Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches S.V.

Lebedev
Mini-course on Z-pinches Monterey, CA
18-19 June 2005 Imperial College London

Acknowledgements
D.J. Ampleford S.N. Bland D. Bliss S.C. Bott J.P. Chittenden M. Cuneo J. Davis C. Deeney J. Goyer C. Jennings M.G. Haines G.N. Hall D.A. Hammer J.B.A. Palmer S.A. Pikuz D.D. Ryutov T. Sanford T.A. Shelkovenko D. Sinars A. Velikovich E. Waisman ……… ………

Experiments at Imperial College are supported by Sandia National Laboratories and by NNSA DOE
2
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Outline
• Introduction: why wire arrays? • Overview of the implosion dynamics • Early stages of plasma formation • Implosion phase in wire arrays and the X-ray pulse • Trailing mass and trailing current • Different implosion modes of nested wire arrays • Possible non-MHD effects • Other configurations/applications of wire array Z-pinches

3
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

0-D implosion
Thin conducting shell with axial current
Equation of motion of a shell driven by the pressure of magnetic field (m0 is mass per unit length) :

μ0 I 2 B2 && m0 R = − 2πR ⋅ =− 2μ0 4πR
In dimensionless variables

Implosion trajectory
1.0

I ~ sin (t)

2

Current

r = R / R0, τ = t / tmax f(τ) = I(τ) / Imax

0.5

0.0

Radius

d 2r r ⋅ 2 = −Π ⋅ f (τ ) 2 dτ

2 2 μ 0 I max t max Π≡ 4π m0 R02

1.0

Π=5
0.5

Π=20

Π is a dimensionless scaling parameter: identical implosions for identical values of Π and the same current pulse shape (f(τ))
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

0.0 0.0

0.5

1.0

Time

4

X-ray power from Z-pinch implosion or why wire arrays?
Imploding plasma shell Energy
CU 2 mV 2 ⇒ ⇒ WX − ray 2 2

Power

P∝

WX

τ

τ~

δR
V

•Small mass to maximize implosion velocity Wire array Z-pinch •Wire array is equivalent to ~50nm thick foil and wires should rapidly merge into a shell
Wire array Shell

This transition does not happen!

3-D effects are important throughout the implosion!
5
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Wire array Z-pinches: two stage implosion dynamics
Wires survive for ~3/4 of the implosion time!

Ablation of wire cores

Two-stage implosion dynamics
Trailing mass

1.0
l on a c or a sm pla


0-D Snowplow-like final implosion

Radius

“Slow” ablation of wires and radial redistribution of mass Snowplough-like final implosion phase, stabilised by the peaked on axis density profile

0.5


Precursor pinch Stagnation

0.0

0.5

1.0

time

6
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Wires in wire array (magnetic field configuration)
Inter-wire separation >> initial wire diameter

gap =
Magnetic field lines (N=8)
6

2πR0 >> δ w N
( ~5-20 μm)

( >200μm)

“Global” and “private” magnetic flux

4

2

Bshell ≡
0 2 4 x, mm 6 8 10

μ0 I μ (I / N ) = Bwire ≡ 0 2πR 2πδ

@δ =

gap 2π

0

Magnetic field distribution (N=16)
2.0 1.5 1.0

Magnetic field distribution
[ Felber & Rostoker, Phys. Fluids 1981]

array: through wire shell array: between wires

B/Bshell

0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 0.6

r − r ⋅ Cos (θ − θ β ) μ0 I 0 N Bθ = ⋅∑ 2 2 β 2πN β =1 r + rβ − 2rrβ ⋅ Cos (θ − θ β )

Br =
0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6

rβ ⋅ Sin(θ − θ β ) μ0 I 0 N ⋅∑ 2 2πN β =1 r + rβ2 − 2rrβ ⋅ Cos (θ − θ β )
7

radius
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Wires in a wire array (R and L)
Typical “cold” array resistance: R~25 mΩ/cm for 6mg, N=300 tungsten array

Typical inductance:

Lout =

μ0 h R Ro 1 (ln ret + ln ) ≈ 6.8 ⋅10 −10 H 2π R0 N rwire ⋅ N

Typical Ohmic heating time to ~Tmelt: τ ~9ns
R (Ohm)

