Abstract
Magnetically insulated line oscillators (MILOs) are crossed-field devices which generate a self-induced azimuthal magnetic field via an axial current. This negates the need for external magnets, potentially increasing overall system efficiency at the expense of reduced device efficiency. This article reports the design, simulation, and experimental demonstration of a dual-frequency, harmonic MILO (HMILO), which is composed of two sequential slow wave structures (SWSs) tuned for oscillation at different frequencies, each paired with a set of choke cavities and insulated by the self-generated magnetic field of the common cathode. The two SWSs—designed for operation in <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$L$</tex-math> </inline-formula> -and <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$S$</tex-math> </inline-formula> -bands at 1 and 2 GHz, respectively—were tested independently before the HMILO experiments. Results for the <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$L$</tex-math> </inline-formula> -band MILO (L-MILO) were reported previously by Packard. In the experiments reported here, the isolated <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$S$</tex-math> </inline-formula> -band MILO (S-MILO) produced <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$1.1 \pm 0.7$</tex-math> </inline-formula> MW of output power at <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$2.076 \pm 0.005$</tex-math> </inline-formula> GHz, when supplied with 207 kV and 7.3 kA from the MELBA-C generator. Ultimately, when implementing two separate extractor configurations, the HMILO produced <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$12.7 \pm 7.6$</tex-math> </inline-formula> MW at <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$0.984 \pm 0.013$</tex-math> </inline-formula> GHz and <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$3.2 \pm 1.5$</tex-math> </inline-formula> MW at <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$2.074 \pm 0.003$</tex-math> </inline-formula> GHz. These results are compared against simulated performance in the particle-in-cell (PIC) codes CST and improved concurrent electromagnetic PIC (ICEPIC).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
