Preliminary Results from Titan Divergence Measurements L. D. Van Woerkom Department of Physics The Ohio State University FSC Special Meeting LLNL 4-6 August 2010
Collaborators
Funding Office of Fusion Energy Science (OFES) –Advanced Concept Exploration Program Fusion Science Center (FSC) This work performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344 FSC
Outline Defining electron beam divergence Titan Experiments –August 2009 –May 2010 –July 2010 Conclusions
Rear view buried layer K imaging CCD Laser K fluor Bragg crystal K (10 m res.) Cone angle 40 o Min diameter 75 m Initial e - beam size ~75 m>>~10 m laser spot (in agreement with transverse view penetration) Beam spreads with 40° full angle J/5 ps microns R. Stephens et al, PRE (2004)
Kα crystal (south) Ka detector Titan experiment layout
B01 series,15 Al/25 Cu/25 Al/25 Al/1mm CH From top right to bottom left: B02-1, no background subtraction; B02-2, couldn’t tell where signal started and background end; B02-3, no background subtraction; B02-4, no background subtraction
Buried Cones -- New 15° half angle C Cu Al As deep as we can image. 200 um? Targets: Electrical Discharge Machine (EDM) start w/ solid uniform Al foil, EDM cone holes, glue C get lost 2009 targets varied depths 2010 targets const. depths Surrounding Al eliminates interface fields Carbon provides get lost layer
First Results Aug 2009
Kα spot size and Kα yield for buried cones May 2010, Mingsheng Wei
July 2010 Titan results
Summary of KB Microscope Results July 2010 H Friesen. July 28, 2010
Everything Aug 2009 Stephens 2004 May 2010 – 30 m tip May 2010 – 60 m tip (full) Jul 2010 – KB
Source Size Use Cu K-alpha imager looking at front Measure spot size for a variety of conditions From Jan 2008
Our main target was Al/Cu/Al 10 µm Al 25 µm Cu 1000 µm Al Irradiated side
Titan Kα spot diameter as a function of Pulselength 104 J 18 J 98 J
Titan Kα spot diameter as a function of Laser 0.7 ps
Titan Kα spot diameter as a function of Pre-pulse
Titan Kα spot diameter as a function of daily shot #
Conclusions Alignment very difficult Lots of scatter due to misalignment Good alignment shows no real difference from flats Full angle ~ degrees Good News? –Effects of cone structure not dominant –Can use flats for source studies