by this method agree
fairly well in the plateau limit with those given in Sec. e. + T. ('. = —n. T. E'~'(p'. ~/v, ) K„A, +K„—
—, '.
22 ar (nT
VI. D. In the collisional regime, the limiting values

agree well with the results of Sec. V. E., specialized to —K»n, T, e'/'c (E((/h)/Bp, , (6. 121)
the case of large aspect ratio and circular cross section.
We note that the quantity in square brackets in Eqs. 8
(5. 151)-(5.153) and Eq. (5. 161) is easily evaluated in ((Zl —Z((,)/h) = —+ Te' *(~/e, ( (IC, , A,', +K, 8
lrlT,
this case to give I
&h')-&I '& '=2e' (6. 111) Z„~"o,(E /h) . (6. 122)
Least-squares fits were made, to simple analytical form- Here we have used A. „=
(E((/h), which follows from the
ulas for the collision frequency dependence, and these approximation (B') = Bo. We have combined the forces
are incorporated in the more general results to be pre- A. „and A4, in a single force
sented in Sec. VI. F.
' =
A. le —lnP
8
g& e
5 BlnT,
——
F. Summary of results
We have obtained transport coefficients for large as- (T j~ T ) Br 1 * (Pl, 2gl)
I+ V~2e C2 Br
4
(
pect-ratio tokamaks in several regimes of collisionality.

All regimes may be relevant in a given plasma, at dif- [where the extra term —2 (81nT, /&r) corresponds to the
ferent minor radii, since the collisionality is defined in use of g, ~ 2 T, 1, as a flux, rather than q„and main-
terms of minor radius, density and temperature. To be tains the Onsager symmetry. j The use of the combined
most useful, the results should be expressed as contin- force A,', affords a considerable simplification of the
uous functions of collisionality. In this section, we give above formulas, and is motivated as follows. For n = 1
simple analytical expressions, obtained by least-squares or 2, we have (a„,ge, ) = (a„, g„) in the banana-plateau
fits to the previous results, which express the transport regime (ve, ' '), while (a„, ge, )/(a„, g„) -v„,'e
«c '«1
coefficients as continuous functions of collisionality. in the collisional regime (ve, e ' '). Since the be-
»
The electron and ion collisionality parameters used here havior of the. coefficients (a„g„) and (a„ge,) in the
are defined by plateau-collisional transition regime is not known, we
use the simple approximation
v„, =u 2rB, /(B v, (r, e'),
he (6. 112) . .
(a., g. ) = (a., g, )l(1+ v:. e'). (6. 124)
where v, „, =(2T,/m, )' ' and r, is given by Eq. (5.4), and For the case n=3, however, we have (a„ge,)/(a„g„) -1
in all collisionality regimes, but since the coefficient of
=
v~; —(( 2 rBO/(B~, v, h; 7'; e' '), A. ,', in ((Z~~ —J((,)/h) is small in the collisional regime
[(a,, g„,) -(a„gee) —v~', e 'j, the error introduced by us-
where v, h; =(2T;/m;)' ', and r; is given by Eq. (6. 42). ing Eq. (6. 124) is small. An expression for (p„g„.),
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part t, April 1976

which also appears in Eq. (6. 123), will be given subse- 1

quently. K „—E (c „/5 „)K „ Il+ cmn vie E 1 + cmn vie e
The approximate analytic expressions, to which the
electron transport coefficient results are fitted, are as (6. 128)
follows. For m or n = 1 or 2, For n =3,
n ~ m n„) v,
~
e' ~~'(
2
c~'„/5
~ e'~ ~~'~ K ~~(K )tl+c
n
«~
~ m no
~I eI
2 ~
~~ ~e
Ie
3 2 ~
~/~ „v~ „v~ E ] (6. 129)
~e
The results of Rawls, Chu, and Hinton (1975) for e«1
~
mn m~
~~
(6. 125) were fitted to such expressions; their values for & „
and c „are listed in Table III (except for b» and c», as
For n=3, mentioned previously). Again, note that these values
were obtained from least-squares fits, so they do not
exactly agree with the collisional regime values given
(6. 126) by Eqs. (5. 151)—(5. 153).
The numerical coefficients, K „, & „, & „, and c „, were Since these two limiting cases represent regimes of
obtained by considering the following two limiting cases. collisionality which overlap, when e «1, we may regard
(i) v„, «e ' ' |banana —
p/a/eau regime) the expressions given in Eqs. (6. 125) and (6. 126) to be
valid for all values of the collisionality parameter v~, .
(6. 127) It then seems reasonable to extrapolate the results to
The results of Hinton and Rosenbluth (1973) for e« 1, finite values of &. In Fig. 11, we show the result of
were fitted to such functions. The term involving v~, ' using the interpolation formula, Eq. (6. 125), for a value
reflects the role of the boundary layer, as mentioned a=0. 2, which makes it possible to see all three colli-
previously. The values of K o and a „so obta. ined are sionality regimes on the same linear scale. The diffu-
listed in Table III. Note that the values of K '„were ob- sion coefficient —(o, , g„), which is proportional to
tained from least-squares fits, in the range 10 '& v~, v~, K»(v„,), is plotted; the ordinate gives the diffusion
& 10; they do not agree exactly with the banana regime coefficient normalized to its plateau value (called D in
values, from Eqs. (6.28) —(6.33), which apply in the limit the figure). Also shown for comparison are the banana,
v~, -0. Also listed in Table DI are the values of b33 and plateau, and collisional regime asymptotes, the ba-
c» obtained by Hinton and Rosenbluth (1973), since these nana-plateau transition formula, Eq. (6. 127), and the
are the only known values of these coefficients. plateau —collisional transition formula, Eq. (6. 128).
(ii) v~, »1 (p/a/eau —eo//isiona/ regime): For m or
n=1 or 2, 2. ion fluxes
A dimensionless ion thermal conductivity coefficient
TABLE III. Numerical coefficients in Eqs. (6.125) and (6.126):
the results of least-squares fits to the transport coefficients. K, may be defined as
(P2 g21) =n e' (P e/&~)~2 (6. 130)
A. Zi= 1
'
where pPe =2m; T; c'/Z, e'R„'„adnT; is given by Eq.
&mn
(6.42). In terms of this coefficient, the ion heat flux,
11 1.04 2.01 1.53 0.89 Eq. (5.84), may be written as follows (in the weak-cou-
12 1.20 0.76 0.67 0.56 pling approximation)
22
13
2. 55
2. 30
0.45
1.02
0.43
1.07
0.43
i.o7 2 i K~iei » g+ (P„g,;) &; I./Z;
23 4. 19 0.57 0.61 0.61 1 + +2 +3
33 1.83 0.68 0.32 0.66 (6. 131)
B. Zi =2 Here we have used the Onsager relation (P„g„)
= —(P„g„.). We have used the approximation of Eq.
(5.75) for A„, which gives, on comparison with Eq.
11 0.86 2. 18 1.17 0.79 (5.70),
12 0.95 0.78 0.50 o. 51
22 1.99 0.46 0.26 0.34
1
I./Z,
2 (6. 132)
13 1.87 0.89 0.62 0.69 1 + p ge Q3
23 3.72 0.52 0.34 0.38

