MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404369954 · doi:10.1115/pvp2024-123079

Electromagnetic Lithium Ring Compression for Magnetized Target Fusion Application: Shell Buckling

2024· article· en· W4404369954 on OpenAlexaff
Fatemeh Edalatfar, L. Santos, Hashem Jayhooni

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsGeneral Fusion (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBucklingMaterials scienceCompression (physics)Shell (structure)Lithium (medication)FusionRing (chemistry)Structural engineeringComposite materialEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Magnetized target fusion (MTF) relies on rapidly compressing magnetized plasma within a flux conserver to attain fusion conditions. Maintaining the smoothness and symmetry of the plasma-facing surface during compression is crucial, as any asymmetric deformation or buckling of the solid metal shell can disrupt magnetic confinement, reducing plasma temperature, and lifetime. To establish the criteria for preventing buckling in solid ring implosions, we assess the effectiveness of the dynamic plastic flow buckling model. This assessment involves analyzing buckling phenomena in magnetically driven, imploding lithium rings. This investigation includes a total of 5 experiments with variations in collapse velocities, radius-to-thickness ratios, and initial ring temperatures. We capture and analyze the collapse trajectories and deformations of the rings during implosion using computer vision techniques. To establish material properties required for the theory, we utilize the Johnson-Cook model for the lithium ring with strain and strain rate extracted from the experiments. Using the extracted material properties and ring dimensions and employing the analytical model, we predict critical buckling velocities and dominant modes for each experimental scenario. We observe qualitative agreement between the experiment and analytical model within measurement uncertainty, indicating the potential to define design, manufacturing, and quality requirements for larger-scale Magnetized Target Fusion experiments using solid shells to achieve fusion conditions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics→French-language works237,207→