Tagged: DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • richardmitnick 5:24 pm on August 6, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "LLNL optimizes flow-through electrodes for electrochemical reactors with 3D printing", , , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US), Engineers will be able to design and manufacture structures optimized for specific processes., First time 3D-printed carbon FTEs — porous electrodes responsible for the reactions in the reactors — from graphene aerogels., Novel high-performance electrodes will be essential components of next-generation electrochemical reactor architectures., , The ability to engineer flow in FTEs will make the technology a much more attractive option for helping solve the global energy crisis.   

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) : “LLNL optimizes flow-through electrodes for electrochemical reactors with 3D printing” 

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)

    8.2.21
    Jeremy Thomas
    thomas244@llnl.gov
    925-422-5539

    1
    For the first time, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory engineers have 3D-printed carbon flow-through electrodes (FTEs) from graphene aerogels. By capitalizing on the design freedom afforded by 3D printing, researchers demonstrated they could tailor the flow in FTEs, dramatically improving mass transfer – the transport of liquid or gas reactants through the electrodes and onto the reactive surfaces. Illustration by Veronica Chen/LLNL.

    To take advantage of the growing abundance and cheaper costs of renewable energy, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) scientists and engineers are 3D printing flow-through electrodes (FTEs), core components of electrochemical reactors used for converting CO2 and other molecules to useful products.

    As described in a paper published by the PNAS, LLNL engineers for the first time 3D-printed carbon FTEs — porous electrodes responsible for the reactions in the reactors — from graphene aerogels. By capitalizing on the design freedom afforded by 3D printing, researchers demonstrated they could tailor the flow in FTEs, dramatically improving mass transfer – the transport of liquid or gas reactants through the electrodes and onto the reactive surfaces. The work opens the door to establishing 3D printing as a “viable, versatile rapid-prototyping method” for flow-through electrodes and as a promising pathway to maximizing reactor performance, according to researchers.

    “At LLNL we are pioneering the use of three-dimensional reactors with precise control over the local reaction environment,” said LLNL engineer Victor Beck, the paper’s lead author. “Novel high-performance electrodes will be essential components of next-generation electrochemical reactor architectures. This advancement demonstrates how we can leverage the control that 3D printing capabilities offer over the electrode structure to engineer the local fluid flow and induce complex, inertial flow patterns that improve reactor performance.”

    Through 3D printing, researchers demonstrated that by controlling the electrodes’ flow channel geometry, they could optimize electrochemical reactions while minimizing the tradeoffs seen in FTEs made through traditional means. Typical materials used in FTEs are “disordered” media, such as carbon fiber-based foams or felts, limiting opportunities for engineering their microstructure. While cheap to produce, the randomly ordered materials suffer from uneven flow and mass transport distribution, researchers explained.

    “By 3D printing advanced materials such as carbon aerogels, it is possible to engineer macroporous networks in these material without compromising the physical properties such as electrical conductivity and surface area,” said co-author Swetha Chandrasekaran.

    The team reported the FTEs, printed in lattice structures through a direct ink writing method, enhanced mass transfer over previously reported 3D printed efforts by one to two orders of magnitude, and achieved performance on par with conventional materials.

    Because the commercial viability and widespread adoption of electrochemical reactors is dependent on attaining greater mass transfer, the ability to engineer flow in FTEs will make the technology a much more attractive option for helping solve the global energy crisis, researchers said. Improving the performance and predictability of 3D-printed electrodes also makes them suitable for use in scaled-up reactors for high efficiency electrochemical converters.

    “Gaining fine control over electrode geometries will enable advanced electrochemical reactor engineering that wasn’t possible with previous generation electrode materials,” said co-author Anna Ivanovskaya. “Engineers will be able to design and manufacture structures optimized for specific processes. Potentially, with development of manufacturing technology, 3D-printed electrodes may replace conventional disordered electrodes for both liquid and gas type reactors.”

    LLNL scientists and engineers are currently exploring use of electrochemical reactors across a range of applications, including converting CO2 to useful fuels and polymers and electrochemical energy storage to enable further deployment of electricity from carbon-free and renewable sources. Researchers said the promising results will allow them to rapidly explore the impact of engineered electrode architectures without expensive industrialized manufacturing techniques.

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.

    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.


    NNSA

     
  • richardmitnick 4:36 pm on July 10, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Scientists develop a new geometry for a neutron source platform for NIF", , , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US), , , University of Rochester(US) Laboratory for Laser Energetics   

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) : “Scientists develop a new geometry for a neutron source platform for NIF” 

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)

    7.8.21

    Michael Padilla
    padilla37@llnl.gov
    925-341-8692

    1
    In the inverted-corona platform, laser beams are pointed onto the inside walls via laser entrance holes. Graphic provided by Matthias Hohenberger.

    The National Ignition Facility (NIF) [below] at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) has added a new tool to its growing list of capabilities.

    A team of scientists has demonstrated a new geometry for a neutron source platform for NIF, called the inverted-corona platform, which does not rely on spherically symmetric laser irradiation.

    This new tool has significantly less-stringent laser-symmetry requirements than conventional laser driven neutron sources on NIF. In this technique, laser energy is used to heat the inner surface of a millimeter-scale capsule. The wall material expands and launches a centrally stagnating shock into the gas fill to heat the gas to fusion conditions.

    “This platform has relevance to applications in effects testing or forensics,” said Matthias Hohenberger, LLNL staff scientist. “We have an experiment scheduled in 2022 for exploring applications as a neutron backlighter, and as a neutron source for nuclear-cross-section measurements with sample materials attached to the outside of the capsule.”

    Hohenberger said there are other potential applications in basic science, and is one-of-a-kind in its geometry flexibility. “It also represents a challenging problem to simulate because of the relatively low plasma density,” he said. “So we’re using it to test mix models in state-of-the-art simulation codes, and to train junior scientists.”

