The right conditions for high-precision dynamic temperature and heat capacity measurement via pyrometry and conductivity
The pursuit of accurate bulk temperature T under extreme conditions has been a long-standing goal of the high pressure science community, complicated by a lack of data to inform models. To reach these extremely high-pressure, high-temperature (high P − T) conditions, a combination of dynamic and heated static experiments (e.g., diamond or gem anvil cel experiments) are used. For example, in a diamond anvil cell (DAC) experiment, a sample placed in the DAC is first pressurized. Following pressurization, the sample T is increased either by heating the entire DAC (usually using resistive heating, and limited to ∼1000K) or by applying intense laser power to the sample surfaces. In a dynamic experiment, the process of pressurizing the sample also heats it. In the case of shock physics experiments, such heating is substantial, easily reaching thousands of Kelvin; in our work we have seen T ∼17000K. Most methods of measuring temperature at ambient are not compatible with experiments under these high-pressure, high-temperature conditions: thermocouples break, melt, or have conductivity properties that differ from ambient where they are calibrated; thermometers would melt; both are too slow. As a result most methods are based on non-contact techniques such as x-ray diffraction broadening, neutron scattering, or optical methods. Of these, optical methods using the visible and near-infrared region of the spectrum are the most commonly used as the sources and detectors are readily available. In the case of optical methods the optical depth, and therefore the measurement location, is limited to the surface. When a window or anvil material is used, heat flows from the sample into the window/anvil. Likewise, if the sample undergoes a change in thermodynamic state, such as expansion upon release, different T may be expected. As a result, the surface or apparent temperature T app measurement will differ from the bulk or interior temperature that is desired. This surface measurement must be related to the bulk measurement using thermal transport models and material models. While it is tempting to conclude that one should just use x-ray methods that directly probe the interior, even these methods have been shown to depend on thermal transport and material models. Regardless of the method used to create the high P − T condition, therefore, we must understand the role of thermal transport and material models upon our interpretation of the T measurement, as well as the errors and uncertainties associated with the choice of models used in the analysis. This is a substantial area of research and this paper is by no means a complete survey of the relevant sources of uncertainty. For example, we have yet to begin to address alternate transport models in a detailed manner (e.g., Tan-Ahrens), or the many models that use additional layers to approximate melting, turbulence, or epitaxial phenomena). Likewise, we have not explored the impact upon uncertainty of thermal models that use temperature-dependent thermal transport coefficients, or the wide range of material models that can be applied. Instead, this paper focuses on using one simple model, the Urtiew-Grover model, to understand the sources of error in T measurement so that we may identify how best to focus future research efforts to return the best improvements and avoid working on over-optimizing a single type of measurement. To this end, we work through some of the best and worst case scenarios for T measurement.