Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

26
1 Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention D. V. Rose* Voss Scientific, LLC A. E. Robson, J. D. Sethian, and J. L. Giuliani Naval Research Laboratory High Average Power Laser Program Workshop Naval Research Laboratory, Building 226 Auditorium October 30 and 31, 2007 h a special acknowledgement to Chris Mostrom for continuing work on 3D graph

description

Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention. D. V. Rose* Voss Scientific, LLC A. E. Robson, J. D. Sethian, and J. L. Giuliani Naval Research Laboratory High Average Power Laser Program Workshop Naval Research Laboratory, Building 226 Auditorium October 30 and 31, 2007. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

Page 1: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

1

Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

D. V. Rose*Voss Scientific, LLC

A. E. Robson, J. D. Sethian, and J. L. GiulianiNaval Research Laboratory

High Average Power Laser Program WorkshopNaval Research Laboratory, Building 226 Auditorium

October 30 and 31, 2007

*With a special acknowledgement to Chris Mostrom for continuing work on 3D graphics!

Page 2: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

2

Status report on computational modeling for Magnetic Intervention (MI):

• Electromagnetic analysis of the Pechacek experiment is essentially complete.– We are continuing to use this analysis to explore other

computational models suitable for efficient EM analysis of IFE-scale MI physics.

• Ion orbit analysis of the conventional MI concept has indicated that the escaping ion “beams” in both the ring and point cusps result in very high current densities.– No integrated, feasible solution of this ion-stopping/materials

problem is known at this time.

• Ion orbit analysis of the OCTACUSP MI concept (A. Robson) is underway (and is the main subject of this presentation):– Discussed in the previous presentation by A. Robson.

Page 3: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

3

EMHD Simulation of “Pechacek” Experiment Complete:

• The essential physical character of the experiment reproduced in a 2D, large-scale simulation.

• This model is NOT directly extendable to IFE chamber-scale problems.

Page 4: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

4

To “zeroth-order”, orbit calculations can be used to conduct relevant design studies for

ions leaving the chamber:• We are continuing

to develop new models that should lessen the discrepancies and handle the IFE chamber spatial & temporal scales.

• The Pechacek experiment will continue to be the test case for all new algorithms.

t (s) t (s)

Page 5: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

5

EMHD vs Orbit Calculation: Ring cusp width and transverse velocities compared:

Ion channel “width” as a function of time at r=29 cm in the escape cusp.

Ion channel transverse momentum (vz) at r=29 cm.

Page 6: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

6

Orbit Analysis of the “duckbill” dumps shows a narrow and sharply peaked ion deposition pattern:

• The duckbill ion dump design does NOT look feasible for the ring cusp.

• “5th” coil designs to spread the escaping ion ring have not been successful.

-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 1500

50

100

150 5 s 25 s 50 s

Ion

Ene

rgy

@ r=

890

cm (J

/cm

2 )

z (cm)

HeliumDensity at

25 s

Page 7: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

7

The resulting time-integratedenergy deposition is a littlebroader than the 4-coil case.

5-coil design used to explore the energy

separation of the ring-cusp ions:

Page 8: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

8

OCTACUSP Primary Coil Configurations Include:Triangles: Circles: Conformal Triangles:

Page 9: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

9

|B| contour levels at z=0 plane illustrating magnetic void at center of trap (left). 3D representation of a

single |B| iso-surface also shown (right).|B|~0.1T iso-surfaces

The long tube-like extensions away from the center of the chamber at X-type neutral lines.

Page 10: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

10

Magnetic topology of a single “tube” or

X-type neutral line:

Magnetic field at x=200 cm plane:

Chamber wall, r=5 m

Page 11: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

11

3D view illustrates that the magnetic field lines extend through the eight solenoids:

Sample streamlines without conductor boundaries:

Sample streamlines with conductor boundaries:

Page 12: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

12

View from “inside” the chamber: “outside” view

3D streamlines can aid in the analysis by looking for critical field line intercept points:

Page 13: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

13

Sample Ion Orbit Calculation:

Oct17.lsp

• 5-meter radius vacuum chamber• Four triangular main “coils” mapped

onto a 6-meter radius sphere– each triangle carrys 6 MA– Allows 1-meter for neutral shielding

• Eight 1.1-meter radius solenoids along ion drift tubes– Drift tubes have an inner diameter of 0.9

meters– Solenoids composed of 11 individual rings,

each carrying 100 kA• Only 3.0 MeV Helium ions (4He++)

followed here.

