The VISA FEL: an ultra-short gain length,

saturated, self-amplified spontaneous emission

free-electron laser
James Rosenzweig
UCLA Department of Physics and Astronomy

CASA Seminar (JLAB)

May 31, 2002

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 SASE
SASE Free-Electron
Free-Electron Lasers
Lasers

• 4th generation high power coherent x-ray radiation source proposed by

Pellegrini, et al., in early 90’s
• Amplifier may start from noise (Self-Amplified Spontaneous Emission,
SASE), no external seed
Interesting coherence characteristics
• Lasing medium is intense relativistic electron beam
No inherent material damage problem
Sub-picosecond, high power source at short wavelength
• Gloriously difficult beam physics problem! Just what UCLA research
(high brightness beams/advanced accelerator/radiation) program is
interested in…
• Intensive research effort world-wide, including UCLA

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Why
Why SASE
SASE FEL?
FEL?
Evolution
Evolution of
of Bright
Bright X-Ray
X-Ray Sources
Sources

LCLS
2004?

VISA
2001

UCLA-LANL
1998

X-ray FELs have a potential to improve the

peak brightness of modern light sources by
many orders of magnitude. How do we get
there?
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 X-ray
X-ray SASE
SASE FEL
FEL development:
development:
A
A Space-time
Space-time Representation
Representation

RF gun
UCLA 16 micron SASE FEL
expt.
PWT linac
t

Lu

FEL ≅ ( u 2 2
)[1 + au2 /2]
z

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 The
The end
end begets
begets the
the beginning:
beginning:
FEL
FEL demands
demands on
on electron
electron beam
beam quality
quality

• FEL gain length

Lg = u
4 3
• Dimensionless gain parameter
 au k p 2 / 3  au  2 / 3 4 e2 nb  1 / 3 2 / 3 Be  1 / 3
=  =    ∝ au  
 
3
 4ku   4ku   

• Need strong focusing and high brightness beam

2I
Be = 2
n

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 VISA
VISA Overview:
Overview: Goals
Goals v.
v. Reality
Reality
• Ultra-short gain length (<20 cm) experiment at 800 nm
• Strong, alternating gradient focusing (probable XFEL model)
• Gain length less than average beta-function (~30 cm)
• Use high brightness electron beam at ATF (LCLS injector test?)
200 A
2 mm-mrad
• Unlike TTF-FEL and LEUTL, no compressor needed
Not quite! Novel compression mechanism deduced
• Gain properties measured
• Saturation final state explored
Angular and wavelength spectra
Microbunching
• Very serious computational model developed and deployed
Necessary to understand anything about experimental features

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Acknowledgments
Acknowledgments
• VISA was a large collaboration (BNL, LLNL, SLAC, UCLA).
C. Pellegrini (UCLA) spokesman
• UCLA was lead on experimental data-taking and analysis
Aaron Tremaine (post-doc, ex-UCLA student). Experiment.
Alex Murokh (student). Experiment.
Ron Agusstson (student). ELEGANT simulation (originally for ATF
compressor expt.)
Sven Reiche (post-doc). GENESIS
JBR (Beam/FEL diagnostics; simulations), CP (theory)
Stealth collaborators in expt/data analysis: P. Emma, H-D. Nuhn
• Extremely difficult experiment to perform and understand, we
needed everyone.

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 VISA
VISA Beamline
Beamline
20° Dispersive Gun
Matching Line
Section

Undulator

Linac Sections
Transport

• Gun and Linac Section (1.6 cell photo-emission gun and 2 SLAC type
linac structures operating at S-Band, generate 71 MeV beam)
• 20° double-bend dispersive transport section
• Beamline III, with VISA matching optics and 4-m strong focusing
undulator (K=1.26)

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Measurements
Measurements on
on Electron
Electron Beam
Beam at
at Linac
Linac Exit
Exit

• Emittance was measured with the quad

scan after the linac. For a typical
charge of 200-500 pC emittance was
optimized at

n ≈ 1.3 − 2.7 µm

• The beam current in the linac was Current [A]

Measured Current

measured by applying a linear chirp to

with Wake-Field Reduction
70

the beam and measuring its profile

60

50

after 20° bend. With wake-field 40

correction the current value is found:

30

20

10

I p ≈ 55 Amp
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time [ps]

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 horizontal alignment rail
vacuum chamber
pumping ports

undulator

vertical alignment rail

diagnostics ports
steering magnets
The VISA Undulator

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Undulator
Undulator Diagnostics
Diagnostics

FEL Optical Diagnostics Beam Profile Monitors

e-beam
Beam Profile Monitors
actuator
FEL
light
out

vacuum OTR to CCD

chamber

8 diagnostic ports

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Electron
Electron Beam
Beam Imaging
Imaging

