Effect of smoothing by spectral dispersion on flow induced laser beam deflection: The random phase modulation scheme

Physics of Plasmas

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 775-781

  Rose, Harvey A ^a   Ghosal, Sandip ^a  

^a LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

APPROXIMATION THEORY; BANDWIDTH; CORRELATION METHODS; HYDRODYNAMICS; LASER BEAMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PHASE MODULATION; PLASMA FLOW; VECTORS;

AUTOCORRELATION FUNCTION; COLOR CYCLE; FINITE LANDAU DAMPING MODEL; LASER BEAM DEFLECTION; RANDOM PHASE MODULATION SCHEME; SMOOTHING; SPATIAL INCOHERENCE METHOD; SPECTRAL DISPERSION;

LASER BEAM EFFECTS;

EID: 0032022177     PISSN: 1070664X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.872763     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. J. Lindl, Phys. Plasmas 2, 3933 (1995).
2. J. D. Moody, B. J. MacGowan, D. E. Kinkel, W. L. Kruer, E. A. Williams, K. Estabrook, R. L. Berger, R. K. Kirkwood, D. S. Montgomery, and T. D. Shepard, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1294 (1996).
3. N. D. Delamater, T. J. Murphy, A. A. Hauer, R. L. Kauffman, A. L. Richard, E. L. Lindman, G. R. Magelssen, B. H. Wilde, D. B. Harris, B. A. Failor, J. Wallace, L. V. Powers, S. M. Pollaine, L. J. Suter, R. Chrien, T. D. Shepard, H. A. Rose, E. A. Williams, M. B. Nelson, M. D. Cable, J. B. Moore, M. A. Salazar, and K. Gifford, Phys. Plasmas 3, 2022 (1996).
4. B. Bauer, private communication (1996).
5. S. G. Glindinning. private communication (1996).
6. H. A. Rose, Phys. Plasmas 3, 1709 (1996).
7. D. E. Hinkel, E. A. Williams, and C. H. Still, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1298 (1996).
8. S. Ghosal and H. A. Rose, Phys. Plasmas 4, 2376 (1997).
9. S. Ghosal and H. A. Rose, Phys. Plasmas 4, 4189 (1997).
10. Y. Kato and K. Mima, Appl. Phys. B: Photophys. Laser Chem. 29, 186 (1982).
11. R. Lehmberg, A. Schmitt, and S. Bodner, J. Appl. Phys. 62, 2680 (1987).
12. S. Skupsky, R. W. Short, T. Lessler, R. S. Craxton, S. Letzring, and J. M. Soures, J. Appl. Phys. 66, 3456 (1989).
13. J. E. Rothenberg, D. Eimerl, M. H. Key, and S. V. Weber, Proc. SPIE 2633, 162 (1995).
14. D. M. Pennington, M. A. Henesian, S. N. Dixit, H. T. Powell, C. E. Thompson, and T. L. Weiland, Proc. SPIE 1870, 175 (1993).
15. H. Nakano, K. Tsubakimoto, N. Miyanaga, M. Nakatsuka, T. Kanabe, H. Azechi, T. Jitsuno, and S. Nakei, J. Appl. Phys. 73, 2122 (1993).
16. K. Tsubakimoto, M. Nakatsuka, N. Miyanaga, T. Jitsuno, T. Kanabe, H. Nakano, and S. Nakai, Proc. SPIE 1870, 186 (1993).
17. Fluctuations in ∈ owing to φ are Gaussian in this limit.
18. While effects such as the supersonic layering instability and flow exclusion, as described in Ref. 6, are not captured by linearized hydrodynamics, for small enough average laser intensity the length scales associated with these phenomena are large compared to a speckle width so that locally, i.e., over the scale of many speckle widths, the linearized hydro response is valid.
19. For this to be accurate, the ion pressure must be negligible.
20. This is only superficially different in form from Eq. (10) of Ref. 9, owing to the introduction of a minus sign in our definition of a now dimension-less linear hydro response function, and the presence of a factor of 1/2 in Eq. (3) of the same reference which is absent in our definition of the correlation function, C.
21. 0) is the universal flow function defined by Eq. (116).
22. y vanishes unless the plasma flow has a finite component along the y axis.
23. Such an ansatz was considered by Dick Berger, Bruce Langdon, Edward Williams (private communication, 1997), but no such effect was found in their simulations with FM-SSD.