Hyperfine Interactions

, Volume 173, Issue 1–3, pp 85–92 | Cite as

A high-current electron beam ion trap as an on-line charge breeder for the high precision mass measurement TITAN experiment

  • M. Froese
  • C. Champagne
  • J. R. Crespo López-Urrutia
  • S. Epp
  • G. Gwinner
  • A. Lapierre
  • J. Pfister
  • G. Sikler
  • J. Ullrich
  • J. Dilling
Article

Abstract

The precision of atomic mass measurements in a Penning trap is directly proportional to the charge state q of the ion and, hence, can be increased by using highly charged ions (HCI). For this reason, charge breeding with an electron beam ion trap (EBIT) is employed at TRIUMF’s Ion Trap for Atomic and Nuclear science (TITAN) on-line facility in Vancouver, Canada. By bombarding the injected and trapped singly charged ions with an intense beam of electrons, the charge state of the ions is rapidly increased inside the EBIT. To be compatible with the on-line requirements of short-lived isotopes, very high electron beam current densities are needed. The TITAN EBIT includes a 6 Tesla superconducting magnet and is designed to have electron beam currents and energies of up to 5 A and 60 keV, respectively. Once operational at full capacity, most species can be bred into a He-like configuration within tens of ms. Subsequently, the HCI are extracted, pass a Wien filter to reduce isobaric contamination, are cooled, and injected into a precision Penning trap for mass measurement. We will present the first results and current status of the TITAN EBIT, which has recently been moved to TRIUMF after assembly and commissioning at the Max-Planck-Institute (MPI) for Nuclear Physics in Heidelberg, Germany.

Keywords

Electron beam ion trap Charge breeding Highly charged ions High precision mass measurements Penning trap Short-lived isotopes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cabibbo, N.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 531 (1963)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kobayashi, M., Maskawa, T.: Prog. Theor. Phys. 49, 652 (1973)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Savard, G., et al.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 102,501 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dilling, J., Bricault, P., Smith, M., Kluge, H.J., et al.: Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 204, 492 (2003)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ball, G., et al.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 1454 (2001)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Levine, M., Marrs, R., Henderson, J., Knapp, D., Schneider, M.: Physica Scripta T22, 157 (1988)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fuchs, T., Biedermann, C., Radtke, R., Behar, E., Doron, R.: Phys. Rev. A 58, 4518 (1998)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McDonald, J., Bauer, R., Schneider, D.: Rev. Sci. Instrum. 73, 30 (2002)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    González-Martínez, A.J.: Ph.D. thesis, University of Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herrmann, G.: J. Appl. Phys. 29, 127 (1958)MATHCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Froese, M.W.: Master’s thesis, University of Manitoba (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Froese
    • 1
  • C. Champagne
    • 2
  • J. R. Crespo López-Urrutia
    • 3
  • S. Epp
    • 3
  • G. Gwinner
    • 1
  • A. Lapierre
    • 2
  • J. Pfister
    • 2
  • G. Sikler
    • 2
  • J. Ullrich
    • 3
  • J. Dilling
    • 2
  1. 1.University of ManitobaWinnipegCanada
  2. 2.TRIUMFVancouverCanada
  3. 3.Max-Planck-Institute for Nuclear PhysicsHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations