Record indoor magnetic field of 1200 T generated by electromagnetic flux-

compression
D. Nakamura, A. Ikeda, H. Sawabe, Y. H. Matsuda, and S. Takeyama

Citation: Review of Scientific Instruments 89, 095106 (2018); doi: 10.1063/1.5044557

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5044557
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/rsi/89/9
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

New world record magnetic field achieved
Scilight 2018, 380001 (2018); 10.1063/1.5055740

Electromagnetic properties of the Great Pyramid: First multipole resonances and energy concentration
Journal of Applied Physics 124, 034903 (2018); 10.1063/1.5026556

, (); 10.1063/PT.6.1.20180822a

Will doubling magnetic field strength halve the time to fusion energy?
Physics Today 71, 25 (2018); 10.1063/PT.3.3994

Note: An approach to 1000 T using the electro-magnetic flux compression

Review of Scientific Instruments 89, 016106 (2018); 10.1063/1.5003411

Generation of vector beam with tandem helical undulators

Applied Physics Letters 113, 021106 (2018); 10.1063/1.5037621
 REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS 89, 095106 (2018)

Record indoor magnetic field of 1200 T generated by electromagnetic

flux-compression
D. Nakamura, A. Ikeda, H. Sawabe, Y. H. Matsuda, and S. Takeyamaa)
Institute for Solid State Physics, University of Tokyo, 5-1-5, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8581, Japan
(Received 13 June 2018; accepted 20 August 2018; published online 17 September 2018)
A peak field of 1200 T was generated by the electromagnetic flux-compression (EMFC) technique
with a newly developed megagauss generator system. Magnetic fields closely up to the turn-around
peak were recorded by a reflection-type Faraday rotation magnetic-field optical-fiber probe. The per-
formance was analyzed and compared with data obtained by the preceding EMFC experiments to
show a significant increase in the liner imploding speed of up to 5 km/s. Published by AIP Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5044557

I. INTRODUCTION Two main methods are used to implode the liner compressing
the magnetic flux. The first is based on explosively-driven
Magnetic fields are one of the fundamental properties of
flux-compression,1–3 which uses chemical explosives such as
a physical environment. They can be controlled with high pre-
trinitrotoluene (TNT) to accelerate the liner. Experiments are
cision and interact directly with electronic orbitals and spins;
only possible to be conducted at explosive-proving grounds or
this makes them indispensable for research in areas of solid
inside large bomb chambers. The second is based on electro-
state physics such as magnetic materials, superconductors,
magnetic flux-compression (EMFC),4–7 which uses electro-
semiconductors, strongly correlated electron materials, and
magnetic forces produced by powerful condenser bank units.
other nanomaterials. When a material is placed in a magnetic
Experiments can be performed indoor, in laboratories that can
field of 1000 T, the Zeeman energy induced in the elec-
be housed in a conventional building.
trons becomes enormously high (as high as 1300 K), which
Another technique uses imploding plasma to compress
corresponds to an energy far above room temperature, result-
the magnetic flux very efficiently and is known as the plasma
ing in substantial effects on the electronic properties of the
focus method.8 Alternatively, high-power laser is used as a
material.
source for producing an ultra-high magnetic field associated
A magnetic field of 1000 T corresponds to 0.8 nm
with a high-density electromagnetic field in its strong radia-
cyclotron-orbit radius (magnetic length) of an electron; this
tion.9–13 However, there are hurdles to their application due
is of the same order as a typical lattice constant. Therefore, in
to the limitations resulting from the extremely short rise time
these extreme conditions the Broch electron model, which is
(less than a few microseconds) and small volume (much less
based on the atomic periodic potential, does not hold anymore.
than one cubic centimeter).
Such ultra-high magnetic fields provide new opportunities for
In contrast to the flux-compression techniques men-
insights into material science and may allow us to develop a
tioned above, a single-turn coil with a one-turn winding of a
deeper understanding of novel physical concepts.
thin-copper plate can be used as a disposable magnet. Mega-
The generation of magnetic field is always accompa-
gauss fields are generated by discharging a megaampere elec-
nied by strong Maxwell stress; at 1000 T, this amounts to
tric current from fast-condenser bank units; this is referred
4 × 1011 N/m2 (4 × 106 times atmospheric pressure). All
to as the single-turn coil method. However, this technique
aspects of the megagauss generator, including the coil and
is limited to a maximum magnetic field of approximately
surrounding instruments, are designed to protect against the
300 T.14–16
violent self-destruction of the magnetic coil, disregarding all
The first report of magnetic fields exceeding 1000 T
of the reinforcement techniques accumulated so far for nonde-
generated by explosively-driven flux-compression appeared
structive pulsed magnets. In order to use the high magnetic
in 1960.1 In 2001, a field of 2800 T in a volume having a
fields for reliable and precise physical measurements, it is
diameter of 5 mm was reported as an absolute record; it was
crucial to generate them over a large volume to provide suf-
achieved by employing a “three-stage cascade liner” in which
ficient working space over the bore and length; hence, they
the liner degradation accompanying the implosion process was
must occupy at least one cubic centimeter. So far, several
circumvented.2,3
methods for generating megagauss magnetic fields with this
All these explosively-driven flux-compression experi-
field volume have been developed for application to physical
ments must be performed outside. Therefore, it is difficult to
measurements.
precisely control or reproduce the experiments, which restricts
A metal cylinder, called the “liner,” is used to compress
their use in sophisticated and precise solid-state physics exper-
the magnetic flux and generate megagauss magnetic fields.
iments. On the other hand, electromagnetic flux-compression,
known as EMFC, relies solely upon the electric energy stored
a) Electronic mail: takeyama@issp.u-tokyo.ac.jp in the condenser bank units, and is a highly controllable method

