Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Cambridge University Press, Journal of Plasma Physics, 4(89), 2023

DOI: 10.1017/s0022377823000740

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Observation of subcritical shocks in a collisional laboratory plasma: scale dependence near the resistive length

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

We present a study of subcritical shocks in a highly collisional laboratory plasma with a dynamically significant magnetic field. Shocks were produced by placing cylindrical obstacles into the supermagnetosonic ( $M_{{\rm MS}} ∼ 1.9$ ) outflow from an inverse wire array z-pinch at the MAGPIE pulsed power facility ( $n_{e} ∼ 8.5 \times 10^{17}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ , $v ∼ 45\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$ ). We demonstrate the existence of subcritical shocks in this regime and find that secondary stagnation shocks form in the downstream which we infer from interferometry and optical Thomson scattering measurements are hydrodynamic in nature. The subcritical shock width is found to be approximately equal to the resistive diffusion length and we demonstrate the absence of a jump in hydrodynamic parameters. Temperature measurements by collective optical Thomson scattering showed little temperature change across the subcritical shock ( ${<}10\,\%$ of the ion kinetic energy) which is consistent with a balance between adiabatic and Ohmic heating and radiative cooling. We demonstrate the absence of subcritical shocks when the obstacle diameter is less than the resistive diffusion length due to decoupling of the magnetic field from the plasma. These findings are supported by magnetohydrodynamic simulations using the Gorgon and AstroBEAR codes and discrepancies between the simulations and experiment are discussed.