33 1.56 0.56 0.25 0.58 The following approximate analytic expression for the
coefficient K2 was fitted to the results of Hinton and
C. Z;=4 Rosenbluth (1973), for the banana-plateau regime
(v~, && e ' ') and to the results of Rawls, Chu and Hinton,
11 0.76 2.30 0.98 0.74
for the plateau-collisional regime (v~, 1): »
12 0.83 0.80 0.42 0.48
22 1.71 0.46 0.22 0.30
13 1.65 0.79 0 56
~ 0.51
23 3.54 0.48 0.33 0.28 (6. 133)
33 1.42 0.47 0.20 0.51 The numerical values of K, ', a„&„and c, are as fol-
low s
Z«~ =0.66, a, =1.03, &, =0.31, c, =0.74 .
The mean ion parallel velocity, averaged over a mag-
netic surface, is obtained from Eqs. (5.46) and Eq.
(5.83), in the weak-coupling approximation:
cT, Z;e S(4)
Zea p"" BlnT;
sr
B)nP;
sx r, ar I
(6. 134)
The coefficient (P„g„), is equal to 1.17 in the banana
regime, —0. 5 in the plateau limit, and —2. 1 in the col- 0 I
lisional regime (in terms of ion collisionality). The v„q- 0 10 15 20

&~a
dependence in the banana-plateau regime was obtained 5/p
by Hinton and Rosenbluth (1973); an approximate fit is
(for v„; «e '~') FIG. ii. Comparison of asymptotic forms of the diffusion co-
efficient D (normalized to the plateau value), in the various
1.17 —0. 35 v~;~' collisionality regimes, with the interpolation formula, Eq.
(P)ig2t) I +Q P pl/2 (6. 135) (6.i25). These were derived with the assumption «&i, and
have been extrapolated to a finite inverse aspect ratio, &=0.2.
Since the v~; dependence in the plateau-collisional re-
gime is not known, we use the simple formula
tion satisfied by the function g„, as given in Sec. V. D;5,
g —g —2. 1 vg~ 6
5
(6. 136) has not been solved; therefore, we use the estimate
(P lt g2)') 1
2
(p„g„)- (~"~; p e/r;)

+g
' (6. 13'7)
where &
—y is given by Eq. (6. 135).
for the banana regime. If the ions are in the collisional
3. Weak-coupling approximation regime, we use Eq. (5. 164). As can be seen from Table
As a check on the weak-coupling approximation of Sec. IV, the weak-coupling approximation is most difficult
V. B.4, we now state the conditions under which 1, I- to satisfy when both species are in the collisional re-
gime. As mentioned in Sec. V. E, however, this condi-
as given by Eq. (5.86), is small. Since the electrons and
tion requires only T, &5 T; for the hydrogen mass ratio,
ions may be in different collisionality regimes, in gen-
eral, we consider four possibilities. In Table IV, we with Z; =1.
-
give estimates for -I 1 when either the electrons or the
4. Two ion species problem
ions may be in either the banana or the eollisional re-
gime. The expressions used for the inner products As we mentioned in Sec. V. B.5, the weak-coupling ap-
(o. „g„)and (P„g„) are obtained as follows. If the elec- proximation is not generally valid for the problem of two
trons are in the banana regime, we use Eq. (6.28); if ion species. The complete formulae given in that sec-
they are in the collisional regime, we use Eq. (5.155). If tion must be used to obtain the particle and heat fluxes,
the ions are in the banana regime, we note that the equa- in general. These are
I', = [a„,g„) —(o'„g„)' (P „g») (Z', /Z', E)]

+ [ ( o'„g„) —( n„g„) ( ~, g„) (P „g,„)(Z ', /Z ~ I') + ( o'„g„)(P „g„)(Z, /Zn 5')] (6. 138)
. .
&./&=[(&. g2. ) —(~„g. ) (~, g. ) (P„g,~) (Z'. /Zl &)1, '- Z'
+[ (~, g„) —(%, g„)' (P „g») (Z', /Z» I ) + ( a.„g„)(P „g„)(Z, /Zn E) ] (6. 139)
lnP, Z, lnP,
qb/T =(o'„g„)(P „g,~) (Z, /Zn I') V
+ [ (P2, g, n) + (W, g„) (P „g») (Z, /Z, 5') + (o'„g„)(P „g'»)' (Z ', /Z'n P) ] (6. 140)
where 1 = 1+(Z2/Z~)(o3, g~, )(P~, g»), and we have used by transposing the results given earlier in this section,
T, = T, =—T, and the Onsager relations, Eqs. (5.98) and i.e. , by replacing m, by m„m; by m„etc.
(We note,
(5.99). however, that the required inner products are not yet
The inner products may be obtained in special cases available in the plateau-collisional transition regime. )

TABLE IV. Estimates of H —f, whose smallness is required for the weak-coupling approxi-
mation to be valid.
Electrons in Electrons in
banana r egime collisional r egime
.
(~, «~) )) ~ -3/2)
Ions in banana regime

(p ., «f)
Ions in collisional regime

—
( p )) g 0!2)
This replacement procedure gives the same results as, Oe35

for example, those obtained by Connor (1973) for the 0. 66+ a (6. 147)
banana regime, and those obtained by Rutherford (1974)
for the collisional regime. The poloidal gyroradii p, (6. 148)
and p; must be replaced by 2 & 0. 58+a '
p „=-(2m. T)'~' c/Z, ea ~, 25 &„1.13 0. 56
(6. 149)
4 Ij" ~ 0 56+~
If both ion species are in the banana-plateau regime,
pbe = (2n««T) c/Zb eBp() q
Eqs. (6. 138)-(6.140) may be simplified by the use of Eq.
respectively. The densities n„n; are to be replaced by (6. 52), and we have
n„nb The . electron collision time T„given by Eq. (5.4),
is to be replaced by 7.,b, where (o'„g„) &lnp, Z, &lnp«Z,
Z'~ &lnT
Z, s g" s.
4 (2 II)'~' n, Z'. Z', e'ln A
ab 1/2 T8/ 8
+
(o. „g„) &ln T (6. 150)
while the ion collision time of Eq. (6.42), must be re-
placed by 7», where (u„g„) &lnp, Z, &lnpb Z, SlnT
+b Zb e IQA
Tbb 3 +
JVg b
i/2 m 3/2 (6. 142)
)
(o.'„g„) (E- 1) slnT
(6. 151)
The charge-neutrality condition n, =Z; n; has no counter-
Bg
part in the two ion species problem; the ion charge num- &b=(P„g.«) 8
(6. 152)
ber Z; in certain expressions must be replaced by the
parameter (Connor, 1973) where only the larger, O(mb/m, )' ' term has been re-
n = n, Z,'/n. Z', . tained in qb. These expressions agree with those given
(6. 143)
by Hinton and Moore (1974), when the proper identifica-
The banana regime coefficients, for example, Eqs. tion of coefficients is made. For the required inner
(6.28)-(6. 30), are expressed as continuous functions of products, it is convenient to use the approximate fits
n by replacing 1+0.53/Z; by 1+0.53/o. , etc. obtained by Hinton and Moore (1974), in which the re-
Eqllatlolls (6. 138)—(6. 140) Illay be sllllpllf led collslder- suIts are expressed as continuous functions of e. We
ably when both ion species are in the collisional regime. first define coefficients A'„and A „, as follows:
Using Eqs. (5. 155), (5. 156), and (5. 164), we find
p2 ~i/2
(6. 153)
)I Blnp4 Z4 &lnpb ~lnT
) (6 144)
( (
.
(~„g, ) =- Oa Pap+abE
i/2
(~i2 —~ I~»)
a 5 a
(6. 154)
g,
T' =(~„g, . ), 1np, ' —Z, ~lnpb'
Z', +(~, g. ) . 1nT (6. 145) ( Z~ g24) =
2
Tab
~1/2
(~22 5~12 + 4 ~IX) ~ (6. 155)
'4 (P2& g2«)

