374

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. ED-@

NO.

6, JUNE 1971

Design Considerations for the High-Power Multicavity Klystron

Abstract-A confined-flow large-signal formulation of the klystron interaction equations is presented and applied to the analysis of the multicavity klystron amplifier. The effects of cavity voltage, cavityphase,driftlength, and beam parameters are studied. The two- and three-cavity amplifiers are studied in detail, and several numerical examples of four-cavity klystrons are also given. A significant second-harmonic component of velocity modulation is shown to improve the dc to RF conversion efficiency. Two methods of obtaining this modulation are discussed. The large-signal theory presented here has been used to design a five-cavity klystron which is 50 percent efficient and has a controllable power transfer curve. Theoretical and experimental power transfer curves are presented for several 1 1/4-MW klystrons;thecalculatedoutputpower is between 4 and 10 percent greater than the experimental values.

2 ) The bunching does not change appreciably over a n electron wavelength, permitting a steady-state phase formulation to be used. 3) T h e space-charge fields are calculated by a Lorentz transformation of the static fields. 4) The gaps are considered thin and gridded. The central problem is to integrate the axial force equationandthusdeterminethetrajectories of each electron. The axial force equation is

INTRODUCTION
THOUGH the nonlinear space-charge behavior in theklystronhas beenstudiedpreviously [1][3], little attention has been given to providing design information to achieve high-gain,high-efficiency amplifiers. I n this report the confined-flow interaction equations are formulated in a manner to make it convenient to analyze any particular multicavity kylstron. The numerical results are presented in graphical form, and as such should be useful to the designer anduser of high-powered klystrons. The concept of a merit figure, as introduced by Mihran [4], is used as an indicationof the maximum dc to R F conversion efficiency for the multicavity klystron. By properadjustment of thecavityparametersand drift lengths, a high degree of bunching can be achieved with a minimum energy spread in the beam. The electrondynamics for these high-efficiency cases are examined in detail.
hfATHEMATICAL F O R M U L A T I O N

where
17 =

I e Ilmo

and E , is due to the axial space-charge fields. T h e normalized working equations are the force equation

and the velocity-phase relation

84 = dy

+ ffuy

2%

(4)

I n (3), Fl(+--d) is the Greens function for the axial space-charge field, which is
Fl(d - 4)
where b is the beam radius, a is the drift tube radius, = w / ( u o p o ) is the radial propagation constant in the drift tunnel, and the U Z S are the solutions of
JO(ML1)

A confined-flow disk model of the electron stream is used in this analysis. T h a t is, the electron beam is simulatedbyafinitenumber of chargedisks,and a Lagrangiananalysis is used to follow themotion of these disks through the various gaps and drift spaces which comprise the klystron. The major assumptions of this analysis are the following. 1) T h e electron motion is parallel to the z axis.
Manuscript received April 20, 1970; revised October 8, 1970. This work was performed under the auspices of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, The author is with Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, University of California, Los ilamos, N. Mex.

0.

(6)

If z and v, are the axial coordinate and velocity, the corresponding normalized variables [ 3 ] are
ffw
y=-2

2% and
-2Ja

= uo(1

(YZl,).

T A L L E R I C O : DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR In addition, the fined :

MULTICAVITY KLYSTRON

375

following quantities have beende-

u o , the dc beam velocity u p= d G o the , radian plasma frequency a = MV,,,/ Vo, the modulation coefficient
PO,

0,

M,

the dc space-charge density the permittivity of free space the gap coupling coefficient [ 5 1.

ber of charge groups is used to simulate the continuous electron flow. Eachchargegroupcarriestwoindices, which have the following meaning: i denotes the axial plane of the interaction region (i= 0 , 1, 2 , . . . ) ; j denotes theentrancephaseof theelectron ( j = l , 2 , . . ,m). T h e differenceequationsareobtainedbyretaining only the first two terms in the Taylor series expansion of the working equations. Equations (3) and (4) then become, in difference form,

T h e electronphase is measuredwithrespectto a hypothetical wave which travels at the dc beam velocity; thus

cp
Fourier amplitudes The needed calculate figure. merit These amplitudes the to are found to be

WZ

= -

- ut.

