This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**Control of Rayleigh-Taylor Instability at the Ablative Surface of IFE Target
**

by

N. RUDRAIAH

National Research Institute for Applied Mathematics (NRIAM) 492/G, 7th Cross, 7th Block (West), Jayanagar, Bangalore – 560 070 and UGC-Centre for Advanced Studies in Fluid Mechanics, Department of Mathematics, Bangalore University, Bangalore – 560 001 Email : rudraiahn@hotmail.com

Lecture delivered at 3rd International Conference on the Frontiers of Plasma Physics and Technology during March 5 – 9, 2007 at BangKok, Thailand

S 3-7

Abstract:

In this paper the effects of electric field, laser radiation and nanostructured smart porous lining or roughness of the boundary on the control of electrohydrodynamic Rayleigh-Taylor instability (ERTI) at the ablative surface of thin IFE target shell is studied using linear stability analysis. A simple theory based on electrohydrodynamic approximations is used to derive the growth rate of ERTI. The cutoff and maximum wavenumbers and the corresponding maximum frequency are obtained. It is shown that the combined effect of electric field, radiation and porous lining or roughness of the boundary reduces the growth rate of ERTI considerably compared to the classical growth rate.

1. Introduction

The Rayleigh-Taylor instability (RTI) in ordinary fluid (i. e. hydrodynamics) or finitely electrically conducting fluid (i.e., MHD) has been extensively investigated in the literature (see Chandrasekhar4, Rudraiah et. al3) because of its importance in many branches of science and engineering. In particular, it plays a significant role in inertial fusion energy (IFE) (see Rudraiah3, Nakai and Mima6) arising while fusing deuterium-tritium (DT) by laser radiation. This IFE is believed to be one of the effective, efficient, environmental friendly and everlasting sources of energy to overcome the present day power crisis. For efficient extraction of this energy it is essential to design a proper fusion target to reduce the asymmetry, caused by laser radiation. During the last three decades the physics of the implosion of fusion pellet has been given much attention, (see Nuckolls et. al7) to achieve fusion ignition and burning which lead to IFE gain.

In IFE, ablatively laser accelerated surface induces the RTI both in the acceleration and deceleration phases and can destroy the symmetry of imploding target leading to a reduction in the efficiency of IFE (see McCrory et. al17, Nakai and Takabe18 ).

The ablation pressure non-uniformity is relaxed from the laser nonuniformity at a later time due to thermal smoothening during the energy transport from the absorption region to ablation surface. In the phase of main pulse acceleration, the RTI grows and it is known that the shorter wavelength perturbation is stabilized owing to the ablative stabilization. If the in-flight aspect ratio is too large, the acceleration shell breaks down and shell break occurs resulting in reduction of IFE efficiency due to mixing of the hot fluid with main cold fuel. Therefore, to improve the efficiency of IFE generator it is essential to reduce the growth rate of RTI.

At present mechanisms like gradual variation of density in a heterogeneous inviscid fluid, compression caused by laser radiation in an inviscid fluid, target shells filled with porous foam or the ablative surface lined with a porous layer have generally been used (see Rudraiah et. al19) to reduce the growth rate. The results of numerous experimental and numerical simulation of RTI growth rate of inviscid fluid at the ablation surface fit the general dispersion formula (see Kanuer et. al8)

lg − β lva n= A 1 + ε lL

(1.1)

where n and l are respectively the growth rate and wavenumber, g the acceleration due to gravity, ε( = 0 or 1) a constant multiplying the density gradient, L the density scale length at the ablation surface, β a constant multiplying the ablation stabilization term, A the Atwood number and va is the velocity across the ablation surface.

. al5) to reduce the RTI growth rate.1) is the classical growth rate for incompressible inviscid ordinary (i.e.The first term on the RHS of Eq.relevant to ablation layer made up of foam have been considered by many authors (see Rudraiah et. Apart from the compression due to laser effect. Recently Rudraiah3 has shown that the non-deformable porous-lining made up of foametal porous material or alloxite porous material lined with the ablative surface of a IFE target shell filled with viscous incompressible ordinary fluid bounded on the other side by a rigid surface will reduce the RTI growth rate considerably and derived the following dispersion relation (hereafter called NR-formula) . (1. during a past decade and a half works on porous IFE. non-electrically conducting) fluid given by Taylor9 in the absence of porous lining.

l2 ⎛ l2 ⎞ n p = ⎜1 − ⎟ − β p lvap = nb − β p lvap 3⎜ B⎟ ⎝ ⎠ l2 ⎛ l2 ⎞ nb = ⎜1 − ⎟ 3⎜ B⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (1. al10.3) where nb is the classical growth rate in the absence of porous lining given by Babchin et.2) (1. suffix p denotes the quantities in the presence of porous lining. σ p = 12(1 + α pσ p ) ⎜ B⎟ k ⎝ ⎠ . βp = 4 + α pσ p 4 + α pσ p ⎛ l2 ⎞ h vap = l ⎜1 − ⎟ . 3α pσ p . B = δ h 2 / γ the Bond number which is a measure of gravitational force to surface tension.

2) reduces to 78. From this growth rate they have shown that the maximum growth rate is reduced to 45% of the classical growth rate.2). we note that the electrical conductivity of DT is usually very small and increases with an increase in temperature caused by radiation.(1. given by Eq. which coincides with Eq. αp the slip parameter (see Rudraiah3 ) and the other quantities are as defined earlier in Eq.1) for A=0.1). the maximum growth rate given by Eq. al2 have derived an expression for the dispersion relation involving the growth rate n. Rudraiah3 has shown that in the case of porous lining with slip parameter αp = 0. Also.(1.(1. We note that the works of both Takabe et. . k the permeability of porous lining. al2 and Rudraiah3 are independent of the effects of electric field and thermal radiation.1 and the permeability parameter σp = 4.(1. from the expression for the growth rate nm.h the thickness of the thin film. Takabe et. Similarly.9 and ε = 0.57% compared to the classical value ( nm)b.

These are ideal for ultrasonic applications because of their high frequency response but they may not be suitable for IFE application because it involves DT having poor electrical conductivity. It is thus described as an enabling technology like nanotechnology that will pave the way for novelty in every stream of technology. new products with tailor made properties leading to new market.The variation of electrical conductivity with temperature releases the electric charges in the target containing DT which in turn produce the electric field known as thermal electric field. The study of the motion of a poorly conducting liquid in the presence of an electric field is called Electrohydrodynamics (EHD). Ng et al13). Literature shows that ferroelectric materials have long been used as smart materials due to their piezoelectric properties (see Xu11. The total (that is sum of induced and applied) electric field not only produces an electric current which acts as sensing (like piezoelectric current in piezo-dielectric material) and also produces the electric force which acts as actuation which are the two basic properties required a material to be a smart material. . Uchino12. It is now believed that smart materials are going to change every aspect of our lives and lead to generation of capabilities. In addition there may be an applied electric field due to the embedded electrodes at the boundaries.

21 has been investigated in the literature. we can overcome it by using an alternative mechanism of providing roughness at the ablative surface of IFE target. it is advantages to use EHD because of its property of smart material in the presence of laser radiation.2). The importance of maintaining an electric potential either parallel to or opposing the direction of gravity in the control of ERTI growth rate is also discussed in this section. To achieve this objective. Although RTI in ordinary fluid. on RTI in EHD with nondeformable porous lining or foametal with application to IFE considering the thermal radiation effect. The study of these are the main objectives of this paper because of their applications mentioned above. The basic equations for poorly conducting viscous fluid in the presence of an electric field. If this is the case then. to our knowledge. The important conclusions are drawn in the final section. but no work has been done.For effective performance of IFE target. this paper is planned as follows. called EHD equations. The dispersion relation for RTI in EHD denoted by ERTI in the presence of laser radiation and electric field is derived in section 3 which is analogous to NR-formula(1. . We note that a doubt may arise whether the nondeformable porous lining or foametal could possibly remain usefully rigid in the IFE context. are given in section 2 with suitable approximations and the boundary conditions. in MHD and EHD20.

. shown in Fig. The assumption on density (ρp>ρf) is needed for ERTI and the assumption on densely packed porous lining made up of smart material of nanostructure is needed to maintain laminar flow using the Darcy equation with Saffman1 slip condition.1. consists of a two layer model. We consider the rectangular co-ordinate system (x. This instability at the interface is electrohydrodynamic Rayleigh-Taylor instability (ERTI). t) as the perturbed interface between the fluid in the thin film-shell and in the porous lining. y) as shown in Fig. with x-axis parallel to the shell and y-axis normal to it with η(x. Mathematical Formulation The physical model.2. The lighterfluid in the shell is set in motion by an acceleration normal to the interface and small disturbances are amplified when the acceleration is directed from the lighterfluid in the shell to heavier fluid in the nanostructure porous lining.1. One is the shell in the form of a thin film of unperturbed thickness h filled with DT regarded as an incompressible viscous poorly electrically conducting Boussinesq light fluid of density ρf bounded on one side by a rigid surface and the other side is lined with smart material of nanostructure which can be regarded as a dense porous layer saturated with an incompressible viscous poorly electrically conducting fluid having density ρp(>ρf) and thickness h′ .

We note that since the porous lining made up of smart material of nanostructure is a nominal surface( see Beavers and Joseph14) that is nondeformable regular surface and the perturbation in the fluid penetrates the porous lining through the space between pores and execute oscillations.1. validated in the experiments of Beavers and Joseph14 and in the theoretical work of Rudraiah15 is needed to use the Saffman1 slip condition. the electrodes are embedded at y = 0 and y = h as shown in Fig. Also. Figure 1: Physical configuration . This assumption.

1) r ∇ .For this configuration.2) ∂T r + ( q.∇ ) q ⎟ = −∇p + µ f ∇ 2 q + ρe E ⎝ ∂t ⎠ The conservation mass for Boussinesq fluid (2.3) .∇ ) T = κ∇ 2T + I 0 Ωe−Ωy ∂t (2.q = 0 The conservation of energy in the presence of laser radiation (2. the basic equations for electrohydrodynamics are: The conservation of momentum r r r r⎞ r ⎛ ∂q ρ ⎜ + ( q.

5e) φ the electric potential. J the current density.∇ ) ρe + ∇.c. σ = σ ⎡1+α (T −T ) ⎤ ∇. b.5b) implies that r r where E is the electric field. ρe the density of charges .(2.5a.The conservation of electric charges r ∂ρe r + ( q. J = σ E . In this poorly conducting fluid (σ<<1) we assume perturbation on σ is negligibly small and hence σ will depend on the conduction temperature Tb for negligible advection in the presence of radiation and is governed by the equation . ∇× E = 0. and the electrical conductivity σ in Eq.5d) is very small (σ<<1) and increases with temperature T.E = 0⎣ 0 ⎦ h εe (2.d) Equation (2.4) The Maxwell’s equations: r ρ r r r e .J = 0 ∂t (2. r E = −∇φ (2.

d 2 Tb I Ω = − 0 e − Ω y with Tb = T0 at y = 0 and Tb = T1 at y =h.5d).5f).5h) .(2. κ dy 2 where I0 is the laser intensity and Ω is the absorption frequency.5f).5g).5g) α h I 0 ⎛ y −Ωy −Ωh y ⎞ σ y = 1+ +e ⎜1 − − e ⎟ + α h ∆T Ωκ ⎝ h σ0 h⎠ h σ << 1 Since σ0 (2.(2.(2. (2.(2.5f) Solution of Eq. satisfying the corresponding boundary conditions in Eqn. is I0 −Ωy + ∆T y − I 0 1 − e−Ωh y 1− e Tb − T0 = Ωκ h Ωκ h Then Eq. becomes ( ) ( ) (2. using Eq.

This approximation simplifies Ω Eq.1) to (2. i.(2. r r and there is no applied magnetic field.(2. following Rudraiah et. σ <<1. is negligibly small. This implies that induced magnetic field is negligible. Hence the Lorentz force. is r zero and there exists only the electric force ρe E .5h) and reduces to σ =σ 0 y ⎞ ⎛ α y /h 1+α ≈ σ 0e ⎜ ⎟ h ⎠ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟.for a poorly conducting fluid we can simplify Eq.(2. σ.e. ⎟ ⎠ (Q α << 1) (2. T1 and T0 are respectively the temperatures at y = h and y = 0. we make use of the following electrohydrodynamic approximations: (i) The electrical conductivity of the liquid.4).5h) using the assumption that the absorption frequency (Ω ≈ 106 / m) of laser radiation has 1 to decay within a short distance of order .. J × B . β1 = ∆ T ⎜ 1 − ⎜ Ω κ∆T ⎝ ∆T = T1 − T0 σ0 is the electrical conductivity at T = T0 . In solving Eqs. . al16.5i) I ⎛ 0 where α =αhβ1.

is negligibly small. These approximations are usually called Stokes and lubrication approximations. (v) The Strauhal number. That is h<<H (iii) The surface elevation η is assumed to be small compared to film thickness h.(2. That is L << 1 to U where the quantities are defined in the nomenclature. particularly the inertial terms in the basic equations.1). We also assume that the heavy fluid in the porous lining is almost static because of creeping flow approximation in a densely packed porous medium.(ii) The film thickness h is much smaller than the thickness H of the dense fluid above the film. which is needed to use the Saffman1 slip condition.4). That is η<<h (iv) Convective charges are negligible compared to conduction charges in Eq. which help to neglect many terms.(2. a measure of the local acceleration to inertial acceleration in Eq. S. S= .

8) 0 =κ f ∂ 2T f ∂y 2 + I 0 Ω e−Ωy (2.Under these approximations the basic Eqs.3) for thin shell–film is (2.6) ∂p ∂ 2u 0 = − + µf 2 + ρe Ex ∂x ∂y (2.2) for fluid in the film reduce to ∂u ∂v + = 0 ∂x ∂y (2.(2.1) and (2.9) . (2. the conservation of energy Eq.7) ∂p + ρe E y 0 = − ∂y Also.

we get ∂u ∂v + ∂x ∂y = 0 (2. E = .and that in the porous layer is 0 =κ p ∂ 2T p ∂y 2 + I 0 Ω e − Ωy (2.11) and for simplicity neglecting asterisks ( * ). y = . ρe = .12) .6) .x = δ0h / µ f δ0h / µ f δ0h ε0v0 h h h ∗ (2.10) where u is the horizontal velocity.v = 2 . κ the thermal diffusivity.(2.(2.8) dimensionless . Making Eqs. T the temperature and suffixes f and p refer to film and porous regions.p = . using ρe h2 v0 u v p y ∗ x * ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ u = 2 .

we get σ ∂ 2φ ∂y 2 ∂φ ∂σ + = 0 ∂y ∂y (2.5e). using the approximations (iv) and (v) given above and using Eqn.∂p ∂ 2u + 0 = − 2 + We ρ e E x ∂x ∂y (2.14) the electric number which represents the measure of the electric energy to kinetic energy and δ0 = g(ρp − ρf ) . From Eq.(2.15) .13) ∂p 0 = − + We ρ e E y ∂y 2 ε 0v0 where We = δ 0 h3 (2.4).(2.

