IPBSM Operation 11th ATF2 Project Meeting Jan. 14, 2011 SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Menlo Park, California Y. Yamaguchi, M.Oroku, Jacqueline Yan.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Stephen Benson U.S. Particle Accelerator School January 28, 2011 Establishing Lasing in the FEL* * This work was supported by U.S. DOE Contract No. DE-AC05-84-ER40150,
Advertisements

VCE Physics Unit 1. Unit 1: Areas of Study Wave-like Properties of Light (10 weeks) Nuclear and Radioactivity Physics ( 2 weeks) Energy from the Nucleus.
Compton gamma stability - Status of the drift source investigation - Nobuhiro Terunuma, KEK March 17 th, 2014, LAPP, FJPPL-FKPPL ATF2 Workshop 1.
IP-BSM Status and Plan 11th ATF2 Project Meeting Jan. 13, 2011 SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Menlo Park, California Jacqueline Yan, M. Oroku, Y.
ATF2 Interaction Point Beam Size Monitor (Shintake Monitor) Status T. Yamanaka, M. Oroku, Y. Yamaguchi, S. Komamiya ( Univ. of Tokyo ), T. Suehara, Y.
OPTICS. I. IMAGES A. Definition- An image is formed where light rays originating from the same point on an object intersect on a surface or appear to.
1 Laser Beam Coherence Purpose: To determine the frequency separation between the axial modes of a He-Ne Laser All sources of light, including lasers,
RESEARCH ON BEAM SIZE MONITORS S. Csorna, Vanderbilt U. LCCOM2, June 30, ’02, Santa Cruz Proposal for Non-Intercepting Beam Size Diagnosis Using Diffraction.
2 February 2005Ken Moffeit Spin Rotation scheme for two IRs Ken Moffeit SLAC.
Status of IPBSM Improvement N. Terunuma, KEK 2012/July/13 ATF2 Weekly Meeting.
-brief report of October runs and some inputs for the Nov/Dec planning – Nobuhiro Terunuma, KEK, ATF ATF session on LCWS13, Tokyo Univ., Nov. 13, 2013.
ATF2 Progress Report For CLIC Workshop Kiyoshi KUBO.
ATF2 Status and Plan K. Kubo ATF2, Final Focus Test for LC Achievement of 37 nm beam size (Goal 1) – Demonstration of a compact final focus.
High Resolution Cavity BPM for ILC final focal system (IP-BPM) ILC2007/LCWS 2007 BDS, 2007/6/1 The University of Tokyo, KEK, Tohoku Gakuin University,
Advanced Optics Lab at San Jose State University Ramen Bahuguna Department of Physics.
Ray Optics: Reflection and Refraction Rays Representation of the path that light follows Represent beams of light that are composed of millions.
B. Spatial coherancy & source size Spetial coherancy is related to the size of the source. Source size governs spatial coherancy and maller source sizes.
Refraction is the change of direction of a light wave caused by a change in speed as the wave crosses a boundary between materials.
IPBSM status and plan ATF project meeting M.Oroku.
Tube Laser Alignment System Georg Gassner. 2 Delta Undulator Project Tube Laser Alignment System SLAC, December 11 th 2012 Period 32 mm, Length 3.2m Gap.
IPBSM - Stability of the laser system - Nobuhiro Terunuma Feb. 12 th 2014, KEK, 17 th ATF2 project meeting.
Taikan SUEHARA, 3 rd ATF2 project KEK, 2006/12/18 Status of Shintake-monitor Optics (focused on phase stabilization) Taikan SUEHARA The University.
IP-BSM Improvement Work N. Terunuma 2012/6/26 ATF2 Project Meeting.
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES BIW ’ 06 Lepton Beam Emittance Instrumentation Igor Pinayev National Synchrotron Light Source BNL, Upton, NY.
Austin Roorda, Ph.D. University of Houston College of Optometry
FFS Issues in the 2011 autumn continuous operation Toshiyuki OKUGI (KEK) 1/13/2011 The 11 th ATF2 project meeting SLAC, USA.
Vibration Measurement on the Shintake Monitor and Final Doublet Takashi Yamanaka (Univ. of Tokyo) Benoît Bolzon (LAPP) ATF2 weekly meeting 26 November,
Newport Optics Junior Lab 2 Brady Longenbaugh Jamie Hegarty Will Keller Matt Meizlish Melanie Carter.
Continuous Run in May K.Kubo. Final Focus Test Line IP; ~40 nm beam ATF Linac (1.3 GeV) ATF Damping Ring (140 m) Extraction Line Photo-cathode.
ATF2 Technical Review Beam Size Measurement using IPBSM Performance Evaluation Apr KEK, Japan ATFII Review Jacqueline Yan, M.Oroku, S. Komamiya.
Compton Experiment at ATF LCWS10 28-March-2010 T. Takahashi (Hiroshima) / T. Omori (KEK) for collaborators.
