Professional Documents
Culture Documents
S.V. Lebedev
Imperial College
In collaboration with J.P. Chittenden, D. Ampleford, F.N Beg, S.N. Bland, C. Jennings, M. Sherlock and M.G. Haines (IC) S. Pikuz, T. Shelkovenko, D. Hammer (Cornell)
1.0
l ona cor a sm pla
Trailing mass
wires
plasma shell
Radius
0-D
0.5
0.0
Precursor pinch
Stagnation
0.5
1.0
time
Ablation of wires and redistribution of mass Snowplough-like final implosion phase Behaviour of nested arrays and foam targets Scaling of the implosion dynamics to 20MA ?
Laser probing Optical streaks X-ray imaging X-ray radiography with X-pinch in return current path
1ns, 10m resolution h 2-5keV
20 18 16
250m
100m
array edge
two wires
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.0
1.5
same
Wire cores remain on the initial array radius until they run out of material in some axial positions
R / R0
0.5
0.0 0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
t / t imp
In the first 80% of time the JxB force is not applied to the cores, accelerating instead the coronal plasma. The available JxB force can only implode < 50% of the initial mass in the last 20% of time.
0 [I ( )]2 ( r, t0 ) = 2 8 R 0 r V 2
R0 r = t0 V
wire cores
mass fraction
By 80% of implosion time ~40% of mass has been removed from the cores!
radius (mm)
Snowplough-like implosion of the distributed mass Stabilisation by density profile Does all mass participate in the implosion?
Radius (mm)
6 4 2 0 100
60% 10%
implies little current reconnection through the gaps in the wire cores is left behind implosion the
150
time (ns)
~ ( + 1)/2 ?
250
precursor
precursor
Radius (mm)
Radius (mm)
Imploding current sheath Some mass fraction is left behind the implosion
Lebedev S.V. et al., BEAMS-DZP, Albuquerque, NM, June 24, 2002
Global m=0 structure on X-ray images from t~0.8 timp Some current reconnects
1.0
1.2
1.4
Radius
0.5 0.0
6
XRD (a.u.)
1.5m 5m
4 2 0 0.6 precursor
keV radiation
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
t / timp
Rising part of the main X-ray pulse: Compression of precursor plasma column by JxB force, terminated by the onset of m=0 MHD instability? Outward current diffusion - re-strike through the trailing mass? Secondary implosions of trailing mass: - is this responsible for the yield exceeding 0-D kinetic energy?
4 2 0
6% of total current
10
20
30
40
50
time (ns)
Core sizes (Al): Outer array ~250m Inner array ~30m (initial wire diameter 15m)
radius (mm)
nested
4
Current from the sheath switches into the inner array at strike
sinlge array
0
PCD (a.u.)
10 5 0 150
single array
200
250
300
time (ns)
power (W/cm)
10
PCD (a.u.)
0 150
200
time (ns)
P (t ) =
1 dm dr 2 ( ) (r , t ) (Va Va ) 3 2 dt dt
100
50
(r, t ) =
R r 0 [I (t 0 )]2 Va 8 2Va2R0 r
0 8 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100120
Density (mg/cm )
10
6
snowplow 0-D radius
3
radius (mm)
Density profile for Vabl =2x10 cm/s stationary at t=73.4ns along the implosion trajectory
Z674
Vpiston = Vabl 2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
time (ns)
Radius (cm)
Agreement in implosion trajectory and in absolute power of the x-ray pulse foot.
Talk TU-O1-3I by M. Cuneo on Tuesday.
Lebedev S.V. et al., BEAMS-DZP, Albuquerque, NM, June 24, 2002
Laser probing
15
dQ/dt (GW/cm )
20eV
20 15 10 5 0
10
TBB = 15eV
0 0
50
100
150
200
250
time (ns)
Lebedev S.V. et al., paper GI1.005 at APS-DPP, Long Beach, CA, October 30, 2001
P (kBar)
Compression of the foam (15mg/cc) is consistent with 0-D implosion driven by kinetic pressure of the precursor flow
0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0
R15mg R10mg R.fort
Radius (mm)
50
100
200
250
R (mm)
10 5 0 100
175ns
230ns
0I 2 dm = R 1 B dt 4 VR 0 dm R 1 . 3 dt
150
200
250
300
350
time (ns)
1.0
R = 4mm R = 8mm R = 18mm
PCD_R8mm (GW/cm)
0.5
0.0 1.0
E ~
-2/3
0.5
scaled ~ R
Prad 300 eV dm / dt
0.0
50
time (ns)
Thermoconduction
Radiative heating
(P ~ 2x107 W/cm2)
Lebedev S.V. et al., paper GI1.005 at APS-DPP, Long Beach, CA, October 30, 2001
= 0.51 mm sd ( ) = 0.1mm
10
frequency
Al
0 0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
"wavelength" (mm)
Lebedev S.V. et al., paper GI1.005 at APS-DPP, Long Beach, CA, October 30, 2001
Implosion of current sheath (current transfer to the array axis) Stabilisation by the density profile? Trailing mass
3-D modelling is required for the 1st stage! 1-D and 2-D could be adequate for the 2nd stage.
Lebedev S.V. et al., paper GI1.005 at APS-DPP, Long Beach, CA, October 30, 2001