| Literature DB >> 28939883 |
A Soloviev1, K Burdonov2, S N Chen2,3, A Eremeev2, A Korzhimanov2, G V Pokrovskiy4, T A Pikuz4,5, G Revet2,3, A Sladkov2, V Ginzburg2, E Khazanov2, A Kuzmin2, R Osmanov2, I Shaikin2, A Shaykin2, I Yakovlev2, S Pikuz4, M Starodubtsev2, J Fuchs6,7.
Abstract
Heating efficiently solid-density, or even compressed, matter has been a long-sought goal in order to allow investigation of the properties of such state of matter of interest for various domains, e.g. astrophysics. High-power lasers, pinches, and more recently Free-Electron-Lasers (FELs) have been used in this respect. Here we show that by using the high-power, high-contrast "PEARL" laser (Institute of Applied Physics-Russian Academy of Science, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia) delivering 7.5 J in a 60 fs laser pulse, such coupling can be efficiently obtained, resulting in heating of a slab of solid-density Al of 0.8 µm thickness at a temperature of 300 eV, and with minimal density gradients. The characterization of the target heating is achieved combining X-ray spectrometry and measurement of the protons accelerated from the Al slab. The measured heating conditions are consistent with a three-temperatures model that simulates resistive and collisional heating of the bulk induced by the hot electrons. Such effective laser energy deposition is achieved owing to the intrinsic high contrast of the laser which results from the Optical Parametric Chirped Pulse Amplification technology it is based on, allowing to attain high target temperatures in a very compact manner, e.g. in comparison with large-scale FEL facilities.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28939883 PMCID: PMC5610192 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-11675-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Central lineout of the focal spot of the amplified laser (measured at low-flux and here scaled to an energy level of 10 J, red curve) compared to the diffraction-limited spot that would be produced by the laser focusing optics (black curve). (b) Measured two-dimensional (2D) focal spot intensity distribution of the amplified laser, from which the lineout shown in (a) is taken. (c) Same as (b) except that the laser is not injected by a coherent seed laser pulse, i.e. this focal spot corresponds to the one of the ASE.
Figure 2(a) Experimental setup; (b) two-dimensional (in cylindrical geometry) hydrodynamic simulation of the plasma density profile resulting from the irradiation of a Al 0.8 µm thick target by the amplified spontaneous amplification (ASE) of the short-pulse laser, just prior to the main peak of the laser. Shown is a density lineout along the plasma expansion axis with various fits: (in green) by exp(x/L) with L = 0.16 µm for the overdense part; (in red) by exp(x/L) with L = 1.1 µm for the dense part; and (in cyan) by exp(x/L) with L = 12 µm for the low-density part.
Figure 3X-ray spectrum measured by means of the FSSR spectrometer from the front surface of an 0.8 µm thick Al target and accumulated in shots #60–64.
Figure 4Radiochromic films exposed by the proton beam accelerated by a 7 J laser pulse from an Al 0.8 µm thick target. The energies indicated in each film correspond to the energy of a proton having its Bragg peak in this particular film.
Figure 5Measurement of the emitted ion spectra as obtained using the Thomson parabola (from an Al 0.8 µm thick target). Traces of H+, C1+– C6+, O1+ and O6+ ions are marked according to the calculations of the ions’ trajectories. On the horizontal axis is shown the energy of the protons.
Figure 6(a) Proton energy spectrum retrieved from the RCF stack shown in Fig. 4. (b) Total energy Etot contained in the proton beam (solid line) and number of the protons N (dash line) with the energy more than E0. (c) Variation of the solid angle subtended by the protons as function of their energy.
Figure 7Experimental proton cut-off energy versus laser energy for different target thickness. The difference in the relative error for the proton energy is induced by differences in RCF stack composition used in different shots. The error-bar for the laser energy is 0.5% and is partially hidden by the markers.
Figure 8Modeled temporal evolution of (top) Th (the hot electron temperature), Tc (the cold electron temperature), and Ti (the ion temperature) within a 0.8 µm thick Al target irradiated by a laser having an intensity of 3 × 1020 W/cm2 and a pulse duration of 60 fs, and (bottom) the normalized extensions (in the 1D model) of the hot electrons front and the target bulk.