1 / 19

Laser Session Issues

Laser Session Issues. List of proposed strategies remains the same Front-end Power amplifier OPCPA/(Ti:Sa) Ti:Sa OPCPA Mixed glass. Entity to build a turn key solution? Two-stages project implementation: Several PW + 2014-2nd stage up to 10PW?. Bottlenecks and/or engineering challenges.

oprah
Download Presentation

Laser Session Issues

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. Laser Session Issues List of proposed strategies remains the same Front-endPower amplifier OPCPA/(Ti:Sa) Ti:Sa OPCPA Mixed glass Entity to build a turn key solution? Two-stages project implementation: Several PW + 2014-2nd stage up to 10PW?

  2. Bottlenecks and/or engineering challenges “System independent” issues • Coherent combination • Beam transportation

  3. Identified Bottlenecks for OPCPA/Ti:Sa strategy Bottlenecks a) HDT broadband large size gratings b) Pump lasers: general design, SHG crystals, Homogenizers c) Large size Ti:Sa crystals d) HDT broadband HR coating on large size optics Engineering challenges e) OPCPA front-end: Synchronization & Pumps f) Contrast: ASE + pre-pulses g) Back-reflection isolation h) Strehl ratio & adaptive optics OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy

  4. Identified Bottlenecks for OPCPA/Mixed glass strategy Bottlenecks a) Tiled compressor b) Rep. rate & slab cooling Engineering challenges c) Contrast: ASE + pre-pulses d) Strehl ratio & adaptive optics Mixed-glass strategy

  5. a) Bottleneck -HDT broadband large size gratings • Present technology limit: shorter than 20 fs • Time-line development: • design: exist at ILE, Fresnel Inst., St-Etienne • demonstrator: not yet – feasibility: 6 months • Potential providers: PGL, JY, LLNL? • Differential budget: 2-3 M€ (more expensive with back-up solution) • Back-up sol.: largest existing gold gratings OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy

  6. b) Bottleneck - Pump lasers • Present technology limit: below 200J • Time-line development: • severaldesigns: Thales, Quantel, Continuum, LLNL,… • demonstrator: available in less than 1 year (fall 2011) • Potential providers: Thales, Quantel, Continuum, LLNL,… • Estimated budget: 8M€ for 800J @527nm • Back-up sol. for SHG: DKDP, Y:COB (if LBO not available) OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy

  7. c) Bottleneck – Large size Ti:Sa crystals • Present technology limit: 15 cm clear aperture making possible up to 5-7 PW@15 fs • Time-line development: 1 year • design: Crystal System Inc • demonstrator: transverse lasing tests end of April 2011 (LOA-LULI) • Potentialproviders: Crystal System, RSA Le Rubis • Budget: 500k€ for R&D and delivery of 2 x 20cm clear aperture crystals - 150 k€ per add. crystals • Back-up sol.: no OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy

  8. d) Bottleneck - HDT broadband HR coating on large size optics, including deformable mirrors • Present technology limit: only metallic coatings after compression (0.15 J/cm²) • Time-line development: • design: proposed by all companies • Deformablemirror demonstrator: already available and in 1 year (after funding) for 20 cm in diameter • Potential providers: CVI, Okamoto, SAGEM, SESO, Cilas,… + Imagine Optics for DM • Potential Budget: ~ 1.3 M€ for R&D includingdelivery of one deformablemirror (200mm in diameter) • Back-up sol.: metallic coatings OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy

  9. e) Engineering challenge – OPCPA front-end: Synchronization & Pumps • Present technology limit: not available • Time-line development: • design: exists at ILE • demonstrator: not yet – available in 6 months • Provider: Apollon • Budget: • Back-up sol.: standard ns-OPCPA pump & electronic synchronization (available from Thales, Continuum, Quantel) OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy

  10. f) Engineering challenge - Contrast: ASE + pre-pulses • Present technology limit: 12 orders of magnitude demonstrated • Time-line development: • severalexistingdesigns: OPCPA, XPW- saturable absorber, plasma mirrors • demonstrator: XPW-saturable absorber measured@10 mJ • Potential providers: Amplitude, Apollon, Thales, etc… • Budget:depends on the choosentechnology • Back-up sol.: plasma mirror if necessary (for solid-state targets interaction) OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy

  11. g) Engineering challenge - Back-reflection isolation • Present technology limit:small size Pockels-cells and Faraday isolators • Time-line development: • design: PEPC and transverse electrodes Pockels-cells • demonstrator:alreadyavailable • Potential providers: • Budget:depending on requirements • Back-up sol.: Comments: SBS-SRS for long pulses; not an issue for fs pulses. No switch existing at that power but could be solved by small angle misalignment OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy

  12. a) Bottleneck - Tiled compressor • Present technology limit: up to 2 kJ / 2 ps at Rochester: good mechanical & thermal stability • Time-line development: • design: 1740 lines/mm by National Energetics • demonstrator: available at 100 fs within 6 months at small scale • Potentialprovider: National Energetics • Estimated budget: few (>5) M€ • Back-up sol.: no Mixed-glass strategy

  13. b) Bottleneck: Rep. rate & slab cooling • Present technology limit: 3 shots/hour • Time-line development: • design: exists at National Energetics • demonstrator: 0.1 Hz in September 2011 • Provider: National Energetics • Budget: • Back-up sol.: 3 shots/hour by using deformable mirror Mixed-glass strategy

  14. c) Engineering challenge - Contrast: ASE + pre-pulses • Present technology limit: 10-10 at Trident • Time-line development: • several existing designs: OPCPA, XPW- saturable absorber, plasma mirrors • demonstrator: ? • Provider: • Budget: • Back-up sol.: plasma mirror Mixed-glass strategy

  15. Shared engineering challenge - Beam transportation • Present technology limit: • Time-line development: • design: • demonstrator: • Potential provider: expertise at NIF, LMJ, Rutherford, etc… • Budget: • Back-up sol.:

  16. Shared bottleneck - Coherent beam combining • Present technology limit: ps level + 100’ fs for fiber laser tech. • Time-line development: several years • design: no • demonstrator: no • Potential provider: not identified at that stage • Budget: ? • Back-up sol.: temporal synchronization

  17. Laser session issues • List of proposed strategies remains the same Front-endPower amplifier OPCPA/(Ti:Sa) Ti:Sa OPCPA Mixed glass Q: Entity to build a turn key solution? Q: Two-stages project implementation: Several PW + 2014-2nd stage up to 10PW? Q: The two strategies in parallel?

  18. Laser session issues Q: Entity to build a turn key solution? Q: Two-stages project implementation: several PW + 2014-2nd stage up to 10PW? Q: The two strategies in parallel? Due to tight timeline, is an immediate contractual engagement with any entity (industrial?) realistic to build a system up to the present tech limit (several PW) ? Risks have to be shared between ELI-NP and the entity. 2 to 3 PW seems to be the upper limit from industrial side. ELI-NP laser team should join the development team. Another place should be identified for development before ELI-NP building availability. No industrial partner is ready today to assume the risk of delivering turn key 10PW A consortium (involving industrial companies to be defined) could be part of the solution. Single stage approach looks possible but the project could be staged in 2 steps, the first one being dedicated to demonstrated technology This two strategies in parallel development would be more costly but possible?

  19. Laser session issues / other comments - LLNL can provide only tech not existing elsewhere. - Dual development could be considered if coherent combining is switched into temporal synchronization. - Rep. rate and intensity on target are linked together (0.1 Hz for 10^23W/cm^2, and 1 Hz or more for 10^24 W/cm^2 assuming real-time feedback corrections) - Improvements on contrast, strehl ratio and so on will continue after the 2015deadline!

More Related