BROPK EN L LABORATORY NAT,lY BNL-79509-2007-CP Free Electron Lasers and High-Energy Electron Cooling Vladimir N. Litvinenko (BNL), Yaroslav S. Derbenev (TJNAF') Presented at the FEL-07(2ghInternational Free Electron Laser Conference) 'Budker INP, Novosibirsk, Russia August 26-3 1,2007 October 2007 Collider-Accelerator Department Brookhaven National Laboratory P.O. Box 5000 Upton, NY 11973-5000 www.bnl.gov Notice: This manuscript has been authored by employees of Brookhaven Science Associates, LLC under Contract No. DE-AC02-98CH10886 with the US. Depamnent of Energy. The publisher by accepting the manuscript for publication acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world- wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes. This preprint is intended for publication in a journal or proceedings. Since changes may be made before publication, it may not be cited or reproduced without the author's permission. DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or any third party’s use or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof FREE ELECTRON LASERS AND HIGH-ENERGY ELECTRON COOLING* Vladimir N. Litvinenko, BNL, Upton, Long Island, NY, USA’ Yaroslav S. Derbenev, TJNAF, Newport News, VA, USA) Abstract The main figure of merit of any collider is its average Cooling intense high-energy hadron beams remains a luminosity, i.e., its average productivity for an appropriate major challenge in modern accelerator physics. branch of physics, Cooling hadron beams at top energy Synchrotron radiation of such beams is too feeble to may further this productivity. provide significant cooling: even in the Large Hadron For a round beam, typical for hadron colliders, the Collider (LHC) with 7 TeV protons, the longitudinal luminosity is given by a simple expression: damping time is about thirteen hours. Decrements of traditional electron cooling decrease rapidly as the high power of beam energy, and an effective electron cooling of protons or antiprotons at energies above 100 GeV where N,, Nz are the number of particles per bunch, f, is seems unlikely. Traditional stochastic cooling still cannot their collision frequency, p* is the transverse p-function catch up with the challenge of cooling high-intensity at the collision point, E is the transverse emittance of the bunched proton beams - to be effective, its bandwidth beam, u, is the bunch length, and h s 1 is a coefficient must be increased by about two orders-of-magnitude. accounting for the so-called hourglass effect [l]: Two techniques offering the potential to cool high- h(x) = -e”“erfc(l/x).?In- energy hadron beams are optical stochastic cooling (OSC) X and coherent electron cooling (CEC) - the latter is the The hourglass effect is caused by variations in the beam’s focus of this paper. In the early 1980s, CEC was size orz=P*c(l+ s2/Ip“’) along the length of the suggested as a possibility for using various instabilities in an electron beam to enhance its interaction with hadrons collision region, which is defined by the bunch-length, 0,. (Le,, cooling them). The capabilities of present-day Accordingly, for h A.75, p* should be limited to values accelerator technology, Energy Recovery Linacs (ERLs), /3*au,. Hence, longitudinal cooling of hadron beam may and high-gain Free-Electron Lasers (FELs), finally caught allow reduction of p* and increase the colliders’ up with the idea and provided the all necessary luminosity. ingredients for realizing such a process. The effect of transverse emittance cooling on the In this paper, we discuss the principles, and the main collider’s luminosity is less straightforward. For beams limitations of the CEC process based on a high-gain FEL with limited intensities, the luminosity (1) grows as the driven by an ERL. We also present, and summarize in transverse emittance decreases. But luminosity in many Table 1, some numerical examples of CEC for ions and oolliders is limited by the beam-beam effects, and hence, protons in RHIC and the LHC. a reduction of emittance can be either counterproductive or luminosity-neutral. In this case, the role of transverse INTRODUCTION cooling is reduced to one of counteracting intra-beam scattering orland cooling large amplitudes of oscillation to In contrast with electron- and positron-beams, hadron lower the detector’s backgrounds. beams in storage rings (colliders) do not have strong loss The presence of strong damping in electron-positron mechanism (such as synchrotron radiation for leptons) colliders allows the use of significantly higher bunch