| Literature DB >> 23189238 |
T G White1, J Vorberger, C R D Brown, B J B Crowley, P Davis, S H Glenzer, J W O Harris, D C Hochhaus, S Le Pape, T Ma, C D Murphy, P Neumayer, L K Pattison, S Richardson, D O Gericke, G Gregori.
Abstract
Creating non-equilibrium states of matter with highly unequal electron and lattice temperatures (T(ele)≠T(ion)) allows unsurpassed insight into the dynamic coupling between electrons and ions through time-resolved energy relaxation measurements. Recent studies on low-temperature laser-heated graphite suggest a complex energy exchange when compared to other materials. To avoid problems related to surface preparation, crystal quality and poor understanding of the energy deposition and transport mechanisms, we apply a different energy deposition mechanism, via laser-accelerated protons, to isochorically and non-radiatively heat macroscopic graphite samples up to temperatures close to the melting threshold. Using time-resolved x ray diffraction, we show clear evidence of a very small electron-ion energy transfer, yielding approximately three times longer relaxation times than previously reported. This is indicative of the existence of an energy transfer bottleneck in non-equilibrium warm dense matter.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23189238 PMCID: PMC3506979 DOI: 10.1038/srep00889
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1A schematic of the experimental setup that was used on the Titan Laser at the Jupiter Laser Facility, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (USA).
Additional details on the experiment are given in the methods section.
Figure 2Measurement of the proton beam and corresponding electron temperature at t = 100 ps.
(a) Measured spatial distribution of the proton intensity showing a ~1 mm width at the position of the sample surface. The inset shows the radiochromic film data used to monitor the proton beam. (b) Proton energy spectrum taken from the centre of the proton beam and plotted up to the maximum energy measured. (c) Calculated electron temperature in the HOPG sample. A ray tracing simulation is used to follow the proton trajectories through the sample. The simulation uses the measured proton distributions in space and energy shown in panels (a) and (b). From the energy deposited by the proton beam and the specific heat of a given equation of state model, the electron temperature throughout the sample can be inferred. Electron heat capacities from density functional simulations are used to obtain the temperature distribution shown.
Figure 3Intensity of scattered radiation and corresponding lattice temperature at t = 225 ps.
(a) The measured Bragg peak intensity of the scattered radiation from across the sample surface. The values are plotted relative to the Bragg intensity without heating. This ratio is given by , where is the Debye-Waller factor. Here, k = 3.73 Å−1 is the scattering wave number with its direction parallel to the c axis of the graphite lattice and is the out-of-plane rms deviation from the equilibrium ion positions. Since is a function of (see supplementary information), we can calculate the ion temperature from the measured decrease in the Bragg scattering intensity, as reported on the right axis of the plot. The shaded region corresponds to ion temperatures obtained by solving the two-temperature model (1) and (2) with an electron-phonon coupling constant of g = 0.45−0.8×1016 W K−1 m−3. (b) Calculated spatial distribution of the lattice temperature within the graphite sample based on the measured decrease in Bragg scattering (best agreement with experimental data is obtained by assuming g = 0.6×1016 W K m.).
Figure 4Relative Bragg scattering intensity at the centre of the graphite sample at t = 225 ps plotted against the electron-phonon coupling coefficient.
The calculations are performed by solving equations (1) and (2) with two different models for the equation of state and the heat capacities: PROPACEOS 4.2 (red line) and DFT-MD (blue line). The experimentally measured scattering intensity is shown by the dotted and dashed lines, where the error margin of 5% was estimated from the variation in intensity across unheated samples. (a) The energy of the laser producing the proton beam is Elaser = 39.3 J. (b) Elaser = 46.5 J incident on the Al foil.