uo

(7)

and
+d+~,j

harmonic of currents are the

= +ipi

. + 1'AYuu<,j + auUyj,j

(14) become sums Ay is the

1 I, I
Zn

dun2

+ bn2

(8)

In the discrete notation, the integrals and @ o f = 27r/m. integration The increment

where

distance between adjacent y planes, and m is the number of electrons per R F cycle used to simulate the beam.

a,
and

n-

b, = 1
n-

so2= -so2"
podzo = pdz,

cos ncpdcpd

(94

SpeciJication of In@& Quantities T h e choice of m and Ay determines the accuracy and length of the calculation. Too small an integration increment will use excessive computer time and can lead to large roundoff errors, while too large an incrementis detrimental to the solution accuracy since the working equations are correct to first order in Ay. The largestAy which can safely be used is given by Rowe [3] as

sin ncpd40'.

(9b)

Note that the integrals in (3) and (9) are taken over the initial electron phase, not the current phase. The continuity equation, which in one dimension is
(10)

For the reduction factors corresponding to the designs has been used for this change in integration coordinates, studied in this paper, (15) calls for 600 integration steps The phase of the nth harmonic current is then perreducedplasmawavelength.Thereducedspace0, = arctan an/b,. (1 11 charge wavelength in the normalized variable is At each gap, the energy of the jth electron changes by an amount' Apj where
=

PO Po
=

1) sin

(cpj

@o

- e,)

(12)

where R is the confined-flow, plasma-frequency reductionfactor[6]whichaccountsforthefringing fields which terminate on the drift-tube walls and is given by
2KO(Y4 1 - 2 l l ( y b ) K l ( y b )- --I12(yb)] Io(r4
112

[l - (uo/c)2]--1/2

and

a0is

the phase of the cavity admittance,

(17)

Difference Formulation Thirty-two electrons were mostfor used of the calThe continuum model equations must be reduced to culations in this report, although 16 electrons were used a set of difference equations in order to obtain a numeri- for preliminary work where there was a large parameter cal solution on a digital computer. The problem then space to be explored. Sixty-four electrons per cycle are can besolved by forward integration. A discrete num- sometimes used to check the other solutions; however, the computation time for the space-charge calculations is proportional to the square of the number of particles. This sign convention is widely used in the literature and corresponds to positive electrons. quantities The which must specified for be caleach

376

IEEE TRANSAGTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, JLTYE

1971

culation are therefore m, A y , w,/w, uo/c, a , y a , and b/a. I n addition, if a multicavity klystron is being analyzed, one must specify the drift length, a , and Qo for each cavity.
~ \ ~ C M E R I C A RESULTS L

1.2

I
/

,/-/

/
/

/
/

The electron phase formalism greatly facilitates the solution of the equations since the steady-state solution is found directly. However, these relations are not valid in regions where the electron trajectories change rapidly within an electronwavelength (Xe=2nuo/w) andthus cannot be used tocalculateelectrontrajectoriesin a output gap. Mihran has proposed the merit figure

/
/

O Y 0
which closely approximates the efficiency in a klystron. Here Emin is the kinetic energy of the slowest electron at the y plane being considered, and E,,, is the energy uo.This merit which corresponds to the dc beam velocity figureshows t h a t good bunching(i.e., a high fundamental harmonic content of the beam current) can only yield high conversion efficiency when the energy spread in the stream is small. Mihran presents arguments on thereasonableness of (18), but the finaljustification must rest on the agreement between experiment and calculated results. Equation(18) is used to estimate the conversion efficiency in this work, butin a nonrelativistic analysis a simpler relation may be used:

.I

.2

.3

,4

.5

.6

.7

LO

Fig. 1. Upper curves: maximum merit figure and fundamental harmonic current versus a: for the two cavity klystron. Lower curves: the normalizeddistance a t whichthesemaximaareachieved. (ra=0.7633, wp/w=0.38198, k e = 0 . 5 1 2 , b/a=0.7.)

reaches a maximum at one-quarter of a reduced spacecharge wavelength from the input gap and the maximum magnitude agrees well with the small-signal prediction :