Transverse beam size measurement High energy micron electron beam non-invasive diagnostics based on diffraction radiation G.Naumenko*, A.Potylitsyn, L.Sukhikh.
Commissioning Status of Shintake Monitor (IP-BSM) T. Yamanaka, M. Oroku, Y. Yamaguchi, Y. Kamiya, S. Komamiya (Univ. of Tokyo), T. Okugi, N. Terunuma,
Taikan Suehara, 2008/03/05 Shintake monitor in ATF2: status, performance and prospects Taikan Suehara (The Univ. of Tokyo) M.
Nonlinear Optics in Plasmas. What is relativistic self-guiding? Ponderomotive self-channeling resulting from expulsion of electrons on axis Relativistic.
Development of TOP counter for Super B factory K. Inami (Nagoya university) 2007/10/ th International Workshop on Ring Imaging Cherenkov Counters.
Haifeng Huang and Kevin K. Lehmann
1/10 Tatsuya KUME Mechanical Engineering Center, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK) ATF2-IN2P3-KEK kick-off meeting (Oct. 10, 2006) Phase.
IPBSM response to non-Gaussian beam K. KUBO.
Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline.
European Linear Collider Workshop ECFA LC2013 BDS+MDI IPBSM Beam Size Measurement & Performance Evaluation May 29, 2013 DESY ECFA LC 2013 Jacqueline Yan,
Plan in summer shutdown Magnet -SF1FF -Swap of QEA magnet - Multipole field of Final Doublet IP-BSM improvement.
ATF2 background and beam halo study D. Wang(IHEP), S. Bai(IHEP), P. bambade(LAL) February 7, 2013.
Performance Evaluation of Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) Americas Workshop on Linear Colliders 2014 May 12-16, 2014 Fermilab, IL, USA 12013/07/20 Jacqueline.
T. Suehara, H. Yoda, T. Sanuki, Univ. of Tokyo, T. Kume, Y. Honda, T. Tauchi, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK) ATF2-IN2P3-KEK kick-off.
IP instrumentation configuration for Autumn 2010 ATF2 runs Toshiyuki OKUGI, KEK 2010 / 7/ 1 10 th ATF2 project meeting.
1/13 Tatsuya KUME Mechanical Engineering Center, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK) ATF2-IN2P3-KEK kick-off meeting (Oct. 9, 2006) Mount.
Taikan SUEHARA, IN2P3-KEK collaboration meeting on ATF2, Annecy, 2007/10/15 Shintake Monitor: Installation and Commissioning Schedule Taikan SUEHARA, The.
ATF2 Tuning Summary Nov & Dec 2010 Glen White, SLAC 11 th ATF2 Project Meeting, SLAC Jan
ATF2 beam operation status Toshiyuki OKUGI, KEK The 9 th TB&SGC meeting KEK, 3-gokan Seminar Hall 2009/ 12/ 16.
Taikan SUEHARA, ATF2 meeting, KEK, 2006/11/22 Status of fringe stabilization of Shintake-monitor Taikan SUEHARA The University of Tokyo.
Summary of Tuning, Corrections, and Commissioning ( Short summary of ATF2 meeting at SLAC in March 2007 ) and Hardware Issues for beam Tuning Toshiyuki.
Taikan SUEHARA et al., LCWS2007 & DESY, 2007/06/01 R&D Status of ATF2 IP Beam Size Monitor (Shintake Monitor) Taikan SUEHARA, H.Yoda, M.Oroku,
IP diagnostics Toshiyuki Okugi 2008 / 6 /19 ATF2 Software mini-workshop LAL, Orsay.
The VIRGO detection system
ST7 Interferometer LIGO-G Z1 The ST7 Interferometer Andreas Kuhnert Robert Spero Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology.
Wakefield effect in ATF2 Kiyoshi Kubo
Design for a New Optical Table of the Shintake Monitor Takashi Yamanaka The University of Tokyo ATF2 weekly meeting 2007/9/26.
Taikan SUEHARA, Joint Meeting of PRPPC in Honolulu, Hawaii, 2006/10/30 Laser Fringe Stabilization of 35nm IP Beam Size Monitor (Shintake monitor) for ATF2/ILC.
Progress of Shintake Monitor (ATF2 IP-BSM) ATF2 weekly meeting 2008/9/3 Takashi Yamanaka The University of Tokyo.
Local control sensors for iKAGRA payloads and perspective (Optical lever) Kazuhiro Agatsuma 2013/Dec./5 ELiTES meeting at Tokyo1.
ATF2 Status N.Terunuma, KEK
Tutorial On Fiducialization Of Accelerator Magnets And Undulators
Shintake Monitor Nanometer Beam Size Measurement and Beam Tuning Technology and Instrumentation in Particle Physics 2011 Chicago, June 11 Jacqueline.
Refraction and Lenses.
For Discussion Possible Beam Dynamics Issues in ILC downstream of Damping Ring LCWS2015 K. Kubo.
ATF2 Recent Wakefield (Beam size Intensity dependence) Studies
Imperial laser system and analysis
Experience with photoinjector at ATF
Presentation transcript:

IPBSM Operation 11th ATF2 Project Meeting Jan. 14, 2011 SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Menlo Park, California Y. Yamaguchi, M.Oroku, Jacqueline Yan T. Yamanaka, Y. Kamiya, T. Suehara, S. Komamiya ( The University of Tokyo ) T. Okugi, T. Terunuma, T. Tauchi, S. Araki, J. Urakawa (KEK)

layout 1.Laser wire scan 2.z-scan 3.reducer scan 4.laser phase stability 5.Gamma detector performance 6.run dependence of background 7.Methods on mode switching: 2-8°  30°  174°

1. laser wire mode purpose 2-8, 30 deg mode Mirror 1 Mirror 2 Mirror 6 Scan with mirror 1,2 174 deg mode scan with mirror 5, 6 Actuator shift vs. laser shift at IP mode C [  m/  m] Mirror 5 signal detection Laser path alignment beam size measurement Laser size measurement

2. z-scan z0z0

z-scan result 5 ~ 10 min per scan Fitting function Re-conducted scan in Dec run with same crossing angle, for confirmation Only need to scan once if laser position is stable

Enter convergence lens: divergence angle change 3. Reducer Scan Reducer parallelconverging Adjust laser divergence angle Laser size at IP change reproducibility?? Depend on laser condition Reproducible during cont. run, but need re-scanning after mode switching because focusing lens differs between modes

4. Phase stability of interference fringe Jitter < 330 mrad for 1 minute measurement – confirmed during contrast measurement (May, 2010)

Contrast measurement Measured contrast at 2.29 deg Large interference fringe pitch, small beam size M nearly 1 Contrast ~ offset from ideal modulation

Phase jitter estimation Power imbalance laser path misalignment spatial/ temporal coherence interference fringe tilt Beam position jitter interference fringe phase jitter Bias factors affecting contrast measurement Determine upper limit assuming phase jitter to be the only bias factor modulation depth degradation due to phase jitter Combine with measured contrast to derive upper limit of σ phase

6. Gamma detector signal ・ BG separability 10 BG: 100 GeV Signal fluctuation during Dec runSimulation under different BG setting Higher BG tolerable if signal > 50 GeV Signal is too small !

