Magnetic Field and Inductance Calculations in Theta-Pinch and Z-Pinch Geometries

T.J. Awe, R.E. Siemon, B.S. Bauer, S. Fuelling, V. Makhin, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557 S.C. Hsu, T.P. Intrator Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545

NATIONAL LABORATORY
EST. 1943

Abstract
Two codes have been developed at the University of Nevada Reno which model solid metal or wire-wound conductors by assuming arrays of thin-wire loops. The first code applies to the formation and translation of an FRC plasma, where theta coils are used both to create the plasma, and to generate translation fields. Shielding is required to suppress large voltage transients and protect sensitive components. The resulting field involves driven currents in the theta coils and eddy currents in the shielding structures. Our two-dimensional r-z code calculates eddy current induction, resistive diffusion, and the resultant magnetic field of cylindrically symmetric conductors. We use fast and accurate elliptic integral subroutines from MATLAB to solve for the time dependent current flowing through each loop and the resultant magnetic field configuration. We will show computational results for FRX-L hardware design at Los Alamos National Laboratory. The second code calculates fields and inductances for conductors in a z-pinch geometry. The two-dimensional r-theta code was written to help with design of a flux compression experiment to be done at the Atlas pulsed power facility. In this experiment, shunt inductors will divert a portion of the main bank current onto a hard core inside the liner. The liner will then be imploded, compressing the injected flux. The code calculates the shunt inductance, the mutual inductance between the shunt inductors and the hard core, and the resultant current division of the system. Numerical results will be compared to data obtained from a small pulsed power system that drives a prototypical inductive divider assembly.

Physics Equations for RZ Geometry

Our first code, which we call EDDY, models cylindrically symmetric solid metal objects with tightly packed arrays of circular wire loops, each with circular cross section. We need only know three geometric parameters of the loop, namely the radius of the loop (b), this distance of the loop center from the z=0 plane (z), and cross sectional radius of the loop (a). When calculating the vector potential, magnetic field, and mutual inductance value for an isolated loop, we assume the cross sectional radius (a) approaches zero, so that these values are referenced to a single point, (r1,z1). When calculating the self inductance and resistance of the loop, the finite cross section must also be considered. We first find the vector potential at (r2, z2) due to a loop at (r1, z1),

r Ir A ( r2 , z 2 ) = 0 1 4

cos d 2 2 2 r1 + r2 + ( z 1 z 2 ) 2 r1 r2 cos

In order to dramatically reduce the computational time, we utilize fast elliptic integral statements. The vector potential becomes
r I A ( r2 , z 2 ) = 0 2 r1 r2 2 k 2 K (k 2 ) 2 E (k 2 ) k

where

k2 =

(r1 + r2 )2 + ( z1 z 2 ) 2

4 r1 r2

To calculate the mutual inductance between two loops we relate the field generated from the current in loop one to the flux passing through loop two. We know r 2 = MI 1 = 2 r 2 A ( r 2 , z 2 )

where M is the mutual inductance between the two loops, thus we find
2 k 2 K (k 2 ) 2 E (k 2 ) M = 0 r1 r2 k The resistance and self inductance of the loop above are found to be
R= L 2b = 2 A a

and

8b 7 L = 0 b ln a 4

With this information, we may simply use the Kirchoff relation which states that shorted conductors will have no change in potential as we traverse the loop. Thus we have
Li dI dt
i

+ RiIi +

dI
ij

dt

= 0

Here we have found n coupled differential equations that govern the transient currents in each loop; this is precisely the type of problem that Matlab is suited to solve. We are now in a position to find the current flowing through each wire element as a function of time, allowing for field calculations, including diffusion into the conductors.

Test 1: Driven Solenoid

Our initial test was to drive a 1KA solenoid with 100 turns/meter. We expect to see B=0.1257 T inside the solenoid, with the field dropping to zero outside. The upper plot shows flux contours parallel to the axis and decreasing in magnitude as we decrease in radius. This figure shows one problem with our simulation method. By using individual wires to simulate solid objects, we have localized currents rather than a continuous current density. Therefore, we find that near the loops the field is dominated by the local current. This effect can be seen by the fringed contour along the surface of the conductor. In the second figure we look at the magnitude of B as a function of radius. Here the code has matched both qualitative and quantitative expectation.

1.08 1.06 1.04 1.02 1 0.98 0.96 0.94 0.92 0.9

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 -0.02

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0

Test 2: Coupling of Two Wires

Next we examine the most simplistic case of eddy current induction. To the left we see the magnetic flux contours for a perfect current source loop located at (.15, .02) and a shorted inductively driven loop at (.1, .03). The flux contours shown are for time t=5e-4 seconds, which is the specified rise time of the drive coil. We see that the eddy current induced in the shorted loop has the effect of limiting the flow of flux through the plane of the loop. To the lower left, we see the sinusoidal drive current in blue, along with the induced eddy current in the shorted loop shown in green. As expected, the eddy current is of lower magnitude than the drive current, and there exists a slight phase shift. The figure quantitatively agrees with the Kirchoff relations previously stated.
-3

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

1000 800 600 400 200 0 -200 -400 -600 -800

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2 x 10

Test 3: Magnetic Field Diffusion

As the final and most rigorous test of code performance we use a driven solenoid to create a pure Bz field, and analyze the diffusion of this field into a coaxial cylindrical conductor. The long shield spans radially from 2 to 2.8cm. We chose to analyze the axial component of the magnetic field at two radial locations: A=1.75cm and B=3cm. At these points, we are far enough from the walls of the cylinder to be able to negate Diffusion of Bz into Cylindrical Shield B (r,t) the errors from the dominant local 1 fields. We first test code convergence 0.8 by increasing the number of wire A B columns composing the shield from 0.6 1 to 2,3,4, and finally 8; convergence IEddy 0.4 IDrive was clearly shown. We then checked 0.2 that the code was converging to the 0 correct solution by comparing with 0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001 0.0012 0.0014 0.0016 0.0018 0.002 -0.2 MHRDR, a trusted code. The -0.4 diffusion fields from the two codes are -0.6 plotted to the right. When using at least four columns the codes agree -0.8 very well, convincing us that EDDY -1 calculates field diffusion with Time (sec) acceptable accuracy. Drive Field MHRDR 1 Colum n 2 Colum ns 4 Colum ns 8 Colum ns
z

Axial Magnetic Field (AU)

Field Calculation of Formation/Translation Region of Liner on Plasma Experiment

Next, we will calculate the eddy currents and fields in a geometry relevant to a plasma formation, translation, and implosion experiment. The diagram shows generic geometric features of such a system. We include the fast rising, high voltage conical theta coil for plasma formation and initial axial acceleration, and the translation region consisting of 6 slowly rising, low voltage, multi-turn coils. These coils produce a magnetic field which slowly diffuses through the shield and liner, creating magnetic flux inside the liner. The spacing of the coils is reduced at each end, creating mirror fields which help to trap the plasma in the liner region. We wish to examine several features of this geometry including the diffusion of the fields through the cylindrical liner and shield, the necessity of proper shielding to protect experimental hardware, and the transient behavior of the fields throughout the system.
Coil 7

0.10 m

0.1016 m

A
Coil 6

D
X X .127 m

Mirror

Coil 5

.0508 m

B
Coil 4

E
.063 .06 .052

.127 m

X .127 m

.05

Slow rising, low voltage multi-turn coils generate magnetic fields in the translation region

Coil 3

X .0335 m

C
Coil 2

F
X X

Steel Shield

.006 m

Aluminum Liner
Coil 1

x x x

Fast rising, high voltage conical theta coil for plasma formation and translation

Slow Field Diffusion Through Cylinders

7 6 Magnetic Field (T) 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 Time (se c) F C E B D A 0.0025 0.003 0.0035 0.004

Diffusion of Slow Magnetic Field

First, we analyze the diffusion of the magnetic field from the slow coils through the cylindrical conductors. Each of the six coils consists of 32 evenly spaced wires, and each is driven as a perfect sinusoidal current source with peak amplitude of 20KA. The rise time of the coils is set to be 2ms. At this frequency, we find that slightly more than half of the field manages to penetrate through the conductors. We also see the effect of the mirror coils, as stronger fields exist at locations D and F, than at location E. In the second plot we show the time evolution of the on-axis magnetic field as a function of axis location. We again see the increased field strength at the mirror locations.

