EFFECTS OF CHAMBER GEOMETRY AND GAS PROPERTIES ON HYDRODYNAMIC EVOLUTION OF IFE CHAMBERS Zoran Dragojlovic and Farrokh Najmabadi University of California.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Introduction to Plasma-Surface Interactions Lecture 6 Divertors.
Advertisements

17. April 2015 Mitglied der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Application of a multiscale transport model for magnetized plasmas in cylindrical configuration Workshop.
The Flame Deflector and Five Segment Booster By: Geoffrey Husk.
Progress Report on SPARTAN Chamber Dynamics Simulation Code Farrokh Najmabadi and Zoran Dragojlovic HAPL Meeting February 5-6, 2004 Georgia Institute of.
MUTAC Review April 6-7, 2009, FNAL, Batavia, IL Mercury Jet Target Simulations Roman Samulyak, Wurigen Bo Applied Mathematics Department, Stony Brook University.
September 24-25, 2003 HAPL meeting, UW, Madison 1 Armor Configuration & Thermal Analysis 1.Parametric analysis in support of system studies 2.Preliminary.
Transport phenomena in chemical processes part II Michał Araszkiewicz PhD.
Max P. Katz, Wayne G. Roberge, & Glenn E. Ciolek Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Department of Physics, Applied Physics and Astronomy.
DAH, UW-FTI ARIES-IFE, April 2002, 1 Results from parametric studies of thin liquid wall IFE chambers D. A. Haynes, Jr. Fusion Technology Institute University.
April 6-7, 2002 A. R. Raffray, et al., Modeling of Inertial Fusion Chamber 1 Modeling of Inertial Fusion Chamber A. R. Raffray, F. Najmabadi, Z. Dragojlovic,
Chamber clearing L. Bromberg ARIES Meeting Madison, WI September 20, 2001.
The Heavy Ion Fusion Virtual National Laboratory UC Berkeley Christophe S. Debonnel 1,2 (1) Thermal Hydraulics Laboratory Department of Nuclear Engineering.
The Heavy Ion Fusion Virtual National Laboratory UC Berkeley C.S. Debonnel 1,2, S.S. Yu 2, P.F. Peterson 1 (1) Thermal Hydraulics Laboratory Department.
Diffusion Model Error Assessment Jim E. Morel Texas A&M University CRASH Annual Review October 29, 2010.
Iain D. Boyd University of Michigan Modeling of Ion Sputtering and Product Transport.
April 4-5, 2002 A. R. Raffray, et al., Chamber Clearing Code Development 1 Chamber Dynamics and Clearing Code Development Effort A. R. Raffray, F. Najmabadi,
Chamber Dynamics and Clearing Farrokh Najmabadi, Rene Raffray, Mark Tillack (UCSD) Ahmed Hassanein (ANL) Laser-IFE Program Workshop February 6-7, 2001.
HYDRODYNAMIC EVOLUTION OF IFE CHAMBERS WITH DIFFERENT PROTECTIVE GASES AND PRE-IGNITION CONDITIONS Zoran Dragojlovic and Farrokh Najmabadi University of.
IFE Chambers: Modeling and Experiments at UCSD Farrokh Najmabadi 5 th US-Japan Workshop on Laser IFE March 21-23, 2005 General Atomics, San Diego Electronic.
Prediction of Fluid Dynamics in The Inertial Confinement Fusion Chamber by Godunov Solver With Adaptive Grid Refinement Zoran Dragojlovic, Farrokh Najmabadi,
May 28-29, 2008/ARR 1 Thermal Effect of Off-Normal Energy Deposition on Bare Ferritic Steel First Wall A. René Raffray University of California, San Diego.
Aerosol protection of laser optics by Electrostatic Fields (not manetic) L. Bromberg ARIES Meeting Madison WI April 23, 2002.
THE WAFER- FOCUS RING GAP*
Chamber Dynamic Response Modeling Zoran Dragojlovic.
Beam Interaction with Chamber Aerosols D. R. Welch and D. V. Rose, MRC C. L. Olson, SNL S. S. Yu, LBNL October 2-4, 2002 Presented at the ARIES Project.
Action Items For ARIES-IFE Study Farrokh Najmabadi ARIES Project Meeting June 19-21, 2000 University of Wisconsin, Madison Electronic copy:
October 24, Remaining Action Items on Dry Chamber Wall 2. “Overlap” Design Regions 3. Scoping Analysis of Sacrificial Wall A. R. Raffray, J.
Progress Report on Chamber Dynamics and Clearing Farrokh Najmabadi, Rene Raffray, Mark S. Tillack, John Pulsifer, Zoran Dragovlovic (UCSD) Ahmed Hassanein.
Nov 13-14, 2001 A. R. Raffray, et al., Progress Report on Chamber Clearing Code Effort 1 Progress Report on Chamber Clearing Code Development Effort A.
MODELING OF MICRODISCHARGES FOR USE AS MICROTHRUSTERS Ramesh A. Arakoni a), J. J. Ewing b) and Mark J. Kushner c) a) Dept. Aerospace Engineering University.
Chamber Clearing by Electrostatic Fields L. Bromberg ARIES Meeting UCSD January 10, 2002.
Status of Operational Windows for HIF Chamber Transport Modes D. V. Rose, D. R. Welch, C. L. Olson, S. Neff, and S. S. Yu ARIES Project Meeting January.