    The work, highlighted in a paper in Review of Scientific Instruments, presents a novel neutron-source platform for NIF. Typically, NIF neutron platforms are based on the spherical compression of a capsule filled with deuterium and tritium (DT) fuel, thus achieving the pressures and temperatures necessary for the DT to undergo fusion reactions. This is achieved using either indirect-drive intertial confinement fusion (ICF) platforms or directly-driven exploding pushers. In these platforms, the incident laser results in a pushing action from the outside of the capsule, accelerating the capsule wall inwards — either from the X-rays generated in the hohlraum, or from the laser incident on the capsule itself. That means performance is highly sensitive to drive asymmetries, as they result in an uneven push of the wall, and eventual mixing of fuel and wall material into the hot spot, said Hohenberger, who is the lead author of the paper.

    “This can, and does, affect fusion performance,” he said. “It also means that the wall composition must be controlled tightly. Even small impurities in the wall, thickness variations or even surface roughness will affect the performance and neutron yield.”

    Pointing lasers onto the inside of capsule wall

    Hohenberger said in this new scheme, which was tested on the OMEGA laser and the NIF, the laser beams are pointed through laser entrance holes onto the inside wall of a ~5-millimeter diameter, gas-filled (D2 or DT) capsule.

    This causes the wall material to ablate inwards, which then launches a converging shock wave into the gas fill. The shock stagnates on center and heats the gas fill to fusion conditions (similarly to an exploding pusher). However, because the laser beams are incident onto the inside wall, the capsule wall itself is pushed outwards and away from the center, and the fusion performance is dominated by the ablatively-driven shock.

    Hohenberger said this work has two key advantages. First, it decouples the wall composition from the neutron source and significantly relaxes requirements on capsule quality such as thickness uniformity, material purity and surface roughness, because the wall does not mix with the hot spot since it is pushed out rather than inwards. Second, the performance is highly insensitive to low-mode asymmetries. That means it is possible to have laser beams incident from only one side, rather than symmetrically distributed around the target, without a reduction in neutron yield.

    The platform was successfully demonstrated in experiments on both the OMEGA laser and NIF.

    The work was funded through LLNL’s Laboratory Directed Research and Development program.

    In addition to Hohenberger, co-authors include Nathan Meezan, Bob Heeter, Rick Heredia, Nino Landen, Andrew MacKinnon and Warren Hsing from LLNL; Will Riedel and Mark Cappelli from Stanford University (US); Neel Kabadi and Richard Petrasso from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US); Chad Forrest from the Laboratory for Energetics (US) at the University of Rochester (US); Loosineh Aghaian, Mike Farrell and Claudia Shuldberg from General Atomics; and Franziska Treffert and Siegfried Glenzer from DOE’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory.

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.

    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.

    NNSA

     
  • richardmitnick 4:29 pm on June 24, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Scientists focus on cone targets to enhance temperature of electron beams", , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US), , , LaserNetUS initiative, Texas petawatt laser system, The cone geometry is a Compound Parabolic Concentrator (CPC) designed to focus the laser to the tip., The team conducted experimental measurements of hot electron production using a short-pulse high-contrast laser on cone and planar targets., The University of Texas at Austin (US)   

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) : “Scientists focus on cone targets to enhance temperature of electron beams” 

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)

    6.24.21

    1
    This image shows the intensification of the laser in simulations and the electrons being accelerated.

    Intense short-pulse laser-driven production of bright high-energy sources, such as X-rays, neutrons and protons, has been shown to be an invaluable tool in the study of high energy density science.

    In an effort to address some of the most challenging applications, such as X-ray radiography of high areal density objects for industrial and national security applications, both the yield and energy of the sources must be increased beyond what has currently been achieved by state-of-the-art high-intensity laser systems.

    A team of scientists from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), The University of Texas at Austin (US) and General Atomics took on this challenge. Specifically, the team conducted experimental measurements of hot electron production using a short-pulse high-contrast laser on cone and planar targets.

    The cone geometry is a Compound Parabolic Concentrator (CPC) designed to focus the laser to the tip. The cone geometry shows higher hot electron temperatures than planar foils. Simulations identified that the primary source of this temperature enhancement is the intensity increase caused by the CPC.

    Led by LLNL postdoctoral appointee Dean Rusby, the research findings are featured in Physical Review E.

    “We were able enhance the temperature of the electron beam from our high-intensity laser interactions by shooting into a focusing cone target,” Rusby said. “It shows that we understand how the compound parabolic concentrator works under these laser conditions.”

    Rusby said increasing the coupling into high-energy electrons in these interactions is crucial for developing applications from laser-plasma interactions.

    “It is very encouraging to see significant enhancements are possible using the CPC target platform on a petawatt 100 fs class laser system, which is already capable of near diffraction limited operation,” said Andrew MacPhee, co-author of the paper. “Non-imaging optics applied to laser target interactions are redefining the parameter space accessible to the community.”

    The team used the Texas petawatt laser system at the University of Austin during a six-week period, which has a short pulse and high contrast that allowed the experiment to work. The target is a compound CPC that is specifically designed to focus more laser energy toward the tip and increase the intensity.

    “The increase in electron temperature strongly agreed with the increase we would expect when using the CPC,” Rusby said.

    The Department of Energy’s Office of Science supported the LaserNetUS initiative at Texas Petawatt and LLNL’s Laboratory Directed Research and Development program funded the team and the crucially important target development from General Atomics.

    3
    This image shows the experimental setup displaying the target, laser and electron spectrometer. A 3D drawing of the CPC, tantalum substrate and the incoming laser also is shown.

    The team has been awarded additional time through LaserNetUS at the Texas petawatt to continue research on CPCs targets. This time, the team will concentrate on the acceleration of the protons from the rear surface and the enhancement that the CPCs provide.

    Andrew Mackinnon, a co-author of the paper and a principal investigator for a Strategic Initiative Laboratory Directed Research & Development, is using these CPC targets for the project.

    “These experiments showed that miniature plasma mirror targets do improve coupling of petawatt-class lasers to MeV (mega-electronvolt) electrons, which benefits potential applications such as laser-based MeV radiography,” he said.