and, therefore, do not have a natural damping mechanism intensities compared with hadron beams of the same to reduce their energy spreads and emittances. energy: the beam-beam tune shift can be about factor of There are several reasons why cooling high-energy four larger in the best lepton colliders than in best hadron hadron beams, mostly at the top energy range of a colliders. The accelerator community discussed the collider, is strongly desirable. conjecture that effective (strong) cooling of hadron beams First, any increases in the longitudinal- and transverse- might increase luminosity in such colliders via increasing emittances of a hadron beam accumulated during multi- the allowable beam-beam tune-shift. We emphasize that stage acceleration from a source to the store energy this assertion, though worth mentioning, ~LXZ.V (collision) remain in the beam. Any instability causing the meculative and should not be accepted without serious growth of emittance (for example, that of the electron skepticism. cloud that is the limiting factor for most modem hadron The electron-hadron collider, eRHIC, however, is one colliders) may entail the need to discard accelerated type of collider where cooling the hadron beam offers beams and start the process again. In any case, present- dramatic advantages [2]. In eRHIC, polarized electrons day high-energy hadron colliders do not have control of accelerated in an ERL will collide with hadrons stored in beam emittances at the collision energy, and are forced to the RHIC’s storage ring. In this case, a reduction in the use beams as they are; this is not always the optimum transverse emittance of the hadron beam engenders a approach. proportional reduction of the electron beam’s intensity * Work nerfomd iinder rhe awnice%of the 1I.S Denartmen1 of Rnerev. while maintaining its ultimate luminosity constant 131. The idea of coherent electron cooling (CEC) [10,11] Reduction of the electron beam’s current has multiple encompasses various possibilities of using collective advantages: reducing the strain on the polarized electron instabilities in the electron beam to enhance the source, proportionally lowering synchrotron radiation (the effectiveness of the interaction between hadrons and main source of the detector’s background); and, offering electrons. In this paper, we focus on a specific case of the possibility of increasing the electron beam’s energy. using a high gain FEL (driven by an ERL) for CEC. CEC Plans are to use a non-zero crossing angle at the Large combines the advantages of electrostatic interaction with Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN [41. In this case, the broad band of FEL-amplifiers: examples in this paper reducing the bunch’s length would directly contribute to span from tens of THz to hundreds of PHz. Such systems increasing the luminosity and eliminating the necessity of are naturally fit into a straight section of modern high- having a crab-crossing system [51. energy hadron colliders. The proposed CEC method has Hence, high-energy hadron cooling may play important some potential advantages compared with the concept of role in increasing the performance of high-energy hadron optical stochastic cooling [121: and lepton-hadron cofiiders, including RHIC and eRHIC a) it may not entail significant modifications to the at Brookhaven National Laboratory, BNL, the Tevatron at lattice of the hadron machine ; Fermilab, and the LHC at CERN. b) it uses electrostatic interaction instead of very Electron cooling proved to be very efficient method of inefficient radiation and interaction with TEM cooling intense hadron- and ion-beams at low and waves by protons in a wiggler; medium energies [6]. The electron cooler of 9 GeV c) it is not limited to few potential choices of laser antiprotons in the Fermilab recycler represents state-of- frequencies and their bandwidths in THz range. the-art technology [7]. Development of the ERL-based Similar to other coherent cooling techniques, the CEC’s, electron cooler at BNL promises effective cooling of gold cooling rate is limited by the cross-talk of neighboring ions with energies of 100 GeV per nucleon [8]. hadrons (and the short noise in the electron beam). Thus, Nevertheless, the effectiveness of electron cooling is the cooling rate is limited by an effective number of weaker for protons than it is for ions (it scales with Z’IA, particles in a coherent sample, which is inversely where Z is the change number of an ion and A its atomic proportional to the amplifier’s bandwidth.