arxiv: v3 [physics.plasm-ph] 10 Mar 2017

Transcription

1 The effect of tangential drifts on neoclassical transport in stellarators close to omnigeneity arxiv:6.66v3 [physics.plasm-ph] Mar 27 Iván Calvo Felix I Parra 2,3 felix.parradiaz@physics.ox.ac.uk José Luis Velasco joseluis.velasco@ciemat.es J Arturo Alonso arturo.alonso@ciemat.es Laboratorio Nacional de Fusión, CIEMAT, 284 Madrid, Spain 2 Rudolf Peierls Centre for Theoretical Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX 3NP, UK 3 Culham Centre for Fusion Energy, Abingdon, OX4 3DB, UK PACS numbers: 52.2.Dq, Fi, Xz, Hc Abstract. In general, the orbit-averaged radial magnetic drift of trapped particles in stellarators is non-zero due to the three-dimensional nature of the magnetic field. Stellarators in which the orbit-averaged radial magnetic drift vanishes are called omnigeneous, and they exhibit neoclassical transport levels comparable to those of axisymmetric tokamaks. However, the effect of deviations from omnigeneity cannot be neglected in practice, and it is more deleterious at small collisionalities. For sufficiently low collision frequencies (below the values that define the /ν regime), the components of the drifts tangential to the flux surface become relevant. This article focuses on the study of such collisionality regimes in stellarators close to omnigeneity when the gradient of the non-omnigeneous perturbation is small. First, it is proven that closeness to omnigeneity is required to actually preserve radial locality in the drift-kinetic equation for collisionalities below the /ν regime. Then, using the derived radially local equation, it is shown that neoclassical transport is determined by two layers located at different regions of phase space. One of the layers corresponds to the so-called ν regime and the other to the so-called superbanana-plateau regime. The importance of the superbanana-plateau layer for the calculation of the tangential electric field is emphasized, as well as the relevance of the latter for neoclassical transport in the collisionality regimes considered in this paper. In particular, the role of the tangential electric field is essential for the emergence of a new subregime of superbanana-plateau transport when the radial electric field is small. A formula for the ion energy flux that includes the ν regime and the superbanana-plateau regime is given. The energy flux scales with the square of the size of the deviation from omnigeneity. Finally, it is explained why below a certain collisionality value the formulation presented in this article ceases to be valid.

2 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 2. Introduction Stellarators [] offer some intrinsic advantages compared to tokamaks, such as the possibility of steady-state operation and the absence of disruptions. However, the magnetic configuration of a stellarator has to be designed very carefully for it to have confinement properties comparable to those of an axisymmetric tokamak. In a generic stellarator, trapped particle orbits have non-zero secular radial drifts and they leave the device in a short time. The stellarator configuration is called omnigeneous [2, 3, 4, 5] if the secular radial drifts vanish. Omnigeneity guarantees a neoclassical transport level similar to that in a tokamak (see equation (2) below). Define the normalized ion gyroradius ρ i := v ti /(Ω i L ), where v ti and Ω i are the ion thermal speed and the ion gyrofrequency, and L is the typical lengthofvariationofthemagneticfield, whichisassumedtobeoftheorderofthesystem size. The gyrofrequency is Ω i = Z i eb/(m i c), where Z i e is the charge of the ions, e is the elementary charge, B is the magnitude of the magnetic field B, m i is the ion mass, and c is the speed of light. Since ρ i in a strongly magnetized plasma, the driftkinetic formalism [6] is appropriate. Denoting by f i (r,v) the phase-space distribution, the radial ion energy flux Q i reads ( ) Q i = d 2 S d 3 mi v 2 v +Z i eϕ v d,i ˆnf i. () 2 Here, ϕ is the electrostatic potential, v d,i is the drift velocity, ˆn is the unit vector normal to the flux surface, v d,i ˆn ρ i v ti, and the integrals are performed over velocity space and over the flux surface. In a perfectly omnigeneous stellarator f i, to lowest order in ρ i, is a Maxwellian f Mi with density n i and temperature T i that are constant on flux surfaces. The phase-space distribution is written as f i = f Mi + f i, where the perturbation to the Maxwellian is found to have a size f i O(ρ i f Mi ). The first nonvanishing contribution to the energy flux comes from a piece of the distribution function that is O(ν i ρ i f Mi ), where ν i := ν ii L /v ti is the ion collisionality and ν ii is the ion-ion collision frequency. Then, in an omnigeneous stellarator, Q i ν i ρ 2 i n it i v ti S ψ. (2) The area of the flux surface is denoted by S ψ, with ψ the radial coordinate. The proof of Cary and Shasharina [2, 3] for the existence of omnigeneous magnetic fields implies that exact omnigeneity throughout the plasma requires, at least, nonanaliticity. Let us explain this in more detail. As shown in references [2] and [3], there exist omnigeneous magnetic fields that are analytic. These configurations coincide with the set of quasisymmetric magnetic fields [7, 8]. To the virtues of omnigeneity, quasisymmetry adds the vanishing of neoclassical flow damping in the quasisymmetric direction. Therefore, in quasisymmetric stellarators larger flow velocities can be attained. In principle, a quasisymmetric stellarator plasma may have large flow shear, that in principle can reduce turbulent transport [9]. However, the quasisymmetry condition is incompatible with the magnetohydrodynamic equilibrium equations [], and the stellarator can be made quasisymmetric only in a limited radial region.