    In addition to Rusby, MacPhee and Mackinnon, co-authors include Paul King, Arthur Pak, N. Lemos, Shaun Kerr, Ginny Cochran, Anthony Link, Andreas Kemp, Scott Wilks, George Williams, Felicie Albert, Maurice Aufderheide, H. Chen, Craig Siders and Andrew Macphee from LLNL; I. Pagano, A. Hannasch, H. Quevedo, M. Spinks and M. Donovan from the University of Austin; and M. J.-E. Manuel, Z. Gavin and A. Haid from General Atomics.

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.

    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.

    LLNL/NIF

    DOE Seal

    NNSA

     
  • richardmitnick 9:37 am on June 24, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Setting gold and platinum standards where few have gone before", , , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US), ,   

    From DOE’s Sandia National Laboratories (US) and From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) : “Setting gold and platinum standards where few have gone before” 

    From DOE’s Sandia National Laboratories (US)

    and

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)

    June 24, 2021

    Neal Singer
    nsinger@sandia.gov
    505-977-7255

    Extreme pressure at DOE’s Sandia National Laboratories (US) and DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories.

    1
    Eight gold samples, four per panel, prior to assembly of the panels into a “stripline” target for Sandia National Laboratories’ Z machine. There they were vaporized by the enormous pressures produced by Z’s 20-million-ampere current pulse. This arrangement will permit four measurements, one for each pair of samples in which one pair is on each panel at the same position Photo: Leo Molina.

    Like two superheroes finally joining forces, Sandia National Laboratories’ Z machine — generator of the world’s most powerful electrical pulses [below]— and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s National Ignition Facility [below] — the planet’s most energetic laser source — in a series of 10 experiments have detailed the responses of gold and platinum at pressures so extreme that their atomic structures momentarily distorted like images in a fun-house mirror.

    Similar high-pressure changes induced in other settings have produced oddities like hydrogen appearing as a metallic fluid, helium in the form of rain and sodium a transparent metal. But until now there has been no way to accurately calibrate these pressures and responses, the first step to controlling them.

    Said Sandia manager Chris Seagle, an author of a technical paper recently published by the journal Science, “Our experiments are designed to measure these distortions in gold and platinum as a function of time. Compression gives us a measurement of pressure versus density.”

    Following experiments on the two big machines, researchers developed tables of gold and platinum responses to extreme pressure. “These will provide a standard to help future researchers calibrate the responses of other metals under similar stress,” said Jean-Paul Davis, another paper author and Sandia’s lead scientist in the effort to reliably categorize extreme data.

    Data generated by experiments at these pressures — roughly 1.2 terapascals (a terapascal is 1 trillion pascals), an amount of pressure relevant to nuclear explosions — can aid understanding the composition of exoplanets, the effects and results of planetary impacts, and how the moon formed.

    2
    The complete target assembly inside Sandia National Laboratories’ Z machine for the high-pressure materials experiments coordinated with researchers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The samples are covered by probes. Photo: Leo Molina.

    The technical unit called the pascal is so small it is often seen in its multiples of thousands, millions, billions or trillions. It may be easier to visualize the scale of these effects in terms of atmospheric pressure units. The center of the Earth is approximately 3.6 million times the atmospheric pressure at sea level, or 3.6 million atmospheres. Z’s data reached 4 million atmospheres, or four million times atmospheric pressure at sea level, while the National Ignition Facility reached 12 million atmospheres.

    The force of the diamond anvil

    Remarkably, such pressures can be generated in the laboratory by a simple compression device called a diamond anvil.

    However, “We have no standards for these extreme pressure ranges,” said Davis. “While investigators see interesting events, they are hampered in comparing them with each other because what one researcher presents at 1.1 terapascals is only 0.9 on another researcher’s scale.”

    What’s needed is an underlying calibration tool, such as the numerical table these experiments helped to create, he said, so that scientists are talking about results achieved at the same documented amounts of pressure.

    “The Z-NIF experiments will provide this,” Davis said.

    The overall experiments, under the direction of Lawrence Livermore researcher D. E. Fratanduono, relied on Z machine’s accuracy as a check on NIF’s power.

    Z’s accuracy, NIF’s power

    Z’s force is created by its powerful shockless magnetic field, generated for hundreds of nanoseconds by its 20 million-ampere pulse. For comparison, a 120-watt bulb uses one ampere.

    The accuracy of this method refocused the higher pressures achieved using NIF methods.

    NIF’s pressures exceeded those at the core of the planet Saturn, which is 850 gigapascals. But its laser-compression experiments sometimes required a small shock at the start of the compression wave, raising the material’s temperature, which can distort measurements intended to set a standard.

    “The point of shockless compression is to keep the temperature relatively low for the materials being studied,” said Seagle. “Basically the material does heat as it compresses, but it should remain relatively cool — hundreds of degrees — even at terapascal pressures. Initial heating is a troublesome start.”

    Another reason that Z, which contributed half the number of “shots,” or firings, and about one-third the data, was considered the standard for results up to 400 gigapascals was because Z’s sample size was roughly 10 times as big: 600 to 1,600 microns thick compared with 60 to 90 microns on NIF. A micron is a thousandth of a millimeter.

    Larger samples, slower pulses equal easier measurements

    “Because they were larger, Z’s samples were less sensitive to the microstructure of the material than were NIF’s,” said Davis. “Larger samples and slower pulses are simply easier to measure to high relative precision. Combining the two facilities really tightly constrained the standards.”

    Combining Z and NIF data meant that the higher-accuracy, but lower-intensity Z data could be used to pin down the low-to-medium pressure response, and with mathematical adjustments, reduce error on the higher-pressure NIF data.

    “The purpose of this study was to produce highly accurate pressure models to approximately one terapascal. We did that, so this combination of facilities has been advantageous,” said Seagle.

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.

    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.

    LLNL/NIF

    DOE Seal

    NNSA

    Sandia Campus.

    DOE’s Sandia National Laboratories (US) managed and operated by the National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia (a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International), is one of three National Nuclear Security Administration(US) research and development laboratories in the United States. Their primary mission is to develop, engineer, and test the non-nuclear components of nuclear weapons and high technology. Headquartered in Central New Mexico near the Sandia Mountains, on Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, Sandia also has a campus in Livermore, California, next to DOE’sLawrence Livermore National Laboratory(US), and a test facility in Waimea, Kauai, Hawaii.

    It is Sandia’s mission to maintain the reliability and surety of nuclear weapon systems, conduct research and development in arms control and nonproliferation technologies, and investigate methods for the disposal of the United States’ nuclear weapons program’s hazardous waste.

    Other missions include research and development in energy and environmental programs, as well as the surety of critical national infrastructures. In addition, Sandia is home to a wide variety of research including computational biology; mathematics (through its Computer Science Research Institute); materials science; alternative energy; psychology; MEMS; and cognitive science initiatives.

    Sandia formerly hosted ASCI Red, one of the world’s fastest supercomputers until its recent decommission, and now hosts ASCI Red Storm supercomputer, originally known as Thor’s Hammer.


    Sandia is also home to the Z Machine.

    The Z Machine is the largest X-ray generator in the world and is designed to test materials in conditions of extreme temperature and pressure. It is operated by Sandia National Laboratories to gather data to aid in computer modeling of nuclear guns. In December 2016, it was announced that National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia, under the direction of Honeywell International, would take over the management of Sandia National Laboratories starting on May 1, 2017.


     
  • richardmitnick 4:52 pm on June 23, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Scientists create a novel instrument to probe thermal states of extreme matter on Earth", , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US), High-resolution measurements of a challenging feature of high energy density matter produced by National Ignition Facility experiments.   

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) and From DOE’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (US) : “Scientists create a novel instrument to probe thermal states of extreme matter on Earth” 

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)

    and

    From DOE’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (US)

    June 23, 2021
    Michael Padilla
    padilla37@llnl.gov
    925-341-8692

    1
    Layout of the spectrometer, which will provide high-resolution measurements of a challenging feature of high energy density matter produced by National Ignition Facility experiments.

    Scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) have collaborated with Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) to design a novel X-ray crystal spectrometer to provide high-resolution measurements of a challenging feature of high energy density (HED) matter produced by National Ignition Facility (NIF) (US) [below] experiments.

    The work is featured in a paper in the Review of Scientific Instruments that describes the new crystal shape being fabricated for NIF, the world’s most energetic laser.

    Laser-produced high energy density plasmas, similar to those found in stars, nuclear explosions and the core of giant planets, may be the most extreme state of matter created on Earth.

    PPPL previously built a spectrometer for NIF that was quite successful. The spectrometer, delivered in 2017, provides high-resolution measurements of the temperature and density of NIF extreme plasmas for inertial confinement fusion experiments, and the data obtained was presented in invited talks and peer-reviewed publications.

    2
    The high-resolution spectrometer named HiRAXS is described in a paper in Review of Scientific Instruments.

    The instruments measure profiles of key parameters such as the ion and electron temperatures in large volumes of hot plasmas that are magnetically confined in doughnut-shaped tokamak fusion devices to facilitate fusion reactions. By contrast, NIF laser-produced HED plasmas are tiny, point-like substances that require differently designed spectrometers for high-resolution studies.

    Marilyn Schneider, leader of the Radiative Properties Group in the Physical and Life Sciences Directorate at LLNL and a co-author of the paper, said this is the third designed crystal for extended X-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS) experiments at NIF. These crystals are part of a high-resolution spectrometer named HiRAXS, which is described in another paper in Review of Scientific Instruments.

    The spectrometer examines copper, tantalum and now lead EXAFS. The X-ray energy gets higher from copper to tantalum to lead, and the signal to noise gets lower, so there was a need to optimize the spectrometer design.

    The collaboration will move to NIF in October when the new crystal is scheduled for testing there, with researchers at both laboratories eagerly awaiting the results.

    “Experiments at NIF that measure the EXFAS spectrum at high X-ray energies have had low signals,” Schneider said. “The spectrometer design described in the paper concentrates the low signal and increases the signal-to-noise ratio while maintaining the high resolution required for observing EXAFS.”

    “Unlike commonly used spherically, cylindrically or toroidally curved crystals, this new shape of crystal follows sinusoidal spirals,” said Yuan Ping, leader of the EXAFS project and the Dynamic Multiscale Material Properties Group. “Such a novel design makes it possible to meet the strict requirements for EXAFS measurements to probe the thermal state of highly compressed higher-Z materials.”

    In addition to Schneider and Ping, LLNL co-authors include Federica Coppari, Robert Kauffman, Michael MacDonald, Andrew MacPhee, Stanislav Stoupin and Daniel Thorn. PPPL co-authors include Manfred Bitter, Ken Hill, Lan Gao, Luis Delgado-Aparicio, Brent Stratton, Brian Kraus and Philip Efthimion. The DOE Office of Science supported this research.

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition


    PPPL campus

    Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (US) is a U.S. Department of Energy national laboratory managed by Princeton University. PPPL, on Princeton University’s Forrestal Campus in Plainsboro, N.J., is devoted to creating new knowledge about the physics of plasmas — ultra-hot, charged gases — and to developing practical solutions for the creation of fusion energy. Results of PPPL research have ranged from a portable nuclear materials detector for anti-terrorist use to universally employed computer codes for analyzing and predicting the outcome of fusion experiments. The Laboratory is managed by the University for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science, which is the largest single supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States, and is working to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more information, please visit https://energy.gov/science.

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.
    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.