8+
(6. 146)
(e„g„)= 5/2-~«, /~b, , (6. 156)
«P«e ~i/2 tlf.
2
(P„g,«) =- «(~b )~/~b ) (6. 157)
which agree with the expressions given by Rutherford
(1974). For the inner products, Eqs. (5. 151)-(5.153) are With the momentum-conserving pitch-angle scattering
to be used; the numerical values of the w's given in model which was used by Hinton and Moore (1974) to
Table II have been fitted to functions of a, with the re- calculate the frictional coupling between the two ion
sults (Rutherford, 1974) species, the value of F, which appears in Eqs. (6. 150)

F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazel tine: Theory of pIasma transport
and (6. 151), was found to be coefficient much smaller than the standard one, by the
& =1+(2m. /m„)" Z,', /nSC, ', .
factor I/E= (n, /n. ) (m„/m. )'~'.
(6. 158) The continuity equation, in which I; appears, has the
The coefficients are given approximately as follows: form
0. 73 (1 + 0. 53/o. )
1+1.26 v~, (1 +0. 53/o) (6. 159)
0. 73 (I + 0. 71/o. } where 8, is the difference between the ionization and re-
' (6, 160) combination rates which affect species &. Neglecting
1+0.37 v„(1+0.71/o. )
these effects, and in the absence of a temperature grad-
1.46 (1 + 0. 8/o. ) ient (& T/&r = 0), diffusion leads to a final state (1, = 0)
(6. 161)
1 + 0. 2 v„, (1 + 0. 8/n) in which ~Inn, /sr = (Z, /Z, ) sinn~/&r or
0. 55 g 0.73 n~ const (n ) b~
1+094v ' 1+037 v
(Spitzer, 1952; Taylor, 1961; Braginskii, 1965). If
1.65 species & is hydrogen, and Z&» 1, then the impurity
K (6. 162)
species "&" is much more highly concentrated in the
where center of the plasma (+=0) than the hydrogen ions, in
this final state. The effect of a temperature gradient is
~*a = ~2~+0/(+po Uu 'ra~ & (6. 163) to increase the inward diffusion rate for impurities, if
both ion species are in the collisional regime. As
pointed out by Rutherford (1974), however, the coeffi-
u„~ =- v 2 xylo/(B„, v, » v'» e'~') = Z', v„,/v 2 Z', , (6. 164) cient &T/9r, in the banana regime expression for F„ is
with w, ~ and 7'» given by Eqs. (6. 141) and (6. 142), and positive, so that a normal temperature gradient
=(2&/~, )' ', vug, =(2T/m~)'~'. The numerical coef- (&T/&+&0} causes inward diffusion of the light species,
ficients in Eqs. (6. 159)-(6.162) were obtained by: (i) re- and hence ouAeaxd diffusion of the impuxity species,
quiring the limits v~, -0, v~~-0 to give the exact banana since F~ = —(Z, /Z, ) I",. As the collisionality is increased
regime values, and (ii) fitting the remaining parameter in the banana-plateau transition, this temperature grad-
to numerical calculations similar to those of Hinton and ient "screening" effect, changes sign (Hinton and Moore,
Rosenbluth (19'l3), with the constraint that the plateau 1974), leading to' results qualitatively like those in the
limiting values be independent of n. The terms pro- collisional regime.
portional to 1/o. in Eqs. (6. 159)-(6.161) are the contri-
butions from like-species collisions. In Eq. (6. 162}, the Vll. Closure of the IVloment Equations
assumption o. »(m, /m~)'~' was used; the effect, on the
The moment equations, discussed in Sec. II, become a
heavy species, of unlike-species collisions is thus ne-
closed set of equations only when the appropriate kinetic
glected here, although it is retained in Eq. (6. 158}.
equations have been solved and the required moments
It is now easy to check on the weak-coupling approxi-
have been calculated from the distribution functions. Xn
mation, using Eqs. (6. 158), (6. 159), (6. 162), and (6. 164).
this section, we discuss the closure problem for tokamak
If both ion species are in the banana regime, then
Ii —1-(m, /m„)' '/o. , which is typically small [except in devices, in which there is an additional difficulty: the
the uninteresting case o. & (m, /m~)'~'j so that the weak- magnetic field is not completely determined by currents
external to the plasma, but must be determined self-con-
coupling approximation is valid. However, if the light
sistently with the transport processes in the plasma
species is in the banana regime, but the heavy species
is in the plateau regime (note that v~, vq„assuming » (Grad and Hogan, 1970; Grad, 1970). The goal is to ob-
tain a set of equations which, with appropriate initial
Zg && Z~) then
data and boundary conditions, completely determine the
S —1=1.25(n. /n, ) (~/m, )'~' v, (1+0.53/u) . . spatial and temporal dependence of the electron density,
the electron and ion temperatures„and the magnetic fieM
Hence, if
v„. (1+0. 53/o. ) ~ (n, /n. ) (m, /m. )" (6. 165)
in the plasma.
As we have seen in Secs. IV-VI, the magnetic surfaces
the weak-coupling approximation is not valid. The provide the basis for the coordinate system in which the
right-hand side of the inequality is typically small; for transport relations —
linear relations between "fluxes"
example, with as much as 5% oxygen in a hydrogen plas- —
and "forces" are given. In fact, the fluxes are aver-
ma, it has the value 0.2. If both ion species are in the ages of certain odd moments over these magnetic sur-
plateau regime, then I'-
1= (n, /n~) (m, /m~)' ', which is faces, while the forces are derivatives of even moments
typically large: the weak-coupling approximation is with respect to a distance coordinate perpendicular to
again not valid. As shown by Hinton and Moore (19'l4), the surfaces. (Although the transport relations were not
the right-hand side of Eq. (6.165) gives the value of col- derived in precisely this form, the quantity (E ~~B) having
lisionality at which the banana-plateau transition actu- been treated as a "force", we will show, shortly, how
ally takes place (i. e. , where the diffusion coefficient be- they may be put in this form. ) Since the magnetic field
comes approximately independent of v~, ). This value configuration in tokamaks depends on the plasma pres-
may be much smaller than the "standard" value for this sure, which changes on the diffusion time scale, we need
transition (v~, -1), which makes the "plateau" diffusion an equation to determine the time dependence of the mag-
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, Aprii 1976

netic field, on this time scale. surface, defined by

The equation of magnetohydrodynamic equilibrium, Eq.
(2. 90), is usually considered to be the equation which de- dt
+ uq, '+4 =0. (7.6)
termines the spatial dependence of g, the poloidal flux,
with P(g) and I(g) regarded as known functions. We are Note that the time derivative at constant 4, of J is taken
concerned here with low-p plasmas, which are evolving while the time derivative of taken at constant x. F is
because of dissipation and transport processes, and This theorem is easily demonstrated by writing the time
possibly because of slowly changing, external, poloidal derivatives as limits, of differences between values at
„„Bt
magnetic fields, in the presence of a constant external times which differ by &t, divided by &t. By using dS
toroidal magnetic field. It is then more natural to con- = (dS/IV%'I)V4, we may write the above result as
sider the poloidal magnetic field, or g, to be determined
by Faraday's law, Eq. (2.103), with an electric field con-
8
at ... d'x5'(x, t) = d'x —
&F
+
dS
vei
I u~ V4.
~
sistent with the transport processes. The role of the I
equilibrium equation, Eq. (2. 90), should be to specify (7.7)

the flux surface configuration, i.e. , the geometry, at
each instant of time. (lt may also be used to determine A. Faraday's law
the small perturbation in the toroidal magnetic field,
We shall now derive an equation for (8$/Bt)@, the time
due to finite plasma pressure. ) The equilibrium equa-
tion thus determines the family of surfaces g(x) =const.
rate of change of the poloidal flux associated with a sur-
at each instant of time, but not the value of g on each face labeled by a given value of toroidal flux. To do so,
surface as a function of time. we first note that
For this reason, we have introduced (in See. V) an ef-
fective minor radius coordinate p, which is related to
the toxoidat flux by @ =INST, vp', where BT, is a constant.
The value of the toroidal flux which labels a given mag- so that
netic surface, may be assigned, once I (=ItIIr) is kno— wn, 8()) 1 BP
through Eqs. (2.46) and (2.87), i.e. , at 2mq N-
(7.8)
@
d' x I/It' (7.1) v)(8@/ag) is the "safety factor" introduced

where (I (1/2=—
27l ~
in Sec. II.
integrated over the region enclosed by the given mag- Using the definition of (I)), Eq. (2.46), and the theorem
netic surface. The small perturbation in I, from its expressed by Eq. (7.7), we have
value in the absence of the plasma, may be determined
by multiplying Eq. (2. 90) by & ' and integrating over the 2n —
8$ =
», d'x —
BB
-
dS
» V&+ ivql B ~
V& u (7.9)
region enclosed by the magnetic surface. Then, by in-
troducing the volume V as an auxiliary flux surface where u& is the velocity of the constant-g surface
label, and differentiating with respect to V, we obtain
. — —= cBEr . —
(I(, -2) —(P/2) = -4m ————
8
~V
8$
V
8$
BQ
BV ~V
8
BV
(7.2)
u& Vt/r =—
ag
(7.10)
By multiplying Faraday's law, Eq. (2.103), by Vg,
where
(V.3)
—Vg = —cV
QB
~ ~
(E x Vg)
Now I' may be obtained by one further integration, using integrating over the region enclosed by the surface g
the boundary conditions. = const. , and using the divergence theorem, we obtain
Having shown how the magnetic surfaces may be
labeled by toroidal flux P, or, equivalently by the effec-
at
—
d3x BB V( = —g ~
v(t
—
E B
~
(7.11)
tive minor radius coordinate p, we must turn to the de- I I
rivation of an equation for the poloidal flux, ()). First, Combining Eqs. (7.9) —(V. ll) gives, therefore,
however, we shall derive a theorem which will be
needed in the following. 2m —
8$
at, = —c
dS
vyi
E ~
B,
This theorem gives the time derivative of an integral I
J, defined by = —c BV (Z — a) (7.12)
(7.4) where the second equality follows from Eq. (2. 56). From
where the integral is carried out over the region inter-
Eq. (V.8) we finally obtain
ior to a moving surface 4'(x, t) = const. The result is
(7.13)
= lj d'x —+ &p dS u F'
~
(7.5) where we have also used the relation
where the surface integral is taken over the surface 4
=const, and where u~ is the velocity of the constant +

F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport 3Q3
which follows from the definition, Eq. (2. 50). The rea- c &I 2 C 8 t
BV
son for using p (which is equivalent to using P) as the 4~ eV By
spatial coordinate should now be clear: Eq. (7.13) is a
simple and exact equation, which contains the electric which may be written as
field only through (E))B&, which is obtainable from the c 2B Xeg
transport relations. "»B&=4.'BV I BV
It is actually more convenient, in applications, to use
an expression for the time derivative of the effective po- where X, as defined by Eq. (7.3), may also be written
loidal field B„(p, t), defined by Eq. (5.36). To obtain as
this expression, we simply differentiate Eq. (7.13) with
respect to p
(V. 14) When the effective minor radius p is used as the spatial
coordinate, we have
where cI' B ' X Bg)
4)TV'(p) Bp IV'(p) Bpg '
Eo = (E))B&/IRo(R (7.15)
This equation has the form of Faraday's law for a cylin- where V'(p) =—
BV/Bp, or
drical system, with Eo as the axial component of the el- cI B XRO
ectric field. 4m V'(p) Bp IV' (p) (7.20)
Next, we derive a useful expression for the velocity,
u, , of a surface of constant p (or constant Q). We note where B„is the effective poloidal field, defined by Eq.
that (5.36).
.V C. Transport relations
u P Vp =u P ~ V
~ B@=u
Bp
We now wish to make two points, with regard to the
where relationships expressed by Eqs. (5.70)-(5.73). The first
8 is quite simple: although the electric field appears in
u ~ V@=— (7.17) the role of a force, through A„— = (E B)&B /(oB ), and the
current density appears as a flux, these roles may
and the time derivative is taken at constant x. Also, easily be interchanged. That is, by solving Eq. (5.72)
since „,
for A. in terms of (J„/h) and A„, A, „A~,, and sub-
stituting the result into Eqs. (5.70) and (5.71), we obtain
transport relations in which (E„B& appears as a flux,
and (J„/11& (=(J„B&/Bo) appears as a force. Note that the
we have Spitzer current term in Eq. (5.72) is, by definition
(J„,/I &
= ~„(E„B&/B,.
(7.18)
It is natural to regard (O„B& as a force', since it is
Finally, combining Eqs. (7.16), (7.18), (7.10), and given in terms of spatial derivatives by Eq. (7.20). It is
(7.13), we have also natural that (E„B& should be regarded as a flux:
recall Eq. (2.115), which gives the Poynting flux rela-
u, Vp = [c(E„B&/I(R &
—cRE z, ]/R~B, . (V. 19) tive to a constant-P surface, averaged over the surface.
The second point which we wish to make is that the
B. Ampere's law particle flux, relative to a, constant-@ surface, is simp-
ly related to the flux I', , defined by Eq. (5.62). [Recall
The transport theory described in earlier sections al- that Eq. (2.108) gives the particle flux relative to a
lows us to relate (E„B& to (J, B& (as well as to spatial constant-g surface. ] To find this relation, we begin
derivatives of the density and temperatures). We now with Eq. (3.81). Noting that the essential difference be-
show how (J B) can be expressed in terms of spatial tween (the radial components of) vD, Eq. (3.17), and v„,
derivatives of |t). We have Eq. (3.24), is the inductive E xB drift, we obtain, from
(J„B&=(J, B,&+P, .5, &
Eq. (3.81),
where the subscripts p and T denote the poloidal and (&,u, ' Vp&— o Vp + 'fIac
toroidal components, respectively. Using the poloidal
and toroidal components of Ampere's law, Eq. (2.42), (7.22)
+(n, u, Vp&,
where E'~'— = -c 'BA/Bt is the inductive electric field.
From now on, we shall neglect the classical flux
(nu, . Vp), although it is easily included.
J ~ vg= —v x B
4m ~
~ vr„= —v (vg/R
4m
) The first term on the right-hand side of Eq. (7.22) can
be transformed, by using Eq. (5.42), in which the indef-
we have inite integral can be eliminated by using Eq. (3.32) and

integrating by parts. In terms of I „defined by Eq.

(5.62), we find (7.30)
Thus, the surface-averaged electron density satisfies a
(7.23)
QO continuity equation, in which the particle flux, relative
Tbe second term on the right-hand side of Eq. (7.22) can to the surface, is to be obtained from Eqs. (7.27) and
be written in a, different form by multiplying Eq. (2.98) (5.70). The electron density is approximately uniform
on the surface, so &n, ) =n, .
by n, c/(Baja/b p) and averaging
In the large aspect ratio circular cross section case,
in which motion of the magnetic surfaces is neglected,
=n, ctI&E ~~/B& —&E +&]/R+po. (7.24) we have U' ~ p=r, independent of time, and Eq. (7.30)
takes the familiar form
By combining Eqs. (7.22) —(7.24), we obtain
ee+
(7.31)
,B, n, c
l
~ (E„B& &E,a&
'(B& Ro (7.25)
which
e
is equivalent to the equation of conservation of

Finally, using Eq. (7.19) for the velocity of a constant- particles in a circular cylinder.
@ surface, we have
E. Energy conservation laws
Beginning with Eq. (2.14), we may derive flux surface-
averaged equations expressing the conservation of ener-
. = I;, gy for electrons and for ions, in a manner similar to
&yg, (u, —u, ) Vp& (7.27) that used for the particle conservation laws. By using
where the approximation used in Eq. (7.27) is B =Br2. collisional conservation of momentum, and energy, ex-
The particle flux, relative to a constant-P surface, is pressed by Eqs. (2.11) and (2.12), we may write Eq.
needed in the particle conservation law, which will (2.14) for electrons and ions in the form
presently be derived. It depends on the electric field
only through the average (E„B), which is related to '+ V. Q = —Q. + J E —u. ~ (F,. n+, Z,. Ee)., (7.32)
spatial derivatives of g (or ) through Eq. (7.20) and B,
the transport relations, Eqs. (5.70)-(5.73). By compar-
ing Eqs. (7.18), (7.10), and (V. 13), it is clea. r that the Q, Q, '
' + V. . = . + u, (F, + . Zre E) .
n, (7.33)
particle flux, relative to a constant-g surface, also de-
pends upon tbe electric field only through (E, B&; this By integrating these equations over the region interior
result is due to Bernstein (1974). to a constant-@ surface and differentiating with respect
to p, we obtain [compare the derivation of Eq. (V. 30)]
D. Particle conservation law
——[V'(p)&t. &]+ —V'(p)t. ~p&--&t.u,
',
&Q. ~p&]
As we have stressed earlier, the motion of particles in
toroidal conf inexnent systems is not localized, in general, = V (pH-&e, &+@ E&- &,-. (F, Z,'E)&], (7.34)
except in a direction perpendicular to the magnetic sur-
faces. We can expect, therefore, to obtain a closed set and a similar equation for the ion energy. By compar-
of macroscopic equations only by taking averages over ing Eq. (3.85) with the definition of q„Eq. (5.63), and
the magnetic surfaces. neglecting the classical and electrostatic terms in. Eq.
We begin with the law of particle conservation, Eq. (3.85), we have
(2.13). By integrating this equation over the region in-
terior to a surface @=const. (or p=const. ) and using the
.
&Q, V'p& 'T, &n, u, &p&.
=q, + —, (7.35)
divergence theorem, we have We will combine terms on the left-hand side of Eq.
(7.34), in order that only the particle flux relative to a
dS
'+
~m,
d'x t7& (n,u, ) =0. (7.28) constant-Q surface appears. In so doing, we obtain an
Iv@1 extra term which may be transformed by using Eq.
Next, we use tbe theorem expressed by Eq. (V.V) to (7.7), with F =1, differentiated with respect to p
write this equation as
— V'(p) = — [V'(p)&u . Vp&] . (7.36)
—u~ Bt Bp
cE x'p2 + ~ -tg u ~ V =Q. (7.29)
I my I
From this point on, , we shall use the approximations
The time derivative is to be taken at constant @ (or con- n, = &n, &, p, = &p,), whenever they appear convenient.
stant p). By noting that Eq. (2. 55) implies For the energy exchange term, the small mass-ratio
approximation (Braginskii, 1965) gives
d'xn, = dpV' p n,
(7.37)
where V'(p) =— SV/Sp and referring to Eq. (2.56), the def-
inition of the surface average, we differentiate Eq. in which the average is not ~ceded, since yg„T„and
(7.29) with respect to p and obtain T,. may be regarded as uniform on a magnetic surface.
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part t, Aprit '1976
The Ohmic heating term in Eq. (V.34) can be trans- ' I',
formed to a more useful form by using Eqs. (2.69) and {u, (F, +n,. Z, eE)) =
~ '+(y ——,')n, /n, . (7;43)
(2.89) This expression was first obtained by Hinton and Rosen-
J E = —(c/4z)(BI/Bt))E„B —c(BP/B)t))E R . (7.38) bluth (1973); the banana regime limit, in which y =1.33,
was given by Rosenbluth, et al. , (1972).
The derivative BI/Bp may be eliminated by using Eq.
(ii) In the collisional regime, A„, as given by Eq.
(2.90), in which the right-hand side is (4m/c)R2J. &7f; (5.85), is negligibly small [cf. Eq. {5.156) and the sub-
multiplying by R ' and averaging over a magnetic sur-
sequent discussion].
face yields We now collect results, and write the general surface-
BI (J Vg)+ cBP/BP
~ averaged electron energy equation as
') (7.39)
B&))
By manipulations
I(R
similar to those which lead to Eq.
3 Q 8 pl
p)p, ]+~, Bf + —V'(p)[q, + 'T, (,(, — —
)~
(7.20), we may write the toroidal current term as ~'

=)' &P)I —
'9;+&& &))(&„&&/I&)) *)-«u,. —K, Vp)
(J. '7g) = [c/4)) V'(p)] — „,B, (7.40)
&
(7.44)
where X is defined by Eq. (7.3). By averaging Eq.
(7.38) and using Eq. (7.19) to eliminate (ErR), we find where Q,. is given by Eq. (7.37), and (J Vg) is given by
(J E) =(J. Vf)(E„B)/I(R-')+(u, . Vp)BP/Bp. (7.41) Eq. (V.40). The ion equation is very similar, the differ-
ences in the right-hand sides being an overall sign
The Ohmic heating term is thus related to the relative change and the absence of the (E, B) term.
Poynting flux [recall Eq. (2.115)] and to the work done In the large aspect-ratio, circular cross section case,
by the moving surface against the plasma pressure with magnetic surface motion neglected, Eq. (7.44)
gradient. takes a more familiar form
The remaining terms on the right-hand side of Eq.
(7.34), involving u, , are evaluated as follows. Noting
that only the O(6') terms are required, and making ex-
1 8
3 Bpe'+ — —~[q + ,'T
e 2 r]-
e e
plicit the 5-ordering subscript, we have

