Diagnostics and Insights from Current waveform and Modelling of Plasma Focus S Lee Institute for Plasma Focus Studies (www.plasmafocus.net) Nanyang Technological University, National Institute of Education, Singapore 637616 INTI University College, 71800 Nilai, Malaysia.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Diagnostics and Insights from Current waveform and Modelling of Plasma FocusS LeeInstitute for Plasma Focus Studies(www.plasmafocus.net)Nanyang Technological University, National Institute of Education, Singapore 637616INTI University College, 71800 Nilai, Malaysia
Keynote address: IWPDA, Singapore 2 July 2009
- Scaling laws for radiation & neutrons
-An explanation of neutron saturation
in plasma focus
(4th from left)
J W Mather
(3rd from left, front row)Introduction: Some landmarks: Plasma Focus independently invented, early 1960’s by
1997 ICDMP Plasma Focus”- a two-dimensional fluid model(International Centre for Dense Magnetised Plasmas) established in Warsaw-now operates one of biggest plasma focus in the world, the PF1000
measuring all aspects of the plasma focus: -imaging for dynamics
-interferometry for densities
-spectroscopy for temperatures
-neutrons, radiation yields, MeV particles
Result: commonly accepted picture today that mechanisms within the focus pinch :
- micro- & MHD instabilities
-acceleration by turbulence
- 'anomalous' plasma resistance
are important to plasma focus behaviour, and
neutron yields are non-thermonuclear in origin
Summarised in: Bernard A, Bruzzone H, Choi P, Chuaqui H, Gribkov V, Herrera J, Hirano K, Krejci A, Lee S, Luo C 1998 “Scientific status of plasma focus research” J Moscow Physical Society 8 93-170
Energy density constancy.
The smallest sub-kJ plasma focus and the largest MJ plasma focus have practically:
- the same energy density (per unit mass)
- the same temperatures,
- the same speeds.
Plasma volumes & lifetimes; increase with anode radius ‘a’
pinch radius ~a
pinch length ~a
pinch lifetime ~a
radius a~ current I
Derived from model scaling, based on observation of constancy of speed factor across plasma focus devices
HV Plasma Focus”- a two-dimensional fluid model
30 mF, 15 kV
Dynamics in the Plasma Focus(This animation courtesy Rajdeep Singh Rawat)
Axial Accelaration Phase
Inverse Pinch Phase
z(t) is the time varying axial position of the piston.
rp is the time-varying radial position of the imploding CS (also called the magnetic piston) zf is the time-varying length of the elongating radially imploding structure.
Whenever an inductance changes with time, a quantity of 0.5(dL/dt)I2 is dissipated non-conservatively as power to the system. The quantity half Ldot (we call dL/dt as Ldot) is an electrical RESISTANCE due to motion.
Hence we call the quantity half Ldot as DR, dynamic resistance.
DRa= Half Ldot= 10-7ln(c)(dz/dt))~7mOhm; for c=b/a=2 and axial speed of 105m/s.
Depends on radius ratio ‘c’ & endaxial speed dz/dt
(Note ‘c’ & dz/dt are about thesame for small and largeplasma focus machines)
Does not depend on size of plasma focus,
Hence DRa is the same for smallest to largest plasma focus machines.
DRr=Half Ldot= 10-7[ ln(b/rp)(dzf/dt)-(zf/rp)(drp/dt) ]~100 mOhm
Depends on speeds; also on ‘c’
Does not depend on size of Plasma Focus
It turns out that: Constancy of DRa causes current saturation leading to neutron saturation:- more of this in Part 2 of talk.
accounts for all effects affecting mass swept up (structure inclination, porosity, boundary layer etc)
accounts for all effects affecting current flowing in the plasma (current leakage to backwall, shunting and fragmenting, CS inclination etc), defines the fraction of Itotal effectively driving the magnetic piston
accounts for all effects affecting mass swept up (structure inclination, porosity, axial mass streaming etc)
accounts for all effects affecting current flowing in the plasma (current leakage to backwall, CS bifurcation, current constriction/disruption etc) defines the fraction of Itotal effectively driving the magnetic piston
We fit the computed Itotal waveform to the measured because the Itotal waveform is the one usually measured. Once the Itotal waveform is fitted by adjusting the 4 model parameters, the Iplasma waveform is also implicitly fitted.
Procedure to operate the code:
Step 1: Configure the specific plasma focus,
The 5-Point Fit:
are in reasonable (typically very good) fit with the measured Itotal trace.
- (4) the computed slope and
- (5) the depth of the dip
agree with the measured Itotal waveform.
Computed Itotal waveform fitted to measured Plasma Focus”- a two-dimensional fluid model
Computed Tube voltage
Computed Itotal & Iplasma
Computed axial trajectory & speed
Diagnostics-Time histories of dynamics, energies and plasma properties computed by the codeLast adjustment, when the computed Itotal trace is judged to be reasonably well fitted in all 5 features, computed times histories are presented (NX2 operated at 11 kV, 2.6 Torr neon)
piston Plasma Focus”- a two-dimensional fluid model
Numerical experiments using the model have been carried out systematically over wide ranges of energy; optimizing pressure, anode length and radius, to obtain scaling laws:
Neutron yield, Yn:
For neon soft x-rays:
Our experience: the laws scaling yield with Ipinch are
robust and more reliable than the others.
Illustrating Y Plasma Focus”- a two-dimensional fluid modeln ‘saturation’ observed in numerical experiments (small black crosses) compared to measurements on various machines (larger coloured crosses)
Small PF-400J; 0.4kJ 28 kV 6.6 Torr D2 Plasma Focus”- a two-dimensional fluid model
~300ns risetime; ~ 20ns current dip of <5%
End axial speed: 10cm/us
Large PF1000 (0.5 MJ) 27 kV 3.5 Torr D2
~8 us risetime; ~2 us current dip of 35%
End axial speed: 10cm/usComparing Itotal for small & large plasma focus
Axial Axial Ipeak
PF Z0 =(L0/C0)1/2 DR0 dominance
Small 100 mW7 mWZ0 ~V0/Z0
Large 1 mW7 mWDR0 ~V0/DR0
As E0 is increased by increasing C0, with voltage kept around tens of kV, Z0 continues to decrease and Ipeak tends towards asymptotic value of V0/DR0
I & large plasma focus- before Ipeak vs E0 from DR0 analysis compared to model simulation
Model simulation gives higher Ipeak due to a ‘current overshoot effect’ which lifts the value of Ipeak before the axial DR0 fully sets in
Ipeak vs E0 on log-log scale
Confirming that Ipeak scaling tends to saturate before 1 MJConfirming Ipeak saturation is due to constancy of DR0
We have shown that: constancy of DR & large plasma focus- before I0 leads to current ‘saturation’ as E0 is increased by increasing C0. Tendency to saturate occurs before 1 MJ
From both numerical experiments as well as from accumulated laboratory data
Hence the ‘saturation’ of Ipeak leads to saturation of neutron yield Yn
Possible ways to improve Yn:
- Scaling laws for radiation & neutrons
- Identifying the major factor causing neutron saturation in plasma focus
- Suggest beyond saturation possibilities
Thank You & large plasma focus- before IAcknowledge contributions of S H Saw, Paul Lee, Rajdeep S Rawat, Liu Mahe, Mohamad Akel, Verma Rishi, H Schmidt, S P Moo, Leopoldo Soto, S V Springham & Sharif Al-Hawat to parts of this talk
This Keynote address is mainly based on the following 2008-2009 IPFS Papers :
Optimizing UNU/ICTP PFF Plasma Focus for Neon Soft X-ray Operation
Soft x-ray yield from NX2 plasma focus
S Lee, S H Saw, P Lee and R S RawatSubmitted toPlasma Phys. Control. Fusion (2009)
Numerical experiments on plasma focus neon soft x-ray scaling
Pinch Current and Soft x-ray yield limitation by numerical experiments on Nitrogen Plasma Focus
IWPDA 2009, July 2, NIE Singapore
Consider instantaneous power P delivered to L(t) by a change in L(t)
Induced voltage: V=d(LI)/dt= I(dL/dt)+L(dI/dt)
Hence instantaneous power into L(t): P=VI= I2(dL/dt)+LI(dI/dt)
Consider instantanteous power associated with the inductive energy
Note: PL not the same as P
Difference=P- PL = (½)(dL/dt)I2 is not associated with the inductive energy
Conclusion: Whenever L(t) changes with time, the instantaneous power delivered to L(t) has a component that is not inductive