Transcript Conclusions Session Laser - ELI-NP

Laser Session Issues
List of proposed strategies remains the same
Front-end
Power amplifier
OPCPA/(Ti:Sa) Ti:Sa
OPCPA
Mixed glass
Entity to build a turn key solution?
Two-stages project implementation: Several PW + 2014-2nd stage up to
10PW?
Bottlenecks and/or engineering challenges
“System independent” issues
– Coherent combination
– Beam transportation
Identified Bottlenecks for OPCPA/Ti:Sa strategy
Bottlenecks
a) HDT broadband large size gratings
b) Pump lasers: general design, SHG crystals,
Homogenizers
c) Large size Ti:Sa crystals
d) HDT broadband HR coating on large size optics
Engineering challenges
e) OPCPA front-end: Synchronization & Pumps
f) Contrast: ASE + pre-pulses
g) Back-reflection isolation
h) Strehl ratio & adaptive optics
OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy
Identified Bottlenecks for OPCPA/Mixed glass strategy
Bottlenecks
a) Tiled compressor
b) Rep. rate & slab cooling
Engineering challenges
c) Contrast: ASE + pre-pulses
d) Strehl ratio & adaptive optics
Mixed-glass strategy
a) Bottleneck - HDT broadband
large size gratings
• Present technology limit: shorter than 20 fs
• Time-line development:
– design: exist at ILE, Fresnel Inst., St-Etienne
– demonstrator: not yet – feasibility: 6 months
• Potential providers: PGL, JY, LLNL?
• Differential budget: 2-3 M€ (more
expensive with back-up solution)
• Back-up sol.: largest existing gold gratings
OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy
b) Bottleneck - Pump lasers
• Present technology limit: below 200J
• Time-line development:
– several designs: Thales, Quantel, Continuum,
LLNL,…
– demonstrator: available in less than 1 year (fall
2011)
• Potential providers: Thales, Quantel,
Continuum, LLNL,…
• Estimated budget: 8M€ for 800J @527nm
• Back-up sol. for SHG: DKDP, Y:COB (if LBO
not available)
OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy
c) Bottleneck – Large size Ti:Sa crystals
• Present technology limit: 15 cm clear aperture
making possible up to 5-7 PW@15 fs
• Time-line development: 1 year
– design: Crystal System Inc
– demonstrator: transverse lasing tests end of April
2011 (LOA-LULI)
• Potential providers: Crystal System, RSA Le Rubis
• Budget: 500k€ for R&D and delivery of 2 x 20cm
clear aperture crystals - 150 k€ per add. crystals
• Back-up sol.: no
OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy
d) Bottleneck - HDT broadband HR coating on large
size optics, including deformable mirrors
• Present technology limit: only metallic coatings
after compression (0.15 J/cm²)
• Time-line development:
– design: proposed by all companies
– Deformable mirror demonstrator: already available
and in 1 year (after funding) for 20 cm in diameter
• Potential providers: CVI, Okamoto, SAGEM,
SESO, Cilas,… + Imagine Optics for DM
• Potential Budget: ~ 1.3 M€ for R&D including
delivery of one deformable mirror (200mm in
diameter)
• Back-up sol.: metallic coatings
OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy
e) Engineering challenge – OPCPA front-end:
Synchronization & Pumps
• Present technology limit: not available
• Time-line development:
– design: exists at ILE
– demonstrator: not yet – available in 6 months
• Provider: Apollon
• Budget:
• Back-up sol.: standard ns-OPCPA pump &
electronic synchronization (available from
Thales, Continuum, Quantel)
OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy
f) Engineering challenge - Contrast: ASE + pre-pulses
• Present technology limit: 12 orders of
magnitude demonstrated
• Time-line development:
– several existing designs: OPCPA, XPWsaturable absorber, plasma mirrors
– demonstrator: XPW-saturable absorber
measured@10 mJ
• Potential providers: Amplitude, Apollon,
Thales, etc…
• Budget: depends on the choosen technology
• Back-up sol.: plasma mirror if necessary (for
solid-state targets interaction)
OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy
g) Engineering challenge - Back-reflection isolation
• Present technology limit: small size Pockels-cells and
Faraday isolators
• Time-line development:
– design: PEPC and transverse electrodes Pockels-cells
– demonstrator: already available
• Potential providers:
• Budget: depending on requirements
• Back-up sol.:
Comments: SBS-SRS for long pulses; not an issue for fs
pulses. No switch existing at that power but could be
solved by small angle misalignment
OPCPA / Ti:Sa strategy
a) Bottleneck - Tiled compressor
• Present technology limit: up to 2 kJ / 2 ps at
Rochester: good mechanical & thermal
stability
• Time-line development:
– design: 1740 lines/mm by National Energetics
– demonstrator: available at 100 fs within 6 months
at small scale
• Potential provider: National Energetics
• Estimated budget: few (>5) M€
• Back-up sol.: no
Mixed-glass strategy
b) Bottleneck: Rep. rate & slab cooling
• Present technology limit: 3 shots/hour
• Time-line development:
– design: exists at National Energetics
– demonstrator: 0.1 Hz in September 2011
• Provider: National Energetics
• Budget:
• Back-up sol.: 3 shots/hour by using
deformable mirror
Mixed-glass strategy
c) Engineering challenge - Contrast: ASE + pre-pulses
• Present technology limit: 10-10 at Trident
• Time-line development:
– several existing designs: OPCPA, XPWsaturable absorber, plasma mirrors
– demonstrator: ?
• Provider:
• Budget:
• Back-up sol.: plasma mirror
Mixed-glass strategy
Shared engineering challenge - Beam transportation
• Present technology limit:
• Time-line development:
– design:
– demonstrator:
• Potential provider: expertise at NIF, LMJ,
Rutherford, etc…
• Budget:
• Back-up sol.:
Shared bottleneck - Coherent beam combining
• Present technology limit: ps level + 100’ fs
for fiber laser tech.
• Time-line development: several years
– design: no
– demonstrator: no
• Potential provider: not identified at that
stage
• Budget: ?
• Back-up sol.: temporal synchronization
Laser session issues
List of proposed strategies remains the same
Front-end
Power amplifier
OPCPA/(Ti:Sa) Ti:Sa
OPCPA
Mixed glass
Q: Entity to build a turn key solution?
Q: Two-stages project implementation: Several
PW + 2014-2nd stage up to 10PW?
Q: The two strategies in parallel?
Laser session issues
Q: Entity to build a turn key solution?
Due to tight timeline, is an immediate contractual engagement with any entity
(industrial?) realistic to build a system up to the present tech limit (several
PW) ?
Risks have to be shared between ELI-NP and the entity.
2 to 3 PW seems to be the upper limit from industrial side.
ELI-NP laser team should join the development team.
Another place should be identified for development before ELI-NP building
availability.
No industrial partner is ready today to assume the risk of delivering turn key
10PW
A consortium (involving industrial companies to be defined) could be part of
the solution.
Q: Two-stages project implementation: several PW +
2014-2nd stage up to 10PW?
Single stage approach looks possible but the project could be staged in 2
steps, the first one being dedicated to demonstrated technology
Q: The two strategies in parallel?
This two strategies in parallel development would be more costly
but possible?
Laser session issues / other comments
- LLNL can provide only tech not existing elsewhere.
- Dual development could be considered if coherent combining is switched into
temporal synchronization.
- Rep. rate and intensity on target are linked together (0.1 Hz for 10^23W/cm^2,
and 1 Hz or more for 10^24 W/cm^2 assuming real-time feedback corrections)
- Improvements on contrast, strehl ratio and so on will continue after the
2015deadline!