Abstract

Recirculating energy recovery linacs are a promising technology for delivering high power particle beams ($\sim$GW) while only requiring low power ($\sim$kW) RF sources. This is achieved by decelerating the used bunches and using the energy they deposit in the accelerating structures to accelerate new bunches. We present studies of the impact of the bunch packet filling pattern on the performance of the accelerating RF system. We perform RF beam loading simulations under various noise levels and beam loading phases with different injection schemes. We also present a mathematical description of the RF system during the beam loading, which can identify optimal beam filling patterns under different conditions. The results of these studies have major implications for design constraints for future energy recovery linacs, by providing a quantitative metric for different machine designs and topologies.

Highlights

  • These studies give us useful insight to ERL beam loading with different filling patterns, level rf system (LLRF) systems, and injection schemes

  • S/N, and LLRF set points are important for maintaining stable cavity voltage and lowering consumed rf power

  • We identified optimal filling patterns for 6-turn ERL, but our methodology can be applied for finding optimal patterns of other multiturn

Read more

Summary

Introduction into ERLs

There is an increasing interest in energy recovery linacs worldwide due to their unique promise of combining the high-brightness electron beams available from conventional linacs with the high average powers available from storage rings. Applications requiring this step-change in capability are coming to the fore in a wide variety of fields, for example high energy particle physics colliders [1], high luminosity colliders for nuclear physics [2], free-electron laser drivers for academic and industrial purposes [3,4], and inverse Compton scattering sources [5,6].

Filling patterns
Cavity voltage calculation
Beam loading pattern
Low level rf system
Variations in cavity voltage
Variations in amplifier power
BEAM LOADING SIMULATION
Static and dynamic set points
Simulation parameters
Comparison of optimal and nonoptimal patterns
MHz kW
Cavity voltage
Amplifier power results
Property of optimal patterns
Off-crest beam loading
Phase angle jitters
Cavity voltage and amplifier power jitters
Bunch charge jitter
Energy modulation
SEQUENCE PRESERVING SCHEME
COMPARISON OF SIMULATION RESULTS
Comparison of dynamic and static set points of FIFO and SP
Comparison of on- and off-crest
CONCLUSION

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.