Distortion of the ion motion projection
Distortion of the ion motion projection onto the detector can be due to misalignment between the magnetic and electric field axes and tilt of the detector plane with respect to the symmetry axis of the trap electrodes. Ions extracted from the measurement trap initially follow the diverging magnetic field lines in the region of constant electric field and, then, accelerated to 30q kV of energy, which creates an intermediate focus point in front of the ground electrode [5]. Thus, the assumption of the electric field-free drift region [3] is not applicable in the case of JYFLTRAP. After the focus point the beam freely develops and reach the detector.
Distortion of the projection was studied using the magnetron motion, which has a period \(T_- \approx 605\) \(\mu \)s (\(\nu _- \approx 1653\) Hz). The magnetron motion of \(^{133}\)Cs\(^+\) ions was excited in the measurement trap by applying a dipolar rf pulse with a duration of 2 magnetron periods at the frequency \(\nu _-\) and amplitude \(A_-\) before extracting them with different phases (altogether 63 phase points spaced apart from each other by delaying the extraction of ions from the trap in steps of 9.68 \(\mu \)s). The start time of the magnetron excitation was scanned over a magnetron period to average possible shifts of the phase spots due to the magnetron motion existing before the excitation. The center spot was collected after every two rounds of phase scans. This was done by applying no excitation and by scanning the extraction time from the trap over a magnetron period to average out any residual magnetron motion. Ideally, the projection would lead to a perfect circle with a certain constant radius, defined as the distance between the phase spot and center spot on the detector. Figure 4 shows the measured variation of radius at different angular positions of the phase spots. The radius variations are similar for different amplitudes of the magnetron excitation (0.7–1.3 V).
Knowing the magnetron frequency (period) and the time difference between the phases in the measurement, the expected angles between the phase spots were calculated. The reference phase spot position was taken at the angular position 0\(^{\circ }\) and deviation of the measured angle between the phase spot and reference phase spot from the calculated value was determined. This deviation as a function of the angular position of the phase spot on the detector is shown in Fig. 5 for the amplitude of magnetron excitation of 1.1 V. Note, the pulse generator (SpinCore, model PB24-100-4k-PCI), generating the timing triggers for the measurement cycle, has a resolution of 10 ns and the TTL-to-optical converter of the signal introduces the main uncertainty in the timings of 25 ns of jitter. However, this contributes to the uncertainty of the angle determination by an order of magnitude less than the statistical error. The deviation of the angles for each measurement with a certain amplitude of excitation was fitted with a periodic function \(f(\alpha ) = A_0 + \sum _{k=1}^{9} A_k \sin (k\alpha - a_k)\), where \(A_0, A_k\) and \(a_k\) are constants. Since the cyclotron frequency is determined via the angle \(\alpha _c\), which is the difference of the polar angles \(\alpha _+\) and \(\alpha _-\) (see Eq. 7), the uncertainty related to the angle shift depends on the value of \(\alpha _{c}\) and the angles \(\alpha _+\) and \(\alpha _-\) of the phase spot positions on the detector. To take into account the angle shift in the cyclotron frequency measurement the systematic uncertainty \(\delta _{syst}\alpha _{c} = |f(\alpha _+) - f(\alpha _-)|\) can be quadratically added to the statistical uncertainty of the angle \(\alpha _{c}\).
Note, that the cyclotron frequency uncertainty caused by the angle shift decreases with increasing the phase-accumulation time \(t_{acc}\) (Eq. 8). In precision mass measurements the angle between the cyclotron and magnetron phase spots \(\alpha _c\) is tuned to be as close to zero as possible, i. e. the phase-accumulation time is as close to multiple of the period of the cyclotron frequency \(\nu _c\). In practice, the angle \(\alpha _c\) can remain within a few degrees for several hours with typical fluctuations of the magnetic field (Sect. 3.2). The position of the phase spots is also chosen to lie in the region where the angle shift is almost constant, and, thus, the systematic uncertainty for the angle \(\alpha _c\) is canceled out. For example, such region is in the ranges of polar angles of \(231^{\circ }-271^{\circ }\), where \(\delta _{syst}\alpha _{c} \le 0.001\) rad. This translates to an upper limit for the relative uncertainty of the cyclotron frequency determination of, e.g., singly-charged ions of \(^{133}\)Cs to about of \(2\times 10^{-10}\)[s]/\(t_{acc}\). This uncertainty is several times smaller than the typical statistical uncertainty. At worst, the magnetron and cyclotron spot images can deviate by 0.05 rad. This translates the relative uncertainty of \(1.2 \times 10^{-8}\)[s]/\(t_{acc}\) and can introduce a significant systematic error. It was observed that the distortion of the projection depends on the preparation of ions in the preparation trap and can differ for different conditions. Thus, the mapping of the optimal angle range can be performed prior to precise PI-ICR measurements in order to minimize the systematic uncertainty of the angle \(\alpha _c\).
Temporal stability of the magnetic and electric fields
Stability of the radial frequencies \(\nu _+\) and \(\nu _-\) depend on the stability of the magnetic field B and trapping potential \(U_0\) (Eq. 4), while the cyclotron frequency \(\nu _c\) depends only on the magnetic field B (Eq. 1). The magnetic field strength of a superconducting magnet is changing over time. A decrease of the current of the superconducting coils due to the flux creep phenomenon [39] leads to a decrease of the magnetic field. This slow change over the years is approximately linear and can be taken into account with calibration. There are also non-linear fluctuations of the magnetic field caused by the instability of the environmental conditions such as temperature, pressure and ambient fields. The temperature of the IGISOL experimental hall is stabilized at the level below 1 \(^{\circ }\)C and additional temperature stabilization of the magnet is not used. The stability of the trapping potential is defined by the stability of the power supplies. The DC voltages for the electrodes of the measurement trap are applied from a single power supply module (ISEG, model EHS F210n) and show a slow drift over time, common to all channels.
Figure 6 shows the polar angles and cyclotron frequencies of \(^{133}\)Cs\(^+\) ions delivered from the surface ionization source, which were measured with the PI-ICR method for about 93.5 h at JYFLTRAP. For each single frequency measurement 700–800 ions were collected in total for both phase spots in about 7 min with the phase accumulation time \(t_{acc}\) of 1 s. Up to 5 detected ions/bunch were taken into the analysis. The drift of the angle \(\alpha _c\) and the cyclotron frequency \(\nu _c\) (Eq. 7) corresponds to the drift of the magnetic field B and represents a smoother change in time compared to the polar angles \(\alpha _-\) and \(\alpha _+\), depending on the radial frequencies \(\nu _-\) and \(\nu _+\), respectively, which are influenced in addition to the magnetic field by the trapping potential \(U_0\). Daily fluctuations of the cyclotron frequency \(\nu _c\) and the magnetron frequency \(\nu _-\) do not exceed 30 mHz and 50 mHz, respectively.
To determine the uncertainty due to non-linear magnetic-field fluctuations the cyclotron frequency at time \(t_{k+1}=(t_{k} + t_{k+2})/2\) was interpolated using Eq. 21 and compared to the actual value \(\nu _c (t_{k+1})\). The relative deviation of the magnetic field from the linear change by using Eq. 1 can be written as
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\Delta B(t_{k+1})}{B(t_{k+1})}&= \frac{B^{inter}(t_{k+1}) - B(t_{k+1})}{B(t_{k+1})} \nonumber \\&= \frac{\nu _c^{inter}(t_{k+1}) - \nu _c(t_{k+1})}{\nu _c(t_{k+1})}. \end{aligned}$$
(22)
The standard deviation of \(\Delta B(t_{k+1})/B(t_{k+1})\) was calculated for different time intervals \(\Delta t = t_{k+2} - t_{k}\) and plotted as a function of \(\Delta t\) (Fig. 7). The data were fitted by a straight line, the slope of which describes the uncertainty related to temporal fluctuations of the magnetic field per time interval between the reference measurements. It results in the standard uncertainty
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\delta B}{B \delta t} = 2.01(25) \times 10^{-12} \text { min}^{-1}. \end{aligned}$$
(23)
In previous studies of the magnetic field fluctuations at JYFLTRAP the cyclotron frequency measurements for \(^{84}\)Kr\(^+\) ions were performed using the TOF-ICR method with Ramsey excitation pattern of 25–350–25 ms and the value \(\delta B/(B \delta t) = 8.18(19) \times 10^{-12}\) min\(^{-1}\) was obtained [40]. We also note that temperature stabilization in the magnet bore and the pressure stabilization in the liquid-helium cryostat implemented at the SHIPTRAP setup (GSI), which has the superconducting magnet similar to the JYFLTRAP magnet, allowed to reach the value \(\delta B/(B \delta t) = 1.3(11) \times 10^{-12}\) min\(^{-1}\) [41].
Contaminations and magnetron phase correction
Ideally only one ion species should be present in the measurement trap during a cyclotron frequency measurement. However, not always the mass-selective buffer gas cooling technique [28] in the preparation trap or the Ramsey cleaning method [42] can provide a pure beam. For example, in the case of low-lying isomers the PI-ICR measurement is performed with more than one ion species in the trap [15, 43]. The resolving power of the PI-ICR method is defined by the ability to resolve the phase difference of the cyclotron motions between two ion species accumulated during a phase accumulation time \(t_{acc}\) [3, 5]. It allows to separate the isomeric states of short-living isotopes (\(T_{1/2} < 1\) s) with energy difference of a few tens of keV, which will have different angular positions of the cyclotron spots on the detector.
Due to finite excitation pulse duration of the dipolar \(\nu _+\) and quadrupolar \(\nu _c\) excitations (Fig. 3), the different ion species accumulate a small phase difference already before the actual phase accumulation period \(t_{acc}\). With only single ion species in the trap, this pre-accumulation has no effect as it merely adds a constant phase for both magnetron and cyclotron phase spots. However, when multiple ion species are present, this effect becomes significant for pattern 1 of Fig. 3. The position of the magnetron spot represents the average position of magnetron phases of all ion species present in the trap weighted by their fractions. Typically the differences of the phases are smaller than the width of the ion distribution and thus there is no way to distinguish the individual magnetron phase spots. Nevertheless, there is a way to correct for this effect.
Let us consider how the phase difference of two ion species \(\Delta \phi = \phi _2 - \phi _1 \) changes during the complete PI-ICR measurement, marking with index “1” and “2” the parameters related to the first and the second ion species, respectively. According to Eq. (15), the phase difference accumulated during the dipolar excitation time \(t_+\) at the frequency \(\nu _d\) (see Fig. 3 step 3) is \(\Delta \phi _+ = \pi (\nu _+^{(2)} - \nu _+^{(1)}) t_+\). To note, the accumulation of phase difference \(\Delta \phi _+\) is only half of that of the free cyclotron motion. After the excitation, during the delay time \(t_{d1}\) (see Fig. 3 between step 3 and step 4) the ions freely rotate at the modified cyclotron frequency and additionally accumulate the phase difference \(\Delta \phi _{f} = 2 \pi (\nu _+^{(2)} - \nu _+^{(1)}) t_{d1}\). Then, the quadrupolar excitation pulse with duration of \(t_c\) (see Fig. 3 step 4) at the frequency \(\nu _q\) is applied converting the cyclotron motion into the magnetron motion. Using Eq. (16) and taking into account that \(\nu _-^{(1)} = \nu _-^{(2)}\), the phase difference accumulated during conversion pulse is then given by \(\Delta \phi _{c} = \pi (\nu _c^{(1)} - \nu _c^{(2)}) t_{c}\). Note that the conversion pulse also inverts the phase of the cyclotron motion accumulated earlier. The total phase difference obtained by combining the phase differences from each of the three stages can be written as
$$\begin{aligned} \Delta \phi = 2 \pi \left( \nu _c^{(1)} - \nu _c^{(2)} \right) \left( \frac{t_+}{2} + t_{d1} + \frac{t_c}{2} \right) , \end{aligned}$$
(24)
assuming \(\nu _+^{(1)} - \nu _+^{(2)} = \nu _c^{(1)} - \nu _c^{(2)}\). As can be seen from this expression, the cyclotron phase difference is accumulated twice as slower during excitations compared to the free cyclotron rotation. Similarly to the correction in [16], the correction angle for the ion species of interest i with the cyclotron frequency \(\nu _c^{i}\) added to the measured angle of the magnetron phase spot \(\alpha _-\) can be written as
$$\begin{aligned} \alpha _{corr}^i = 2 \pi t_{corr} \sum _{k=1}^N \chi _k \left( \nu _c^{(i)} - \nu _c^{(k)} \right) , \end{aligned}$$
(25)
where \(t_{corr} = (t_+ / 2 + t_{d1} + t_c / 2\)), and \(\chi _k\) and \(\nu _c^{k}\) are the relative population fraction and cyclotron frequency of the \(k^{th}\) ion species, respectively. The fractions of the different ion species can be deduced from the separated cyclotron phase spots of different ion species on the detector. The cyclotron frequencies of the ion species can be determined from preliminary analysis before applying the correction for the magnetron phase.