BG levels : May and Dec OpticsSignal [GeV]BG [GeV] Beam Current [10 9 e - ] May, 2010 Beta x 10 optics 15015~ 4 Dec, 2010 nominal15* ~ 3 * After problem of unfocused laser

7. Laser crossing angle control ° 30° 8° 2° Electron beam continuous fringe pitch  : crossing angle

Laser crossing angle control Rotation Stage Rotating stage Switch between 2-8, 30, 174 deg modes Prism stage Continuous change from 2 to 8 deg

Mode switching + re-alignment After changing modes: transverse plane alignment by laser wire scan switching from 2-8 deg to 30 deg – Also need longitudinal direction scan  z - scan – transverse alignment alone cannot make ideal laser path – laser will not hit screen monitor – 30 deg path pass close to lens edge  better to adjust inside shield remote control possible if align during weekend shut-down

summary Must re-align from beginning after mode switching If beam position is stable: Stable IP-BSM operation expected after alignment for each mode Transverse alignment needed if beam position changes S/N tolerable if laser is focused at IP

backup

4. Phase stability of Interference fringe Phase monitor not in use – Phase jitter at IP partially cancelled by lens effects – unseen with phase monitor – Phase monitor measured 790 mrad jitter much over-evaluated Jitter < 330 mrad confirmed during 2010 May`s contrast measurement

Lens cancel phase jitter 18 1.Plane wave gather at focal point after entering lens  optical path length to focal point is equal from any point on wave plane 2.Extract path1 and path 2 from plane wave  assume path 2 is jittering (in position) compared to path 1  no phase difference since optical length is same for both paths Path length difference due to laser position changes before half mirrors are same for both paths  do not contribute to phase jitter However path length difference between half mirror and lens does contribute

Contrast measurement Interference fringe at IP can only be measured with beam (1)Laser power too strong, cannot use CCD (2)Fringe felt by beam (rest frame) is different from lab frame Biggest fringe pitch 2 deg + much smaller beam size Ideal M |cosθ| = Measured result is less due to modulation degradation factors The measured M is fringe contrast felt by beam 2010: measured deg: 380 nm (actually smaller ; there is error for 8 deg also) Measure contrast at 2.29 deg Ideal: M > Actual:

Phase monitor Cut intensity  expand with lens ( must be smaller than pixel size d)  form laser interference on 1D CMOS image sensor (downstream from IP)  Fourier transf. image simultaneous with beam size measurement Correct beam size result with measured phase jitter?? Phase jitter contribute to relative laser – beam position jitter and signal fluctuation

Phase monitor over-evaluation 1 min measurement: 790 mrad (400 mrad with old laser)  73% degradation However modulation degradation factor (from contrast meas.) ~ 98% Only 200 (330) mrad even if all degradation only come from phase jitter Cancellation effect of lens 2 paths from same plane wave entering lens Gather at single focal point  no phase difference No lens: Assume jitter before entering half mirror (dotted line) Path 2 has larger phase than solid line (no jitter) Angle jitter is cancelled in same way as position jitter

Phase monitor: Fourier transf. Cut noise of all frequencies xj: jth pixel coordinate image sensor signal: Fourier transformed: spectrum peak sharply at k pm phase centering technique for stable phase around peak

Phase monitor: Fourier transf. image sensor measurement fourier transformed signal calculated phase α

Reducer Expander  20 m transport  reducer Distance between pair of converge and convex lenses Control expansion/reduction/diverging angle After reducer Enter Focusing lenses f = 250 mm for 2-8, 174 ° f = 300 mm for 30° σ laser = λf/πσ 0 σ 0 should be 3.5 μs if transported correctly  σ laser = 6 μm for 2-8, 174 (measured for 2 deg)  σ laser = 7.2μm for 30 deg However too small will cause unstable interference fringe So design size at 10 μm