For larger values of a the fundamental current is less than the small-signal prediction. It can, however, exceed the ballistictheorymaximum [ l ] . Anotherprediction of the ballistic theory is that any large a will yield the same conversion efficiency, although the merit figure shows t h a t t h eefficiency is strongly dependent on Numerical calculations to determine the merit figure a and reaches a maximum a t a = 0.35. for the two-, three-, and four-cavity klystrons have I t is important to note that the working equations been performed in the present investigation. The largest [(13) and (14) 3 do not contain the plasma frequency merit figures invariably occurred with a substantial R F reductionfactor,butsincetheGreensfunctionacvoltage on the first cavity; hence, one or more low-level counts for the finite radial geometry, the fundamental cavities would have to precede the large-signal power its maxiharmonic current (for small signals) reaches extraction sections considered here. The linear spacemum at the proper distance. charge wave theory may be used to design the smallThree-Cavity Results signal portion of the amplifiers. Unless specified otherwise, 32 electrons per R F cycle Thethree-cavityklystron is specifiedby thebeam and an integration increment given by (15) were used variables w,/w, u o / c , y a , and the following parameters: in the numerical calculations. 011 the input cavity normalized voltage, 012 the center cavity normalized voltage, Two-Cavity Results QZ the phase angle of the admittance of the second The two-cavity klystron can beeasilyanalyzedby cavity, and the linear space-charge wave theory [ S I , provided that L l thelength of thefirstdriftlengthinreduced the input signal is small enough. Thus, two-cavity calplasma wavelengths. culations provide a good check on the R F space-charge I n Figs. 2-4 meritfigurecontoursareshownfora forces and the solution method. Kumerical results for a family of three-cavity amplifiers for ai's of 0.05, 0.1, and series of calculations in which a1 was varied are shown in Fig. 1 . 2 For small values of a the fundamental current 0.2, respectively. The merit figure is plotted as a function of the relative bunching voltage 0 1 2 and the phase lag - 4 % of the second cavity. The beam parameters in 2 The notation Li means that the distance is measured in units nonnormalized variables are of Z/h,.

T A L L E R I C O : DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR MULTICAVITY KLYSTRON

377

.s

.2+

.I

' 0

Fig. 2. Merit figure contours on the a2-G2 plane for the three-cavity klystron. (a1=0.05, L1=0.1255.)

.
4 5 0

m-.-ll-

.2

. 4 J

.a

.I

.I5

.2

.25

. 4

.8

1 . 2

1.6

2.0

2.4

LI

- @ 2 , RADIANS

Fig. 5 . Merit figure versus L1 for the three-cavity klystron 1 as the parameter. (as=0.4, On= -1.4.) with a

' 0

3 4 1.2 1 . 6 2.0 2.4

.0

.os

I
m-.-.-a-,2

.I

.IS

.20

25

.30

- a2,
Fig. 3.

LI

RADIANS

Fig. 6 . Normalized saturation length versus L1 for the three-cavity 1 as the parameter. (as= 0.4, @Z = - 1.4.) klystron with a

Merit figure contours on the aa-@2 plane for the three-cavity klystron. (a1=0.1, L1=0.1255.)

2a = 2 g in
w = 2n X 8 0 5 X lo6 rad/s Io=32 A V , = 87 000 V on the anode, and LI-= ~ 10.5 in (0.1255 reduced plasma. wavelengths).

'It

OC
0

.4

.0

1.2

1.6

2.0

24

--IP2,R-

Fig. 4.

Merit figure contours three-cavity klystron.

(a1 =0.2,

on the

L1=0.1255.)

plane for the

The beam variables in normalized units are shown in the caption of Fig. 1. The maximum merit figure can be seen to increase from 0.54 to over 0.60 as a 1 is made larger, illustrating the gain-efficiency compromise. The maximum merit figure for all al's is a t a 2 =0.35, as in the two-cavity case; however, the phase becomes more criticalasthelargermeritfigurecasesareachieved. This is in agreement with previous knowledge that the penultimatecavitymustbehigh-Qandtunedabove the drive frequency for maximum efficiency. Fig. 5 shows the effect of the first drift length on merit figure for the three-cavity klystron, while Fig. 6 shows thecorrespondingseconddriftlengths a t which the maximum merit figure is achieved. I n these studies az=0.4 and @ 2 = -1.4. The largest merit figures again

IEEE TRANSACTIONS
FIRST DRIFT SPACE SECOND DRIFT SPACE

ON ELECTRON DEVICES, JUNE

1971

............
0

.......

o/

'".& I.

