1 / 29

Generation of Sub-fsec, High Brightness Electron Beams for Single-Spike SASE FEL Operation

Generation of Sub-fsec, High Brightness Electron Beams for Single-Spike SASE FEL Operation. J.B. Rosenzweig UCLA Dept. of Physics and Astronomy for SPARC(X)-UCLA collaboration. Ultra-short FEL pulses. Investigations at atomic electron spatio-temporal scales

tarala
Download Presentation

Generation of Sub-fsec, High Brightness Electron Beams for Single-Spike SASE FEL Operation

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. Generation of Sub-fsec, High Brightness Electron Beams for Single-Spike SASE FEL Operation J.B. Rosenzweig UCLA Dept. of Physics and Astronomy for SPARC(X)-UCLA collaboration

  2. Ultra-short FEL pulses • Investigations at atomic electron spatio-temporal scales • Angstroms-nanometers (~Bohr radius) • Femtoseconds (electronic motion, Bohr period) • 100 femtoseconds using standard techniques • Many methods proposed for the fsec frontier • Slotted spoiler; ESASE; two stage chirped pulse • Unsatisfactory (noise pedestal, low flux, etc.) • Still unproven • Use “clean” ultra-short electron beam • Myriad of advantages in FEL and beam physics

  3. A new path: ultra-low charge electron beam • Excellent phase space ( and ||) • Very low emittance • Highly compressible • Ultra-short beam • Very high brightness • Bunch ~ cooperation length; super-radiantsingle spike • Short cooperation length; femtosecond pulse • Clean, ultra-short pulse • Mitigate collective effects dramatically • CSR instability • Undulator beam-pipe wakes

  4. Working backwards: FEL requirements • 1D dimensionless gain parameter • 1D gain length • Cooperation length • Single spike operation

  5. Numerical example: SPARX • Take 2 GeV operation, “standard undulator”, =3 nm • Peak current I=2 kA, • Estimate single spike condition: • Note: with ultra-small Q,  is enhanced • Spike is a bit shorter… • FEL gain better (watch diffraction)

  6. Compression scaling • Beam momentum distribution in , ignoring slice spread • Quadratic term no longer dominant • Include uncorrelated term • Moments:

  7. Compression with chicane • Needed chicane essentially unchanged • Final bunch length/initial • “Thermal” spread from velocity bunching • In low Q limit

  8. Example: SPARX (preliminary) • Compression at 2 GeV before undulator • Need nm • Choose to accelerate 23° forward of crest • Deduce upstream beam of • Must produce from velocity buncher • Check consistency with energy spread • We have • Final (full) energy compression OK • not in LCLS case

  9. Photoinjector scaling • Change beam Q while keeping plasma frequency (n and aspect ratio) same • Dimensions scale • Shorter beam… • Emittances: • At low Q, x,th dominant in Ferrario WP • With low Q vel. bunching (1st attempt)

  10. Low charge working point • Velocity bunching gives • Space charge limit on long. Dynamics • Depends on transverse focusing • Need • Not that short… factor of 10 below present • Work at Q=1 pC (factor of 103) • Emittance > compensated value • Some growth in velocity buncher (?) • Higher brightness beam in the end!

  11. Velocity bunching • Proposed by Serafini, Ferrario; tool for SASE FEL injector, avoids magnetic compression • Inject emittance-compensated beam at 5-7 MeV into vf≤c linac • Effectively compresses at low energy — good for energy spread control • Perform one-quarter of synchrotron oscillation to compress beam • Gentle, low gradient option • Hamiltonian model (forward wave) Longitudinal phase space schematic for velocity bunching from Hamiltonian picture

  12. Beam simulations for original 1 pC case (UCLA PARMELA) Summary

  13. Beam envelope evolution (cm) Very small beam sizes

  14. Emittance evolution Still very small, other optimizations possible

  15. Compression at SPARX • SPARX example, compress at 2 GeV, • Compressor: • Analytical est. of growth in , p: • With I=260 A, and • Two orders of magnitude enhanced

  16. Genesis simulation of SPARX • Standard case • Start-to-end from PARMELA/Elegant • Do not take advantage of lower  by changing  to evade diffraction • Single spike operation

  17. FEL peak power, profile evolution z  Saturation in <30 m Extremely clean pulse No sideband instability

  18. Power profile • 220 MW peak power (/10 from standard) • <1 femtosecond rms pulse! • Narrower than electron beam

  19. Spectral properties • Nearly Fourier transform limited at onset of saturation

  20. Push to shorter pulses at SPARX Q=1 pC case • Study 1 and 10 pC case. Use LANL PARMELA (standardization) • Relax focusing during velocity bunching, low emittance growth • For 1 pC, sz only 4.7 mm after velocity bunching • Use most June 2008 version of SPARX lattice • compression no longer at end, at 1.2 GeV (Final 2.1 GeV) • Much higher currents, • some CSR emittance growth, • Longitudinal tails, higher peak brightness

  21. FEL performance at 1 pC • Single spike with some structure • > 1 GW peak power at saturation (30 m) • 480 attosecond rms pulse s (mm)

  22. Higher Q SPARX case: 10 pC • Put back beam power, X-ray photons • Velocity bunch to 10.3 mm rms (~Q1/3) • Emittance growth

  23. SPARX FEL at 10 pC s (mm) • 10 GW peak FEL power • Saturation at 20 m (v. high brightness) • Quasi-single spike

  24. Extension to LCLS case • 1 pC does not give quasi-single spike operation • Beam too long, need to scale with l/r • Use 0.25 pC (1.5M e-), obtain en=0.033 mm-mrad • Yet higher brightness; saturation expected in 60 m Over 350A peak

  25. LCLS Genesis results Deep saturation achieved Minimum rms pulse: 150 attosec Quasi-single spike, 2 GW

  26. Not all shots single spike z 

  27. Alternative scenario: new undulator for short l operation • Can also use high brightness beam to push to short wavelength • Shorter period undulator

  28. Other injector scenarios X-band simulation • X-band (higher field, >200 MV/,m) • Higher field can yield higher brightness • Scaling requires new structure: e.g.hybrid SW-TW • Lower peak field, ~eliminate RF reflection • Inherent velocity bunching • S-band high power test @UCLA (w/LNF-Univ.Roma) with modular “split” structure

  29. Conclusions; future work • Very promising option • Excellent emittance and gain; can allow shorter  • Marry to “blowout regime” injector; shorter beams • Excellent beam scenario, but… • All measurements change • Low energy similar to electron diffraction scenario • Coherent optical signals at high energy • Clean up noise • Dark current has much more charge • Natural focusing; may use dual deflector/collimator • Tests at SPARC (velocity bunching only) • Beam dynamics of 1st stage compression (1 pC) • Scaled FEL operation: see Ferrario poster • First operation at LCLS at 18 pC shows excellent e • Need to add compression

More Related