
- High Power Laser Science and Engineering
- Vol. 3, Issue 1, 010000e6 (2015)
Abstract
1. Introduction
The principal constituents of shock ignition (SI), converging shocks and their returns in spherical or cylindrical geometry, are based on ideas suggested some time ago[. This is at least a factor of 10 higher then the laser intensities employed in direct or indirect drive ICF. Strong parametric instability[
One of the important results of kinetic simulations of LPI in the framework of SI is the fact that the laser energy is absorbed not at the critical density via inverse Bremsstrahlung but by collective effects in the low-density plasma corona[, whereas the installations used for LPI in the context of SI achieve much less at present (LULI:
; PALS:
; LIL:
; OMEGA:
). Care has to be taken when extrapolating physics behaviour from low temperature to the higher operating temperature expected for SI.
Most of the experimental activity initially concentrated on the hydrodynamic aspects of SI. However, in recent years, several experiments have been performed of relevance or at least related to LPI aspects of SI[
Sign up for High Power Laser Science and Engineering TOC. Get the latest issue of High Power Laser Science and Engineering delivered right to you!Sign up now
Case | ||
---|---|---|
c8 | ![]() | 0.5 |
h8 | ![]() | 2 |
h7 | ![]() | 5 |
h9 | ![]() | 10 |
i8 | ![]() | 2 |
Table 1. Summary of the simulations. Here, refers to the laser intensity,
is the electron plasma temperature. All simulations are at
, i.e., a laser wavelength of
. The fully relativistic PIC code emi2D[42] was used for all simulations;
for all simulations. The reduced intensity case i8 will not be discussed in the text as the results show the same scenario as the corresponding high-intensity case h8.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section
2. Simulation setup
The simulations used in this paper are summarized in Table FWHM. A mass ratio
is used and the ion charge is
. The total simulation time is of the order of
. Radiation hydrodyamic simulations show that the temperature varies little in the plasma corona. Therefore the same temperature is assigned for the whole plasma profile.
The simulation box is in the parallel direction (laser propagation direction) and
in the transverse direction. For a wavelength of
this corresponds to
by
. The simulated plasma fills the box completely in the transverse direction but has a length of only
in the parallel direction, being surrounded by a vacuum region on both side. The plasma profile is exponential in the propagation direction of the laser with a scale length of
and extends from
up to
with 60 particles per cell at the highest density. It should be noted that in reality the gradient scale length is of the order of a few hundred microns. However, previous simulations in 1D have shown that
does not affect the underlying scenario and physics strongly but only affects the time scales. The plasma temperature is a much more stringent parameter for LPI-SI simulations then the gradient scale length. The boundary conditions are periodic in the transverse direction and open in the parallel direction. The incident laser light is p-polarized in normal incidence. The pulse length is infinite with a ramp-up time of a few laser cycles. The spatial discretization is
(in the laser propagation direction),
(in the transverse direction) and
, respecting the Courant–Friedrichs–Lewy condition for explicit integration of the PIC equations. Relativistic normalization is used throughout, i.e., the time
and spatial coordinate
are normalized by the laser frequency
and vacuum
-vector
, respectively. Collisions are not accounted for. The simulation times are too short and the temperatures too high for collisions to have much of an effect on the parametric instabilities analysed in the following simulations. The typical electron–ion collision frequency is given as
, with
in
and
in keV. The use of, as worst-case scenario, the highest plasma density,
, and the lowest temperature,
, employed in the simulations results in a collision time of
. This is twice the simuation time. Moreover, for the considered intensities the growth rates of the instabilities are also much larger than the typical collision frequencies.
Figure in order to avoid numerical boundary effects.
3. Analysis of simulation results
3.1. Characterization of the parametric instabilities involved
The two main instabilities of interest here are SRS and TPD instability. The resonant SRS process consists of the decomposition of a laser photon () into a backscattered frequency-downshifted photon (
) and a forward travelling electron plasma wave (
) (EPW). It fulfils the following conditions for the frequency and wavevector:

The frequency of the EPW follows from the dispersion relation as










The TPD is the decomposition of the laser photon () into two plasmons (
). The plasmon frequencies are determined by the dispersion relation for the electron plasma waves, Equation (

Figure ) obey the relations

The threshold for the TPD instability in an inhomogeneous plasma profile[

Here, , is in units of kilo electron volts and
is the laser intensity in units of
;
and
are given in units of microns. The TPD instability is excited in the vicinity of the quarter critical density and develops as an absolute instability as the slow plasma waves do not escape the resonance. In contrast, the threshold for SRS excitation near
is not a function of
and is given by[

Depending on the electron temperature, the thresholds for the two instabilities can be quite similar and develop in competition. A high-frequency hybrid instability (HFHI) can develop[, with
. Here,
and
are the damping rates due to Landau damping and collisions, respectively. In the case when Raman is above threshold, i.e.,
, the growth rate reduces to
. Even for the lowest temperature used in the simulations,
, the collisional damping rate is two orders of magnitude smaller than the Landau damping rate for EPWs, which, for backward SRS, is given as

Here, is the electron plasma wavevector and one has the following expression for
in practical units:



Evaluation of these expressions at a density of and for
results in a Landau damping rate of
, i.e., much larger than the collision rate quoted in Section
, and is of the order of
at the quarter critical density
. However, even in the most damped case, since the collision frequency is so low as discussed in Section





At very low electron plasma temperature, a few hundred eV, the Langmuir decay instability (LDI) can play an important role as it saturates TPD and SRS activity. Although of limited importance in the case of SI which operates in multi-keV conditions, it could be relevant for present-day LPI experiments for SI, as these take place at a much lower temperature. Therefore it is presented in some more detail.
The LDI was predicted in the 1960s[
The LDI induces a decay of the pump plasma wave into an IAW characterized by
(travelling in the direction of the original EPW) and an anti-Stokes daughter EPW (travelling in the opposite direction) having a frequency close to the original frequency (downshifted by
) and a wavevector given by
, where the correction
has the form

Here, is the Debye length, which in practical units is given as
, with
in eV and
in
. A necessary condition for LDI to take place is therefore that[

For all the cases considered in Table
The maximum growth rate is given by

Here, is the electrostatic field associated with the EPWs,
represent the two plasmons, and



For the intensity considered in this study SBS takes place in the weak-coupling regime even for the lowest temperature used, i.e., Equation (, with
. The growth rate for SBS in this regime is given as
, which in practical units is




In the following the simulation results are analysed with respect to the behaviour of the reflectivity of the incident laser beam, the induced activity of the parametric instabilities, and the phase space and Poynting vector. These issues are of course strongly interdependent.
3.2. Overall scenario
Two fundamental issues have to be addressed as far as the simulations are concerned.
The relative importance of TPD and SRS. One would expect that the colder the plasma the stronger the TPD.
Which mechanism is saturating the TPD and SRS activity at the quarter critical density
With respect to the first point it is indeed found that the higher the temperature the more pronounced SRS becomes, although it is a negligible energy loss mechanism as far as reflectivity is concerned. With respect to the second point one can observe a clear transition from LDI-induced saturation of Raman at to saturation due to cavitation and density fluctuations for temperatures of
and above. For the low-temperature case c8 there is LDI and TPD activity but no SRS.
SBS is present for any temperature but decreases in importance the higher the temperature. The general conclusion of this set of simulations is that the plasma temperature plays a crucial role as far as the LPI scenario is concerned. Already a factor of two in the electron plasma temperature can significantly affect the relative importance of the parametric instabilities and their effect on the plasma dynamics and laser absorption. Realistic simulations and future experiments for SI require LPI to take place at the right temperature.
The overall energy balance is affected by the amount of the energy of the incident laser beam reflected due to SRS and SBS, Section
3.3. Reflectivity
Figure integrated over the whole transverse direction. The use of
instead of
ensures that nothing is lost due to a possible opening angle of the backscattered light. There is basically no SRS activity for the cases c8 and h8. The substantial backscattering of the order of 10%–20% originates entirely from Brillouin. Increase of the temperatures strongly reduces SBS activity and increases SRS. However, the energy losses due to SRS even for the highest temperature case, h9, remain negligible. The bursty, spike-like nature of the SRS reflectivity is not related to inflationary SRS, as the corresponding frequency spectra relate the region of SRS activity to the vicinity of
, in accordance with standard absolute SRS excitation. In general, SRS is strongly Landau damped at temperatures of the order of a few keV. However, in the vicinity of the quarter critical density the wavevector of the backscattered light