4 ELECTRON PHASE

(4

....
a --

0.2

el,

z/x, =0.198

IT

2 t

a --

20

z/Aq

in
..I18
0.15

Fig. 7 . Velocity-phasediagramsforthethree-cavityklystron at various locations in the drift spaces. (a1=0.2, Ll =0.2, az=0.4, a p z = - 1.4.)

0.1

0.05

occur for large (XI: the surprising feature of Fig. 5 is t h a t the merit figure increases steadily with L I . This occurs 0 0 2 4 6 8 since the long drift length increases the harmonic curELECTRON PHASE rent and reduces the velocity spread on the beam as i t (b) enters the second cavity. One would expect that Fig. 8. (a) Electron phase versus normalized distanceforthe first Ll=O.25 would be too long an input drift length for a drift space of the klystron of Fig. 7. (b) Electron phase versus high-efficiency klystron. The fact that the radial motion normalized distance for the second drift space of the klystron of Fig. 7. has beenignored may well accountforthegenerally increasing merit figure as L1 is made larger. The general trend shown in Fig. 5 is true; however, the author does not trust these results for L1>0.2 due to the confined- electrons in front of the bunch ( + > A ) and decelerating flow electronic model.3 The experimental klystron to be those immediately behind the bunch center. This causes a second harmonic to be added to the velocity distribudescribed below used L I =0.16 and the results were in agreement with the computed predictions. Fig. 6 indi- tion as shown in the third diagram. The last diagram second gap. T h e cates that a normalized drift length Lz = 0.1 to 0.125 is shows the situation just prior to the corresponding Applegate diagram (with the dc compooptimum for the high a 1 cases. The velocity-phase diagrams for all of the caseswhich nent of velocityremoved) is shown in Fig. 8(a). The fourfigures in the secondcolumn of Fig. 7 show the yieldedahighmeritfigurewerefoundtobesimilar. development of the electron bunch in the second drift Fig. 7 shows the velocity-phase diagrams for a typical space. The first figure is the velocity modulation imhigh merit figure case. The left column of figures are mediately after the second gap. The second harmonic the velocity-phase diagrams a t various drift distances component of the velocity modulation reduces the total within the first drift tube. The first two diagramsshow velocity spread of the bunch in the region of phase from the initial modulation and the modulation a t z/X, 2.7 to 3.8 rad. The next two diagrams are taken for =0.0762.Large-signalnonlineareffectsappear in the further distances along the second drift tube; while the third frame (z/X,=O.1564); here the electrons near the bunch center (+ = T ) are all traveling near the dc beam last diagram is the velocity phase plot drawn near the saturation plane. The modified Applegate diagram for velocity. The space-charge forces are accelerating the the second drift space is shown in Fig. 8(b). Theseresultsemphasizethenecessity of having a 3 Note added in proof. Recent three-dimensional calculations by large voltage in the pre-penultimate cavity as well as the author indicate that for finite magnetic focusingfields the curves the penultimate. For high efficiency the bunch must be of Fig. 5 all reach a maximum for LI=O.2.

T A L L E R I C O : DESIGN

CONSIDERATIONS FOR MULTICAVITY KLYSTRON

.4--

379

shaped by at least two large-signal (a 2 0.1) cavities to maximize the bunching while maintaining low a velocity spread.

