| Literature DB >> 30076346 |
S Di Mitri1,2, A Perucchi3, N Adhlakha3, P Di Pietro3, S Nicastro4, E Roussel3,5, S Spampinati3, M Veronese3, E Allaria3, L Badano3, I Cudin3, G De Ninno3, B Diviacco3, G Gaio3, D Gauthier3,6, L Giannessi3,7, S Lupi8,9, G Penco3, F Piccirilli9, P Rebernik3, C Spezzani3, M Trovò3.
Abstract
We demonstrate that emission of coherent transition radiation by a ∼1 GeV energy-electron beam passing through an Al foil is enhanced in intensity and extended in frequency spectral range, by the energy correlation established along the beam by coherent synchrotron radiation wakefield, in the presence of a proper electron optics in the beam delivery system. Analytical and numerical models, based on experimental electron beam parameters collected at the FERMI free electron laser (FEL), predict transition radiation with two intensity peaks at ∼0.3 THz and ∼1.5 THz, and extending up to 8.5 THz with intensity above 20 dB w.r.t. the main peak. Up to 80-µJ pulse energy integrated over the full bandwidth is expected at the source, and in agreement with experimental pulse energy measurements. By virtue of its implementation in an FEL beam dump line, this work promises dissemination of user-oriented multi-THz beamlines parasitic and self-synchronized to EUV and x-ray FELs.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30076346 PMCID: PMC6076281 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-30125-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Top: sketch, not to scale, of the FERMI FEL1 beam delivery system. Only the first magnetic bunch length compressor (BC1) is routinely active for lasing. Start-to-end simulations of the electron beam dynamics were carried out, for diverse linac settings, from the Gun (G) through the linac sections (L0–L4) until the Main Beam Dump (MBD), where the Al target for CTR emission is installed. Bottom: 3-D rendering of the MBD, from the FEL post-undulator region to the dump. The active dipole magnets, named “Dipole 1” and “Dipole 2” in the figure, are long 1.12 m and 2.44 m, with bending angles of 15.7 deg and 31.4 deg respectively. Three quadrupoles between “Dipole 1” and “Dipole 2” tune the momentum compaction (R56) of the beam line. CTR is emitted at the 1 µm-thick Al target. Four quadrupoles installed upstream of the first dipole control the beam envelope along the line without affecting the R56 value. The transverse RMS beam sizes at the CTR target are kept smaller than 0.5 mm. Steering magnets and beam position monitors (not shown) allow control of beam trajectory. While electrons are bent and eventually dumped, FEL propagates straight to the downstream experimental hall (EH).
Figure 2Left: simulated and measured electron beam longitudinal phase space at the end of the FERMI linac, at the beam energy of 1308 MeV (see also Table 1); bunch head is at negative time coordinates. The comparison reveals very similar mean energy, energy spread, pulse duration, linear and higher order energy chirp components. The current profile is approximately flat at the level of ∼600 A (the measured phase space is upper-shifted w.r.t. the simulation for visualization). Right: betatron functions (βx,y) and horizontal energy-dispersion function (ηx) from the exit of the FERMI undulator to the Al target (see Fig. 1). These functions were calculated starting from Twiss parameters measured in front of the undulator, and for the actual quadrupoles setting. They correspond to R56 = 19 mm. Measured (simulated) RMS beam sizes at the screen in front of the target were: 0.37 (0.33) ± 0.03 mm horizontal, 0.09 (0.08) ± 0.03 mm vertical.
Electron beam parameters of the THz experimental sessions. The asterisc (*) means “at the linac end”.
| Parameter | Value | Units | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bunch Charge | 0.7 | nC | |
| Initial Bunch Duration | 2.8 | ps | |
| Mean Energy* | 1308 | 871 | MeV |
| Hor. Norm. Emittance* | 2.1 | 1.8 | µm |
| Vert. Norm. Emittance* | 1.7 | 1.5 | µm |
| Compression Factor* | 8 | 8, 11 | |
| Bunch Duration* | 0.35 | 0.35, 0.25 | ps |
| Peak Current* | 560 | 560, 750 | A |
| Transverse Sizes at the Al target | <0.5 (x), <0.2 (y) | mm | |
| R56 of the dump line | 5, 19 | 37 | mm |
Figure 3(a) Simulated electron bunch current profiles at the Al target for two optics settings of the dump line (OS1-red and OS2-green). For comparison, a case without CSR in the dump line dipole magnets is shown (violet), see also Table 2. (b) Calculated CTR spectra. A threshold of 20 dB from the main intensity peak is indicated by the gray area. (c) Solid lines: CTR pulse energy integrated over the frequency range 0.01–10 THz and calculated from the above current profiles. Dots with error bars: measured pulse energy, see also Table 2. The pulse energy values refer to emission at the Al foil, i.e., actual measurements are reduced by ∼30% from the shown values because of the transmission efficiency of the Diamond window installed between the foil and the pyroelectric detector. Electron beam and linac parameters are in Table 1, for the beam energy E = 1308 MeV at the linac end.
Figure 4(a) Simulated electron bunch current profiles at the Al target for two compression factors in the linac (CF1-yellow and CF2-brown) and fixed R56 in the dump line. For comparison, a case without CSR in the dump line dipole magnets is shown (cyan), see also Table 2. (b) Calculated CTR spectra. A threshold of 20 dB from the main intensity peak is indicated by the gray area. (c) Solid lines: CTR pulse energy integrated over the frequency range 0.01–10 THz and calculated from the above current profiles. Dots with error bars: measured pulse energy, see also Table 2. The pulse energy values refer to emission at the Al foil, i.e., actual measurements are reduced by ∼30% from the shown values because of the transmission efficiency of the Diamond window installed between the foil and the pyroelectric detector. Electron beam and linac parameters are in Table 1, for the beam energy E = 871 MeV at the linac end.
Momentum compaction of the beam dump line (R56), bunch duration at its entrance (σt,i), measured and simulated pulse energies in the 0.01–10 THz range. Pulse energies simulated without CSR are in italics. The error on the measured energy value is dominated by the signal RMS fluctuation.
| Configuration | R56 [mm] | σt,i [ps] | E [µJ] simul. | E [µJ] meas. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS1 | 5 | 0.35 | 51 | 50 ± 4 |
| OS2 | 19 | 0.35 | 80 | 77 ± 7 |
|
|
|
|
| |
| CF1 | 37 | 0.35 | 34 | 33 ± 3 |
| CF2 | 37 | 0.25 | 82 | 76 ± 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 5Left: TeraFERMI pyroelectric detector signal (red line is the moving average signal) vs. time. Right: statistical distribution of counts. The RMS fluctuation over 35 minutes is 7%. Typical fluctuations during FEL operation are smaller than 10%.