The total reflectivities, i.e., the SRS and SBS contributions combined, reduce strongly as the temperature is increased. For the cases c8 and h8 the average reflectivity is of the order of 10%–15%, whereas for the high-temperature cases, h7 and h9, the overall reflectivity is reduced to 1%–2% only.
SBS develops everywhere in the profile, up to . At
SBS is strongly inhibited due to the fact that the laser beam is randomized due to the cavitation process and LDI, and the associated strong density fluctuations (see, e.g., Figure
By contrast, SRS develops predominantly at . The simulated time scales are short for the SBS evolution. It is therefore unclear what the saturation mechanisms for SBS are on longer time scales. The bursty behaviour of the reflectivities as visible in Figure
Figure but is very weak in agreement with the reflectivity curves. In the hot case, h9 (Figure
with
. This most likely originates from density perturbations induced by TPD and/or cavitation. The localization of the SRS signal around
is a signature of the fact that SRS originates from the vicinity of the quarter critical density. The downshifted backscattered light from SRS has the correct frequency to be trapped locally in density cavities[
Figure at large angle. This is a signature of TPD coupling with the laser and disappears at later time after saturation of TPD, as can be seen in Figure
stems from the incoming laser and the backscattered light due to SBS. The strong-signal opening angle increases in time due to side scattering and refraction from density perturbations. In the hot case, Figure
and
. The first is the signature of SRS, as
close to
(see the discussion above), the latter one is the coupling of electron plasma waves at
with the laser. As expected, the signal is mostly in the parallel direction as SRS has a small opening angle.
3.4. Electron-related mode activity: SRS, TPD and LDI
As already mentioned, there is almost no SRS for the cases c8 and h8. Strong SRS is present for higher temperatures above . In general, it can be said that there is no SRS activity in the low-density part of the plasma corona. SRS is concentrated near the quarter critical density. The high-temperature case h9 has very strong absolute SRS activity but basically no TPD.
As can be seen from Table
Case | ![]() | CAV | LDI | SRS | SBS | TPD | ![]() | ![]() |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
c8 | 0.5 | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | 0.014 | 0.11 |
h8 | 2 | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | 0.056 | 0.11 |
h7 | 5 | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | 0.14 | 0.11 |
h9 | 10 | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | 0.28 | 0.11 |
Table 2. Temperature-dependent occurrence of LPI phenomena. The number of stars gives a rough ‘visual’ interpretation of the strength of the process occurring, with strongest and
weakest. The numbers in the columns
and
are calculated from the corresponding Equations (
is 1.2 for all cases. CAV
cavitation.
As the SBS reflectivity data (see Figure
At a later stage SRS still does not develop due to the strong, irregular small-scale density modulations induced by TPD. For the cold case c8, TPD is saturated by LDI which develops on the EPWs generated originally by TPD.
In the high-temperature cases (h7 and h9) the threshold for SRS is lower than for TPD and strong absolute SRS develops which induces cavitation and leads to saturation.
Figure and
reproduces the IAWs which are the result of LDI decay of the plasmons excited by TPD and has
-vectors that are roughly twice the original
-vectors from the EPWs. The extent is due to the large spread of the
-vectors of the EPWs. The smaller feature with
close to zero results from the low-frequency beating of symmetrically excited plasmons, e.g.,
and
in Figure
and in an almost perfect forward direction is the IAW signal generated by SBS (also visible in (b) for case h8).
The EPWs generated by TPD and the secondary waves generated by LDI evolve into turbulence, as observed in other recent simulations for SI[
3.5. Plasma cavitation
The role of cavitation was clearly identified in previous work related to SI[, see Equation (
The high-temperature case h9, in particular, Figure (see Figure
. The particular regimes where either one or the other is dominant are not yet fully clarified.
As discussed above (see Section
The creation of the cavities is therefore an intricate interdependence of laser intensity, plasma profile, plasma temperature and growth rate of absolute Raman at . From previous and present simulations it follows that the optimum is around
for cavity creation. Figure
case shown in Figure
3.6. Laser absorption into hot electrons
SRS, TPD and cavitation are all sources of hot electron production. However, the hot electrons differ as far as temperature and propagation direction are concerned[
As discussed above, TPD is the dominant process in the cold case c8. As shown in Figure -vectors, which has also been observed recently in other simulation work[
-space (not shown here). By contrast, the hot case h9, Figure
by either collective modes or hot electrons. For the case c8, Figure
, i.e., no transmission at all. At early time the transmissivity is on average 50%, and it is 10% at later time (around
). For case h8 one has 35% transmission at early time, and 15% at later time (same times as for the previous case c8). The case h7 is shown in detail in Figure 2(b) of Ref. [
As was pointed out previously[ and is not dependent on the laser intensity but is determined by the resonant interaction of the electrons with the plasma waves generated by TPD and SRS. The laser intensity affects the number of hot electrons produced. The relevant parameters affecting the hot electron production are the phase velocity and the initial bulk electron temperature. Present and previous simulation work[
4. Conclusions
The relative importance of the various phenomena (cavitation, LDI, SRS, SBS and TPD) is summarized in Table . Setting the ratio equal to 1 results in an electron plasma temperature of
, which separates the SRS-dominated regime from the TPD-dominated regime. This value agrees well with the observed switchover of the LPI scenario in the simulations. The laser intensities used in the simulations are above the threshold intensities for SRS and TPD for all temperatures used in the simulations. One should note that the above ratio depends strongly on the plasma temperature but only weakly on the gradient scale length of the plasma profile. Therefore, temperature should be the determining parameter for a given intensity. On increasing the intensity other instabilities might appear, such as iSRS in the low-density region, far below
, although saturation of SRS and TPD close to
was observed. In addition, SBS will become even more dominant on the time scales considered in the simulations[
An important conclusion of the simulation work presented is the necessity to have better absorption models for the laser beam in radiation hydrodynamic simulation for shock ignition. It is clear that a large fraction, or even most of it, dependent on the LPI parameters, is not absorbed via inverse Bremsstrahlung at the critical density, but rather by collective effects in the low-density corona. This has to be accounted for in hydrodynamic simulations of the implosion phase in a realistic way. Reliable integrated simulations for SI are necessary.
SI experiments and simulations therefore currently have some important caveats.
Another important issue is how these instabilities are affected in the case of multiple overlapping beams as the driver[
Much more detailed experiments and simulations are needed to determine the presence and relative importance of the various participating instabilities.
A very interesting issue is to determine experimentally where exactly the laser energy is absorbed: in the low-density plasma corona, at the critical surface or at both locations (in which case the ratio would be important). Possible hot electrons have to be attributed clearly to either SRS or TPD. The distribution functions and directionality of the hot electrons will help in this respect. The simulations clearly show the importance of cavitation at the quarter critical density. The cavities are in general of the order of a few wavelengths. It should be possible to perform interferometry at to image the presence of cavities.
References
[1] G. von Guderley. Luftfahrt-Forsch., 9, 302(1942).
[2] K. Brueckner, S. Jorna. Rev. Mod. Phys., 46, 325(1974).
[3] V. Shcherbakov. Sov. J. Plasma Phys., 9, 240(1983).
[5] L. Perkins, R. Betti, K. LaFortune, W. Williams. Phys. Rev. Lett., 103, 045004(2009).
[17] W. Kruer. The Physics of Laser–Plasma Interaction(1988).
[18] H. Vu, D. DuBois, B. Bezzerides. Phys. Rev. Lett., 86, 4306(2001).
[19] C. Riconda, S. Weber, V. Tikhonchuk, A. Heron. Phys. Plasmas, 18, 092701(2011).
[20] S. Weber, C. Riconda, O. Klimo, A. Heron, V. Tikhonchuk. Phys. Rev. E, 85, 016403(2012).
[21] O. Klimo, S. Weber, V. Tikhonchuk, J. Limpouch. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion, 52, 055013(2010).
[23] O. Klimo, V. Tikhonchuk. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion, 55, 095002(2013).
[24] O. Klimo, J. Psikal, V. Tikhonchuk, S. Weber. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion, 56, 055010(2014).
[27] S. Depierreux, K. Lewis, C. Labaune, C. Stenz. J. Phys. IV, 133, 317(2006).
[29] C. Labaune, K. Lewis, H. Bandulet, S. Depierreux, S. Huller, P. Masson-Laborde, D. Pesme, G. Riazuelo. J. Phys. IV, 133, 29(2006).
[30] H. Baldis, C. Labaune, J. Moody, T. Jalinaud, V. Tikhonchuk. Phys. Rev. Lett., 80, 1900(1998).
[31] R. Drake, R. Watt, K. Estabrook. Phys. Rev. Lett., 77, 79(1996).
[33] H. Baldis, C. Labaune, E. Schifano, N. Renard, A. Michard. Phys. Rev. Lett., 77, 2957(1996).
[36] D. Michel, S. Depierreux, C. Stenz, V. Tassin, C. Labaune. Phys. Rev. Lett., 104, 255001(2010).
[37] L. Antonelli, D. Batani, A. Patria, O. Ciricosta, C. Cecchetti, P. Koester, L. Labate, A. Giulietti, L. Gizzi, A. Moretti, M. Richetta, L. Giuffrida, L. Torrisi, M. Kozlova, J. Nejdl, M. Sawicka, D. Margarone, B. Rus, G. Schurtz, X. Ribeyre, M. Lafon, C. Spindloe, T. O’Dell. Acta Tecn., 56, T57(2011).
[40] H. Baldis, C. Walsh. Phys. Fluids, 26, 1364(1983).
[42]
[43] C. Liu, M. Rosenbluth. Phys. Fluids, 19, 967(1976).
[44] A. Simon, R. Short, E. Williams, T. Dewandre. Phys. Fluids, 26, 3107(1983).
[45] C. Menyuk, N. El-Siragy, W. Manheimer. Phys. Fluids, 28, 3409(1985).
[46] B. Afeyan, E. Williams. Phys. Rev. Lett., 75, 4218(1995).
[47] B. Afeyan, E. Williams. Phys. Plasmas, 4, 3845(1997).
[48] D. Forslund, J. Kindel, E. Lindman. Phys. Fluids, 18, 1002(1975).
[49] V. Oraevskii, R. Sagdeev. Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys., 7, 955(1963).
[50] Y. Ichikawa. Phys. Fluids, 9, 1454(1966).
[54] T. Obiki, R. Itatani, Y. Otani. Phys. Rev. Lett., 20, 184(1968).
[55] R. Drake, S. Batha. Phys. Fluids B, 3, 2936(1991).
[60] G. Bonnaud, D. Pesme, R. Pellat. Phys. Fluids B, 2, 1618(1990).
[61] S. Karttunen. Phys. Rev. A, 23, 206(1981).
[62] J. Heikkinen, S. Karttunen. Phys. Fluids, 29, 1291(1986).
[63] B. Bezzerides, D. DuBois, H. Rose. Phys. Rev. Lett., 70, 2569(1993).
[64] B. Bezzerides, D. DuBois, H. Rose, D. Russell. Phys. Scr. T, 63, 16(1996).
[65] R. Berger, C. Still, E. Williams, A. Langdon. Phys. Plasmas, 5, 4337(1998).
[66] D. Russell, D. DuBois, H. Rose. Phys. Plasmas, 6, 1294(1999).
[67] R. Yan, J. Li, C. Ren. Phys. Plasmas, 21, 062705(2014).
[68] C. Riconda, S. Weber, V. Tikhonchuk, J.-C. Adam, A. Heron. Phys. Plasmas, 13, 083103(2006).
[69] C. Riconda, S. Weber, O. Klimo, A. Heron, V. Tikhonchuk. EPJ Web Conf., 59, 05007(2013).
[70] H. Vu, D. DuBois, D. Russell, J. Myatt. Phys. Plasmas, 19, 102708(2012).
[71] H. Vu, D. DuBois, J. Myatt, D. Russell. Phys. Plasmas, 19, 102703(2012).
[72] H. Vu, D. DuBois, D. Russell, J. Myatt, J. Zhang. Phys. Plasmas, 21, 042705(2014).
[73] S. Weber, C. Riconda, V. Tikhonchuk. Phys. Rev. Lett., 94, 055005(2005).

Set citation alerts for the article
Please enter your email address