Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byTaylor Lloyd Modified over 2 years ago

1
Illumination Uniformity Study for the Direct Drive J.-L. Feugeas Centre Lasers Intenses et Applications, Université Bordeaux 1 – CNRS – CEA France 6th Direct Drive and Fast Ignition Workshop Lisbon, 11th–14th May

2
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 2 J. Breil, Ph. Nicolaï, G. Schurtz L. Hallo, M. Olazabal-Loumé, X. Ribeyre Centre Lasers Intenses et Applications, Université Bordeaux 1 - CNRS- CEA, Talence cedex, France Collaborators

3
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 3 Summary A new tool has been developed to provide a nominal configuration of illumination for any direct drive project The code CECLAD has been developed in CELIA to study the direct- drive illumination of any target Several parameters have been studied to optimize the uniformity of illumination - Beam size variation - Beam balance - Beam pointing - Beam centering - Target position A solution of illumination has been proposed to answer to the baseline specification of HIPER

4
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 4 Summary/Conclusions Speckle pattern for each beam

5
CECLAD

6
A tool to study the illumination : various 3D configurations

7
A tool to study the illumination : control parameters of each beams

8
A tool to study the illumination : absorption

9
A tool to study the illumination : robustness analysis Normal variation of target or beam imperfections : Beams size variation Target position Beams balanceBeams pointingBeams centering

10
1/e a m=1 m=2 m=3 m=4 a m A tool to study illumination : diagnostic of optimisation

11
A tool to study the illumination : Legendre analysis 11 x rms = 0.15 %a = 0.61m = (-4)

12
A tool to study the illumination : validation Validation with studies of the literature : Ref. POP B. Canaud et al 2002 rms = % rms = % 49° 59°5 33°2 59°5 78° 33°2 Validation with analytical solutions (Ref. J. Opt J. Xiao and B. Lu) : - perfect uniform irradiation Validation with known configuration : Omega

13
HIPER

14
300 kJ on target – 15 kJ per beams – 50 3 The specification for HiPER : number of compression (ns) beams Modelling with a shaped adiabat (Atzeni, Bellei, Schiavi) based on theoretical and experimental work by Betti et al (LLE) Energy : 300 kJ 15 kJ per beam at the output of the main amplifier section Wavelength : 2 baseline : conversion 70 % 3 option : conversion (70 %) 2 = 50 % Transmission : 80 % A 3 : 50 beams x 15 kJ x 50 % (conversion 3 ) x 80 % (transmission) = 300 kJ Pulse shape : Adiabatic shock plus ramp plus final < 200 ps resolution 70 kJ 10 ps PW 300 kJ 50 beams 5 ns, 2 -3

15
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 15 rms (%) (%) ( ) (-5) (-4) (-8) (-5) (-1) (-1) (-1) amNb The 48 beams configuration is a good candidate : 0.12 % RMS a m

16
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 16 The 48 beams configuration seems the best candidate with the cone The 48 beams configuration gives : - rms 0.15 % - ratio of power 94 % - disconnection of 1 (or 2) ring of 4 beams is enough to put the cone or beams dedicated for the fast ignition. - Robustness of the configuration : - zooming in time - stability analysis 47° 74°95 21°24 47° 74°95 30° Calotte : r 2 = (R sin(30°)) 2 r 2 / 4 R 2 = 1/16 = 6.25 % Beams off 4/48 = 1/12 = 8.33 % 5/42 = 11.9 % 8/46 = 17.4 % 5/60 = 1/12 = 8.33 % rms (%) (%) % (-4) amNb

17
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 17 The 48 beams configuration is a good candidate

18
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 18 The 48 beams configuration is a good candidate The 48 beams configuration gives : - energy on the cone - energy in the cone reduced (0.08/4.18) Other configurations lead to higher energy on/in the cone

19
19 x rms = 0.15 %a = 0.61m = (-4) The 48 beams configuration : Legendre analysis

20
20 rms = 0.15 %a = 0.61m =

21
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 21 At the end of the 11 ns 10.4 ns 10.6 ns 10.8 ns 1-50 modes End of free flight time Weakly non linear Mode 12 dominates