In the discussion above, it was assumed that the magnetron frequency is mass independent. However, it has a very weak dependency on mass as can be seen starting with the second-order series expansion in \(\nu _z^2 / \nu _c^2\) of Eq. (4). In the series expansion up to the third order, the magnetron frequency \(\nu _-\) is approximated as
$$\begin{aligned} \nu _- \approx \frac{U_0}{4 \pi B d^2} + \frac{U_0^2}{8 \pi B^3 d^4} \frac{m}{q} + \frac{U_0^3}{8 \pi B^5 d^6} \left( \frac{m}{q} \right) ^2. \end{aligned}$$
(26)
Using the JYFLTRAP parameters (\(U_0\) = 100 V, B = 7 T, \(d^2 = 6.9 \times 10^{-4}\) m\(^2\)), the magnetron-frequency difference \(\nu _-^{(2)} - \nu _-^{(1)}\) between two singly-charged ions with the mass difference \(\Delta m = m_2 - m_1\) can be written as
$$\begin{aligned}&\frac{\nu _-^{(2)} - \nu _-^{(1)}}{[Hz]} \approx \frac{U_0^2}{8 \pi B^3 d^4} \frac{\Delta m}{q} + \frac{U_0^3}{8 \pi B^5 d^6} \frac{m_2^2 - m_1^2}{q^2} \approx \nonumber \\&\quad 3 \cdot 10^{-2} \cdot \frac{\Delta m}{[u]} + 8 \cdot 10^{-7} \cdot \frac{(m_1 + m_2) \Delta m}{[u]^2}. \end{aligned}$$
(27)
The first term is dominant in Eq. (27) for all ions used at JYFLTRAP. For example, the mass difference of 1 MeV/\(c^2\) corresponds to the magnetron-frequency difference of about \(3 \times 10^{-5}\) Hz. This frequency shift results in the error of the cyclotron frequency ratio R at the level well below \(10^{-10}\) for typically used ions and can be neglected. Ions with larger than 1 MeV/\(c^2\) mass differences can be separated relatively easily using the Ramsey cleaning method [42] or the mass-selective buffer gas cooling technique [28], which allows to perform the measurements with a single ion species, thus, eliminating the shift completely. For smaller mass differences the effect is so small that it is safe to assume that the magnetron frequency is mass independent with a sufficient accuracy for all practical cases at JYFLTRAP.
So far, typical pulse durations of the dipolar and quadrupolar excitations used at JYFLTRAP have been 1 ms and 2 ms, respectively. The usual delay time between excitation pulses \(t_{d1}\) is about 50 \(\mu \)s. However, there is a room to reduce all of them. Figure 8 shows the projections of the magnetron and cyclotron phases of \(^{115}\)Sn\(^+\) and \(^{115}\)In\(^+\) ions simultaneously stored in the measurement trap. The atomic mass difference between \(^{115}\)In and \(^{115}\)Sn was measured with the FSU cryogenic Penning trap mass spectrometer with a high accuracy (\(\Delta m = 497.489(10)\) keV/\(c^2\) [44]), giving the cyclotron frequency difference \(\Delta \nu _c = \nu _c(^{115}\text {Sn}^+) - \nu _c(^{115}\text {In}^+) =\) 4.34697(9) Hz for singly-charged ions at JYFLTRAP. The phase accumulation time used in the measurement was about 307 ms and the accumulated phase difference for the cyclotron phases \(^{115}\)Sn\(^+\) and \(^{115}\)In\(^+\) was one full turn plus about 120\(^{\circ }\). According to Eq. 25 the phase difference of the two ion species in the magnetron spots is about of 2.4\(^{\circ }\). Taking into account the correction for the magnetron phase spot and using the count-rate class analysis (see Sect. 3.4.1) to account ion-ion interactions in the trap, the result of the measurement with 18 cyclotron-frequency ratios is in an agreement with the FSU Q-value [44], giving \(\Delta m = 497.43(57)\) keV/\(c^2\) for the mass difference of \(^{115}\)In and \(^{115}\)Sn. Without the correction of the magnetron spot position, the mass difference \(\Delta m = 499.64(57)\) keV/\(c^2\), differs from FSU [44] by more than 2 keV/\(c^2\), i.e., by more than 3 \(\sigma \). Note, that the cyclotron frequency measurements were performed alternately with the settings for \(^{115}\)Sn and \(^{115}\)In in such a way that the angle between the magnetron and cyclotron phases of the ion of interest was close to zero in order to reduce the error due to distortion of the projection and conversion error.
To reduce the effect of the overlapping magnetron spots, the durations of the excitation pulses should be minimized. The main limitation concerns the conversion pulse, which typically has an amplitude of 5.6 V for 2 ms of duration at JYFLTRAP, and can be shortened to about of 1.12 ms (function generators provide 10 V for the maximum amplitudes). Another approach is to increase the delay time \(t_{d1}\) in such a way that the phases obtained in pattern 1 of excitation scheme are also separated on the detector. However, in this case, the phase accumulation time \(t_{acc} = t_{d2} - t_{d1}\) is reduced for the same trap cycle length, reducing the accuracy of the cyclotron frequency determination.
Ion-number dependence
More than one ion species in the trap during a TOF-ICR or PI-ICR measurement introduces also frequency shifts. If ions of a single species are simultaneously stored in the trap the space charge of such a cloud of ions does not influence the center-of-mass motion of the cloud. A driving field acts on the mass center of the cloud and no frequency shifts are observed [45, 46]. However, if too many ions are stored in the trap and the space charge pushes a significant portion of ions from the center region of the trap to the region of the field imperfections, it leads to a frequency shift.