3 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 3 This is why we said above that a necessary condition for exact omnigeneity is nonanaliticity; specifically, the discontinuity of some derivatives of second or higher order. However, designing and aligning coils that create a magnetic field with discontinuous derivatives at certain points in space is probably technically impossible. Therefore, even in optimized magnetic fields, the effect of deviations from the desired omnigeneous configuration cannot be neglected. It is thus necessary to study magnetic fields of the formb = B +δb, where B isomnigeneous andδb isaperturbation, with δ and B B. The effect of a deviation from omnigeneity is more detrimental for confinement at small collisionalities. If ν i and the stellarator is non-omnigeneous, the nonomnigeneous piece of f i becomes large, so that f i ρ i f Mi and the energy flux can be much larger than the estimation (2) even if δ is small. The quantification of this effect for ρ i ν i, (3) that defines the /ν regime, has been treated in [, 2, 3] for stellarators close to quasisymmetry and is the subject of [4] for stellarators close to omnigeneity. However, this regime does not exhaust the low collisionality parameter space in stellarators. When ν i ρ i, the components of the drifts tangential to the flux surface matter [, 5, 6, 7]. In this paper we study stellarators close to omnigeneity in the collisionality regime (4), relevant for a stellarator reactor [8]. It is important to point out that the calculations in this paper do not rely on large aspect ratio approximations. Of course, if the stellarator close to omnigeneity under consideration has large aspect ratio, one can perform a subsidiary expansion in the inverse aspect ratio and refine the results obtained here. This will be the subject of future work. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we introduce a set of flux coordinates that is well-adapted to stellarator magnetic geometries. Then, we give the formal definition of omnigeneity. In Section 3 we derive, starting from the complete drift-kinetic equation, the equation for the dominant component of the distribution function when δ and ν i ρ i. In particular, we explain why the standard expansion in ρ i breaks down for a generic stellarator when ν i ρ i. In brief, the reason is that f i becomes so large that f i f Mi. For stellarators close to omnigeneity, however, we can expand in the small parameter δ. In addition, in a generic stellarator the drift-kinetic equation becomes radially non-local when ν i ρ i, but we will see that with the condition δ we can derive a radially local drift-kinetic equation in this collisionality regime. A precision must be made about the asymptotic expansion in δ carried out in this paper. When ρ i ν i, it has been understood (in [, 2, 3] for stellarators close to quasisymmetry and in [4] for stellarators close to omnigeneity) that the effect of the deviations (from quasisymmetry or omnigeneity) is very different depending on the size of the gradients on the surface of the magnetic field perturbation. For the regime (4)

4 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 4 (4), the case of deviations with small gradients and the case of deviations with large gradients also require different treatments, in principle. Here, we restrict ourselves to deviations with small gradients. Let us be more precise. If B := B and B := B, by deviations with small gradients we mean that lnb / lnb δ. If this inequality is well satisfied, then we can consider that the characteristic lengths of both, B and B, are O(L ) as far as the asymptotic expansion in δ is concerned. In Section 4 the equation derived in Section 3 for the non-omnigeneous piece of the distribution function is solved when ν i ρ i. We find that Q i is dominated by two collisional layers in phase space. One of the layers lies at the boundary between trapped and passing trajectories and produces an energy flux Q i δ 2ν/2 ii ln(ωα /ν ωα 3/2 ii )ρ 2 i n it i vti 2 L S ψ, (5) where ω α ρ i v ti /L, defined in Section 4, is the precession frequency due to the tangential drifts. On the right side of (5) ω α actually stands for the value of the precession frequency evaluated at the boundary between trapped and passing particles and at v = v ti. Note the logarithmic correction to the scaling with (ν ii /ω α ) /2 in (5), that we calculate in subsection 4.. The other layer lies at the points of phase space where ω α vanishes and yields Q i independent of ν i. Namely, Q i δ 2 ρ i n i T i v ti S ψ. (6) Thefirst layer (seesubsection 4.)gives theso-called ν regime, foundincertainmodels of stellarator geometry [9, 2] where the inverse aspect ratio and the helical ripple are employed as expansion parameters. The second layer (see subsection 4.2) gives the superbanana-plateau regime, derived in [2] for finite aspect ratio tokamaks with broken symmetry. Here, the ν andsuperbanana-plateauregimesarederived andanalyzedina much broader setting and in deeper detail than previously available in the literature. In particular, we will show that the treatment of the superbanana-plateau regime requires special care for small values of the radial electric field (see (5) for a precise definition of what small means in this context), and in those cases logarithmic corrections appear in (6) as well. Of course, neither the ν regime nor the superbanana-plateau regime (nor the /ν regime) exist in perfectly omnigeneous stellarators; i.e. when δ =. From the start, it will be evident that the role of the electric field tangent to the flux surface is relevant when the collisionality is as low as in (4) (not to mention its importance for impurity transport, as pointed out, for example, in [22, 23, 24]). Furthermore, we will show that writing the contributions to the quasineutrality equation that gives the electric field tangent to the flux surface is a subtle issue. In particular, we will prove that the superbanana-plateau layer has to be resolved to find the tangent electric field. For this reason, we discuss the quasineutrality equation in subsection The contributions to Q i from the two layers mentioned above are additive, as long as the layers are distinct and do not overlap, and a general expression embracing the ν

5 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 5 and superbanana-plateau regimes is provided in subsection 4.3. The treatment of cases in which both layers overlap is left for the future. As (5) and (6) already indicate, we will show that the neoclassical fluxes scale with the square of the size of the deviation from omnigeneity, δ. In Section 5 we use the results of previous sections to write the equation that gives the radial electric field. Finally, in Section 6, we explain that the results of Section 4 are not expected to be correct for arbitrarily small ν i. For each δ there exists a value of the collisionality ν δ such that if ν i < ν δ our solution is not valid. We explain and estimate the limit value ν δ. In Section 7 we summarize the conclusions of the paper. 2. Omnigeneous stellarators Throughout the paper, we deal with stellarators whose magnetic field configurations possess nested flux surfaces. In the first place, we define a set of spatial coordinates {ψ,α,l} adapted to the magnetic field. The coordinate ψ determines the flux surface, whereas α is an angular coordinate that labels a magnetic field line once ψ has been fixed. Finally l, the arc length over the magnetic field line, specifies the position along the line for fixed ψ and α. Denote by ψ(r), α(r) and l(r) the functions giving the value ofthese coordinatesforeach point r inthestellarator. The magneticfield canbewritten as B = Ψ t(ψ) ψ α. (7) Here, Ψ t is the toroidal magnetic flux over 2π and primes stand for differentiation with respect to ψ. In order to have unique pairs (α,l) associated to each point on a flux surface, we choose a curve C that closes poloidally. This curve can be parameterized by α. All points on the curve are assigned, by definition, the value l =. For each pair ψ and α we take l [,L(ψ,α)), where L(ψ,α) is found by integrating from C along the line until the curve C is encountered again. Let v be the magnitude of the velocity and = v 2 /(v2 B) the pitch angle. Given a flux surface determined by ψ, particles are passing or trapped depending on the value of. Passing trajectories have < /B max (ψ), where B max (ψ) is the maximum value of B on the flux surface. Passing particles explore the entire flux surface and always have vanishing average radial magnetic drift. Particles with > /B max (ψ) are trapped. For trapped particles, the radial magnetic drift averaged over the orbit is non-zero in a generic stellarator. A stellarator is called omnigeneous if the orbit-averaged radial magnetic drift is zero for all particles [2, 3, 4, 5]. That is, if and only if the second To fix ideas, we are thinking of α as a poloidal angle, but things work analogously if α, and therefore the curve C, have a different helicity.

6 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 6 adiabatic invariant J = 2 l b2 l b v dl is a flux function, which means that α lb2 l b Bdl = (8) must hold for every trapped trajectory. Here l b and l b2 are the bounce points; i.e. the solutions for l of the equation B(ψ,α,l) = for a particular trapped trajectory. Since (8) has to be satisfied for every, that equation is equivalent to requiring α lb2 l b Λ(ψ,v,,B(ψ,α,l))dl = (9) for any function Λ that depends on α and l only through B. We will make use of this definition of omnigeneity several times along the article. 3. Low-collisionality drift-kinetic equation in stellarators close to omnigeneity AswesaidintheIntroduction, duetothesmallnessofρ i wecanemploythedrift-kinetic approach [6,, 25, 26]. It consists of a systematic way to average, order by order in ρ i, over the fast gyration of particles around magnetic field lines. This is achieved by finding a coordinate transformation on phase space that decouples the gyromotion from the comparatively slow motion of the guiding center. The new coordinates are called drift-kinetic coordinates. In what follows, we restrict ourselves to electrostatic drift-kinetics and assume that ϕ m i v 2 ti /e. The form of the drift-kinetic equation is determined by the transformation from coordinates {r, v} to drift-kinetic coordinates (or, perhaps more precisely, to the driftkinetic limit of gyrokinetic coordinates [27]). Even though we will end up employing the coordinates v and defined in Section 2, it is convenient to start using as independent coordinates the total energy per mass unit E and the magnetic moment µ because they are constants of the particle motion. Then, in drift-kinetic coordinates {R, E, µ, σ, γ}, where R is the position of the guiding center, σ is the sign of the parallel velocity and γ is the gyrophase, we have R = r Ω iˆb v+o(ρ 2 i L ), E = v2 2 + Z ieϕ m i, µ = 2B (v2 (v ˆb) 2 )+O(ρ i vti 2 /B), ( ) v ê2 γ = arctan +O(ρ i ), () v ê In [3], it is proven that (8) implies that dl/db (the sum runs over the two points of each well where the magnitude of the magnetic field reaches a certain value B) depends only on ψ and on the value of B. Property (9) follows by employing this result after changing the integration variable on the left-side of (9) from l to B.

7 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 7 where ˆb = B B and the right sides of the previous expressions are evaluated at r. The orthogonal unit vector fields ê and ê 2 satisfy at each point ê ê 2 = ˆb. The higher-order corrections in the definition of µ are determined by the fact that µ is the adiabatic invariant corresponding to the ignorable coordinate γ. Finally, σ = v / v gives the sign of the parallel velocity, where the latter is viewed as a function of the other coordinates through the expression ( v = σ 2 E µb Z ) ieϕ. () m i Denote by F i (ψ(r),α(r),l(r),e,µ,σ) the distribution function in drift-kinetic coordinates. We assume from the beginning that our distribution function does not depend on the gyrophase γ, which is true for all the calculations in this paper (see [25] for the proof that only pieces of the distribution function O(ν i ρ i f Mi ) or smaller are gyrophase dependent). In these coordinates the drift-kinetic equation reads Here, and with Ṙ F i = C E ii [F i,f i ]. (2) Ṙ ˆbˆb = v ˆb+O(ρi v ti ) (3) Ṙ Ṙ ˆbˆb = v M,i +v E +O(ρ 2 i v ti ), (4) v M,i = Ω iˆb ( v 2 κ+µ B ) (5) being the magnetic drift, v E = c Bˆb ϕ (6) being the E B drift and κ = ˆb ˆb being the curvature of the magnetic field lines. Note that v M,i and v E are O(ρ i v ti ). In (3) and (4) we have shown only the terms that will be needed later on. All the terms of Ṙ up to O(ρ 2 i v ti ) have been computed in [26]. In (2), an expansion in the mass ratio m e /m i has been taken so that ion-electron collisions are neglected, and Cii E is the ion-ion Landau collision operator written in coordinates E and µ. Its explicit expression (see [28], for example) is not necessary for our purposes. From here on, we concentrate on ion transport. Lowcollisionalityregimes aredefinedbyν i. Itiswell-known (see, forexample, subsection 7. in [] and also [4]) that if the collisionality is small but still larger than the normalized gyroradius, i.e. if ρ i ν i, then the distribution function and electrostatic potential can be expanded as and F i = F E i +F i +... (7) ϕ = ϕ +ϕ +..., (8)

8 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 8 where ( ) 3/2 Fi(ψ,E) E mi = n i (ψ) exp( m ) ie Z i eϕ (ψ) 2πT i (ψ) T i (ψ) is a Maxwellian distribution with density and temperature constant on the flux surface, the non-adiabatic perturbation to Fi E has a size (9) F i ρ i ν i F E i, (2) ϕ (ψ) T i /Z i e is a flux function and ϕ is found from the quasineutrality equation Z i F i d 3 v = N e. (2) Here, N e is the electron density and ( )d 3 v σ ( )B v dedµdγ. To lowest order in m e /m i, only the adiabatic response of the electrons counts. Then, ( ) ( ) eϕ eϕ N e = n e (ψ) exp exp, (22) T e (ψ) T e (ψ) ψ where T e is the electron temperature, n e is the flux-surface averaged electron density and ψ denotes the flux-surface average operation, defined for a function f(ψ,α,l) as 2π f ψ = V (ψ) dα L(ψ,α) dlψ t B f, (23) where V (ψ) is the radial derivative of the volume enclosed by the flux surface labeled by ψ, 2π L(ψ,α) V (ψ) = dα dlψ t B. (24) In the quasineutrality equation defined by (2) and (22) the expansions (7) and (8) have not been employed yet. Using them, we obtain ( Zi + ) ϕ = F i d 3 v, (25) T i T e en i where we have assumed that ϕ and the right side of (25) have vanishing flux-surface average. The proof that this choice in the definition of ϕ and F i is possible is provided in reference []. From (25) and the fact that F i ν, one obtains i ρ i Fi E ϕ ρ i ν i ϕ. (26) This is the so-called /ν regime [29], that exists for any stellarator (strictly speaking, for any stellarator that is not exactly omnigeneous). The point that needs to be emphasized here is that the expansions (7) and (8) do not work when ν i ρ i because F i becomes as large as Fi E and ϕ becomes as large as ϕ (see (2) and (26)). The regime ν i ρ i is the subject of this paper, and we start to analyze it in the next subsection.

