Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Kinetic description of electron-proton instability in high-intensity proton linacs and storage rings based on the Vlasov-Maxwell equations

Ronald C. Davidson, Hong Qin, and Peter H. Stoltz

Tai-Sen F. Wang

  • Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08543

  • Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545

Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams 2, 054401 – Published 7 May, 1999

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTAB.2.054401

Abstract

The present analysis makes use of the Vlasov-Maxwell equations to develop a fully kinetic description of the electrostatic, electron-ion two-stream instability driven by the directed axial motion of a high-intensity ion beam propagating in the z direction with average axial momentum γbmbβbc through a stationary population of background electrons. The ion beam has characteristic radius rb and is treated as continuous in the z direction, and the applied transverse focusing force on the beam ions is modeled by Ffocb=γbmbωβb02x in the smooth-focusing approximation. Here, ωβb0=const is the effective betatron frequency associated with the applied focusing field, x is the transverse displacement from the beam axis, (γb1)mbc2 is the ion kinetic energy, and Vb=βbc is the average axial velocity, where γb=(1βb2)1/2. Furthermore, the ion motion in the beam frame is assumed to be nonrelativistic, and the electron motion in the laboratory frame is assumed to be nonrelativistic. The ion charge and number density are denoted by +Zbe and nb, and the electron charge and number density by e and ne. For Zbnb>ne, the electrons are electrostatically confined in the transverse direction by the space-charge potential φ produced by the excess ion charge. The equilibrium and stability analysis retains the effects of finite radial geometry transverse to the beam propagation direction, including the presence of a perfectly conducting cylindrical wall located at radius r=rw. In addition, the analysis assumes perturbations with long axial wavelength, kz2rb21, and sufficiently high frequency that |ω/kz|vTez and |ω/kzVb|vTbz, where vTez and vTbz are the characteristic axial thermal speeds of the background electrons and beam ions. In this regime, Landau damping (in axial velocity space vz) by resonant ions and electrons is negligibly small. We introduce the ion plasma frequency squared defined by ω^pb2=4πn^bZb2e2/γbmb, and the fractional charge neutralization defined by f=n^e/Zbn^b, where n^b and n^e are the characteristic ion and electron densities. The equilibrium and stability analysis is carried out for arbitrary normalized beam intensity ω^pb2/ωβb02, and arbitrary fractional charge neutralization f, consistent with radial confinement of the beam particles. For the moderately high beam intensities envisioned in the proton linacs and storage rings for the Accelerator for Production of Tritium and the Spallation Neutron Source, the normalized beam intensity is typically ω^pb2/ωβb020.1. For heavy ion fusion applications, however, the transverse beam emittance is very small, and the space-charge-dominated beam intensity is much larger, with ω^pb2/ωβb022γb2. The stability analysis shows that the instability growth rate Imω increases with increasing normalized beam intensity ω^pb2/ωβb02 and increasing fractional charge neutralization f. In addition, the instability is strongest (largest growth rate) for perturbations with azimuthal mode number =1, corresponding to a simple (dipole) transverse displacement of the beam ions and the background electrons. For the case of overlapping step-function density profiles for the beam ions and background electrons, corresponding to monoenergetic ions and electrons, a key result is that there is no threshold in beam intensity ω^pb2/ωβb02 or fractional charge neutralization f for the onset of instability. Finally, for the case of continuously varying density profiles with parabolic profile shape, a semiquantitative estimate is made of the effects of the corresponding spread in (depressed) betatron frequency on stability behavior, including an estimate of the instability threshold for the case of weak density nonuniformity.

View figure in article

References (52)

