J Fusion Energ DOI 10.

1007/s10894-011-9411-6

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

The Plasma Jet/Laser Driven Compression of Compact Plasmoids to Fusion Conditions

Alexei Yu. Chirkov Sergei V. Ryzhkov

Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Abstract Magneto-inertial fusion (MIF) is based on both magnetic and inertial connement. An embedded magnetic eld is compressed along with the target plasma to achieve magnetic insulation and fusion condition. Several magnetic systems for plasma connement may be used for laserdriven (LD) and plasma jet driven (PJ) magnetic ux compression. Estimations show the possibility in principle to realize regimes of PJMIF system with a plasma gain factor Q [ 10. Keywords Magneto-inertial fusion Magnetized target Plasma jets

Introduction There are two basic principles of thermonuclear plasma connement: magnetic and inertial (Table 1). In the rst case, a dense, high temperature (10 20 keV) plasma is kept in a given volume under the magnetic eld pressure, counteracting the plasma pressure. The second approach is based on the use of powerful sources of energy, heating of thermonuclear fuel to high temperatures for a time comparable with the characteristic times of the hydrodynamic expansion of the plasma. Magneto-inertial fusion (MIF), including solid/plasma/liquid liners [15], laser-driven (LDMIF) [6] and plasma jet driven magneto-inertial fusion (PJMIF) [7] presents the third concept. Interest in research on magneto-inertial fusion (MIF) [810] has recently been stimulated by (a) laser-driven [11]
A. Yu. Chirkov S. V. Ryzhkov (&) Bauman Moscow State Technical University, 2-nd Baumanskaya Street, 5, Moscow 105005, Russia e-mail: svryzhkov@gmail.com

and plasma jet driven [12] magnetic ux compression experiments, (b) the approach to a high b (beta is the ratio of plasma pressure to external magnetic pressure) magnetic systems, and (c) advantages in lasers, liners and plasma guns. MIF [13, 14] represents evolution of inertial connement fusion (ICF) with elements of magnetic connement fusion, i.e. the concept with high density plasma (Fig. 1) in ultrahigh magnetic elds (B [ 500 T). Presence of a magnetic eld reduces the heat conductivity and plasma should be at fusion temperatures for only microseconds. The main idea of MIF is compression of the magnetic ux using a high-temperature conductive plasma. Ignition is possible with lower implosion velocity and low cost drivers with magnetized targets [15]. Magnetic elds up to 10,000 T are required for typical inertial fusion scenarios, due to the high burn-time density in targets. Experiments with solid and liquid shells are conducted earlier [16]. Compression of target in MIF includes four stages. (1) The system uses a solenoid operated with a pulsed voltage power supply to generate initial (seeded) magnetic eld in the imploding target plasma of MIF. Magnetic eld embedded in the fuel thermally insulates it from the plasma liner. Thus, magnetic eld compression leads to increasing of the plasma pressure (dynamic high-pressure on a target), heating target plasma to ultrahigh temperature. Fuel temperature and pressure both increase to extremely high values with increasing of compression ratio, producing ultrahigh magnetic elds.

(2) (3)

(4)

Cusp (antiprobkotron) [17, 18], eld reversed conguration (FRC) [1921] and gas-dynamic trap (GDT) [2224] are possible systems for MIF power concept. Preferable

123

J Fusion Energ Table 1 Magneto-inertial fusion (MIF) parameters in comparison with magnetic connement fusion (MCF) and inertial connement fusion (ICF) Concept MCF ICF LDMIF PJMIF Particle connement Magnetic Inertial Inertial Energy connement Magnetic Inertial Magnetic Plasma density n * 1021 m-3 *100 g/cm3 *0.1 g/cm3 n * 1018 cm-3 Connement time sE *1 s *10 ps *100 ns * 100 ls *1 g/cm2 *0.1 g/cm2 * 0.001 g/cm2 *1,000 T Density-radius R Magnetic eld *10 T

