🔌 Update current drive variables to new style

documentation/proc-pages/development/standards.md

@@ -365,10 +365,32 @@ The unit declaration `_fpy` can be used to specify that it is the full-power yea
 
 ---------------------
 
+##### Current drive efficiencies
+
+Absolute current drive efficiencies ($\eta_{\text{CD}}$) representing Amps driven per Watt of injected power start with the `eta_cd` prefix.
+
+$$
+\eta_{\text{CD}} = \frac{I_{\text{driven}}}{P_{\text{injected}}}
+$$
+
+Normalized current drive efficiecnies using major radius and volume averaged electron temperature start with the `eta_cd_norm` prefix
+
+$$
+\eta_{\text{CD,norm}} = R_0 n_{\text{e,20}} \eta_{\text{CD}}
+$$
+
+$\eta_{\text{CD,norm}}$ has the units of $\frac{1\times 10^{20} \text{A}}{\text{W} \text{m}^2}$
+
+The above is concurrent with that of general efficiencies given [below](#efficiencies).
+
+--------------
+
 ##### Variables representing fractions
 
 If a variable is intended to demonstrate a fraction of a value or distribution etc. Then it should start with the `f_` prefix.
 
+###### Efficiencies
+
 Similar to this is variables representing efficiencies.
 
 If a variable is intended to represent an engineering efficiency then it should start with the `eta_` prefix to represent $\eta$

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/NBI/culham_nb.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Culham Neutral Beam Model | `culnbi()`
 
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 8 
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 8 
 
 
 
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ from that of ITER (approx. 2.8).
 | Output | Description |
 |----------|-------------|
 | $\mathtt{effnbss}$  | Neutral beam current drive efficiency in Amperes per Watt |
-| $\mathtt{fpion}$    | Fraction of NB power given to ions |
+| $\mathtt{f_p_beam_injected_ions}$    | Fraction of NB power given to ions |
 | $\mathtt{fshine}$   | Shine-through fraction of the beam |
 
 $$
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ Beams topping cross section is calculated via $\mathtt{sigbeam}$ found [here](..
 Calculate number of decay lengths to centre
 
 $$
-\mathtt{taubeam} = \mathtt{dpath} \times n_{\text{e,0}} \times \mathtt{sigstop}
+\mathtt{n_beam_decay_lengths_core} = \mathtt{dpath} \times n_{\text{e,0}} \times \mathtt{sigstop}
 $$
 
 Calculate the shine through fraction of the beam
@@ -49,14 +49,14 @@ $$
 Deuterium and tritium beam densities
 
 $$
-\mathtt{dend} = n_{\text{ion}} \times (1-\mathtt{f_tritium_beam})
+\mathtt{dend} = n_{\text{ion}} \times (1-\mathtt{f_beam_tritium})
 $$
 
 $$
-\mathtt{dent} = n_{\text{ion}} \times \mathtt{f_tritium_beam}
+\mathtt{dent} = n_{\text{ion}} \times \mathtt{f_beam_tritium}
 $$
 
-Power split to the ions and electrons is clauclated with the $\mathtt{cfnbi()}$ method found [here](../NBI/nbi_overview.md/#ion-coupled-power-cfnbi) and outputs $\mathtt{fpion}$
+Power split to the ions and electrons is calculated with the $\mathtt{cfnbi()}$ method found [here](../NBI/nbi_overview.md/#ion-coupled-power-cfnbi) and outputs $\mathtt{f_p_beam_injected_ions}$
 
 ## Current drive efficiency | `etanb2()`
 
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ plus correction terms outlined in Culham Report AEA FUS 172.
 |  $\mathtt{aspect}$, $A$      |   aspect ratio                            |
 |  $\mathtt{dene}$, $n_{\text{e}}$     |    volume averaged electron density $(\text{m}^{-3})$                           |
 |  $\mathtt{dnla}$, $n_{\text{e,0}}$      |    line averaged electron density $(\text{m}^{-3})$                           |
-|  $\mathtt{beam_energy}$      |  neutral beam energy $(\text{keV})$                             |
+|  $\mathtt{e_beam_kev}$      |  neutral beam energy $(\text{keV})$                             |
 |  $\mathtt{frbeam}$      |   R_tangent / R_major for neutral beam injection                            |
 |  $\mathtt{fshine}$      |  shine-through fraction of beam                             |
 |  $\mathtt{rmajor}$, $R$      |  plasma major radius $(\text{m})$                              |
@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ $$
 Beam energy in MeV
 
 $$
-\mathtt{ebmev} = \frac{\mathtt{beam_energy}}{10^3}
+\mathtt{ebmev} = \frac{\mathtt{e_beam_kev}}{10^3}
 $$
 
 x and y coefficients of function J0(x,y) (IPDG89)

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/NBI/iter_nb.md

@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
 # ITER Neutral Beam Model | `iternb()`
 
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 5
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 5
 
 | Output | Description |
 |----------|-------------|
 | $\mathtt{effnbss}$  | Neutral beam current drive efficiency in $\text{A/W}$ |
-| $\mathtt{fpion}$    | Fraction of NB power given to ions |
+| $\mathtt{f_p_beam_injected_ions}$    | Fraction of NB power given to ions |
 | $\mathtt{fshine}$   | Shine-through fraction of the beam |
 
 This model calculates the current drive parameters for a neutral beam system, based on the 1990 ITER model.[^1]
@@ -39,11 +39,11 @@ $$
 
 Deuterium and tritium beam densities:
 $$
-n_D = n_i * (1.0 - \mathtt{f_tritium_beam}) 
+n_D = n_i * (1.0 - \mathtt{f_beam_tritium}) 
 $$
 
 $$
-n_T = n_i * \mathtt{f_tritium_beam}
+n_T = n_i * \mathtt{f_beam_tritium}
 $$
 
 Power split to ions / electrons is calculated via the the `cfnbi` method described [here](nbi_overview.md)

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/NBI/nbi_overview.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
 
 ## Neutral beam access
 
-If present, a neutral beam injection system needs sufficient space between the TF coils to be able to intercept the plasma tangentially. The major radius `rtanbeam` at which the centre-line of the beam is tangential to the toroidal direction is user-defined using input parameter `frbeam`, which is the ratio of `rtanbeam` to the plasma major radius `rmajor`. The maximum possible tangency radius `rtanmax` is determined by the geometry of the TF coils - see Figure 1, and this can be enforced using constraint equation no. 20 with iteration variable no. 33 (`fportsz`). The thickness of the beam duct walls may be set using input parameter `nbshield`.
+If present, a neutral beam injection system needs sufficient space between the TF coils to be able to intercept the plasma tangentially. The major radius `rtanbeam` at which the centre-line of the beam is tangential to the toroidal direction is user-defined using input parameter `frbeam`, which is the ratio of `rtanbeam` to the plasma major radius `rmajor`. The maximum possible tangency radius `rtanmax` is determined by the geometry of the TF coils - see Figure 1, and this can be enforced using constraint equation no. 20 with iteration variable no. 33 (`fportsz`). The thickness of the beam duct walls may be set using input parameter `dx_beam_shield`.
 
 <figure markdown>
 ![NBI Port Size](../images/portsize.png){ width = "300"}
@@ -14,12 +14,12 @@ If present, a neutral beam injection system needs sufficient space between the T
 
 ## Neutral beam losses
 
-Input parameter `forbitloss` can be used to specify the fraction of the net injected neutral beam power that is lost between the beam particles' ionisation and thermalisation (known as the first orbit loss). This quantity cannot easily be calculated as it depends on the field ripple and other three-dimensional effects. The power lost is assumed to be absorbed by the first wall.
+Input parameter `f_p_beam_orbit_loss` can be used to specify the fraction of the net injected neutral beam power that is lost between the beam particles' ionisation and thermalisation (known as the first orbit loss). This quantity cannot easily be calculated as it depends on the field ripple and other three-dimensional effects. The power lost is assumed to be absorbed by the first wall.
 
 The power in the beam atoms that are not ionised as they pass through the plasma (shine-through) is calculated by the code. There are two constraint equations that can be used to control the beam penetration and deposition, as follows:
 
 - It is necessary to use a beam energy that simultaneously gives adequate penetration of the beam to the centre of the plasma and tolerable shine-through of the beam on the wall after the beam has traversed the plasma. The number of exponential decay lengths, $\tau$, for the beam power to fall before it reaches the plasma centre should be in the region of ~ 4-6[^2],. Constraint equation no. 14 may be used to force $\tau$ to be equal to the value given by input parameter `tbeamin`, and is therefore in effect a beam energy consistency equation.
-- Alternatively, constraint equation no. 59 with iteration variable no. 105 (`fnbshineef`) may be used to ensure that the beam power fraction emerging from the plasma is no more than the value given by input parameter `nbshinefmax`.
+- Alternatively, constraint equation no. 59 with iteration variable no. 105 (`fnbshineef`) may be used to ensure that the beam power fraction emerging from the plasma is no more than the value given by input parameter `f_p_beam_shine_through_max`.
 
 It is recommended that <b>only one</b> of these two constraint equations is used during a run.
 

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/RF/culham_electron_cyclotron.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Culham Electron Cyclotron Model | `culecd()`
 
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 7
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 7
 
 This routine calculates the current drive parameters for a electron cyclotron system, based on the AEA FUS 172 model[^1]
 

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/RF/culham_lower_hybrid.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Culham Lower Hybrid | `cullhy()`
 
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 6
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 6
 
 This routine calculates the current drive parameters for a
 lower hybrid system, based on the AEA FUS 172 model.