0.50 mm 0.25 mm
YAG YAG Scintillators do not generate an
adequate electron beam image for
small bright beams. Saturation due
to interesting collective effects…
OTR Phosphor
OTR + SE

1.20 mm
1.80 mm

OTR
OTR is a low intensity signal, which is
often hard to separate from the undulator
SE (polarizer, notch filter). Need
excellent surface…

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Beam
Beam Profile
Profile Monitor
Monitor Set-Up
Set-Up

Diagnostic Port
ATF Framegrabber

Collimating Lens

Filters and Polarizers

1.5 mm

Cold Mirrors

1st Harmonic CCD camera

Rifle Scope
OTR+SE

OTR
Cold Mirrors

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
Overview
Overview of
of the
the Intra-undulator
Intra-undulator Diagnostic
Diagnostic System
System

OTR to diagnostics room

CCD scope CCD scope CCD scope CCD scope CCD scope CCD scope vacuum chamber

undulator

FEL radiation Odd ports bypass line

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Tune
Tune “Optimization”
“Optimization”
• Initially an FEL radiation pulse energy was measured ~ 1-10 nJ, in accord
with the measured beam brightness.
• In the attempt to compensate for the dispersion, a new tune was
developed:
400.0000 400.0000
x-beta [m] x-beta [m]
dispersion [cm] dispersion [cm]
300.0000 y-beta [m] 300.0000 y-beta [m]

200.0000 200.0000

100.0000 100.0000

0.0000 0.0000

-100.0000 -100.0000

-200.0000 -200.0000

-300.0000 -300.0000

old tune new tune

0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25

• With the new tune the FEL radiation intensity went up to ~ 10 µJ. Why?

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Saturation
Saturation and
and Physical
Physical Model
Model
• With the high gain an FEL saturation in 3.6 m was observed:

Energy Emittance [mm-mrad]

[nJ] 2.5
6
10
2

10 4 1.5

1
100
0.5
1 Lg = 18.7 cm 0
40 60 80 100 120 140 160
0.01 Peak Current [Amp]

0.0001
0 1 2 3 4

M. Xie numerical model:

z [m]

18.7 cm gain length at 140 pC

• How does the gain length measurement charge and ~50 Amp peak current
agree with the high gain SASE-FEL corresponds to slice emittance of
theory? Not that well if we believe <0.35 mm-mrad
beam parameters at linac exit…
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 More
More inconsistencies
inconsistencies in
in the
the data
data
• Highest gain observed after changing rf phase of linac
• Change of the tune significantly altered all SASE radiation properties,
indicating changes of basic electron beam properties:
stable condition very unstable, 100% fluctuations
low gain high gain
G ~ 103 G ~ 107
many spikes single spike
spike width ~ 0.1% spike width ~ 1%
centered at 830 nm centered at 845 nm

800 820 840 860 880 900 800 820 840 860 880 900

(old tune) (new tune)

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 4/30/01:
4/30/01: Bunch
Bunch compression
compression hypothesis
hypothesis
• High gain observed for running ~4 degrees forward of crest; horizontal
beam size expands inside of undulator (dispersion error…)
• Strong bunch compression in the dispersive section was suggested, due
to mistuning of linac energy from the nominal value. Effective R56 can
change sign, order of magnitude due to T566, off energy operation.
R56
2
0.2
p 1  p
0.15 z f = zi + R56 + T566  
0.1 p 2  p
= −0.15 m
0.05

0
R56 p=0
dp/p
∂R56
-0.05

-0.1
T566 = ≈ -10
−7 m rad2
-0.15 ∂( p p)
-0.2
-0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02

• Increase in peak current reduces FEL gain length, explains the observed
spectral behavior (watch for ε growth due to dispersion mismatch…)
• Longitudinal transformation highly nonlinear; horizontal/long. coupling
• Measure compression in final VISA runs!
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Single
Single Golay
Golay Cell
Cell Experimental
Experimental Set-up
Set-up

e-beam 1
0.9

90° polarizer
0.8 filter transmission
0.7

Transmission
FEL light 0.6 detector window cut-off
0.5

Golay cell 0.4 40 µm

parabolic 0.3
mirrors 0.2 100 µm
0.1 400 µm
0
removable low-pass filter 0 20 40 60
Wavenumber [cm-1]

System allows following measurements:

1. Scanning linac RF phase and observe CTR signal (test for a possible
bunch compression).
2. Inserting a remote controlled low-pass filter for a quantitative measure
of a bunch length when compared to PARMELA/ELEGANT model.
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Using
Using Collimator
Collimator to
to Map
Map Linac
Linac RF
RF Phase
Phase
• To understand the nature of the compression, one has to keep a track of
the linac RF phase jitter.
1.5 cm
• It was found that the σx [mm] aperture
3.5

bending dipole to ATF 3.0

Beamline 1 acts as a scraper 2.5

with the 1.5 cm aperture. 2.0

• Charge loss at the scraper 1.5

depends on the beam energy 1.0

and is very sensitive to 0.5

changes in the RF phase. 0.0

0 5 10 15 20 25

Measuring the charge loss at the collimator allows to

1. Calibrate the linac RF phase shot-by-shot.
2. Use the same system operating point for FEL measurements.

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Results
Results of
of the
the Measurements
Measurements
• Initial test indicated strong CTR signal dependence on linac RF phase.