0.5 0.4 0.3 Z array W 6mg, 1cm long N=300

4000

L/Rcold ~ 30ns Typical array resistance at T=Tmelt:
R~8.7 Ω/cm

R
0.2 0.1

2000

1000

I (kA)
0.0 0 2 4 6 8 0 10 time (ns)

After plasma formation current is in the coronal plasma:
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Rplasma =?
8

T (K), I (kA)

T

3000

Experimental set-up: MAGPIE (1MA) and Z (20MA)
MAGPIE

Z

Wire arrays:
MAGPIE R (mm) N timplosion 4-8mm ~32 ~250ns 30 kA Z 10-20mm ~300 ~100ns 60 kA

Diagnostics: X-ray/optical imaging, laser probing Radiography: X-pinch in current return

Current per wire

Z-Beamlet and spherical crystals

1ns, 10μm hν ~ 3-5keV 9
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Core-corona structure of plasma in wire arrays (1MA)
Dense, stationary wire cores surrounded by low density coronal plasma
Radiography Laser probing Same λ Radiography

Al

W 250μm 100μm

Film density (a.u.)

20

18

16

array edge

two wires

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5 2.0 0.5 Radial position (mm)

1.0

1.5

Wires remain at initial positions until ~80% of implosion Non-uniformity of coronal plasma formation imprints on the cores Sharp outward and a shallow inward edges of wire cores

Shape of wire cores is not cylindrical
10
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Core-corona structure of plasma in wire arrays (1MA)
Dense, stationary wire cores surrounded by low density coronal plasma
Radiography Laser probing Same λ Radiography

Radiography

Laser probing

Wires remain at initial positions until ~80% of implosion Non-uniformity of coronal plasma formation imprints on the cores Maximum ablation and maximum plasma flow are at different axial positions!
flow gap 11

S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Precursor plasma flow in wire arrays (1MA)
Inward streaming of the coronal plasma
End-on laser probing End-on XUV Radial optical streak

X-ray image of precursor

• Plasma on axis at t ~50% timpl
(V~15cm/μs from end-on measurements)

• “Inertially confined” precursor column on axis
• Implosion starts at t ~80% timpl

12
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Core-corona structure of plasma in wire arrays (Z)
Radiography
D. Sinars et al, PoP 2005.

Visible imaging
D. Bliss et al, ICOPS 2004.

End-on X-ray image
M. Cuneo et al., PRE 2005

Radiography shows wire cores until ~60% of implosion Non-uniformity of coronal plasma formation Maximum ablation and maximum plasma flow are in different axial positions! Precursor column on axis
precursor 13

S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

“Delayed” implosion trajectories
MAGPIE
1.0
0-D Al N=16 N=32 N=32, 8mm W N=32 N=64

Z

R / R0

shell-like implosion

0-D

0.5

0.0 0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

t / t imp

• During the first 80% - 60% of time the JxB force is not applied to the cores, accelerating instead the coronal plasma • Fast acceleration – not all mass participates • Rate of plasma formation is the most important parameter during the first phase
M. Cuneo et al., PRE 2005
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

14

Ablation rate of wires in a wire array
Direct application of single wire results is not possible !
Ablation in conical array Ablation time depends on array radius

32x15μm Al arrays driven by the same current pulse have different ablation times

The JxB force of the “global” magnetic field determines the ablation rate of wires in an array
15
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

“Rocket” model of ablation and mass redistribution
Ablation of stationary wire cores
Momentum balance: JxB force is only acting on the coronal plasma
(0-D model)

μ0I 2 d 2r m0 2 = − dt 4π r
(Rocket model)

μ0I 2 dm =− V dt 4π R 0

Ablation rate:

μ0 I 2 dm =− dt 4πR0Vabl
Ablated mass:

Concept of “ablation velocity” (Vabl) highlights the main dependence of the ablation rate on current and array radius (Vabliis a weak function) Radial profile of the ablated material:
2

δm(t ) =

4πVabl R0

μ0

∫I
0

t

dt

ρ ( r, t ) =

2 8 π 2 R 0 r Vabl

μ0

R0 − r 2 ⋅ [ I (t − )] Vabl
16

Lebedev et al., PoP 2001
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Ablation rate of wires in a wire array
Direct application of single wire results is not possible !
Ablation in conical array Ablation time depends on array radius