9 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity Drift-kinetic equation when ν i ρ i in stellarators close to omnigeneity As explained above, the expansion of the distribution function and electrostatic potential employed inthe/ν regime(recallequations(7), (9), (2), (8)and(26)), ρ i ν i, is not valid when ν i ρ i. In order to understand what happens at collisionality values ν i ρ i we go back to (2), assume ν i ρ i and expand in ρ i. We take F i = F E i +F i +... (27) with F i ρ i F E i. To lowest order in ρ i equation (2) gives v l Fi E =. (28) To solve (28) and the next order equations, we employ a procedure similar to the one developed in [4] for the /ν regime. Equation (28) implies that on an ergodic flux surface Fi E can be written as F E i = h i(ψ,e,µ,σ)+g i (ψ,α,e,µ), (29) where g i can be chosen such that it vanishes in the passing particle region of phase space and h i cannot depend on σ in the trapped particle region. In order to understand (29) observe, first, thatthedistributionfunctionfi E cannotdependonαinthepassing region of phase space because passing particles trace out a flux surface. Second, that in the trapped region of phase space Fi E cannot depend on σ because it has to be continuous at the bounce points. The split between h i and g i is defined up to a function independent of α that vanishes for passing particles. To completely determine g i, we impose the condition 2π lb2 g i dα dl =. (3) l b v There are other conditions that could be used to fix g i. The equation satisfied by Fi E is found from averages of equation (2) to next order in ρ i. For passing particles one has to multiply the O(ρ i v ti L Fi) E terms of (2) by / v and integrate over the flux surface, obtaining 2π dα L(ψ,α) v CE ii[f E i,f E i]dl =. (3) In order to get (3) we have employed l Fi E =, the fact that in the passing region α Fi E =, and finally the property 2π dα L(ψ,α) for passing trajectories. v (v M,i +v E ) ψdl = (32) On a rational surface, passing particles follow periodic orbits and must be treated like standard trapped particles. Hence, there would be no splitting between h i and g i on a rational surface.

10 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity For trapped particles we multiply the O(ρ i v ti L FE i ) terms of (2) by /v and integrate over the orbit, arriving at lb2 ψ J α Fi E + αj ψ Fi E = Z i eψ t m σ i c l b v CE ii [FE i,fe i ]dl. (33) Equation(33) has conveniently been expressed in terms of the second adiabatic invariant J(ψ,α,E,µ) := 2 by employing the relations 2 lb2 and 2 lb2 l b v dl (34) l b v (v M,i +v E ) ψdl = m ic Z i eψ α J (35) t lb2 l b v (v M,i +v E ) αdl = m ic Z i eψ ψ J, (36) t that are derived in Appendix A. Given the profiles for ion density, ion temperature and radial electric field, the piece of the electrostatic potential that determines the tangential electric field is found from (recall (2) and (22)) ( ) ( ) eϕ eϕ Z i Fid E 3 v = n e (ψ) exp exp. (37) T e (ψ) ψ T e (ψ) In a generic stellarator one cannot go beyond (3), (33) and (37), that are a set of non-linear equations for the distribution function and the electrostatic potential. In particular, this means that without further assumptions, when ν i ρ i, one cannot deduce that Fi E be Maxwellian, and the drift-kinetic equation is clearly not radially local (note the term in (33) containing ψ Fi). E However, we proceed to show that the situation is different if the stellarator is close to omnigeneity. We take B = B +δb, (38) where B is omnigeneous, B B and δ, and assume that the expansion in δ is subsidiary with respect to the expansion in ρ i. As advanced in the Introduction, we only consider the case in which B has small spatial derivatives tangent to the flux surface, and δ l B δl B, δ α B δb. (39) The distribution function and the electrostatic potential are expanded as Fi E = F E() i +δf E() i +... (4) ϕ = ϕ (ψ)+δϕ () +..., (4)

11 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity where F E() i F E() i is the non-adiabatic correction of the distribution function and ϕ () ϕ. We also expand J as with J () = 2 lb2 J = J () +δj () +..., (42) l b v () dl, lb2 J () = 2 l b v () Here l b and l b2 are the points that make v () (ψ,α,l,e,µ) = σ ( µb (α,l)+ Z ) ie ϕ () (α,l) dl. (43) m i 2 ( E µb (ψ,α,l) Z ie m i ϕ (ψ) vanish and J () is independent of α, which is the defining property of omnigeneity, as explained insection2. The rigorousproofthatthe perturbationtoj () isactually linear in δ when (39) is satisfied is contained in [3]. Finally, observe that we have assumed that ϕ is a flux function. It can be proven that this follows from quasineutrality for an exactly omnigeneous magnetic field. To lowest order in δ equation (3) gives 2π dα L () (ψ) ) (44) v () CE() ii [F E() i,f E() i ]dl =, (45) where the superindex () in C E() ii indicates that only B has been kept in the kernel that defines the collision operator. Analogously, L () (ψ) is the length of the magnetic field line for the omnigeneous configuration, and it has been stressed that it does not depend on α. The lowest order terms of (33) in the δ expansion are ψ J () α F E() i = σ Z i eψ t m i c lb2 l b v () CE() ii [F E() i,f E() i ]dl, (46) where we have used α J () = due to omnigeneity. We solve equations (45) and (46) by using the entropy production property of the collision operator. The lowest-order piece of (29) in the δ expansion implies that F E() i does not depend on α in the passing region. Hence, we multiply (45) by lnf E() i and find 2π L () (ψ) dα v () lnfe() i C E() ii [F E() i,f E() i ]dl = (47) in the passing region. Similarly, we multiply (46) by lnf E() i, integrate the resulting expression over α and recall that omnigeneity implies that ψ J () does not depend on α. We end up with σ 2π dα lb2 l b v () lnfe() i C E() ii [F E() i,f E() i ]dl = (48)

12 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 2 in the trapped region. Integrating (47) and (48) in velocity space and following an entropy-production argument, we deduce that F E() i is a Maxwellian distribution. Furthermore, it must have zero flow because F E() i cannot depend either on l or on the gyrophase. Inserting the Maxwellian into (46), we find that it is also independent of α, leading to ( ) 3/2 F E() mi i (ψ,e) = n i (ψ) exp( m ) ie Z i eϕ (ψ). (49) 2πT i (ψ) T i (ψ) We turn to the equations provided by terms that are linear in δ in (3) and (33). Using the decomposition (29), we can write F E() i = h () i (ψ,e,µ,σ)+g () i (ψ,α,e,µ), (5) where h () i cannot depend on σ in the trapped particle region of phase space, and g () i may be chosen such that it vanishes in the passing particle region and such that 2π g () i dα =. (5) Equation (5) is simply condition (3) written to O(δ) by using (9). To O(δ) equation (3) gives 2π where dα L () (ψ) v () CE,l() ii [h () i ]dl =, (52) C E,l() ii [h () i ] = C E() ii [F E() i,h () i ]+C E() ii [h () i,f E() i ] (53) is the linearization of the collision operator around F E() i. In order to get (52) we have employed that for passing trajectories 2π dα L () (ψ) v () CE,l() ii [g () i ]dl =. (54) This is obtained by noting condition (5) and by using that, due to (9), L () (ψ) σ v () C E,l() ii [ ]dl is an operator whose coefficients are independent of α when acting on functions independent of l. The O(δ) terms of (33) yield ψ J () α F E() i where Υ E i = n i + T i n i gives σ T i + α J () Υ E i FE() i = σ Z i eψ t m i c lb2 l b dl v () CE,l() ii [F E() i ], (55) ( mi (E Z i eϕ /m i ) 3 ) + Z ieϕ. (56) T i 2 T i Next, we show that h () i 2π can be set equal to zero. We integrate (55) over α, which lb2 dα l b v () CE,l() ii [h () i ]dl =. (57)

13 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 3 In order to obtain (57) we have used that in the trapped region 2π lb2 dα σ l b v () CE,l() ii [g () i ]dl =. (58) This can be deduced by recalling (5) and by noting that, due to (9), lb2 σ l b v () C E,l() ii [ ]dl is anoperator withcoefficients independent of α when acting on functions independent of l. Multiplying (52) and (57) by h () i /F E() i, integrating over velocity space and applying again an entropy-production argument, we find that h () i has to be a Maxwellian distribution with zero flow, and independent of α and l. Thus, it can be absorbed in the definition of F E() i and, from here on, we can assume h () i (59) without loss of generality. Then, we only need to determine g () i, which is found from (55) by setting h () i equal to zero. Namely, ψ J () α g () i + α J () Υ E i FE() i = σ Z i eψ t m i c lb2 l b dl v () CE,l() ii [g () i ]. (6) It is obvious, but still worth pointing out, that when ρ i ν i the first term in (6) can be neglected and one recovers the equation for the dominant piece of the distribution function in the /ν regime of a stellarator close to omnigeneity with a non-omnigeneous perturbation that has small gradients [4]. Note that the orbit integrations in (43) and (6) only involve B and ϕ. We use this fact to employ, in what follows, the coordinates v = 2(E Z i eϕ (ψ)/m i ), µ =, (6) E Z i eϕ (ψ)/m i in which the equations become simpler. We will not change the names of the functions v (), ψ J (), J () and g () i but assume that they are expressed in coordinates v and. Let us be explicit to avoid any confusion. From here on, by ψ J () and J () we understand and ψ J () = lb2 v ψ B +2Z i e/(m i v)ϕ dl (62) l b B lb2 J () vb +2Z i e/(m i v)ϕ () = dl. (63) l b B In these coordinates the equation for g () i reads, to the relevant order in δ, ψ J () α g () i + α J () Υ i F i = σ where F i (ψ,v) = n i (ψ) Z i eψ t m i c lb2 l b dl v () Cl() ii [g () i ], (64) ( ) 3/2 mi exp( m ) iv 2, (65) 2πT i (ψ) 2T i (ψ)

14 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 4 ( Υ i = n i + T i mi v 2 3 ) + Z ieϕ n i 2T i 2 T i (66) T i and C l() ii is the linearized collision operator corresponding to B written in coordinates v and, given in [4]. Noting that ( )d 2 S B ψ ( )dαdl and recalling (35), the energy flux () can be written as ( Q i = πm2 i cδ2 v dvv 3 2 Z i e 2 + Z ) /B,min ieϕ m i 2π d /B,max dα α J () g () i, (67) where B,min and B,max are the minimum and maximum values of B on the flux surface, respectively. The adiabatic response is absent from(67) because its contribution vanishes (the same can be said about its contribution to the particle flux), as shown in Appendix B. In particular, we have shown that Q i is proportional to δ 2, the square of the size of the deviation from omnigeneity. In Section 4 we expand (64) for ν i ρ i and give the expressions for (67) in such collisionality regimes. 4. Solution of the drift-kinetic equation (64) when ν i ρ i Let us define the precession frequency due to the tangential drift m i c ω α (ψ,v,) := Z i eψ tτ () ψ J (), b (68) where τ () b (ψ,v,) = 2 lb2 dl v l b B (ψ,α,l) (69) is the time that a particle trapped in B takes to complete its orbit. Note that τ () b does not depend on α due to property (9), and therefore ω α is also independent of α. Typically, ω α ρ i v ti /L, and equation (64) is solved by expanding in ν ii /ω α ν i /ρ i. We use the notation g () i = g +g +O((ν ii /ω α ) 2 F i ), (7) where g /g O(ν ii /ω α ) and g F i. To lowest order in the ν ii /ω α expansion, equation (64) gives α g = αj () ψ J ()Υ if i. The solution of (7), choosing 2π g dα =, is g = ( J () 2π ) J () dα Υ ψ J () i F i. (72) 2π Using that ( J () 2π 2π (7) ) [ ( J () dα α J () = 2 α J () 2π ) 2 ] J () dα, (73) 2π