    LLNL/NIF

    DOE Seal

    NNSA

     
  • richardmitnick 7:57 am on June 19, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Lawrence Livermore team designs semiconductor switch for next-generation communications", , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US), , , Laser-driven semiconductor switch   

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) : “Lawrence Livermore team designs semiconductor switch for next-generation communications” 

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)

    6.18.21

    Jeremy Thomas
    thomas244@llnl.gov
    925-422-5539

    1
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory engineers have designed a new kind of laser-driven semiconductor switch that can theoretically achieve higher speeds at higher voltages than existing photoconductive devices. If the device could be realized, it could be miniaturized and incorporated into satellites to enable communication systems beyond 5G, potentially transferring more data at a faster rate and over longer distances, according to researchers.

    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) engineers have designed a new kind of laser-driven semiconductor switch that can theoretically achieve higher speeds at higher voltages than existing photoconductive devices. The development of such a device could enable next-generation satellite communication systems capable of transferring more data at a faster rate, and over longer distances, according to the research team.

    Scientists at LLNL and the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US) (UIUC) reported on the design and simulation of the novel photoconductive device in a paper published in the IEEE Journal of the Electron Devices Society. The device utilizes a high-powered laser to generate an electron charge cloud in the base material gallium nitride while under extreme electric fields.

    Unlike normal semiconductors, in which electrons move faster as the applied electrical field is increased, gallium nitride expresses a phenomenon called negative differential mobility, where the generated electron cloud doesn’t disperse, but actually slows down at the front of the cloud. This allows the device to create extremely fast pulses and high voltage signals at frequencies approaching one terahertz when exposed to electromagnetic radiation, researchers said.

    “The goal of this project is to build a device that is significantly more powerful than existing technology but also can operate at very high frequencies,” said LLNL engineer and project principal investigator Lars Voss. “It works in a unique mode, where the output pulse can actually be shorter in time than the input pulse of the laser — almost like a compression device. You can compress an optical input into an electrical output, so it lets you potentially generate extremely high speed and very high-power radio frequency waveforms.”

    If the photoconductive switch modeled in the paper could be realized, it could be miniaturized and incorporated into satellites to enable communication systems beyond 5G, potentially transferring more data at a faster rate and over longer distances, Voss said.

    High-power and high-frequency technologies are one of the last areas where solid state devices have yet to replace vacuum tubes, Voss added. New compact semiconductor technologies capable of operating at more than 300 gigahertz (GHz) while delivering a watt or more in output power are in high demand for such applications, and while some high electron mobility transistors can reach frequencies higher than 300 GHz, they are generally limited in energy output, researchers reported.

    “Modeling and simulation of this new switch will provide guidance to experiments, reduce costs of test structures, improve the turnaround and success rate of laboratory tests by preventing trial and error and enable correct interpretation of experimental data,” said lead author Shaloo Rakheja, an assistant professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and resident faculty at the Holonyak Micro and Nanotechnology Laboratory at UIUC.

    Researchers are building the switches at LLNL and are exploring other materials such as gallium arsenide to optimize performance.

    “Gallium arsenide expresses the negative differential mobility at lower electric fields than gallium nitride, so it’s a great model to understand the tradeoffs of the effect with more accessible testing,” said LLNL postdoctoral researcher and co-author Karen Dowling.

    Funded by the Laboratory Directed Research and Development program, the goal of the project is demonstrating a conduction device that can operate at 100 GHz and at a high power. Future work will examine the impact of heating from the laser on the electron charge cloud, as well as improving understanding of the device’s operation under an electrical-optical simulation framework, the team reported.

    The simulation work was performed by lead author Rakheja and Kexin Li at UIUC. The project’s original principal investigator Adam Conway, formerly of LLNL, also contributed.

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.
    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.

    LLNL/NIF

    DOE Seal

    NNSA

     
  • richardmitnick 12:46 pm on June 17, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "LLNL/Tyvak space telescope goes into orbit", , , , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US), ,   

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) : “LLNL/Tyvak space telescope goes into orbit” 

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)

    6.17.21
    Stephen Wampler
    wampler1@llnl.gov
    925-423-3107

    1
    LLNL/Tyvak space telescope. Credit: LLNL.

    2
    Tyvak smallsat launched by SpaceX to validate miniature space debris telescope – Credit: SpaceflightNow.

    Thousands of images of Earth and space have been taken by a compact space imaging payload developed by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) researchers and its collaborator Tyvak Nano-Satellite Systems.

    Known as GEOStare2, the payload has two space telescopes that together have taken more than 4,500 pictures for space domain awareness, astronomy and Earth observations that have been transmitted back to Earth during the past month.

    The space telescopes were integrated into a Tyvak nanosatellite, weighing 25 pounds, that flew into orbit on May 15 aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launched from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center.

    “Our payload is operating very well; we’re ahead of schedule on the checkout,” said LLNL astrophysicist Wim de Vries, an associate program leader for the Lab’s Space Science and Security Program. “The satellite is functioning extremely well.”

    “We are more than pleased with the quality and resolution of the images we have been receiving from Tyvak-0130,” said Marc Bell, chief executive officer of Terran Orbital, Tyvak’s parent company. “Our collaboration with LLNL has been incredibly successful thus far and we are more than optimistic about the future.”

    To date, flying in low-earth orbit at 575 kilometers (or 360 miles altitude), GEOStare2 has taken more than 2,000 ground images of the Earth, as well as more than 2,500 images for space domain awareness and astronomy.

    The aim of space domain awareness is to track the satellites and debris in space to avoid collisions. “It’s much easier to conduct space domain awareness from space because you don’t have to look through clouds and you don’t have to wait for darkness,” de Vries said.

    The technology has been developed by LLNL and Tyvak under a four-year, $6 million cooperative research and development agreement (CRADA) to advance compact satellites for commercial applications. It combines LLNL’s Monolithic Telescope (MonoTele) technology with Tyvak’s expertise producing high-reliability spacecraft.

    The MonoTele consists of a space telescope fabricated from a single, monolithic fused silica slab, allowing the optic lens to operate within tight tolerances. This approach does not require on-orbit alignment, greatly simplifying spacecraft design and favorably affecting spacecraft size, weight and power needs.

