{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013311148086522463, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.035087719298246, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of Raman and pyrometry dynamic temperature measurements of shocked cyclohexane

Optical pyrometry is a well-developed, broadly applicable method to determine temperature in dynamic compression experiments. However, it measures radiation from only the skin depth of the radiant material, is highly susceptible to spurious backgrounds, and requires an often-unmeasurable free parameter—the sample dynamic emissivity. Raman spectroscopy offers a method to determine temperature directly from fundamental theory, but it is practically limited in applications to a small subset of shock experiments. In this work, we describe an experiment allowing simultaneous application of Raman and pyrometric temperature techniques to benchmark a specific instance of pyrometry. We attempted both measurements on multiple experiments and compare the successful temperature results between the separate but highly repeatable shots. We find that dynamic shock temperatures inferred from Raman spectroscopy and pyrometry generally agree within the uncertainties of each measurement, although those uncertainties are larger than typical for a specially designed pyrometry experiment on a shocked metal sample.