Uncertainty Quantification for EoS and Porous Hugoniots
Abstract not provided.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Menikoff-Kober Hugoniot”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
(U) PRAD0697 & PRAD0698: Complex Loading of CeO₂ Powder
Cerium(IV) oxide (CeO₂) powder is shock compressed using the Precision High Energy-density Liner Implosion eXperiment (PHELIX) platform. Experimental results are compared against several modeling approaches. Compaction behavior is best captured with a P-∝ model, which calculates CeO₂ powder bulk densities within 80-99% of experimental values but overpredicts densi cation at the cylindrical target's outer radius and center by up to 20%. Preliminary calculations suggest that accuracy could be increased with the inclusion of a coupled strength model. Several common computational modeling approaches for the shock compression response of granular materials and the magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) force upon the impactor/liner in pulsed power compression experiments are investigated and analyzed for their validity. The Bi-linear Ramp, P-∝ PACXP, and P-∝ Menikoff-Kober continuum compaction models are calibrated to planar impact Hugoniot data for CeO₂ powder and used to predict the powder's shock compaction response under non-planar shock wave compression. MHD calculations of the PHELIX pulsed power driver are performed using an idealized resistor-inductor-capacitor (RLC) circuit calibrated to previous experiments. All simulations are performed using the LANL code FLAG. Two validation experiments are computationally designed using the calibrated compaction and circuit models, executed using the PHELIX platform on CeO₂ targets with initial porous densities of 3.95 and 4.03 g/cm³, measured with proton radiography, and analyzed against the model predictions. The two P-∝ models more accurately describe CeO₂ powder densi cation than the Bi-linear Ramp model. However, the two P-∝ models overpredict bulk density of the shock compressed CeO₂ powder by up to 20% when the appropriate impact velocities are applied. MHD calculations for both validation experiments underpredict liner impact velocities by 4-11% when using the idealized RLC circuit model calibrated to previous experiments. Compensating underpredictions of impact velocity and overpredictions of powder densication lead to a false accuracy in pre-shot calculations compared to experimental data. To improve correlation between simulations and experiments, the following improvements are suggested: 1. A coupled strength model for CeO₂ powder that updates strength as a function of porosity and applied stress. 2. An improved MHD circuit model that more accurately captures the PHELIX machine.
36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