Review of (UPFLF) Plasma Focus Numerical Experiments S Lee 1,2,3 & H Saw 1,2 1 INTI International University, Nilai, Malaysia 2 Institute for Plasma Focus.

Review of (UPFLF) Plasma Focus Numerical Experiments

S Lee1,2,3 & H Saw1,2

1INTI International University, Nilai, Malaysia2Institute for Plasma Focus Studies, Melbourne, Australia

3University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

International Workshop on Plasma Science and Applications, 4 & 5 October 2012, Bangkok, Thailand

Seminar on Plasma Focus Experiments 2012,(SPFE2012), 12 th July 2012 S H Saw

Plasma Focus Numerical Experiments- Outline of Lecture

• Development, usage and results

• Basis and philosophy

• Reference for Diagnostics

• Insights and frontiers

• Continuing development- Ion beam modelling


UNU ICTP PFF- 3 kJ Plasma Focus Designed for International Collaboration within AAAPT Background


Design of the UNU/ICTP PFF- 3kJ Plasma Focus System Background


UNU/ICTP PFF- placed at ICTP, 1988 Background

Network: Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Pakistan, India, Egypt,

Similar machines with designs based on or upgraded:Zimbabwe, Syria, USA, Bulgaria, Iran


The Code Intro code

• From beginning of that program it was realized that the laboratory work should be complemented by computer simulation.

• A 2-phase model was developed in 1983• We are continually developing the model to its present form• It now includes thermodynamics data so the code can be

operated in H2, D2, D-T, N2, O2, He, Ne, Ar, Kr, Xe. • We have used it to simulate a wide range of plasma focus

devices from the sub-kJ PF400 (Chile) , the small 3kJ UNU/ICTP PFF (Network countries), the NX2 3kJ Hi Rep focus (Singapore), medium size tens of kJ DPF78 & Poseidon (Germany) to the MJ PF1000, the largest in the world.

• An Iranian Group has modified the model, calling it the Lee model, to simulate Filippov type plasma focus .


Review of UPFLF Plasma Focus Numerical Experiments Intro code

• The code10 couples the electrical circuit with PF dynamics, thermodynamics and radiation.

• Using standard circuit equations and Newtonian equations of motion adapted for the plasma focus:

the code is consistent in

(a) energy,

(b) charge and (c) mass.


Development of the code Intro code

• It was described in 198311 and used in the design and interpretation of experiments12-15.

• An improved 5-phase code incorporating finite small disturbance speed16, radiation and radiation-coupled dynamics was used17-19,

• It was web-published20 in 2000 and 200521. • Plasma self- absorption was included20 in 2007


Usage Intro code

• It has been used extensively as a complementary facility in several machines, for example: UNU/ICTP PFF12,14,15,17-19, NX219,22, NX119, DENA23, AECS

• It has also been used in other machines for design and interpretation including Chile’s sub-kJ PF and other machines24, Mexico’s FNII25 and the

Argentinian UBA hard x-ray source26.• More recently KSU PF (US), NX3 (Singapore), FoFu

I (US) and several Iranian machines APF, Tehran U, AZAD U


Information derived Intro code

Information computed includes •axial and radial dynamics11,17-23, pinch properties•SXR emission characteristics and yield17-19, 22, 27-33, •design of machines10,12,24,26, •optimization of machines10,22, 24,30 and adaptation to Filippov-type DENA23. •Speed-enhanced PF17 was facilitated.


Information Derived Intro code

Scaling Properties; •Constancy of energy density (per unit mass) across range of machines14

•Hence same temperature and density14

•Constancy of drive current density I/a relating to the speed factor14

• (I/a)/0.5

•Scaling of pinch dimensions & lifetime14 with anode radius ‘a’:

pinch radius ratio rp/a =constant

pinch length ratio zp/a=constant

pinch duration ratio tp/a=constant


Recent development and Insights Intro code

• PF neutron yield calculations34

• Current & neutron yield limitations35 with reducing L0

• Wide-ranging neutron scaling laws• Wide-ranging soft x-ray scaling laws in various gases• Neutron saturation36,37- cause and Global Scaling Law• Radiative collapse 38

• Current-stepped PF39 • Extraction of diagnostic data33,40-42

• Anomalous resistance data43,44 from current signals

• Benchmarks for Ion Beams- scaling with E0.


