Diagnostics for Benchmarking Experiments
-
Upload
teegan-cunningham -
Category
Documents
-
view
24 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Diagnostics for Benchmarking Experiments
Diagnostics for Benchmarking Experiments
L. Van Woerkom
The Ohio State University
University of California, San DiegoCenter for Energy Research
3rd MEETING FUSION SCIENCE CENTER
FOR EXTREME STATES OF MATTER AND FAST IGNITION PHYSICS
Overview
• High level of activity in establishing Z-Petawatt– Laser still under construction– Z machine takes priority– 2 postdocs, 5 grad students over several months
• Benchmarking crucial to advance diagnostics– Laser diagnostics– Standard diagnostics– New techniques
Why are Laser diagnostics important?
Proton production & focusing
Temperature of proton irradiated foil from XUV images
Size of proton irradiated region via XUV dominated by target geometry
Temperature strongly dependent on laser.Scatter in data probably due to laser
10
100
1000
10000
0 100 200
Depth (µm)
Norm
aliz
ed
Maxim
um
In
ten
sity
Why are target diagnostics important?
Current seems to drop quickly near front surface
mfp ~ 70 m
d
Big unresolved issues:•No agreement in theory•No agreement in codes•Inability of experiment to provide sufficient information to discriminate amongst them•Scale length on order of resolution•Diagnostics must improve
Diagnostics
• Laser Diagnostics– Develop in-situ peak intensity monitoring– Build robust high dynamic range autocorrelator– Build robust prepulse/pedestal system
• Target Diagnostics– Standard techniques
• K x-ray imaging hot electrons• XUV imaging temperature profile• HOPG spectra temperature• Streaked XUV temporal heating
– New techniques• Time- and Space-resolved reflectivity• Time- and Space-resolved polarimetry• Space-resolved XUV spectroscopy
Laser Diagnostic Development Goals
• In-situ peak intensity monitor – – currently SNL – Directly measure intensity in focal region
• Third order single-shot autocorrelator – design and building at OSU– Gives time direction– Gives pulse fidelity out to ~100 picoseconds
• Pedestal measurement– design and building at OSU– Fast photodiodes– Plasma shutters for increased dynamic range
Intensity calibration
• Indirect method– Various laser parameters are measured outside the
interaction region, from which peak intensity can be inferred
• Direct (in situ) method– Based on measurement of intensity dependent
phenomena at the interaction region, intensity at the focus can be ascertained
Physics tells us about LaserPhysics tells us about Laser
10-9
10-7
10-5
10-3
10-1
101
1014 1015 1016 1017 1018
Ioni
zatio
n Y
ield
(arb
. u.)
Intensity (Wcm-2)
Neon 1+ - 8+
We have a detailed understanding of high intensity laser atomic physics after two decades of extensive study. The laser has been used to understand the physics.
Now, we use the physics to understand the laser.
Highest charge states are well represented by current analytical atomic physics models and ratios of charge states from a single laser shot yield the peak focused laser intensity.
Pulse Width Measurement
Pulse Characterization
Plasma shutter photodiode
target
3rd Order Autocorrelator w/ high dynamic range CCD camera
• Making robust diagnostic tools, not reinventing the wheel• Taking advantage of many years of short pulse high
intensity laser research• Along with the intensity measurement, this gives the actual
experimental transfer function
Improvements in Standard Techniques
• Distinguishing models/codes requires improved resolution in space & time
• Improving spatial resolution requires – Crystal manufacturing– Mirror alignment– Careful optical design
• Improving temporal resolution– Streaked XUV– Streaked HOPG
New Diagnostic Development
Chirped probe beam
Pump beam
Imaging spectrometer and polarization analyzer
camera
• Anomalous near-surface physics• Reflectivity & Polarization• Temporal & Spatial Mapping
• Surface conductivity• Magnetic fields
A. Benuzzi-Mounaix, M. Koenig, J. M. Boudenne, et al., Physical Review E 60, R2488 (1999).
Experimental Scenarios
Bragg
crystal
CCD
HOPG
Bra
gg
cr
ysta
l
CC
D
Who is doing what and where?
• Supported fully or in part by the FSC• Core concentration at Sandia Z-Petawatt
– J. Pasley project coordinator– E Chowdhury intensity measurement– D Offermann intensity measurement & reflectivity– A Link intensity measurement & Cu K imager– N Patel Cu K imager– E. Shipton optical interferometry
• Support work at OSU– D Clark HOPG design & construction– J Morrison reflectivity development– V Ovchinnikov reflectivity & deformable optics
• XUV imaging spectrometer– A Link (will be in the UK over summer)
• Data archiving and information– J Young, R Weber, K Highbarger, N Patel
Summary & Conclusion
Core efforts focused at Sandia Z-Petawatt
• Advancing the understanding of FI requires– Robust, reliable, in-situ laser diagnostics– Improved spatial & temporal target resolution– Development of a new generation of high spatial &
temporal diagnostic technologies