4.4 Article

Experimental validation of shock propagation through a foam with engineered macro-pores

期刊

PHYSICS OF PLASMAS
卷 28, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/5.0024697

关键词

-

资金

  1. OMEGA Laser Facility operations team at Laboratory for Laser Energetics
  2. National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [89233218CNA000001]
  3. DOE NNSA Office of Experimental Sciences [NA-113]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigates thermonuclear burn physics using engineered macro-pore foam, finding significant effects of the foam on shock wave speed and shape. Experimental and numerical simulation approaches were used to reveal these effects of the foam structure on shock propagation.
The engineered macro-pore foam provides a new way to study thermonuclear burn physics by utilizing capsules containing deuterated (D) foam and filling tritium (T) gas in the engineered macro-pores. The implosion of a thermonuclear capsule filled with an engineered macro-pore foam will be complex due to the interaction of a shock wave with the engineered macro-pores. It is our goal to quantify how substantially complex foam structures affect the shape of shock and bulk shock speed. A cylinder-shape shock tube experiment has been designed and performed at the Omega Laser Facility. In order to examine how a foam structure will affect shock propagation, we performed several tests varying (1) engineered macro-pore size, (2) average foam density, and (3) with/without neopentane (C5H12) gas. X-ray radiographic data indicate that shock speed through engineered macro-pore foams depends strongly on average foam density and less on pore size. Experimental shock propagation data helped guide two numerical simulation approaches: (1) a 2D simulation with homogenizing foams rather than explicitly simulating engineered macro-pores and (2) a 2D toroidal-pore approximation adopting a toroidal-tube geometry to model engineered macro-pores.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据