Download Cryogenic Permanent Magnet Undulators

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Cryogenic Permanent Magnet Undulators
Finn O’Shea
March 27, 2013
HBEB 2013, Puerto Rico
Outline
1)
Motivation for shorter period technology

2)
Prototype undulator has been tested

3)
As usual, it is money
Results are ‘unsuprising’ and that is a good thing!
Improving performance of cryogenic undulators through the
use of rare-earth element poles – the DPU project

Cryogenic compatible magnetic materials lead to improved
performance

Can we do the same with the pole material?
2
Motivation
o Researchers from many branches
of science are using modern light
sources to do a lot of cutting edge
research
o LCLS accepts ¼ of proposals for
beam time
o These machines are big (km) and
expensive ($1/2 billion)
o Linacs are the really expensive part
o NGLS is being built through a
mountain – real estate is getting
more expensive
3
Where do short periods fit in?
 “Moore’s Law” of radiation brightness is doubling every 10 months
since the 1960s – this has come from bigger, more expensive
facilities
 Increased brightness does not lead to increased access unless the
facilities become more common
 The path to cheaper access is to increase the amount of radiation
produced by each electron
 Lots of beam lines on synchrotrons
 Multiple beam lines at FELs: LCLS-II, NGLS, SwissFEL
 Reduce the energy of the electrons required to produce the desired
wavelengths
4
To make shorter periods…
 The magnetic material needs to be very radiation resistant
 In vacuum undulators have higher exposure because of the smaller
gap and no vacuum chamber wall for protection
 Cryogenically cooled magnets show a modest increase in remanent
field and a massive increase in coercivity
 They also show an increase in resistance to radiation induced
demagnetization
 Originally attributed to coercivity increase,
more likely due to increase in heat
capacity decreasing the effects of local heating
 Rad damage is not well understood:
 Radiation damage is reversible with
remagnetization  no structure change
5
Strategy to increase survivability
1)
Use material that has maximum remanent field at room
temperature
 Limitation is ability to assemble the undulator
2)
Cool as much as possible to get the highest possible
magnetic field and largest coercivity/heat capacity
 The clear choice is PrFeB
 No SRT (NdFeB)
 High remanent field (SmCo)
6
Benabderrahmane, NIM A 669, 1 (2011).
Example of performance change
LCLS Normal
LCLS Low Charge/CPMU
 Energy = 13.6 GeV
 Energy = 4.5 GeV
 Charge = 250 pC
 Charge = 250 fC
 Norm Emittance = 0.4 μm
 Norm Emittance = 33 nm
 Saturation Length: 60 m
 Saturation Length: 15 m
 Pulse Energy = 1.5 mJ
 Pulse Energy = 2.8 μJ
 Pulse Length = 100 fs
 Pulse Length = 0.5 fs
 B = 2 x 1033 ph/(s mm2 mrad2
 B = 1.3 x 1036 ph/(s mm2 mrad2
0.1%)
7
0.1%)
PRSTAB 070702 (2010)
CPMU9
Testing of Cryogenic Permanent Magnet Undulator – 9 mm at the Next Linear
Collider Test Accelerator
Cryogenic Permanent Magnet Undulator
– 9 mm period
• 9 mm period length
• 20 period prototype
• Compensated 1st integral
• Working temp down to 11K
• NLCTA experiment run at 43K
9
CPMU - II
 Design process was iterative: use FEM and BIM codes to
determine magnetically safe assembly and operating
conditions as material is characterized.
 Results in a 2D geometry with pieces that are strategically
chamfered to reduce reverse fields
10
Measuring the field
 Field is measured at
cryogenic temps on a
specially constructed
measurement bench at
HZ-Berlin
 Bpeak=1.15 T (K=0.97)
11
Next Linear Collider
Test Accelerator
Facilities at NLCTA made it an
excellent place to test the undulator
using a scaled experiment at optical
frequencies.
• Radiation bandwidth measurement
•Energy modulation measurement
• Confirmation of microbunching
12
Undulator Radiation
Bandwidth
 at NLCTA the bandwidth of
the radiation should be
dominated by the 5%
bandwidth of the single
electron radiation process
13
Laser seeding
 800 nm laser is used to seed
the FEL mechanism
 Laser is shorter than the
electron beam, they are
about the same transverse
width
 Leads to very 3D process
 Energy modulation strength
is function of distance along
beam and radius
 Genesis predicts:
K = 0.97
14
K = 0.94
Observation of microbunching
 Microbunching of electron
beam causes coherent
emission of transition
radiation
Laser off
 CTR signal shows up as near
field structure when laser is
turned on
 Null tests showed that this is
likely forward CTR from OTR3
rather than backward CTR
from OTR4, which is the
screen that is imaged
15
Laser on
Summary of Results
 Bandwidth of the undulator radiation is dominated by the 5%
interference bandwidth – consistent with expectations
 Energy modulation is consistent with expected value from
iFEL interaction
 CTR appears when modulation is turned on – microbunching
is occuring although scattering in OTR3 is spoiling the
measurement
16
Rare-earth poles
Dysprosium poles at RadiaBeam Technologies
Why replace CoFe?
 Vanadium Permendur (49% Fe, 49% Co, 2% V) is an excellent pole
material
 Saturates at low applied field:
μi~104 and Hsat<<0.1 T
 Bsat = 2.35 T
 The reason for replacing CoFe as the pole material of choice is to
get higher saturation induction
 Because we need to cool a CPMU anyway, what gains can be
realized?
18
Rare-earth elements
 Materials such as dysprosium,
gadolinium and holmium
show large sat. ind. at
cryogenic temperatures
 Dy -> 3.8 T (single crystal)
 Single crystals are hard to
grow and polycrystals are not
useful
 Secondary re-crystallization
can be used to develop
“texture”
19
Secondary Re-crystallization
 Rolling then annealing exploits an energy advantage that
results in the growth of the grains in-plane
20
21
Performance of textured Dy
 100 μm thick foils
 CoFe
• Competitive with CoFe if the applied field is
greater than ~0.10 T
• Thinner foils should work even better 
• Non-linear nature and mixing of 1120 and
1010 in different samples could be a problem
22
Short test undulator
 Most poles are CoFe
 One pole pair is replaced with Dy laminated poles
 The field is measured while the undulator is cooled
 BCoFe is compared to BDy
23
Results
~3%
24
Details
 Effect is reproduced in Radia with the magnetization curves
measured from one pole (destructive measurement via VSM)
 Dy Pole position exposed it to larger applied fields than a
typical pole
 working point is above
the Dy > CoFe point
 Shows promise
25
Summary
 Using shorter period undulators can:
 Decrease the electron beam energy required to reach a given
wavelength
 Extend the reach of existing facilities
 This can lead to cost savings and a potential increase in accessibility
 A prototype short period cryogenic undulator has been built and
tested in a successful scaled experiment at optical wavelengths
 Rare-earth poles have the potential to outperform CoFe poles in
undulators that can be cooled to the temperatures where they are
ferromagnetic
 Thank you!
26