15 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 5 one proves that (72) does not contribute to (67). The next order terms of (64) in the ν ii /ω α expansion yield α g = C l() ii [g ], (74) ω α where we have introduced a convenient notation for the orbit average, Thus, g = ω α ( ) = τ () b v σ lb2 dl ( ) l b B (ψ,α,l). (75) α C l() ii [g ]dα, (76) where the lower limit of the integral is selected so that 2π g dα =. When plugged into (67), this piece of the distribution function gives a scaling Q i δ 2ν ii ρ i n i T i v ti S ψ (77) ω α for the energy flux. However, this is not the dominant contribution to Q i. It turns out that the energy flux is dominated by two small collisional layers that appear where (72) is not a good approximation to g () i. This happens near the boundary between trapped and passing particles, and also near points where ψ J () =. We study these layers in subsections 4. and 4.2. Finally, we advance a more subtle point. The necessity of solving the layers is not only tied to the calculation of transport fluxes. It is clear that one cannot say that the drift-kinetic equation has been completely solved unless ϕ () is known, because the latter enters the source term of the former via α J (). However, so far, ϕ () has not been found. It has to be determined from the quasineutrality equation (37). Expanding (37) in δ and choosing ϕ () such that it has vanishing flux-surface average, we obtain the equation that determines the tangential electric field ( Zi + ) ϕ () = 2π B dv T i T e en i B,max d v3 B v () g() i. (78) Here, wehaveusedthatin{v,,σ,γ}coordinates ( )d 3 v σ ( )v 3 B/(2 v )dvddγ and that g () i vanishes in the passing region, so that the integral on the right side of (78) is taken only over trapped trajectories. Note that (78) is consistent with the vanishing of the flux-surface average of ϕ () and with condition (5). We will prove later on (see subsection 4.2.) that the layer analyzed in subsection 4.2 contributes to the quasineutrality equation as much as g, in general. Hence, to treat this layer, we need to calculate ϕ () self-consistently. 4.. Layer around the boundary between trapped and passing particles: the ν regime Recall that g () i in the passing region. The value of g () i at the boundary of the trapped region is given by g + := g ( c ), with c = /B,max and g given by (72). Sometimes, in order to ease the notation, we will omit some of the arguments of the functions. For example, in this section it will be common to display only the dependences on.

16 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 6 Then, the distribution function is not continuous. This discontinuity comes from an incorrect treatment of the region around the interface between passing and trapped particles. More specifically, it is the consequence of dropping the collision term in that region. Usually, this indicates [34] that there is a small layer in a neighborhood of c where the distribution function develops large variations in, and neglecting the collision term is not correct. In the standard language of boundary-layer theory g is the outer solution, and the inner solution of the boundary layer, that we will denote by g bl, remains to be found. We have to replace (7) by g () i = g +g bl +..., (79) where g bl satisfies the equation ω α α g bl +C l() ii [g bl ] = C l() ii [g ]. (8) The collision operator acting on g has been included on the right-hand side of the previous equation because very close to c the function g varies fast with, and the right side of (8) actually diverges at c, as we will see below. Equation (8) must be solved between = c and a value of c > sufficiently large that g bl becomes small. Denote the width of the layer in the coordinate by B (its typical size is deduced below; see equation (2)) and let K be a constant that satisfies K and K ν B. Then, equation (8) is viewed as an equation in the interval [ c, K ], with K c K ν. The boundary conditions are g bl ( c ) = g + and g bl ( K ) =. At the end of this subsection we will conclude that the solution is asymptotically independent of K, as it should be. Due to the boundary condition g bl ( c ) = g +, we know that g bl g. In addition, if the two terms on the left side of (8) are to be comparable in size, then the support ν of g bl (that is, the size of the boundary layer ν pitch angle scattering piece of the collision operator on the left side of (8), ) has to be sufficiently small for the C l() ii [g bl ] = ν v () ( v 2 v () g bl )+..., (8) B to dominate. Here, ν (v) = 8πn izie 4 4 lnλ [ ) )] erf( mi v m 2 2 /(2T i ) χ( mi v 2 /(2T i ) (82) i v3 is the pitch angle scattering frequency, lnλ is the Coulomb logarithm, χ(x) = [erf(x) (2x/ π)exp( x 2 )]/(2x 2 ) and erf(x) = (2/ π) x exp( t2 )dt is the error function. In the boundary layer the pitch-angle scattering operator on the right side of (8) is dominated by the piece that involves 2g bl; i.e. the term that contains (v () ) g bl is small. The same happens for the right side of (8) close to c, as will be justified below. Therefore, (8) can be approximated by ω α α g bl +ν B ( B ) 2 g bl = ν B ( B ) 2 g, (83) where again the coefficient multiplying 2 g bl and 2 g does not depend on α due to (9).

17 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 7 Due to the smallness of the boundary layer we can approximate this equation further by taking = c in most terms; that is, equation (83) becomes where ξ(ψ,v) := Z ieψ t m i c ψ J () α g bl +ν ξ 2 g bl = ν ξ 2 g, (84) 2 c v lb2 B l b c B (ψ,α,l)dl. (85) The dependence of ψ J () on cannot be neglected because ψ J () (ψ,v,) diverges when c. The point = c is a singular point of the differential equation (84) and requires a careful analysis. The right-hand side of (84) also diverges at c, as pointed out above. We proceed to explain how these divergences emerge. In Appendix C we show that the asymptotic expansion of ψ J () for small c (with > c ) is of the form + where ψ J () = a ln(b,max ( c ))+a 2 +O(v ti L B ( c )/ψ), (86) a = 2 c 2 k= c v ψ B (l M,k )+2Z i e/(m i v) ψ ϕ 2 l B (l M,k ) and the values l M,k, for k =,2, locate two consecutive absolute maxima of B when moving along the field line. The coefficient a 2 can be computed from the relation Defining ã 2 by the relation (87) a 2 = lim c ( ψ J () a ln(b,max ( c )) ). (88) a 2 = a ln ( B,maxã2), (89) one can recast (86) in the more convenient way where and ψ J () = a ln(ã 2 ( c ))+O(v ti L B ( c )/ψ). (9) Analogously, the asymptotic expansion of J () yields J () = c ln(b,max ( c ))+c 2 +O(v ti L B ( c )), (9) c = 2 c 2 k= c vb (l M,k )+2Z i e/(m i v)ϕ (l M,k ) 2 l B (l M,k ) (92) c 2 = lim c ( J () c ln(b,max ( c )) ). (93) + An identical calculation to the one carried out in Appendix C for ψ J () shows that τ () b also diverges logarithmically when c. This is not a problem in order to define the orbit-averaged drift-kinetic equation in the boundary layer because the number of particles for which ν ii τ () b is exponentially small, O(exp( /ν i )), and therefore negligible in an asymptotic expansion in small ν i.