32x15μm Al arrays driven by the same current pulse have different ablation times

Starting time of the implosion is consistent with ablation of about half of array mass:

δm(t )
m0

=

4πVabl R0 m0

μ0

∫I
0

t

2

dt

17
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Early time XUV radiation as indicator of ablation rate
32x15μm Al arrays driven by the same current pulse show different level of XUV emission

Linear wire array

The same current, but larger Bgl (x6.6)

I × Bglobal dm =− dt 2 ⋅ Vabl

E~

Prad dm / dt

~ 300 eV / ion ( Al ), ~ 4 keV / ion (W )
18

S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Variation of ablation rate with inter-wire gap
Ablation time of an array “Ablation velocity” versus inter-wire gap
Magnetic field
2.0
N=32 N=16 R=8mm R=8mm N=64 R=8mm N=8 R=8mm

6

Vabl (107 cm/s)

1.5 1.0 0.5

4

⎛ ⎛ x ⎞⎞ ⎜ ⎟ N=16, R=4mm f ( x) = 1.5 ⋅ ⎜1 − exp⎜ − 3.4 ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠⎠ ⎝

2

0 0 2 4 x, mm 6 8 10

N=32, R=4mm N=64, R=4mm

δm(t )
m0

=

4πVabl R0 m0

μ0

2 ∫ I dt 0

t

0.0 0

π (critical ratio)
5 10 15 20 25

Al W 30 35

2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 7 8 x, mm 9 10

gap / core size

Rapid increase of ablation rate for the gaps below “critical”: change in the magnetic field topology at δcr ~ 3 x (core size) Could be an additional dependence of Vabl on wire diameter
[D. Sinars et al., PoP 2005] 19
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Implosion similarity of wire arrays
0-D similarity
In dimensionless variables:

How the similarity criteria should change to account for the redistribution of mass by the precursor plasma? Ablation rate:

ˆ τ = t / t max r = r / R0 f (tˆ) = I (τ ) / I max ) ) d 2r r ⋅ 2 = −Π ⋅ f (τ ) 2 dτ
2 2 μ 0 I max t max Π≡ 4π m0 R02

μ0 I 2 dm =− dt 4πR0Vabl
Ablated mass:

0-D dimensionless scaling: identical implosions for identical Π and the same current pulse shape f(τ)

δm(t )
m0

=

4π ⋅ m0Vabl R0

μ0

I 2 dt ∫
0

t

20
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Implosion similarity of “ablating” wire arrays
Dimensionless variables:

ˆ ˆ ˆ τ = t / t m r = r / R0 ρ (r , tˆ) = ρ /(m0 / R02 )
Ablated mass fraction:

δm(τ )
m0

τ τ 2 R0 μ 0 I 2t m ~ 2 ~ = ⋅ ⋅ ∫ ( I ) dτ = Π ⋅ K ⋅ ∫ ( I ) 2 dτ 4π ⋅ m0 R02 Vabl ⋅ t m 0 0

Πis fixed ⇒ the same 0-D implosion time and the same trajectory + K is fixed ⇒ the same degree of mass redistribution Density profile:

Π

K

K2 ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ρ ( r ,τ ) = Π ⋅ ⋅ I (τ − K ⋅ (1 − r )) ˆ 2π ⋅ r
1.0

[

]

2

Ablated mass fraction

Π~6

0.4

KMagpie ~0.2 KAngara ~0.2 KZ ~ 0.4 - 0.7 KSphinx ~0.7
Density

Π~6
0.3
K=0.7, τ =0.7 (Z ?)

Current

0.5
K=0.7 (Z ?)

K=0.2 (Magpie)

0.2

0.1

K=0.2, τ = 0.97 (Magpie)

0.0 0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

0.0 0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

time
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Radius

21

Distribution of mass at the start of implosion phase
1.0 0.8

Π~6
~50% of mass in wire cores at R0
K=0.2, τ = 0.97 (Magpie)

Mass fraction

0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0
K=0.7, τ =0.7 (Z ?)

~50% of mass is inside the array

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Radius

Implosion phase:
Snowplough-like implosion of the distributed mass Stabilisation by density profile Does all mass participate in the implosion?

22
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Axial non-uniformity of the ablation rate
Axial modulation of the ablation rate is responsible for existence of trailing mass in wire array Z-pinches

1MA MAGPIE

20MA Z (SNL)

Process of wire ablation is the same for 1MA and 20MA currents
23
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Transition to the implosion phase
Axial modulation of ablation rate
Laser probing (Al, N=16)

formation of “breaks” in the wires
XUV images (Cu, N=8)

precursor

Imploding current sheath, formed by a number of “magnetic bubbles”

24
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Snowplough-like implosion in W arrays
Laser probing of 32 x 4 µm tungsten wire array

Optical density (a.u.)

200 150 100 initial array diameter 50 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8

Optical density (a.u.)

250

precursor

200 150 100 50

imploding plasma piston

precursor

initial array diameter 0 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8

Radius (mm)

Radius (mm)

Implosion of current sheath through the plasma pre-fill
25
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Snowplough implosion phase
Two possible implosion scenarios:
No current through the gaps Trailing mass Current re-strike All mass implodes
8 0-D

32 x 15µm Al array on MAGPIE
implosion trajectory
experiment streak x-ray: outer inner

Radius (mm)

6 4 2 0 100

mass fraction in the piston: 0% 10% 60%

60% 10%

Imploding sheath on end-on X-ray images

150

200

250

300

350

time (ns)

ρ(r) from “rocket” model Initial piston mass is adjusted to fit implosion trajectory ~40% of array mass is left behind
26
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Snowplough implosion phase on Z facility
Density profile from the ablation model:
ρ ( r, t ) =
8π R 0 r V
2

Radiation power from the inelastically accreted plasma: P(t ) = 1 dm dr 2 ⋅ ( ) ∝ ρ (r , t ) ⋅ (V p − Vabl ) 3 2 dt dt
100

μ0

2 abl

⋅ [ I (t −

R0 − r 2 )] Vabl

density (mg/cc)

6 4 2 0 0

Density profile along implosion trajectory

10 Radius (mm)

Vabl = 1.45x107 cm/s t0 = 71.4ns

Vabl = 1.45x107 cm/s Vpiston = Vabl

5
Shot674nf rpeak R0D rad

1
P_exp
P_model

0.1 0.01

0

2

4

6

8

10

60

80 100 120 140 time (ns)

60

80 100 120 140

Radius (mm)

time (ns)

~35% of array mass is left behind

The “foot” of the X-ray pulse is produced by the snowplow radiation
M. Cuneo et al., PRE 2005

27
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Power (TW)

10

Expansion of precursor during the implosion phase
Equilibrium radius of precursor during wire ablation phase:
Kinetic pressure of plasma flow is equal to the precursor thermal pressure

Pkin =

Vabl dm ⋅ 2πR p dt

E=

3 2 ( Z + 1)πR p niTl 2

Pth = ( Z + 1)niT =

2 E ⋅ 2 3 πR p l

Equilibrium precursor radius:

R=

4 E ⋅ 3 V ⋅ l ⋅ dm abl dt

M. Cuneo et al., PRE 2005

Heating of precursor by the snowplow radiation leads to increase of equilibrium radius

dR dE ∝ = F ⋅ (1 − α ) ⋅ Qrad dt dt

28
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Implosion and stagnation phase
XUV images (32x10μm Al)
X-ray peak

Laser probing

Transition from small λ modulation on wires to the global m=0 mode with λ ~2mm (Al) Fraction of mass is left behind, and it is gradually reducing with time Significant fraction of mass is left behind even at the time of the X-ray peak Development of m=1 mode after the peak of X-ray pulse

29
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Implosion and stagnation phase
XUV images (32x10μm Al)
X-ray peak

X-ray signals

Expansion of precursor during the implosion phase Start of the main X-ray pulse at ~time of the current sheath collision with precursor Fast electrons (~100keV e-beam) during the X-ray pulse phase
X-ray >10keV

30
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Spatial structure of stagnated pinch (MAGPIE)
Axially resolved X-ray spectrum (Al) Correlation between positions of “hot spots” and the most pronounced m=0 structures in the trailing plasma

