1 / 34

Study of Linac for TESLA XFEL: Tracking, Comparison to LCLS, Re-optimization, Tolerances, Jitter, CSR Effects

This study focuses on analyzing the linac for TESLA XFEL, including tracking, comparing it to LCLS, re-optimizing its parameters, studying tolerances, investigating jitter, and examining the effects of CSR.

Download Presentation

Study of Linac for TESLA XFEL: Tracking, Comparison to LCLS, Re-optimization, Tolerances, Jitter, CSR Effects

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. ‘S2E’ Study of Linac for TESLA XFEL P. Emma SLAC • Tracking • Comparison to LCLS • Re-optimization • Tolerances • Jitter • CSR Effects

  2. LCLS rf gun 150 MeV z  0.83 mm   0.10 % 250 MeV z  0.19 mm   1.8 % 4.54 GeV z  0.022 mm   0.76 % 14.35 GeV z  0.022 mm   0.01 % 6 MeV z  0.83 mm   0.1 % Lh L =0.6 m rf=180 rf gun L0 L = 9 m rf = -38° L = 330 m rf = -43° L = 550 m rf = -10° L = 6 m undulator L =120 m L1 L2 L3 X ...existing linac BC-1 L = 6 m R56= -36 mm BC-2 L = 22 m R56= -22 mm DL-1 R56  0 DL-2 R56 = 0 TESLA-XFEL 375 MeV z  0.1 mm   1.4 % 1.64 GeV z  0.020 mm   0.5 % 20.5 GeV z  0.020 mm   0.01 % 6 MeV z  2.0 mm   0.1 % 120 MeV z  0.5 mm   2.0 % Lh L 1.4 m rf= -191 L 72 m rf -40° L  16 m rf -40° L  850 m rf = 0° L = 8 m rf  -22° undulator L =? m L0 L2 L3 3.9 L1 BC-1 L  4 m R56= -76 mm BC-2 L  14 m R56= -36 mm BC-3 L 18 m R56= -11 mm (parameters only approximate)

  3. Twiss parameters along TESLA-XFEL undulator BC1 BC2 BC3

  4. Bunch length and energy spread along TESLA-XFEL sE/E ss

  5. BC1+ BC3+ BC2+ m-bunching exaggerated by noise, but gain may be large (see modulated beam study below).

  6. Longitudinal phase space at end of TESLA-XFEL m-bunching exaggerated by noise (see modulation study below) gex 1.3  3.6 mm

  7. Slice emittance at end of TESLA-XFEL

  8. Slice energy spread at end of TESLA-XFEL sE/E < 0.01%

  9. Sliced Bunch Analysis gex,y Ipk sE/E0 Dl/l slice 4D centroid osc. amplitude Twiss slice mismatch amplitude

  10. 1 mm Quad alignment tolerances 10 mrad Quad roll-angle tolerances

  11. Longitudinal-only simulation with LiTrack (200k in 66 seconds) no CSR

  12. Test rf phase sensitivity: Df0 = 0 Ipk 11 kA Df0 = 0.2° Ipk 6 kA

  13. Scan gun-laser timing and charge, monitoring energy and peak current |Dti| < 0.13 ps |DQ/Q| < 4% |DIpk/Ipk| < 12% gun-timing charge |DE/E| < 0.1% gun-timing charge

  14. gun-timing charge L0-phase L0-voltage |Dti|< 0.13 ps |DQ/Q|< 4% |DV0/V0|< 0.08% |Df0|< 0.07° 3.9-phase 3.9-voltage L1-phase L1-voltage |Dfh|< 0.05° |DVh/Vh|< 0.3% |Df1|< 0.05° |DV1/V1|< 0.21%

  15. |DV2/V2|< 1.6% |Df2|< 1.1° |DV3/V3|< 0.1% |Df3|< 2.2° L2-phase L2-voltage L3-phase L3-voltage System is very sensitive with large 11-kA spike at head (T. Limberg)… Note 2nd-order chirp after BC2 This suggests an increase of the 3.9-GHz voltage 

  16. LiTrack with 3.9-GHz voltage raised from 16.6 MV to 21.0 MV previous distribution no spikes

  17. With 21-MV 3.9-GHz rf, again testing rf phase sensitivity: Df0 = 0 Ipk 5.5 kA Df0 = 0.2° …much less sensitive Ipk 4.5 kA

  18. gun-timing charge L0 phase L0 voltage |DV0/V0|< 0.20% |Df0|< 0.09° |Dti|< 6.0 ps |DQ/Q|< 100% 3.9-phase 3.9-voltage L1 phase L1 voltage |Dfh|< 0.19° |Df1|< 0.24° |DV1/V1|< 1.0% |DVh/Vh|< 1.0%

  19. |Df3|< 2.2° |DV3/V3|< 0.1% L3 phase L3 voltage L2 phase L2 voltage |Df2|< 0.49° |DV2/V2|< 1.4%

  20. adjusted 3.9-GHz original 3.9-GHz & X-band

  21. Form ‘jitter budget’ based on uncorrelated jitter: h- 3.9-GHz & X-band degrees of X-band or 3.9-GHz

  22. LiTrack Jitter Simulation of TESLA-XFEL using ‘jitter budget’ energy • (DE/E0)rms • 0.09% Dl/l • 0.18% energy spread 6.7 minutes @ 5 Hz (no CSR) (DI/I0)rms  13% peak current (Dt)rms  0.2 ps arrival time

  23. Now test re-optimized setup with full 6D tracking (Elegant) No CSR

  24. Elegant tracking with CSR (and increased 3.9-GHz voltage) 4 keV injector slice energy spread m-bunching exaggerated by noise, but gain at l 3 mm may be large (see modulation study below) gex 1.3  2.4 mm

  25. Elegant tracking with CSR and slice energy spread ×6 from gun 23 keV injector slice energy spread gex 1.3  2.0 mm m-bunching damped by large intrinsic energy spread (23 keV or  10-4 at undulator)

  26. Full 6D Elegant tracking with increased 3.9-GHz voltage and “23 keV” slice ge slice sE/E < 0.01% b-tron oscillation induced by CSR energy loss …gex might be affected

  27. Add modulation on density and energy profile at 120 MeV l = 500 mm A = 0.5% Use 106 macro-particles and quiet-start bunch population in x, x, z, DE/E

  28. CSR m-bunching in full TESLA-XFEL N = 106, bins = 500, transient 1D model, linear optics, matched b’s, Q= 1 nC, gex = 1 mm, Ipk /Ipk0 100, sE0 = 4 keV & 23 keV 120 MeV 20.5 GeV 10-2 Ipk 50 A linear optics sE/E 10-4 at 20 GeV after BC’s Ipk 5 kA CSR off

  29. Track full XFEL in 4D (x, x, z, DE/E) from pre-BC1 at 120 MeV to just past BC3 at 1.64 GeV using “CSR_calc” (PE) and linearly re-matching to proper b,a and energy chirp prior to each BC. BC2 BC3 BC1 re-match point re-match point

  30. sE0 = 4 keV post-BC1 l 123 mm, A 0.5% injector l = 500 mm, A = 0.5% gain  100 post-BC2 l 20 mm, A 6.0% post-BC3 l 6.6 mm, A 50%

  31. sE0 = 23 keV post-BC1 l 123 mm, A< 1.0% injector l = 500 mm, A = 0.5% gain  6 post-BC2 l 20 mm, A< 1.0% post-BC3 l 6 mm, A 3%

  32. l = 250 mm, A = 0.5% sE0 = 4 keV sE0 = 23 keV gain 150 gain ~ 1

  33. TESLA-XFEL CSR Compound Gain Curve (no LSC) sE0 = 4 keV sE0 = 23 keV starting at 120 MeV

  34. Final Comments • Large m-bunching gain, even without longitudinal space charge – adding energy spread is very helpful • Charge jitter in XFEL much looser than LCLS • Some rf phase tolerances tighter than LCLS • Lack of longitudinal wakefield allows very linear compression, producing nearly uniform current profile – not possible in LCLS • Possibly better performance if BC3 were integrated into BC2? • Thanks especially to Yujong, Jean-Paul, and Torsten

More Related