Four-Cavity Results The task of finding an optimum configuration with .I .. four large-signal cavities is formidable. Using the merit figure, there are still seven variables (al, L1, az, @2, L2, 0 . a 3 , and a3)which must beexamined. The beam var0 .4 .a 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 iables are all held at the same values as outlinedin the @2 two-cavity section above. A subroutine was written for Fig. 9. Merit figure contours on the a % - % plane for a four-cavity the large-signalcodewhichwouldautomaticallystep , % = -1.4.) klystron. (al=O.l,L1=0.1255, L ~ = 0 . 1 2 7ns=0.4, any one of the parameters of the second or third cavity to seek a maximum along a one dimensional path. T h e number of combinations is still so large that one cannot 2.0.hope to systematically study the entire parameter space. SATURATION Fig. 9 shows merit figure contours on the a 2 -@2 plane for a family of four-cavity klystrons. The merit figure 1.5. reaches 0.67 for a2 in the range of 0.15 to 0.2 and with ,,-----I-I / @ z = - 1.4 rad. This is a substantial improvement of / 18 percent over the corresponding three-cavity calcula1.0 / I tion. Thus it is advantageous to have three large-signal cavities before the output section. I t is likewise well to tune the penultimate and the pre-penultimate cavities .5.higher than the drive frequency to achieve the proper phaseangle.Thesecavitiesmusthaveahigh Q to realize theproperimpedanceattheoptimumphase angles. An optimum merit figure for the four-cavity klystron z/x q L2, was found as follows. T h e six parameters L1, a2,a2, 0 1 3 , and @ 3 were each varied (one a t a time) and set to the Fig. 10. Harmonic currents and merit figure versus distance for a four-cavityklystron. (a1=0.1, LI =0.165,a2=0.15, + z = -1.4, bestvalue whichgavethelargestmeritfigure.This La=0.152, a3=0.4, &=1.4.) optimization procedure gives a first order approximation to the best parameter settings. in (12). The highest merit figure was reached with the follow- where all symbols have the same meaning as The highest merit figure was achieved with the following parameters: al=O.l,Ll=0.1646, a2=0.15, aZ=1.4, ing parameters: al=O.l, Ll=O.1255, aa=0.16 (the L~=O.1515, a 3 =0.4, and = 1.4. The merit figurewas second-harmonic cavity voltage), @2 =0.8, Lz =0.077, 0.689 in a total length of 0.4401 reduced plasma wavea 3 = 0.4, and@3 = - 1.4. This resulted in a merit figureof lengths. Extensive calculations were only performed in 0.712 in a total length of 0.3499 wavelengths. The merit the four-cavity case for a1= 0.1. The trend of the merit figure improvement over the best results with four funfigure increasing as the total gain is decreased was obdamental cavities is modest; however, there is the apserved as in the three-cavity cases. preciable reduction in the total tube length of 20 percent Lien [7 ] has reported his work on a klystron in which one cavity is tuned near the secondharmonic of the (0.09wavelengths)whenthesecond-harmoniccavity is used. I n either configuration i t is necessary to precede drive frequency. This method has the advantage that the large-signal cavities by two or three gain cavities; the second-harmonic velocity component, which is thus, the overall percentage length reduction is not as necessarytoachievethehighest efficiencies, canbe dramatic. Theoptimumphaseangle of the secondadded by the cavity rather than by the space-charge is 0.8 rad, which implies that the cavity harmonic cavity forces. The second-harmonic voltage and phase can be should be tuned somewhat below the second harmonic arbitrarilysetbycontrollingthecavityimpedance. The four-cavity situation in which the second cavity is of the drive frequency. This point is in agreement with the results of Lien. tunednearthesecondharmonicwasstudiedinthis Fig. 10 shows the variation of the merit figure and program. The energy change at a thin second-harmonic first two harmonic current amplitudes for the four gap is fundamental-cavity klystrons described above, and the Apj = a ( p 0 - 1) sin (2& - O2 a0), (21) sameinformation is showninFig. 11 forthecase in

a Lu 2 .3---

f & ]
lkl\/

/ e *

380

EEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, JUNE

7 977

,r

SATURATION
PLANE

---7

Fig. 11. Harmonic currents and merit figure versus distance for a four-cavity klystron with the second cavity tuned near the second harmonic of the drive frequency. (al=0.1, L1=0.126, aZ=0.16, &=0.8, L2=0.077, aa=0.4, @ =-1.4.) Fig. 12.

