STI Memorandum
TO: Wayne Kimura
COPIES TO: Distribution
FROM: Dave Quimby
SUBJECT: Configuration of Second-Stage IFEL Wiggler
DATE: 5 April 2000
As Wayne forecast in his email of 3 April 2000 [1],
the IFEL simulation model has been
modified to simulate a second permanent-magnet wiggler IFEL stage. The objectives
are to determine the expected second-stage performance and to examine whether
tapering the wiggler would be useful. The nominal parameters assumed for simulating
this second wiggler are listed in Table 1.
Laser Beam Radius (w) 1 mm
Laser Wavelength
10.6 mm
Wiggler Length (effective) 26.4 cm
Wiggler Period
33 mm
Wiggler B-Field
configure as needed
E-Beam Energy
45.6 MeV (g = 90.3)
The assumed e-beam phase space distribution at the entrance to the second wiggler is based on an earlier simulation completed by Wayne for the current nominal conditions of the STELLA experiment. The beam is assumed to have an energy modulation of ±0.5% and to be optimally pre-bunched, neglecting space charge.
Various possibilities for linear tapering the wiggler were examined. As discussed by Wayne [1], up to 2% energy taper could be used. The best settings for adjusting the relative phase and energy of the electron micro-bunches were determined. Approximately optimal settings are listed in Table 2.
Relative Bunch Energy (Dg/gr) -1.5% 0.0%
Figure 1 shows the calculated energy gain of the micro-bunches as a function of laser power. It is found that the untapered wiggler can actually produce larger acceleration than the tapered wiggler. Evidently this is because the wiggler is so short and the available laser power is sufficiently limited that tapering is not particularly useful.
Figure 1.
Figure 2 shows the calculated phase space distributions for the untapered case. Note that the second wiggler is to be configured such that the electron micro-bunch enters below resonance and is swept upward in phase space. In the electron energy spectrum the accelerated micro-bunch is superposed upon a very broad background, but should be readily detectable above the background provided that the pre-bunching is reasonably efficient.
At the nominal laser power of 400 MW the bucket full-height
for the untapered wiggler is about 7%. However, the wiggler is so short that
there is less than 1/3 of a synchrotron period within
the wiggler length. Thus it is not possible to accelerate the electrons by
the full bucket height. Furthermore, since the untapered wiggler is not saturated
(there is <½ synchrotron period), there is no real benefit to be obtained
by tapering.
Figure 2. Calculated phase space distributions
at wiggler entrance and exit for nominal simulation parameters and untapered
wiggler.
|
|
|
Thus we recommend using a uniform, untapered wiggler for the second stage. Recommended parameters are listed in Table 3.
Resonant gamma
90.3 91.7 (1.5% larger)
Wiggler parameter, K
2.91 2.97
Effective field
0.945T 0.964T
Peak field
0.986T 1.006T (est.)
Magnetic gap
8.14 mm 7.93 mm (est.)
We have also examined the sensitivity to the values used to setting the relative phase and energy of the electron micro-bunches at the entrance to the second-stage wiggler. Results are shown in Figure 3. The nominal recommended operating point is not near any “cliffs.” The proper relative energy should be set by offsetting the resonant energy of the second wiggler from that of the first as indicated in Table 3 and by matching the e-beam energy to resonate with the first wiggler. The proper phasing in the second stage should be obtainable simply by optimizing the observed acceleration of the micro-bunches.
Figure
3. Calculated sensitivity to phase and energy of injecting micro-bunches
into second stage IFEL.
|
|
|
[1]
W. Kimura, “Second Permanent-Magnet IFEL,” email dated 4/3/00.