0034-6748/2018/89(9)/095106/7/$30.00 89, 095106-1 Published by AIP Publishing.

095106-2 Nakamura et al.
for the indoor generation of megagauss magnetic fields. This
technique, utilizing the electromagnetic force, was first pre-
sented by Cnare in 1966, and he reported a peak field of
210 T from 0.136 MJ condenser banks.4 The principal mech-
anism is simple; a thin metal cylinder, called the “liner,”
undergoes high-speed implosion accelerated by the magnetic
force induced by a huge electric current about its circumfer-
ence, and a magnetic flux (a seed magnetic field) initially
generated in a large volume (∼500 cm3 ) is eventually com-
pressed into a megagauss magnetic field. Therefore, the mag-
net employed in the EMFC method is, in principle, composed
of a single-turn primary outer coil, the liner (which is coaxi-
ally set inside the primary coil), and a pair of seed field coils
set on either side of the primary coil.17–19 It is noted, how-
ever, that during implosion, under certain circumstances the
magnetic flux that penetrates through the liner’s wall can be
compressed and generates a very high magnetic field, even in
the absence of a seed field. This phenomenon (the so-called
Cnare effect) was presented actually by Cnare in his seminal
work.4
Over the last decade, new records have been set for the
maximum magnetic field generated by EMFC, with notable
progress made by the Institute for Solid State Physics,
University of Tokyo. A 730 T field was recorded using the
newly designed primary coil, a high performance copper-
lined (CL) steel primary coil.7 Using the same set-up for the
condenser bank units as for EMFC, a peak field of 985 T
has recently been announced, approaching 1000 T by simply
adjusting the initial seed magnetic field.20
A new set-up for the EMFC megagauss generator system
with improved performance has now been installed. A peak
field of 1200 T was recorded using the Faraday rotation mag-
netic field measurement,21 a substantial improvement on the
previous record, for the new system using the same destructing
magnet CL coil. The present experimental results are discussed
with regard to the previous EMFC experiments.7,20
II. EXPERIMENT
The specification of the condenser banks used in this
experiment is summarized in Table I. The residual impedance
of the main condenser banks and the transmission line was
evaluated from the discharged current waveform into a short
load (Fig. S1 of the supplementary material). The residual
resistance Rres and inductance L res were 0.6 mΩ and 40 nH,
respectively. A comparison between the present condenser
banks and those previously used is provided in Table SI of
the supplementary material.
TABLE I. Parameter of main and sub condenser banks.
Energy Voltage Capacitance I max Rres
Main condenser banks
5 MJ 50 kV 4.0 mF 8 MA 0.6 mΩa
Sub condenser banks
2 MJ 20 kV 10 mF
a Values obtained from measurements.
Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 095106 (2018)
The schematic view of the EMFC instrument is illustrated
in Fig. 1(a). The electric current discharged from the main con-
denser banks was concentrated on the collector plate through
480 high-voltage co-axial cables. In order to reduce the elec-
tromagnetic stress induced by the huge electric current, the
collector plate was divided in two parts. It was then mechani-
cally and electrically connected to the interface plate as shown
in Fig. 1(b), where the primary coil was clamped by a hydraulic
press (100 tons).
The CL coil7 shown in Fig. 1(c) was used as the pri-
mary coil. The inner diameter and the width of the CL coil
were 130 mm and 45 mm, respectively. The liner was made
of electrolytic tough pitch (ETP) copper, whose inner diame-
ter, thickness, and width were 116 mm, 1.5 mm, and 50 mm,
respectively. The liner was inserted into the center of the CL
coil. The entire dimension of the CL coil was the same as those
used in our previous studies.7,20
In this study, the energy of 3.2 MJ was injected into the
CL coil from the main condenser banks (8 of 10 units, 45 kV).
The intensity of the seed field, B0 , was set to be 3.2 T. For mea-
surement of the magnetic field intensity, the Faraday rotation
(FR, also see the supplementary material) of the fused quartz
rod and the induced voltage in the standard pickup coil were
measured simultaneously.
For the FR measurement, the reflection-type optical
probe22 was set into the CL coil. The schematic diagram is
shown in Fig. 2. At the open end of the optical fiber of diameter
1.0 mm (A, the core diameter is 550 µm), a plastic linear polar-
izer with 0.4 mm thickness (B), and a fused quartz rod with
0.95 mm diameter and 0.500 mm thickness (C) were arranged.
After travelling through the quartz rod, the linearly polarized
light was reflected by the mirror (D), which is made by vacuum
deposition of a thin aluminum layer on the quartz rod. Because
the reflected light was transmitted through the quartz rod again,
the effective length of the rod turned out to be L eff = 0.500 × 2
= 1.000 mm. The optical probe (A ∼ D) was inserted in a home-
made plastic pipe with an inner and outer diameter of 1.0 mm
and 2.0 mm, respectively, (E). The plastic pipe was set at the
center of the vacuum chamber in the CL coil. Another magnetic
field probe, a pickup coil (F), was wound one-turn around the
plastic pipe E by using the polyimide-amide-enameled copper
wire with a diameter of 72 µm (the diameter of the inner con-
ductor: 60 µm, the thickness of the insulation coating: 6 µm).
The pickup coil was calibrated by the reference solenoid mag-
net and the details were described in our previously published
paper.21
The incident light of wavelength 640 nm was focused on
an optical coupler (G) and introduced to the quartz rod. The
reflected light was extracted from another port of the opti-
cal coupler, and passed through a bandpass filter (H, HWFM:
10 nm) to cut the strong bright light emitted from the implod-
L res
ing metallic liner at the final stage of the flux-compression
process.7,23 In the shield room, the light was transformed by
an opto-electronic converter with a bandwidth of 125 MHz and
40 nHa
monitored by a high-speed 14-bit digitizer with a time reso-
lution of 2 ns. The EMFC instrument and the measurement
system were synchronized by an optical pulse generated in
the control console. The measurement was performed at room
temperature.
095106-3 Nakamura et al. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 095106 (2018)

FIG. 1. (a) Schematic view of the

EMFC megagauss generator. (b) Cross
section of (a). (c) Copper-lined primary
coil and a pair of seed field coils. [Repro-
duced with permission from Nakamura
et al., Rev. Sci. Instrum. 84, 044702
(2013). Copyright 2013 AIP Publish-
ing LLC.] In (a), one of the initial seed
field coils is presented in the displaced
position, for more visible view of the
primary coil. The primary coil is cov-
ered by an anti-explosive block made of
bulk iron-steel, which is omitted in the
drawing (a).

