2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.10.204
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling of beam-target interaction during pulsed electron beam ablation of graphite: Case of melting

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Results from our recent investigations have indicated that the optimum values of beam efficiency and accelerating voltage are about 0.6 and 15 kV, respectively, for the target to reach optimal ablation performance [7,14]. The results correspond to a beam efficiency of 0.6 and accelerating voltage of 15 kV.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Results from our recent investigations have indicated that the optimum values of beam efficiency and accelerating voltage are about 0.6 and 15 kV, respectively, for the target to reach optimal ablation performance [7,14]. The results correspond to a beam efficiency of 0.6 and accelerating voltage of 15 kV.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Towards the end of the pulse, the shock waves seem to blend together resulting in a broader shock wave, as depicted in Figure 1 at t = 80 ns, 100 ns. The plasma temperature slightly increases due to the polyenergetic nature of the electron beam [14,15]. Plasma velocity profile calculated for various time intervals is shown in Figure 2.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have developed a flexible tool to study the target thermal field and the thermomechanical stress, which can be applied more in general to any material, target geometry, sequences and intensities of the positron bunches. In principle, our model can be also easily extended to other particle sources, as protons or electrons, for which the heat deposition can be again calculated with FLUKA and Geant4 [69][70][71].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%