Al K-shell spectral lines Continuum radiation from localised “hot spots” Similar “hot spots” emitting continuum radiation were observed on Z [Sinars et al., JQSRT, in press]
31
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Spatial structure of stagnated pinch (Z)
X-ray image of W array on Z
[Deeney et al., PRL 1998]

Radiography of W wire array on Z
[Sinars et al., PRL 2004]

The spatial structure of the stagnated pinch could be related to the axial distribution of the trailing mass?
Pinch diameter ~1.5mm

32
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Trailing mass at the time of the radiation pulse
X-ray peak

Laser probing

X-ray image
X-ray peak

Diameter of Xray emitting region is a small fraction of the plasma diameter

~10 -30% of mass is trailing at time of X-ray peak gradual clearing of trailing throughout the X-ray pulse mass

Trailing mass on Z (Cuneo et al. PRE 05)

Trailing mass could prevent efficient delivery of current (magnetic energy) to the radiating pinch
33
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Trailing mass at the time of the radiation pulse
X-ray peak

Laser probing

X-ray image
X-ray peak

Diameter of Xray emitting region is a small fraction of the plasma diameter

~10 -30% of mass is trailing at time of X-ray peak gradual clearing of trailing throughout the X-ray pulse mass

Secondary implosions could act as a mechanism transporting magnetic energy to stagnated pinch

Trailing mass could prevent efficient delivery of current (magnetic energy) to the radiating pinch
34
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Dynamic modes of nested wire arrays
Plasma shell

Model of two plasma shells:
• Mitigation of R-T instability by the inner shell • X-ray pulse at the strike

3-D reality:
• No current in the inner array • Initial array transparency > 99% • Interpenetration of the arrays and implosion due to fast transfer of current to the inner array
Wires
Davis et al., APL 1997, Deeney et al., PRL 1998, Terry et al. PRL 1999, Lebedev et al., PRL 2000, Deeney et al., PRL 2004, Cuneo et al PRL 2005 35
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Current division in nested wire arrays
Inductive current division
Array inductance Mutual inductance

Larr =

μ0 h R Rarr 1 (ln ret + ln ) Rarr N rwire ⋅ N 2π

M=

μ0 h R (ln ret ) Rarr 2π

Current fraction in the inner array

I inner ( Lout − M ) Ro ) = ∝ ln( I total ( Lout + Lin − 2 M ) rwire ⋅ N

For large wire number arrays (e.g. on Z) only a small fraction of total current (~2%) should be in the inner array For arrays with N~16 (e.g. on MAGPIE) current fraction is ~ 20% Resistivity could play a role in the current division
A. Velikovich et al., PoP 2002

36
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Nested wire arrays operating in a current switching mode
Current pulse through the inner array is suppressed

6 current (kA) current in inner array

6% of total current

4

2 0

0

10

20

30

40

50

time (ns)

Current pulse through the inner array is controlled by the phase transitions in the wires of outer and then inner arrays Small core size of the inner array wires Inner array retain high transparency (~98%)
Lebedev et al., PRL 2000, Bland et al, PoP 2003

37
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Nested wire arrays operating in a current switching mode
No momentum transfer at “strike”
Trajectory and the X-ray pulse
8

radius (mm)

nested
4

sinlge array
0

PCD (a.u.)

Current from the sheath switches into the inner array at “strike” Decay of snowplough emission, plasma piston coasts to the axis
Ablation phase of the inner array after current pulse [Cuneo et al., PRL 2005] Interaction radiation pulse in talk by M. Cuneo

single array
10 5 0 150

nested array
200 250 300

time (ns)

38
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Nested wire arrays offer control of the radiation pulse shape
Different current division between the outer and the inner array affects the X-ray pulse shape
Implosion trajectories
0.8 Radius (cm) 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 experiment: single array I = 100% (single array) experiment: nested array

X- ray pulses
radius (mm)
c
1.0

Effect of inner array radius on X-ray pulse shape
8 6 4 2 0
pcd1s0726 pcd1s0802

b current (MA) current

X-ray PCD
3

0-D, 100% current transfer

PCD (a.u.)

2 0.5

stagnation strike precursor
1 0

single array

nested

0.8 Radius (cm) 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 100 Iin = 22% Iin = 35% 150 200 time (ns) 250 I = 100% (single array) Iout = 78% Iout = 65%

d
PCD (a.u.)
2

a

time (ns) nested array

PCD (a.u.)

0.0

10 5 0
pcd3s0802 pcd3s0830

nested Rin=4mm

PCD (a.u.)

single array
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

300

1

nested Rin=2mm

0 150

200

250

300

time (ns)

39
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Some “hot” topics (very subjective)
“Optimal” wire number Effect of electric field polarity on plasma formation Non-MHD effects? Effects of turbulence on plasma resistivity?

40
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Effect of wire number on X-ray power
Rise-time of the X-ray pulse for Al and W arrays Expected scaling of Vabl with wire number for Z conditions
3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0
N=600 N=120 N=300

Change in the density profile along the implosion trajectory
6

Vabl (107 cm/s)

density (mg/cc)

f(x) = 2.2*(1-exp(-x/3.4))
N=50

5 4 3 2 1 0 0 2

V=0.8, t_0=61.6ns V=1.0, t_0=65.1ns V=1.2, t_0=68.1ns V=1.45, t_0=71.5ns V=2.2, t_0=80ns

0.8 1 1.2 1.45 2.2

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

4

6

8

10

gap / core size

radius (mm)

Optimal wire number in wire array implosions:
• at large gaps – improvement with wire number due to statistics of uncorrelated perturbations
Mazarakis et al., Pl. Dev. Oper. 2005

• small gaps – degradation due to less stabilisation of the R-T by the density profile

41
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Non-MHD or “initial conditions” effects?

The wires in the array should have the same current. However, the top and the bottom halves show very different dynamics!

The reason for this appears to be in the sign of the radial electric field on the wires

42
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Effect of polarity of the radial electric field
The polarity of the radial electric field changes in the middle of the “long” array
Long single array Electric field in “long” array

“Standard” array: Er <0 “Long” array:

8mm
80

Distance (mm)

Er <0 at the top Er >0 at the bottom half Difference in: •time of plasma formation •core size •ablation rate (Vabl) •implosion time The half with Er>0 behaves as a standard array (in which Er<0) !?
43

Anode MITL Holes in electrodes

60

40

20

-1

-0.5

0 0

0.5

1

Electric Field (AU)

S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Effect of polarity of the radial electric field
The polarity of the radial electric field changes in the middle of the “long” array

Laser probing

High resolution XUV image

Later “breakage” of the wires and later start of the implosion for the top half of the array Different ablation rate:
Standard / bottom half top half

Size of the wire core shadows:
Standard array 300-350μm “Long” array bottom half ~350μm top half ~100μm

Vabl ~15cm/μs

Vabl ~40cm/μs
44

S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Axial plasma flow: two-fluid MHD?
MAGPIE

Z

Plasma has an axial velocity component (from cathode to anode), especially on the outward side of the wires Is this related to the mechanism responsible for the axial modulation of ablation rate?
45
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

X-ray pulse: kinetic energy or current convergence?
Configuration with post-convolute transfers a fraction of current from the wires into precursor column, leading to delay in implosion
Total current
total current (MA)
1.0
Id0117 Id0121

Different current left in the wires different array mass to keep the same implosion time different kinetic energy ( x2) The same current after stagnation and the same X-ray pulse
20
pcd2s1013

Id0128

0.5

0.0

current on axis (MA)

0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
4

Precursor current
Iin0117 Iin0121 Iin0128

15 10

pcd2s0921

m=1 instability in the precursor

X-ray pulse
PCD (a.u.)
pcd1s0117 pcd1s0121 pcd1s0128

5 0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 220 240 260 280 300
pcd5s1013 pcd5s0921

pcd (a.u.)