FIG. 2. Schematic diagram of the reflection-type FR measurement setup. The right part shows an optical FR probe placed in the CL coil.
095106-4 Nakamura et al. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 095106 (2018)

III. RESULT guideline, in order to pass the minimum 2 . The calibrated FR

signal V FR = V FR0 − V off is shown in Fig. 3(b) as an intrin-
The FR signal V FR0 recorded in the digitizer is shown in
sic FR signal. We note that the optical probe was destroyed
Fig. 3(a). Points 1, 2, 3 , and 4 represent the starting of
just after the point 4 , judging from an abrupt and abnormal
discharge into the CL coil (time = 0), the observed minima,
decrease of V FR . Therefore, the FR signal should be extrinsic
maxima, and inflection point, respectively. The offset contri-
after the point 4, and we draw it by a dotted line. Figure 3(c)
bution V off (thick broken curve) in V FR0 was the summation of
shows the time derivative of the magnetic field simultaneously
the intensity of reflected light on the surface of linear polarizer
measured by a pickup coil with the FR probe.
(i, time-independent) and that of bright light from the implod-
Figure 3(d), with normalized V FR , is an enlarged plot of
ing liner (ii, developed from 38.5 µs). The similar luminous
Fig. 3(b) at around 40 µs. An inflection point 4 was found at
phenomena with bright light have always been observed in the
40.8 µs, where V FR approached an intermediate value between
EMFC experiments.6,7,23 A guideline passing through 1 and
2 and 3 . V FR almost saturated just before 4 , indicating the
3 was drawn as a thin dotted curve, which indicated the incre-
saturation of the magnetic field (turn-around phenomenon).
ment value of (ii). V off was evaluated by a vertical shift of the
More enlarged view is represented in the supplementary mate-
rial. For calculating the FR angle θ FR , the following formula
was used: s
−1 * VFR (t) − Vmin +
θ FR = cos . /. (1)
Vmax − Vmin
, -
Here, V max and V min are the maximum and minimum values
of V FR , respectively. The magnetic field calculated from θ FR ,
BFR = θ FR /vL eff , is shown as a solid curve in Fig. 3(e). The
determination of the Verdet constant v is described in detail in
Ref. 21 and in the supplementary material. The broken curve
Bpc is the magnetic field measured by a pickup coil. The pickup
coil could monitor the field up to 40.3 µs (640 T) where the
coil wire was cut.21 BFR and Bpc were almost congruent to
each other up to 640 T. BFR was discontinuous at 39.9 µs
and 40.6 µs because the differential curve of θ FR became
divergent at 90◦ and 180◦ , respectively. The peak magnetic
field intensity at the turn-around point 4 was calculated to be
1200 T.