22
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 22

23
Robustness of the 48 beams configuration Normal variation of -Beam imperfections : Balance : 10 % Beam pointing : 5 % Beam centering : 2 % Several low l-mode sources of direct-drive illumination non-uniformity can come from imperfections or can be significantly reduced by those same parameters. Marshall APS %0.26 %0.59 %rms (0.15 %) maxminmean after configurations Normal repartition of the beam to beam imbalance A Gaussian repartition around 10 % of balance imperfections between beams after configurations

24
Robustness of the 48 beams configuration

25
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA %0.26 %0.59 %rms (0.15 %) maxminmean after configurations Normal repartition of the beam to beam imbalance A Gaussian repartition around 10 % of balance imperfections between beams after configurations 3.2 %0.82 %1.2 %rms (0.15 %) maxminmean after configurations Normal repartition of the beam pointing A Gaussian repartition around 5 % of beam defaults of pointing after configurations %%rms (0.15 %) maxminmean after configurations Normal repartition of the beam centering A Gaussian repartition around 2 % of beam centering after configurations Robustness of the 48 beams configuration

26
Normal variation of -Beam imperfections : Beam size variation : (a +/- a,m +/- m ) Balance : 10 % Beam pointing : 5 % Beam centering : 2 % - Target position Several low l-mode sources of direct-drive illumination non-uniformity can come from imperfections or can be significantly reduced by those same parameters. For example, on OMEGA Marshall APS 03

27
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 27 IRRADIATION Illumination non uniformity 48 beams, (a=0.61, m=1.02.) rms = 0.15 %, l -modes : 12, 8 and 10 Energy : 130 kJ LOW MODES ASYMETRY Hydrodynamics instabilities analysis TARGET Baseline target definition Small - Large - Reference FACILITY X Ribeyre, Ph Nicolaï, G Schurtz, M Olazabal-Loumé, J Breil, P.-H. Maire, J.-L. Feugeas, L Hallo and V. T Tikhonchuk Algorithm of definition of nominal configuration

28
LMJ

29
Optimisation de configuration déclairement Attaque Directe en configuration LMJ attaque indirecte (33°2, 49°, 59°5) Sens trigonométrique Θ 1 Θ 2 Θ 3 a : tache m : puissance Avantages : -simplicité de mise en place et de réglages Interrogation : - absorption - évolution en temps au cours de limplosion - perte dénergie (à coté) - robustesse décentrage Θ DECENTRAGE

30
Retrouver les résultats existant

31
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 31 Configuration : LMJ able to produce 1.8 MJ of UV light (3 ) and 550 TW of peak power. 240 beams delivering 8.2 kJ of UV light for each beam. Goal : choc ignition 49° 59°5 33°2 49° 59°5 33°2 49° 59°5 49° 59°5 49° 59°5 33°2 59°5 78° 33°2 49° 59°5 33°2

32
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 32 49° 59°5 33°2

33
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 33 59°5 78° 33°2 x100

34
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 34 49° 59°5 33°2

35
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 35 49° 59°5 33°2 x100

36
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 36 49° 59°5 x10

37
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 37 49° 59°5 x100

38
J.-L. Feugeas CELIA 38 Configuration : LMJ able to produce 1.8 MJ of UV light (3 ) and 550 TW of peak power. 240 beams delivering 8.2 kJ of UV light for each beam. Goal : choc ignition 49° 59°5 33°2 49° 59°5 49° 59°5 33°2 49° 59°5

39
Solution optimale calculé par le code déclairement s rms = 0.16 % Pi / Pa = 133/167 = 79,44% s rms = % Pi / Pa = 137/160 = 85,7% Θ 1 = ° Θ 2 = 5.33 ° Θ 3 = 19,22 ° a = 1 m = 1.91 Attaque Directe en configuration LMJ attaque indirecte (33°2, 49°, 59°5) Optimisation de configuration

40
The 48 beams configuration is a good candidate

Similar presentations

© 2016 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google