Philosophy of our Modelling Philosophy

• Experimental based

• Utility prioritised

• To cover the whole process- from lift-off, to axial, to all the radial sub-phases; and recently to post-focussed phase which is important for advanced materials deposition and damage simulation.


Priority of Basis Philosophy

Correct choice of Circuit equations coupled to equations of motion ensures:

•Energy consistent for the total process and each part of the process•Charge consistent •Mass consistentFitting computed current waveform to measured current waveform ensures:

•Connected to the reality of experiments


Priority of Results Philosophy

• Applicable to all PF machines, existing and hypothetical

• Current Waveform accuracy• Dynamics in agreement with experiments• Consistency of Energy distribution • Realistic Yields of neutrons, SXR, other radiations;

Ions and Plasma Stream (latest-Benchmarks); in conformity with experiments

• Widest Scaling of the yields• Insightful definition of scaling properties• Design of new devices; e.g. Hi V & Current-Step • Design new experiments-Radiative cooling & collapse


Philosophy, modelling, results & applications of the Lee Model code Philosophy


Numerical Experiments Philosophy

• Range of activities using the code is so wide

• Not theoretical

• Not simulation

• The correct description is:

Numerical Experiments


UPFLF-The CodeControl Panel- configured for PF1000 Demo

L0 nH C0 F b cm a cm z0 r0 m

33.5 1332 16 11.6 60 6.1

fm fc fmr fcr

0.13 0.7 0.35 0.65

V0 P0 M.W. A At/Molecular

27 3.5 4 1 2


PF1000, ICDMP Poland, the biggest plasma focus in the world

Firing the PF1000 Demo


Fitting: 1. L0 fitted from current rise profile

2. Adjust model parameters (mass and current factors fm, fc, fmr, fcr) until computed current waveform

matches measured current waveform (sequential processes shown below) Demo


PF1000 fitted results Demo


PF1000: Yn Focus & Pinch Properties as functions of Pressure Demo


Plasma Focus- Numerical Experiments leading Technology Insights

• Numerical Experiments- For any problem, plan matrix, perform experiments, get results- sometimes surprising, leading to new insights

• In this way, the Numerical Experiments have pointed the way for technology to follow


NE showing the way for experiments and technology Insights

• PF1000 (largest PF in world): 1997 was planning to reduce static inductance so as to increase current and neutron yield Yn. They published their L0 as 20 nH

• Using their published current waveform and parameters we showed

a. their L0 =33 nH

b. their L0 was already at optimum

c. that lowering their L0 would be a waste of effort and resources


Results from Numerical Experiments with PF1000 - For decreasing L0- from 100 nH to 5 nH Insights 1

• As L0 was reduced from 100 to 35 nH - As expected– Ipeak increased from 1.66 to 3.5 MA– Ipinch also increased, from 0.96 to 1.05 MA

• Further reduction from 35 to 5 nH– Ipeak continue to increase from 3.5 to 4.4 MA

– Ipinch decreasing slightly to - Unexpected 1.03 MA at 20 nH, 1.0 MA at10 nH, and 0.97 MA at 5 nH.

• Yn also had a maximum value of 3.2x1011

at 35 nH.


Pinch Current Limitation Effect - Insights 1

L0 decreases higher Ipeak bigger a longer zp bigger Lp

L0 decreases shorter rise time shorter zo smaller La

L0 decreases, Ipinch/Ipeak decreases


Pinch Current Limitation Effect Insights 1

• L0 decreases, L-C interaction time of capacitor decreases

• L0 decreases, duration of current drop increases due to bigger a

Capacitor bank is more and more coupled to the inductive energy transfer


Pinch Current Limitation Effect Insights 1

• A combination of two complex effects

– Interplay of various inductances

– Increasing coupling of C0 to the inductive energetic processes as L0 is reduced

Leads to this Limitation Effect

Two basic circuit rules: lead to such complex interplay of factors which was not foreseen; revealed only by extensive numerical experiments


Neutron yield scaling laws and neutron saturation problem Insights 2

• One of most exciting properties of plasma focus is

• Early experiments show: Yn~E02

• Prospect was raised in those early research years that, breakeven could be attained at several tens of MJ .

• However quickly shown that as E0 approaches 1 MJ, a neutron saturation effect was observed; Yn does not increase as much as expected, as E0 was progressively raised towards 1 MJ.

• Question: Is there a fundamental reason for Yn


Global Scaling Law Insights 2

Scaling deterioration observed in numerical experiments (small black crosses) compared to measurements on various machines (larger coloured crosses)

Neutron ‘saturation’ is more aptly portrayed as a scaling deterioration-Conclusion of IPFS-INTI UC research

LogYn vs LogEo

y = 0.5x0.8

y = 0.001x2

0.0001

0.0010

0.0100

0.1000

1.0000

10.0000

100.0000

1000.0000

10000.0000

0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 10000.0 100000.0

Log Eo, Eo in kJ

Lo

gY

n, Y

n in

10^

10

High E0 (Low Eo)Mid Eo compile expts08 compiled dataPower ( High E0)Power ( (Low Eo))

• S Lee & S H Saw, J Fusion Energy, 27 292-295 (2008)

• S Lee, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion, 50 (2008) 105005

• S H Saw & S Lee.. Nuclear & Renewable Energy Sources Ankara, Turkey, 28 & 29 Sepr 2009.

• S Lee Appl Phys Lett 95, 151503 (2009)

Cause: Due to constant dynamic resistance relative to decreasing generator impedance


Scaling for large Plasma Focus Scaling 1

Targets:

1. IFMIF (International fusion materials irradiation facility)-level fusion wall materials testing

(a major test facility for the international programme to build a fusion reactor)- essentially an ion accelerator


Fusion Wall materials testing at the mid-level of IFMIF: 1015 D-T neutrons per shot, 1 Hz, 1 year for 0.1-1 dpa-

Gribkov Scaling 1

IPFS numerical Experiments:


Possible PF configuration: Fast capacitor bank 10x PF1000-Fully modelled- 1.5x1015 D-T neutrons per shot Scaling 1

• Operating Parameters: 35kV, 14 Torr D-T• Bank Parameters: L0=33.5nH, C0=13320uF, r0=0.19m

• E0=8.2 MJ• Tube Parameters: b=35.1 cm, a=25.3 cm z0=220cm

• Ipeak=7.3 MA, Ipinch=3.0 MA

• Model parameters 0.13, 0.65, 0.35, 0.65


Ongoing IPFS numerical experiments of Multi-MJ Plasma Focus Scaling 1


50 kV modelled- 1.2x1015 D-T neutrons per shot Scaling 1

• Operating Parameters: 50kV, 40 Torr D-T• Bank Parameters: L0=33.5nH, C0=2000uF, r0=0.45m • E0=2.5 MJ• Tube Parameters: b=20.9 cm, a=15 cm z0=70cm• Ipeak=6.7 MA, Ipinch=2.8 MA• Model parameters 0.14, 0.7, 0.35, 0.7

Improved performance going from 35 kV to 50 kV


IFMIF-scale device Scaling 1

• Numerical Experiments suggests the possibility of scaling the PF up to IFMIF mid-scale with a PF1000-like device at 50kV and 2.5 MJ at pinch current of 2.8MA

• Such a system would cost only a few % of the planned IFMIF


Scaling further- possibilities Scaling 2

• 1. Increase E0, however note: scaling deteriorated already below Yn~E0

• 2. Increase voltage, at 50 kV beam energy ~150kV already past fusion x-section peak; further increase in voltage, x-section decreases, so gain is marginal

• Need technological advancement to increase current per unit E0 and per unit V0.

• We next extrapolate from point of view of Ipinch


Scaling from Ipinch using present predominantly beam-target :

Yn=1.8x1010Ipeak3.8; Yn=3.2x1011Ipinch

4.4 (I in MA) Scaling 2


SXR Scaling Laws Scaling 3

• First systematic studies in the world done in neon as a collaborative effort of IPFS, INTI IU CPR and NIE Plasma Radiation Lab:

Ysxr = 8300× Ipinch3.6

Ysxr = 600 × Ipeak3.2 in J (I in MA).

• Scaling laws extended to Argon, N and O by M Akel AEC, Syria in collaboration.


Special characteristics of SXR-for applications Scaling 3

• Not penetrating; for example neon SXR only penetrates microns of most surfaces

• Energy carried by the radiation is delivered at surface• Suitable for lithography and micro-machining• At low intensity - applications for surface sterilisation or

treatment of food• at high levels of energy intensity, Surface hammering

effect;, production of ultra-strong shock waves to punch through backing material; or as high intensity compression drivers in fusion scenarios


Compression- and Yield- Enhancement methods Scaling 4

• Suitable design optimize compression

• Role of high voltage

• Role of special circuits e.g current-steps

• Role of radiative cooling and collapse


Latest development Latest

Modelling:

Ion beam fluence

Post focus axial shock waves

Plasma streams

Anode sputtered material

Plasma Focus PinchPlasma Focus Pinch Latest

photo taken by Paul Lee on INTI PF

Emissions from the PF Pinch region Emissions from the PF Pinch region Latest

+Mach500 Plasma stream

+Mach20 anode material jet

Sequence of shadowgraphs of PF Pinch- Sequence of shadowgraphs of PF Pinch- M Shahid Rafique PhD Thesis NTU/NIE Singapore 2000 M Shahid Rafique PhD Thesis NTU/NIE Singapore 2000 Latest

Highest post-pinch axial shock waves speed ~50cm/us M500

Highest pre-pinch radial speed>25cm/us M250

Much later…Sequence of shadowgraphics of post-pinch copper jetS Lee et al J Fiz Mal 6, 33 (1985) Latest

Slow Copper plasma jet 2cm/us M20


Extracted from V A Gribkov presentation: IAEA Dec 2012

Comparing large and small PF’s- Dimensions and Comparing large and small PF’s- Dimensions and lifetimes- putting shadowgraphs side-by-side, same scalelifetimes- putting shadowgraphs side-by-side, same scale

Lifetime ~10ns order of ~100 ns

Anode radius 1 cm 11.6 cm

Pinch Radius: 1mm 12mm

Pinch length: 8mm 90mm

Flux out of Plasma FocusFlux out of Plasma Focus

Charged particle beams

Neutron emission when operating with D

Radiation including Bremsstrahlung, line radiation, SXR and HXR

Plasma stream

Anode sputtered material


Plasma Focus Ion Beam Fluence and Flux –Scaling with Stored Energy E0 Latest

• Many Measurements on plasma focus ion beams have been published

• Include various advanced techniques producing a bewildering variety of data using variety of units

• Yet to produce benchmark numbers.

• Our latest work uses the Lee Model code, integrated with experimental measurements to provide the basis for reference numbers and the scaling of deuteron beams versus E0


Basic Definition of Ion Beam characteristics Latest

• Beam number fluence Fib defines (ions m-2)

• Beam energy fluence defines (J m-2)

Flux =fluence x pulse duration

• Beam number flux Fib/ defines (ions m-2s-1)

• Beam energy flux defines (W m-2)

Modelling the flux Modelling the flux Latest

Ion beam number fluence is derived from beam-plasma target considerations as:

FFibib = C = Cnn I Ipinchpinch22zzpp[ln(b/r[ln(b/rpp)]/ ()]/ (rrpp

22 U U1/21/2))

ions m-2

All SI units:calibration constant Cn =8.5x108; calibrated against experimental point at 0.5MA

Ipinch=pinch currentzp=pinch lengthb=outer electrode, cathode radiusrp=pinch radiusU=beam energy in eV where in this model U=3x Vmax

(max dynamic induced voltage)These values are computed by our code

Example: Numerical Experiment for PF1000 based on following fitted parameters: Latest

L0=33 nH, C0=1332 uF, r0=6.3 mb=16 cm, a= 11.6 cm, z0=60 cmfm=0.14, fc=0.7, fmr=0.35, fcr=0.7 V0=27 kV,

P0= 3.5 Torr MW=4, A=1, At=2 for deuterium

Results are extracted from dataline after shot: Results are extracted from dataline after shot:

Ipinch=8.63x105 A, zp=0.188 m, b/rp=16 cm/2.23 cm, ln(b/rp)=1.97, U=3Vmax=3x4.21x104 =1.26x105 V

From the above; estimate From the above; estimate ions/mions/m22 per shot per shot

For PF1000 (at 500 kJ) we obtained

Jb =4.3x1020 ions/m2 per shot

=4.3x1016 ions/cm2 per shot at 126 keV

Computing for various plasma focus we obtain the following table:


Table 1: Parameters of a range of Plasma Focus and computed Ion Beam characteristics Latest

Machine PF1000 DPF78 NX3 INTIPF NX2 PF-5M PF400J

E0 (kJ) 486 31.0 14.5 3.4 2.7 2.0 0.4

L0 (nH) 33 55 50 110 20 33 40

V0 (kV) 27 60 17 15 14 16 28

'a' (cm) 11.50 4.00 2.60 0.95 1.90 1.50 0.60

c=b/a 1.4 1.3 2 3.4 2.2 1.7 2.7

Ipeak (kA) 1846 961 582 180 382 258 129

Ipinch (kA) 862 444 348 122 220 165 84

zp (cm) 18.8 5.5 3.8 1.4 2.8 2.3 0.8

rp (cm) 2.23 0.62 0.4 0.13 0.31 0.22 0.09

t (ns) 255 41.0 36.5 7.6 30.0 12.2 5.1

Vmax (kV) 42 68.3 35 25 22 32.3 18


Latest

MachineIB Ion Fluence (x1020m-2)

PF1000 3.9

DPF783.2

NX35.7

INTI3.6

NX23.4

PF5M2.4

PF400J2.6

IB Ion Flux (x1027m-2s-1) 1.5 7.8 15.6 46.7 11.5 19.6 50.4

Mean Ion Energy (keV) 126 205 105 75 66 97 54

IB Energy Fluence (x106 J m-2) 7.8 10.6 9.6 4.3 3.6 3.7 2.2

IB Energy Flux (x1013 W m-2) 3.1 25.8 26.3 56.4 12.0 30.6 43.2

Ion Number (x1014) 6100 390 280 19 110 37 5.9

IB Energy (J) 12248 1284 479 23 111 58 5.1

(% E0) (2.5) (4.1) (3.3) (0.7) (4.1) (2.8) (1.3)

IB current (kA) 380.0 152.4 124.8 40.0 56.7 49.1 18.6

IB Damage Ftr (x1010 Wm-2s0.5) 1.6 5.2 5.0 4.9 2.1 3.4 3.1

Ion Speed (cm/ms) 347 443 317 269 250 305 226

Ion Number per kJ (x1014) 12.6 12.7 19.4 5.6 40.1 18.1 15.1

Plasma Stream Energy (J) 39120 394 1707 249 369 92 17

(% E0) (8.1) (1.3) (12.0) (7.4) (13.7) (4.5) (4.5)