FIG. 3. (a) Time dependence of the FR signal, V FR0 . Thick broken curve
shows the offset. (b) Time dependence of the calibrated FR signal, V FR .
(c) Time derivative of Bpc (t). (d) Enlarged view of V FR at around 40 µs.
(e) Magnetic field waveforms measured by the FR probe BFR and the pickup
coil Bpc .
IV. DISCUSSION
Figure 4(a) compares several magnetic field waveforms,
of maximum intensities 1200 T (A), 985 T20 (B), and
730 T7 (C), generated by the EMFC technique. The mag-
netic fields (B) and (C) were generated by using 4.0 MJ from
the previous condenser banks (see Sec. A of the supplemen-
tary material). The seed magnetic field intensities, B0 , were
3.0 T (B) and 3.8 T (C), respectively. The primary coil was the
CL coil with the same dimension all through the experiments
(A) to (C).
In experiment (A), the injected energy was 3.2 MJ, which
corresponded to 80% of that in experiments (B) and (C). How-
ever, the time to reach the maximum magnetic field did not
differ much. This indicates a significant increase in the energy
transfer efficiency—from the electrical energy injected into the
primary coil to the kinetic energy of the imploding liner. The
electric current waveform flowing into the primary coil (mea-
sured by the Rogowski-coil) is compared in Fig. 4(b). The
initial slope of the curve (A) was 0.41 MA/µs, and increased
24% from that of (B) (0.33 MA/µs), and a larger current flowed
up to 30 µs (hatched region). Just after the discharge of the main
condenser banks, the mutual inductance between the primary
coil and the liner is still large and then eventually decreases
with time. Therefore, the energy transformation from the elec-
trical energy to the liner kinetic energy becomes more efficient,
095106-5 Nakamura et al.
in case when the initial slope of the discharged current becomes
large.
Next, the magnetic field waveforms close to their peak
fields in Fig. 4(a) are compared. The slope of the curve (A)
was steeper than those of (B) and (C). This indicates that the
implosion speed of the liner significantly increased near the
peak field. Assuming that the volume of the liner is constant
during the implosion process, the following relationship is
established between the implosion velocity of the inner (vi )
and outer (vo ) surface of liner:
vi = (ro /ri )vo . (2)
Here, r i and r o are the inner and outer radius of the liner.
Therefore, vi gradually increases with increasing thickness
of the imploding liner. Then, vi reaches a limiting value due
to the competing magnetic pressure on the inner surface of
the liner and the heating loss of kinetic energy. After that,
the liner starts to decelerate (slowing-down phenomenon).
If r i is fixed, the magnetic pressure inside the liner should
decrease with decreasing B0 . Therefore, the slowing-down of
liner is less likely to happen. In the experiments (A) and (B), the
slowing-down of liner was suppressed by reducing B0 , com-
pared to the experiment (C). In addition, the electrical energy
injected into the primary coil was efficiently transformed into
the kinetic energy of liner in the experiment (A). These effects
contributed to a significant increase in vi at the very end of the
implosion process.
The magnetic field intensity generated by the EMFC tech-
nique is known to be correlated with vi . On the liner surface,
the pressure wave is produced by an energy associated with
the magnetic field and propagated inside the liner. Because
the velocity of the pressure wave at the inner surface of liner
increases with the compressed magnetic field, a shockwave
is formed. The particle speed vp associated with the shock-
wave is described as follows (the so-called the Hugoniot
curve):
q
−c0 + c02 + 4κp/D0
vp = . (3)
2κ
Here, c0 and κ are material-dependent parameters, D0 is the
mass density, and p is the magnetic pressure. vp indicates the
degree of the diffusion velocity of magnetic flux confined in the
bore of liner. Therefore, vi has to exceed vp in order to compress
the magnetic flux. This indicates that the flux-compression
Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 095106 (2018)
FIG. 4. (a) Comparison of magnetic
field waveforms. (b) Comparison of the
electric current waveforms flowing in
the primary coil. The inset is an enlarged
plot.
up to a higher magnetic field can be achieved by the liner
implosion with higher vi .
The lowest limit of vi can be evaluated from the magnetic
field curve obtained in the EMFC experiment. Let us assume
that the liner radius is reduced from r 0 to r. By ignoring the
flux diffusion inside the liner, the following expression holds
from the conservation of magnetic flux:
2πr 2 B = 2πr02 B0 . (4)
By taking the time derivative of Eq. (4),
s
dr(t) d  B0 

=  r0  . (5)
dt dt  B(t) 
 