3 2 1 0

0

100

200 time (ns)

300

time (ns)

46
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Trailing mass at the time of the radiation pulse
X-ray peak

Laser probing

X-ray image
X-ray peak

Diameter of Xray emitting region is a small fraction of the plasma diameter

~10 -30% of mass is trailing at time of X-ray peak gradual clearing of trailing throughout the X-ray pulse mass

Trailing mass on Z (Cuneo et al. PRE 05)

Trailing mass could prevent efficient delivery of current (magnetic energy) to the radiating pinch
47
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

What limits the current flowing through the trailing mass? For Spitzer resistivity all current should remain in the trailing mass
• High non-uniformity of the trailing mass • Anomalous resitivity – Ion Acoustic Turbulence: The following conditions should be satisfied
(see e.g. Ryutov et al., RMP, 72, 167 (2000)):

1. Current velocity should exceed critical velocity:

For typical Z array
(m0 =6mg, tungsten)

u > ucrit = ξ ⋅ Cs

(ξ ~ 1 − 2)

If mtr / m0 = 10% u > ucrit for Itr > 3 MA

2. Ion sound speed should exceed ion thermal speed by, e.g., factor of 2:
Cs = ZT e + T i > 2⋅ mi 2T i mi

Te > 7

Ti Z

For high Z plasma satisfied even for Te=Ti
48

S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Is I.A.T. responsible for sub-quadratic power scaling?
Only the current flowing through the radiating pinch is useful!
Current density in the trailing mass is saturated at the threshold of ion acoustic turbulence:

j = ene ⋅ ucrit = eneξ ⋅ Cs
Ohm’s law with Ion Acoustic Turbulence

Total trailing current is proportional to the trailing mass:

I tr = ∫ j (r )2πrdr =

ξC s Ze
Am p

⋅ mtr
2.5 2.0 400
R=2cm

Magnetic energy delivered to the array axis:

1.5 1.0 0.5

Power (TW) (τ=5ns)

Energy (MJ)

0-D R=10mm R=20mm Exp R=10mm Exp R=20mm

R=1cm 200

W=

R μ0 h ⋅ ( I 0 − I tr ) 2 ln( 0 ) 4π Rp

Trailing plasma parameters: A =183, Z =8, T =30eV, α = 0.1, ξ = 1.1

Z
0.0 0 5 10 15 20 25

ZR
0 30

current (MA)

49
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

Some other configurations of wire arrays
Radiatively cooled supersonic plasma jets: “hydrodynamic” “magnetic”

50
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

The “dynamic” life story of wire array Z-pinches

Ablation of wire cores

1.0
l ona cor a sm pla

Trailing mass

Radius

0-D

0.5

Snowplow-like final implosion

Precursor pinch

Stagnation

0.0

0.5

1.0

time
51
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

References used in this talk
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. D. D. Ryutov, M. S. Derzon, M. K. Matzen, “The physics of fast Z pinches”, Rev. Mod. Physics 72, 167 (2000) M. K. Matzen, Phys. Plasmas 4, 1519 (1997) T. W. L. Sanford et al, - “Improved Symmetry Greatly Increases X-Ray Power from Wire-Array Z-Pinches”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 5063 (1996) M. K. Matzen et al., - “Pulsed-power-driven high energy density physics and inertial confinement fusion research”, Phys. Plasmas 12, 055503 (2005) F.S. Felber, N. Rostoker, “Kink and displacement instabilities in imploding wire arrays”, Phys. Fluids 24 1049 (1981) M.E. Cuneo et al., - “Characteristics and Scaling of Tungsten-Wire-Array Z-Pinch Implosion Dynamics at 20 MA”, Phys. Rev., E71, 046406 (2005). S.V. Lebedev et al., - “Physics of Wire Array Z-Pinch implosions: Experiments at Imperial College”, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 47, A91 (2005) S.V Lebedev. et al., – “Snowplow-like behaviour in the implosion phase of wire array Z pinches” , Phys. Plasmas, 9, 2293 (2002) S.V. Lebedev et al., - “Effect of discrete wires on the implosion dynamics of wire array Z pinches” , Phys. Plasmas, 8, 3734 (2001)

10. C. Deeney et al., - ” Enhancement of X-Ray Power from a Z Pinch Using Nested-Wire Arrays”, Phys. Rev. Letters, 81, 4883 (1998) 11. S.V., Lebedev et al.,– “Plasma formation and the implosion phase of wire array Z-pinch experiments”, Laser and Particle Beams, 19, 355 (2001) 12. D. B. Sinars et al., - ” Mass-Profile and Instability-Growth Measurements for 300-Wire Z-Pinch Implosions Driven by 14–18 MA”, Phys. Rev. Letters, 93, 145002-1 (2004) 13. D. B. Sinars et al., “Measurements of the mass distribution and instability growth for wire-array Z-pinch implosions driven by 14–20 MA”, Phys. Plasmas, 12, 056303 (2005)