{u,. {F,. +n,. z,. eE)) = —Z,. eBC/Bp((n, .u, ), %p) ne Br
(F,. + n,. Z,. e E )) .
+ (u, , where Eo is given by Eq. (7.15), (P„g2,.) is given by Eq.
{6.136), and A„. is given by Eq. (6.132).
We computed
ten as
for
and
the
U y ln Sec. II. C.2; the result may be writ-
u, , =K,. B/n, . —(c/Z, en, )(BP,/Bg+ .Z, en, BC/Bg)R'Vg

the axisymmetric case [recall Eqs. (2.65), (2. 66),
(2.86)]. Combining these two equations, recalling
„
relation between K,. and p, implied by Eq. (5.46),
In Eq. (7.44), the two time-derivative terms can be
combined, and the equation written as follows
— —[p (v')'"]+(v')'~' —v'[q + .'T r
e g+ e 2 e e
]-
and using Eq. (2.93), we find
{u, (F, +n, Z,. eE)) = u, %'p)BP, /Bp —p,. T, A„, (7.42)
(.
where A„. is defined by Eq. (5.59). Note that the radial

electric field does not appear in Eq. (V.42); there is an
electrostatic energy change due to radial diffusion, but
this is precisely cancelled by the energy change due to
The ion energy equation can be written in a similar form
——[&t) (V')' ]+(V') '—
=(v')'"
V'[q
—
Q.i + ~ '
+ ,'T
I'e P'- 8
r.i ]—i i.T.i A li. (7.47)
equilibrium rotation. It follows in particular that the e gp
radial electric field never appears in the closed set of
second- order moment equations. The meaning of the factor (V')'~' in the time derivatives
The right-hand side of Eq. (V.42) appears in both elec- can be made clear by considering an example in which
tron and ion energy equations, with opposite signs in transport processes are negligible.
each equation, and represents a transfer of energy be-
tween the species. It can be simplified in either of two F. Adiabatic compression
limiting cases: Gne successful method of heating tokamak plasmas
(i) In the large aspect-ratio circular cross-section has been compression in major radius (Bol, et al. ,
case, with electrons in the banana-plateau regime, A„ 1972). By changing the external poloidal magnetic field,
is given by Eq. (6.55), in terms of the particle flux. with a time-independent toroidal field, the equilibrium
If the ions are also in the banana-plateau regime, then position of the plasma column can be shifted to smaller-
p,. is given by Eq. (6.50), in terms of the ion tempera- values of major radius. U this is done fast enough that
ture gradient and the parameter y. Neglecting motion dissipation and transport effects are negligible, but
of the magnetic surfaces, (u, 7'p) is given by Eq. (7.27) slowly enough that magnetohydrodynamic equilibrium is
divided by n„so that Eq. (V.42) reduces to approximately maintained, the plasma is adiaba3tical/y
Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Pa~ l, April 1976

compressed. In this case, we assume that the time de- obtained by first solving the kinetic equations, Eqs.
rivative terms dominate in Eqs. {7.13), (7.30), (7.46), (5.80) and (5.81). Thus, the closure problem is solved
and (7.47), which become in principle, although explicit results for the transport
coefficients are known only in special cases.
(7.48) The most useful special case is the large aspect-ra-
tio, circular cross- section case, for which the geometry
—
8
8t
(n e
V') =0, (7.49)
was discussed in Sec. VI.A. Only in this case are the
transport coefficients known explicitly, for all regimes
of collisionality. In order to facilitate the use of these
—[P, (V')' '] = &
Lt',.( V')' '] = 0 . (7.50) results in computer programs, we now summarize the
complete set of equations and transport coefficients for
If the temperature equilibration occurs more quickly the large aspect ratio, circular cross-section case.
than the compression, Eq. (7.50) should be replaced by The magnetic surface configuration is assumed here to
be time- independent.
—
Bt P
(V')'"] =0, (7.51) The equations which (with appropriate boundary and in-
where P=—P, +p, =(n, +n;)T. Equation (7.48) states that

the poloidal flux is conserved, following a surface of
itial data) determine
i—
8
n„T,
, T, , and functions of
& and t are as follows (with p, = n, T, and—P, =n, T,
B„as
):.
constant toroidal flux. By differentiating with respect '+
e — xl" =0,
8t
to Q and using the definition of the safety factor q, Eq,
(2.50), we have q =const. , following the flux surface
motion. Equation (7.49) gives n, V' =const. which ex-
3 8pe'+ 1 8
—.
8&
—
~(q e +-,~'T e I"e )
presses the conservation of the number of particles be-
tween two nearby magnetic surfaces, while Eq. (7.51)
yields P(V')'~' = const. which is the law for the change
gpss
—
3~e' Qe'(T —T.)+ cEp
e
&e i
8—
47t~ 8y
(~B&0) —
—Ie'
+e
8p&
8&
+ p. i T i A. .
in pressure, in an adiabatic compression. By differ- 38p;'+ —

1 8 —
r(q +-,'T.i I e /Z.i )
entiating Eq. {7.1) with respect to V, using Eq. {2.55),
and using the definition of p, Q =BT,mp', we have
V' = (2m)'pB /TI(R ). (7.52)
Hence, the adiabatic scaling laws for rotational trans-
8Byo 8E' p
=3~e
Jpl
—(T —T )+ —
&e
7e
I',' ' —
8& pg
e
8Pg
p, .T A.
8t 8+
form 2m/q, density, and pressure are
In order to have a. closed set of equations, we must ex-
q =const, n (R ), P (R )'~ (7.53) press I'„q„q, E„p,
, , and A„ in terms of n„T„T„
following a magnetic surface. These generalize some- and B„and their derivatives. This is accomplished by
what the. large aspect-ratio scaling laws (Furth and the use of Eqs. (6.120)-(6.123), (6.131), (6.132), and
Yoshikawa, 1970) for which (R ') =Ro', and p is the ini-
tial minor radius. &.T~ = (~i W2;)(BT;/s&)
in which the weak coupling approximation, as discussed
G. SUmmaly in Sec. V.B.4, has been used. In Eq. (6.122), one must
solve for Eo, using (E q/h) E y(JO[[~/A) (F[[E [wolth (7t[
The equations which must be solved, to determine the given by Eq. (5.66)], and
radial profiles of density, electron and ion tempera-
ture, and poloidal magnetic field, as functions of time,
are Eqs. (7.14), (7.30), (7.46), and (7.47). By "radial
(Z„/h) = —, .
(~B, ) .
profiles, " we mean the dependence on the effective min- The transport coefficients which appear in these equa-
or radius coordinate p (equivalent to toroidal flux @). tions, the K „'s, K, and (P„g„), have been fitted to
The magnetic surface configuration is to be determined, analytic expressions, given by Eqs. (6.125), (6.133), .
at each instant of time by Eq. (2.90), using Eqs. (7.39) and (6.136), respectively.
and (7.40) to express 8I/8$ in terms of spatial deriva. —
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
tives of the pressure' P and the poloidal magnetic field
B„. These equations describe the radial profiles and This work was supported in part by U. S. Energy Re-
search and Development Administration through Con-
magnetic surfaces on time scales long compared with
the time needed to establish magnetohydrodynamic equi- tract AT-(40-1)-4478 and also in part by the Alfred P.
librium. We have shown that, when the transport is Sloan Foundation, through a Research Fellowship held
negligible, the equations are consistent with the scaling by one of the authors (F.L.H. ). Figure 11 was kindly
laws for adiabatic compression. supplied by D. W. Ross.
We have shown that these equations are a closed set REFERENCES
.of equations when the following quantities are related to
Alfven, H. , 1950, CosmicaE Electrodynamics (Oxford U. P. ,
the density, temperatures and poloidal field and their Fairlawn, N. J.).
spatial derivatives: I', , q, , q, , (E B), p, „A„.. But these Artsirnovich, L. A. , 1972, Nucl. Fusion 12, 215.
relations are given by Eqs. (5.70)-(5.73), (5.75), and Banos, A. , Jr. , 1967, J. Plasma Phys. 1, 305.
(5.76), in terms of transport coefficients '.ch must be Berk, H. L. , and &. A. Galeev, 1967, Phys. Fluids 10, 441.

Bernstein, I. B., 1974, Phys. Fluids 17, 574. 1883.

Bickerton, B. J., J. W. Connor, and J. B. Taylor, 1971, Nat. Hazeltine, B. D. , F. L. Hinton, and M. N. Rosenbluth, 1973,
Phys. Sci. 229, 110. Phys. Fluids 16, 1645.
Bol, K., R. A. Ellis, H. Eubank, H. P. Furth, R. A. Jacobsen, Hazeltine, R. D. , and M. N. Rosenbluth, Phys. Fluids. 15,
L. C. Johnson, E. Mazzucato, W. Stodiek, E. L. Tolgas, 2211.
1972, Phys. Rev. Lett. 29, 1495. Hazeltine, R. D. , A. A. Ware, D. J.
Sigmar, S. P. Hirshman,
Braginskii, S. I., 1965, in Reviews of Plasma Physics, edited J. E. McCune, E. C. Crume, T. Hogan, and J. F. Clarke,
J.
by M. A. Leontovich (Consultants Bureau, New York), Vol. 1, 1974 to be published in Plasma Physics and Controlled Nu-
p. 205. clea~ 8'usion Research (IAEA, Vienna).
Chandrasekhar, S., 1943, Astrophys. J. 97, 255, 263. Hinton, F. L., and T. B. Moore, 1974, Nucl. Fusion 14, 639.
Chapman, S., and T. G. Cowling, 1952, The Mathematical Hinton, F. L. , and C. Oberman, 1969, Nucl. Fusion 9, 319.
Theory of Non-Uniform Gases, (Cambridge University, Lon- Hinton, F. L., and M. N. Rosenbluth, 1973, Phys. Fluids 16,
don). 83 6.
Chew, G. F., M. L. Goldberger, and F. E. Low, 1956, Proc. Kadomtsev, B. B., and 0-. P. Pogutse, 1971, Nucl. Fusion 11,
R. Soc. I ond. , 236A, 112. 67.
Cohen, R. S. , L. Spitzer, Jr. , and P. McR. Boutly, 1950, Kadomtsev, B. B., and V. D. Shafranov, 1972, Nucl. Fusion
Phys. Bev. 80, 230. Supp. (IAEA, Vienna), p. 209.
Connor, J. W. , 1973, Plasma Phys, . 15, 765. Kaufman, A. N. , 1960, in the Theory of Neutral and Ionized
Connor, J. W. , R. C. Grimm, R. J. Hastie, P. M. Keeping, Gases, edited by C. de Witt and J. F. Detouef (Wiley, New
1973, Nucl. Fusion 13, 211. York).
Connor, J. W. , and R. J. Hastie, 1973, Nucl. Fusion 13, 221. Kaufman, A. N. , 1966, in Plasma Physics in Theory and
Connor, J. W. , and R. J. Hastie, 1974, Phys. Fluids 17, 114. Application, edited by Wulf B. Kunkel (McGraw-Hill, New
Coppi, B., and D. J. Sigmar, 1973, Phys. Fluids 16, 1174. York), p. 91.
Daybelge, U. , 1971, Phys. Rev. Lett. 27, 916. Kihara, T. , and O. Aono, 1971, in Kinetic E'quations, edited
de Groot, S. R. , and P. Mazur, 1962, Non-equilibrium Ther- by Richard L. Liboff and Norman Rostoker (Gordon and
modynamics (North-Holland Publ. Co. , Amsterdam), Chap. 4. Breach, New York), p. 201.
Dolgov-Saveliev, G. G. , V. S. Mukhovatov, V. S. Strelkov, Klima, R. , 1965, Czech. J.
Phys. . B15, 473.
M. N. Shepelov, and N. A. Yavlinski, 1960, in Proceedings Kovrizhnikh, L. M. , 1969, Sov. Phys. —JETP 29, 475.
of the Fourth International Conference on Ionization Phenom- Kovrizhnikh, L. M. , 1970, International Atomic Energy Agency
ena in Gases, Uppsala (North-Holland, Amsterdam), Vol. Internal Report IC/70/124 (unpublished).
II, p. 947. Kruskal, M. D. , J. L. Johnson, M. B. Gottlieb, and L. M.
Dreic er, H. , 1959, Phys. Bev. 115, 238. Goldman, 1958, Phys. Fluids 1, 421.
Fried, B. D. , 1966, in Plasma Physics in Theory and Applica- Kruskal, M. D. , and B. M. Kulsrud, 1958, Phys. Fluids 1,
tion, edited by W. B.. Kunkel {McGraw-Hill, New York), p. 265.
49 Laing, E. W. , S. J. Roberts, and R. T. Whipple, 1959, J. Nucl.
Frieman, E. A. , 1970, Phys. Fluids 13, 490. Energy C 1, 49.
Furth, H. P. , and M. N. Rosenbluth, 1969, in Plasma Physics Landau, L. , 1936, Phys. Z. Sowjetunion 10, 154.
and Controlled Nuclear elusion Research (IAEA, Vienna), Lenard, A. , 1960, Ann. Phys. (N. Y.) 3, 390.
Vol. 1, p. 821. Marshak, R. F., 1941, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 41, 49.
Furth, H. P. , and S. Yoshikawa, 1970, Phys. Fluids 13, 2593. Maschke, E. K. , 1972, Plasma Phys. 14, 141.
Furth, H. P. , M. N. Rosenbluth, P. H. Rutherford, W. Stodiek, Montgomery, D. , L. Turner, and G. Joyce, 1974, Phys. Fluids
1970, Phys. Fluids 13, 3020. 17, 2201.
Galeev, A. A. , 1971, Sov. Phys. —JETP 32, 752. Morosov, A. I. , and L. S. Solov'ev, 1966, in Reviews of Plas-
Galeev, A. A. , and B. Z. Sagdeev, 1968, Sov. Phys. —JETP 26, ma Physics, edited by M. A. Leontovich (Consultants Bureau,
233. New York), p. 201.
Galeev, A. A. , and R. Z. Sagdeev, 1971, JETP Lett. 13, 113. Northrop, T. G. , 1963, The Adiabatic Motion of Charged Par-
Galeev, A. A. , and R. Z. Sagdeev, 1975, to be published in ticles (Interscience, New York).
Advances in Plasma Physics, edited by A. Simon and W. B. Ohkawa, T. , 1968, Kakuyugo-Kenkyu 20, 557.
Thompson (Interscience, New York), Vol. VI. Pfirsch, D. , and A. Schluter, 1962, Max-Planck-Institut Re-
Galeev, A. A. , R. Z. Sagdeev, H. P. Furth, and M. N. Rosen- port MPP/PA/7/62 (unpublished).
bluth, 1969, Phys. Rev. Lett. 22, 511. Post, R. F., 1956, Bev. Mod. Phys. 28, 338.
Gibson, A. , and D. W. Mason, 1969, Plasma Phys. 11, 121. Prigogine, I., 1961, Introduction to Thermodynamics of Ir-
Gibson, A. , and J. B. Taylor, 1967, Phys. Fluids 10, 2653. reversible Processes (Interscience Publishers, New York),
Glasser, A. H. , and W. B. Thompson, 1973, Phys. Fluids 16, 2nd edition.
95. Bawls, J. M. , M. S. Chu, F. L. Hinton, 1975, Phys. Fluids 18,
Grad, H. , 1967, Phys. Fluids 10, 137. 1160.
Grad, H. , 1970, Actes, Congress intern. Math. 3, 105. Robinson, B. B., and I. B. Bernstein, 1962, Ann. Phys. 18,
Grad, H. , and J. Hogan, 1970, Phys. Rev. Lett. 24, 1337. 110.
Grad, H. , and H. Bubin, 1958, in Proceedings of Second Inter- Rosenbluth, M. N. , 1973, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 18, 1337.
national Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy Rosenbluth, M. N. , R. D. Hazeltine, and F. L. Hinton, 1972,
(United Nations, Geneva), 31, 190. Phys. Fluids 15, 116.
Greene, J. M. , and J. L. Johnson, 1961, Phys. Fluids 4, 875. Rosenbluth, M. N. , and A. N. Kaufman, 1958, Phys. Rev. 109,
Hamada, S., 1962, Nucl. Fusion 2, 23. 1.
Hastie, R. J., J. B. Taylor, and F. A. Haas, 1967, Ann. Phys. Rosenbluth, M. N. , and C. L. Longmire, 1957, Ann. Phys.
41, 302. {N.. Y.) 1, 120.
Hazeltine,R. D. , 1973, Plasma Phys. 15, 77. Rosenbluth, M. N. , W. MacDonald, and D. Judd, 1957, Phys.
Hazeltine,R. D. , 1974, Phys. Fluids 17, 961. Rev. 107, 1.
Hazeltine,R. D. , 1975, to be published in Advances in Plasma Rosenbluth, M. N. , P. H. Rutherford, J. P. Taylor, E. A.
Physics, edited by A. Simon and W. B. Thompson (Inter- Frieman, and L. M. Kovrizhnikh,
1971, in Plasma Physics
science, New York), Vol. VI. and Controlled Nuclear E'usion Research (IAEA, Vienna, ),
Hazeltine, R. D. , and F. L. Hinton, 1973, Phys. Fluids 16, Vol. 1, p. 495.