ELECTRON PHASE

Electron phase versus distance for the klystron

of Fig. 10.

which the second cavity is tuned near the second harmonic. In the latter case, the bunching in the second drift space is almost entirely a t t h e second harmonic; thus the fundamental current amplitude hardly grows in this drift space. The second harmonic amplitude is Y3 greater than the dc current at the saturation plane in both cases. The Applegate diagrams for these interac0tions are shown in Figs. 12 and 13, respectively. The 9.asymmetry is caused by the variation of the mass of the electrons with velocity. Since the gaps have been 2.assumed to be thin, the flight lines can have discontinuities in their slopes a t each gap. In both cases the slow 0electrons in the last drift space bunch more quickly and .4reach a maximum density a t a shorter distance than YI the faster electrons. In the conventional klystron (Fig. .e12), the electrons are always forced towards the central electron (4 = R ) at each gap. This bunching around R 07 0 2 4 6 8 causes the repulsive space-charge forces to be very effiELECTRON PHASE cientinthefinaldriftspaceandthislimitsthe final amount of bunching. With a second-harmonic cavity, Fig. 13. Electron phase versus distance for the klystron of Fig. 11. two bunches are formed in the second drift space, one near 2.0 rad and the other near 4.8 rad, leaving the area near q 5 = T with a sparse electron population. Then in similar in bothcases,althoughthebunchingprocess the final drift space the two bunches converge towards can be controlled better with the second-harmonic cavity. The second-harmonic cavity allows a shorter overall thecentralelectronsandthespace-chargeforcesare length to be used for a high-efficiency klystron; this' is notas effective a t inhibiting the bunching process. an important advantage for low-frequency applications. Another way of looking at the mechanism of the efficiency improvement shown in Fig. 13 is that after the COMPARISON OF THEORY A N D EXPERIMENTS second drift space, both bunches are a t phases where the The above results were used to design a high-power gap fields are high. This allows most of the electrons to klystron for the Los AlamosMesonPhysicsFacility. experience a large and favorable velocity modulation. The major klystron requirements forthisapplication This modulation effectively overcomes the space-charge are the following. effects. 805 MHz Drive frequency A very long penultimate drift length also produces a 1 . 2 5 MW rarefaction of the flight-line diagram near + = R . T h u s Peak power output Duty factor the mechanisms for the merit figure improvement are 12 percent

TALLERICO: DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR MULTICAVITY KLYSTRON

381

Ili
50

0 0 -0

1 0

20

x)

40

50

Ib

I2

i l k

1 8

POWER INPUT, W

POWER INPUT,W

Fig. 14. Calculated power transfer curves for the L5120A with cavity frequency and Q as the parameters.

Fig. 16. Theoretical and experimental power transfer curves for the L5120A. ( S I N 2005, V0=86 kV, 1 0 = 3 3 A.) TABLE I SUMMARY OF L5120A DESIGN DATA.BEAM VOLTAGE 32 A 86 kV; BEAMCURRENT Normalized harmonic Drift current length amplitude Frequency I~I/IO/ (inches) 0
I

Normalized voltage a t saturation Cavity

1 10.5 2 0.1215 3 14.3 4 5
8 1 7 4 809 8 1 1 813

(MHz)

R/Q 105 90 80 80 70

0.0071 0.0385 10.5 0.138 0.457 0.6727 7.6

1.3718

805 807 815 82 1 805

815819 817

Fig. 15.

gain. T h e region under and to the right of the gain line is the area where the saturated gain is greater than 50 dB,the specified minimum.Theoperatingpoint of F3 =815 MHz and F4=821 MHz was chosen, yielding Gain 50 d B a merit figure of 0.55. Minimum efficiency 45 percent T h e cy of the first cavityis too small to permit a direct Power transfer curve as smooth as possible application of the large-signal equations. Thus the cy in Maximum accelerating voltage 86 kV the second cavity was calculated according to the smallBandwidth 4 MHz. signal method and then a large-signal, four-cavity calculation was made. The only drawback of this approach T h e designwasaccomplished as follows. The beam is that the large-signal effects of the tuning of the second diameterwaschosen so thatthenormalizedplasma frequency with a 0.7 b/a ratio became w,/w =0.38. The cavity cannot be found. F2 was set a t 807 MHz, based first two drift lengths were set at L1=LZ=O.125 from on previous experience with large klystrons for the a small-signalgaincalculation.UsingFig. 5 , athird Stanford linear accelerator. length of L a =0.16 was chosen. Some calculated power T h e calculated and actual performance of the L5120A transfercurveswithvariousthird-andfourth-cavity are shown in Fig. 16. K O adjustments of the cavity fretunings are shown in Fig. 14. These computed results quencies from the calculated values were needed. The indicate that the third cavity should be unloaded; how- parameters for this klystron are listed in Table I. ever, the tube builders decided to load the first three T h e theoretical and experimental power transfer cavitiestoreducetheeffects of manufacturingtolercurves for two other klystrons are shown in Figs. 17 and ances and to provide a means of selectively loading any 18. Two experimental curves are shown in Fig. 1 7 for higher order cavity modes. The third- and fourth-cavity twosettings of the focus magnetcurrent.The 14-A frequencies were determined from the calculations sum- current yields the most output power and this is commarized in Fig. 15. The merit figure is shown on the pared to the theory. F3-F4 plane, and the dashed curve is the locus of 50-dB In all cases the calculated output power is between 4
Merit figure contours on the

