The study of structural dynamics of complex macromolecular crystals using electrons requires bunches of sufficient coherence and charge. We present diffraction patterns from graphite, obtained with bunches from an ultracold electron source, based on femtosecond near-threshold photoionization of a laser-cooled atomic gas. By varying the photoionization wavelength, we change the effective source temperature from 300 K to 10 K, resulting in a concomitant change in the width of the diffraction peaks, which is consistent with independently measured source parameters. This constitutes a direct measurement of the beam coherence of this ultracold source and confirms its suitability for protein crystal diffraction.
The study of structural dynamics of complex macromolecular crystals using electrons requires bunches of sufficient coherence and charge. We present diffraction patterns from graphite, obtained with bunches from an ultracold electron source, based on femtosecond near-threshold photoionization of a laser-cooled atomic gas. By varying the photoionization wavelength, we change the effective source temperature from 300 K to 10 K, resulting in a concomitant change in the width of the diffraction peaks, which is consistent with independently measured source parameters. This constitutes a direct measurement of the beam coherence of this ultracold source and confirms its suitability for protein crystal diffraction.
The fast pace at which the field of ultrafast structural dynamics is currently evolving is
largely due to spectacular developments in ultrafast X-ray and electron beams. A particularly interesting development is the ultracold
electron source,
which is based on near-threshold photo-ionization of a laser-cooled and trapped atomic gas. Recently, it was shown that
the ultracold electron
source can be operated at femtosecond timescales while, surprisingly, retaining its
high spatial coherence.Typical ultrafast electron
diffraction (UED) experiments are performed using a planar photocathode
source, characterized
by effective electron temperatures T ≥ 1000 K. These temperatures can, to a
certain degree, be controlled by adjusting the photoemission laser wavelength. Kirchner et
al. have shown that by
focusing the femtosecond photoemission laser to a small spot on a gold cathode and
extracting not more than a single electron per pulse, a root-mean-square (rms)
source size
of σsource = 3 μm can be achieved. In combination
with a rms beam size at the sample of σsample = 77 μm, this
results in transverse coherence lengths of with
being the Dirac's constant,
being the rms transverse momentum, m being the electron mass, and
kB being the Boltzmann's constant. To resolve a diffraction pattern,
L⊥ should be larger than the lattice constant
a of the sample under investigation. A coherence length of
L⊥ = 20 nm is more than sufficient for protein crystal
diffraction (with
typically a = 1–5 nm), as shown in Ref. 14 on an organic salt with a ≈ 1 nm. An even larger
coherence length
can be achievable by extracting single electrons from tip-based sources. For a full, high-quality diffraction pattern of a
complicated macromolecular crystal, 106–107 electrons are required.
Measurements using single-electron pulses are therefore restricted to processes which can be
repeated reproducibly millions of times. This is particularly important when studying
samples susceptible to pump laser damage.
An ultrafast electron
source producing more charge per pulse but with the same beam quality is
therefore highly desirable.The ultracold electron
source has been developed as an alternative candidate for ultrafast
electron
diffraction, providing the required higher beam brightness. The
source was
previously shown to have effective temperatures as low as 10 K, implying a coherence length at least an order of magnitude larger
compared to conventional photocathodes, for similar source sizes and charges.
Alternatively, the ultracold source can be operated with a source size an order of magnitude larger than that of
photocathodes, while achieving the same coherence length. This allows extraction of at least 100
times more charge per pulse. So far, the beam properties of the ultracold and ultrafast
source have
been studied, but the source has not yet been applied for imaging or diffraction.Here, we present diffraction patterns of a mono-crystalline graphite sample generated with
picosecond electron bunches extracted from an ultracold source. We achieve sharp
diffraction spots
by focusing the beam through the sample onto the detector. When focusing the beam to a micron-sized spot on
the sample, diffraction spots expand considerably but remain clearly distinguishable.
The enlarged diffraction spot sizes allow us to directly determine the coherence properties of the beam
at the sample, which we find to be consistent with independently measured source parameters.
EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP
Fig. 1 shows a schematic overview of the set-up, which
is described in more detail in Refs. 16 and 17.
Electrons are created by near-threshold photoionization of a laser-cooled and trapped cloud of
85Rb atoms. Rubidium atoms are first excited from the 5s to the 5p state and
subsequently ionized by a ≈100 fs full-width-at-half-maximum long laser pulse with a tunable
central wavelength λ (Fig. 1(a)). The excitation and ionization laser pulses propagate along perpendicular directions (Fig.
1(b)) and overlap in a well-defined region within
the magneto-optical trap (MOT), resulting in an ionized cloud a few tens of microns in size
in all three directions.
