1. Progress of Shintake Monitor (ATF2 IP-BSM) ATF2 weekly meeting 2008/9/3 Takashi Yamanaka The University of Tokyo

2. Beam Size Measurement Performance Expectation Although we have been developed Shintake Monitor in the laboratory, we need the measurement in the actual setup to estimate the various errors from the laser and optics I have done the performance expectation measurement regarding the optics in this summer. Main measurements are the following. 1.Laser interference fringe visibility at the IP 2.Laser position stability at the IP 3.Laser phase stability at the IP They can be the main error sources of beam size measurement, so we need to evaluate the amount of errors of them.

3. Contents Introduction of the measurement Result of the measurements 1. Laser interference fringe visibility at the IP 2.Laser position stability at the IP 3.Laser phase stability at the IP Conclusion Schedule from now to Beam Operation

4. Interference Fringe Measurement R=50% splitter R=100% mirror R=100% prism f=250mm convex lens φ1μm pinhole photodiode automatic stage Scan laser fringe by a photodiode  1  m pinhole is attached in front of the photodiode Laser power is also monitored by another photodiode so the laser profile measurement is not affected by the laser power jitter. delay line for phase stabilization Image Inverting Dove prism

5. Actual Optics

6. Measurement Results – upper path only – lower path only – both path (interference)

7. Position Stability We use the pulsed Nd:YAG laser and it has large angular jitter. This causes the position jitter at the IP. I measured the position jitter at the IP by using the PSD (Position Sensitive Detector). We also intend to monitor the laser position at other places and estimate the IP position from these monitored results.

8. Position Stability Measurement Setup PSD1 To the Vertical Table From the Laser Table PSD2 IP Laser Optical Table (Top View) Vertical Optical Table (Front View) PSD3 Pulsed Laser

9. Actual Optics Laser TableVertical Table

10. Measurement Results psd3x (vertical direction) : 3.2  m (RMS) psd3y(electron beam axis) : 1.9  m (RMS) Position Stability at the IP (in 10,000 pulses = 1,000 sec measurement)

11. Remarks on the Position Jitter The position jitter only affects the laser power at the IP Designed laser beam size at the IP is 20  m (  = 10  m), so 3.2  m and 1.9  m position jitters correspond to only 5 % and 2 % power reduction respectively. We also check the correlation of the position jitters between at the IP and other places

12. Position Correlation between IP and PSD1between IP and PSD2

13. Phase Stability Position of peaks and valleys of interference fringe is the laser phase, so the phase stability directly affects the electron beam size measurement We need to know the phase stability at the IP but it is impossible to monitor this at the IP. We designed the phase monitor to estimate the phase jitter at the IP

14. Principle of Phase Monitor 50% Beam Splitter Piezo Stage Microscope Lens Linear Image Sensor Measure fringe profile Fourier Transform Calculate the phase of fringe at the peak frequency feedback to Piezo Stage to stabilize the phase Magnify the interference fringe

15. Actual Optics （ in 174 degree crossing angle mode ） Piezo Stage 50% Beam Splitter Microsope Lens Linear Image Sensor IP

16. 174 degree mode the smallest beam size measurement mode fringe pitch at the IP is 266 nm We set two phase monitor in this mode Feedback to the Pieszo stage is determined by the first monitor By using the second monitor we can check the result of the stabilization

17. Measurement Results （ Not Stabilized ） ― ch1 ― ch2 Long time measurement (6000 sec=100 min) There are large drift and small jitter It seems to be some correlation between ch1 and ch2 but it is small Short time measurement (60 sec: assumed beam size measurement time) Large drift which can be seen in the long time is ignored in short span. There are also small jitter pulse by pulse and second order vibration. pulse repetition frequency is 10 Hz

18. Phase Stability (Not Stabilized) ch1: 1 min Phase RMS = 383.7 ± 49.7 mrad ch2: 1 min Phase RMS = 408.6 ± 54.5 mrad Results of phase stability in 1 minute measurement 400 mrad phase correspond to 16.9 nm in 174 degree crossing mode (266 nm fringe pitch) This amount of phase jitter can be problem in the smallest beam size measurement (37 nm).

19. Measurement Result （ Stabilized ） ― ch1 ― ch2 Long time plot (6000 sec=100 min ） ch1 is stabilized ch1 drift was canceled but ch2 was not This result indicates that ch1 and ch2 has only weak correlation Short time plot (60 sec) Long time drift can be ignored. Small jitter pulse by pulse is remained in both channels but second order vibration is canceled in ch1. However, this vibration is remained in ch2

20. Phase Stability (Stabilized) ch1 1 min Phase RMS : 168.8 ± 9.2 mrad ch2 1 min Phase RMS : 325.0 ± 50.4 mrad Phase jitter of stabilized channel is well reduced Not stabilized channel gets better a little. This is the phase stability we have achieved for now. 325 mrad correspond to 13.8 nm (266 nm fringe pitch)

21. Conclusion Laser interference fringe visibility can be treated as 100 % Position jitter at the IP was small for now, and we intend to estimate it by using not IP position data Phase jitter is estimated to be a litter bit large to measure the small beam size. We may need some improvement on the detectors or devices.

22. Schedule