Progress of the Multibunch Plasma

Wakefield Experiments at ATF

Themos Kallos
University of Southern California
July 2006ad
 Presentation Outline
 Theoretical Motivation
 Basic Principles of Multiple Bunches
 Simulations of 45MeV eBeam into Plasma

 Experimental Aspects
 CTR Diagnostics for Microbunched eBeam
 Create bunches by selectively blocking eBeam
 Gas-Filled Capillary: The road to 1019cm-3 plasma density

 The Double Bunch Experiment

 Theoretical Model
 Comparison with Experimental Data
Principles of multiple bunches into
a Plasma
Principles of multiple bunches into
a Plasma
Principles of multiple bunches into
a Plasma
Principles of multiple bunches into
a Plasma
Principles of multiple bunches into
a Plasma
Principles of multiple bunches into
a Plasma
Principles of multiple bunches into
a Plasma
Principles of multiple bunches into
a Plasma
Principles of multiple bunches into
a Plasma
Bunched VS Non-Bunched eBeam
σr=75μm, σz=1μm Microbunches

13
x 10 IFEL Microbunched eBeam

3
eBeam Density [cm-3]

-1

3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6

Time [ps]
 Theory & Simulation
Wakefield Evolution @65MeV – Resonant Case
7GeV/m
1 2

Advantages of 1D Code

 1000 times faster than

2D Osiris PIC Code

 Allows fast plasma

3 density scan

 Insensitive to noise
(allows longer runs,
larger beams)
The electron beam density x100 (1), the theoretical
wakefield (2) and the Osiris simulated wakefield (3) after
1mm of propagation in the plasma. Units: 1=300 GeV/m
Predicted Energy Spread
After 15mm in plasma
 Experiment Overview
Electron Beam Microbunches
Ipeak≈100A Ipeak≈600A Capillary Energy
Plasma
σr=75μm 45 MeV IFEL Wiggler Diagnostic

1500μm
Wiggler

np=1019 cm-3
Resonant for λp=10.6μm
Ppeak≈50MW 10.6μm

λ0=10.6μm, 200ps

Laser Beam

 Establish Microbunching (easy)

 Establish 1019 Plasma Density (hard…)
 eBeam Diagnostics
Coherent Transition Radiation

1μm Ti
To plasma To energy
spectrograph

e- e-

Beamline Window

2
d 2E1forward e2 2  sin  
 3  1   2 cos 2  
dkd 4  0   Focusing IR
Lens Detector

 k  c 1
Mirror
 eBeam Diagnostics
CTR Spectrum Harmonics

13
x 10 IFEL Microbunched eBeam

3
eBeam Density [cm-3]

0
FFT
-1

3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6

Time [ps]
 Coherent Transition Radiation (CTR)
Data comparison with Theory
8 Ratio of CTR harmonics vs microbunching
10
Ratio of 1st/2nd
Ratio of 1st/3rd
6
Ratio of CTR harmonics

10 Ratio of 2nd/3rd

4
10

2
10
Experiment
Data Range 0
10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
z of each microbunch [ m]

 All 3 data sets agree around σz=0.7μm

 Creating Microbunches
By dispersing the eBeam Energy in space
125μm
250μm At dispersion plane:

Energy Slit Closes

Energy (x)

Half the charge is

blocked

Time

CTR Interferometry Signal for different Slit openings

Narrow Slit Open Slit

1.1

1
CTR Signal [normalized]

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5
1 microbunch every 30μm
0.4
14.1 14.15 14.2 14.25 14.3 14.35 14.4 14.45 14.5 14.55 14.6 (15μm on CTR graph)
Single Arm Delay [mm]
 The Plasma Source
Past and Present
 Past: Ablative Polypropylene Capillary  Now: H2 gas-filled Capillary
 20kV, 0.7kA Discharge  20kV, 1.8kA Discharge
 2.3*1018cm-3 Max Plasma Density  5.0*1018cm-3 Max Plasma Density

Plasma light during 20kV discharge Comparison of Stark Broadening inside and outside the capillary
20kV Voltage, 1.3kA Current
FWHM of Ha Line [no back] Discharge Current
Inside Outside
1
1.E+19
0.9
Normalized Light Intensity, Discharge Current

0.8

0.7
and Ha Linewidth [au]

Plasma Density [cm^-3]

1.E+18
0.6

0.5

0.4
1.E+17
0.3

0.2

0.1
1.E+16
0 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
-100 100 300 500 700 900
Discharge Delay [ns]
Time after peak of main discharge [ns]
 Density with Laser Interferometry
# of current oscillations dependence
Intereference Pattern, 1.3kA Discharge Trace and Plasma Density
1 cycle = 1.2e18cc

Interference Trace Discharge Current Plasma Density 1e18cc

1.4

Discharge Current and 1e18cc

1.2

Interference Signal [V],

1

Plasma Density
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Time [ns]

 The phase change introduced from the

ne
plasma is   k HeNe L  Np 2
1.2  1018
 Double Bunch Experiment
1D Model Prediction for Wakefield

Wakefield Evolution versus Time (5e16 cm^-3 density)

eBeam Density Wakefield

200
61MeV
59MeV
eBeam Density [1e18 cm^-3] and

150

100
Wakefield [MeV/m]

50

-50

-100

-150

-200
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [ps]
 Double Bunch Experiment
Energy Loss and Gain
Double Bunch Energy Loss Experiment

First Bunch Second Bunch Discharge Current

2
1.5
Energy Loss [MeV]

1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Discharge Delay [μs]

120
Spectrometer Output (arb. units)

Spectrometer Output (arb. units)

120 No
100 discharge
100 With discharge
No With discharge Delay = ~2 s
80
discharge Delay = 1.6 s 80
60
60
40 40
20 20

0 0
56 58 60 62 64 56 58 60 62 64
Electron Energy (MeV) Electron Energy (MeV)
 Double Bunch Experiment
The 2nd Bunch samples the wakefield of the first

Double Bunch In Plasma - 2nd Bunch Data

Charge Ratio 300pC:150pC (1st Bunch:2nd Bunch)

2nd Bunch Loss

Theory (Peak Wakefield)
Theory(Wakefield @Peak of 2nd Bunch

2
1.5
Energy Loss [MeV]

1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
1E+13 1E+14 1E+15 1E+16 1E+17 1E+18
Plasma Density [cm^-3]

 Assume 5*1016cm-3 Plasma Density at 1μs

 Experimental Progress Summary
 10.6μm Microbunching confirmed

 HeNe interferometry as a plasma density diagnostic is

feasible
 Awaiting for a new 5 kA capillary, aiming for 1019cm-3
plasma density

 The wire mesh can seems to be creating microbunches,

but will there be enough charge left?

 Double Bunch experiment shows dependence on plasma

density
Thank you for listening!