FIG. 1.
Experimental set-up. (a) Magneto-optically trapped atoms are ionized by two perpendicular
laser beams via a two step ionization scheme. Electrons are first excited from the
5s to the 5p state, and subsequently ionized. (b) The
electron bunch is accelerated towards a detector. A set of magnetic lenses controls the
beam divergence and size, allowing us to focus the beam on the sample (b) or on the
detector (c). The beam passes through a graphite sample and undergoes diffraction. The 0th
order beam is blocked.
Typically, a few hundred electrons are produced per shot. The laser-cooled gas cloud is
trapped inside an accelerator structure (Fig. 1(b))
with local electric field strength F. The combination of
λ and F determines the kinetic energy
distribution of the released electrons, and thus the effective source temperature
T. The thermal energy
k is on the order of the excess energy of the electrons,
which is given by with
c being the speed of light, λ0 = 479.06 nm, the zero-field
ionization
threshold wavelength, E = 27.2 eV being the Hartree energy, and
F0 = 5.14 × 1011 V/m being the atomic unit of field
strength. Electrons are extracted from the cloud by the electric field and are accelerated
to a final energy U = eFdacc, with
e being the elementary charge, and
dacc = 12.7 mm.At 1.245 m from the source, the beam is sent through a 13–20 nm thick monocrystallinegraphite
sample on a 200 mesh copper TEM grid.
At a distance of h = 0.285 m from the sample, electrons arrive at a
microchannel plate with phosphor screen, imaged by a CCD camera. Two magnetic lenses (at
0.53 m and 1.12 m) provide control over the spot size and the angular spread of the beam on
the sample. To obtain sharp diffraction patterns, we focus the beam on the detector, resulting in a
converging beam with a rms size of σsample ∼ 200 μm at the
sample, schematically shown in Fig. 1(c).
Alternatively, we can focus the beam to a micron-sized beam on the sample, as shown in Fig.
1(b), allowing us to analyze the quality of
diffraction spots
more conveniently.
SOURCE
PARAMETERS
According to Eq. (1), the coherence length of the beam is
dependent on the source size σsource and the effective source temperature
T. The source size is determined by means of an ion space charge scan, in which
the spot size of an ion bunch is measured at the detector as a function of bunch charge. The spot size is partly determined by the repulsive effects
of space charge. Ions are used instead of electrons primarily because the former is
negligibly heated during the ionization process, so that angular spread due to temperature can be
ignored. We scan through the bunch charge by changing the intensity of the ionization laser pulse using
neutral density (ND) filters. Fig. 2(a) shows the
result of a space charge scan. The resulting spot sizes (green triangles and blue squares)
are compared to particle tracking simulations using the General Particle Tracer (GPT)
code (dotted lines), which calculates
charged particle trajectories through known electric and magnetic fields. In the simulations, both the initial
source size
in two directions, σsource, {x, y}, and a
proportionality factor between laser intensity and bunch charge are varied. The best overlap
between experimental and simulation data in the least-squares sense, as shown in the inset,
is obtained for initial source size, σsource,
x(y) = 32 ± 2(54 ± 2) μm. Throughout this
paper, the dimensions x and y refer to the transverse
minor and major axes, respectively, of the charged particle beam which is generally
elliptically shaped.
FIG. 2.
Source parameters. (a) Results of an ion space charge scan to determine
σsource. The spot size at the detector, in two directions (green triangles
and blue squares) is shown as function of bunch charge. The inset shows the normalized
residual between experimental and simulation data for various simulated source sizes. From
this, we determine the source size is
σsource, × σsource, = (32 ± 2) × (54 ± 2)
μm2. The dotted lines indicate the simulated final spot
sizes as a function of bunch charge for the best fit. (b) Effective transverse source
temperature as function of ionization laser wavelength, determined using waist scans for
an electric field strength of F = 850 kV/m. For large wavelengths,
temperatures reach T ≈ 10 K. The uncertainty of the data points is partly
due to a systematic error in fitting a waist scan.
Using the waist scan method, the thermal emittance
of the source
can be determined, which, combined with
σsource, yields the effective source temperature
T. In a waist scan, the current of a magnetic solenoid lens halfway the
beam line is altered, changing the beam spot size on the detector. From the dependence of
the spot size on the focusing strength, the source emittance (and thus temperature) is determined.
We have established that for F = 0.85 MV/m the source temperature
T can be varied from 300 K to 10 K by tuning
λ from 477 nm to 500 nm, displayed in Fig. 2(b). Consequently, the emittance of the beam is varied
from
ϵth,() = 7.2
(12.2) nm rad to 1.3 (2.2) nm rad.