18 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 8 We rewrite (9) as with where and J () = c ln(ã 2 ( c ))+ c 2 +O(v ti L B ( c )), (94) c 2 = c 2 c ln ( B,maxã2). (95) Using (9) and (94), equation (84) becomes ψ J () α g bl +ν ξ 2 g bl = ν ξ 2 ĝ, (96) ψ J () = a ln(ã 2 ( c )), (97) ( ĝ = ψ Ĵ () 2π ) Ĵ J () 2π () dα Υ i F i (98) Ĵ () = c ln(ã 2 ( c ))+ c 2. (99) Thatis, (96)isobtainedfrom(84)bykeeping onlythedominanttermsintheasymptotic expansions of ψ J () and J () near c. It is clear from (97), (98) and (99) that the right side of (96) diverges for c. It is also obvious that, whereas both ψ J () and J () diverge at c, g + := g ( c ) is finite, as it should be. The solution of equation (96) is more easily found by first expanding g bl in Fourier modes with respect to the coordinate α. Define g bl,n, g,n and g +,n by the relations g bl (α,) = g bl,n ()e inα, ĝ (α,) = g + (α) = n= n= n= g,n ()e inα, g +,n e inα. () The Fourier coefficients g bl,, g, and g +, are equal to zero because of condition (5). Here, we have stressed the α and dependence although g bl, ĝ and g + also depend on ψ and v. Then, (96) transforms into the set of ordinary differential equations in ψ J () g bl,n +ν ξ 2 g bl,n = ν ξ 2 g,n, () that must be solved with the boundary conditions and g bl,n ( c ) = g +,n (2) g bl,n ( K ) =. (3)

19 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 9 At this point, we can explain why equation () has not been extended up to = from the beginning. The reason is that there always exists a sufficiently large valueofsuch thatthetruncation ψ J () vanishes even though ψ J () maynever vanish. We will see in subsection 4.2 that points where ψ J () = correspond to another layer that, typically, givesnon-negligibletransport. Toavoidpointswhere ψ J () =, wehave imposed the boundary condition of () at a finite value of K, with K c K ν. We must choose K such that ψ J () does not vanish for [ c, K ]; i.e. such that ln(ã 2 ( c )) ln(ã 2 ( K c )) for [ c, K ]. The behavior of () in a vicinity of the singular point = c is analyzed in Appendix D, where it is proven that the equation possesses solutions compatible with (2). where We also expand Ĵ() in Fourier modes, Ĵ () (ψ,α,v,) = Ĵ () n(ψ,v,)e inα, (4) n= Ĵ () n = c,n ln(ã 2 ( c ))+ c 2,n (5) and where c,n and c 2,n are the coefficients of the Fourier expansions of c and c 2. Employing the solution for g bl, we find that the contribution of the boundary layer to the right side of (67) is Q i, ν = 2π2 m 2 icδ 2 Z i e n= in dvv 3 ( v Z ) K ieϕ m i c dĵ() ng bl,n. (6) We proceed to show the scaling of (6) with the square root of the collisionality, to which the ν regime owes its name. We will also prove that the scaling with the square root of the collisionality must actually be corrected by a logarithm due to the logarithmic singularities in (). Finally, we will show that the solution is independent of the constant K as long as ln(ã 2 ( K c )) is sufficiently large. In (), we perform the change of coordinate ( where z = = 2 ln ã Then, equation () becomes i na [ lnz na ln(/(ã 2 ) 2 ) 2 with g,n = a [c,n ) ( c ), (7) ( ) /2 ν ξ. (8) na ( + ln[ln(/(ã 2 ) 2 )] ln(/(ã 2 ) 2 ) )] g bl,n + 2 zg bl,n = 2 zg,n, (9) ] 2 c 2,n Υ ln(/(ã ))+ln[ln(/(ã 2 ) 2 i F i. () ))] 2lnz

20 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 2 Employing that z in the layer and performing an expansion in the small quantity /ln(/(ã 2 ) 2 ), one obtains to lowest order i na 2 na g bl,n + z 2 g bl,n =, () where we have used, inparticular, that theright side of (9) issmall in/ln(/(ã 2 ) 2 ), as can be deduced by inspecting (). Equation () has an exponentially decaying solution with a characteristic width z. Using (7) to go back to the original coordinate, we find that the width of the layer in is ( ) /2 ν ν ξ na ln(/(ã2 ) 2 ). (2) Therefore, not even to lowest order in /ln(/(ã 2 ) 2 ) does the width of the layer scale exactly with the square root of the collision frequency. Although the logarithmic corrections do not change the qualitative features of this collisionality regime, they must be accounted for in order to have accurate results for the neoclassical fluxes. Noting the asymptotic expression (5), and using the change of coordinate (7) to rewrite the right side of (6), we find that the size of Q i, ν is Q i, ν δ 2ν/2 ii ln(ωα /ν ωα 3/2 ii )ρ 2 i n it i vti 2 L S ψ. (3) Finally, we point out that the expansion of (9) in the small quantity /ln(/(ã 2 ) 2 ) can be continued to higher orders. It is straightforward to check that, to any order, the boundary condition for large z (equivalently, for large ) can be imposed at z =. In other words, the solution to equation (9) is independent of K when /ln(/(ã 2 ) 2 ). Recall that ϕ () remains to be found. In order to write the precise form of the quasineutrality equation that determines ϕ () (given in subsection 4.2.), we have to solve for the layer around points where ψ J () =. This is the subject of subsection Layer around points where ω α = : the superbanana-plateau regime The outer solution (72) for the distribution function is correct everywhere except near the boundary between the passing and trapped regions (already treated in subsection 4.) and in the neighborhood of points where ω α = (equivalently, points where ψ J () = ). Around these resonant points the ν ii /ω α expansion is not valid. This region of phase space is the subject of the present section. In order to understand what happens in the vicinity of a point where ω α =, we go back to equation (64) and do not carry out the ν ii /ω α expansion. That is, we consider the equation ω α α g () i +C l() ii [g () i ] = S (4)

