Semi-hydro-equivalent design and performance extrapolation between 100 kJ-scale and NIF-scale indirect drive implosion

Huasen Zhang; Dongguo Kang; Changshu Wu; Liang Hao; Hao Shen; Shiyang Zou; Shaoping Zhu; Yongkun Ding

doi:10.1063/5.0150343

Matter and Radiation at Extremes, Volume. 9, Issue 1, 015601(2024)

Semi-hydro-equivalent design and performance extrapolation between 100 kJ-scale and NIF-scale indirect drive implosion

Huasen Zhang1...2, Dongguo Kang2,a), Changshu Wu2, Liang Hao2, Hao Shen2, Shiyang Zou2, Shaoping Zhu2 and Yongkun Ding2 |Show fewer author(s)

Author Affiliations

¹Laboratory of Computational Physics, Institute of Applied Physics and Computational Mathematics, Beijing 10088, China

²Institute of Applied Physics and Computational Mathematics, Beijing 10088, China

show less

Figures & Tables(10)

Fig. 1. Normalized laser pulse (a) and capsule radiation drive (b) for the S1.0 and the S0.4 semi-hydro-equivalent implosions. In both (a) and (b), the laser power and time of S0.4 are normalized to those of S1.0, i.e., P_L/0.4² and t/0.4 for S0.4.

Download full size

View in Article

Fig. 2. Comparisons of the normalized shell velocity history (a) and the density profile at peak implosion velocity (b) for the S1.0 and S0.4 semi-hydro-equivalent implosions. In both (a) and (b), the time and space of S0.4 are normalized to those of S1.0.

Download full size

View in Article

Fig. 3. (a) Comparison of normalized P2 radiation asymmetry for the S1.0 and S0.4 hohlraums. (b) Normalized P2 radiation asymmetry used for the semi-hydro-equivalent implosions. The time of S0.4 is normalized to that of S1.0.

Download full size

View in Article

Fig. 4. Comparisons of shell density at nBT for the same scaled P2 radiation asymmetry.

Download full size

View in Article

Fig. 5. YOC_noα vs single mode-perturbation of the ablation surface (a) and the DT/HDC interface (b) for semi-hydro-equivalent implosions.

Download full size

View in Article

Fig. 6. Initial perturbation spectrum in the multimode simulations.

Download full size

View in Article

Fig. 7. Comparisons of shell density at nBT for multimode simulations with (a)–(c) ablation surface perturbation and (d)–(f) interface perturbation.

Download full size

View in Article

Table 1. Comparisons of the 1D parameters and implosion performance between the S1.0 and S0.4 implosions. Here, P_hs and ρR_DT are the neutron-averaged values, which are smaller than the values at stagnation. The GLC factor is calculated by $χ_{no α}^{1 D} = {(0.18 Y_{no α} / M_{DT})}^{0.34} ρ R_{DT}^{0.61}$ according to our simulation database of the indirect drive implosion. The S1.0 and S0.4 semi-hydro-equivalent results are from simulations. The S0.4 fully hydro-equivalent results are obtained by scaling the S1.0 results to S0.4 using the classical hydro-equivalent relations.

View table

View in Article

Table 1. Comparisons of the 1D parameters and implosion performance between the S1.0 and S0.4 implosions. Here, P_hs and ρR_DT are the neutron-averaged values, which are smaller than the values at stagnation. The GLC factor is calculated by $χ_{no α}^{1 D} = {(0.18 Y_{no α} / M_{DT})}^{0.34} ρ R_{DT}^{0.61}$ according to our simulation database of the indirect drive implosion. The S1.0 and S0.4 semi-hydro-equivalent results are from simulations. The S0.4 fully hydro-equivalent results are obtained by scaling the S1.0 results to S0.4 using the classical hydro-equivalent relations.

Scale	S1.0	S0.4 full hydro-equivalence	S0.4 semi-hydro-equivalence
Peak T_r (eV)	302	302	282
HDC thickness (μm)	70	28	30
DT thickness (μm)	56	22.4	22.4
R_in (μm)	854	341.6	341.6
α_F	2.58	2.58	2.59
V_i (km/s)	383	383	383
nBT (ns)	8.21	3.28	3.28
P_hs (Gbars)	189	189	180
ρR_DT (g/cm²)	0.728	0.291	0.282
$Y_{no α}^{1 D}$	9.8 × 10¹⁵	2.5 × 10¹⁴	2.7 × 10¹⁴
$χ_{no α}^{1 D}$	0.888	0.372	0.374

Table 2. Comparisons of YOC_noα for semi-hydro-equivalent implosions.
View table
View in Article
Table 2. Comparisons of YOC_noα for semi-hydro-equivalent implosions.
Perturbation mode: Ablation surface (%) Interface (%)
L = 6–80 L = 6–24 L = 6–80
S1.0, σ = 1.0 72.0 86.9 91.5
S0.4, σ = 1.0 59.0 65.2 82.3
S0.4, σ = 0.4 84.6 88.0 94.8

Table 3. Comparisons of implosion performance between different design strategies. The 2D GLC factor is calculated by $χ_{no α}^{2 D} = χ_{no α}^{1 D} {YOC}_{no α}^{μ}$ with μ = 0.5 based on our simulation database of indirect drive implosions.

View table

View in Article

Table 3. Comparisons of implosion performance between different design strategies. The 2D GLC factor is calculated by $χ_{no α}^{2 D} = χ_{no α}^{1 D} {YOC}_{no α}^{μ}$ with μ = 0.5 based on our simulation database of indirect drive implosions.

Scale	S1.0	S0.4 full hydro-equivalence	S0.4 semi-hydro-equivalence	S0.4 lower V_i	S0.4 higher α_F
α_F	2.58	2.58	2.59	2.60	3.4
V_i (km/s)	383	383	383	353	394
P_hs (Gbars)	189	189	180	153	169
ρR_DT (g/cm²)	0.728	0.291	0.282	0.277	0.258
$Y_{no α}^{1 D}$	9.8 × 10¹⁵	2.5 × 10¹⁴	2.7 × 10¹⁴	1.4 × 10¹⁴	2.6 × 10¹⁴
$χ_{no α}^{1 D}$	0.888	0.372	0.374	0.299	0.351
YOC_abl (%)	72	72	59	72	64
$Y_{no α}^{2 D}$	7.1 × 10¹⁵	1.8 × 10¹⁴	1.6 × 10¹⁴	1.0 × 10¹⁴	1.7 × 10¹⁴
$χ_{no α}^{2 D}$	0.754	0.316	0.287	0.254	0.281

Tools

Get Citation

Copy Citation Text

Huasen Zhang, Dongguo Kang, Changshu Wu, Liang Hao, Hao Shen, Shiyang Zou, Shaoping Zhu, Yongkun Ding. Semi-hydro-equivalent design and performance extrapolation between 100 kJ-scale and NIF-scale indirect drive implosion[J]. Matter and Radiation at Extremes, 2024, 9(1): 015601

Download Citation

EndNote(RIS)BibTex Plain Text

Set citation alerts for article

Save article for my favorites