In the case of more than one ion species confined in the trap, the center-of-mass motions of the ion species can interact with each other causing large shifts in the cyclotron frequencies. The frequency shift depends on the total number of stored ions, the difference of the cyclotron frequencies and the ratio between the number of the ions of interest and contaminant ions [46].
Count-rate class analysis
In order to identify and correct for the cyclotron frequency shift due to the presence of contaminant ions in the measurement trap, the count-rate class (z-class) analysis can be performed [17]. The frequency data are divided into classes by the count rate, i.e. the number of ions simultaneously stored in the trap. The frequencies determined for each class are plotted as a function of the center of gravity of the ions in the class and fitted by a straight line. Extrapolation to the efficiency of the detector results in the corrected frequency. A similar analysis can be directly performed with the cyclotron frequency ratios [47].
In our case, as shown below (Sect. 3.4.2), the detector efficiency \(\epsilon \) depends on the count rate, it is not a constant. Therefore, the frequencies or frequency ratios are plotted as a function of number of detected ion per bunch corrected by the detector efficiency and, then, extrapolated to the unity, i.e. a single ion in the measurement trap [48]. Figure 9a shows a dependence of the cyclotron frequency ratio \(\nu _c\)(\(^{172}\)Yb\(^+\))/\(\nu _c\)(\(^{170}\)Yb\(^+\)) measured with the PI-ICR method on the number of ions per bunch in the trap. The count-rate classes with 1 to 5 detected ions per bunch, corrected by the efficiency \(\epsilon \), were used. Only the ions of single species, either \(^{172}\)Yb\(^+\) or \(^{170}\)Yb\(^+\), were present in the measurement trap at the same time and no frequency shift was observed. A linear fit (red line) is in agreement with the mean frequency value (blue line), averaged over all classes.
The situation when two ion species are simultaneously stored in the trap is demonstrated for \(^{115}\)Sn\(^+\) and \(^{115}\)In\(^+\) ions, created at the same time from tin-indium alloy electrode in the glow discharge ion source. Two ion species were resolved in the PI-ICR measurement, which corresponds to two different cyclotron phase spots on the detector (Fig. 8). The data were divided into four groups according to the number of detected ions per bunch and corrected by the efficiency \(\epsilon \). The cyclotron frequency of the of \(^{115}\)Sn\(^+\) ions decreases with increasing the number of ions in the trap, while the cyclotron frequency of the \(^{115}\)In\(^+\), on the contrary, increases. Thus, the frequencies of the states shifted towards each other and the magnitude of the shift depends on the number of stored ions. Figure 9b shows this dependence for the cyclotron frequency ratio \(\nu _c\)(\(^{115}\)Sn\(^+\))/\(\nu _c\)(\(^{115}\)In\(^+\)). The frequency ratio was extrapolated to a single ion in the trap by using a linear fit, represented by the red line with a red band of 1\(\sigma \) uncertainty of the fit. Note that the data points have also \(x-\)axis error bars due to the uncertainty of the efficiency curve of the detector and an orthogonal distance regression fitting method was used.
The analysis performed for the cyclotron-frequency ratio measurement of \(^{115}\)Sn\(^+\) and \(^{115}\)In\(^+\) ions (see Sect. 3.3) with the data limited to 1–4 detected ions/bunch and without count-rate class analysis results in the mass difference \(\Delta m = 495.25(29)\) keV/\(c^2\) of \(^{115}\)In and \(^{115}\)Sn, which differs from FSU Q-value [44] by \(-2.24(29)\) keV. The difference between the cyclotron frequency ratios received without and with count-rate class analysis is \(-2.04(60)\times 10 ^ {-8}\).
Efficiency of the MCP detector
The position-sensitive ion detector used in the PI-ICR measurements at JYFLTRAP is a microchannel plate (MCP) detector with two plates in chevron configuration with a delay-line anode (RoentDek GmbH, model DLD40). Data acquisition system (RoentDek GmbH, model TDC8HP) operates with software developed locally at JYFLTRAP, using the drivers provided by the manufacturer. Ion hit events consist of a MCP backplate signal and of four delay line signals, which are needed to reconstruct the position. Currently the data acquisition software is realized so that even if just one of the delay line signals is missing, this event is discarded in the PI-ICR analysis. The MCP detector is located outside the superconducting magnet at a distance of 104 cm from the center of the measurement trap, where the magnetic field strength B is about of 30 mT.
