Iranian Journal of Physics Research

Effect of target geometry on magnetic field generation and amplification in high-intensity laser–plasma interaction using 2D PIC simulation

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Fatemeh Shahi 1
Mehdi Sharifian 1
Soheil Khoshbinfar 2

1 Atomic and Molecular Group, Physics Department, Yazd University, Yazd P. O. Box: 891995-741, Iran

2 Department of Physics, Faculty of Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht P. O. Box: 41335-1914, Iran

https://doi.org/10.47176/ijpr.26.2.22246
Abstract
The effect of target geometry on magnetic field amplification in high-intensity laser–plasma interactions is investigated using two-dimensional particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations performed with the EPOCH code. Two plasma target configurations are considered: a double-cone target and a curved-foil target, while all laser parameters, computational conditions, and plasma properties are kept the same. The temporal evolution and spatial distribution of the generated magnetic field, particle energies, and electric-field components are analyzed. The results show that the curved-foil target produces a stronger, more localized, and more temporally stable magnetic field than the double-cone target. This enhancement is associated with improved electron confinement, increased axial current density, and reduced radial electron divergence. The findings demonstrate that target geometry plays an important role in controlling current dynamics and enhancing magnetic field generation in laser–plasma interactions.

Keywords

PIC simulation, Laser&ndash
plasma interaction, Electron acceleration, Axial currents, Magnetic field generation
Subjects
1.     T Tajima and J M Dawson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979) 267.
2.     P K Shukla and B Eliasson, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83 (2011) 885.
3.     A R Bell and R J Kingham, Phys Rev Lett 91 (2003) 035003.
4.     H Daido, M Nishiuchi and A S Pirozhkov, Rep. Prog. Phys. 75 (2012) 056401.
5.     A Macchi, “A Superintense Laser-Plasma Interaction Theory Primer”, Springer (2013).
6.     S Li et al., Nat. Phys. 17 (2021) 1108.
7.     F Fiuza et al., Phys. Plasmas. 27 (2020) 012702.
8.     T G Blackburn et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 92 (2020) 015002.
9.     M Tatarakis et al., Nature 415 (2002) 280.
10. P M Nilson et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 255001.
11. Y Sentoku and A J Kemp, J. Comput. Phys. 227 (2008) 6846.
12. K Quinn et al., Plasma. Phys. Control. Fusion. 54 (2012) 095007.
13. A Pukhov, Rep. Prog. Phys. 66 (2003) 47.
14. S Zhang et al., High Power Laser Sci Eng 10 (2022) e52.
15. D Wu et al., Phys. Plasmas 28 (2021) 033105.
16. R Singh et al., Laser Part Beams 38 (2020) 107.
17. X Wang et al., Sci. Rep. 13 (2023) 1452.
18. Q Zhao et al., Matter Radiat Extremes 7 (2022) 054401.
19. L Tian et al., Plasma Phys. Rep. 47 (2021) 326.
20. C K Birdsall and A B Langdon, “Plasma Physics via Computer Simulation, McGraw–Hill” (1985).
21. T D Arber et al., Plasma Phys. Control Fusion 57 (2015) 113001.
22. R A Fonseca et al., Lect. Notes Comput Sci. 2331 (2013) 342.
23. EPOCH Code Documentation, Version 4–5, University of Warwick and UK EPSRC (online technical documentation)
24. H B Cai, K Mima, W M Zhou, T Jozaki, H Nagatomo, A Sunahara and R J Mason, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 245001.

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us

تحت نظارت وف بومی