without/filter
with/filter ratio
Linac RF phase span of 2°
0.02 0.1 filter/fit 1
no filter/fit

0.08 0.8
0.015
Goaly Signal [mV]

0.06 0.6
0.01
Peaked
SASE Signal 0.04 0.4

0.005
0.02 0.2

0 0 0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2
Charge [nC]
Charge [nC]

• Filter in/out comparison (R=0.68) indicated short (sub-40 µm) bunch length.

• Ratio measurement at the operating point established a benchmark for the

PARMELA/ELEGANT numerical model of the system.
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 PARMELA/ELEGANT
PARMELA/ELEGANT Analysis
Analysis
• PARMELA reproduced the beam properties measured after the linac,
and ELEGANT simulated bunch compression in the double-bend line.
• ELEGANT is input off-design energy, with appropriate chirp for high
gain case

PARMELA output after

linac

Low energy tail of

the beam lost at the
collimator

ELEGANT output after

dispersive section (no
collimation). Note width,
mainly due to T512
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Comparison
Comparison with
with CTR
CTR Measurements
Measurements

• Manipulating the beam energy and 250

chirp (equivalent to linac RF phase 200 Simulated After beamline 3

detuning) allowed reproduction of

the bunch compression measured
150 current

I (A)
experimentally. 100
After injector
50

Measurements
0.015 Simulations 0
-800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800
z (µm)
CTR Signal [V]

0.01

0.005
Simulated CTR from the
ELEGANT beam current
output; good agreement with
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2

measurement.
Relative Linac RF-phase [deg]

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Emittance
Emittance Growth
Growth in
in Dispersive
Dispersive Section
Section
CSR effect on emittance is
insignificant :
∆ε<CSR> ~ 0.3 mm-mrad

Residual dispersion,
nonlinearities dominate:
ε<∆p/p> ~ 7 mm-mrad

Slice emittance of the lasing

beam core stays below
ε<slice> < 4 mm-mrad

Now we have a detailed, benchmarked model of the

beam sent into the undulator
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Complete
Complete Set
Set of
of Experimental
Experimental Data
Data for
for
Simulations
Simulations for
for SASE
SASE Performance
Performance

20° Dispersive Gun

Matching Line Section

Undulator
SASE Diagnostics Linac Sections
Transport

Golay cell

at peak lasing:
LG ~ 18.5 cm (at FEL operating point) Q ~ 200 pC
LSAT ~ 3.6-3.8 m ∆p/p ~ 0.14 - 0.20 % IP ~ 55 Amp
ESAT ~ 20 µJ transmission ~ 70 % ∆p/p ~ 0.05 % (uncorrelated)
∆ω/ω ~ 1.2 % (single spike) compression ~ x 5 (CTR) εn(projected) ~ 1 - 2 mm-mrad

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Full
Full constraints
constraints of
of start-to-end
start-to-end model
model
• PARMELA must reproduce conditions at end of linac
Measured emittance, charge, energy, energy spread
• ELEGANT fed PARMELA output, exact quad settings
• ELEGANT output benchmarked by measurements
CTR bunch length
Beam size (dispersive emittance growth)
RF phase
• GENESIS input from ELEGANT output
• GENESIS must reproduce FEL results
Gain length, saturation
Angular and wavelength spectra
Higher harmonic gain and bunching
RF phase dependence
• This effort took six months…
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 GENESIS
GENESIS simulations:
simulations: main
main results
results
• GENESIS output is in excellent agreement with FEL gain, angular profile

10 2 simulations Measured angular profile

measurements
10 1
SASE Intensity [µJ]

10 0

10 -1

10 -2

10 -3

10 -4

10 -5 GENESIS simulations
10 -6
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
z [m]

• Statistics of saturation also benchmarked

with start-to-end model

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Effect
Effect of
of CSR
CSR on
on compressed
compressed beam
beam
• Beam bunch length is T516/T526/emittance limited (emittance must be
~2 mm-mrad)
• CSR provides energy loss mechanism during bends
• This can interact with the T516/T526 terms to produce longer beam
• No CSR case has 300 A, not 250 A - GENESIS gain is far too large.