5i).16).18) −α 1− e ( ) .16) The applied voltage Vx / h and V(x − x0 )/ h y = 0 and y =h respectively are made dimensionless.(2.This using Eq.(2.17a.b) φ = x − x 0 at The nature of these boundary conditions permits a linear variation of φ with x.17a. using the scale V for potential.b) is x0 φ = x− 1− e− α y (2. becomes ∂ 2φ ∂y 2 ∂φ +α = 0 ∂y due to electrodes at (2. using the above boundary conditions (2. Then the solution of Eq. and obtain φ = x at y=0 y=1 (2.

using Eqs.Equation(2.19) .5e) and (2.5a).(2.18). becomes ρe = x0α 2 1− e −α e −α y so that α 2 x0e−α y ∂φ ρe Ex = − ρe = ∂x (1−e−α ) (2.

we derive the dispersion relation as well as the temperature distribution incorporating the laser radiation.3.(2. Dispersion Relation and Temperature Distribution In this section. The no-slip condition at the rigid surface u = 0 at y = 0 (3. 3. we have to find the velocity distribution from Eq.1 Dispersion Relation To find the dispersion relation.2) α0 = h′ h′ .13) using the following dimensionless boundary and surface conditions. σp = h k .1) The Saffman1 slip condition at the interface ∂u = −α 0 σ p u at y = 1 ∂y where (3.

3) The dynamic condition.4) .In the case of roughness at the interface we use the Navier – Slip at the interface (see Miksis and Davis23) du β1 = −u at dy y =1 (3. is 1 ∂ 2η p = − δ −We η − B ∂x 2 ( ) at y = 1 (3.2a) β1 is the dimensionless roughness parameter The kinematic condition ∂η ∂η +u v = ∂t ∂x at y =1 (3. in the case of porous lining.

(3. a 2 = We a 0 0 1−e ∂x x0 . a constant with respect to y.2a) instead of (3. B is the Bond number. ∆ and We are the electric numbers. a = − α . is y2 u=P + a2 1 − e−α y + a1 y 2 ( ) (3.4a) where δ = β 2 (θ f − θ p ) . The solution of Eq.1) and (3. using Eqs.(2.2).and that in the case of rough surface is 1 ∂2 y p = − (θ l1 − θ f 1 )η − ± ∆η 2 B ∂x (3.5a) where P = ∂p . (2.13).2) we get P 2 u = y + a2 1 − e−α y + A1 y 2 ( ) (3.5) Similarly. using (3.19).

6) .3) takes the form ∂η v = ∂t at y =1 (3.⎡ ⎛ ⎢ ⎜ α0σ p + 2 a1 = − ⎢ P ⎜ ⎢ ⎝ 2 α0σ p +1 ⎣ ( ) ( ⎞ We a0 ⎟− e−α +α e−α −α0σ p ⎟ α0σ p +1 ⎠ ( ) ) ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ ⎡ P (1 + 2 β1 ) + 2a2 1 + αβ1e −α − e −α ⎤ ⎦ A1 = − ⎣ 2 (1 + β1 ) ( ) For linear theory. the kinematic condition (3.

6). using Eqs. becomes (3.7) Similarly.(3. we get 1 + 4 β1 ∂ 2 p v1 = 12 (1 + β1 ) ∂x 2 Then Eq.(3. we get ⎛ 4+α σ ⎞ ∂2 p ∂u 0 p ⎟ v(1) = v1 = − dy = ⎜ ⎜ 12(1+α 0σ p ) ⎟ ∂ x 2 ∂x 0 ⎝ ⎠ ∫ 1 (3.4) and (3.7a) ⎛ ∂η ⎜ 4 + α 0σ p = −⎜ ∂t ⎜ 12 1+ α 0σ p ⎝ ( ) ⎞⎡ ∂ 2η 1 ∂ 4η ⎤ ⎟ ⎟ ⎢(δ −We ) 2 + B 4 ⎥ ⎟⎢ ∂x ∂x ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎠ (3. using (3.From Eq. using Eq.(2.(3.5).7).8) .12) and after integrating it.5a).

n.9).8).(3.(3. θl1 = θ f1 (1) and θl1 = θl (1) To investigate the growth rate. of the periodic perturbation of the interface.6). becomes ⎛ 4 β1 + 1 ⎞ ⎡ ∂η ∂ 2η 1 ∂ 4η ⎤ = −⎜ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎢ θ l1 − θ f1 ± ∆ ∂x 2 + B ∂x 4 ⎥ ∂t ⎦ ⎝ 12 (1 + β1 ) ⎠ ⎣ ( ) (3. using Eq.9) ⎛ ⎜ 4 + α 0σ p n = ⎜ ⎜ 4 1+α 0σ p ⎝ ( ) ⎞ 2 l2 ⎤ ⎟l ⎡ ⎟ 3 ⎢(δ (1) −We ) − B ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎟ ⎠ (3.(3. we look for solution of Eq.8) in the form η = η 0 exp{i lx + nt } Then Eq.4a) and (3.7a).Similarly Eq(3. using Eq (3.8a) where ± ∆ will depend on whether the applied voltage is in the direction or opposing the direction of gravity. takes the form (3.10) .

⎛ l2 ⎞ ⎛ l2 ⎞ 4(1+α0σ p )⎜1 − ⎟ −⎜ δ − ⎟ +We ( 4+α0σ p ) ⎜ 4+α0σ p l ⎛ B⎟ ⎜ B⎟ ⎞ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ l2 where β = . va = ⎜ δ − +We ⎟ 2 ⎛ ⎞ 12 1+α0σ p ⎝ B ⎠ l 4+α0σ p )⎜ δ − −We ⎟ ( ⎜ ⎟ B ⎝ ⎠ ( ( ) ) .10) reduces to given by Eq.where δ(1) = β 2 [θ f (1) .2).(3.12) which is analogous to NR formula(1. the growth rate given by Eq.10) can be written as ⎛ α σ + 4 ⎞ l2 2⎞ ⎛ l ⎜ 0 p ⎟ W n = nb − l ⎜ δ (1) − ⎟ + 4(α 0σ p +1) B ⎠ ⎜ α 0σ p +1 ⎟ B e ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ α0σ p 2 (3.11) This dispersion relation can be expressed as n = n b − lβ v a (3.(3. that is We→ 0 and σp→0.(1. Eq. Accordingly.θ p1 ] β 2 = αT T0 In the absence of electric field and porous lining.θ p (1)] = β 2 [θ f 1 .3).

Here δ1 (1) = θ l (1) − θ f (1) . To know the nature of dispersion relation (3.12) δ = ρ p − ρ f = α T ρ 0 (T f − Tp ) .(3.12a) tends to nb. (3.2. we find Tf and Tp in the following section 3. (3.In the case of roughness.12). .12a) ∆→0 n in 4 (1 + β1 ) βr = ( ⎛ l2 ⎞ 1 − l / β − ⎜ δ1 − ⎟ ± ∆e (1 + r β1 ) β⎠ ⎝ . we have ( 4β1 + 1) l 2 ⎡δ 1 ± ∆ − l 2 ⎤ = n − lβ V n= r ar ⎢ 1( ) ⎥ b 12 (1 + β1 ) ⎣ B⎦ When β1 is very large compared to unity. 2 ⎛ ⎞ l 1 + 4 β1 ⎜ δ1 − ± ∆ ⎟ β ⎝ ⎠ 2 ) Var (1 + 4β1 ) ⎛ l 2 = ⎜ δ1 − 12 (1 + β1 ) ⎝ β ⎞ ± ∆⎟ ⎠ In this Eq. and δ (1) → 1.

θ p = . Then making Eqs.11). we h T0 T0 get for the thin film .(3.3.2 Temperature Distribution The effect of laser radiation on heat transfer in thin film and porous lining or rough surface is studied in this section using equations for fluid layer 0 =κ f and for porous lining ∂ 2T f ∂y 2 + I 0Ωe−Ωy (3.(2.14) where κ f and κ p are the thermal diffusivities respectively for shell-film and porous–lining.13) and (3. y* = and Ω* = Ωh together with Eq.14) dimensionless using Tf Tp y θf = .13) ∂ 2T p 0 =κ p + I0Ωe−Ωy ∂y 2 (3.

0= and for the porous lining ∂ 2θ f ∂y 2 ∂ 2θ p ∂y 2 + N f e−Ωy (3. d) . b) =λ at y = 1 and = − Bi (θ p − 1) at y = 1 + α 0 = δ1 (3.16) I0Ωh3 I0Ωh3 where N f = κ T and N p = κ T p 0 f 0 The boundary conditions are θ f = 1 at y = 0 and θ p = θ f at y = 1 ∂θ f ∂y ∂θ p ∂y ∂θ p ∂y (3.15) 0= + N p e−Ωy (3.17 a.17 c.

.18) N p ⎛ a5 Nf −Ωy ⎞ θ p ( y ) = 1 + 2 ⎜ y + a6 − e ⎟ + 2 Ω ⎝ a3 ⎠ Ω ⎛ a4 ⎞ ⎜ y − a7 ⎟ ⎝ a3 ⎠ (3.17a).17c) becomes = − βi (θ f − 1) at y = 1and instead of (3.16) and in the we have ∂θ f ∂y = 0 as y→∞ ∂y The solutions of Eqs.19) .(3.15) and (3.16) satisfying the above boundary conditions are θ f ( y) = 1 + and Nf Ω 2 (1 − e−Ωy ) − N f ⎛ −Ω a4 ⎞ Np ⎛ a ⎞ Ωe − λ ⎟ y + 2 e −Ω λ ⎜ Ω + 5 ⎟ y ⎜ a3 ⎠ a3 ⎠ Ω2 ⎝ Ω ⎝ (3. For the case of roughness the suffix p in Eq (3.Bi = κp h′ where λ = the ratio of thermal diffusivities. α 0 = and the Biot number κf h H T T 0 κp remaining part of this paper will be replaced by l and + N p will be replaced by ∂θ f ± N l and (3.

a5 = e−Ω Bi (1 − λΩ) − e−Ωδ1 ( Bi − Ω) N f Ra e −Ωδ1 a3 ( Bi − Ω) − a5 (1 + Biδ1 ) a4 ⎛ 1 + Biδ1 ⎞ . a7 = ⎜ a6 = ⎟ .18a) (3. a4 = Bi (1 − e−Ω (1 + Ω)).19a) a3 = Bi(1 − δ1 − λ ).Similarly in the case of roughness θ f ( y ) = 1 − a8 ⎡ e −Ω0 y − 1 + a9 1 − e cy ⎤ ⎣ N l e −Ω0 y N l eΩ0 θl ( y) = 1 + + 2 ( Ω 0 − Bi ) 2 Ω0 Ω 0 Bi where ( )⎦ (3. a8 = Ω ( Ω + C ) a3 Bi a3 ⎝ Bi ⎠ 0 0 a9 = Bi − Bi e−Ω0 − Ω0 e−Ω0 Ce − 1 − e Bi c c ( ) and C = Va Ra .

12a) we obtain the cut-off wavenumber.20) −Ω ) − ⎛ Ωe−Ω − a4 λ ⎞ . for porous . a = λ ⎛ Ω + a5 ⎞ where a10 = (1 − e ⎜ ⎟ 11 ⎜ ⎟ and β 2 = α T T0 . ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ a3 ⎠ a3 ⎟ ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ 4.(3.From these. Results and Discussion The effect of transverse electric field and porous lining with laser radiation on the linear ERTI in a thin shell filled with incompressible poorly conducting fluid is studied using normal mode analysis. as l ct . lining. Setting n = 0 in Eq.10) and (3. we have N p β 2 ⎛ −Ω ⎞ N f β2 a5 e (1 + a11 ) − − a6 ⎟ + δ (1) = β 2 [θ f (1) − θ p (1)] = 2 ⎜ a3 Ω ⎝ Ω2 ⎠ ⎛ a ⎞ a7 + a10 − 4 ⎟ ⎜ a3 ⎠ ⎝ (3.

(3. is B (α 0σ p + 4) nm = (δ (1) − We ) 2 48 (α 0σ p + 1) (3.22).l ct = B(δ (1) − We ) and for roughness at the boundary.10) and (3.12a)by = l ct 2 (3. Similarly replacing δ(1) by δ1(1) and We by ± ∆.21) l ct = B (δ1 (1) ± ∆) The maximum wavenumber.21a) ∂n = 0. obtained from Eqs.22) lm = B (δ (1) − We ) 2 for porous lining.23) . The corresponding maximum growth rate. as (3. (3. are setting ∂l l m . we get l mf for roughness from Eq (3. nm.

and δ1(1) =1 Therefore.24) for porous lining. is given by m 2 nbm .23a) and Similarly. δ(1) =1. Similarly for roughness .23a) by letting β1 is much greater than 1.for porous lining and for roughness nm = B ( 4β1 + 1) (δ1 (1) ± ∆ ) 48 (1 + β1 ) 2 (3. using l = B. for σ p = 0. ∆ = 0. (α 0σ p + 4) nm (δ (1) − We ) 2 Gm = = nbm 4(α 0σ p + 1) (3. the maximum classical growth. We = 0 nbm = B 12 for porous lining and the same is true for roughness which is obtained from Eq (3.

24a) The values of Gm given by Eq. σp and We and the results are tabulated in Table 1.Gmr 2 nm (1 + 4 β1 ) = = (δ1 (1) ± ∆ ) nbm 4 (1 + β1 ) (3. Similarly Gmr for roughness are computed for different values of β1 . . From the following table it is clear that the porous lining or roughness and the external constraint of electric field in the presence of laser radiation are more effective than the effect of compression in reducing the growth rate of RTI. and ∆ and the results are also tabulated in table 1. δ1 (1) = 1.(3.24) are computed for different values of α0.

We = 1) (for EHD) 70% (∆ = 2. ∆ = 2.79 0.0) Present paper with Roughness .83 0.Table 1: Comparison of Results Authors Takabe et al2 Rudraiah3 Rudraiah et al5 Gm 0.624974 0.0.19 0.75 1.0.7% 0. ∆ = 0.224984 0.1.99% 71. β1 = 1. We = 0. β1 = 4.1.5) 75% (β1 = 2. σp = 10.4) 40 % (α0 = 0.0) 19% (β1 = 2.81 0.5) 75%(∆ = 2.52% 2.0003 0.0) (β1 = 2.85 0.1. β1 = 3.0) 19% (β1 = 2.5) (β1 = 2.0. σp = 4 ) (for porous lining) M =10-1 M =100 M =101 M =102 ( for MHD ) Present paper with porous lining 22. β1 = 3. β1 = 2.5 % (α0 = 0.1.5) 85%(∆ = 2.399979 0.79 0. ∆ = 3. We = 0.7152 0.45 0. β1 = 2.5% (α0 = 0. σp = 10.03% for for for for Percentage of reduction in growth rate 45% (for compression) 79% (αp = 0.70 0.0) 79%(∆ = 2.0. σp = 10.8) 90 % (α0 = 0.19 0.00 99.75 0.1. σp = 10.00 0. ∆ = 1.0027 0. ∆ = 1.0) 83%(∆ = 2.899969 0.5) (β1 = 2.0. We = 0.99996 0.5) 81%(∆ = 2. ∆ = 2.6) 62.69 3.

2 is the plot of the growth rate n versus l for different values of electric number We. ∆.5 there is a considerable increase in the growth rate. In the case of roughness for a fixed ∆ = 2.4.10) for porous lining and (3.The growth rate n given by Eq. However for a fixed β1 = 2. Also. varying ∆ we find a marked change in the growth rate. From this figure we found that the growth rate decreases with a decrease in B implying increase in the surface tension because B is reciprocal of surface tension. σp. From this we conclude that an increase with surface tension decreases the growth rate and hence makes the interface more stable. . β1 and B and the results are compared with those available in the literature in Table 1 and also represented graphically in Figures 2. Fig.12a) for roughness are numerically computed for different values of We.3 is the plot of the growth rate n versus wavenumber l for different values of B. varying values of β1 from 1.0 we find that roughness controls the growth rate more efficiently then porous lining.0. From this we conclude that for a suitable choice of roughness parameter and electric number it is possible to decrease the growth rate.5 to 4. From this figure it is clear that the decrease in the growth rate with an increase in the value of We in the range of 1 to 100.(3.0. Fig. the roughness decreases the growth rate. for example β1 = 2 and ∆ ≤ 2. whereas for β1 = 2 and ∆ ≥ 2.