    Developed by LLNL over the past eight years, the MonoTele space telescopes range in size from one inch (called the mini-monolith) to eight inches.

    One of the GEOStare2’s two telescopes has a narrow field of view with a high resolution, while the other has a wide field of view featuring excellent sensitivity.

    The GEOStare2 payload, which is traveling aboard the Tyvak-0130 nanosatellite, is about the size of a loaf of bread and each sensor within it measures 85 millimeters (or 3.3 inches) in diameter and 140 millimeters (or about six inches) in length.

    The Tyvak spacecraft features an advanced and stable attitude control system that features three-star trackers, four ultra-smooth reaction wheels and a high-performance flight computer, all developed and manufactured by Tyvak.

    A one-inch LLNL-built mini-monolith space telescope has already been flying in space aboard Tyvak-0192, also known as Cerberus, and another 85-millimeter version was used on the GEOstare1 satellite that was launched in January 2018.

    In addition to de Vries, the LLNL team that built the GEOStare2 included mechanical engineer Darrell Carter, precision engineer Jeff Klingmann and Alex Pertica, physicist and deputy program leader for the Space Science and Security Program.

    LLNL optical scientist Brian Bauman is the inventor of the MonoTele technology – replacing the two mirrors and metering structure with one solid piece of glass, with optical shapes and reflective coatings at both ends of the glass.

    Founded in 2013 and headquartered in Irvine, California, Tyvak Nano-Satellite Systems is a satellite manufacturer and is a wholly owned subsidiary of Terran Orbital.

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.
    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.

    LLNL/NIF

    DOE Seal

    NNSA

     
  • richardmitnick 11:59 am on June 13, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: " 'Sterile neutrinos' may be portal to the dark side", “BeEST”: “Beryllium Electron-capture with Superconducting Tunnel junctions.”, , , , , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US), Using nuclear decay in high-rate quantum sensors in the search for "sterile neutrinos".   

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) : “Sterile neutrinos may be portal to the dark side” 

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)

    4.27.21 [Just now in social media.]

    Anne M Stark
    stark8@llnl.gov
    925-422-9799

    1
    Schematic of the “BeEST” experiment. Radioactive beryllium-7 is implanted into the superconducting sensor. Precision measurements of the decay products could indicate the presence of hypothesized “sterile neutrinos”.

    “Sterile neutrinos” are theoretically predicted new particles that offer an intriguing possibility in the quest for understanding the Dark Matter in our universe.

    Unlike the known “active” neutrinos in the Standard Model (SM) of Particle Physics, these sterile neutrinos do not interact with normal matter as they move through space, making them very difficult to detect.

    A team of interdisciplinary researchers, led by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and the Colorado School of Mines (US), has demonstrated the power of using nuclear decay in high-rate quantum sensors in the search for sterile neutrinos. The findings are the first measurements of their kind.

    The research has been featured recently as a DOE Office of Science Highlight and will jump-start an extended project to look for one of the most promising candidates for dark matter, the strange unidentified material that permeates the universe and accounts for 85 percent of its total mass.

    The experiment involves implanting radioactive beryllium-7 atoms into superconducting sensors developed at LLNL and has been nicknamed the “BeEST” for “Beryllium Electron-capture with Superconducting Tunnel junctions.” When the beryllium-7 decays by electron capture into lithium-7 and a neutrino, the neutrino escapes from the sensor, but the recoil energy of the lithium-7 provides a measure of the neutrino mass. If a heavy sterile neutrino with mass mc^2 were to be generated in a faction of the decays, the lithium-7 recoil energy would be reduced and produce a measurable signal, even though the elusive neutrino itself is not detected directly.

    With a measurement time of just 28 days using a single sensor, the data excludes the existence of sterile neutrinos in the mass range of 100 to 850 kiloelectronvolts down to a 0.01 percent level of mixing with the active neutrinos — better than all previous decay experiments in this range. In addition, simulations on LLNL supercomputers have helped the team understand some of the materials effects in the detector that need to be accounted for to gain confidence in potential sterile neutrino detection events.

    “This research effort lays the groundwork for even more powerful searches for these new particles using large arrays of sensors with new superconducting materials,” said LLNL scientist Stephan Friedrich, lead author of the research appearing in Physical Review Letters.

    The Standard Model of Particle Physics is one of the crowning achievements in modern science and the cornerstone of current subatomic studies. Despite its success, the SM is known to be incomplete, and physics beyond the Standard Model (BSM) is required to develop a full description of the universe. The neutrino sector offers an intriguing avenue for BSM physics as the observation of nonzero neutrino masses currently provides the only confirmed violation of the SM as it was originally constructed.

    “Sterile neutrinos are exciting because they are strong candidates for so-called ‘warm’ dark matter, and they also may help to address the origin of the matter-antimatter asymmetry of the universe,” Friedrich said.

    Other LLNL authors include Geonbo Kim, Vincenzo Lordi and Amit Samanta.

    This research is funded by the Laboratory Directed Research and Development program.

    _____________________________________________________________________________________

    Dark Matter Background
    Fritz Zwicky discovered Dark Matter in the 1930s when observing the movement of the Coma Cluster., Vera Rubin a Woman in STEM denied the Nobel, some 30 years later, did most of the work on Dark Matter.

    Fritz Zwicky from http:// palomarskies.blogspot.com.


    Coma cluster via NASA/ESA Hubble.


    In modern times, it was astronomer Fritz Zwicky, in the 1930s, who made the first observations of what we now call dark matter. His 1933 observations of the Coma Cluster of galaxies seemed to indicated it has a mass 500 times more than that previously calculated by Edwin Hubble. Furthermore, this extra mass seemed to be completely invisible. Although Zwicky’s observations were initially met with much skepticism, they were later confirmed by other groups of astronomers.
    Thirty years later, astronomer Vera Rubin provided a huge piece of evidence for the existence of dark matter. She discovered that the centers of galaxies rotate at the same speed as their extremities, whereas, of course, they should rotate faster. Think of a vinyl LP on a record deck: its center rotates faster than its edge. That’s what logic dictates we should see in galaxies too. But we do not. The only way to explain this is if the whole galaxy is only the center of some much larger structure, as if it is only the label on the LP so to speak, causing the galaxy to have a consistent rotation speed from center to edge.
    Vera Rubin, following Zwicky, postulated that the missing structure in galaxies is dark matter. Her ideas were met with much resistance from the astronomical community, but her observations have been confirmed and are seen today as pivotal proof of the existence of dark matter.