Actually, the finite magnetic flux diffusion inside the liner can-
not be ignored. Therefore, the liner velocity calculated from
Eq. (5) provides the lower limit of vi . The liner velocity was cal-
culated from the experimental curves of B(t), by using Eq. (5)
[thin solid curves in Fig. 5(a)]. Comparing with (B) and (C),
the liner velocity in (A) was significantly high and reached
a maximum of 5.1 km/s. As a reference, the particle speed,
vp , of copper is shown as the thick solid curve in Fig. 5(a).
Here, parameters were set to be c0 = 3.940, κ = 1.489, and
D0 = 8.930 g/cm3 , respectively.18 vi of 5.4 km/s (∼5.1 km/s)
is a criterion for keeping the magnetic field of 1200 T in the
bore of the liner. Therefore, the achievement of 1200 T in the
experiment (A) is consistent with a criterion suggested from
the Hugoniot curve.18
From the calculation of liner implosion dynamics,24 a high
vi in the experiment (A) was qualitatively confirmed. It is to
be noted that our calculation did not consider the flux diffu-
sion effect related to the particle speed. The broken curves in
Fig. 5(a) were calculated by using the experimental parame-
ter corresponding to the experiments (A)-(C). The maximum
magnetic field obtained by using the condenser banks previ-
ously used in the experiment (B) and (C) was 10% higher than
that of the calculation.20 Therefore, the abscissa was multi-
plied by 1.1. The same was multiplied by 1.04 for experiment
(A), performed by using the newly installed condenser banks.
In the calculation, the maximum value of vi in (A) was signif-
icantly higher than the calculated results in (B) and (C) and
reached 4.3 km/s.
The magnetic field dependence of r i was also calculated
for (A)-(C). As shown in Fig. 5(b), r i of the condition (A)
095106-6 Nakamura et al.
FIG. 5. (a) Comparison of the magnetic field dependence of the velocity of the liner. Thick solid curve shows the particle speed of copper (the Hugo-
niot curve). Thin solid curves are the lowest limit of the velocity of the liner, evaluated from the slope of magnetic field curves of each experiment,
(A)-(C). Broken curves are obtained from calculation for each experiment. (b) Calculated lines of the inner diameter of the imploding liner with increas-
ing magnetic field. The abscissa of broken curves were multiplied by 1.04 for (A) and 1.1 for both (B) and (C), adjusting to the experimental val-
ues. (c) Calculated seed-field dependence of the inner diameter of the imploding liner with increasing magnetic fields. A red curve corresponds to the
experiment (A).
was the smallest and estimated to be 2.7 mm at the peak mag-
netic field. In (A), we here demonstrate that the solid state
physics measurement is possible at room temperature. How-
ever, a wider bore (∼5 mm) is required for low-temperature
experiment in order to set the cryostat at the center of the liner.
r i of the condition (C) was calculated to be 6.5 mm at the peak
magnetic field, which enabled the low-temperature measure-
ments.25 The seed field dependence of the inner diameter is
shown in Fig. 5(c), calculated for the present condition of the
main condenser banks. A red curve (B0 = 3.2 T) corresponds
to the experiment (A). For obtaining 5 mm bore diameter, the
seed field around 4.0 T is considered to be required, where the
low-temperature measurement will be enabled at least above
800 T.
V. CONCLUSION
We developed a high performance EMFC instrument to
generate a megagauss magnetic field. The conversion effi-
ciency of the electric energy stored in condenser banks to
the imploding liner kinetic energy was found to be substan-
tially improved in comparison to those in previous instruments.
The magnetic field was measured by the reflection-type Fara-
day rotation probe using an optical fiber, and a peak field
of 1200 T was recorded. This is the highest magnetic field
ever recorded by the EMFC technique. The liner velocity
was estimated to reach 5 km/s at the final stage of liner
implosion, which was essential to significantly increase the
peak magnetic field intensity. It is important to note that,
only 40 years ago, magnetic fields of the order of 1000 T
(10 MG) were only reported in extremely complicated and
sometimes unreliable explosively-driven liner systems, with-
out any of the sophisticated level of control achievable in the
present report. Therefore, one can say without any doubt, that
the present results represent the beginning of a new era in
the quest of producing and using ultrahigh magnetic fields
for solid state studies as well as for plasma fusion related
experiments.
Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 095106 (2018)
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
See supplementary material for the comparison of the
condenser banks, seed field coil, and Faraday rotation
measurement.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
S.T. acknowledges Professor F. Herlach and Professor
B. M. Novac for their useful advisory contributions regarding
the flux-compression technique.
1 C. M. Fowler, W. B. Garn, and R. S. Caird, J. Appl. Phys. 31, 588 (1960).
2 A. I. Bykov, M. I. Dolotenko, N. P. Kolokolchikov, A. I. Pavlovskii, and
O. M. Tatsenko, Physica B 216, 215 (1996).
3 A. I. Bykov, M. I. Dolotenko, N. P. Kolokolchikov, V. D. Selemir, and
O. M. Tatsenko, Physica B 294-295, 574 (2001).
4 E. C. Cnare, J. Appl. Phys. 37, 3812 (1966).
5 N. Miura, G. Kido, I. Oguro, and S. Chikazumi, in Proceedings International
Colloquium on “Physics in High Magnetic Fields” (CNRS, 1975), Vol. 345.
6 B. M. Novac, I. R. Smith, D. F. Rankin, and M. Hubbard, J. Phys. D: Appl.
Phys. 37, 3041 (2004).
7 S. Takeyama and E. Kojima, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 44, 425003 (2011).
8 F. J. Wessel, F. S. Felber, N. C. Wild, and H. U. Rahman, Appl. Phys. Lett.
48, 1119 (1986).
9 M. Tatarakis et al., Nature 415, 280 (2002).
10 U. Wagner et al., Phys. Rev. E 70, 026401 (2004).
11 J. P. Knauer et al., Phys. Plasmas 17, 056318 (2010).
12 S. Fujioka et al., Sci. Rep. 3, 1170 (2013).
13 J. J. Santos et al., New J. Phys. 17, 083051 (2015).
14 N. Miura, T. Osada, and S. Takeyama, J. Low Temp. Phys. 133, 139 (2003).
15 K. Nakao, F. Herlach, T. Goto, S. Takeyama, T. Sakakibara, and N. Miura,
J. Phys. E: Sci. Instrum. 18, 1018 (1985).
16 O. Portugall, N. Puhlmann, H. U. Müller, M. Barczewski, I. Stolpe, and
M. von Ortenberg, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 32, 2354 (1999).
17 N. Miura and F. Herlach, Pulsed and Ultrastrong Magnetic Fields, Springer
Topics in Applied Physics, edited by F. Herlach (Springer, Berlin, 1985),
Vol. 57, p. 247.
18 F. Herlach, Rep. Prog. Phys. 62, 859 (1999).
19 N. Miura and F. Herlach, “Genertion of megagauss fields,” in High Magnetic
Fields-Science and Technology (World Scientific, 2002), Vol. 1, p. 235.
20 D. Nakamura, H. Sawabe, and S. Takeyama, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 016106
(2018).
21 D. Nakamura, Y. H. Matsuda, H. Sawabe, and S. Takeyama, Rev. Sci.
Instrum. 84, 044702 (2013).
095106-7 Nakamura et al. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 095106 (2018)

22 H. Knoepfel, Pulsed High Magnetic Fields (North-Holland Publishing Co., 24 D. Nakamura, H. Sawabe, and S. Takeyama, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 85, 036102
Amsterdam, 1970), p. 286. (2014).
23 Y. H. Matsuda, F. Herlach, S. Ikeda, and N. Miura, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 73, 25 A. Miyata, H. Ueda, Y. Ueda, H. Sawabe, and S. Takeyama, Phys. Rev. Lett.

4288 (2002). 107, 207203 (2011).