G. Math. “On the boundary condition at the surface of a porous medium”. 93-101(1971). P.We also plot the growth rate n versus wavenumber l in Fig. References 1. Acknowledgement The work reported here is supported by ISRO under Respond No.:10/2/300 (2003). 50. 4 for different values of σp and for fixed values of other parameters. Saffman. Studies in Appl. This figure shows a decrease in the growth rate with an increase in the values of porous parameter σp in the range of 1 to 100.12a for a suitable choose of roughness parameter and electric number ∆(≤2). The decrease in growth rate helps to reduce the asymmetry of the target caused by laser radiation in fusing DT and hence useful for efficient extraction of IFE. Analogous results can be observed if the results obtained by computing n from Eq 2.. The financial support of ISRO is gratefully acknowledged. .

A. Thiessen and G. 28(12). Jalaja and T. “Self consistent growth rate of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability in an ablatively accelerating plasma”. Nature. 22. and Tech. 139-144(1972). “Effect of porous lining on reducing the growth rate of Rayleigh-Taylor instability in the inertial fusion energy target”. Phys. “Effect of magnetic field on the growth rate of RTI of a laser accelerated thin ablative surface”. Nuckolls. A. Krishnamurthy.. H. Zimmerman. Phys. 7. . 4. S. S. 1-5(2003). “Hydrodynamic and Stabilitiy”. 43. Montierth. N. 1-5(2004). Wood. Prog. Chandrasekhar. Rep. “Laser-driven IFE: Present and Prospective”.Rudraiah. and R. 6. 239. S. B. 3. Fusion Sci. Mima. N.Rudraiah. K. Magnetohydrodynamic 5. J. B. 3676-3682(1985).L. S. Desai. Fluids. 321-349(2003). L. L. Mima. 67.Morse. University Press (1961). “Laser compression of matter to super-high densities: Thermonuclear (CTR) Applications”. Camb. Nakai and K. Laser and Particle Beams. Takabe.2.

Gelndinning. Smalyuk.A. Phys. Mekenty. “The instability of liquid surfaces when accelerated in a direction perpendicular to their planes-I”. A. G. Watt. T. Betti. T.149-196(1950). Kluwer (1997).R. Fluids. Uchino.Babchin. W Kalantar and R.B.I.L. “Nonlinear saturation of Rayleigh-Taylor instability in thin films”. Fluids. 10.Taylor. N. 11. K. Soc (London). P. RayleighTaylor growth rate measurements on the OMEGA laser s ystem”.W. V. G. A. J. 3159-3161(1983). R.P.J. Shivashinsky. 201. Collino. C. D. 338-345(2002). Kanuer. Bradley.8.G. D. Levich.Frenkel. 12. Roy. V.D Meyerhofer. K. 7(1). Y. Proc. North Holland (1991). 26.G. “Ferroelectric Materials and Their Applications”.J. Phys. Xu. Goncharov. Verdon.I. “Piezoelectric actuators and Ultrasonic Motors”. B. A. Bochly. D. Amsterdam. 9. . P. “Single-mode.

“Nonlinear Evolution of Ablation . “Principles of inertial confinement fusionphysics of implosion and the concept of inertial fusion energy”. G.. Fluid Engg. “The effect of oblique magnetic field on the surface instability of a finite conducting fluid layer”. 119. Nagaraj and H. Rudraiah. 18.L. R. Mathad. of Energy. N. 107. L Morse and C. L.1. “Coupled parallel flows in a channel and a bounding porous medium of finite thickness”.P. 1071-1131(1996).322329(1985).D. 59. 46. Ng. 336-339(1981).Beavers and D.O. McCrory. Rudraiah. 27.N. S. D. Phys. Krishnamurthy and R.64(2005). C. Fluid Mech. “Electrohydrodynamic dispersion of macromolecular component in biological bearing”. ASME J. 14. 197-207(1967). J.Driven Rayleigh-Taylor Instability”. 39.13. S. R. Lett.165-180(1996). Rep. 17. 15. Joseph. 16. Acta Mech. C. Heat Mass Transfer. J. B. N. Prog. Phys.. Nakai and H. Rudraiah. N. 30. Nagaraj. “Boundary conditions at a naturally permeable wall”. . Montierth.S. Verdon. Takabe. Rev.

Proc.Davis. 111146(1969). “Electrically driven jets”. Roy.(accepted for publication)(2007). . Mech. “Electrohydrodynamics: A Review of the Role of the interfacial shear stresses”. Appl.19.Taylor.”Slip over Rough and Coated Surfaces”. P. “RTI in EHD bounded by rough surface in the presence of an electric field” Int. Ann. Fluid Mech. Lond. Taylor. pp 125-139(1994). 23. N. 665676(2003). Siddalinga Prasad.Miksis and S. Applied. Venkatachalappa and M. J. Int. and Eng. Rudraiah. J. G. Rudraiah. M. N. I. 453475(1969). 1. Mech. 21..R. G. 314. “Laser-driven ablative surface instability in inertial fusion energy”. J.J. 22. Mech. A. Desai.H. 273..Fluid. J. 20. 8(4).I. Sridharan and T. Rev. M. Melcher. Soc. Engg.

4 0.02.10 Fig. B = 0.0. Np =1.1. Nf =1. .05 l -0. α0 =0. δ1 = 1.10 We = 1 0.0001.2 10 0.0 0.Bi =1.6 100 -0. β 2 = 10 and Ω = 0.. n versus the wavenumber.1.2: Growth rate.05 n 0. l for different values of We −3 for fixed σp = 10.00 0.3.

0. 3: Growth rate. n versus the wavenumber.04 0. λ = 1 .6 -0.3.0 -0.2 l 0.06 Fig.02 0. β 2 = 10−3 and Ω = 0.06 B =0.04 0.1. Bi =1.1 .4 0. Nf =1.0001 .02 0. δ1 = 1.02 n 0. We=10.04 -0. Np =1. α0 = 0. l for different values of B for fixed σp = 10.00 0.03 0.

02 -0. 4: Growth rate.4 0. n versus the wavenumber. . δ1 = 1.04 σp = 1 10 0.02. B = 0.0001.0. Bi =1.02 100 n 0. Nf =1.2 0. α0 =0. −3 Np =1.5 l -0. λ = 1 .3.1 0. l for different values of σp for fixed We = 10.3 0.0 0.00 0.04 Fig. β 2 = 10 and Ω = 0.1.1 .

Nomenclature δ 0 h2 B = γ Bi = Bond number HT h κp Biot number I0Ωh3 Nf = κ f T0 I0Ωh3 Np = κ pT0 laser intensity parameter in the fluid region laser intensity parameter in the porous region I 0 Ω0 h Nl = κ T0 laser intensity parameter for region 2 in the case of roughness .

T Temperature Temperature at the rigid surface electric field acceleration due to gravity thickness of the film current density r E g T0 r J L = h γ δ characteristic length wavenumber permeability growth rate pressure velocity l k n p r q = (u. v) .

S t Strauhal number time t0 = µfγ L3δ 2 characteristic time δ L3 U = µf v0 We = 2 ε ev0 characteristic velocity applied potential δ 0h 3 electric parameter horizontal co-ordinate vertical co-ordinate roughness parameter x y β1 .

Greek symbols α0 δ0 = g(ρp − ρf ) slip parameter at the ablative surface stress gradient in porous lining for rough surface dielectric constant electric potential surface tension surface elevation or amplitude thermal diffusivity in fluid region thermal diffusivity in porous region absorption coefficient dimensionless absorption coefficient uniform amplitude δ 0 = gdT ρ1T0 εe φ γ η κf κp Ω Ω0 = Ωh η0 .

ρ2 viscosity of fluid density density of electric charges density of porous lining difference in temperature electrical conductivity electrical conductivity at T = T0 ∆T = Tp-Tf σ σ0 r ∂ r ∂ ∇=i + j ∂x ∂y αT σp = h p Subscript : ε 0γ 2 ∆= δ 0 h3 volumetric coefficient k porous parameter porous lining fluid reference f 0 . ρ1 ρ p .µf ρ ρ f .

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot useful- 11-Influence of Porosity on Compressive and Tensile Strength of Cement Mortarby Pankaj Saini
- The Importance of Choosing the Right Laser Irradiation Parameters for Effective Laser Ablation of Dental Hard Tissueby ali rico muno
- Porosity, Permeability & Skin Factorby Pratick Tibrewala
- Alzhemers MSby api-3811432

- 11-Influence of Porosity on Compressive and Tensile Strength of Cement Mortar
- The Importance of Choosing the Right Laser Irradiation Parameters for Effective Laser Ablation of Dental Hard Tissue
- Porosity, Permeability & Skin Factor
- Alzhemers MS
- Time-Average Equation Revisited
- Laser Ablation for Polymer Waveguide Fabrication
- 2010 - SPIE PW - Manuscript_SPIE_paper_no_7590-3
- 00002162
- Artigo - The Morphology of Anisotropic 3D-Printed Hydroxyapatite Scaffolds
- Resume of Acceptance Criteria RT
- Scaffold Fabrication
- Correlation of AVO Inversion Methods With Porosity Seen on Logs and Cores
- This Laser Door Alarm is Based on the Interruption of Laser Beam
- Settlement and Consolidation, 1-25-00
- INTERACTION OF INTENSE SHORT LASER PULSES WITH GASES OF NANOSCALE ATOMIC .pdf
- More Powerful than the Hyperboloid
- WEB- CBET - Safety in the Health Care Facility (V14) 1 Slide-Page
- Amoo
- Syntonics AOC RF Over-Fiber 19 Jan 08
- Expert Answers Gassman Eq.pdf
- What Is a CNC Laser Reducing Machine and What Does It Do?
- 78nbfgnfgbf
- 106168730 Laser Cjbkufdvbidfvbfommunication 75
- ls120
- ls 110
- 106168scdcvse730 ffregrLahser Couyju7ijmmunication 73
- 106168730 Laser Commuvjgyvfgdvdfrnvkhtrfnication 76
- 10616rfesfare8730 Lfrefetgtraser Cotrhtyhetymmunication 70
- ls 118
- ls115
- s3-7s