1 / 31

W.B.Mori University of California at Los Angeles Much is based on QuickPIC and OSIRIS Simulations

Key Physics Topics for Plasma Wakefield Accelerator Research Topics for Plasma Wakefield R&D at FACET and Beyond. W.B.Mori University of California at Los Angeles Much is based on QuickPIC and OSIRIS Simulations. Doe FACET Review February 19, 2008. p x. x. s x. Uncompensated Nonlinear

gaia
Download Presentation

W.B.Mori University of California at Los Angeles Much is based on QuickPIC and OSIRIS Simulations

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. Key Physics Topics for Plasma Wakefield Accelerator Research Topics for Plasma Wakefield R&D at FACET and Beyond W.B.Mori University of California at Los Angeles Much is based on QuickPIC and OSIRIS Simulations Doe FACET ReviewFebruary 19, 2008

  2. px x sx Uncompensated Nonlinear Focusing forces leads to Emittance growth after several betatron periods (effective area increased) Key Physics follows from energy gain and beam quality considerations • Energy Gain=eEloaded x Lacc • eEloaded= Gradient of Loaded wake • Wakefield amplitude (accelerating and focusing fields) • Beam loading • Lacc= acceleration length • LdephasingNot an issue for PWFA • LpumpdepletionHigh Transformer Ratios • LdiffractionHead Erosion • LinstabilityHosing Plasma focusing causes beam to rotate in phase space Radially dependent accelerating field leads to energy spread

  3. Wake excitationNarrow beams

  4. Blowout or Bubble regime for PWFA Rosenzweig et al. 1990, Lu et al. 2006 Trajectory crossing • Ion channel formed by trajectory crossing • Ideal linear focusing force • Uniform acceleration • Fluid model breaks down! • 2D/3D and electromagnetic in nature! Driven by an electron beam What do we want to know and predict? • Wake excitation for given drive beam …… • Evolution of drive beam, e.g, instabilities… • Transformer ratio, shaped bunches, train of bunches • Beam loading, beam quality …… • How to put these all together in a design? • What about positrons? Driven by a laser pulse

  5. Wakefields are completely characterized by the trajectory of the blowout radius W. Lu et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 16, 16500 (2006) The trajectory of the inner most particle is Space charge of beam Ponderomotive force of laser Two distinct limits: Ultra-relativistic blowout (behind the driver) Non-relativistic blowout Nearly a circle!

  6. Linear focusing field Uniform accelerating field Field structure in blowout regime Relativistic blowout regime for blowout radius Lu et al.PRL 16, 16500 [2006] Bubble radius :

  7. Beam Loadinglinear regime • In the linear regime one superimposes the wake by trailer to the wake by the driver to find the total wakefield [1]. • Bunch shaping for no energy spread: Triangular. • The total charge can be found by requiring that all of the energy in the wake is absorbed. [1] T. Katsouleas, S. Wilks, P. Chen, J. M. Dawson, J. J. Su - Part. Accel, 1987

  8. Original simulation results: 1987 Drive beam (laser or particle beam) Note that wedge gives nearly constant decelerating field Properly phased trailing beam of particles: Loads wake • In linear theory just use superposition: • Add wakes => (for spot size c/wp) • 100% energy extraction (though Vgr=0) • 100% energy spread Katsouleas, Wilks et al., 1987

  9. Nonlinear beam loading:Solve equation for Rb(x)M. Tzoufras, in preparation These equations are integrated for a trapezoidal () to obtain Ez() and rb(). This allows us to design accelerators with 100% beam-loading efficiency that conserve the energy spread.

  10. Nonlinear beam loadingM. Tzoufras, to be submitted Nonlinear beam loadingtheory has been confirmed in fully nonlinear particle-in-cell simulations

  11. 25 GeV Stage No energy spread 25 GeV Driver 25 GeV Trailing beam 25 GeV Driver 475 GeV Trailing beam np=5.661016cm-3 Ndriver = 4.421010, r= 3 m, L = 58 m, Energy = 25 GeV Ntrailing = 1.71010 , r= 3 m , L = 22 m, Energy = 25 GeV or 475 GeV Rtrans = -Eacc/Edec = 1

  12. Pump depletion: Transformer ratio E_ E+

  13. Can the transformer ratio be increased?W.Lu PhD Dissertation UCLA 2007 • Linear theory: • Triangular or wedge shaped bunch + precursor leads to constant E_ and an E+ that • Nonlinear blowout regime: - Starting from equation of Lu et al., it can be shown that the optimal shape of a single bunch is once again a wedge (but without the need for a precursor np=21016cm-3 Ndriver = 21010, r= 3 m, L = 390 m Ntrailing = 0.67109, r= 1 m, L = 15 m Edec= 0.085 mcp/e Eacc= -0.85 mcp/e Rtrans= -Eacc / Edec = 10

  14. High transformer ratio used a wedge shaped beam Blowout regime flattens wake, reduces energy spread Beam load Ez Unloaded wake • Loaded wake • Nload~30% Nmax • 1% energy spread

  15. Multi-bunch Afterburner Drivers: 75pC*(1:3:5:7)~1nC Witness: 0.3/R*1nC~50pC Transf. Ratio ~ 7 Transformer Efficiency ~ 30% Themos Kallos, USC

  16. Hosing (Head-tail) Instability • Caused by the coupling between the beam and the electron sheath at the ion channel boundary. • Triggered by head-tail offset along the beam and leads to the transverse beam centroid oscillation with a spatial-temporal growth. Electron hosing and positron transverse instabilities are likely the biggest obstacles for PWFA (or LWFA) to impact HEP applications. It will cause steering errors as well as limit the energy gain, degrade the beam quality and lead to beam breakup.

  17. How severe is hosing? The coupled equations for beam centroid(xb) and channel centroid (xc) (Whittum et. al. 1991): where Standard theory predics oscillation and exponential growth Asymptotic solution for a linearly tilted beam kbs= kbLpd=(g/2)1/2/e-

  18. Hosing in the blow-out regime Huang et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 255001 (2007) Parameters: Ipeak = 7.7 kA

  19. 25 GeV stages Minimal hosing and emittance growth! 25 GeV Driver 25 GeV Trailing beam 25 GeV Driver 475 GeV Trailing beam np=5.661016cm-3 Ndriver = 4.421010, r= 3 m, L = 58 m, Energy = 25 GeV Ntrailing = 1.71010 , r= 3 m , L = 22 m, Energy = 25 GeV or 475 GeV Rtrans = -Eacc/Edec = 1

  20. Head erosion Matched propagation of beam body: For matched beams head erosion is an issue: Difficult to achieve matched propagation without head erosion for an ordinary beam (i.e., uniform emittance and spotsize). Possible solutions: 1. External focusing 2. Muliple stages such that L of each stage is shorter 3. Trumpet shaped beams that can be produced using a plasma lense. 4. Emittance growth at the head

  21. Beam head erosion in field ionized plasmas

  22. Ionization front Pinch point Vacuum expansion Slower expansion Ion Focusing Beam head erosion in field ionized plasmas MM. Zhou, in preparation Slowed down free expansion between A & B (by a factor 0<<1)

  23. Synchrotron radiation betatron radiation

  24. Ion Motion • Ion motion when • Matched beam spot size shrinks at large g, low en • For future collider • eny down by 102 (e.g., 10nm-rad) • g up by 10+ • nb up by 102 • Ion motion must be included in design/models • Could cause emittance growth • Could cause energy spread • Could increase betatron radiation to unacceptable levels Ref. S. Lee et al., AAC Proc (2000); J. Rosenzweig et al., PRL (2006)

  25. Ion Motion nb=1.3x1019 nb/n0 m/M=350/1836=.125 np=5.661016cm-3 Ndriver = 4.421010, r= 3 m, L = 58 m, Energy = 250 GeV `nb=1.91x1019 Ntrailing = 1.71010 , r= 3 m , L = 22 m, Energy = 250 GeV nb=1.41x1019 Rtrans = Eloaded/Edec = 1 Ion motion

  26. e- e+ Positron Acceleration3-D QuickPIC Simulations, plasma e- density • “Uniform” focusing force (r,z) • • Non-uniform focusing force (r,z) • Smaller accelerating force Ref. S. Lee et al., Phys. Rev. E (2000); M. Zhou, PhD Thesis (2008)

  27. Head erosion 5.7GeV in 39cm Positron acceleration Evolution of a positron beam/wakefiled and final energy gain in a field-ionized plasma

  28. Positron Acceleration: Needed for e-e+ colliderOnly at FACETA few scenarios • Positrons are accelerated on a positron wake • Hollow channels might be needed • Use linear wakes • Positrons are accelerated on an electron wake • One idea for injecting positrons onto an electron wake will be discussed in Mark Hogan’s talk • Beam loading by narrow intense positron bunches has not been tackled theoretically as of yet Ref. S. Lee et al., Phys. Rev. E (2000); M. Zhou, PhD Thesis (2008)

  29. Summary • Recent success is very promising experiments theory simulation (PIC and reduced PIC) • No known show stoppers to extending plasma accelerators to the energy frontier • Many questions remain to be addressed for realizing a collider • Experiments • Theory • simulation • FACET-class facility is needed to address them • Lower energy beam facilities cannot access critical issues in the regime of interest • FACET can address most issues of one stage of a 5-20 stage e-e+ TeV collider

  30. 25 GeV Stage No energy spread 25 GeV Driver 25 GeV Trailing beam 25 GeV Driver 475 GeV Trailing beam np=5.661016cm-3 Ndriver = 4.421010, r= 3 m, L = 58 m, Energy = 25 GeV Ntrailing = 1.71010 , r= 3 m , L = 22 m, Energy = 25 GeV or 475 GeV Rtrans = -Eacc/Edec = 1

More Related