4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Analysis of the National Ignition Facility ignition hohlraum energetics experiments

Journal

PHYSICS OF PLASMAS
Volume 18, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/1.3562552

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A series of 40 experiments on the National Ignition Facility (NIF) [E. I. Moses et al., Phys. Plasmas 16, 041006 (2009)] to study energy balance and implosion symmetry in reduced-and full-scale ignition hohlraums was shot at energies up to 1.3 MJ. This paper reports the findings of the analysis of the ensemble of experimental data obtained that has produced an improved model for simulating ignition hohlraums. Last year the first observation in a NIF hohlraum of energy transfer between cones of beams as a function of wavelength shift between those cones was reported [P. Michel et al., Phys. Plasmas 17, 056305 (2010)]. Detailed analysis of hohlraum wall emission as measured through the laser entrance hole (LEH) has allowed the amount of energy transferred versus wavelength shift to be quantified. The change in outer beam brightness is found to be quantitatively consistent with LASNEX [G. B. Zimmerman and W. L. Kruer, Comments Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 2, 51 (1975)] simulations using the predicted energy transfer when possible saturation of the plasma wave mediating the transfer is included. The effect of the predicted energy transfer on implosion symmetry is also found to be in good agreement with gated x-ray framing camera images. Hohlraum energy balance, as measured by x-ray power escaping the LEH, is quantitatively consistent with revised estimates of backscatter and incident laser energy combined with a more rigorous non-local-thermodynamic-equilibrium atomic physics model with greater emissivity than the simpler average-atom model used in the original design of NIF targets. (C) 2011 American Institute of Physics. [doi:10.1063/1.3562552]

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available