    Astronomer Vera Rubin at the Lowell Observatory in 1965, worked on Dark Matter (The Carnegie Institution for Science).


    Vera Rubin measuring spectra, worked on Dark Matter (Emilio Segre Visual Archives AIP SPL).


    Vera Rubin, with Department of Terrestrial Magnetism (DTM) image tube spectrograph attached to the Kitt Peak 84-inch telescope, 1970. https://home.dtm.ciw.edu.


    _____________________________________________________________________________________

    Dark Matter Research

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.
    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.

    LLNL/NIF

    DOE Seal

    NNSA

     
  • richardmitnick 9:11 pm on June 10, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Machine learning aids in materials design", , , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US), , , Predicting molecules’ crystalline properties from their chemical structures alone.   

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) : “Machine learning aids in materials design” 

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)

    6.10.21

    Anne M Stark
    stark8@llnl.gov
    925-422-9799

    1
    Scientists developed a machine learning algorithm to predict 3D molecular crystal density from 2D chemical structures.

    A long-held goal by chemists across many industries, including energy, pharmaceuticals, energetics, food additives and organic semiconductors, is to imagine the chemical structure of a new molecule and be able to predict how it will function for a desired application. In practice, this vision is difficult, often requiring extensive laboratory work to synthesize, isolate, purify and characterize newly designed molecules to obtain the desired information.

    Recently, a team of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) materials and computer scientists have brought this vision to fruition for energetic molecules by creating machine learning (ML) models that can predict molecules’ crystalline properties from their chemical structures alone, such as molecular density. Predicting crystal structure descriptors (rather than the entire crystal structure) offers an efficient method to infer a material’s properties, thus expediting materials design and discovery. The research appears in the Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling.

    “One of the team’s most prominent ML models is capable of predicting the crystalline density of energetic and energetic-like molecules with a high degree of accuracy compared to previous ML-based methods,” said Phan Nguyen, LLNL applied mathematician and co-first author of the paper.

    “Even when compared to density-functional theory (DFT), a computationally expensive and physics-informed method for crystal structure and crystalline property prediction, the ML model boasts competitive accuracy while requiring a fraction of the computation time,” said Donald Loveland, LLNL computer scientist and co-first author.

    Members of LLNL’s High Explosive Application Facility (HEAF) already have begun taking advantage of the model’s web interface, with a goal to discover new insensitive energetic materials. By simply inputting molecules’ 2D chemical structure, HEAF chemists have been able to quickly determine the predicted crystalline density of those molecules, which is closely correlated with potential energetics’ performance metrics.

    “We are excited to see the results of our work be applied to important missions of the Lab. This work will certainly aid in accelerating discovery and optimization of new materials moving forward,” said Yong Han, LLNL materials scientist and principal investigator of the project.

    Follow-up efforts within the Materials Science Division have used the ML model in conjunction with a generative model to search large chemical spaces quickly and efficiently for high density candidates.

    “Both efforts push the boundaries of materials discovery and are facilitated through the new paradigm of merging materials science and machine learning,” said Anna Hiszpanski, LLNL material scientist and co-corresponding author of the paper.

    The team continues to search for new properties of interest to the Lab with the vision of providing a suite of predictive models for materials scientists to use in their research.

    Other authors of the work include Joanne Kim and Piyush Karande. This work was funded by LLNL’s Laboratory Directed Research Development program.

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.
    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.

    LLNL/NIF

    DOE Seal

    NNSA

     
  • richardmitnick 1:38 pm on May 26, 2021 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Experiments validate the possibility of helium rain inside Jupiter and Saturn", , , DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US),   

    From DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US) : “Experiments validate the possibility of helium rain inside Jupiter and Saturn” 

    May 26, 2021

    Breanna Bishop
    bishop33@llnl.gov
    925-423-9802

    1
    An international research team, including scientists from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, have validated a nearly 40-year-old prediction and experimentally shown that helium rain is possible inside planets such as Jupiter and Saturn (pictured). Image credit: National Aeronautics Space Agency (US)/JPL-Caltech (US)/Space Telescope Science Institute (US).

    Nearly 40 years ago, scientists first predicted the existence of helium rain inside planets composed primarily of hydrogen and helium, such as Jupiter and Saturn. However, achieving the experimental conditions necessary to validate this hypothesis hasn’t been possible — until now.

    In a paper published today by Nature, scientists reveal experimental evidence to support this long-standing prediction, showing that helium rain is possible over a range of pressure and temperature conditions that mirror those expected to occur inside these planets.

    “We discovered that helium rain is real, and can occur both in Jupiter and Saturn,” said Marius Millot, a physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and co-author on the publication. “This is important to help planetary scientists decipher how these planets formed and evolved, which is critical to understanding how the solar system formed.”

    “Jupiter is especially interesting because it’s thought to have helped protect the inner-planet region where Earth formed,” added Raymond Jeanloz, co-author and professor of earth and planetary science and astronomy at the University of California-Berkeley (US). “We may be here because of Jupiter.”

    The international research team, which included scientists from LLNL, the Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission [commission des énergies alternatives et de l’énergie atomique] (FR), the University of Rochester (US) and the University of California, Berkeley, conducted their experiments at the University of Rochester’s Laboratory for Laser Energetics (LLE) (US).

    “Coupling static compression and laser-driven shocks is key to allow us to reach the conditions comparable to the interior of Jupiter and Saturn, but it is very challenging,” Millot said. “We really had to work on the technique to obtain convincing evidence. It took many years and lots of creativity from the team.”

    The team used diamond anvil cells to compress a mixture of hydrogen and helium to 4 gigapascals, (GPa; approximately 40,000 times Earth’s atmosphere). Then, the scientists used 12 giant beams of LLE’s Omega Laser to launch strong shock waves to further compress the sample to final pressures of 60-180 GPa and heat it to several thousand degrees. A similar approach was key to the discovery of superionic water ice.

    Using a series of ultrafast diagnostic tools, the team measured the shock velocity, the optical reflectivity of the shock-compressed sample and its thermal emission, finding that the reflectivity of the sample did not increase smoothly with increasing shock pressure, as in most samples the researchers studied with similar measurements. Instead, they found discontinuities in the observed reflectivity signal, which indicate that the electrical conductivity of the sample was changing abruptly, a signature of the helium and hydrogen mixture separating. In a paper published in 2011 [Physical Review B], LLNL scientists Sebastien Hamel, Miguel Morales and Eric Schwegler suggested using changes in the optical reflectivity as a probe for the demixing process.

    “Our experiments reveal experimental evidence for a long-standing prediction: There is a range of pressures and temperatures at which this mixture becomes unstable and demixes,” Millot said. “This transition occurs at pressure and temperature conditions close to that needed to transform hydrogen into a metallic fluid [Science], and the intuitive picture is that the hydrogen metallization triggers the demixing.”

    Numerically simulating this demixing process is challenging because of subtle quantum effects. These experiments provide a critical benchmark for theory and numerical simulations. Looking ahead, the team will continue to refine the measurement and extend it to other compositions in the continued pursuit of improving our understanding of materials at extreme conditions.

    The work was funded by LLNL’s Laboratory Directed Research and Development program and the Department of Energy’s Office of Science
    . In addition to Millot and Jeanloz, collaborators include Stephanie Brygoo and Paul Loubeyre of CEA; Peter Celliers and Jon Eggert from LLNL; and Ryan Rygg and Gilbert Collins from the University of Rochester.

    See the full article here .


    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration

    DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (US) is an American federal research facility in Livermore, California, United States, founded by the University of California-Berkeley (US) in 1952. A Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), it is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, BWX Technologies, AECOM, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System (US). In 2012, the laboratory had the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it.
    LLNL is self-described as “a premier research and development institution for science and technology applied to national security.” Its principal responsibility is ensuring the safety, security and reliability of the nation’s nuclear weapons through the application of advanced science, engineering and technology. The Laboratory also applies its special expertise and multidisciplinary capabilities to preventing the proliferation and use of weapons of mass destruction, bolstering homeland security and solving other nationally important problems, including energy and environmental security, basic science and economic competitiveness.

    The Laboratory is located on a one-square-mile (2.6 km^2) site at the eastern edge of Livermore. It also operates a 7,000 acres (28 km2) remote experimental test site, called Site 300, situated about 15 miles (24 km) southeast of the main lab site. LLNL has an annual budget of about $1.5 billion and a staff of roughly 5,800 employees.

    LLNL was established in 1952 as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore, an offshoot of the existing UC Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley. It was intended to spur innovation and provide competition to the nuclear weapon design laboratory at Los Alamos in New Mexico, home of the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic weapons. Edward Teller and Ernest Lawrence, director of the Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, are regarded as the co-founders of the Livermore facility.

    The new laboratory was sited at a former naval air station of World War II. It was already home to several UC Radiation Laboratory projects that were too large for its location in the Berkeley Hills above the UC campus, including one of the first experiments in the magnetic approach to confined thermonuclear reactions (i.e. fusion). About half an hour southeast of Berkeley, the Livermore site provided much greater security for classified projects than an urban university campus.

    Lawrence tapped 32-year-old Herbert York, a former graduate student of his, to run Livermore. Under York, the Lab had four main programs: Project Sherwood (the magnetic-fusion program), Project Whitney (the weapons-design program), diagnostic weapon experiments (both for the DOE’s Los Alamos National Laboratory(US) and Livermore laboratories), and a basic physics program. York and the new lab embraced the Lawrence “big science” approach, tackling challenging projects with physicists, chemists, engineers, and computational scientists working together in multidisciplinary teams. Lawrence died in August 1958 and shortly after, the university’s board of regents named both laboratories for him, as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

    Historically, the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US) and Livermore laboratories have had very close relationships on research projects, business operations, and staff. The Livermore Lab was established initially as a branch of the Berkeley laboratory. The Livermore lab was not officially severed administratively from the Berkeley lab until 1971. To this day, in official planning documents and records, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is designated as Site 100, Lawrence Livermore National Lab as Site 200, and LLNL’s remote test location as Site 300.

    The laboratory was renamed Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in 1971. On October 1, 2007 LLNS assumed management of LLNL from the University of California, which had exclusively managed and operated the Laboratory since its inception 55 years before. The laboratory was honored in 2012 by having the synthetic chemical element livermorium named after it. The LLNS takeover of the laboratory has been controversial. In May 2013, an Alameda County jury awarded over $2.7 million to five former laboratory employees who were among 430 employees LLNS laid off during 2008.The jury found that LLNS breached a contractual obligation to terminate the employees only for “reasonable cause.” The five plaintiffs also have pending age discrimination claims against LLNS, which will be heard by a different jury in a separate trial.[6] There are 125 co-plaintiffs awaiting trial on similar claims against LLNS. The May 2008 layoff was the first layoff at the laboratory in nearly 40 years.

    On March 14, 2011, the City of Livermore officially expanded the city’s boundaries to annex LLNL and move it within the city limits. The unanimous vote by the Livermore city council expanded Livermore’s southeastern boundaries to cover 15 land parcels covering 1,057 acres (4.28 km^2) that comprise the LLNL site. The site was formerly an unincorporated area of Alameda County. The LLNL campus continues to be owned by the federal government.

    LLNL/NIF

    DOE Seal

    NNSA

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: