1 / 15

Injector Experimental Results John Schmerge, SSRL/SLAC April 24, 2002

This report presents the experimental results of transverse and longitudinal emittance measurements at the Gun Test Facility (GTF). The goals, facility layout, and future improvements are discussed. The report also compares the GTF injector with the LCLS injector and highlights the major differences. The measurement techniques, improvements, and conclusions are included.

Download Presentation

Injector Experimental Results John Schmerge, SSRL/SLAC April 24, 2002

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. Injector Experimental Results John Schmerge, SSRL/SLACApril 24, 2002 • Goals • Gun Test Facility Layout • Transverse Emittance • Longitudinal Emittance • Future Improvements/Conclusions John Schmerge, SLAC

  2. Experimental Goals • Transverse Emittance • en < 1.2 mm-mrad (projected) • Q = 0.2-1 nC • Longitudinal Emittance • Dt < 10 ps • sg /g < 0.1% • Laser • sjitter < 1 ps • Temporal shape – flat-top • Elaser > 100 mJ (UV) John Schmerge, SLAC

  3. GTF Linac and Diagnostics Analyzing Magnet Solenoid Phosphor Screen Phosphor Faraday YAG Screen & OTR Screen Screens & Cup Quadrupole PCRF Faraday Phosphor Screen & Energy Filter Doublet Gun Cups Toroids 3m S-Band SLAC Linac John Schmerge, SLAC

  4. GTF Beamline John Schmerge, SLAC

  5. Major Differences between GTF and LCLS Injector • Laser • Nd:glass instead of Ti:saphire • 20% energy fluctuations • Gun • Single RF power monitor • 10 Hz operation • Beamline • 90 cm gun to linac drift distance instead of 140 cm • Single linac section instead of two • No solenoid around the first linac section John Schmerge, SLAC

  6. Published Thermal Emittance for Cu John Schmerge, SLAC

  7. Emittance Measurement Technique at GTF Quadrupole Scan Technique Measure beam size vs quadrupole current or strength. counts Background subtracted image pixels rms spot size calculation using projection cut off at 5% of maximum John Schmerge, SLAC

  8. Emittance vs Charge Parameters Egun = 110MV/m gun = 40 Rcat = 1mm Bsol» 2.0kG Elinac = 8.3 MV/m John Schmerge, SLAC

  9. Other Laboratories Published Results John Schmerge, SLAC

  10. QE vs Position QE = 3.6 ±0.4 10-5 100 MV/m 40° injection John Schmerge, SLAC

  11. Improvements • Data Acquisition and Analysis • Include space charge (20-25% reduction in reported e) • Use OTR screen instead of YAG screen for improved resolution • Beamline • Optimize gun field ratio and phase (minimum e near 30 degrees) • Optimize gun to linac matching • Eliminate 15 m focal length quadrupole in solenoid • Pulse Shaping • Improved transverse profile to reduce slice e • Laser temporal pulse shaping to reduce projected e John Schmerge, SLAC

  12. Longitudinal Emittance Measurement Technique analagous to quadrupole scan of transverse emittance Spectrometer Booster (vary fbooster) Gun Determine Longitudinal f-Space at Linac Entrance Energy Screen Longitudinal : Measure Energy Spectra vs booster phase Transverse: Measure Beam Size vs quad strength John Schmerge, SLAC

  13. Measurements Minimum Energy Spread Maximum Energy Correlated Energy Spread DETotal = -ERF cos(fRF) Df = 400 keV or 8 % FWHM PARMELA predicts 2% correlated energy spread John Schmerge, SLAC

  14. Path to Low Emittance Measurements at the GTF John Schmerge, SLAC

  15. Conclusions • 1.5 mm projected emittance with 100 A beam measured at GTF with Gaussian temporal pulse shape • Measurements agree with PARMELA simulations • Emittance can be further reduced by: • Improved laser spatial uniformity • Improved solenoid with reduced quadrupole field • Optimize gun field, phase and linac matching • Emittance will be reduced using flat-top temporal laser pulse shape • Including space charge in analysis will reduce the reported emittance • Utilize OTR screens with improved resolution John Schmerge, SLAC

More Related