1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Comparison for non-local hydrodynamic thermal conduction models
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.4789878
/content/aip/journal/pop/20/2/10.1063/1.4789878
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/pop/20/2/10.1063/1.4789878
View: Figures

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Effective thermal conductivity divided by SH thermal conductivity. OSHUN VFP calculations are: blue diamonds—Z = 1 (a), orange squares—Z = 2 (b), green triangle—Z = 4 (c). One hundred simulations have been run for the DUED-SNB model and for the DUED-CMG model. DUED-SNB is plotted with a solid blue line, DUED-CMG is plotted with a solid red line. The three panels compare the VFP results against DUED-SNB and DUED-CMG for Z = 1 in (a), for Z = 2 in (b), and for Z = 4 in (c).

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

(a) Effective thermal conductivity divided by SH thermal conductivity, blue diamonds: VFP-OSHUN Z = 1, solid lines: sharp cutoff flux limiters. (b) Effective thermal conductivity divided by SH thermal conductivity, blue diamonds: VFP-OSHUN Z = 1, green triangles: VFP-OSHUN Z = 4, blue solid line: sharp cutoff f = 0.02 Z = 1, cyan solid line: harmonic mean f = 0.04 Z = 1, green solid line: sharp cutoff f = 0.02 Z = 4.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Hot spot relaxation test. Non-local electron conduction SNB-CMG models are compared against VFP simulations (OSHUN), classical SH diffusive operator and SH flux limited with f = 0.08. Two representative instants have been chosen: 2 and 30 , the first is representative of a fully kinetic behavior, the second of a fluid-like regime. First line: temperature profile in linear scale. Second line: normalized temperature profile in logarithmic scale to highlight the formation of non-local electron tails. Third line: heat fluxes, fourth line: electric fields.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

(a) Heat flux comparison at 30 . Green line: heat flux calculated with the VFP code OSHUN, red dashed line: heat flux calculated with the flux limiter technique f = 0.08. (b) displays on the same graph the heat flux and the corresponding temperature profile at 30 .

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

DUED-SNB and DUED-CMG comparison. The two non-local electron conduction models are compared at nanosecond timescales for a simplified temperature-density profile that should mock up an ICF scenario. Frame (a) compares temperature profiles at 4.3 ns, frame (b) at 4.7 ns. The image highlights how the electrons penetrate through the cold dense shell, thus, how the thermal front is treated ahead of the shock. DUED-SNB exhibits a much heavier precursor. Domain reduced to 700 μm for sake of clarity.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Boundary condition problem. Temperature profile and flux comparison for the SNB-CMG-SH-flux limited 0.08 thermal conduction models. Density ramps linearly from 1 g/cm3 at 0 cm to at 0.1 cm. Images displays temperatures (both in linear and logarithmic scales) and the flux only up to 0.06 cm for sake of clarity.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/pop/20/2/10.1063/1.4789878
2013-02-04
2014-04-17
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Comparison for non-local hydrodynamic thermal conduction models
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/pop/20/2/10.1063/1.4789878
10.1063/1.4789878
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM