Wall damage due to oblique high velocity dust impacts

Dario Ripamonti; Giambattista Daminelli; Marco De Angeli; Monica De Angeli; Panagiotis Tolias; Svetlana Ratynskaia

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 59 references

Wall damage due to oblique high velocity dust impacts

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Oblique dust impacts dig craters whose depth scales with the cosine of the impact angle, extending tungsten wall damage laws from normal to angled hits.

desk verdict First controlled oblique W-on-W impact dataset; the cosθ depth law is plausible but the paper overstates its reliability given unquantified fit errors and fragile anchor points. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.18794 v2 pith:4RFH44XO submitted 2025-09-23 physics.plasm-ph

Panagiotis Tolias , Marco De Angeli , Dario Ripamonti , Svetlana Ratynskaia , Giambattista Daminelli , Monica De Angeli This is my paper

classification physics.plasm-ph

keywords obliqueimpactstungstendustcraterdepthimpactangletwo-stagelightgasgunrunawayelectronterminationplasmafacingcomponentsempiricaldamagelaw

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper establishes that for high-velocity tungsten dust striking tungsten plates, the crater depth at an oblique angle equals the normal-impact depth multiplied by the cosine of the angle. The result comes from controlled light-gas-gun experiments with 63-micrometer tungsten dust at 2000 to 3000 meters per second. This matters because runaway-electron termination events in fusion reactors eject debris that hits walls at many angles, so wall damage predictions need an angular dependence. The paper also documents how crater length, width, and morphology change with angle, findings that refine how witness plates can be used to infer dust speeds and sizes.

What carries the argument

The central object is the empirical law of Eq. (3), H(Dd, vimp, θ)/Hn(Dd, vimp) = cosθ, which converts the prior normal-incidence damage law (Eq. 1) into an angle-dependent prediction. The law is extracted from two-stage light-gas-gun experiments that fire nearly monodisperse 63 µm W dust at tilted W plates, with crater depths measured by optical microscopy and lengths/widths by scanning electron and optical microscopy. The cosine law is the key angular correction factor for wall damage assessments.

What would settle it

Measure crater depths at 60°, 70°, and 80° with a sub-micron profilometer for 63 µm tungsten dust at ~2500 m/s; if the normalized depth ratio departs from cosθ by more than the combined statistical and instrumental uncertainties, the empirical cosine law is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper reports that for 63 µm spherical tungsten dust impacting bulk tungsten in the partial-disintegration regime (roughly 2000–3000 m/s), the crater depth H at impact angle θ relative to the surface normal is described by H/Hn = cosθ, where Hn is the normal-incidence depth given by the earlier empirical law Hn = 0.0000114 Dd^1.264 vimp^1.282. Least-squares fits to the data give pre-factors a = 0.963–1.049 and exponents b = 0.949–0.975, essentially independent of impact speed, so the authors approximate a ≈ 1, b ≈ 1. The paper also documents that crater length and width vary non-monotonically with angle, peaking near 60° and 30–45° respectively, and that crater volume computed assuming a

Load-bearing premise

The fitted exponent b is anchored heavily by the shallowest craters at 80°, where measured depths (5.5–9.2 µm) are comparable to the ±3 µm optical-microscope uncertainty, and the 45° data deviate systematically at all speeds; an angle-dependent bias of a few micrometres in those points would shift b away from unity and undermine the cosine law.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Wall cratering predictions following runaway-electron termination events should adopt the cosine law, since ejected debris impacts are more likely oblique than normal.
Witness plates can serve as a diagnostic of ejected-dust speed and size distributions, now with a quantitative angle correction for oblique impacts.
The cosine law holds across the three probed speeds (~2000, 2500, 3000 m/s), supporting its use throughout the partial-disintegration regime.
Crater length and width are non-monotonic with angle, so volume estimates based on a half-ellipsoid assumption must use angle-resolved length and width data rather than normal-incidence scalings.
The similarity of the cosine law to observations with aluminum and steel projectiles suggests it may be a general feature of same-material high-velocity impacts.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the cosine law reflects the dominance of the normal velocity component, it may extend to other dust sizes and speeds within the plastic and partial-disintegration regimes, potentially reducing the damage law to Hn(Dd, vimp·cosθ).
The systematic underestimation of depth at 45° across all three speeds hints that the circular-to-elliptical morphological transition locally alters crater formation; data between 30° and 60° could reveal a smoother angle dependence than a pure power law.
The shallow 'head' features at grazing angles, attributed speculatively to secondary fragment impacts, imply that oblique impacts produce additional localized damage beyond the main crater; quantifying them would refine total wall damage estimates.
For reactor design, the cosine law implies that surfaces nearly parallel to the debris trajectory suffer much shallower penetration, so damage-mitigation efforts may prioritize components facing debris more head-on.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper delivers the first controlled oblique high-velocity W-on-W impact dataset: 18 conditions spanning 0–80° at 2000–3000 m/s, with per-condition crater statistics. That data alone is a real contribution. The headline result, H/Hn = cosθ, is useful and gains credibility from matching Burchell & Mackay's aluminum and steel results. The authors also document a genuine conflict with MD simulations on length, width, and volume scaling, which is worth knowing.

The reporting is honest: per-condition crater counts, standard deviations, and instrument uncertainties are all given. The circularity concern is low because the normal-incidence law enters only as a multiplicative normalization; the angular fit is independent data.

The soft spots are real but not fatal. First, the fitted prefactors a and exponents b come without confidence intervals. The b≈1 conclusion is anchored heavily by the 80° points, where mean depths are 5.5–9.2 µm against a quoted ±3 µm optical uncertainty. A few micrometres of angle-dependent bias there would shift b measurably. Second, the 45° points are systematically underpredicted at all three speeds—roughly 7–8 µm low at 2000–2500 m/s—so the pure cosine law is less accurate than the abstract's "reliable" implies. The authors mention this deviation but do not quantify its impact on the fit. Third, width is set equal to length up to 30–45° by convention, so the reported width maximum at 30–45° partly rests on non-independent measurements. The head-feature exclusion at grazing angles is reasonable but explicitly speculative.

None of this undermines the central claim. The monotonic near-cosine trend is defensible and externally corroborated. What the paper needs is straightforward: report fit uncertainties, run a sensitivity check excluding the 80° points or applying a ±3 µm offset, and temper the language from "reliable" to "engineering approximation with known mid-angle deviations."

This deserves a serious referee. The experiments are difficult, the data are new and useful, and the discrepancies are tractable. I would engage with it and recommend acceptance after the uncertainty analysis is added.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports a controlled experimental study of oblique high-velocity tungsten-on-tungsten dust impacts, using 63 µm nearly monodisperse W spheres accelerated by a two-stage light gas gun at nominal speeds of 2000, 2500 and 3000 m/s and impact angles of 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 70° and 80°. Crater depth, length, width and a half-ellipsoid volume estimate are documented in Table I. The central claim is Eq. (3): H(Dd,vimp,θ)/Hn(Dd,vimp) ≈ cosθ, based on least-squares fits of H/Hn = a(cosθ)^b giving a = 0.963–1.049 and b = 0.949–0.975, which the authors approximate as a≈1, b≈1. The paper also documents non-monotonic angular dependencies of crater length and width and compares them with previous experiments and MD simulations.

Significance. If the cosine law were robust, this would be the first empirical damage law for oblique high-velocity W-on-W impacts and would be directly useful for estimating runaway-electron-debris wall damage in tokamaks, as well as for interpreting witness-plate diagnostics. The experimental setup is careful: controlled dust size, speed and angle, post-mortem SEM/optical profiling, and a complete table of raw crater statistics. The comparison with the Burchell–Mackay metal data and with MD simulations is useful. However, the headline result rests on a small number of shallow craters, and the fitted exponents/prefactors are quoted without uncertainties, so the evidence for the clean cosθ law is currently not as strong as the text suggests. Table I and Figs. 6–9 contain the data needed to make the support quantitative, but additional robustness analysis is required.

major comments (4)

[Section 4, Eq. (3), Table I] The fitted prefactors a and exponents b are reported as numbers (a=0.963,1.049,1.043; b=0.949,0.975,0.958) with no confidence intervals, no fit quality metric, and no statement about weighting or the fit procedure. The claim a≈1, b≈1 is the entire basis of Eq. (3), so this is load-bearing. In particular, the 80° craters in Table I have mean depths of 5.5–9.2 µm against a quoted ±3 µm optical-microscope uncertainty; a systematic shift of a few micrometres at these points would move b by O(0.1) and alter the law. Please report confidence intervals, fits excluding the 80° points, and a sensitivity test in which the ±3 µm instrument uncertainty is added as a systematic offset.
[Section 4, Fig. 6, Table I] The 45° data are systematically underpredicted by Eq. (3) at all three speeds. Using Eq. (1) to evaluate Hn, the predicted depths at 45° are roughly 26.5, 33.5 and 42.5 µm for the 2000, 2500 and 3000 m/s rows, while the observed depths are 33.5, 43.8 and 50.0 µm—differences of 7–10 µm, i.e. about 2–4 times the quoted statistical errors. The authors note the underprediction but dismiss it as possibly coincidental; appearing independently at three speeds makes this less likely. Since Eq. (3) is the paper’s central result, this residual pattern needs to be quantified (residual plot, reduced chi-square, alternative model) rather than set aside.
[Section 4, Figs. 4–5] At 70°–80°, the ‘fish-like’ deviations and the shallow ‘head’ features are excluded from the quantification on the stated speculation that the heads are caused by secondary fragment impacts. These grazing-angle points are precisely the ones that anchor the fitted exponent b. If the head features are part of the primary crater, the depths and lengths at 70°–80° would be underestimated, with a direct effect on b and hence on Eq. (3). Please provide a robustness test that includes the head features (or quantifies their contribution to depth) and discuss how the speculation could be validated or refuted, e.g. by comparing head-to-crater distance with fragment-impact kinematics.
[Section 4, Eq. (1) normalization] The normalization Hn uses the authors’ own earlier empirical law, Eq. (1). This is not circular, since the angular dependence is new data, but the uncertainty of Eq. (1) is never propagated into the fitted a,b or into Eq. (3). Given that the 45° residuals are comparable to the spread of Eq. (1) at these speeds, the final law should be presented with a total uncertainty that includes this source, or at least the authors should state that only relative (H/Hn) uncertainties are used.

minor comments (4)

[Figure 1 caption] Captions refer to ‘65 µm W dust’ while the text and Table I use 63 µm. Please unify.
[Table I, 3000 m/s, 45° row] The row for vimp=2950 m/s, θ=45° lists L=170.2 µm and W=170.2 µm, i.e. a circular crater, which contradicts the elliptical morphology documented for 45° at the other two speeds. Check whether the width entry is a typo, and if so correct it because it affects the volume and width analysis in Figs. 8–9.
[Section 4, fits] Please specify the fitting method (linear or nonlinear least squares, weighting by statistical errors) and the number of points per fit. Also report the fit quality (e.g. R² or residual sum of squares) in addition to a and b.
[References] Reference [35] (Stronge) lacks a publisher/place; please complete the bibliographic entry.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Eq. (3) is an empirical fit to new oblique-impact data; the prior normal-impact law enters only as a multiplicative normalization and does not force the angular dependence.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is Eq. (3), H/Hn = cosθ, obtained by least-squares fitting the new oblique-impact crater depths to a(cosθ)^b and then approximating a≈1, b≈1. This is an empirical fit to the new experimental data, not a derivation from the prior normal-impact law Eq. (1). The prior law [29] is used only to provide the normalization Hn; because Hn multiplies the entire fitted curve, any error in Hn would shift the prefactor a but would not determine the exponent b or the functional form. The angular dependence is therefore independent content, not equivalent to Eq. (1) by construction. The paper does not present Eq. (3) as a prediction; it explicitly states that the parameters are fitted and then approximated. Comparisons with Burchell & Mackay experiments and Dwivedi & Fraile MD simulations are external corroboration, not inputs to the fit. Concerns about the 80° data points being shallow relative to the reported ±3 µm optical uncertainty are legitimate experimental robustness issues, but they do not constitute circularity: they affect the quality of the fit, not the logical dependence of the result on its inputs. No self-citation chain forces the conclusion, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work. The paper is self-contained as an empirical study.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The empirical law is a two-parameter per-speed fit (a, b) to new data, normalized by the authors' own prior normal-incidence law Eq. (1) [29], whose constants (0.0000114, 1.264, 1.282) are imported fitted values. No new physical entities, forces, or dimensions are introduced. The assumptions are instrument calibrations, projectile integrity, and geometric shape choices, all stated in the text.

free parameters (3)

prefactor a in H/Hn = a(cosθ)^b = 0.963 (2000 m/s), 1.049 (2500 m/s), 1.043 (3000 m/s)
Least-squares fit to the new oblique-impact data, Section 4; approximated to a≈1 in the final law Eq. (3).
exponent b in H/Hn = a(cosθ)^b = 0.949 (2000 m/s), 0.975 (2500 m/s), 0.958 (3000 m/s)
Least-squares fit exponent, no fit uncertainty reported; approximated to b≈1 in Eq. (3).
normal-incidence depth-law constants (Eq. 1) = 0.0000114, 1.264, 1.282
Empirical constants fitted in the authors' prior normal-impact study [29]; used here to compute Hn for normalizing all oblique depths.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Empirical normal-incidence damage law Eq. (1) from Ref. [29] correctly predicts crater depth at θ=0° for this 63 µm dust batch and speed range.
Section 4: Hn is computed from Eq. (1) to normalize all oblique depths. The fitted exponent b is insensitive to the Hn value (multiplicative scale), but the claim a≈1 requires Eq. (1) to be accurate for this batch.
domain assumption The dust-cloud transit-time speed measured by the laser sheets equals the speed of each individual dust particle.
Section 3: stated with ±1% uncertainty, justified by the near-constant recorded cloud width.
domain assumption Dust particles are intact, near-perfectly spherical, 63±3 µm at the moment of impact.
Section 3: sieve-selected TEKNA batch; impacts lie in partial-disintegration regimes 3c/3d, where fragmentation is expected during, not before, impact.
domain assumption Crater volume is estimated with the half-ellipsoid formula V = πHLW/6.
Section 4: explicitly flagged by the authors as an oversimplifying assumption with unquantified error.
ad hoc to paper The angle dependence of H/Hn has the power-law form a(cosθ)^b over 0-80°.
Section 4: the power law is chosen for the fit, not derived; the consistent 45° residuals show the form is not exact.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Wall damage due to oblique high velocity dust impacts." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4RFH44XO

@misc{pith2026250918794,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Wall damage due to oblique high velocity dust impacts},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4RFH44XO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.18794}
}

read the original abstract

Runaway electron termination on plasma facing components can trigger material explosions that are accompanied by the expulsion of fast solid debris. Due to the large kinetic energies of the ejected dust particles, their subsequent mechanical impacts on the vessel lead to extensive cratering. Earlier experimental studies of high velocity micrometric tungsten dust collisions with tungsten plates focused exclusively on normal impacts. Here, oblique high velocity tungsten-on-tungsten mechanical impacts are reproduced in a controlled manner by a two-stage light gas gun shooting system. The strong dependence of the crater characteristics and crater morphology on the incident angle is documented. A reliable empirical damage law is extracted for the dependence of the crater depth on the incident angle.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.18794 by the authors.

**Figure 3.** SEM images of damaged bulk W targets after the high velocity impact of spherical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Optical image of a damaged bulk W target after the high [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The crater depth as a function of the incident angle with respect to the surface normal for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: The crater length as a function of the incident angle with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: The crater volume normalized by the dust volume as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

[1]

R. A. Pitts, S. Carpentier, F. Escourbiac, T. Hirai, V. Komarov, A. S. Kukushkin, S. Lisgo, A. Loarte, M. Merola, R. Mitteau, A. R. Raffray, M. Shimada and P. C. Stangeby, Physics basis and design of the ITER plasma-facing components,J. Nucl. Mater. 415(2011) S957

2011
[2]

R. A. Pitts, X. Bonnin, F. Escourbiac, H. Frerichs, J. P. Gunn, T. Hirai, A. S. Kukushkin, E. Kaveeva, M. A. Miller, D. Moulton, V. Rozhansky, I. Senichenkov, E. Sytova, O. Schmitz, P. C. Stangeby, G. De Temmerman, I. Veselova and S. Wiesen, Physics basis for the first ITER tungsten divertor, Nucl. Mater. Energy20(2019) 100696

2019
[3]

Krieger, S

K. Krieger, S. Brezinsek, J. W. Coenen, H. Frerichs, A. Kallenbach, A. W. Leonard, T. Loarer, S. Ratyn- skaia, N. Vianello, N. Asakura, M. Bernert, D. Car- ralero, R. Ding, D. Douai, T. Eich, Y. Gasparyan, A. Hakola, Y. Hatano, M. Jakubowski, M. Kobayashi, 7 S. Krasheninnikov, S. Masuzaki, T. Nakano, R. Neu, R. A. Pitts, J. Rapp, K. Schmid, O. Schmitz, D....

2025
[4]

Ratynskaia, E

S. Ratynskaia, E. Thoren, P. Tolias, R. A. Pitts, K. Krieger, L. Vignitchouk and D. Iglesias, Resolidification-controlled melt dynamics under fast transient tokamak plasma loads,Nucl. Fusion60 (2020) 104001

2020
[5]

Thoren, S

E. Thoren, S. Ratynskaia, P. Tolias and R. A. Pitts, The MEMOS-U code description of macroscopic melt dynamics in fusion devices,Plasma Phys. Con- trol. Fusion63(2020) 035021

2020
[6]

Paschalidis, F

K. Paschalidis, F. Lucco Castello, S. Ratynskaia, P. Tolias and L. Brandt, The MEMENTO code for modeling of macroscopic melt motion in fusion de- vices,Fusion Eng. Des.206(2024) 114603

2024
[7]