PLASMA CONFINEMENT SYSTEMS for controlled fusion

Steady-State > 1 s, n 10 20 m3 Magnetic confinement fusion

Hybrid ~ 10 6 10 3 s, n ~ 10 24 10 27 m3 Magneto-inertial fusion

Pulsed-Power < 10 8 s, n 10 30 m3 Inertial confinement fusion

Fig. 1 Typical parameters for different types of fusion reactors

choice of plasma connement in magnetic device may be combined with properties of inertial connement. Direct compression of the magnetized plasma (target) by electromagnetic pulsed power of laser driver (laser beams) and plasma liner (plasma jets) schematically shown in Fig. 2. In this scheme, the eld-reversed conguration (FRC) plasma can be formed by merging spheromaks of nearly opposite helicities, indicating a high state of self-organization. Magnetized target of FRC is formed by two spheromaks merging. Compact toroids are oblate plasmoid congurations in formation chambers (Fig. 2, right). The advantage of this scheme compared to the cusp is the closed magnetic eld line geometry of magnetized target. The liner in the plasma with increasing density leads to a compression. High temperature plasma (target) conned by magnetic eld may be compressed by high energy laser pulses (laser system) or plasma jets (plasma guns) to push and heat plasma. Physical principles of ultrahigh magnetic eld generation in laser-driven plasma compression of cusp conguration
Laser beams

are described in Refs. [14, 25]. A new quasi-monotone numerical method and model for both laser-driven magnetoinertial fusion and plasma liner magneto-inertial fusion are developed [26]. The present research explores the burn dynamics [27, 28] in the reactor regime of the recently invented concept of using plasma jets to form the liner [8, 29]. Estimations show that initial temperature of the target is about 100 eV, temperature of compressed plasma is about 10 keV. Magnetic eld amplication during spherical implosion in such scheme may achieve about 1,000; fusion yield is close to 1,000 MJ. Such systems might be used for neutron source, space propulsion and radioactive waste disposal [30].

The Study of Gradient Drift Instabilities Related to the Anomalous Resistivity and Transport The usual reasons of the plasma transport across magnetic eld are the gradient drift instabilities associated with ion temperature gradient (ITG) and electron temperature
Plasma jet Plasma gun

Compact toroid

Target FRC target

Magnetic coil

Formation chamber

Fig. 2 Magnetic ux compression by laser-driven (left) and plasma jet driven (right) magneto-inertial fusion

123

J Fusion Energ

gradient (ETG) modes. Here we consider collisionless drift instabilities which are related to the problem of turbulent anomalous transport across magnetic eld under conditions of high-b magnetized plasma. High-b means that the local parameter b (inside the plasma) can be larger than unity. For a strongly collisional regime the problem of drift instability in MIF plasma was considered in Ref. [31] as a modication of collisionless case of innite b wallconnement regime [32]. We study collisionless ITG/ETG induced turbulence and transport in small-size (L * 1 cm) plasma with magnetic eld B * 1001,000 T and b * 1. Because of high density the connement time required for high efciency is relatively short and cross-eld transport plays not very important role in connement. But the ITG/ ETG induced penetration of strong magnetic eld into the plasma during the implosion can be signicant. In traps with strong plasma diamagnetism due to high b (mirrors, FRCs) magnetic eld increases from the central regions to the periphery of the plasma in accordance with p the relationship B % Be 1 b0 , where Be is the external magnetic eld, b0 2l0 p=B2 is the ratio of plasma prese sure p to the external magnetic eld pressure. The local beta parameter b 2l0 p=B2 is calculated using the eld inside plasma B. Two mentioned beta parameters are connected as follows: b b0 =1 b0 . In the cusp magnetic eld lines are concave inward. There are regions of decreasing eld in systems with internal conductors. The results of calculations of the drift instabilities can be used as the basis for model of plasma transport. Two typical ranges of the transversal wave number k\ are considered in mentioned model: (1) k\ * 1/qTi, and (2) k\ * 1/qTe, where qTi and qTe are the ion and electron thermal gyro-radiuses. The rst range corresponds to the ion temperature gradient (ITG) driven instability and the instability due to the plasma density gradient. Such relatively large scale convective motion in composition with sheared plasma ows can form non-linear low-frequency turbulent structures. The second range corresponds to electron temperature gradient (ETG) instability. Oscillations with k\ ) 1/qTe usually are not interesting from the viewpoint of plasma connement and anomalous transport in magnetic fusion devices. The model [33, 34] includes ITG/ETG instabilities taking into account non-adiabatic responses of both ions and electrons in whole range of k\ under the consideration. The analysis is carried out in the framework of the local electromagnetic kinetic approach. Low frequency (x ( xci, xci is the ion cyclotron frequency) drift instabilities are studied on the basis of the linearized Vlasov Maxwell equations. This system includes gyro-kinetic solution of the Vlasov equation, quasi-neutrality condition, and Amperes law for parallel and perpendicular

