MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413638771 · doi:10.3390/fluids10090222

Compressing Magnetic Fields by the Electromagnetic Implosion of a Hollow Lithium Cylinder: Experimental Test Beds Simulated with OpenFOAM

2025· article· en· W4413638771 on OpenAlex
Victoria Suponitsky, Ivan Khalzov, David M. Roberts, Piotr W. Forysinski

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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".

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFluids · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsGeneral Fusion (Canada)
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsImplosionCylinderMechanicsPhysicsMagnetic fieldMaterials scienceAcousticsNuclear physicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electromagnetic implosions of hollow lithium cylinders can be utilized to compress magnetized plasma targets in the context of Magnetized Target Fusion (MTF). Two small-scale experiments were conducted at General Fusion as a stepping stone toward compressing magnetized plasmas on a larger scale. The first experiment is an electromagnetic implosion of a lithium ring, and the second is a compression of toroidal magnetic flux by imploding a hollow lithium cylinder onto an hourglass-shaped central structure. Here we present the methodology and results of modelling these experiments with OpenFOAM. Our in-house axisymmetric compressible MHD multi-phase solver was further extended to incorporate: (i) external RLC circuit model for electromagnetic compression coils and (ii) diffusion of the magnetic field into multiple solid materials. The implementation of the external RLC circuit model for electromagnetic coils was verified by comparison with results obtained with FEMM software and with the analytical solution. The solver was then applied to model both experiments and the main conclusions are as follows: (i) modelling solid lithium as a high-viscosity liquid is an adequate approach for the problems considered; (ii) the magnetic diffusivity of lithium is an important parameter for the accurate prediction of implosion trajectories (for the implosion of the lithium ring, higher values of magnetic diffusivity in the range 0.2 ≤ ηring[m2/s] ≤ 0.5 resulted in a better fit to the experimental data with a relative deviation in the trajectory of ≲20%); (iii) simulation results agree well with experimental data, and in particular, the toroidal field amplification of 2.25 observed in the experiment is reproduced in simulations within a relative error margin of 20%. The solver is proven to be robust and has the potential to be employed in a variety of applications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.218 · 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