Plasma Stream Speed (cm/s) 18.2 23.1 24.2 47.4 20.1 48.6 35.7


Ion Beam Property Units (multiplier) Range Suggested Scaling

Fluence Ions m-2 ( x1020) 2.4 – 7.8 independent of E0

Average ion energy keV 55 - 300 independent of E0

Energy Fluence J m-2 (x106) 2 - 33 independent of E0

Beam exit radius fraction of radius 'a' 0.14 - 0.19 scales with 'a'

Beam Ion number Ions per kJ ( x1014) 12 - 40* scales with E0

Beam energy % of E0 1.3 – 5.4+ scales with E0

Beam charge mC per kJ 0.2 - 0.4# scales with E0

Beam duration ns per cm of ‘a’ 8 – 20 scales with ‘a’

Flux ions m-2 s-1 (x1027) 1.5 – 50 independent of E0

Energy flux W m-2 (x1013) 3 – 56 independent of E0

Beam current % of Ipeak 14 – 23 scales with Ipeak

Damage Factor (x1010 Wm-2s0.5) 1.6 – 11 independent of E0

*= 6 for INTI PF

+= 0.7 for INTI PF

#= 0.1 for INTI PF

Table 2: Summary of Range of Ion beam properties and suggested scaling


(b) Philosophy, modelling, results and applications of the Lee Model code TR Package


Plasma Focus Numerical Experiments- Conclusions: We have covered

• Development, usage and results

• Basis and philosophy

• Reference for Diagnostics

• Insights and frontiers

• Continuing development- Ion beam modelling


References•10S Lee, Radiative Dense Plasma Focus Computation Package: RADPF. http://www.plasmafocus.net; http://www.intimal.edu.my/school/fas/UFLF/(archival websites)•11 S Lee in Radiation in Plasmas Vol II, Ed B McNamara, Procs of Spring College in Plasma Physics (1983) ICTP, Trieste, p. 978-987, ISBN 9971-966-37-9, Published byWorld Scientific Publishing Co, Singapore (1984)•12S Lee, T.Y. Tou, S.P. Moo, M.A. Elissa, A.V. Gholap, K.H. Kwek, S. Mulyodrono, A.J. Smith, Suryadi, W.Usala & M. Zakaullah. Amer J Phys 56, 62 (1988)•13T.Y.Tou, S.Lee & K.H.Kwek. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci 17, 311-315 (1989)•14S Lee & A Serban, IEEE Trans Plasma Sci 24, 1101-1105 (1996)•15 SP Moo, CK Chakrabarty, S Lee - IEEE Trans Plasma Sci 19, 515-519 (1991)•16D E Potter, Phys Fluids 14, 1911 (1971)•17A Serban and S Lee, Plasma Sources Sci and Tehnology, 6, 78 (1997)•18M H Liu, X P Feng, SV Springham & S Lee, IEEE Trans Plasma Sci. 26, 135 (1998)•19S Lee, P.Lee, G.Zhang, X.Feng, V.A.Gribkov, M.Liu, A.Serban & T.Wong. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci, 26, 1119 (1998)•20S.Lee in http://ckplee.home.nie.edu.sg/plasmaphysics/ (archival website) (2012) •21S. Lee in ICTP Open Access Archive: http://eprints.ictp.it/85/ (2005)•22D.Wong, P.Lee, T.Zhang, A.Patran, T.L.Tan, R.S.Rawat & S.Lee. Plasma Sources, Sci & Tech 16, 116 (2007)•23V. Siahpoush, M.A.Tafreshi, S. Sobhanian, & S. Khorram. Plasma Phys & Controlled Fusion 47, 1065 (2005)

http://www.plasmafocus.net/

http://www.intimal.edu.my/school/fas/UFLF/

http://ckplee.home.nie.edu.sg/plasmaphysics/

http://eprints.ictp.it/85/


References•24L. Soto, P. Silva, J. Moreno, G. Silvester, M. Zambra, C. Pavez, L. Altamirano, H. Bruzzone, M. Barbaglia, Y. Sidelnikov & W. Kies. Brazilian J Phys 34, 1814 (2004)•25H.Acuna, F.Castillo, J.Herrera & A.Postal. International conf on Plasma Sci, 3-5 June 1996, conf record Pg127 •26C.Moreno, V.Raspa, L.Sigaut & R.Vieytes, Applied Phys Letters 89(2006)•27S. Lee, R S Rawat, P Lee and S H Saw, J. Appl. Phys. 106, 023309 (2009)• 28S. H. Saw and S. Lee, Energy and Power Engineering, 2 (1), 65-72 (2010)• 29M. Akel, Sh Al-Hawat, S H Saw and S Lee, J Fusion Energy, 29, 3, 223-231 (2010)• 30S H Saw, P C K Lee, R S Rawat, S Lee, IEEE Trans Plasma Sci, 37, 1276-1282 (2009)•31Sh. Al-Hawat, M. Akel, S H Saw, S Lee, J Fusion Energy, 31, 13 – 20, (2012)• 32Sh Al-Hawat, M. Akel , S. Lee, S. H. Saw, J Fusio Energy 31, 13-20 (2012)• 33S Lee, S H Saw, R S Rawat, P Lee, A.Talebitaher, A E Abdou, P L Chong, F Roy, A Singh, D Wong and K Devi, IEEE Trans Plasma Sci 39, 3196-3202 (2011)• 34S Lee and S H Saw, J Fusion Energy, 27, 292-295 (2008)• 35S. Lee and S H Saw, Appl. Phys. Lett., 92, 021503 (2008)• 36S Lee. Plasma Physics Controlled Fusion, 50 10500 (2008) •37S Lee. Appl. Phys. Lett. 95 151503 (2009)


References•38S Lee, S. H. Saw and Jalil Ali, J Fusion Energy DOI: 10.1007/s10894-012-9522- 8 First Online 26 Feb (2012) • 39S Lee and S H Saw, J Fusion Energy DOI: 10.1007/s10894-012-9506-8 First Online 31 January (2012) •40 S Lee, S H Saw, P C K Lee, R S Rawat and H Schmidt, Appl Phys Lett 92, 111501 (2008)• 41S H Saw, S Lee, F Roy, PL Chong, V Vengadeswaran, ASM Sidik, YW Leong & A Singh, Rev Sci Instruments, 81, 053505 (2010)• 42 S Lee, S H Saw, R S Rawat, P Lee, R Verma, A.Talebitaher, S M Hassan, A E Abdou, Mohamed Ismail, Amgad Mohamed, H Torreblanca, Sh Al Hawat, M Akel, P L Chong, F Roy, A Singh, D Wong and K Devi, J Fusion Energy 31,198–204 (2012)• 43S Lee, S H Saw, A E Abdou and H Torreblanca, J Fusion Energy 30, 277-282 (2011)• 44F M Aghamir and R A Behbahani, J. Plasma Physics: doi:10.1017/S0022377812000438 in press (2012)• 45 S.Lee, S.H.Saw, L..Soto, S V Springham, S P Moo, Plasma Phys and Control. Fusion, 51 075006 (11pp) (2009)•46 S.P. Chow, S. Lee and B.C. Tan, J Plasma Phys, 8 21-31 (1972).

Review of (UPFLF) Plasma Focus Numerical Experiments

S Lee1,2,3 & H Saw1,2

1INTI International University, Nilai, Malaysia2Institute for Plasma Focus Studies, Melbourne, Australia

3University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

International Workshop on Plasma Science and Applications, 4 & 5 October 2012, Bangkok, Thailand

Review of (UPFLF) Plasma Focus Numerical Experiments S Lee 1,2,3 & H Saw 1,2 1 INTI International University, Nilai, Malaysia 2 Institute for Plasma Focus.

Documents

plasma focus experiments

s h saw plasma

plasma focus studies

filippov type plasma

plasma science

s h saw review of upflf

code intro code

s h saw development