Interaction of Liquid Droplets with Low-Temperature, Low-Pressure Plasma
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INTERACTION OF LIQUID DROPLETS WITH LOW-TEMPERATURE, LOW-PRESSURE PLASMA A Thesis Presented to The Academic Faculty By Tony Lee Jones In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology May, 2005 INTERACTION OF LIQUID DROPLETS WITH LOW-TEMPERATURE, LOW-PRESSURE PLASMA Approved by: Dr. Said I. Abdel-Khalik, Chair School of Mechanical Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Minami Yoda School of Mechanical Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Sheldon M. Jeter School of Mechanical Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Date Approved: April 1, 2005 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to all those who assisted me in this endeavor. First, I would like to thank my faculty advisor, Dr. Said Abdel-Khalik for his guidance and understanding as I worked through this project. His willingness to freely give of his expertise and life experience was essential and greatly appreciated. I would also like to thank the members of my thesis committee, Dr Minami Yoda and Dr. Sheldon Jeter for their advice and support. Their ideas and suggestions greatly enhanced this project. I am especially grateful for the help, support, and advice I received from Dennis Sadowski. He always opened his door and went far beyond just doing his job. I would not have completed this work without him. I would also like to thank several members of the department staff. This project would not have been constructed were it not for the technical expertise and support of John Graham, Shop Manager; Vladimir Bortkevich, Electronics Lab Supervisor; and Kyle French, Electrical Engineer. I would like to thank my laboratory colleagues for their willingness to help: Chad Dillon, Celine Lascar, and Vladimir Novak. I would especially like to thank Dr. Sam Durbin and Timothy Koehler for always providing a spare set of hands; great ideas; and, above all, encouragement. Lastly, and most importantly, I would like to thank my wife and son for always being there with love and support despite the late hours and frustration that I at times brought home. They make me the man I am. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES ix SUMMARY xvii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Motivation and Objectives 1 1.1.1 Fusion Power 1 1.1.2 Objectives 4 CHAPTER 2: BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW 6 2.1 Chamber Wall Protection 6 2.2 Liquid Protection in Conceptual Fusion Power Plants 8 2.2.1 Thick Liquid Jet Protection in Fusion Power Plants 8 2.2.2 Thin Film Protection in Fusion Power Plants 11 2.2.3 Chamber Clearing 17 CHAPTER 3: EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS AND PROCEDURES 20 3.1 Experimental Apparatus 21 3.1.1 Vacuum/Pressure System 21 3.1.2 Plasma Generation System 32 3.1.3 Liquid Droplet Generation System 55 3.1.4 Imaging System 70 3.2 Experimental Procedures 89 3.2.1 Initial Apparatus Setup 89 3.2.2 Falling Camera Test 89 3.2.3 Droplet Generation Test 92 3.2.4 Degassed Liquid Droplet Generation Test 96 3.2.5 Dual-View Droplet Size Test 97 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 101 4.1 Falling Camera Test 101 4.2 Droplet Generation Test 103 4.2.1 Atmospheric Pressure Test 103 iv 4.2.2 300 Torr Test 108 4.2.3 75 Torr Test 109 4.2.4 20-50 Torr Test 114 4.3 Degassed Liquid Droplet Generation Test 118 4.4 Dual View Droplet Size Test 121 4.4.1 Top View Results 121 4.4.2 Bottom View Results 124 4.4.3 Top and Bottom Comparison 127 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 130 5.1 Conclusions 130 5.2 Recommendations 133 5.2.1 Improvements to the Current Apparatus 133 5.2.2 Recommendations for Further Experiments 135 5.2.3 Improvements in The Overall Methodology 136 APPENDIX A: RAW DATA 138 A.1 Data for Falling Camera Test 138 A.2 Data for Droplet Generation Test at Atmospheric Pressure 139 A.3 Data for Droplet Generation Test at 300 Torr Pressure 141 A.4 Data for Droplet Generation Test at 75 Torr Pressure 142 A.5 Data for Droplet Generation Test at 20-50 Torr Pressure 143 A.6 Data for Degassed Water Droplet Generation Test at 20-50 Torr 144 Pressure A.7 Data for Top Dual View Droplet Size Test at Atmospheric 145 Pressure A.8 Data for Bottom Dual View Droplet Size Test at Atmospheric 146 Pressure APPENDIX B: POTENTIAL MATERIAL DATA 147 B.1 Temperatures for Elements at Various Vapor Pressures 147 B.2 Vapor Pressures at 0oC and 20oC 149 B.3 Compounds with Acceptable Temperatures and Vapor Pressures 158 at 20oC B.4 Compounds with Acceptable Temperatures and Vapor Pressures 