Page 14: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

14

Individual particle and density plots are less helpful here:

Particle positions anddensities at 5 s:

Page 15: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

15

Charge deposition on the chamber surfaces (time-integrated) is being used to optimize the magnetic

field topology:

All surface cells plotted Here, only surface cells with non-zerocharge deposition are plotted.

Page 16: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

16

Views of the charge deposition in a single octant illustrate the three-fold symmetry in the escaping

ion distribution

For this case, about40% of the ions reach theends of the drift tubes.About 2% are deposited at the neutral line points,and 58% are in the flowerpetals radiating out from the entrance to the drift tubes.

Page 17: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

17

Target planes along the drift tubes are used to diagnose the escaping ion beams ( time-integrated).

Lsp uses combinatorialgeometry of basic objectsto build physical spaces and material boundaries.

Target planes alongone drift tube are shown.

Page 18: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

18

3D targets in drift tubes indicate a focused ion beam*

At r = 10 m:

* Additional diagnostics, not shown here, also indicate an expanding ion beam envelope.

Page 19: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

19

Issues/Work-in-Progress:• Tapered X-type neutral line physics (including

diamagnetic effects) needs to be addressed.

• Full “Perkins” ion spectrum needs to be examined once the current design exercise is completed.

• Lead vapor dE/dx mass-stopping analysis for the ions (realistic energy loading, radiation, thermal cycles, etc.).

• The eight-fold symmetry of the OCTACUSP design adds complexity to the plasma/magnetic-field interaction analysis. (A full 3D inertialess-electron dynamic EM model is still being explored.)

Page 20: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

20

Summary:• Issues with the “conventional” MI chamber (with

2 or 4 coil system with ring and point cusps) are forcing consideration of other magnetic field topologies.

• Bertie’s OCTACUSP design:– preserves the spherical symmetry inherent in direct-

drive systems– minimizes the chamber surface area for ion escape

ports (~5%)• Other coil configurations are possible (nested

triangles, etc.)

Page 21: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

21

Backup slides:

Page 22: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

22

Oct16.lsp

1-m radius solenoids at each point cusp, 2 kA/cm (11 rings each carrying x MA)5-meter radius chamberConformal Triangles on 6-m radius sphere, 3 MA3 MeV He++ ion orbits followed

Show magnetic field topologyIon orbitsSample density plotEnergy deposition on surfaces.

Page 23: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

23

Cutaway view of an iso-surface of |B| illustrates location of the neutral lines:

|B|=0.6 T iso-surfaces.

Neutral lines (6)lie along thecoordinate axesin this orientation,and terminatenear the chamberwall.

Page 24: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

24

Plots of the ion charge deposition on

conducting surfaces are used to guide the design

of the magnetic fields. Ion Energy Delivery:~20% in 8 tube ends~4% in 6 neutral line points~76% in the chamber wall (flower petals)

Page 25: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

25

3D targets in drift tubes indicate a focused ion beam*

R = 6 m

R = 10 m

* Additional diagnostics, not shown here, also indicate an oscillating ion beam envelope.

Page 26: Computational Modeling of Magnetic Intervention

26

Particle escape orbits are complex in the OCTACUSP magnetic field:

-200-100

0

100

200

-200-100

0

100

200

-200

-100

0

100

200

-200-100

0

100

200-200

-1000

100200

-200

-100

0

100

200

0 500 1000 1500 20000

50

100

150

200

radi

us (c

m)

time (ns)

Sample orbits for 3 MeV particles launchedfrom the origin at differentinitial angles.Escape radius is 200 cm(the radius of the conductingspherical boundary).