Study of Beam Slice Evolution under

Nonlinear Self-fields

Scott Anderson

APS Meeting
April 2000
 Introduction
– We present analysis and simulation of the evolution of a single
longitudinal beam slice with non-linear transverse space charge
fields.
Motivation
– The process of emittance compensation had been modeled[1] as an
inter-slice process of matching the beam to the Invariant Envelope
(IE).
– Beam slices on the IE make the same angle in phase space,
removing any correlation between longitudinal position and phase
space angle, thus minimizing emittance.
2 I σ′ 1γ′
σ inv = =−
γ ′ 3I 0γ σ 2 γ

• How do the intra-slice dynamics effect this process?

[1] Serafini and Rosenzweig,

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 2

 Modeling the Intra-slice Dynamics
– Begin by examining radial force within a slice.
Define: nslice (r , z) = n0 f ( r, z) f ( r = 0, z0 ) = 1

Then from Gauss’ Law:

2en0 r
Er ( r, z) = 2πr˜f (r˜ , z)d˜r
r ∫0

The single particle equation of motion is:

4πre n0 r k 2p0
r ′′ = 2 3 ∫ ˜rf (r˜ , z)d˜r + ( fexternal) = F( r, z) + ( fexternal)
β γ r0 r

– Further analysis is done with assumption of laminar flow.[2]

F( r, z) = F( r0 )

[2] O. Anderson,
4/22/04 April APS Meeting 3
 Coasting Beam in a Focusing Channel
• In the case of an external focusing channel we have
k 2p0
r ′′ + k β2r = F( r0 )
r
• We can solve this equation approximately by linearizing it about the
equilibrium solution
k p0
re q = F( r0 ) δr′′ + 2k β2δr = 0 δr = r − re q
kβ
• This gives us particle position and angle as a function of z

[ ] ( )
r(r0 , z) = re q( r0 ) + r0 − re q( r0 ) cos 2kβ z

r ′(r0 ,z) = 2k [r (r ) − r ]sin( 2k z)

β eq 0 0 β

• We can use this to calculate the slice σ and ε. To do this we recall

that the assumption of laminarity can be written mathematically as

2πn(r, z)dr = 2πn( r0 )dr0

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 4

 Coasting Beam in a Focusing Channel
– This makes calculation of the second moments tractable as
∞

g( r, z) = g(r0 ) = ∫ 2πr0 n(r0 )g( r0 )dr0

0

– Working through the algebra, we find ε(z)

ε = ασ e2qk p sin ( 2k β z )
– Where α is a constant depending of the form of the initial
distribution (α ≈ 0.065 for a parabolic slice)
– We can see how long this analysis is valid by again rewriting the
laminarity condition as

∂r
in this case
∂r k p0 r0 π
∂r0
≥0
∂r0
=
kβ 2F (r0 ) 0 [ ( )] (
f (r ) 1− cos 2kβ z + cos 2kβ z )

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 5

 Coasting Beam in a Focusing Channel
– For a distribution with tails where f(r0) → 0, the laminarity
condition is broken after a quarter of an oscillation, where the
emittance is a maximum.
• Simulation of the matched beam
Simulation
Theory

Matched Beam
1.2

1.0
Norm. Emit. [mm mrad]

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.0
2 3 3 3 3
0.0 5.0 10 1.0 10 1.5 10 2.0 10 2.5 10
Z [mm]

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 6

 Coasting Beam in a Focusing Channel
– We can observe the slice at the emittance maximum and after to
see irreversible emittance growth.

Trace Space at Emittance Maximum Charge Density at Emittance Maximum

0.005 500

400
0

2
Macroparticles/mm
300
r' [radians]

-0.005

200

-0.01
100

-0.015 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

r [mm] r [mm]

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 7

 Coasting Beam in a Focusing Channel
• Compare the case of a matched beam slice to that of a mismatched
slice.

Matched Beam Dynamics Mismatched Beam Dynamics

1.5 2.5

Rrms [mm] Emittance [mm mrad]

[mm] Emitance [mm mrad]

2.0

1.0
1.5

1.0
0.50

0.50
r m s
R

0.0 0.0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Z [mm] Z [mm]

• The emittance minimum is significantly smaller for the mismatched

slice.

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 8

 Coasting Beam in a Focusing Channel
– Wave breaking and irreversible emittance growth are reduced for
the mismatched beam.

Final Phase Space Beam Profiles

-3
3.0 10 700
Initial Distribution
-3 600 Final Distribution
2.0 10

2
500

Macroparticles/mm
-3
1.0 10
r' [radians]

400
0
0.0 10
300
-3
-1.0 10
200

-3
-2.0 10 100

-3
-3.0 10 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40
r [mm] r [mm]

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 9

 Accelerating Beam
– The analysis of the accelerating beam is similar to the coasting
beam, but now the equation of motion contains terms arising from
adiabatic damping and ponderomotive (alternating transverse
gradient) forces.
2
 γ′  η γ ′  2reλ (r0 )
r ′′( z) +   r ′( z ) +   r( z) =
 γ (z )  8  γ (z ) γ ( z )3 r

– This is analogous to the envelope equation and has a particular

solution
4 re λ (r0 )
rp (r0 ,z) =
γ′ (2 + η )γ (z)

– Again, we linearize about the particular solution to get

2
 γ ′ 1 + η  γ ′
δr′′ +   δr ′ +   δr = 0
γ  4 γ 

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 10

 Accelerating Beams
– This equation has solutions of the form
 1 + η γ 0  1 +η γ 0 
δr = A cos ln    + Bsin ln   
 2  γ   2  γ 

– Choosing initial conditions so that the beam starts on the invariant

envelope we have
 1 + η γ 0 1  1 +η γ 0 
[ ]
r(r0 , z) = rp (r0 ,z) + r0 − rp0 (r0 ) cos
 2
ln    +
 γ  1+η
[ ]
r0 − rp0 (r0 ) sin
 2
ln   
 γ 

– Again working through the calculation of the second moments we

get
3
4πα  n0  2 2 +η  1 +η γ 0 
ε g e o m( z) =   sin ln   
λb  γ ( z)  1 +η  2  γ 

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 11

 Accelerating Beams
– Comparison with simulations
Theory
Simulation

Normalized Emittance
1.4

1.2

1
Emittance [mm mrad]

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Z [mm]

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 12

 Accelerating Beams
– The theory becomes invalid after wave-breaking, which happens
again at the emittance maximum. This occurs when
∂ε n2 4πα 3 2 + η γ ′  1+ η  γ 0     1 + η  γ 0    1 +η γ 0 
=0=− n0 2 sin ln  sin ln   + 1 + η cos  2 ln  γ   
∂z λb 1+ η γ 2  2  γ     2  γ   

Or
 1 +η γ 0 
tan  ln    = − 1+ η
 2  γ 
So
 
γ0 1 
zε − max = − 1
γ ′  2 tan ( − 1+η )
−1

2 
e
1
 8  4 ε n, max
σ min =   = 0.22mm (for above simulation)
 η γ′

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 13

 Accelerating Beams

Theory
Emittance Limit
Simulation
IE
Beam Size
1

0.8

0.6
<r2>1/2 [mm]

0.4

0.2

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Z [mm]

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 14

 Conclusions
• Nonlinear radial space charge forces within a slice cause
wave breaking and irreversible emittance growth in
matched beams.
• This emittance growth can be partially mitigated by
mismatching the beam.
• Accelerating beams are analogous to coasting beams in
that slices matched to the invariant envelope will undergo
wave breaking and the resulting emittance will limit the
minimum beam size.

4/22/04 April APS Meeting 15