• Matter and Radiation at Extremes
  • Vol. 6, Issue 3, 035902 (2021)
Peng Wang1、2、*, Chen Zhang1, Shaoen Jiang1, Xiaoxi Duan1, Huan Zhang1, LiLing Li1, Weiming Yang1, Yonggang Liu1, Yulong Li1, Liang Sun1, Hao Liu1, and Zhebin Wang1
Author Affiliations
  • 1Laser Fusion Research Center, China Academy of Engineering Physics, Mianyang 621900, China
  • 2Department of Plasma Physics and Fusion Engineering, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.1063/5.0039062 Cite this Article
    Peng Wang, Chen Zhang, Shaoen Jiang, Xiaoxi Duan, Huan Zhang, LiLing Li, Weiming Yang, Yonggang Liu, Yulong Li, Liang Sun, Hao Liu, Zhebin Wang. Density-dependent shock Hugoniot of polycrystalline diamond at pressures relevant to ICF[J]. Matter and Radiation at Extremes, 2021, 6(3): 035902 Copy Citation Text show less
    Schematic of experimental configuration with impedance-matching target: PSBO, a passive shock breakout diagnostic system.
    Fig. 1. Schematic of experimental configuration with impedance-matching target: PSBO, a passive shock breakout diagnostic system.
    (a) Streaked image of shot 212 recorded by a passive shock breakout diagnostic system (PSBO); the rightmost streak is stray light. (b) Average intensities of groups indicated in (a).
    Fig. 2. (a) Streaked image of shot 212 recorded by a passive shock breakout diagnostic system (PSBO); the rightmost streak is stray light. (b) Average intensities of groups indicated in (a).
    (a) Shock wave propagation in standard and sample. (b) Impedance-matching analysis. Point A (upA, PA) is the incident shock state in the standard, and point B (upB, PB) is the Hugoniot state of the sample.
    Fig. 3. (a) Shock wave propagation in standard and sample. (b) Impedance-matching analysis. Point A (upA, PA) is the incident shock state in the standard, and point B (upB, PB) is the Hugoniot state of the sample.
    Experimental data and fitted lines: (a) shock velocity vs particle velocity; (b) pressure vs density.
    Fig. 4. Experimental data and fitted lines: (a) shock velocity vs particle velocity; (b) pressure vs density.
    Comparisons between Hugoniot data and models: (a) shock velocity vs particle velocity; (b) pressure vs density. The results of SESAME 7830 and SESAME 7831 are shown as the blue and green lines, respectively, for initial densities of 3.23, 3.36, and 3.515 g/cm3.
    Fig. 5. Comparisons between Hugoniot data and models: (a) shock velocity vs particle velocity; (b) pressure vs density. The results of SESAME 7830 and SESAME 7831 are shown as the blue and green lines, respectively, for initial densities of 3.23, 3.36, and 3.515 g/cm3.
    Hugoniots of materials with diffeinitial density (ρ0 = 3.515 g/cm3): (a) Hugoniots from SESAME 7830 and McQueen model in P–ρ plane; (b)–(d) Hugoniots from SESAME 7830, McQueen model, and Wu–Jing model in Us–up plane.
    Fig. 6. Hugoniots of materials with diffeinitial density (ρ0 = 3.515 g/cm3): (a) Hugoniots from SESAME 7830 and McQueen model in Pρ plane; (b)–(d) Hugoniots from SESAME 7830, McQueen model, and Wu–Jing model in Usup plane.
    Grüneisen parameter vs density. The gray and yellow regions are the valid density regions for the Grüneisen parameter of the present work (red curve) and Gregor et al.34 (black curve), respectively.
    Fig. 7. Grüneisen parameter vs density. The gray and yellow regions are the valid density regions for the Grüneisen parameter of the present work (red curve) and Gregor et al.34 (black curve), respectively.
    (a) and (b) Grüneisen parameter calculated using Hugoniots of different initial density (full-density Hugoniot as reference) of SESAME 7830 and SESAME 7831; (c) and (d) Grüneisen parameter calculated along isochores of SESAME 7830 and SESAME 7831.
    Fig. 8. (a) and (b) Grüneisen parameter calculated using Hugoniots of different initial density (full-density Hugoniot as reference) of SESAME 7830 and SESAME 7831; (c) and (d) Grüneisen parameter calculated along isochores of SESAME 7830 and SESAME 7831.
    ShotAl step (μm)HDC step (μm)
    21227.79 ± 0.3531.95 ± 0.30
    21327.84 ± 0.2730.43 ± 0.24
    21427.87 ± 0.2330.78 ± 0.74
    Table 1. Thicknesses of target steps used in experiments.
    Range (km/s)a0±σa0(km/s)a1±σa1β (km/s)
    up ≤ 6.7639.449 ± 0.0201.324 ± 0.0163.0220
    6.763 < up ≤ 3017.992 ± 0.0781.167 ± 0.0269.8381
    Table 2. Coefficients and uncertainties of piecewise-linear form of Usup relationship Us = a0 + a1(upβ) for Al.41
    ShotΔt1 (ps)Δt2 (ps)Us1 (km/s)Us2 (km/s)Us2 (km/s)up2 (km/s)P2 (Mbar)ρ2 (g/cm3)
    212818.9 ± 5.1857.4 ± 6.733.94 ± 0.4837.26 ± 0.4537.20 ± 0.4521.36 ± 0.6325.67 ± 0.897.59 ± 0.34
    213876.2 ± 6.0879.1 ± 7.631.78 ± 0.3834.61 ± 0.4134.51 ± 0.4119.72 ± 0.5221.98 ± 0.707.54 ± 0.31
    214977.2 ± 5.4988.0 ± 14.428.53 ± 0.2831.15 ± 0.8831.02 ± 0.8817.13 ± 0.4417.16 ± 0.587.21 ± 0.41
    Table 3. Experimental data of present study: subscripts 1 and 2 denote Al and diamond, respectively; Δt, shock transition time in Al or diamond step; Us, measured average shock velocity; Us*, shock velocity with non-steady wave correction; up, particle velocity; P, pressure; ρ, density; Us1 and Us2* are used in impedance matching.
    Peng Wang, Chen Zhang, Shaoen Jiang, Xiaoxi Duan, Huan Zhang, LiLing Li, Weiming Yang, Yonggang Liu, Yulong Li, Liang Sun, Hao Liu, Zhebin Wang. Density-dependent shock Hugoniot of polycrystalline diamond at pressures relevant to ICF[J]. Matter and Radiation at Extremes, 2021, 6(3): 035902
    Download Citation