Federici, C

G. Federici, C. H. Skinner, J. N. Brooks, J. P. Coad, C. Grisolia, A. A. Haasz, A. Hassanein, V. Philipps, C. S. Pitcher, J. Roth, W. R. Wampler and D. G. Whyte, Plasma-material interactions in current tokamaks and their implications for next step fusion reactors,Nucl. Fusion41(2001) 1967

2001
[8]

Ratynskaia, M

S. Ratynskaia, M. Hoelzl, E. Nardon, P. Aleynikov, F.J. Artola, V. Bandaru, M. Beidler, B. Breizman, D. del-Castillo-Negrete, M. De Angeli, V. Dimitriou, R. Ding, J. Eriksson, O. Ficker, R.S. Granetz, E. Hollmann, M. Hoppe, M. Houry, I. Jepu, H.R. Koslowski, C. Liu, J.R. Martin-Solis, G. Pautasso, Y. Peneliau, R.A. Pitts, G.I. Pokol, C. Reux, U. Sheikh, S...

arXiv 2025

Show all 59 references

[9]

De Angeli, P

M. De Angeli, P. Tolias, S. Ratynskaia, D. Ripa- monti, L. Vignitchouk, F. Causa, G. Daminelli, B. Esposito, E. Fortuna-Zalesna, F. Ghezzi, L. La- guardia, G. Maddaluno, G. Riva and W. Zielinski, Evidence for high-velocity solid dust generation in- duced by runaway electron im...

2023
[10]

E. M. Hollmann, C. Marini, D. L. Rudakov, E. Martinez-Loran, M. Beidler, J. L. Herfindal, D. Shi- raki, Y. Q. Liu, I. Bykov, A. Lvovskiy, C. Lasnier, J. Ren, S. Ratynskaia, T. Rizzi, K. Paschalidis, P. To- lias, A. Kulachenko and R. A. Pitts, Measurement of post-disruption run...

2025
[11]

Ratynskaia, P

S. Ratynskaia, P. Tolias, T. Rizzi, K. Paschalidis, A. Kulachenko, E. Hollmann, M. Beidler, Y. Liu, D. Rudakov, I. Bykov and R. A. Pitts, Modelling the brittle failure of graphite induced by the controlled impact of runaway electrons in DIII-D,Nucl. Fusion 65(2025) 024002

2025
[12]

De Angeli, P Tolias, S

M. De Angeli, P Tolias, S. Ratynskaia, D. Ripa- monti, M. Iafrati, G. Maddaluno, G. Daminelli and E. Fortuna-Zalesna, Primary and secondary metallic PFC damage induced by runaway electron dissipa- tioninFTU,Nucl. Mater. Energy, submitted(2025)

2025
[13]

R. A. Pitts, A. Loarte, T. Wauters, M. Dubrov, Y. Gribov, F. Kochl, A. Pshenov, Y. Zhang, J. Ar- tola, X. Bonnin, L. Chen, M. Lehnen, K. Schmid, R. Ding, H. Frerichs, R. Futtersack, X. Gong, G. Hage- laar, E. Hodille, J. Hobirk, S. Krat, D. Matveev, K. Paschalidis, J. Qian, S....

2025
[14]

S. V. Klinkov, V. F. Kosarev and M. Rein, Cold spray deposition: Significance of particle impact phenomena,Aerosp. Sci. Technol.9(2005) 582

2005
[15]

Hassani-Gangaraj, D

M. Hassani-Gangaraj, D. Veysset, K. A. Nelson and C. A. Schuh, Melt-driven erosion in microparticle impact,Nature Commun.9(2018) 5077

2018
[16]

B. G. Cour-Palais, Hypervelocity impact in metals, glass and composites,Int. J. Impact Eng.5(1987) 221

1987
[17]

Niu, X.-C

G.-J. Niu, X.-C. Li, Q. Xu, Z.-S. Yang and G.-N. Luo, Molecular dynamics simulations of interactions between energetic dust and plasma-facing materials, Fusion Eng. Des.100(2015) 220

2015
[18]

Niu, X.-C

G.-J. Niu, X.-C. Li, Q. Xu, Z.-S. Yang and G.-N. Luo, Sputtering and reflection of self-bombardment of tungsten material,Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B349(2015) 45

2015
[19]

S. K. Naspoori, K. K. Kammara and R. Kumar, Study of crater formation and its characteristics due to impact of a cluster projectile on a metal surface by molecular dynamics approach,Nucl. Instrum. Meth- ods Phys. Res. B396(2017) 34

2017
[20]

Fraile, P

A. Fraile, P. Dwivedi, G. Bonny and T. Polcar, Analysis of hypervelocity impacts: the tungsten case Nucl. Fusion62(2022) 026034

2022
[21]

Dwivedi, A

P. Dwivedi, A. Fraile and T. Polcar, High-velocity dust impacts in plasma facing materials: Insights from molecular dynamics simulations,J. Nucl. Mater.594(2024) 155042. 8

2024
[22]

Dwivedi, A

P. Dwivedi, A. Fraile and T. Polcar, Tungsten wall cratering under high-velocity dust impacts: Influ- ence of impact angle and temperature,J. Nucl. Mater.600(2024) 155289

2024
[23]

G. R. Johnson, R. A. Stryk and S. R. Beissel, SPH for high velocity impact computations,Com- put. Methods in Appl. Mech. Eng.139, 347 (1996)

1996
[24]

J. J. Monaghan, Smoothed particle hydrodynamics, Rep. Prog. Phys.68(2005) 1703

2005
[25]

Silling, M

S.A. Silling, M. Epton, O. Weckner, J. Xu and E. Askari, Peridynamic states and constitutive model- ing,J. Elast.88(2007) 151

2007
[26]

Ren and J

B. Ren and J. Song, Peridynamic simulation of par- ticles impact and interfacial bonding in cold spray process,J. Therm. Spray Technol.31(2022) 1827

2022
[27]

Riva and A

G. Riva and A. Reggiori, Modeling of pellet acceler- ation by two-stage guns,Fusion Technol.15(1989) 143

1989
[28]

T. J. Ringrose, H. W. Doyle, P. S. Foster, M. Betney, J. W. Skidmore, T. Edwards, B. Tully, J. R. Parkin and N. Hawker, A hypervelocity impact facility op- timised for the dynamic study of high pressure shock compression,Procedia Eng.204(2017) 344

2017
[29]

Tolias, M

P. Tolias, M. De Angeli, D. Ripamonti, S. Ratyn- skaia, G. Riva, G. Daminelli and M. De Angeli, Wall crateringuponhighvelocitynormaldustimpact,Fu- sion Eng. Des.195(2023) 113938

2023
[30]

De Angeli, P

M. De Angeli, P. Tolias, F. Suzuki-Vidal, D. Ripa- monti, T. Ringrose, H. Doyle, G. Daminelli, J. Shad- bolt, P. Jarvis and M. De Angeli, Normal high ve- locity solid dust impacts on tiles of tokamak-relevant temperature,Nucl. Mater. Energy41(2024)101735

2024
[31]

D. E. Gault and J. A. Wedekind, Experimental stud- ies of oblique impact, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 9th (1978) 3843

1978
[32]

M. J. Burchell and N. G. Mackay, Crater ellipticity in hypervelocity impacts on metals,J. Geophys. Res. 103(1998) 22761

1998
[33]

M.J.BurchellandI.D.S.Grey, Obliquehyperveloc- ity impacts on thick glass targets,Mater. Sci. Eng. A303(2001) 134

2001
[34]

I. D. S. Grey, M. J. Burchell and N. R. G. Shrine, Scaling of hypervelocity impact craters in ice with impact angle,J. Geophys. Res.107(2002) 5076

2002
[35]

W. J. Stronge, Impact mechanics, University of Cambridge (2018)

2018
[36]

John, Particle-surface interactions: charge trans- fer, energy loss, resuspension, and deagglomeration, Aerosol Sci

W. John, Particle-surface interactions: charge trans- fer, energy loss, resuspension, and deagglomeration, Aerosol Sci. Technol.23(1995) 2

1995
[37]

C.ThorntonandZ.Ning, Atheoreticalmodelforthe stick / bounce behaviour of adhesive, elastic-plastic spheres,Powder Technol.99(1998) 154

1998
[38]

Krijt, C

S. Krijt, C. Güttler, D. Heißelmann, C. Dominik and A. G. G. M. Tielens, Energy dissipation in head- on collisions of spheres,J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.46 (2013) 435303

2013
[39]

Shalpegin, F

A. Shalpegin, F. Brochard, S. Ratynskaia, P. To- lias, M. De Angeli, L. Vignitchouk, I. Bykov, S. Bardin, K. Bystrov, T. Morgan and G. De Temmer- man, Highly resolved measurements of dust motion inthesheathboundaryofmagnetizedplasmas,Nucl. Fusion55(2015) 112001

2015
[40]

Ratynskaia, P

S. Ratynskaia, P. Tolias, A. Shalpegin, L. Vig- nitchouk, M. De Angeli, I. Bykov, K. Bystrov, S. Bardin, F. Brochard, D. Ripamonti, N. den Harder and G. De Temmerman, Elastic–plastic adhesive im- pacts of tungsten dust with metal surfaces in plasma environments,J. Nucl. Mater....

2015
[41]

Tolias, S

P. Tolias, S. Ratynskaia, A. Shalpegin, L. Vig- nitchouk, F. Brochard, M. De Angeli and H. van der Meiden, Experimental validation of the analyti- cal model for tungsten dust-wall mechanical impacts incorporated in the MIGRAINe dust dynamics code, Nucl. Mater. Energy12(2017) 524

2017
[42]

Y.Sun, D.Veysset, K.A.NelsonandC.A.Schuh, In situ observations of jetting in the divergent rebound regime for high-velocity metallic microparticle im- pact,Appl. Phys. Lett.117(2020) 134105

2020
[43]

Hassani-Gangaraj, D

M. Hassani-Gangaraj, D. Veysset, K. A. Nelson and C. A. Schuh, In-situ observations of single micro- particle impact bonding,Scr. Mater.145(2018) 9

2018
[44]

Schmidt, F

T. Schmidt, F. Gärtner, H. Assadi and H. Kreye, Development of a generalized parameter window for cold spray deposition,Acta Mater.54(2006) 729

2006
[45]

Hassani-Gangaraj, D

M. Hassani-Gangaraj, D. Veysset, K. A. Nelson and C. A. Schuh, Impact-bonding with aluminum, silver, and gold microparticles: Toward understanding the role of native oxide layer,Appl. Surf. Sci.476(2019) 528

2019
[46]

M. J. Burchell, M. J. Cole, J. A. M. McDonnell and J. C. Zarnecki, Hypervelocity impact studies using the 2 MV Van de Graaff accelerator and two-stage light gas gun of the University of Kent at Canter- bury,Meas. Sci. Technol.10(1999) 41. 9

1999
[47]

Eichhorn, Analysis of the hypervelocity impact process from impact flash measurements,Planet

G. Eichhorn, Analysis of the hypervelocity impact process from impact flash measurements,Planet. Space Sci.24(1976) 771

1976
[48]

Ratynskaia, C

S. Ratynskaia, C. Castaldo, E. Giovannozzi, D. Rudakov, G. Morfill, M. Horanyi, J. H. Yu and G. Maddaluno, In situ dust detection in fusion devices, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion50(2018) 124046

2018
[49]

Ratynskaia, C

S. Ratynskaia, C. Castaldo, K. Rypdal, G. Morfill, U. de Angelis, V. Pericoli-Ridolfini, A. Rufoloni and E. Giovannozzi, Hypervelocity dust impacts in FTU scrape-off layer,Nucl. Fusion48(2008) 015006

2008
[50]

Ratynskaia, A

S. Ratynskaia, A. Bortolon and S. I. Krasheninnikov, Dust and powder in fusion plasmas: recent develop- ments in theory, modeling, and experiments,Rev. Mod. Plasma Phys.6(2022) 20

2022
[51]

Dowding, M

I. Dowding, M. Hassani, Y. Sun, D. Veysset, K. A. Nelson and C. A. Schuh, Particle size effects in metallic microparticle impact-bonding,Acta Mater. 194(2020) 40

2020
[52]

Rahmati and B

S. Rahmati and B. Jodoin, Physically based finite element modeling method to predict metallic bond- ing in cold spray,J. Therm. Spray Tech.29(2020) 611

2020
[53]

Assadi, F

H. Assadi, F. Gärtner, T. Stoltenhoff and H. Kr- eye, Bonding mechanism in cold gas spraying,Acta Mater.51(2003) 4379

2003
[54]

Vignitchouk, S

L. Vignitchouk, S. Ratynskaia, M. Kantor, P. Tolias, M. De Angeli, H. van der Meiden, J. Vernimmen, F. Brochard, A. Shalpegin, E. Thorén and J.-P. Banon, Validating heat balance models for tungsten dust in cold dense plasmas,Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 60(2018) 115002

2018
[55]

Ratynskaia, P

S. Ratynskaia, P. Tolias, M. De Angeli, V. Rohde, A. Herrmann, D. Ripamonti, G. Riva, E. Thorén, L. Vignitchouk, B. Sieglin, K. Krieger, R. Neu, The ASDEX-UpgradeTeamandTheEUROfusionMST1 Team, Interaction of metal dust adhered on castel- lated substrates with the ELMy H-mode p...

2018
[56]

Tolias, S

P. Tolias, S. Ratynskaia, M. De Angeli, G. De Tem- merman, D. Ripamonti, G Riva, I Bykov, A. Shalpe- gin, L. Vignitchouk, F. Brochard, K. Bystrov, S. Bardin and A. Litnovsky, Dust remobilization in fu- sion plasmas under steady state conditions,Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion58(2...

2016
[57]

Ratynskaia, P

S. Ratynskaia, P. Tolias, I. Bykov, D. Rudakov, M. De Angeli, L. Vignitchouk, D. Ripamonti, G. Riva, S. Bardin, H. van der Meiden, J. Vernimmen, K. Bystrov and G. De Temmerman, Interaction of ad- heredmetallicdustwithtransientplasmaheatloads, Nucl. Fusion56(2016) 066010

2016
[58]

G. Riva, P. Tolias, S. Ratynskaia, G. Daminelli, R. Donde, M. De Angeli, E. Vassallo and M. Pedroni, Adhesion measurements for tungsten dust deposited on tungsten surfaces, Nucl. Mater. Energy12(2017) 593

2017
[59]

Tolias, G

P. Tolias, G. Riva, M. De Angeli, S. Ratynskaia, G. Daminelli, C.P. Lungu, C. Porosnicu, Adhesive force distributions for tungsten dust deposited on bulk tungsten and beryllium-coated tungsten sur- faces,Nucl. Mater. Energy15(2018) 55. 10

2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

R. A. Pitts, S. Carpentier, F. Escourbiac, T. Hirai, V. Komarov, A. S. Kukushkin, S. Lisgo, A. Loarte, M. Merola, R. Mitteau, A. R. Raffray, M. Shimada and P. C. Stangeby, Physics basis and design of the ITER plasma-facing components,J. Nucl. Mater. 415(2011) S957

2011

[2] [2]

R. A. Pitts, X. Bonnin, F. Escourbiac, H. Frerichs, J. P. Gunn, T. Hirai, A. S. Kukushkin, E. Kaveeva, M. A. Miller, D. Moulton, V. Rozhansky, I. Senichenkov, E. Sytova, O. Schmitz, P. C. Stangeby, G. De Temmerman, I. Veselova and S. Wiesen, Physics basis for the first ITER tungsten divertor, Nucl. Mater. Energy20(2019) 100696

2019

[3] [3]

Krieger, S

K. Krieger, S. Brezinsek, J. W. Coenen, H. Frerichs, A. Kallenbach, A. W. Leonard, T. Loarer, S. Ratyn- skaia, N. Vianello, N. Asakura, M. Bernert, D. Car- ralero, R. Ding, D. Douai, T. Eich, Y. Gasparyan, A. Hakola, Y. Hatano, M. Jakubowski, M. Kobayashi, 7 S. Krasheninnikov, S. Masuzaki, T. Nakano, R. Neu, R. A. Pitts, J. Rapp, K. Schmid, O. Schmitz, D....

2025

[4] [4]

Ratynskaia, E

S. Ratynskaia, E. Thoren, P. Tolias, R. A. Pitts, K. Krieger, L. Vignitchouk and D. Iglesias, Resolidification-controlled melt dynamics under fast transient tokamak plasma loads,Nucl. Fusion60 (2020) 104001

2020

[5] [5]

Thoren, S

E. Thoren, S. Ratynskaia, P. Tolias and R. A. Pitts, The MEMOS-U code description of macroscopic melt dynamics in fusion devices,Plasma Phys. Con- trol. Fusion63(2020) 035021

2020

[6] [6]

Paschalidis, F

K. Paschalidis, F. Lucco Castello, S. Ratynskaia, P. Tolias and L. Brandt, The MEMENTO code for modeling of macroscopic melt motion in fusion de- vices,Fusion Eng. Des.206(2024) 114603

2024

[7] [7]

Federici, C

G. Federici, C. H. Skinner, J. N. Brooks, J. P. Coad, C. Grisolia, A. A. Haasz, A. Hassanein, V. Philipps, C. S. Pitcher, J. Roth, W. R. Wampler and D. G. Whyte, Plasma-material interactions in current tokamaks and their implications for next step fusion reactors,Nucl. Fusion41(2001) 1967

2001

[8] [8]

Ratynskaia, M

S. Ratynskaia, M. Hoelzl, E. Nardon, P. Aleynikov, F.J. Artola, V. Bandaru, M. Beidler, B. Breizman, D. del-Castillo-Negrete, M. De Angeli, V. Dimitriou, R. Ding, J. Eriksson, O. Ficker, R.S. Granetz, E. Hollmann, M. Hoppe, M. Houry, I. Jepu, H.R. Koslowski, C. Liu, J.R. Martin-Solis, G. Pautasso, Y. Peneliau, R.A. Pitts, G.I. Pokol, C. Reux, U. Sheikh, S...

arXiv 2025