4.4 Article

Dynamics of implosion phase of modified plasma focus studied via laser interferometry and electrical measurements

期刊

PHYSICS OF PLASMAS
卷 29, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/5.0098124

关键词

-

资金

  1. Grant Agency of the Czech Republic [19-02545S]
  2. Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sports of the Czech Republic [CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000778]
  3. Czech Technical University [SGS22/161/OHK3/3T/13]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigates the relationship between implosion dynamics and electrical parameters on the PF-1000 facility, and concludes the proportion of current flowing through the current sheath based on experiments and analysis.
Dynamics of the implosion of the dense plasma focus play an essential role in converting electrical energy into the kinetic energy of the current sheath and subsequent production of accelerated electrons, ions, hard X-ray, and neutron emission. This paper presents the analysis of the implosion parameters, such as the implosion velocity and imploding mass, coupled with electrical parameters observed on the PF-1000 facility with a modified electrode system. The first two parameters are based on the 16-frame Mach-Zehnder interferometer, which provides the spatial distribution of electron density in a time sequence. Measurement of the total current, current derivative, and voltage enables us to evaluate the total inductance and kinetic energy driven by the capacitor bank. Then comparing the inductances and kinetic energies evaluated from the interferograms and electrical waveforms can provide more precise information on the current flowing in the imploding sheath. We present a possible way to deal with the fact that only part of the total current flows through the imploding layer. With the supposition that the rest of the current flows close to the insulator, we conclude that roughly 70% of the total current flows through the pinch, which is in good agreement with an input parameter of the Lee model, for example.

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