对美国国家点火装置2010年以来实验设计思路的分析

张棋; 马积瑞; 范金燕; 张杰

doi:10.7498/aps.71.20220199

摘要

美国国家点火装置(NIF)自2010年投入使用以来, 已经进行了约1030发次的惯性约束聚变研究实验. 在经历了最初7年多的艰难探索之后, 自2017年以来, 激光聚变反应输出能量接连突破55 kJ和170 kJ, 特别是在2021年8月的实验中, NIF研究团队获得了1.35MJ聚变输出能量的结果, 已经接近实现靶点火（target ignition）的门槛. NIF实验数据具有极高的分析价值, 近些年来NIF研究团队已经将这些数据用于进一步实验的优化设计、预测产额、矫正模拟等目的. 由于NIF实验数据库中大量数据未被公开, 我国科研工作者只能从少量已公开数据中了解其实验历程, 无法深入分析各阶段NIF实验及各时间节点NIF团队对下一阶段实验设计思路的来源. 本文根据NIF实验数据的特点, 采用预测平均匹配方法和信赖域方法对NIF实验缺失数据进行了数据还原研究, 并且对还原数据进行了可靠性验证. 利用还原数据, 本文分析了过去十年间不同阶段NIF实验的不同侧重点以及设计思路, 并且利用机器学习方法预测了未来NIF实验中的热斑压强. 这些结果为我国科研工作者持续跟进并深入理解最新NIF实验结果提供了一种可行的方法, 也可以对我国激光聚变点火实验的设计起到借鉴作用.

关键词:

Abstract

Since completion of the National Ignition Facility (NIF) in 2010, more than 1030 experiments were carried out to achieve ignition. Though the experiments were unsuccessful in the first 8 years, the NIF has improved the experimental designs and achieved fusion yields from 55kJ, 170kJ to 1.35MJ since 2019, approaching to the ignition milestone. The designs are based on the experimental database, which has been widely used for optimization design, yield prediction, corrected simulation, etc. However, so far the published experimental data is very limited. Also, it is difficult to obtain a completion data matrix for analyzing and understanding the experimental designs of NIF experiments at each stage and to know how the NIF sets strategic priorities for each phase.In this paper, we proposed an optimization method, which combines the PMM algorithm and trust region algorithm, to restore the missing NIF experimental data. Based on the completed data, the design principles of experiments on the NIF were analyzed, and the hot spot pressure was predicted by machine learning algorithms. The results may be helpful for the designs of laser fusion ignition experiments in China.

Keywords:

作者及机构信息

1.
上海交通大学物理与天文学院, 激光等离子体教育部重点实验室, 上海　200240

2.
上海交通大学数学科学学院, 科学工程计算教育部重点实验室, 上海　200240

3.
上海交通大学IFSA协同创新中心, 上海　200240

4.
中国科学院物理研究所光物理实验室, 北京　100190

通信作者: 张杰, jzhang@iphy.ac.cn

基金项目: 中国科学院战略性科技先导专项(批准号: XDA25010100)和国家自然科学基金(批准号: 11971309)资助的课题.

Authors and contacts

1.
Key Laboratory for Laser Plasmas (MOE), School of Physics and Astronomy, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China

2.
Key laboratory for Scientific Computing (MOE), School of Mathematical Sciences, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China

3.
Collaborative Innovation Center of IFSA (CICIFSA), Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China

4.
Laboratory of Optical Physics, Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China

Corresponding author: Zhang Jie, jzhang@iphy.ac.cn

Funds: Project supported by the Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, China (Grant No. XDA25010100) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11971309)

文章全文 : translate this paragraph

参考文献

[1]	Zylstra A B, Kritcher A L, Callahan D A, Ralph J E, Some basic principles of ICF and some recent burning plasma results, 2021 LLNL-PRES-825381
[2]	Kritcher A L, Initial results from the HYBRID-E DT experiment N210808 with >1.3 MJ yield, 2021 LLNL-PRES-826367
[3]	Ross J S, Ralph J E, Zylstra A B, Kritcher A L, Robey H F 2021 arXiv: 2111.04640 [physics. plasma-ph]
[4]	Zylstra A B, Hurricane O A, Callahan D A, Kritcher A L, Ralph J E 2022 Nature 601 542 Google Scholar
[5]	Pape L S, Hopkins L B, Divol L, Pak A, Dewald E L 2018 Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 245003 Google Scholar
[6]	Kritcher A L, Zylstra A B, Callahan D A, Hurricane O A, Weber C 2021 Phys. Plasma 28 072706 Google Scholar
[7]	Hatfield P W, Rose S J, Scott R 2019 Phys. Plasma 26 062706 Google Scholar
[8]	Hatfield P W, Rose S J, Scott R 2019 IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 60 1.22 Google Scholar
[9]	Gaffnev J A, Brandon S T, Humbird K D, Kruse K G, Nora R C, Peterson J L, Spears B K 2019 Phys. Plasma 26 082704 Google Scholar
[10]	Humbird K D, Peterson J L, McClarren R G 2018 preprint arXiv: 1812.06055
[11]	Humbird K D, Peterson J L, Salmonson J, Spears B K 2021 Phys. Plasma 28 042709 Google Scholar
[12]	Hsu A, Cheng B, Bradley P A 2020 Phys. Plasma 27 012703 Google Scholar
[13]	Glenzer S H, Brian K S, Edwards M J, Alger E T, Berger R L 2012 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 54 045013 Google Scholar
[14]	Regan S P, Epstein R, Hammel B A, Suter L J, Ralph, Scott H 2012 Phys. Plasma 19 056307 Google Scholar
[15]	Glenzer S H, Callahan D A, MacKinnon A J, Kline J K, Grim G 2012 Phys. Plasma 19 056318 Google Scholar
[16]	Robey H F, McGowan B J, Landen O L, LaFortune K N, Widmayer C 2013 Phys. Plasma 20 052707 Google Scholar
[17]	Callahan D A, Hurricane O A, Ralph J E, Thomas C A, Baker K L 2018 Phys. Plasma 25 056305 Google Scholar
[18]	Lawson J D 1957 Proc. Phys. Soc. Sect. B 70 6 Google Scholar
[19]	Hicks D G, Meezan N B, Dewald E L, Mackinnon A J, Olson R E 2012 Phys. Plasma 19 122702 Google Scholar
[20]	Lindl J, Landen O, Edwards J, Moses E 2014 Phys. Plasma 21 020501 Google Scholar
[21]	Park H S, Hurricane O A, Callahan D A, Casey D T, Dewald E L 2014 Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 055001 Google Scholar
[22]	Casey D T, Thomas C A, Baser K L, Spears B K, Hohenberger M 2018 Phys. Plasma 25 056308 Google Scholar
[23]	Zylstra A B, Casey D T, Kritcher A, Pickworth L, Bachmann B 2020 Phys. Plasma 27 092709 Google Scholar
[24]	Hohenberger M, Casey D T, Kritcher A L, Pak A, Zylstra A B 2020 Phys. Plasma 27 112704 Google Scholar
[25]	Robey H F, Hopkins L B, Milovich J L, Meezan N B 2018 Phys. Plasma 25 012711 Google Scholar
[26]	Hopkins L B, LePape S, Divol L, Pak A, Edwald E, Ho D D 2019 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 61 014023 Google Scholar
[27]	Zylstra A B, MacLaren S, Kline S A Yi J, Callahan D, Hurricane O 2019 Phys. Plasma 26 052707 Google Scholar
[28]	Hohenberger M, Casey D T, Thomas C A, Landen O L, Baker K L 2019 Phys. Plasma 26 112707 Google Scholar
[29]	Kritcher A L, Casey D T, Thomas C A, Zylstra A B, Hohenberger M 2020 Phys. Plasma 27 052710 Google Scholar
[30]	Kritcher A L, Zylstra A B, Callahan D A, Hurricane O A, Weber C 2021 Physics of Plasmas 28 072706
[31]	Kritcher A L, Young C V, Robey H F, Weber C R, Zylstra A B 2022 Nat. Phys. 18 251 Google Scholar
[32]	Hurricane O A, Callahan D A, Springer P T, Edwards M J, Patel P 2019 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 61 014033 Google Scholar
[33]	Rubin D B 1986 J. Bus. Econom. Statist. 4 87 Google Scholar
[34]	Little R J A 1988 J. Bus. Econom. Statist. 6 287 Google Scholar
[35]	Buuren S 2018 Flexible Imputation of Missing Data Second Edition (Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis) p77
[36]	Yuan Ya-xiang 2015 Math. Program. 151 249 Google Scholar
[37]	Landen O L, Casey D T, DiNicola J M, Doeppner T, Hartouni E P 2020 High Energy Density Phys. 36 100755 Google Scholar
[38]	Laser Indirect Drive input to NNSA 2020 Report, 2020 LLNL-TR-810573
[39]	Robey HF, Celliers P M, Kline J L, Mackinnon A J, Boehly T R 2012 Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 215004 Google Scholar
[40]	Robey H F, Boehly T R, Celliers P M, Eqqert J H, Hicks D 2012 Phys. Plasma 19 042706 Google Scholar
[41]	Review of BigFoot Implosion Data at NIF, Baker K L, Casey D T, Hohenberger M, Kritcher A L, Spears B Khttps://www.lle.rochester.edu/media/publications/presentations/documents/APS19/Thomas_APS19.pdf [2022-02-14]

施引文献

图 1 NIF各方案已公布的各方案年度发次数与年度总发次数

Fig. 1. The numbers of NIF shots in various designs and the numbers of annual total shots.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 4组变量的交叉验证结果　(a)中子产额; (b)内爆速度; (c)热斑压强; (d)靶丸规模

Fig. 2. Cross-validation results of 4 groups of variables: (a) Fusion yield; (b) implosion velocity; (c) hos-spot pressure; (d) spatial scale factor.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 NIF间接点火4个阶段中子产额、内爆速度、热斑压强的变化过程　(a) NIC和LF实验阶段; (b)新增HF实验阶段数据; (c) 新增HDC, BF实验阶段数据; (d)新增Hybrid实验阶段数据

Fig. 3. NIF indirect drive implosion data are plotted in the space of the implosion velocity, the hot-spot pressure, and fusion yield. The various designs are added to subgraph the in turn: (a) The low-foot/NIC implosions; (b) the high-foot implosions; (c) the high-density-carbon designs and the Bigfoot designs; (d) the high yield big radius implosion designs.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 使用机器学习方法预测热斑压强　(a) 基于2010—2017数据的预测结果; (b) 基于2010—2021数据的预测结果

Fig. 4. Prediction of hot-spot pressure using machine learning methods: (a) Prediction based on data from 2010 to 2017; (b) prediction based on data from 2010 to 2021.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 213组数据的变量缺失情况与还原需求

Table 1. Missing data classification and imputation needs

数据情况	完整数据组	可还原数据组				未还原数据组
缺失变量/个	0	1	2	3	4	4或5
数据/组	21	19	14	33	4	122

下载: 导出CSV

表 A1 原始数据及还原结果(其中上标*的数据为还原所得数据)

Table A1. Restoring the original data(the data marked with * is the data obtained from the restoration).

发次号	发次类别	α	P_hs/Gbar	v_imp/(km·s^–1)	S	Y_total(10¹⁵)	年份	填补数据量
N110914	Velocity	1.6	116	355	1.002	0.58	2011	0
N111215	Shape	1.6	103	312	1.022	0.85	2011	0
N120205	LF	2.7	105	310	1.004	0.593	2011	0
N120321	LF	1.6	156	321	0.918	0.536	2012	0
N120405	LF	1.4	145	324	1.137	0.14	2012	0
N130927	DTHF3 shock	2.7	140	334	1.060	5.1	2012	0
N131119	DTHF	2.2	123	352	1.053	5.98	2013	0
N140120	DTHF-CH	2.5	152	356	0.938	9.25	2013	0
N140520	DTHF-HGF-CH	2.4	152	367	0.948	8.98	2014	0
N141123	DTHFAS	1.6	153	320	0.926	1.37	2014	0
N150115	DTHFAS	2.3	168	335	0.931	3.77	2014	0
N150121	DTHF CH	2.2	219	377	0.948	6.26	2015	0
N161030	DTHDCS8BF	4.0	161	390	0.844	1.87	2015	0
N170109	DTHDCS8BF	4.0	220	411	0.844	2.63	2016	0
N170601	HDC	2.4	320	381	0.910	17	2017	0
N170827	DTHDCS9	2.3	360	395	0.910	16.6	2017	0
N191117	672S9HF	2.7	280	370	0.841	4.99	2017	0
N201001	Hybrid-E	3.0	284	383	1.050	34.9	2020	0
N201122	I-raum	3.2	260	376	1.000	37.7	2020	0
N210207	Hybrid-E	3.0	314	389	1.050	60.7	2021	0
N210220	I-raum	3.1	281	369	1.000	57	2021	0
N130501	DTHF	2.0	69	297	1.002^*	0.767	2019	1
N130710	DTHF	2.1^*	59	337	1.002	1.2	2013	1
N130812	DTHF	2.7	98	325	1.002^*	2.785	2013	1
N140225	DTHF	2.2^*	141	334	0.938	2.8	2013	1
N140304	DTHF	2.7	116	364	1.103^*	9.28	2013	1
N140707	DTHF	2.3^*	165	350	0.938	5	2014	1
N140819	DTHF	2.7	295	390	0.805^*	5.47	2014	1
N150416	DTHFAS	2.3	210	325^*	0.930	8.46	2014	1
N171022	DTHDCS8BF	2.2	280	373	0.867^*	5.85	2014	1
N171210	DT672S9HF	2.2	230	369	0.886^*	3.68	2015	1
N180128	DTHDCS9BF	3.9	311	432	0.839^*	19	2017	1
N180204	DT672S9HF	2.2	250	385	0.880^*	4.12	2017	1
N190415	DT672S9HF	2.2	221^*	375	0.841	4.37	2018	1
N190422	DT672S9HF	2.7	169^*	364	0.841	2.44	2018	1
N190527	DT672S9HF	2.5	224^*	388	0.841	4.72	2019	1
N190602	DT672S9HF	2.5	217^*	378	0.841	4.25	2019	1
N190918	Hybrid-E	2.7^*	140	374	1.100	7.5	2019	1
N191007	Hybrid-E	2.8^*	206	374	1.100	18.8	2019	1
N191110	Hybrid(HDC)-E	2.3	273	366	1.028	20	2019	1
N131219	DTHF	2.5^*	120	348	1.117^*	3.2	2021	2
N140311	DTHF	2.8^*	140	372	1.128^*	6.06	2014	2
N160418	DTHDCS8	2.6^*	176^*	378	0.845	2.86	2013	2
N170328	DT672S9HF	2.6^*	240	385	0.897^*	5.83	2014	2
N170524	DTHDCS9BF	3.1^*	186^*	413	0.950	6.2	2016	2
N170813	DT672S9HF	2.6^*	255	385	0.875^*	5.72	2017	2
N180429	Hybrid-B	2.5^*	218^*	365	0.999	9.5	2017	2
N180618	DTBe672S8HF	2.3^*	220	365	0.776^*	1.4	2017	2
N180708	Hybrid-B	2.3^*	183^*	346	1.000	5.2	2018	2
N181007	Hybrid-B	2.6^*	194^*	372	1.050	9.1	2021	2
N181203	Hybrid-B	2.8^*	186^*	393	1.050	8.1	2018	2
N181209	Hybrid-B	2.6^*	158^*	370	1.099	6.3	2018	2
N190203	Hybrid-B	2.2 ^*	151^*	359	1.050	4.4	2018	2
N190318	Hybrid-B	2.5^*	168^*	367	1.099	7.8	2018	2
N110121	Commsissioning	1.0^*	55^*	363^*	0.021	0.02	2018	3
N110201	Commsissioning	2.4^*	145^*	334^*	1.004	0.11	2019	3
N110212	Commsissioning	1.2^*	37^*	244^*	1.004	0.13	2019	3
N110603	Shock timing	1.2^*	50^*	260^*	1.004	0.065	2011	3
N110608	Shock timing	1.8^*	84^*	293^*	1.004	0.19	2011	3
N110615	Shock timing	2.0^*	103^*	308^*	1.004	0.43	2011	3
N110620	Shock timing	2.4^*	228^*	372^*	1.004	0.42	2011	3
N110804	Velocity	1.3^*	56^*	267^*	1.002	0.0048	2011	3
N110826	Velocity	1.6^*	73^*	284^*	1.002	0.17	2011	3
N110904	Velocity	2.2^*	124^*	322^*	1.002	0.46	2011	3
N110908	Velocity	2.2^*	128^*	324^*	1.002	0.59	2011	3
N111029	Shape	1.5^*	63^*	274^*	1.002	0.009	2011	3
N111103	Shape	2.0^*	99^*	305^*	1.002	0.23	2011	3
N111112	Shape	2.5^*	172^*	348^*	1.002	0.6	2011	3
N120311	LF	1.8^*	100^*	318	0.827^*	0.159	2011	3
N120316	LF	1.8^*	116^*	316	0.838^*	0.275	2011	3
N120417	LF	1.8^*	140^*	314	0.847^*	0.532	2011	3
N120626	LF	1.8^*	91^*	314	0.829^*	0.118	2011	3
N160207	DTHDCS8BF	1.3^*	80^*	296	0.844	0.18	2012	3
N160411	DTHDCS8	1.9^*	141^*	307	0.845	0.62^*	2012	3
N170702	SymcapHDCS9	2.6^*	55^*	359	0.801^*	0.2	2012	3
N171015	DTHDCS9BF	3.2^*	192^*	419	0.953^*	8.1	2012	3
N171029	DTHDCS9BF	3.4^*	201^*	436	0.969^*	10	2016	3
N171112	SymcapDTHDCS8BF	1.8^*	112^*	307	0.902^*	0.7	2016	3
N171119	DTHDCS9BF	3.4^*	206^*	433	0.977^*	11	2017	3
N171218	DTHDCS9	2.9^*	285^*	408	0.987	17	2017	3
N180121	DTBe672S8HF	2.1^*	113^*	328	0.818	0.8	2017	3
N180218	DTHDCS9	3.1^*	249^*	422	0.990	11.79	2017	3
N180226	DTHDCS9BF	2.9^*	241^*	404	0.979	10	2017	3
N180909	DT672S9HF	3.2^*	262^*	427	1.002	14	2017	3
N180930	DT672S9HF	3.5^*	259^*	451	1.004^*	15	2018	3
N181104	Hybrid	2.6^*	207^*	412^*	1.050	10.1	2018	3
N190721	DTHDCS8BF	2.9^*	249^*	404	0.988^*	11	2018	3
N121125	SymcapLF	1.4^*	74^*	250^*	0.954^*	0.25	2018	4
N130530	DTHF	2^*	105^*	298^*	1.007^*	0.65	2018	4
N130802	DTHF	1.8^*	91^*	296^*	0.984^*	0.53	2018	4
N170821	DTHDCS9	2.8^*	210^*	374^*	1.009^*	8.7	2019	4

下载: 导出CSV

map

[1]	Zylstra A B, Kritcher A L, Callahan D A, Ralph J E, Some basic principles of ICF and some recent burning plasma results, 2021 LLNL-PRES-825381
[2]	Kritcher A L, Initial results from the HYBRID-E DT experiment N210808 with >1.3 MJ yield, 2021 LLNL-PRES-826367
[3]	Ross J S, Ralph J E, Zylstra A B, Kritcher A L, Robey H F 2021 arXiv: 2111.04640 [physics. plasma-ph]
[4]	Zylstra A B, Hurricane O A, Callahan D A, Kritcher A L, Ralph J E 2022 Nature 601 542 Google Scholar
[5]	Pape L S, Hopkins L B, Divol L, Pak A, Dewald E L 2018 Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 245003 Google Scholar
[6]	Kritcher A L, Zylstra A B, Callahan D A, Hurricane O A, Weber C 2021 Phys. Plasma 28 072706 Google Scholar
[7]	Hatfield P W, Rose S J, Scott R 2019 Phys. Plasma 26 062706 Google Scholar
[8]	Hatfield P W, Rose S J, Scott R 2019 IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 60 1.22 Google Scholar
[9]	Gaffnev J A, Brandon S T, Humbird K D, Kruse K G, Nora R C, Peterson J L, Spears B K 2019 Phys. Plasma 26 082704 Google Scholar
[10]	Humbird K D, Peterson J L, McClarren R G 2018 preprint arXiv: 1812.06055
[11]	Humbird K D, Peterson J L, Salmonson J, Spears B K 2021 Phys. Plasma 28 042709 Google Scholar
[12]	Hsu A, Cheng B, Bradley P A 2020 Phys. Plasma 27 012703 Google Scholar
[13]	Glenzer S H, Brian K S, Edwards M J, Alger E T, Berger R L 2012 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 54 045013 Google Scholar
[14]	Regan S P, Epstein R, Hammel B A, Suter L J, Ralph, Scott H 2012 Phys. Plasma 19 056307 Google Scholar
[15]	Glenzer S H, Callahan D A, MacKinnon A J, Kline J K, Grim G 2012 Phys. Plasma 19 056318 Google Scholar
[16]	Robey H F, McGowan B J, Landen O L, LaFortune K N, Widmayer C 2013 Phys. Plasma 20 052707 Google Scholar
[17]	Callahan D A, Hurricane O A, Ralph J E, Thomas C A, Baker K L 2018 Phys. Plasma 25 056305 Google Scholar
[18]	Lawson J D 1957 Proc. Phys. Soc. Sect. B 70 6 Google Scholar
[19]	Hicks D G, Meezan N B, Dewald E L, Mackinnon A J, Olson R E 2012 Phys. Plasma 19 122702 Google Scholar
[20]	Lindl J, Landen O, Edwards J, Moses E 2014 Phys. Plasma 21 020501 Google Scholar
[21]	Park H S, Hurricane O A, Callahan D A, Casey D T, Dewald E L 2014 Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 055001 Google Scholar
[22]	Casey D T, Thomas C A, Baser K L, Spears B K, Hohenberger M 2018 Phys. Plasma 25 056308 Google Scholar
[23]	Zylstra A B, Casey D T, Kritcher A, Pickworth L, Bachmann B 2020 Phys. Plasma 27 092709 Google Scholar
[24]	Hohenberger M, Casey D T, Kritcher A L, Pak A, Zylstra A B 2020 Phys. Plasma 27 112704 Google Scholar
[25]	Robey H F, Hopkins L B, Milovich J L, Meezan N B 2018 Phys. Plasma 25 012711 Google Scholar
[26]	Hopkins L B, LePape S, Divol L, Pak A, Edwald E, Ho D D 2019 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 61 014023 Google Scholar
[27]	Zylstra A B, MacLaren S, Kline S A Yi J, Callahan D, Hurricane O 2019 Phys. Plasma 26 052707 Google Scholar
[28]	Hohenberger M, Casey D T, Thomas C A, Landen O L, Baker K L 2019 Phys. Plasma 26 112707 Google Scholar
[29]	Kritcher A L, Casey D T, Thomas C A, Zylstra A B, Hohenberger M 2020 Phys. Plasma 27 052710 Google Scholar
[30]	Kritcher A L, Zylstra A B, Callahan D A, Hurricane O A, Weber C 2021 Physics of Plasmas 28 072706
[31]	Kritcher A L, Young C V, Robey H F, Weber C R, Zylstra A B 2022 Nat. Phys. 18 251 Google Scholar
[32]	Hurricane O A, Callahan D A, Springer P T, Edwards M J, Patel P 2019 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 61 014033 Google Scholar
[33]	Rubin D B 1986 J. Bus. Econom. Statist. 4 87 Google Scholar
[34]	Little R J A 1988 J. Bus. Econom. Statist. 6 287 Google Scholar
[35]	Buuren S 2018 Flexible Imputation of Missing Data Second Edition (Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis) p77
[36]	Yuan Ya-xiang 2015 Math. Program. 151 249 Google Scholar
[37]	Landen O L, Casey D T, DiNicola J M, Doeppner T, Hartouni E P 2020 High Energy Density Phys. 36 100755 Google Scholar
[38]	Laser Indirect Drive input to NNSA 2020 Report, 2020 LLNL-TR-810573
[39]	Robey HF, Celliers P M, Kline J L, Mackinnon A J, Boehly T R 2012 Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 215004 Google Scholar
[40]	Robey H F, Boehly T R, Celliers P M, Eqqert J H, Hicks D 2012 Phys. Plasma 19 042706 Google Scholar
[41]	Review of BigFoot Implosion Data at NIF, Baker K L, Casey D T, Hohenberger M, Kritcher A L, Spears B Khttps://www.lle.rochester.edu/media/publications/presentations/documents/APS19/Thomas_APS19.pdf [2022-02-14]

[1]	李树, 王旸, 姬志成, 蓝可. 高温热辐射输运模拟的蒙特卡罗全局降方差方法. , 2023, 72(13): 139501. doi: 10.7498/aps.72.20230218
[2]	黄天晅, 吴畅书, 陈忠靖, 晏骥, 李欣, 葛峰峻, 张兴, 蒋炜, 邓博, 侯立飞, 蒲昱东, 董云松, 王立锋. 在间接驱动内爆实验中采用花生腔增强对称性调控. , 2023, 72(2): 025201. doi: 10.7498/aps.72.20220861
[3]	熊皓, 钟哲强, 张彬, 隋展, 张小民. 基于束间动态干涉的快速匀滑新方法. , 2020, 69(6): 064206. doi: 10.7498/aps.69.20190962
[4]	杨钧兰, 钟哲强, 翁小凤, 张彬. 惯性约束聚变装置中靶面光场特性的统计表征方法. , 2019, 68(8): 084207. doi: 10.7498/aps.68.20182091
[5]	肖德龙, 戴自换, 孙顺凯, 丁宁, 张扬, 邬吉明, 尹丽, 束小建. Z箍缩动态黑腔驱动靶丸内爆动力学. , 2018, 67(2): 025203. doi: 10.7498/aps.67.20171640
[6]	李宏勋, 张锐, 朱娜, 田小程, 许党朋, 周丹丹, 宗兆玉, 范孟秋, 谢亮华, 郑天然, 李钊历. 基于光束参量优化实现直接驱动靶丸均匀辐照. , 2017, 66(10): 105202. doi: 10.7498/aps.66.105202
[7]	邓学伟, 周维, 袁强, 代万俊, 胡东霞, 朱启华, 景峰. 甚多束激光直接驱动靶面辐照均匀性研究. , 2015, 64(19): 195203. doi: 10.7498/aps.64.195203
[8]	赵英奎, 欧阳碧耀, 文武, 王敏. 惯性约束聚变中氘氚燃料整体点火与燃烧条件研究. , 2015, 64(4): 045205. doi: 10.7498/aps.64.045205
[9]	宁成, 丰志兴, 薛创. Z箍缩驱动动态黑腔中的基本能量转移特征. , 2014, 63(12): 125208. doi: 10.7498/aps.63.125208
[10]	李树, 李刚, 田东风, 邓力. 热辐射输运问题的隐式蒙特卡罗方法求解. , 2013, 62(24): 249501. doi: 10.7498/aps.62.249501
[11]	晏骥, 江少恩, 苏明, 巫顺超, 林稚伟. X射线相衬成像应用于惯性约束核聚变多层球壳靶丸检测. , 2012, 61(6): 068703. doi: 10.7498/aps.61.068703
[12]	张占文, 漆小波, 李波. 惯性约束聚变点火靶候选靶丸特点及制备研究进展. , 2012, 61(14): 145204. doi: 10.7498/aps.61.145204
[13]	占江徽, 姚欣, 高福华, 阳泽健, 张怡霄, 郭永康. 惯性约束聚变驱动器连续相位板前置时频率转换晶体内部光场研究. , 2011, 60(1): 014205. doi: 10.7498/aps.60.014205
[14]	张锐, 王建军, 粟敬钦, 刘兰琴, 邓青华. 基于线性调频脉冲的光谱色散平滑技术实验研究. , 2010, 59(2): 1088-1094. doi: 10.7498/aps.59.1088
[15]	程文雍, 张小民, 粟敬钦, 赵圣之, 董军, 李平, 周丽丹. 利用运动光束抑制高功率激光小尺度自聚焦. , 2009, 58(10): 7012-7016. doi: 10.7498/aps.58.7012
[16]	姚欣, 高福华, 高博, 张怡霄, 黄利新, 郭永康, 林祥棣. 惯性约束聚变驱动器终端束匀滑器件前置时频率转换系统优化研究. , 2009, 58(7): 4598-4604. doi: 10.7498/aps.58.4598
[17]	姚欣, 高福华, 张怡霄, 温圣林, 郭永康, 林祥棣. 激光惯性约束聚变驱动器终端光学系统中束匀滑器件前置的条件研究. , 2009, 58(5): 3130-3134. doi: 10.7498/aps.58.3130
[18]	姚欣, 高福华, 李剑峰, 张怡霄, 温圣林, 郭永康. 光束取样光栅强激光近场调制及诱导损伤研究. , 2008, 57(8): 4891-4897. doi: 10.7498/aps.57.4891
[19]	姚欣, 高福华, 温圣林, 张怡霄, 李剑峰, 郭永康. 谐波分离和光束取样集成光学元件强激光近场调制及损伤特性研究. , 2007, 56(12): 6945-6953. doi: 10.7498/aps.56.6945
[20]	杨洪琼, 杨建伦, 温树槐, 王根兴, 郭玉芝, 唐正元, 牟维兵, 马驰. 激光直接驱动内爆DT燃料面密度诊断. , 2001, 50(12): 2408-2412. doi: 10.7498/aps.50.2408

计量

文章访问数: 5678
PDF下载量: 224
被引次数: 0

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

搜索

留言板