159 at 0oC APPENDIX C: DETERMINATION OF DROPLET SIZE (MATLAB CODE) 160 C.1 DropComparison.m - M File Controlling Image Manipulation 160 and Data Recording C.2 Scale.m - M file Used to Determine Image Scale in Inches Per 161 Pixel C.3 Edgefind.m - M File Used to Find Droplet Edges 162 C.4 FillUp.m - M File Used to Fill In Center of Droplet 163 C.5 Reduce.m - M File Used to Remove Extraneous Portions of Image 164 C.6 DropStats.m - M File Used to Determine Filled Area Properties 165 v C.7 VolumeCalc.m - M File Used to Determine Droplet Rotation and 165 Resulting Volume APPENDIX D: ERROR ANALYSIS 166 D.1 Scale Bias Error 166 D.2 Volumetric Random Error 169 D.3 Volumetric Total Error 170 REFERENCES 172 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Comparison of the Design Parameters of the Prometheus-L/H 13 Conceptual Reactor Designs (Abdou, et al., 1993; Waganer, 1994; and Osirus Report, 1992). Table 3.1 Detailed List of the Vacuum/Pressure System Hardware 22 Components. Table 3.2 Detailed List of the Plasma Generation System Hardware 33 Components. Table 3.3 Detailed List of the Liquid Droplet Generation System Hardware 55 Components. Table 3.4 Common Substances with Acceptable Vapor Pressures at 20o C. 59 Table 3.5 Common Substances with Acceptable Vapor Pressures at ~0o C 60 (Yellow denotes substances with applicable temperatures between 0 o and 20o C). Table 3.6 Metal Vapor Pressure Data. 61 Table 3.7 Water Vapor Pressure Data. 62 Table 3.8 Detailed List of the Imaging System Hardware Components. 71 Table 3.9 Scale Bias Errors. 94 Table 4.1 Falling Camera Test Results. 102 Table 4.2 Summary of All Droplet Generation Tests. 114 Table 4.3 Orientation Comparison. 123 Table 4.4 Top and Bottom Trial by Trial Comparison. 129 Table A.1 Data for Falling Camera Test. 138 vii Table A.2 Data for Droplet Generation Test at Atmospheric Pressure. 139 Table A.3 Data for Droplet Generation Test at 300 Torr Pressure. 141 Table A.4 Data for Droplet Generation Test at 75 Torr Pressure. 142 Table A.5 Data for Droplet Generation Test at 20-50 Torr Pressure. 143 Table A.6 Data for Degassed Water Droplet Generation Test at 20-50 Torr 144 Pressure. Table A.7 Data for Top Dual View Droplet Size Test at Atmospheric 145 Pressure. Table A.8 Data for Bottom Dual View Droplet Size Test at Atmospheric 146 Pressure. Table B.1 Temperatures for Elements at Various Vapor Pressures. 147 Table B.2 Vapor Pressures at 0oC and 20oC (Yaws, 1995). Red Denotes 149 Unusable Ranges. Yellow Denotes Ranges that Apply to Only One Temperature. Table B.3 Compounds with Acceptable Temperatures and Vapor Pressures 158 at 20oC. Table B.4 Compounds with Acceptable Temperatures and Vapor Pressures 159 at 0oC. Table D.1 Sample of Centerline Analysis. 167 Table D.2 Summary of Centerline Analysis. 168 Table D.3 Scale and Volumetric Bias Errors. 169 Table D.4 Volumetric Random Error Comparison. 170 Table D.5 Total Volumetric Error. 171 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Illustration of the Indirect-Drive Ignition Process in IFE. (Durbin, 2 2005). Figure 2.1 Sketches of Liquid Sheets Forming the Stationary Lattice (Left) 8 for Protecting the Front and Back Walls and the Array of Obliquely Oscillated Flows (Right) For Protecting The Sidewalls. (Durbin, 2005). Figure 2.2 Orthogonal Views of the HYLIFE-II Reaction Chamber (Moir, 9 Et Al., 1994). Figure 2.3 Illustration of Driver Interface Issues in Thick Liquid Protection. 11 for Efficient Shielding the Beam/Jet Standoff Should Be Minimized without Causing Interference from Free-Surface Fluctuations and Droplets Due to Primary Breakup. (Durbin, 2005). Figure 2.4 Conceptual 3-D Model of the Original Thin Liquid Film 13 Protection Scheme Scheme for the Inertial Fusion Energy IFE System and Close-Up of the DT Implosion Process (Mollendorff, Et Al., 1996; and Hiball, 1981). Figure 2.5 Photon and Ion Attenuation in Carbon (C) and Tungsten (W) for 14 Direct-Drive Spectra without Protective Chamber Gas (Raffray, Et Al., 2001). Figure 2.6 Temperature Histories for Carbon Flat Wall Under Energy 15 Deposition From Direct Drive Spectra Without Protective Chamber Gas (Raffray, Et Al., 2001). Figure 2.7 Photon and Ion Attenuation in Carbon (C) and Tungsten (W) for 16 Indirect-Drive Spectra without Protective Chamber Gas (Raffray, Et Al., 2001). Figure 2.8 Conceptual Model of the Prometheus-L Thin Liquid Protection 17 Scheme for the Inertial Fusion Energy IFE System: (A) Three- ix Dimensional Model, and (B) Two Dimensional Section (Williams, et al., 1974; and Waganer, et al., 1992). Figure 2.9 Simulated Properties of Pb Droplet in Pb Plasma (Konkashbaev, 19 et al., 2003).