21 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 2 with S(ψ,α,v,) = m i c Z i eψ tτ () b α J () Υ i F i. (5) Below we will find it useful to distinguish between the contributions to α J () coming from B and from ϕ (). Defining and J () B = v lb2 l b B B dl (6) lb2 J ϕ () = 2Z ie ϕ () dl, (7) m i v l b B we write S = S B +S ϕ, where and S B (ψ,α,v,) = S ϕ (ψ,α,v,) = m i c Z i eψ tτ () b m i c Z i eψ tτ () b α J () B Υ if i (8) α J () ϕ Υ i F i. (9) We call r the values of that satisfy ω α =. Given an omnigeneous magnetic field B, they are found from the equation (recall (62) and (75)) r ψ B (ψ, r ) = 2Z ieϕ (ψ) m i v 2. (2) Of course, in general r is a function of ψ and v, r r (ψ,v). The qualitative discussion on the number of zeroes of (2) depends on the number of zeroes of (2) for the particular case of ϕ =, ψ B (ψ, r ) =. (2) To fix ideas, we assume the common situation in which one, and only one value of solves equation (2). In this setting, for any value of ϕ and v, ω α vanishes at most for one value of. And for any given value of ϕ, there exists a minimum value of v such that ω α = for some value of. We denote this value of v by v min. Around r, ω α () = ω α ( r )( r )+O(( r ) 2 ), (22) where the dependence on ψ and v has been omitted for simplicity. The balance of the two terms on the left side of (4) implies that in a neighborhood of r of size sb p ω α ( r ) sb p ν ii, (23) B 2( sb p ) 2. Since, typically, ω α ( r ) ρ i B L v ti, one finds ( ) /3 B sb p νi. (24) ρ i

22 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 22 In the particular case of a large-aspect-ratio tokamak with broken symmetry, this estimation coincides with the one obtained in [35]. Denote by g rl the distribution function in this resonant layer. The pitch-angle scattering piece of the collision operator dominates the collision term in this layer, ii [g rl ] = ν v () ( v 2 v () g rl )+..., (25) B C l() and, in fact, we can keep only the term involving 2 g rl. Hence, in the resonant layer we write the drift kinetic equation as with and ω α,r ( r ) α g rl +ν χ r 2 g rl = S B,r +Ŝϕ, (26) χ r (ψ,v) := r B ( rb ), (27) ω α,r (ψ,v) := ω α (ψ,v, r (ψ,v)), (28) S B,r (ψ,α,v) := S B (ψ,α,v, r (ψ,v)) (29) Ŝ ϕ (ψ,α,v,) = with τ () b,r = τ() b (ψ,v, r (ψ,v)) and J () ϕ = 2Z ie m i v lr lb2 m i c Z i eψ tτ () b,r r l B (l L ) (l l L ) ( r )B (l L ) dl lb ϕ () α Ĵ () ϕ (ψ,α,v,)υ i F i, (3) 2Z ie ϕ () m i v l L r l B (l R ) (l R l) ( r )B (l R ) dl 2Z lr [ ie ϕ () m i v l L r B (l) r l B (l L ) (l l L ) ] dl. (3) r l B (l R ) (l R l) We have denoted by l L and l R, respectively, the left and right bounce points of the orbit corresponding to = r ; i.e. the solutions for l of r B (l) =. In (3), l b and lb2 are approximations to the exact bounce points, l b and l b2, given by and lb l L = B (l L ) r l B (l L ) ( r) (32) l R l b2 = B (l R ) r l B (l R ) ( r). (33) Expression (3) is an asymptotic approximation to J ϕ () near the resonant value of the pitch-angle coordinate, as can be proven by using the techniques developed in [3].

23 The effect of tangential drifts in stellarators close to omnigeneity 23 Obviously, ifϕ () wereregulareverywhere, onecouldsimplyevaluatej ϕ () at the resonant value = r (which would amount to retaining only the first term in square brackets in (3)). However, in subsections 4.2. and we will show that if ϕ is small then ϕ () (ρ i /ν i ) /6 T i /e T i /e in a neighborhood of l L and l R, and therefore the more elaborate asymptotic expression (3) is nedeed. Equation (26) is viewed as a differential equation in (, ) with vanishing boundary conditions at infinity. Note that a rescaling of the coordinate ( ) /3 ν χ r x = ( r ) (34) ω α,r gives the expression sb p = ( ν χ r ω α,r ) /3 (35) forthesizeofthelayerneededtomakethetwotermsontheleftsideof(26)comparable. Then, the size of the distribution function in the layer can be estimated as S B,r g rl ω α,r sb p Define the Fourier expansions g rl = g rl,n e inα, S B,r = Ŝ ϕ = n= n= n= (S B,r ) n e inα, B sb p F i. (36) (Ŝϕ) n e inα. (37) The coefficient g rl, vanishes due to (5), and (S B,r ) and (Ŝϕ) vanish due to definition (5). Inserting the expansions in (26) and noting that ω α,r and χ r do not depend on α, we find an ordinary differential equation for each mode g rl,n, in ω α,r ( r )g rl,n +ν χ r 2 g rl,n = (S B,r ) n +(Ŝϕ) n. (38) In terms of the solution to this set of equations, the energy flux (67) can be written as Q i,sb p = 2π2 m 2 icδ 2 ( v in dvv 3 2 Z i e v min 2 + Z ) [ ieϕ d (J () B,r m ) n i n= +(Ĵ() ϕ ) n ]g rl,n. (39) () The perturbation to the Maxwellian has a size δg i δg rl in the layer. From (36), one might be worried that the perturbation to the Maxwellian becomes larger than the Maxwellian when ν i < ρ i δ 3. This is not a problem, however, because the analysis in this subsection does not apply to such small values of the collisionality. This is explained in Section 6 (see equation (85)).