1 / 11

Status of Synchronization System

This document discusses the current status and challenges of the synchronization system, including RF to laser pulses and e-bunch to laser synchronization. It also presents future architecture plans and cost estimations for system upgrades.

sbunn
Download Presentation

Status of Synchronization System

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. Status of Synchronization System M. Bellaveglia On behalf of the LNF timing, synchronization and LLRF group

  2. Synchronization issues • RF to laserpulses • Example: COMB • Multiple e-bunchesinjected in the same RF bucket • Critical injectionphase for RF compression • Request: ΔtRMS≈100fs • e-bunch to laser • Example: PLASMONX • SPARC and Flame beams injected together • Synchronization at the level of the plasma wave period • Request: ΔtRMS<30fs

  3. Present architecture

  4. Present architecture • RF distribution through coaxial cables • Feedbacks: • Temperature drifts (BW<<1Hz) • RF-to-laser (BW≈5kHz) (PC laser PLL problem) • RF-to-RF (BW≈1MHz) • System performance • Detection resolution: <50fsRMS • RF-to-LLRF: 40÷100 fsRMS • Laser-to-LLRF: <250fsRMS(resolution problem) • e-bunch-to-LLRF: <150fs (resolution limit) • Enough for COMB, but not for LWPA with external injection

  5. Future architecture

  6. Cost estimation - OMO • RMO already at LNF • Low f noise depeds upon RMO (≈70fsRMS) • High f phase noise <10fs • OMO Femtosecond Fiber Laser 50k€ • Laser amplifier 26k€ • Splitting box 12k€ • Best EO electronics for PLL 31k€ • Locking Electronics (motor controller) 13k€ • Thermalized system enclosure 15k€

  7. Cost estimation – Fiber links • Point-to-pointdistribution with a jitter<10fsRMS • 2x Stabilized fiber links 120k€ • Due to our limited client distance (50m maximum), we are planning to avoid the active links, by means of special fibers with low Thermal Coefficient of Delay (TCD)

  8. Stabilized Fibers • Figure shows measurements performed at DESY: • FURUKAWA fibers3.3fs/°K/m from specs65k€/km • LINDEN fibers5fs/°K/m not specifiedprice much lower • FURUKAWA fibers with coating added by german company18fs/°K/m • Normal SMF40fs/°K/m

  9. Cost estimation - Optical phase detection • Phase detection resolution in the range of attoseconds • Client locks in the worst case with a jitter well below 50fsRMS • Custom Cross-Correlator 1550nm x 800nm • To be used in the SPARC and FLAME lasers • 2x Custom OptoMech 30k€

  10. Single pulse time arrival monitor • Use of a Mach-Zender 10GHz EO modulator • Already purchased (1.5k€) and benchmarked in the lab

  11. Conclusion • Present system with coaxial distribution • Resolution should be upgraded for: • Photocathode laser-to-RF PLL and arrival time monitor • Diagnostics for bunch arrival time monitor • We can achieve a performance of ≈100fsRMS of sub-systems relative jitter • Future system with optical distribution • It is mandatory in case of LPWA (external injection) • It is already developed and installed by MENLO systems in FERMI@ELETTRA • Performance of <50fsRMS of relative jitter • Total quotation fro MENLO systems is 360k€ • We are studying alternatives to some proposed devices

More Related