perturbations of the magnetic eld [3537]. Each solution of dispersion equation x = xR ? ic (xR is the real frequency, c is the growth rate) depends on the following parameters: parallel wave number k||, transversal wave number k\, gi = Ln/LTi, ge = Ln/LTe, Te/Ti, parameter of the transversal non-uniformity of the magnetic eld aB = Ln/LB, relative curvature parameter aR = Ln/R; here Ln = n/r\n, LTi = Ti/r\Ti, LTe = Te/r\Te, LB = B/ r\B, n is the plasma density, Ti is the ion temperature, Te is the electron temperature, B is the static magnetic eld inside the plasma, R is the magnetic eld line curvature radius. Narrow class of modes of practical importance enclosing perturbations with k|| = 0. In this case dispersion equation describes two kinds of perturbations: extraordinary and ordinary waves. Extraordinary wave can be interpreted as temperature gradient drift mode coupled with compressional perturbations [38]. The perturbed electric eld of this mode E1 is perpendicular to the unperturbed magnetic eld B. The structure of the ordinary-wave electromagnetic perturbations is the following: E1 is parallel to B. In general case aB = Ln/LB is independent parameter but for the traps such as mirrors and FRCs it is P 1gj bj Ln connected with other parameters as LB , where 2
j

bj 2l0 nj kB Tj =B2 is the local beta parameter for component j. Calculations show for high-b regimes growth rates are maximal at Ln/LB = 1.5 that corresponds to b = 1 (b0 = 0.5). For b = 1 we estimate that collisionless approximation for drift instabilities is available for not very p high compression of the magnetic eld: B\T 3=2 = L, where units of T, B, and L are keV, Tesla, and meter, respectively. If this condition is satised the instability growth rate exceeds the rate of electronelectron collisions. Collisionless approximation gives an upper bound for the growth rate. For example, at L = 1 mm and T = 20 keV upper boundary of collisionless drift wave transport regime is B = 3,000 T. It was estimated that for prospective regimes of this system B = 200400 T [39]. Typical scale of the growth rate c and real frequency xR is x0 kB Ti =eBLn qTi . Estimates have shown that considered instabilities with a wavelength comparable with the size of the target can cause transversal transport with the loss time which is several times longer that the time of target expansion. An important element of the proposed concept is the magnetic isolation of the target from the plasma of the liner. It is necessary that the time of the diffusion of the magnetic eld into the plasma was small compared with the connement time or, in other words, the diffusion depth should be much smaller than the target size at the

123

J Fusion Energ

p nal stage of the compression. Diffusion depth is l % Ds, where D is the magnetic diffusivity, and s is the connement time. Magnetic diffusivity is practically equal to particle diffusivity in the plasma with b * 1. We use the Bohm diffusivity as an upper bound, which corresponds to the long-wave drift instabilities. Then l * 0.1 mm. This value calculated using parameters of the target at the nal stage of the compression. But if we take into account initial stage, l may be an order greater (*1 mm). Nevertheless, the depth of the diffusion layer l * 1 mm is acceptable from the standpoint of the target radius which after compression is r = 5 mm. Hydrodynamic stability of such systems certainly requires further investigation taking into account the generation of spontaneous magnetic elds and processes associated with fast compression of the external magnetic ux. Strong magnetic eld achieved at the stagnation stage contributes to a signicant reduction of RayleighTaylor instability growing in comparison with the conventional scheme of laser inertial fusion. Other dangerous hydrodynamic instabilities causing convective mixing in a magnetic eld are KelvinHelmholtz type instabilities [40, 41]. In the plasma with b * 1 such instability is associated with the non-uniform diamagnetic ow. The velocity of such ow is v % kB T=eBr and the scale of its variation is about the target radius r. In this case, the growth rate of KelvinHelmholtz instability is c % kB T=eBr 2 . This value is comparable to the inverse time of diffusion of the magnetic eld. For the global structure of the plasma conguration hydrodynamic instabilities are certainly more dangerous than the drift microinstabilities. However, the effectiveness of magnetic insulation of the target from the liner plasma depends on the diffusion of the magnetic eld. When the b * 1, this process is determined by the considered above drift instabilities.

burning stage, and therefore the plasma connement time in the considered scheme will be several orders greater than the connement time for conventional inertial fusion. Consequently, the issue of justication of regimes with TL ( T in the target with the afterburner is an important task for the prospects of such systems. The limiting factor seems to be the magnetic eld. Here we consider a limiting case of performances, which can be achieved in the framework of the simplest approximations. The efciency of such PJMIF scheme can be characterized by a plasma power gain factor Q Wfus =Wpl WM WL ; where Wfus is the fusion energy output during the connement time, Wpl is the thermal energy of the plasma, WM is the energy of the magnetic eld, WL is the energy of the liner. Connement of alpha particles in the target volume is very important to the viewpoint of its heating and power efciency in general. Lets estimate the level of magnetic eld at which alpha particles with energy W0 = 3.5 MeV are magnetized in the target with radius r % 1 cm. It means that the Larmor radius of the alpha particle qa is less than p the radius of the target: qa % ma W0 =2eB\r, where ma is the alpha particle mass, e is the electron charge, B is the magnetic eld induction. This condition is satised if p B [ ma W0 =2ea = 20 T. Thus, at the nal sage of the compression (r % 1 cm, B [ 200 T) alpha particles can be considered as magnetized. Similar calculations for the initial stage give the following result: qa \ r, if B [ 2 T. Numerical study of fast particle kinetics is based on FokkerPlanck equation. It showed that angular scattering into the loss region during the slowdown is relatively slow process at high energies. The losses of fast alpha particles during the slowing down slightly reduce their density and pressure in comparison with the case of ideal connement. In Table 2, results of the estimations of some regimes are presented. We consider the compression of deuterium tritium (plasma consists of equal portions of deuterium and tritium) sphere with the initial temperature T0. Target of the radius r0 is placed in a magnetic eld with the induction B0. The magnetic eld occupies the region of radius R0. As a result of the action of the plasma jets, the liner is formed around the target. The liner temperature is TL. Liner compresses the magnetic eld. Its induction increases to the value B. In this case the outer radius of the magnetic shell is decreases down to the value R. The radius of the target is decreased down to value r, and its temperature increases to the thermonuclear value T = 1020 keV. Compression is assumed to be adiabatic. The connement time is estimated as s rkB TL =mL 1 , where kB is the Boltzmann constant, mL is the ion mass of liner. In the

Plasma Power Balance and Gain Factor Study Consider a scheme in which the magnetic eld isolates the plasma jet from the target plasma. The magnetic eld is compressed under the action of the liner and it compresses the target. Ideally, the compression pressure is almost the same value for the target plasma, magnetic eld and plasma liner. Diffusion of the magnetic eld into the target and the liner is assumed to be neglected, since the compression is much faster in the MIF scheme under consideration. This allows getting target temperature T several orders higher then the temperature of the liner TL on the nal stage of the compression. As a rst approximation we can assume that the connement is determined by the thermal expansion velocity of the plasma liner during the

123

J Fusion Energ Table 2 Parameters of the target and power balance of the PJMIF system (radius of the target after the compression r = 0.5 cm) Parameters B0, T B, T nD, m-3 T, keV TL, eV Liner plasma J, W/m2 Wpl, J WM, J WL, J Wfus, J Wfus0, J s, s Q Ver. #1 6.3 11,340 4.0 9 1027 20 10 Xe 4.3 9 1018 3.0 9 10 7.7 9 10
7

Ver. #2 9.0 16,040 8.0 9 1027 20 10 Xe 8.8 9 1018 6.0 9 10 1.5 9 10

7

Ver. #3 9.0 16,040 8.0 9 1027 20 1 Xe 2.8 9 1018 6.0 9 10 1.5 9 10

7

Ver. #4 6.3 11,340 4.0 9 1027 20 1 Xe 1.4 9 1018 3.0 9 10 7.7 9 10

7

Ver. #5 4.5 8,020 4.0 9 1027 10 1 Xe 6.9 9 1017 1.5 9 10 7.7 9 10

7

Ver. #6 6.3 11,340 4.0 9 1027 20 1 Ar 2.5 9 1018 3.0 9 107 8.8 9 106 7.7 9 107 7.8 9 108 4.4 9 109 1.0 9 10-7 6.7