RESULTS
To record a single diffraction pattern, 103 shots are acquired at a 100 Hz
repetition rate. Each shot contains a few hundred electrons. We have checked that for such
bunch charges space charge effects are negligible, which are confirmed by charged particle
tracking simulations.Fig. 3(a) shows an electron diffraction pattern
produced with the beam focused onto the detector (Fig. 1(c)),
using only the first magnetic lens. For illustrative purposes, the diffraction pattern shown here is
an average over 10 images. The pattern was recorded with beam parameters
U = 13.2 keV and λ = 485 nm.
FIG. 3.
Diffraction images obtained with the ultracold source (a) 13.2 keV electrons are focused
on the detector using the first magnetic lens. Five 1st order spots (1) and one 2nd order
spot (2) are visible. The intraspot distance is 14.3 mm. The beam block (3) and detector
edge (4) are outlined. (b) shows the line profile along the minor axis of one of the spots
and its Gaussian fit, from which spot size is determined. (c) and (e) show diffraction
images obtained with a 10.8 keV beam focused on the sample, for source temperatures of
T = 250 K (c) and T = 10 K (e). The improved beam
quality due to lower temperatures can be seen by comparing close-up views of a spot and
the respective line profiles (d) and (f) of their minor axes.
Five of the six 1st order spots (1) of the expected hexagonal pattern are visible, centered
around the beam block (3). The sixth 1st order spot is blocked by the stem of the beam
block. In the bottom left, a 2nd order spot (2) can be seen; the others fall outside the
detection area
(4). The 1st order beamlets arrive at the detector at a distance of s = 14.3 mm from
the central (0th order) beam. The 1st order diffraction angle is ,
in agreement with the theoretical value from Bragg's law, θB = 49.9 mrad.The rms spot size on the detector (magnified and profiled in Fig. 3(b)) is measured to be
σd,() = 180
(210) μm. The size σd of the diffraction spot is actually
expected to be as low as 30 μm, on the basis of measured source temperature and
size, but is limited by the detector resolution and beam instabilities.To unambiguously demonstrate the full quality of the beam, without being limited by
detector
resolution or beam instability, measurements have been done with the beam focused to
micron-sized spots on the sample (Fig. 1(b)). In this
configuration, diffraction spots expand to a much larger size, but remain clearly
distinguishable. For an electron energy U = 10.8 keV, diffraction images have been
taken for ionization
laser wavelengths λ = 500–477 nm
(T ≈ 10–300 K). Complementary to our experimental data, we simulate the
beam properties using GPT, from which we find a spot size on the sample
σsample = 3.3 μm for 10 K and
σsample = 8.7 μm for 250 K.Figs. 3(c) and 3(e) show two examples of
diffraction images
from this data set, at ionization laser wavelengths of 478 and 498 nm, respectively,
corresponding to measured source temperatures of T = 250 and 10 K. The thin gray
lines are guides to show the hexagonal diffraction pattern. The spots inside the blue squares have
been magnified and profiled in (d) (T = 250 K) and (f)
(T = 10 K). Two-dimensional Gaussian fits are used to determine the size of
the spots:
σd,() = 1.6
(1.8) mm for T = 250 K and
σd,() = 0.88
(1.1) mm for T = 10 K. The diffraction spots clearly become sharper when lowering the
source
temperature.The diffraction
spot sizes σd are plotted as function of source temperature in Fig.
4(a), where the two sets represent the rms sizes of
the minor (green triangles) and major (blue squares) axes of the elliptical spots. Each
individual data point is the average over spot sizes obtained from 10 diffraction images. The results
are in general agreement with the values from GPT simulations (black line ± shaded area).
This shows that the spot sizes of the diffraction patterns behave as expected on the basis of
source
properties. The scatter in the data points is attributed to pointing instabilities in the
femtosecond
ionization laser,
which cause the position and size of the ionization volume, thus the final spot size, to vary.
FIG. 4.
(a) Final diffraction spot size σd as a function of effective source
temperatures. The two data sets (green triangles and blue squares) are diffraction spot
sizes determined using a 2-dimensional Gaussian fit of the elliptical diffraction spots.
The gray bands are simulated spot sizes. (b) Coherence length, calculated from
σd measurements, using Eq. (3).
The gray bands are coherence lengths determined using source parameters and the GPT
simulated beam size at the sample (Eq. (1)).