The measurement of the MCP detector efficiency was based on a comparison of the count rate of radioactive ions on the MCP detector and the silicon detector (300 mm\(^2\) of area and 500 \(\mu \)m of thickness) with a known efficiency of 30.72(28)% [49]. The MCP is placed on an actuator and can be removed from the beam axis to pass the beam downstream to the silicon detector located 41 cm behind the MCP on the same beam axis. Thus, the measurement can be performed alternately with both detectors. \(\beta \)-decaying ions of \(^{112}\)Rh\(^+\) were used to measure the MCP efficiency. They were produced in proton-induced fission of \(^{nat}\)U at IGISOL, purified from the isobars in the preparation trap of JYFLTRAP and sent to either the MCP or silicon detector. Mainly isomeric state of \(^{112}\)Rh with T\(_{1/2}\) = 6.73 (15) s is populated in fission reactions. Data were collected for 180 s alternately on both detectors for different intensities of the radioactive beam. The daughter of \(^{112}\)Rh is \(^{112}\)Pd having \(T_{1/2} \approx 21\) h and effectively does not contribute to \(\beta \)-background. The \(^{112}\)Rh activity was let to saturate and this activity was taken as the rate of ions after correcting for \(\beta \)-efficiency. Red points in Fig. 10 represent the efficiency based on the number of detected ions on the MCP detector and beta-decays on the silicon detector as a function of the average number of detected ions in the ion bunches.
Additionally to the online data with \(^{112}\)Rh\(^+\) ions, the offline measurements with the stable \(^{133}\)Cs\(^+\) ions, produced at the offline source station (Fig. 1) before the dipole magnet, were performed to get better statistics and extend the efficiency curve. Pulsing the voltage on a kicker electrode, located at the electrostatic switchyard, allows to control the time (beam gate) when the ions let to enter the RFQ. Thus, the number of ions in bunches formed in the RFQ is proportional to the beam gate time. This time was scanned and the number of ions, detected on the MCP after cooling and centering in the preparation trap, provided information about the relative MCP efficiency. The data obtained in this way (green points in Fig. 10) were fitted by a polynomial of 4th order and scaled with a constant factor to match the absolute efficiency (red points). The efficiency curve shows a significant decrease with an increase in the number of ions in the bunch. Figure 10a shows the data with time-of-flight information (signal from the MCP backplate) for the ions, while Figure 10b shows the data with both time-of-flight information and the necessary information (all the four delay line signals) from the delay-lines to successfully reconstruct the ion impact position. With an increase in the number of ions per bunch, a loss of signal from one or several outputs of the delay-line anode is observed, which leads to a failed reconstruction of the ion impact position on the detector. Likely this due to pileup of signals and dead time of the TDC8HP.
The measured MCP efficiency (Figure 10) is higher than the efficiency determined earlier, when the MCP was located closer to the magnet [48]. In addition to reducing the effect of the magnetic field, this can also be significantly due to an increase in the time width of the ion bunches arriving at the MCP. The voltages on the extraction electrodes were changed to obtain the same magnification factor [5] as before the movement of the MCP, which in turn led to an increase in the width of the time-of-flight distribution of ions on the detector. With wider time-of-flight distribution, the effects of pile-up and dead time of the TDC are smaller.
Cross-reference measurements with carbon clusters
In this study a Sigradur® glassy carbon plate (disc-shaped, 16 mm diameter, 2 mm thickness) was used to produce carbon clusters in the laser ablation ion source (Sect. 2.2). Laser pulse creating a bunch of ionized clusters was synchronized with the open time of the preparation trap to capture the ions. Figure 11 shows a time-of-flight spectrum of singly-charged carbon clusters detected at the MCP. The open time of the preparation trap was scanned from 100 \(\mu \)s to 500 \(\mu \)s. The ions were trapped and cooled for 265 ms in the preparation trap without any rf excitations and then extracted through the measurement trap to the MCP. The spectrum shows mainly carbon clusters \(^{12}\)C\(_n\) with n from 3 up to at least 20. The main contaminants are He\(^+\) and K\(^+\) ions.
In the measurement cycle the bunches of the produced carbon cluster ions were captured into the preparation trap. The optimum capture time was chosen to select the desired cluster size. The ions were cooled and purified in the preparation trap for about 235 ms and transferred into the measurement trap. Then the purified ions of interest were transported back to the preparation trap for an additional step of cooling for 133 ms. One step of cooling was insufficient for effective cooling and centering of the ions due to large number of ions of different cluster sizes. Finally, the ions of interest were sent to the measurement trap, where the cyclotron frequency determination using the PI-ICR method with the phase accumulation time of 400 ms was performed (see Fig. 12b). Both traps worked in parallel in such a way that when the cyclotron frequency of ions was determined in the measurement trap, a new ion bunch was prepared in the preparation trap. A single cyclotron frequency measurement took about 10 min.