CSR No CSR

Width set by Correlated cut

T516/T526 due to collimator, T516/T526

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 SASE
SASE statistics
statistics and
and saturation
saturation
• Statistical analysis possible from collimation data (same
charge implies same rf state, compression)
• In exponential gain, statistics are consistent with single
spike model
• In saturation, picture changes radically in data and model

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Extended
Extended work
work for
for model:
model: SASE
SASE harmonics
harmonics

Harmonic Energy vs. Distance

300
105
250
104
Count (Amplitude)

Fundamental
200 103

Energy (nJ)
150 102
100 101
100 2nd harmonic
50
10-1 3rd harmonic
0
240 320 400 480 560 640 720 800 880
Wavelength (nm)
10-2
2 2.5 3 3.5 4
z(m)

• Fundamental saturation allows deep beam modulation - harmonics

• “Nonlinear gain” observed on 2nd and 3rd harmonics
• Gain profiles consistent with scaling Lg,n=L g,1/n (Z. Huang, K-J Kim theory)

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 CTR
CTR microbunching
microbunching diagnostic
diagnostic

• Extension of method introduced at

UCLA/LANL experiment
advanced at LEUTL
• Measured final state of e-beam
with 2-surface radiator setup
• Looked at fundamental, 2nd
harmonic (first time)
• Compare microscopic beam picture
to model

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Microscopic
Microscopic view:
view: CTR
CTR microbunching
microbunching v.
v. SASE
SASE
Fundamental Microbunching
vs. SASE
400
Another detailed
350
benchmark with UCTR
300
N 2e 2bn2  4  1 1
250 Un =    2 + 2 
8 z  nkr   x y
CTR (pJ)

x y
200

150

100
b1
50

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
SASE (µJ)
2nd Harmonic Bunching
vs. SASE
1.4

1.2
b2
CTR (pJ)

0.8

0.6

b22 ∝ exp( z /Lg,2 ) ∝ exp(2z /Lg,1) ∝ b14

0.4

0.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
SASE (µJ)

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Next
Next step:
step: ATF
ATF Compressor/VISA-b
Compressor/VISA-b
• UCLA/BNL compressor funded by
ONR, delivered 5/02 to ATF
• Installation this summer
• Compress beam to 25 micron rms
• Dedicated CSR measurements
Tokyo polychromator
Remove SDL ambiguities
• Energy spectrum measurements
CSR port, aimed at
CSR instability
Dipole 4 entrance
• What kind of beam do we expect?
• Can we take send this beam to the
VISA undulator in useful form?

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
5/31/02 Elegant study of compress line alone J. Rosenzweig
 VISA-b
VISA-b prospects
prospects
• LCLS demands path to shorter
(few fs!) pulse lengths
Chirped beam/slicing
Chirped beam/compression
• Proposed experiments using
Chirped, compressed beam
Chirped, uncompressed beam
• Compress FEL output. Use FROG to
diagnose?
• ONR funding on the way for
compressor/VISA-b this summer
Saturation in 3 m with
• First job for FEL: fix transport in compressed beam (GENESIS)
BL3 to allow chirping
Offset linear negative R56
(compressor setting)
Correct T566
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
Sextupole
Sextupole correction
correction of
of BL3
BL3 dynamics
dynamics
Initial State
LongitudinalDensityProfile
LongitudinalTraceSpace

0.002 0.025

0.001 0.02

dHradL 0 l z 0.015
-0.001 0.01
-0.002 0.005

-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0

zHmmL -0.75
-0.5
-0.25 0 0.250.50.75
zHmmL
Final State (no sextupoles)
LongitudinalDensityProfile
LongitudinalTraceSpace 0.175
0.003
0.15
0.002
0.125
0.001
0.1
dHradL 0 lz
0.075
-0.001
0.05
-0.002 0.025
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0
zHmmL -0.75
-0.5
-0.25 0 0.250.50.75
zHmmL
Final State (with sextupoles)
LongitudinalDensityProfile
LongitudinalTraceSpace
0.003
0.02
0.002
0.001 0.015
dHradL 0 lz 0.01
-0.001
-0.002 0.005

-0.6-0.4-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0

zHmmL -0.75
-0.5
-0.25 0 0.250.50.75
zHmmL
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
 Summary
Summary and
and conclusions
conclusions
• Proper understanding of compression and beam performance requires
large effort in diagnosis and simulation — in tandem
• At 70 MeV, PARMELA/ELEGANT/GENESIS combination very robust
“Pathological” running conditions at VISA explained
• Some verification of CSR importance at VISA
• Nonlinear harmonic gain observed
• CTR microbunching provides a critical look at microscopic beam physics
• Computational tools are developing to meet experimental demands
• The more details of beam 6D electron beam phase space revealed, the
better
FEL is excellent phase space diagnostic
• Go back to understand more SASE physics with a better controlled
beamline, and a compressor
• FEL and high brightness beam physics tightly linked…

5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig
5/31/02 J. Rosenzweig