30S F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine: Theory of plasma transport
Rutherford, P. H. , 1970, Phys. Fluids i3, 482. Spitzer, L. , Jr. , 1967, Physics of 5'ully Ionized Gases (»«r-
Rutherford, P. H. , 1974, Phys. Fluids 17, 1782. science, New York).
Rutherford, P. H. , and E. A. Frieman, 1968, Phys, Fluids 11, Spitzer, L. , Jr. , and R. Harm, 1953, Phys. Rev. 89, 977.
569. Stix, T. H. , 1973, Phys. Fluids 16, 1260.
Rutherford, P. H. , L. M, Kovrizhnikh, M. N. Rosenbluth, and Stringer, T. E., 1970, Phys. Fluids 13, 810.
F. L. Hinton, 1970, Phys. Rev. Lett. 25, 1090. Su, C. H. , and C. Oberman, 1968, Phys. Rev. Lett. 20, 427.
Sagdeev, R. Z. , and A. A. Galeev, 1970, Sov. Phys. —Dokl. 14, Tamm, I. E., 1959, in Plasma Physics and the Pxoblem of
1198. Contxolled Tkexmonucleax Pusion (Pergamon, New York),
Shafranov, V. D. , 1958, Sov.. Phys. —JETP 8, 545. Vol. 1, p. 35.
Shafranov, V. D. , 1965, At. Energ. 19, 120. Taylor, J. B., 1961, Phys. Fluids 4, 1142.
Shafranov, V. D. , 1966, in Reviewers of Plasma Physics, edited Trubnikov, B. A. , 1965, in geviezes of Plasma Physics,
by M. A. Leontovich (Consultants Bureau, New York), Vol. edited by M. A. Leontovich (Consultants Bureau, New York),
2, p. 103. Vol. 1, p. 105.
Sigmar, D. J., 1972, talk given at the Sherwood Theory Meet- Tsang, K. T. , and E. A. Frieman, 1975, to be published in
ing, Los Alamos, March 23 (unpublished). Phys. Fluids.
Sigmar, D. J., J. F. Clarke, R. V. Neidigh, and K. L. Vander Ware, A. A. , 1970, Phys. Rev. Lett. 25, 916.
Sluis, 1974, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33, 1376. Ware, A. A. , 1973, Nucl. Fusion t3, 793.
Spitzer, L. , Jr. , 1952, Astrophys. J. 116, 299. Wimmel, H. K. , 1970, Nucl. Fusion 10, 117.
Rev. Mod. Phys. , VoI. 48, No. 2, Part f, Aprif 'f976

Hinton 1976

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hinton 1976

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

Hinton 1976

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Theory of plasr~ia transport in toroidal confineraient systems

F. L. Hinton and R. D. Hazeltine

CONTENTS 3. Drift- kinetic equation 260

3. Ion transport word "collision" requires interpretation when applied

Re@. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 'l976

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April |976

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 'l976

scattering processes under consideration. Equation E. Small mass-ratio approximations

ators which include large-angle scattering terms, and be neglected.

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

relatively fast, and Eq. (1.16) is applicable. The mo- P = d'vmvv (2 2)

the stress tensor —(e/mc) QxB =G. (2. 16)

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April '1976

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 4S, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

C. First-order equilibrium Bg/eg = 0 . (2. 44)

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

It can be seen that rational values of q correspond to g QH

surfaces which are not ergodically covered, the field

=(d4/dV) (d/d4) (dV/dC ) (r ~

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

d'v mvv [Eq. (1.1)]. (2. 73)

I-= o(5~/~), (2.82) ond is related to conservation of angular momentum,

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

(nu„c V() = —(c/e)(R'V

drift, survives, and Eq. (2. 109) becomes the statement

Faraday s law (2.110)

Rev. IVIod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

face is given by (c/4v)[E + c 'u, B] B, wher e u, is the

v~, = dR/dt =v, —dp/—dt. (3.14)

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

small. Hence a particle with sufficiently large perpen- (3.29)

Rev. IV!od. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

Hence, the trapped particles remain, on the average,

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1S76

1. Collisional regime where AB measures the field variation which causes

P~ev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

v, 6', ; since trapped particles comprise a fraction

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, Aprii '1976

For the case of an axisymmetric system such refined

d v(v~+v„) f =nu —nu, +VxM, (3.81) —c P~ n x V 4/B, (3.85)

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

«&+&«& transport problem is given implicitly by Eqs. and Eq. (3.90) by

where the overbar indicates a gyrophase average, as in

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

and the ordering of Eq. (3.99) follows. Equation (3.100) (3.106)

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, Na. 2, Part l, April 1976

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

where involves both like- and unlike-species collisions, so that

The evaluation of the integrals in Eqs. (4.20) and (4. 21)

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

that we should allow for an n =-1 term in the series of

6 = &u/v «1 (4. 27)

Rev. IVlod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part l, April 1976

After the function g, = O(&f, ~) is expanded in b. (4. 54)

Rev. Mod. Phys. , Vol. 48, No. 2, Part I, April 1976

frequency, they considered a kinetic equation more