Physics of Particles and Nuclei Letters

, Volume 15, Issue 7, pp 937–942 | Cite as

Optical Diagnostics for Plasma Physics and Accelerator Science: Commonality and Differences

  • O. MeshkovEmail author
Control and Diagnostic Systems


Optical diagnostics are widely used both for experiments of plasma physics and for measurements of parameters of electron/positron beams in accelerators. The approaches, applied for that, often have the same methodological basement that is explained by similarity of properties of the studied phenomena. Nevertheless, these branches of physics are very specific and require special diagnostics. Possibility of closed contacts and cooperation between scientists solving similar problems at different areas of physics helps to overcome these problems. It is especially typical for BINP SB RAS known by pioneering works on electron-positron colliders and nuclear fusion. The paper describes the diagnostics that are used at the experiments of plasma physics, especially for plasma heating by high-current electron beam and contains comparison with optical diagnostics which are recognized tools at colliders and storage rings.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. Sheffield, D. Froula, S. H. Glenzer, and N. C. Luhmann, Jr., Plasma Scattering of Electromagnetic Radiation. Theory and Measurement Techniques, 2nd ed. (Academic, New York, 2010).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    V. Smaluk, Particle Beam Diagnostics for Accelerators: Instruments and Methods (Novosib. Gos. Univ., Novosibirsk, 2009; VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, 2009).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Burdakov et al., Fusion Sci. Technol. 51, 352 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. S. Popov et al., “Upgrading of Thomson scattering system for measurements of spatial dynamics of plasma heating in GOL-3,” Trans. Fusion Sci. Technol. 59, 292–294 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    O. I. Meshkov et al., “The upgraded optical diagnostics of the VEPP-4M collider,” in Proceedings of European Particle Accelerator Conference EPAC 2004, Lucerne, Switzerland, pp. 2739–2741.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. Scheidt, “Review of streak cameras for accelerators: features, applications and results,” in Proceedings of European Particle Accelerator Conference EPAC 2000, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Proceedings of International Congresses on High Speed Photography and Photonics.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Maslov et al., “Status of the JET LIDAR Thomson scattering diagnostics,” EFDA-JET-PR(13)51.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    N. Yu. Muchnoi et al., “The beam energy measurement system for the Beijing electron-positron collider,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 659, 21–29 (2011).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Murari, Overview Measuring Techniques for Magnetic Confinement Nuclear Fusion.
  11. 11.
    P. Tenenbaum and T. Shintake, “Measurement of small electron beam spots,” SLAC-PUB-8057 (SLAC, Stanford, USA, 1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    G. Braithwaite, N. Gottardi, G. Magyar, J. O’Rourke, J. Ryan, D. Véron, and JET Team, “JET Polari–interferometer,” JET–P(89)15.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    G. Kube, “Transversal beam measurements,” in Proceedings of CERN Accelerator School, Dourdane, France, 2008.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Lizunov et al., “Development of a multichannel dispersion interferometer at TEXTOR,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 79, 10E708 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    T. Mitsuhashi, in Proceedings of the Joint US-CERNJapan-Russia School of Particle Accelerators, Montreux, May 11–20, 1998 (World Scientific, 1998), pp. 399–427.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    T. Naito and T. Mitsuhashi, “Very small beam-size measurement by a reflective synchrotron radiation interferometer,” Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams 9, 122802 (2006).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    T. Naito and T. Mitsuhashi, “Improvement of the resolution of SR interferometer ta KEK-ATF damping ring,” in Proceedings of International Particle Accelerator Conference IPAC’10, Kyoto, Japan.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    V. Dorohov et al., “New station for optical observation of electron beam parameters at electron storage ring SIBERIA-2,” in Proceedings of International Particle Accelerator Conference IPAC 2014, Dresden, Germany, THPME151, pp. 361–363.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Notley et al., “Development of time resolved X-ray spectroscopy in high intensity laser-plasma interactions,” Central Laser Facility Annual Report 2005/2006 (Rutherford Appleton Labor., Chilton, Didcot, UK, 2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. C. Thompson et al., “UCLA/FNPL underdense plasma lens experiment: results and analysis,” AIP Conf. Proc. 877, 561–567 (2006); FERMILABCONF-06-531-AD.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    A. I. Butakov et al., “Injection and extraction at damping ring of an electron-positron injection complex VEPP-5,” in Proceedings of the DIPAC-2001, pp. 1496–1498.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    V. P. Degtyareva et al., Proc. SPIE 491, 239 (1984).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    E. I. Zinin et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. 208, 439 (1983).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    E. I. Zinin and V. A. Pustovarov, Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Fiz., No. 4 (Suppl.), 165 (2006).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    E. I. Zinin and O. I. Meshkov, “Optical dissector for longitudinal beam profile measurements,” JINST 10, 10024 (2015). doi 10.1088/1748-0221/10/10/P10024ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RASNovosibirskRussia
  2. 2.Novosibirsk State UniversityNovosibirskRussia

Personalised recommendations