1 / 17

1nm X-ray Optics: Vibrations' Effect on Focusing Efficiency

Explore the impact of vibrations on 1nm X-ray optics, examining key metrics like Numerical Aperture and resolution, with insights on stability requirements and advanced waveguide layouts. Learn how to position accurately with 1nm beams and tackle challenges for achieving optimal resolutions. Discover future possibilities and the potential for 1nm efficiency. Explore the essential factors for achieving 1nm resolutions in X-ray optics.

ebangs
Download Presentation

1nm X-ray Optics: Vibrations' Effect on Focusing Efficiency

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Vibrations effect on 1nm focussing K. Evans-Lutterodt NSLS-II VTG Januaury 22 2007

  2. Outline • Background and important optics metrics • Simple optics layout • How we see the source; some stability reqs • More complex layout (Waveguide) • Can we position with 1nm beam sufficient accuracy?

  3. Towards 1nm X-ray Optics Figure courtesy of C. Jacobsen • Future • It can be done: There is no physical reason we cannot get to 1nm • However, it will take resources and a targeted effort.

  4. Basic Issues • Metrics • Numerical Aperture and resolution • Depth of field • Aperture • Efficiency • Chromaticity • Modulation Transfer Function Resolution of 1nm at l=1A requires NA < 0.1 If resolution is 1nm => then DOF =27nm

  5. Simplest configuration Mono deleted for clarity

  6. Order of magnitudes for stability  ~ 10 microns(v) x 40 microns (h) Slit down in the horizontal to get 10 by 10. Demagnify by 104 to get 1nm. For a source to lens of 50m, this implies 5mm focal length. If you include details, we expect focal lengths of between 1 to 5mm (We would really like to get out to 100mm, but this is probably too tough, Aperture) Main point: Easy to integrate lens and sample stage monolithically.

  7. We already mount optics and sample monolithically

  8. Stability of e-beam is crucial for effective source size • Position of electron beam translates directly into stability of image. • Typical tolerance is 10% if e-beam size; 0.3microns?. • Angular stability? L  Angular uncertainty ~ (0.3 microns/ 3 meter) ~ 1e-7 radians

  9. How the stability comes in A: Size If sigma stability is 10%, then stability adds negligibly to size B: Intensity If you are measuring fluorescence intensity, and we assume a gaussian profile And we want to keep signal intensities within 1%: 1% criterion 5% criterian

  10. Off-axis Abberrations Using zone plate as a guide: will have to revisit this in optics R&D Aberration angular field of view , , is given by Using N=1e5, F=0.1, =0.1nm   1e-3 radians which is much bigger than everything else so not a problem.

  11. More complicated optics layout

  12. Main advantages of waveguide geometry • More stable, but more optics so more loss.( 4.7% experimental state of the art, but not optimal) • Wave guide provides new source size (50nm) • Allows better working distances • All fluctuations in position,angle translate to intensity fluctuations • Attempt to do normalization, not invented yet for small WD.

  13. Can we position with 1nm accuracy? It is difficult, but possible. Worry about materials, and temperature control.

  14. Commercial 0.02nm positioner

  15. Non Commercial (APS-RD)

  16. Timescales • Time scale : 1second /scan. • If normalization invented then stability to 1 second ok • If not ~2 hour full scan stability.

More Related