On-Axis Magnetic Field Magnitude

3.5 3 2.5 M ag n etic F ield (T ) 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 Location on z-axis (m ) t=0.6ms t=1.2ms t=1.8ms t=2.4ms t=3.0ms

Effects of Shielding
1.1

Next, we demonstrate the need for proper shielding by calculating the voltage that would appear on coil 2 during the firing of coil 1 if no shielding were present. We have modeled a conical fast theta coil with inner radius increasing from 6cm to 7cm, and length 30cm. We have assigned a rise time of 3s and have distributed currents so that a maximum field of 4T develops on axis. We then calculated the flux at each of the 32 wire locations of coil 2. Taking the time derivative of these flux values, and summing gives the maximum induced voltage on this coil, which we found to be approximately 2.2MV. By placing the shield between the two coils, and completing the same calculation, we find the induced voltage to be reduced to 160KV. The plots shown are magnetic flux contours with (top) and without (bottom) the shield present.

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

Time Evolution of Magnetic Fields in a Plasma Translation Geometry

Now that we have shown results pertaining to the time evolution of the field from the slow coils, and the high voltage induced from the fast coil, we next bring the entire system together and examine the temporal field variation. We use the same geometry given above. We have also used the coil currents which were given in the previous sections. Now, we allow the slow coil to fire and magnetic flux to diffuse into the liner region. Then, at near maximum liner flux, we set the fast coil to fire. In the plots to follow, we show the evolution of these fields for several time steps. In the first three plots we see the slow diffusion of magnetic field into the liner region. Plot four shows the final flux contours immediately before activation of the fast coil. Plot five gives flux contours at half maximum fast coil current. Finally plot six gives the field line configuration at peak fast coil current.

t=0.0008s
1.8

t=0.0016s
1.8

t=0.0024s

1.6

1.6

1.4

1.4

1.2

1.2

0.8

0.8

0.6

0.6 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11

0.01 0.02

0.03 0.04

0.05 0.06

0.07 0.08 0.09

0.1

0.11

t=0.0033s

t=0.0033012s

t=0.003303s

Time Evolution of On Axis Magnetic Field

Finally, we analyze the magnitude of the magnetic field along the axis of symmetry. We have plotted the magnetic field strength versus z-location for the times shown in the six contour plots above. On Axis Magnetic Field We see that when the 5 fast coil fires, the 4.5 shielding allows very 4 little field to enter the 3.5 3 liner region. We also 2.5 see a drop in field 2 strength in the region 1.5 1 between the fast coil 0.5 and slow coils, however, 0 the field strength 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 remains nearly 50% of Location on z-axis that in the mirror region.
M agnetic Field (T)
t=.0008 t=.0016 t=.0024 t=.0032 t=.0033024 t=.0033030

Code is Used for Hardware Design on FRX-L Experiment

Our code is currently being used by members of the P-24 Plasma Physics group at Los Alamos National Laboratory as a design tool for magnetic coils and shielding in the FRX-L experiment. In order to characterize and optimize their FRC plasmas, the plasma must be held axially stationary; mirror fields are used to accomplish this. Below we show calculations of magnetic flux contours and magnetic pressures for different end-mirror geometries. The first figures show magnetic quantities for the case with no end plates.
Flux Contours Magnetic Pressure

Flux Contours

Magnetic Pressure

Next, thin end plates are added to the theta coil (small plates shown in blue at z~20cm), notice that the mirror coil causes field enhancement at 4.5cm but does not reach 3.5 cm.

Finally, as still thicker end plates are added, we see well defined mirror regions in both the flux contours and the pressure curves. Here, the mirror effect reaches small radii, with enhanced fields at inside of 3.5cm.

Flux Contours

Magnetic Pressure

R- Code: Field and Inductance Calculations Non-Symmetric Z-pinch Geometries.

Motivation for Calculations in R- Geometry

Our second code models conductors in a z-pinch geometry. We are interested in a flux compression experiment, where magnetic flux is compressed by an imploding liner. Our code was developed to calculate the current division in an inductive divider which is used to divert a portion of the main bank current onto a conducting hard core inside the liner. The core current recombines with the main current on the outside of the liner, and thus still drives the implosion. Schematics are shown below.
z Conducting hard core
Shunt and feed currents recombine on liner surface Return Current Feed Current

5cm

Imploded Liner Flux Chamber

Liner
~ 1.5 cm

Metal Insulator

Several Shunt rods split current

L1

L2

Atlas Bank Current

Atlas

Inductive Divider Modeling

Our inductive divider assembly will create two current paths. First, current may flow along a central cylinder which feeds current to the hard core. This cylinder will be surrounded by a set of conducting rods or shunt inductors, which carry current directly to the outside of the liner. All conductors will have dimensions greater than one skin depth, and thus we cannot assume them to carry current uniformly. We therefore model both cylinders and rods with many constituent conductors to account for non-uniform current distribution. An example geometry is shown where a large cylinder and eight shunt conductors carry current to a cylindrical return conductor. The main purpose of the code is to calculate inductances so that we may determine the amount of current that will be diverted to the hard core.

Appropriate Wire Spacing can be Determined

In a code where solid conductors are modeled in a filamentary manner, it is important to determine which wire spacing gives the best results. In order to determine this we model coaxial cylinders, where the inductance is given by Coax Inductance: Order of Magnitude Changes in Wire Radius R L coax = 0 ln outer 1.44E-07 2 R inner
1.42E-07

1.40E-07 In d u ctan ce

1.38E-07

1.36E-07

1.34E-07

1.32E-07 -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Order of Magnitude Inductance (250) Inductance (500) Inductance (1000) Analytic Inductance (2000)

The center rod of the coax was modeled with a single post (since the current distribution is uniform in the geometry). The outer conductor is composed of either 250, 500, 1000, or 2000 wire elements. For each case, the radius of the filaments were varied by factors of ten. Zero on the order of magnitude axis corresponds to the radius where the wires are as tightly packed as possible without overlap.

Plot Allows Determination of Appropriate Wire Spacing

All solutions are linear on the logarithmic scale The larger the number of wires, the lower the sensitivity to changes in wire radius All curves intersect the analytic solution (red line) with the same order of magnitude change in radius. The radius to be used is found to be

r = ro 10

0 .5

ro = 10

Where r0 is defined to be the cross sectional radius where the wires touch but do not overlap.

Small Pulser and Prototypical Inductive Current Divider Constructed

CVR measures total flux

Port into flux chamber for B-Dot probe

Liner with flux chamber

Shunt rods Return Posts Feed

20 kV, 10 kA, 1/4 ~ 700 ns

Number of Shunt posts can be altered from 0 to 12. Current division is calculated with B-dot probes and current viewing resistor (CVR)

Ratio of Chamber Current to Total Current

1 0.9

Cavity current / Total current

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Number of Rods
Pulser Code

Conclusions
We have demonstrated that one can fairly accurately model the electromagnetic properties of solid conductors with tightly packed wire arrays. The capability to calculate eddy current induction, magnetic field diffusion, and the resultant field maps for systems in both theta-pinch and z-pinch geometries has been demonstrated.

Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge several helpful conversations with Jim Degnan, Mike Frese, and Glen Wurden. This work was sponsored at the University of Nevada, Reno by DOE OFES Grant DE-FG02-04ER54752.