8.8 9 106
7 8

1.8 9 107
8 9

1.8 9 107
8 9

8.8 9 106
6 9

4.4 9 106
6 7

4.5 9 10 4.4 9 109 5.8 9 10-8 3.8

1.8 9 10 8.8 9 109 5.8 9 10-8 7.7

5.6 9 10 8.8 9 109 1.8 9 10-7 24

1.4 9 10 4.4 9 109 1.8 9 10-7 12

3.9 9 10 3.7 9 108 1.8 9 10-7 6.4

Table 2, in addition to the fusion energy Wfus, stored fusion energy Wfus0 corresponding to the complete reaction is presented. Liner material is plasma of easy to ionize the gas with relatively high atomic mass, in the case under consideration it is argon or xenon. The nD is deuterium density after the compression; J is the liner energy ux in the target. The estimated values of the plasma power gain factor Q = 5 give hope to use such systems applications such as sources of neutrons and high-energy particles, fusion engine, devices for material testing studies, etc. For the pure fusion energy production (with no ssion or any amplication) power gain factor could be Q [ 10. Such regimes (Ver. #3 and Ver. #4 in Table 2) can be achieved by the following ways: (1) an increase of the plasma target density and magnetic eld; and (2) the decrease in the liner plasma temperature.

they can be attractive for fusion applications in the limit of ultrahigh intensity magnetic eld that can be generated by magnetic ux compression. In present work we are developing a simple quasisteady-state model for the calculation of the parameters of magnetized target at the nal stage of the compression. The estimated values of the plasma amplication factor Q give hope such a system with prospective regimes of higher magnetic eld compression and optimized driver properties. The development of complex models and computational schemes seems appropriate for further investigations of the processes in the relatively cold liner plasma, laser induced plasma and its interactions with the fusion plasma of target.
Acknowledgments This work has been supported by the RFBR (grants 09-08-00137-a and 11-08-00700-a), Erasmus Mundus Action 2 Program of the European Union and Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (AVTsP Development of Scientic Potential in Higher Education (20092011) and Russian Presidential grant MK-1811.2010.8).

Conclusions The magneto-inertial fusion (MIF) is the fastest developing area of science, which combines the advantages of traditional magnetic and inertial approaches to the fusion [4245]. In the present work, we have investigated ITG and ETG effects in MIF target parameters. Cusp [14, 25], mirror trap [6, 46] and compact toroid [4750] are considered for laser-driven and plasma jet driven magnetoinertial fusion. These systems give the ability to use such congurations in both magnetic and magneto-inertial fusion. Although these geometries are not received much attention in modern magnetic fusion energy research but References
1. Yu.B. Khariton, V.N. Mokhov, V.K. Chernyshev, V.B. Yakubov, Sov. UFN 120, 706 (1976) 2. R.W. Moses, R.A. Krakowski, R.L. Miller, Los Alamos Scientic Laboratory informal report, LA-7686-MS (1979) 3. A.G. Eskov, R.Kh. Kurtmullaev, A.P. Kreschchuck et al., Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Research (International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 1979), Proc. 7th Int. Conf., Innsbruck, II, 187 (1979) 4. I.R. Lindemuth, R.C. Kirkpatrick, Nucl. Fusion 23, 263 (1983) 5. T.P. Intrator, G.A. Wurden, P.E. Sieck et al., J. Fusion Energy 28, 165 (2009)

123

J Fusion Energ 6. O.V. Gotchev, N.W. Jang, J.P. Knauer et al., J. Fusion Energy 27, 25 (2008) 7. Y.C.F. Thio, C.E. Knapp, R.C. Kirkpatrick, R.E. Siemon, P.J. Turchi, J. Fusion Energy 20, 1 (2001) 8. Y.C.F. Thio, E. Panarella, R.C. Kirkpatrick et al., 2nd Symposium Current Trends in Int. Fusion Research (NRC Research Press, Ottawa, 1999), p. 113 9. I.R. Lindemuth, R.E. Siemon, Am. J. Phys. 77, 5407 (2009) 10. S.A. Slutz, M.C. Herrmann, R.A. Vesey et al., Phys. Plasmas 17, 056303 (2010) 11. O.V. Gotchev, P.Y. Chang, J.P. Knauer et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 215004 (2009) 12. F.D. Witherspoon, R. Bomgardner, A. Case et al. (36th ICOPS, San Diego, 2009) 13. Y.C.F. Thio, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 112, 042084 (2008) 14. S.V. Ryzhkov, I.Yu. Kostyukov, ArXiv e-prints, http://arxiv.org/ abs/0911.5497 (2009) 15. R.C. Kirkpatrick, I.R. Lindemuth, M.S. Ward, Fusion Tech. 27, 201 (1995) 16. A.G. Eskov, N.P. Kozlov, R.Kh. Kurtmullaev et al., Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett. 9, 38 (1983) 17. O.A. Lavrentev, Magnetic Traps (Magnitnye Lovushki) (Naukova dumka, Kiev, 1968), p. 77 18. D.D. Ryutov, Sov. UFN 154, 565 (1988) 19. M. Tuszewski, Nucl. Fusion 28, 2033 (1988) 20. V.I. Khvesyuk, S.V. Ryzhkov, J.F. Santarius et al., Fusion Sci. Tech. 39, 410 (2001) 21. S.V. Ryzhkov, V.I. Khvesyuk, A.A. Ivanov, Fusion Sci. Tech. 43, 304 (2003) 22. V.V. Mirnov, D.D. Ryutov, Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett. 5, 279 (1979) 23. A.A. Skovoroda, Magnetic Traps for Plasma Connement (Magnitnye Lovushki dlya Uderzhaniya Plazmy) (Fizmatlit, Moscow, 2009) 24. A.Yu. Chirkov, S.V. Ryzhkov, A.V. Anikeev, P.A. Bagryansky, Fusion Sci. Tech. 59(IT), 39 (2011) 25. I.Yu. Kostyukov, S.V. Ryzhkov, Rus. Applied Physics (Prikladnaya Fizika) 1, 65 (2011) 26. V.V. Kuzenov, S.V. Ryzhkov, Acta Technica CSAV in press (2011) 27. J.F. Santarius, Bull. Amer. Phys. Soc. 54(15), 296 (2009) 28. J.F. Santarius, Bull. Amer. Phys. Soc. 55(15), 360 (2010) 29. http://wsx.lanl.gov/Plasma-Jet-Workshop-08/workshop-talks.html 30. S.V. Ryzhkov, Proc. of 35th EPS Conf. on PPCF, vol. ECA 32F, P1.114 (2008) 31. D.D. Ryutov, Phys. Plasmas 9, 4085 (2002) 32. A. El-Nadi, M.N. Rosenbluth, Phys. Fluids 16, 2036 (1973) 33. A.Yu. Chirkov, V.I. Khvesyuk, Fusion Sci. Tech. 55, 162 (2009) 34. A.Yu. Chirkov, V.I. Khvesyuk, Phys. Plasmas 17, 012105 (2010) 35. W. Horton, Phys. Fluids 26, 1461 (1983) 36. K.T. Tsang, C.Z. Cheng, Phys. Fluids B3, 688 (1991) 37. F. Jenko, W. Dorland, M. Kotschenreuther, B.N. Rogers, Phys. Plasmas 7, 1904 (2000) 38. A.B. Mikhailovskii, Theory of Plasma Instabilities, vol. 2 (Consultants Bureau, New York, 1974) 39. S.V. Ryzhkov, A.Yu. Chirkov, 23rd IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, ICC/P5-05 (2010) http://www-pub.iaea.org/mtcd/ meetings/PDFplus/2010/cn180/cn180_papers/icc_p5-05.pdf 40. A. Miura, Phys. Plasmas. 4, 2871 (1997) 41. A. Tenerani, M. Faganello, F. Califano, F. Pegoraro, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion. 53, 015003 (2011) 42. D.D. Ryutov, Y.C.F. Thio, Fusion Sci. Tech. 49, 39 (2006) 43. S.V. Ryzhkov, Prob. Atomic Sci. Tech. 4. Ser.: Plasma Electronics and New Methods of Acceleration (7), 105 (2010) 44. D. Kirtley, J. Slough, J. Fusion Energy 29, 561 (2010) 45. G. Votroubek, J. Slough, J. Fusion Energy 29, 571 (2010) 46. S.V. Ryzhkov, Fusion Sci. Tech. 51, 190 (2007) 47. S.V. Ryzhkov, Prob. Atomic Sci. Tech. 4. Ser.: Plasma Physics (7), 73 (2002) 48. S.V. Ryzhkov, Rus. Applied Physics (Prikladnaya Fizika) 1, 47 (2010) 49. S. Woodruff, M. Brown, E.B. Hooper et al., J. Fusion Energy 29, 447 (2010) 50. L.C. Steinhauer, J.F. Santarius, J. Fusion Energy 29, 577 (2010)

123