Ion interaction with the residual gas in the measurement trap results in a damping of the radial motions and increase in the size of the images of the phase spots. The main source of the residual gas is the flow of helium atoms entering from the preparation trap through a pumping barrier into the measurement trap. Since the modified cyclotron frequency \(\nu _+\) is much higher than the magnetron frequency \(\nu _-\), the ions performing the cyclotron motion travel a longer distance and undergo more collisions with the residual gas atoms than the ions performing the magnetron motion during the phase accumulation time \(t_{acc}\). Thus, the damping effect is manifested stronger for the cyclotron phase spot with an increase in \(t_{acc}\) than for the magnetron phase spot (Fig. 12b). A collision of an ion, performing a radial motion, with the residual gas results in a decrease in the cyclotron motion radius and an increase in the magnetron motion radius [3]. The radial frequencies are slightly shifted due to damping, however, their sum is still the cyclotron frequency \(\nu _c\) [50]. The effects of damping and smearing of the cyclotron motion increase the statistical uncertainty of the angle \(\alpha _+\). The damping effect for the carbon clusters is stronger than for monatomic ions. Damping effects for the ion motions in a Penning trap can be described by introducing a damping force \(\vec {F} = -2m \gamma \vec {\upsilon }\), where \(\vec {\upsilon }\) is the ion velocity and \(\gamma \) is the damping coefficient [50, 51],
$$\begin{aligned} \gamma = \frac{q}{2m} \frac{1}{K_0} \frac{(p/p_0)}{(T/T_0)}, \end{aligned}$$
(28)
where the reduced ion mobility \(K_0\) is tabulated at normal atmospheric pressure \(p_0 = 10^5\) Pa and room temperature \(T_0 = 300\) K. The reduced ion mobility for the \(^{133}\)Cs\(^+\) and \(^{85}\)Rb\(^+\) ions in helium is about 18 and 20 cm\(^2\)s\(^{-1}\)V\(^{-1}\) [52], respectively, and it ranges from about 5 cm\(^2\)s\(^{-1}\)V\(^{-1}\) for \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{20}\) ions to 12 cm\(^2\)s\(^{-1}\)V\(^{-1}\) for \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{6}\) ions [53, 54]. Hence, the \(\gamma \) is larger for the carbon cluster ions and they are more affected by residual gas than the typically used monoatomic ions. For example, the ratio of the cyclotron-to-magnetron motion radii \(r_+/r_-\) in the PI-ICR measurement with 400 ms of the phase accumulation time was smaller by 22 % for the \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{11}\) ions (A = 132) compared to the \(^{133}\)Cs\(^+\) ions with the similar mass number at the same helium gas flow in the preparation trap.
Table 1 Carbon-cluster cross-reference measurements performed at JYFLTRAP with the PI-ICR method. The ions \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{9}\), \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{11}\) and \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{13}\) were chosen as the reference ions. The number of individual cyclotron frequency ratios \(r_i = \nu _c(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{n, ref}) / \nu _c(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{n, ioi})/\) measured for the ions of interest is shown for each pair The cyclotron frequency ratio measurements have been performed for the singly-charged carbon cluster ions \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{n}\) with \(6 \le n \le 15\) in three series, where the ions \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{9}\), \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{11}\) and \(^{12}\)C\(^+ _{13}\) were used as reference ions (Table 1). A typical obtained statistical uncertainty for the frequency ratios was a few \(\times 10^{-9}\). The uncertainty related to the magnetic field fluctuations (Sect. 3.2) was added quadratically to the statistical uncertainty and made a very minor contribution. Count-rate class analysis for the measured cyclotron frequency ratios was performed [47]. No dependence of the frequency ratio on the number of detected ions was observed and data with detected 1–5 ions/bunch were taken into account in the analysis.
The setup was optimized for a certain mass in the frequency ratio measurement. Especially the pressure of the purification trap is optimal for only a small mass range. Thus the masses significantly higher or lighter were not prepared in the preparation trap in an optimal way. Also, the damping effect was stronger for lighter carbon clusters at the same pressure in the trap, since the damping coefficient (Eq. 28) slightly increases with decreasing the cluster size.
In addition to the measurements with the carbon clusters two previous PI-ICR measurements with \(^{85,87}\)Rb\(^+\) and \(^{170,172}\)Yb\(^+\) ions, which have very well-known mass values [35], were included in the analysis. The cyclotron frequency ratios \(r=\nu _c(^{85}\)Rb\(^+) / \nu _c(^{87}\)Rb\(^+)\) [5] and \(r=\nu _c(^{172}\)Yb\(^+) / \nu _c(^{170}\)Yb\(^+)\) [55] were measured with a relative uncertainty of 0.64 and 0.5 ppb, respectively.
The molecular binding energy (ionization energy) of the carbon clusters gradually changes in range from about of 5.3 eV to 6.6 eV per atom for the clusters C\(_n\) with \(6 \le n \le 15\) [36, 56]. Since the molecular binding energy is almost a constant, its contribution to the calculated cyclotron frequency ratio of the cluster ions is negligible, less than \(10^{-10}\) in our cases. The binding energy of valence electron is about \(9-10\) eV in the studied carbon clusters [57], about 4 eV in Rb\(^+\) ions [34] and 6 eV in Yb\(^+\) ions [34] and, thus, its contribution to the frequency ratio is also negligible. The mass of the singly-charged carbon cluster ions was calculated as \(m(^{12}\text {C}^+_n) = n \times m(^{12}\text {C}) - m_e\), where an atomic mass of carbon m(\(^{12}\)C)\(=12\) u.
The weighted mean ratios r of the measured individual cyclotron frequency ratios were compared with the calculated frequency ratios \(r_{calc}\). If the measurements of the cyclotron frequencies results in values which deviate from the correct frequencies by a constant offset, the relative shift of the cyclotron frequency ratio
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\varepsilon (r)}{r} = \frac{r - r_{calc}}{r} \propto (m_{ref} - m_{ioi}) \end{aligned}$$
(29)
is proportional to the mass difference of the reference ion \(m_{ref}\) and ion of interest \(m_{ioi}\). The cyclotron frequency offset, leading to a mass-dependent ratio shift, can be due to imperfections of the electric-quadrupolar field in a Penning trap or a misalignment of the electrostatic trapping field with respect to the magnetic field axis [58].
The relative deviation of the measured cyclotron frequency ratios from the calculated ratios \(\varepsilon (r)/r\) is plotted as a function of the mass difference \(\Delta m = (m_{ref} - m_{ioi})\) between the reference ion and the ion of interest in Fig. 13. By fitting the data with a straight line, which is forced to pass through the origin, a mass-dependent shift
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\delta _m r}{r} = -2.35(81) \times 10^{-10} / \text {u} \times (m_{ref} - m_{ioi}) \end{aligned}$$
(30)
was obtained.
The cyclotron frequency ratios were corrected for the obtained mass-dependent effect and the reduced chi-square \(\chi ^2 / N\) for the \((r_{corr}-r_{calc})\) was greater than one, indicating the presence of an additional residual uncertainty. The residual uncertainty of
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\delta _{res} r}{r} = 9 \times 10^{-9} \end{aligned}$$
(31)
was quadratically added to the frequency ratios to satisfy the condition \(\chi ^2 / N \le 1\). The relative deviation of the corrected cyclotron frequency ratios with the included residual uncertainty is shown in Fig. 14.
If only the carbon cluster measurements are taken into the analysis, the similar systematic uncertainties are obtained: \(\delta _m r / r = -2.39(87) \times 10^{-10} / \text {u} \times \Delta m\) and \(\delta _{res} r / r = 9.6 \times 10^{-9}\). If all the data are restricted to \(|m_{ref} - m_{ioi}| \le 12\) u, the mass-dependent shift and residual uncertainty are \(-2.3(21) \times 10^{-10} / \text {u} \times \Delta m\) and \(5.3 \times 10^{-9}\), respectively. The previous cross-reference mass measurements with carbon cluster ions performed at JYFLTRAP using the TOF-ICR method with Ramsey excitation patterns resulted in the systematic uncertainties \(\delta _m r / r = -7.8(3) \times 10^{-10} / \text {u} \times \Delta m\) and \(\delta _{res} r / r = 1.2 \times 10^{-8}\) for the data with \(|m_{ref} - m_{ioi}| \le 48\) u and \(\delta _m r / r = -7.5(4) \times 10^{-10} / \text {u} \times \Delta m\) and \(\delta _{res} r / r = 7.9 \times 10^{-9}\) for the data with \(|m_{ref} - m_{ioi}| \le 24\) u [19].
The systematic uncertainties \(\delta _m r / r\) and \(\delta _{res} r / r\) impose a limit on the accuracy of mass determination at JYFLTRAP. However, it is worth noting, that in mass measurements with the mass doublets (\(A_{ref} = A_{ioi}\)) these systematic uncertainties are cancelled out [47] and the accuracy level better than \(10^{-9}\) [59] can be reached. Such accuracy can also be obtained in mass measurements with ions differing by \(\Delta m = 2\) u [5, 55]. In general, it is very rare that reference mass is more than 12u away from the ion-of-interest.