The Heavy Ion Fusion Virtual National Laboratory UC Berkeley Christophe S. Debonnel 1,2 (1) Thermal Hydraulics Laboratory Department of Nuclear Engineering.
RRP:10/17/01Aries IFE 1 Liquid Wall Chamber Dynamics Aries Electronic Workshop October 17, 2001 Robert R. Peterson Fusion Technology Institute University.
Multi-physics coupling Application on TRIGA reactor Student Romain Henry Supervisors: Prof. Dr. IZTOK TISELJ Dr. LUKA SNOJ PhD Topic presentation 27/03/2012.
Fabrice Laturelle, Snecma Moteurs
Chapter 5 Diffusion and resistivity
The Heavy Ion Fusion Virtual National Laboratory UC Berkeley Christophe S. Debonnel Thermal Hydraulics Laboratory Department of Nuclear Engineering University.
INTRODUCTION TO CONDUCTION
MISKAM simulation of the Oklahoma City case Márton Balczó COST 732 MC /WG meeting Madrid, December 4, 2008 Budapest University of Technology and Economics.
1 LARP Phase II Secondary Rotatable Collimator Evolution of design changes 3 rd March, 2010.
Yoon kichul Department of Mechanical Engineering Seoul National University Multi-scale Heat Conduction.
Progress Report on SPARTAN Simulation of IFE Chamber Dynamics Farrokh Najmabadi and Zoran Dragojlovic HAPL Meeting March 3-4, 2005 Naval Research Laboratory.
Cavitation Models Roman Samulyak, Yarema Prykarpatskyy Center for Data Intensive Computing Brookhaven National Laboratory U.S. Department of Energy
14 Oct. 2009, S. Masuzaki 1/18 Edge Heat Transport in the Helical Divertor Configuration in LHD S. Masuzaki, M. Kobayashi, T. Murase, T. Morisaki, N. Ohyabu,
FLCC March 28, 2005 FLCC - Plasma 1 Fluid Modeling of Capacitive Plasma Tools FLCC Presentation March 28, 2005 Berkeley, CA David B. Graves, Mark Nierode,
July 11, 2003 HAPL e-meeting. 1 Armor Design & Modeling Progress A. René Raffray UCSD HAPL e-meeting July 11, 2003 (1)Provide Parameters for Chamber “System”
Molecular dynamics simulation of strongly coupled QCD plasmas Peter Hartmann 1 Molecular dynamics simulation of strongly coupled QCD plasmas Péter Hartmann.
University of Wisconsin Chambers Work John Santarius, Greg Moses, and Milad Fatenajed HAPL Team Meeting Georgia Institute of Technology February 5-6, 2004.
1 Challenge the future The Lateral Motion of Wafer under the Influence of Thin-film Flow Leilei Hu Solid and Fluid Mechanics
SPARTAN Chamber Dynamics Code Zoran Dragojlovic and Farrokh Najmabadi University of California in San Diego HAPL Meeting, June 20-21, 2005, Lawrence Livermore.
Systems Analysis Development for ARIES Next Step C. E. Kessel 1, Z. Dragojlovic 2, and R. Raffrey 2 1 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory 2 University.
INTRODUCTION TO CONVECTION
Integrated Simulation of ELM Energy Loss Determined by Pedestal MHD and SOL Transport N. Hayashi, T. Takizuka, T. Ozeki, N. Aiba, N. Oyama JAEA Naka TH/4-2.
Target threat spectra Gregory Moses and John Santarius Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin-Madison HAPL Review Meeting March 3-4, 2005.
HW/Tutorial # 1 WRF Chapters 14-15; WWWR Chapters ID Chapters 1-2
Microwave Cooking Modeling Heat and moisture transport Andriy Rychahivskyy.
PROPERTIES OF UNIPOLAR DC-PULSED MICROPLASMA ARRAYS AT INTERMEDIATE PRESSURES* Peng Tian a), Chenhui Qu a) and Mark J. Kushner a) a) University of Michigan,
1 Teaching Innovation - Entrepreneurial - Global The Centre for Technology enabled Teaching & Learning D M I E T R, Wardha DTEL DTEL (Department for Technology.
Russian Research Center” Kurchatov Institute” Shock wave propagation near 450 GeV and 7 TeV proton beams in LHC collimator materials Alexander Ryazanov.
HW/Tutorial # 1 WRF Chapters 14-15; WWWR Chapters ID Chapters 1-2 Tutorial #1 WRF#14.12, WWWR #15.26, WRF#14.1, WWWR#15.2, WWWR#15.3, WRF#15.1, WWWR.
Ion Mitigation for Laser IFE Optics Ryan Abbott, Jeff Latkowski, Rob Schmitt HAPL Program Workshop Atlanta, Georgia, February 5, 2004 This work was performed.
Chapter 1. Essential Concepts
THE DYNAMIC EVOLUTION OF TWISTED MAGNETIC FLUX TUBES IN A THREE-DIMENSIONALCONVECTING FLOW. II. TURBULENT PUMPING AND THE COHESION OF Ω-LOOPS.
Progress Report on SPARTAN Chamber Dynamics Simulation Code Farrokh Najmabadi, Zoran Dragojlovic HAPL Meeting April 8-10, 2003 Sandia National Laboratory,
Chapter 8: Internal Flow
Chamber Dynamic Response Modeling
M. S. Tillack and F. Najmabadi
University of California, San Diego
BOLTZMANN-FOKKER-PLANCK KINETIC SOLVER
Presentation transcript:

EFFECTS OF CHAMBER GEOMETRY AND GAS PROPERTIES ON HYDRODYNAMIC EVOLUTION OF IFE CHAMBERS Zoran Dragojlovic and Farrokh Najmabadi University of California in San Diego

Motivation The focus of our research effort is to model and study the chamber dynamic behavior on the long time scale, including: –the hydrodynamics; –the transfer mechanisms such as photon and ion heat deposition chamber gas conduction, convection and radiation; chamber wall response and lifetime; cavity clearing. In order to investigate these phenomena, a fully integrated numerical code SPARTAN is being developed as assembly of well documented algorithms. This talk is concerned with –multidimensional geometry effects which arise as fluid interacts with the vessel wall containing various beam access ports. –Effect of molecular diffusion and background plasma on chamber state evolution.

IFE Chamber Models CartesianCylindrical SPARTAN numerical algorithms : –Godunov solver of Navier-Stokes equations with state dependent transport properties. –Embedded boundary –Adaptive Mesh Refinement Two different aspects of the cylindrical chamber given here : –Cartesian geometry (everything along chamber axis is constant) Arrays of beam lines along chamber axis replaced by 4 beam sheets. –Cylindrical Geometry: (everything along polar angle  is constant). Arrays of beam lines around chamber perimeter replaced by a single beam sheet. A beam line placed on top and bottom. initial conditions from BUCKY chamber dimensions: radius: 6.5 m height: 13 m beam sheet dimensions: length: 20 m width: 1 m z r x y    Xe

Effects of Chamber Geometry on Evolution of Chamber State Details are given for neutral gas. Impact of background plasma will be addressed separately.

Effects of Chamber Geometry Cartesian Cylindrical Time = 0.5 msTime = 3 msTime = 8 ms T max = K T max = K T max = K T max = K T max = K For all cases: T min = T wall = K

Effects of Chamber Geometry Time = 20 msTime = 65 msTime = 100 ms Cartesian Cylindrical T max = K T max = K T max = K T max = K T max = K T max = K For all cases: T min = T wall = K

Evolution of Gas Energy from ms Impact of transport phenomena on chamber system, such as: –Molecular conduction of neutral gas. –Conduction due to free electrons of background plasma. –Volumetric heat loss due to radiation of background plasma.

Gas Energy from 0-100ms internal energy kinetic energy heat conducted to wall Case I: Neutral Gas

Gas Energy from ms Case I: Neutral Gas internal energy kinetic energy heat conducted to wall Case II: Neutral Gas + Electron Conductivity

Gas Energy from ms Case I: Neutral Gas Case II: Neutral Gas + Electron Conductivity internal energy kinetic energy heat conducted to wall Case III: Neutral Gas + Electron Conductivity + Radiation

Chamber State at 100 ms Impact of electron conductivity. Impact of radiation.

Chamber State at 100 ms Cartesian Cylindrical For all cases: T min = T wall = K Case I: Neutral Gas Case II: Neutral Gas + Electron Conductivity Case III: Neutral Gas + Electron Conductivity + Radiation T max = K T ave = K T max = K T ave = K T max = K T ave = K T max = K T ave = K T max = K T ave = K T max = K T ave = K V max = m/s V max = m/s V max = m/s V max = m/s V max = m/s V max = m/s

Conclusions SPARTAN simulations of the hydrodynamic evolution of the IFE chamber indicate: –Multi-dimensional effects of chamber geometry are critical in assessing the chamber dynamics. –Radiation of background plasma is the most important mechanism of heat transfer. Is 2-D modeling good enough? –Maybe. Present simulations with Cartesian and cylindrical geometry show similar trends in flow and heat transfer. To fully answer this question, more different aspects of geometry to be probed by 2-D simulations, such as spherical chamber wall, different configuration of beam lines, etc. Doing at least a few 3-D simulations might be a good idea.