28.01.2013 Views

LCLS Conceptual Design Report - Stanford Synchrotron Radiation ...

LCLS Conceptual Design Report - Stanford Synchrotron Radiation ...

LCLS Conceptual Design Report - Stanford Synchrotron Radiation ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

L C L S C O N C E P T U A L D E S I G N R E P O R T<br />

optimal stability is best found with a complete computer simulation that includes the important<br />

non-linearities and wakefield effects.<br />

7.2.2 <strong>Design</strong> Optimization Technique<br />

In order to determine the best parameter set which provides the correct acceleration,<br />

compression, machine stability, and final energy spread, a fast computer program is used which<br />

semi-analytically models the longitudinal beam dynamics and minimizes a penalty function while<br />

varying the key system parameters [5]. The varied parameters are:<br />

• 1 st and 2 nd compressor strengths (R56-1, R56-2),<br />

• RF phases of L1, L2, and L3 (φ1, φ2, φ3),<br />

• Energy (or location) of 1 st and 2 nd compression stages (EBC1, EBC2).<br />

The penalty function, which is minimized, includes:<br />

• The deviation of the final and intermediate bunch lengths from the desired ones,<br />

normalized to an allowable error (e.g., 22 µm ± 0.1 µm rms at undulator, and 200 µm<br />

± 100 µm after BC1),<br />

• The energy deviation at both compressors and at the undulator, with respect to the<br />

desired energy, each normalized to an allowable error (e.g., 14.35 GeV ± 0.02 GeV at<br />

undulator, or 250, +250, −50 MeV at 1 st compressor),<br />

• The deviation of the final correlated energy spread at the undulator with respect to<br />

the desired energy spread, normalized to an allowable error (e.g., 0.01% ± 0.002% —<br />

this is a signed quantity allowing for a positive or negatively correlated energy chirp<br />

as a desired outcome),<br />

• The four sensitivities of: 1) final relative energy error vs. gun-timing error, and 2) vs.<br />

bunch-charge error; 3) the final peak current vs. gun-timing error, and 4) vs. bunch-<br />

charge error, all normalized to an allowable error (e.g., 0 ± 100 Amps/psec).<br />

The parameters are varied over a reasonable range by constraining the minimization scan. The<br />

parameters constrained are:<br />

• The two R56 values (e.g., −10 mm to −40 mm),<br />

• The mean rf accelerating gradient per linac section (e.g., 18 MV/m upper limit),<br />

• The three rf phases per linac section (e.g., −50˚ to +50˚),<br />

• The net active S-band linac length available to the <strong>LCLS</strong> beam (~900 m).<br />

The semi-analytic model includes longitudinal wakefields, non-linearities (T566 and sinusoidal<br />

rf), and the effects of errors (timing, phase, charge and energy). The model also includes the X-<br />

band rf section, its wakefield, and its four-fold frequency increase. The details of the model and<br />

its range of validity are reviewed in reference [5]. The final chosen parameters, which provide for<br />

optimum machine stability, as well as the undulator peak current and energy spread requirements<br />

A C C E L E R A T O R ♦ 7-7

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!