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/RF/cutoff_ecrh.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # ECRH with Cutoff
 
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 13
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 13
 
 | Input | Description |
 |-------|-------------|
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
 | `rmajor`, $R_0$ | Major radius $\left[\text{m}\right]$ |
 | `bt`, $B_{\text{T}}$ | Toroidal magnetic field $\left[\text{T}\right]$ |
 | `zeff`, $Z_{\text{eff}}$ | Effective charge |
-| `harnum` | Harmonic number |
+| `n_ecrh_harmonic` | Harmonic number |
 | `mode` | RF mode |
 
 ----
@@ -43,14 +43,14 @@ $$
 For the X-mode case:
 
 $$
-\mathtt{f_{cutoff}} = 0.5\left(\mathtt{fc}+\sqrt{\mathtt{harnum}\times\mathtt{fc}^2+4\mathtt{fp}^2}\right)
+\mathtt{f_{cutoff}} = 0.5\left(\mathtt{fc}+\sqrt{\mathtt{n_ecrh_harmonic}\times\mathtt{fc}^2+4\mathtt{fp}^2}\right)
 $$
 
 Plasma coupling only occurs if the plasma cut-off is below the cyclotron harmonic
 (a = 0.1).  This controls how sharply the transition is reached
 
 $$
-\mathtt{cutoff_{factor}} = 0.5\left(1+\tanh\left({\left(\frac{2}{a}\right)((\mathtt{harnum}\times \mathtt{fc} -\mathtt{f_cutoff})/\mathtt{fp -a })}\right)\right)
+\mathtt{cutoff_{factor}} = 0.5\left(1+\tanh\left({\left(\frac{2}{a}\right)((\mathtt{n_ecrh_harmonic}\times \mathtt{fc} -\mathtt{f_cutoff})/\mathtt{fp -a })}\right)\right)
 $$
 
 $$

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/RF/ebw_freethy.md

@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ $$
 
 The EBWs can only couple to the plasma if the cyclotron harmonic is above the plasma density cut-off. In order to capture this behaviour, we introduce an ad-hoc model which reduces the plasma current up to this condition, by way of a tanh function:
 
-Where $\mathtt{fp}$ is the plasma frequency, $\mathtt{fc}$ is the cyclotron frequency, $\mathtt{harnum}$ is the harmonic number and $a$ is a free parameter which defines the sharpness of the transition.
+Where $\mathtt{fp}$ is the plasma frequency, $\mathtt{fc}$ is the cyclotron frequency, $\mathtt{n_ecrh_harmonic}$ is the harmonic number and $a$ is a free parameter which defines the sharpness of the transition.
 
 The effect of this factor can be seen below:
 
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ a = 0.1
 $$
 
 $$
-\mathtt{fc} = \frac{\frac{1}{2\pi}\times \mathtt{harnum} \times e B_{\text{T}}}{m_{\text{e}}}
+\mathtt{fc} = \frac{\frac{1}{2\pi}\times \mathtt{n_ecrh_harmonic} \times e B_{\text{T}}}{m_{\text{e}}}
 $$
 
 $$

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/RF/ecrh_gamma.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # ECRH User Input Gamma Model
 
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 10 
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 10 
 
-This model allows the user to input a scaling factor to the current drive efficiency with the variable `gamma_ecrh`. The value of this variable should follow the value and form of the expression below:
+This model allows the user to input a scaling factor to the current drive efficiency with the variable `eta_cd_norm_ecrh`. The value of this variable should follow the value and form of the expression below:
 
 $$
 \gamma_{CD} = \frac{\langle n_{e,20} \rangle I_{CD}R_0}{P_{CD}}

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/RF/ehst_lower_hybrid.md

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 # Ehst Lower Hybrid
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 4
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 4
 $$
 \text{Current drive efficiency [A/W]} = \frac{T_{\text{e}}^{0.77} (0.034 + 0.196\beta)}{R_0 n_{\text{e},20}}\frac{\frac{32}{5+Z_{\text{eff}}}+2+\frac{\frac{12\left(6+Z_{\text{eff}}\right)}{5+Z_{\text{eff}}}}{3+Z_{\text{eff}}}+\frac{3.76}{Z_{\text{eff}}}}{12.507}
 $$ 

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/RF/fenstermacher_electron_cyclotron_resonance.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Fenstermacher Electron Cyclotron Resonance
 
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 3
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 3
 $$
 \text{Current drive efficiency [A/W]} = \frac{0.21 T_{\langle e,n_{\text{e}} \rangle}}{R_0n_{\text{e,20}}(31.0-(\log{n_{\text{e}}}/2)+(\log{(T_\text{e}}\times1000))}
 $$ 

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/RF/fenstermacher_lower_hybrid.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Fenstermacher Lower Hybrid
 
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 1:
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 1:
 
 $$
 \text{Current drive efficiency [A/W]} = 0.36 \frac{(1+(T_{\text{e}}/25)^{1.16})}{R_{0} n_{\text{e},20}}

documentation/proc-pages/eng-models/heating_and_current_drive/RF/ic_model.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Ion cyclotron model
 
-- `iefrf/iefrffix` = 2
+- `i_hcd_primary/i_hcd_secondary` = 2
 
 $$
 \text{Current drive efficiency [A/W]} = \frac{\frac{0.063 T_{\langle \text{e}, n_{\text{e}}\rangle}}{2+Z_{\text{eff}}}}{R_0n_{\text{e,20}}}