52
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

References used in this talk
14. A. L. Velikovich, I. V. Sokolov, A. A. Esaulov, - ” Perfectly conducting incompressible fluid model of a wire array implosion”, Phys. Plasmas, 9, 1366 (2002) 15. D.B. Sinars et al., - ” Measurements of K-shell Ar spectra from z -pinch dynamic hohlraum experiments made using a focusing spectrometer with spatial resolution”, JQSRT – (in press) 16. E. M. Waisman et al., - “Wire array implosion characteristics from determination of load inductance on the Z pulsedpower accelerator”, Phys. Plasmas, 11, 2009 (2004) 17. J. Davis, N. A. Gondarenko, A. L. Velikovich, - “Fast commutation of high current in double wire array Z-pinch loads”, Appl. Phys. Letters, 70, 170 (1997) 18. R. E. Terry et al., - “Current Switching and Mass Interpenetration Offer Enhanced Power from Nested-Array Z Pinches”, Phys. Rev. Letters, 83, 4305 (1999) 19. S.N. Bland et al., – “Nested wire array z-pinch experiments operating in the current transfer mode”, Phys. Plasmas, 10, 1100 (2003) 20. C. Deeney et al., - “Spectroscopic Diagnosis of Nested-Wire-Array Dynamics and Interpenetration at 7 MA”, Phys. Rev. Letters, 93, 155001-1 (2004) 21. M. E. Cuneo et al., - “Direct Experimental Evidence for Current-Transfer Mode Operation of Nested Tungsten Wire Arrays at 16–19 MA”, Phys. Rev. Letters, 94, 225003-1 (2005) 22. S.V. Lebedev et al., - “Effect of core-corona plasma structure on seeding of instabilities in wire array z-pinches”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 98 (2000) 23. C. A. Coverdale et al., - “Optimal Wire-Number Range for High X-Ray Power in Long-Implosion-Time Aluminum Z Pinches”, Phys. Rev. Letters, 88, 065001-1 (2002) 24. M. G. Mazarakis et al., - “Tungsten wire number dependence of the implosion dynamics at the Z-accelerator”, Plasma Devices and Operations, 13, 157 (2005)

53
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005

References used in this talk
25. C. Deeney, C.A. Coverdale, M.R. Douglas, - “A review of long-implosion-time z pinches as efficient and high-power radiation sources”, Laser and Particle Beams 19, 497 (2001) 26. S.V. Lebedev et al., - “Two different modes of nested wire array Z pinch implosions” - Phys. Rev. Lett., 84 1708 (2000) 27. S. N. Bland et al., – “Use of linear wire array Z-pinches to examine plasma dynamics in high magnetic fields”, Phys. Plasmas, 11, 4911 (2004) 28. S.V. Lebedev et al., - “The dynamics of wire array z-pinch implosions”, Phys.Plasmas, 6, 2016 (1999) 29. W. A. Stygar et al., - “X-ray emission from z pinches at 107 A: Current scaling, gap closure, and shot-to-shot fluctuations”, Phys. Rev. E 69, 046403 (2004) 30. V. V. Aleksandrov et al., - “Dynamics of Heterogeneous Liners with Prolonged Plasma Creation”, Plasma Physics Reports, 27, 89 (2001) 31. I. K. Aivazov, V. D. Vikharev, G. S. Volkov, L. B. Nikandrov, V. P. Smirnov, and V. Ya Tsarfin, JETP Lett. 45, 28 (1987) 32. Bekhtev M B et al, Sov. Phys.—JETP 68 955 (1989) 33. C. Deeney et al., - “Power enhancement by increasing the initial array radius and wire number of tungsten Z pinches”, Phys. Rev. E 56, 5945 (1997)

54
S.V. Lebedev, Implosion dynamics of wire array Z-pinches. Z-pinch mini-course, Monterey, CA, June 19, 2005