It is instructive to discuss the results shown in Fig. 4(a) in terms of coherence length. Writing the coherence length in terms of angular spread σθ of
the beam, ,
and the kinetic energy U in terms of the diffraction angle from Bragg's
law, ,
with a1 = 0.2131 nm graphite's first order lattice constant, we find
L⊥ = a1θ/2πσθ. Since
σsample ≪ σd, σd is dominated by the angular spread of
the beam. This allows us to write L⊥ as implying
that L⊥ can be determined directly from diffraction data, independent of
the source
parameters.Fig. 4(b) shows the coherence lengths as a function
of source
temperature, determined using Eq. (3) and the
data shown in Fig. 4(a). As expected, the measured
coherence length
increases when lowering the source temperature. The gray bands in Fig. 4(b) are coherence lengths calculated using Eq. (1) with the measured source parameters and σsample from GPT
simulations. From the similarity between the experimental and simulated coherence lengths, we conclude
that the values of L⊥ calculated using Eq. (3) are consistent with Eq. (1). This shows that the quality of the
diffraction
pattern agrees with emittance of the beam as determined from the source properties.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, we have shown that the ultracold electron source is capable of producing sharp diffraction patterns of
mono-crystalline graphite. When focusing the beam down to a micron-sized spot on the
sample, we find that the enlarged diffraction spots remain distinguishable, which is a consequence of the
low source
temperature. In this situation, we can accurately analyze the diffraction spots, from which the
beam's coherence
length L⊥ at the sample is directly determined, and is found to
be consistent with independently measured source characteristics. The data from Fig. 4(b) and Eq. (1) together imply that with a sample size of 100 μm, a
coherence length
of at least 15 nm is reachable, with a few 100 electrons per pulse.Actually, much more charge, up to a few times 104 electrons, can be extracted
from the same ionization volume, given the local atomic density. However, this will
significantly reduce the beam's coherence length through space-charge effects. Developing methods to manage, and to a certain degree
undo, space-charge effects then
becomes necessary to preserve the beam brightness. That would represent the next step
towards single-shot ultrafast electron diffraction for the study of structural dynamics of complex
molecular crystals.
Authors: Henry N Chapman; Petra Fromme; Anton Barty; Thomas A White; Richard A Kirian; Andrew Aquila; Mark S Hunter; Joachim Schulz; Daniel P DePonte; Uwe Weierstall; R Bruce Doak; Filipe R N C Maia; Andrew V Martin; Ilme Schlichting; Lukas Lomb; Nicola Coppola; Robert L Shoeman; Sascha W Epp; Robert Hartmann; Daniel Rolles; Artem Rudenko; Lutz Foucar; Nils Kimmel; Georg Weidenspointner; Peter Holl; Mengning Liang; Miriam Barthelmess; Carl Caleman; Sébastien Boutet; Michael J Bogan; Jacek Krzywinski; Christoph Bostedt; Saša Bajt; Lars Gumprecht; Benedikt Rudek; Benjamin Erk; Carlo Schmidt; André Hömke; Christian Reich; Daniel Pietschner; Lothar Strüder; Günter Hauser; Hubert Gorke; Joachim Ullrich; Sven Herrmann; Gerhard Schaller; Florian Schopper; Heike Soltau; Kai-Uwe Kühnel; Marc Messerschmidt; John D Bozek; Stefan P Hau-Riege; Matthias Frank; Christina Y Hampton; Raymond G Sierra; Dmitri Starodub; Garth J Williams; Janos Hajdu; Nicusor Timneanu; M Marvin Seibert; Jakob Andreasson; Andrea Rocker; Olof Jönsson; Martin Svenda; Stephan Stern; Karol Nass; Robert Andritschke; Claus-Dieter Schröter; Faton Krasniqi; Mario Bott; Kevin E Schmidt; Xiaoyu Wang; Ingo Grotjohann; James M Holton; Thomas R M Barends; Richard Neutze; Stefano Marchesini; Raimund Fromme; Sebastian Schorb; Daniela Rupp; Marcus Adolph; Tais Gorkhover; Inger Andersson; Helmut Hirsemann; Guillaume Potdevin; Heinz Graafsma; Björn Nilsson; John C H Spence Journal: Nature Date: 2011-02-03 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Rafael Abela; Paul Beaud; Jeroen A van Bokhoven; Majed Chergui; Thomas Feurer; Johannes Haase; Gerhard Ingold; Steven L Johnson; Gregor Knopp; Henrik Lemke; Chris J Milne; Bill Pedrini; Peter Radi; Gebhard Schertler; Jörg Standfuss; Urs Staub; Luc Patthey Journal: Struct Dyn Date: 2018-01-08 Impact factor: 2.920