F3 (MHz)

F3-F4 plane for the L5120A.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, JUNE

1971

V ., 84.5 k V v29.4A

5 IO POWER INPUT, W

15

Fig. 17. Theoretical and experimental power transfer curves for the VA-862A with magnet current as the parameter. ( S I N 104.)

and 10 percentgreaterthanthatactuallyobserved. This discrepancy is probably due to the fact that under most conditions the merit figure is an optimistic measure of efficiency. The agreementis very good, especially since the flow is not confined. Some of these tubes have an isolated collector, which allows the intercepted current to be measured easily. Typically the intercepted current at saturation is about one-tenth of the beam current. Thewiggles on some experimental curves (such as Fig. 18) are caused by reflected electrons returning to the input gap. This hypothesis is verified by Fig. 19 whichshowstheforwardandreflectedpower atthe input cavity of a n L.5120 klystron. The VSWR of the cavity depends on the drive level, which indicates t h a t for some drive levels the returning electrons cause more power to be reflected into the generator.

SUMMARY A N D CONCLUSIONS
The major results of this investigation are that for a high-efficiency klystron the following conditionsmust be met. 1) Atleasttwocavities, inadditiontotheoutput cavity, must have a normalized gap voltage of a! 20.1. 2) An appreciable second-harmonic component must be present on the electron velocity as the beam enters the penultimate cavity. This component can arise from either a second-harmonic cavity or a long drift space. T h e large-signal equations presented here have been applied to several different klystrons and the calculated saturated output power is between 4 and 10 percent greaterthanthemeasuredvalues.The confined flow diskmodel of theelectron flow andMihransmerit figuremethod of estimatingtheconversion efficiency are therefore shown to be valid concepts for the design and analysis of high-powered klystrons. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authorwishes to thank L. J. Fox of Litton Industriesand 0. C. Lundstrom of VarianAssociatesfor their work in the design and production of the klystrons referred to in this paper. REFERENCES
[ l ] S. E. W$ber,Ballisticanalysis of a two-cavityfinitebeam Electron Devices, vol. ED-5,Apr. 1958, klystron, IRE Trans. pp. 98-108. ---, Large-signal analysis of the multicavity klystron, I R E Trans.ElectronDevices, vol. ED-5, Oct. 1958, pp. 306-315. J . E. Rowe, Nonlinear Electron- Wuoe Interaction Phenomena. New York: Academic Press, 1965. T. G. NIihran, The effect of driftlength,beamradiusand perveance on klystron power conversionefficiency, IEEE Trans. Electron Deoices, vol. ED-14, Apr. 1967, pp. 201-206. A. H . W . Beck, Space-Chavge Waves. New York: Pergamon, 1958. [ 6 ] S. Wallander, Large-signal computer analysis of klystron waves, I n t . J . E l e c t r y . , vol. 24, Feb. 1968, pp. 185-196. [7] E. L.Lien,High efficiency klystronamplifier,presented at C., 1969 IEEE Int. Electron Devices Meeting, Washington, D. Oct. 30, 1969.

. -----.
1.2.-

,/

.
V,,=aOkV &826.!5A

POWER

OUTPUT,W

Fig. 18. Theoretical and experimental power transfer curves for the \A-862A with beam voltage as the parameter. ( S I N 105.)

PEAK INCIDENT INPVTPOWER,W

Fig. 19. Reflected input power versus incident input power for the L5120. ( S J N 2004R, V0=86 kV, I 0 = 4 0 A.)