  1. R. C. Davidson, Physics of Nonneutral Plasmas (Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, MA, 1990), and references therein.
  2. T. P. Wangler, Principles of RF Linear Accelerators (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1998).
  3. M. Reiser, Theory and Design of Charged Particle Beams (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1994).
  4. J. D. Lawson, The Physics of Charged-Particle Beams (Oxford Science Publications, New York, 1988).
  5. R. A. Jameson, in Advanced Accelerator Concepts, J. S. Wurtele, AIP Conf. Proc. No. 279 (AIP, New York, 1993), p. 969.
  6. E. P. Lee and J. Hovingh, Fusion Technol. 15, 369 (1989).
  7. See, for example, Proceedings of the 1995 International Symposium on Heavy Ion Inertial Fusion, J. J. Barnard, T. J. Fessenden, and E. P. Lee [J. Fusion Eng. Design 32, 1–620 (1996)], and references therein.
  8. I. Kapchinskij and V. Vladimirskij, in Proceedings of the International Conference on High Energy Accelerators and Instrumentation (CERN Scientific Information Service, Geneva, 1959), p. 274.
  9. R. L. Gluckstern, in Proceedings of the 1970 Proton Linear Accelerator Conference, Batavia, IL, M. R. Tracy (National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL, 1971), p. 811.
  10. H. S. Uhm and R. C. Davidson, Phys. Fluids 23, 1586 (1980).
  11. H. S. Uhm and R. C. Davidson, Part. Accel. 11, 65 (1980).
  12. T.-S. Wang and L. Smith, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 28, 2399 (1981).
  13. T.-S. Wang and L. Smith, Part. Accel. 12, 247 (1982).
  14. I. Hofmann, L. J. Laslett, L. Smith, and I. Haber, Part. Accel. 13, 145 (1983).
  15. J. Struckmeier and J. Klabunde, Part. Accel. 15, 47 (1984).
  16. I. Hofmann and J. Struckmeier, Part. Accel. 21, 69 (1987).
  17. J. Struckmeier and I. Hofmann, Part. Accel. 39, 219 (1992).
  18. N. Brown and M. Reiser, Phys. Plasmas 2, 965 (1995).
  19. C. Chen, R. Pakter, and R. C. Davidson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 225 (1997).
  20. R. C. Davidson and C. Chen, Part. Accel. 59, 175 (1998).
  21. R. C. Davidson, W. W. Lee, and P. H. Stoltz, Phys. Plasmas 5, 279 (1998).
  22. P. J. Channell, Phys. Plasmas 6, 982 (1999).
  23. R. C. Davidson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 991 (1998).
  24. R. C. Davidson, Phys. Plasmas 5, 3459 (1998).
  25. B. V. Chirikov, At. Energ. 19, 239 (1965) [Sov. J. At. Energy 19, 1149 (1965)].
  26. R. H. Levy, J. D. Daugherty, and O. Buneman, Phys. Fluids 12, 2616 (1969).
  27. E. Keil and B. Zotter, CERN Report No. CERN-ISR-TH/71-58, 1971.
  28. D. G. Koshkarev and P. R. Zenkevich, Part. Accel. 3, 1 (1972).
  29. R. C. Davidson and H. S. Uhm, Phys. Fluids 20, 1938 (1977).
  30. R. C. Davidson and H. S. Uhm, Phys. Fluids 21, 60 (1978).
  31. D. Neuffer, E. Colton, D. Fitzgerald, T. Hardek, R. Hutson, R. Macek, M. Plum, H. Thiessen, and T.-S. Wang, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 321, 1 (1992).
  32. D. Neuffer and C. Ohmori, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 343, 390 (1994).
  33. T.-S. Wang, Los Alamos National Laboratory PSR Report No. 96-004 (1996).
  34. T.-S. Wang, Los Alamos National Laboratory PSR Report No. 96-005, 1996.
  35. M. A. Plum, D. H. Fitzgerald, D. Johnson, J. Langenbrunner, R. J. Macek, F. Merrill, P. Morton, B. Prichard, O. Sander, M. Shulze, H. A. Thiessen, T.-S. Wang, and C. A. Wilkinson, Proceedings of the Particle Accelerator Conference, Vancouver, Canada, 1997 (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1998), p. 1611.
  36. D. Sagan and A. Temnykh, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 344, 459 (1994).
  37. M. Izawa, Y. Sato, and T. Toyomasu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 5044 (1995).
  38. S. A. Heifets, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center Report No. SLAC/AP-95-101, 1995.
  39. T. O. Roubenheimer and F. Zimmermann, Phys. Rev. E 52, 5487 (1995); G. V. Stupakov, T. O. Roubenheimer, and F. Zimmermann, 52, 5499 (1995).
  40. J. Byrd, A. Chao, S. Heifets, M. Minty, T. O. Roubenheimer, J. Seeman, G. Stupakov, J. Thomson, and F. Zimmerman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 79 (1997).
  41. K. Ohmi, Phys. Rev. E 55, 7550 (1997).
  42. L. J. Laslett, A. M. Sessler, and D. Möhl, Nucl. Instrum. Methods 121, 517 (1974).
  43. See, for example, Ref. [[1]], pp. 240–271, and references therein.
  44. N. A. Krall and A. W. Trivelpiece, Principles of Plasma Physics (San Francisco Press, San Francisco, CA, 1986).
  45. I. B. Bernstein and S. K. Trehan, Nucl. Fusion 1, 3 (1960).
  46. See, for example, Refs. [[25,27,28,31–35]].
  47. See, for example, Ref. [[1]], Chaps. 2, 4, and 10.
  48. R. C. Davidson, Phys. Fluids 19, 1189 (1976).
  49. V. K. Neil and A. M. Sessler, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 36, 429 (1965).
  50. R. L. Gluckstern, R. K. Cooper, and P. J. Channell, Part. Accel. 16, 125 (1985).
  51. T. P. Wangler (private communication).
  52. I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, Tables of Integrals, Series and Products (Academic Press, New York, 1980), pp. 910–917.

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation