Detector / Interaction Region Integration Vasiliy Morozov, Charles Hyde, Pawel Nadel-Turonski Joint CASA/Accelerator and Nuclear Physics MEIC/ELIC Meeting.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
M. Sullivan Mini-workshop on the MEIC design Nov 2, 2012.
Advertisements

SLIDE Beam measurements using the MICE TOF counters Analysis meeting, 23 September 2008 Mark Rayner.
1 EIC Users Meeting, Stony Brook June 27, 2014 Request for these slides: Comment on “EIC working group activities at Jefferson Lab, and how people could.
Full-Acceptance Detector Integration at MEIC Vasiliy Morozov for MEIC Study Group Electron Ion Collider Users Meeting, Stony Brook University June 27,
Possible Spectrometer for eA Collider Seigo Kato Faculty of Science, Yamagata University, Yamagata , Japan Presented to the workshop "Rare-Isotope.
IR Optics and Nonlinear Beam Dynamics Fanglei Lin for MEIC study group at JLab 2 nd Mini-workshop on MEIC IR Design, November 2, 2012.
POETIC 2012 Indiana University R. D. McKeown 12 GeV CEBAF.
Ion Collider Ring Design V.S. Morozov for MEIC study group MEIC Collaboration Meeting, JLab October 5-7, 2015.
Operated by JSA for the U.S. Department of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility EIC Collaboration Meeting, Hampton University, May 19-23,
1 EPIC SIMULATIONS V.S. Morozov, Y.S. Derbenev Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility A. Afanasev Hampton University R.P. Johnson Muons, Inc. Operated.
ELIC Low Beta Optics with Chromatic Corrections Hisham Kamal Sayed 1,2 Alex Bogacz 1 1 Jefferson Lab 2 Old Dominion University.
Page 1 Overview and Issues of the MEIC Interaction Region M. Sullivan MEIC Accelerator Design Review September 15-16, 2010.
MEIC Detector Rolf Ent MEIC Accelerator Design Review September 15-16, 2010.
Lattice /Detector Integration for Target Fragmentation, Diffraction, and other Low-t Processes Charles Hyde-Wright Old Dominion University
Interaction Region Backgrounds M. Sullivan for the MEIC Collaboration Meeting Oct. 5-7, 2015.
Overview of IR Design V.S. Morozov 1, P. Brindza 1, A. Camsonne 1, Ya.S. Derbenev 1, R. Ent 1, D. Gaskell 1, F. Lin 1, P. Nadel-Turonski 1, M. Ungaro 1,
Interaction Region Issues M. Sullivan for the EIC User Group Meeting Jan. 6-9, 2016.
Current eRHIC IR Design  Important features  10 mrad crossing angle Needs to be integrated into the current STAR and upgrades Important for luminosity.
MEIC Detector and IR Integration Vasiliy Morozov, Charles Hyde, Pawel Nadel-Turonski MEIC Detector and IR Design Mini-Workshop, October 31, 2011.
IR-Design 0.44 m Q5 D5 Q4 90 m 10 mrad m 3.67 mrad 60 m m 18.8 m 16.8 m 6.33 mrad 4 m Dipole © D.Trbojevic 30 GeV e GeV p.
Interaction Region Design and Detector Integration V.S. Morozov for EIC Study Group at JLAB 2 nd Mini-Workshop on MEIC Interaction Region Design JLab,
Present MEIC IR Design Status Vasiliy Morozov, Yaroslav Derbenev MEIC Detector and IR Design Mini-Workshop, October 31, 2011.
Compensation of Detector Solenoid G.H. Wei, V.S. Morozov, Fanglei Lin JLEIC Collaboration Meeting Spring, 2016.
Some thoughts to stimulate Discussion E.C. Stony Brook, January
The eRHIC Interaction Region. Your Guide: B. Parker, BNL-SMD Time Tunnel The eRHIC Interaction Region Try to Envision a Viable Future Layout Give Overview.
E.C. AschenauerEIC INT Program, Seattle Week 81.
DIS 2011, 12 April DIS 2012, 28 March 2012 Electron Ion Collider Machine Design Edward Nissen for Jefferson Lab EIC Study Group XX International.
Full-Acceptance & 2 nd Detector Region Designs V.S. Morozov on behalf of the JLEIC detector study group JLEIC Collaboration Meeting, JLab March 29-31,
Interaction Region and Detector
MEIC Interaction Region & Tagging
LHeC interaction region
JLEIC Forward Ion Detection Region
Large Booster and Collider Ring
Q1 IR Septum Quadrupole for LHeC
Final Focus Synchrotron Radiation
First Look at Nonlinear Dynamics in the Electron Collider Ring
JLEIC Detector Simulation Forward Ion Detection
Forward (ion-SIDE) Tagging: Motivations, ConCepT, Performance
CASA Collider Design Review Retreat Other Electron-Ion Colliders: eRHIC, ENC & LHeC Yuhong Zhang February 24, 2010.
Specifications for the JLEIC IR Magnets
Ion-Side Small Angle Detection Forward, Far-Forward, & Ultra-Forward
Collider Ring Optics & Related Issues
Update on JLEIC Interaction Region Design
EIC Accelerator Collaboration Meeting
Sha Bai CEPC AP meeting Local double ring MDI Sha Bai CEPC AP meeting
IR Lattice with Detector Solenoid
JLEIC Collaboration meeting Spring 2016 Ion Polarization with Figure-8
Yuri Nosochkov Yunhai Cai, Fanglei Lin, Vasiliy Morozov
Electron Ring IP Region Optics
Feasibility of Reusing PEP-II Hardware for MEIC Electron Ring
Fanglei Lin, Andrew Hutton, Vasiliy S. Morozov, Yuhong Zhang
Update on MEIC Nonlinear Dynamics Work
JLEIC High-Energy Ion IR Design: Options and Performance
Ion Collider Ring Using Superferric Magnets
Fanglei Lin, Yuhong Zhang JLEIC R&D Meeting, March 10, 2016
Status and plans for crab crossing studies at JLEIC
Alternative Ion Injector Design
Compensation of Detector Solenoids
G.H. Wei, V.S. Morozov, Fanglei Lin Y. Nosochkov (SLAC), M-H. Wang
Integration of Detector Solenoid into the JLEIC ion collider ring
IR/MDI requirements for the EIC
First results of proton spin tracking in a figure-8 ring
Possibility of MEIC Arc Cell Using PEP-II Dipole
JLEIC Electron Ring Nonlinear Dynamics Work Plan
Upgrade on Compensation of Detector Solenoid effects
Fanglei Lin JLEIC R&D Meeting, August 4, 2016
MEIC Alternative Design Part III
DYNAMIC APERTURE OF JLEIC ELECTRON COLLIDER
Option 1: Reduced FF Quad Apertures
Sha Bai CEPC AP meeting Work summary Sha Bai CEPC AP meeting
Presentation transcript:

Detector / Interaction Region Integration Vasiliy Morozov, Charles Hyde, Pawel Nadel-Turonski Joint CASA/Accelerator and Nuclear Physics MEIC/ELIC Meeting February 3, 2012

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Motivation Pawel Nadel-Turonski

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Central detector EM Calorimeter Hadron Calorimeter Muon Detector EM Calorimeter Solenoid yoke + Muon Detector TOF HTCC RICH Cerenkov Tracking 2 m 3 m 2 m 4-5 m Solenoid yoke + Hadronic Calorimeter MEIC Primary “Full-Acceptance” Detector Distance IP – electron FFQs = 3.5 m Distance IP – ion FFQs = 7.0 m (Driven by push to 0.5  detection before ion FFQs) Pawel Nadel-Turonski & Rolf Ent solenoid electron FFQs 50 mrad 0 mrad ion dipole w/ detectors (approximately to scale) ions electrons IP ion FFQs 2+3 m 2 m Make use of the (50 mr) crossing angle for ions! detectors Central detector, more detection space in ion direction as particles have higher momenta Detect particles with angles below 0.5 o beyond ion FFQs and in arcs. Detect particles with angles down to 0.5 o before ion FFQs. Need up to 2 Tm dipole in addition to central solenoid. 7 m

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 GEANT4 Model Detector solenoid – 4 T field at the center, 5 m long, 2.5 m inner radius, IP 2 m downstream from edge Small spectrometer dipole in front of the FFB – 1.2 T 60 GeV/c), 1 m long, hard-edge uniform field – Interaction plane and dipole are rotated around z to compensate orbit offset FFB Big spectrometer dipole – 4 m downstream of the FFB, sector bend, 3.5 m long, 60 mrad bending angle (12 Tm, GeV/c),  20 cm square aperture

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Separation of Electron and Ion Beams

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Beam Parallel after FFB FFB: quad lengths = 1.2, 2.4, 1.2 m, quad 100 GeV/c = -79.6, 41.1, T/m 1.2 Tm 60 GeV/c) outward-bending dipole in front of the final focus 12 Tm 60 GeV/c) inward-bending dipole 4 m downstream of the final focus Pawel Nadel-Turonski & Alex Bogacz

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 FFB Acceptance 60 GeV/c protons, each quad aperture = B max / (field 100 GeV/c) 6 T max 9 T max 12 T max

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 FFB Acceptance for Neutrons 6 T max 9 T max 12 T max Neutrons uniformly distributed within  1  horizontal & vertical angles around 60 GeV/c proton beam Each quad aperture = B max / (field 100 GeV/c)

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 System Acceptance at 6 T max Field Uniform distribution horizontally & vertically within  1  around 60 GeV/c protons Each quad aperture = 6 T / (field 100 GeV/c)  p/p = 0 neutrons  p/p = -0.5  p/p = 0.5  electron beam

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Momentum & Angle Resolution Beam parallel after the final focus Protons with  p/p spread launched at different angles to nominal 60 GeV/c trajectory Red hashed band indicates  10  beam stay-clear

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Momentum & Angle Resolution Beam parallel after the final focus Protons with  p/p spread launched at different angles to nominal 60 GeV/c trajectory Red hashed band indicates  10  beam stay-clear |  p/p| >  x,y = 0

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Momentum & Angle Resolution Beam parallel after the final focus Protons with different  p/p launched with  x spread around nominal 60 GeV/c trajectory Red hashed band indicates  10  beam stay-clear

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Momentum & Angle Resolution Beam parallel after the final focus Protons with different  p/p launched with  x spread around nominal 60 GeV/c trajectory Red hashed band indicates  10  beam stay-clear |  x | > 2  p/p = 0

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Beam Focused after FFB FFB: quad lengths = 1.2, 2.4, 1.2 m, quad 100 GeV/c = -89.0, 51.1, T/m 1.2 Tm 60 GeV/c) outward-bending dipole in front of the final focus 12 Tm 60 GeV/c) inward-bending dipole 4 m downstream of the final focus Pawel Nadel-Turonski & Charles Hyde

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 System Acceptance at 6 T max Field Uniform distribution horizontally & vertically within  1  around 60 GeV/c protons Each quad aperture = 6 T / (field 100 GeV/c)  p/p = 0 neutrons  p/p = -0.5  p/p = 0.5  electron beam

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 System Acceptance with Varied Quad Fields Uniform distribution horizontally & vertically within  1  around 60 GeV/c protons Quad apertures = 9, 9, 6 T / (field 100 GeV/c)  p/p = -0.5  p/p = 0  p/p = 0.5 neutrons  electron beam

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Detector / IR Layout n p e

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Momentum & Angle Resolution Beam focused after the FFB Protons with  p/p spread launched at different angles to nominal 60 GeV/c trajectory Red hashed band indicates  10  beam stay-clear

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Momentum & Angle Resolution Beam focused after the FFB Protons with  p/p spread launched at different angles to nominal 60 GeV/c trajectory Red hashed band indicates  10  beam stay-clear |  p/p| >  x,y = 0

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Momentum & Angle Resolution Beam focused after the FFB Protons with different  p/p launched with  x spread around nominal 60 GeV/c trajectory Red hashed band indicates  10  beam stay-clear

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Momentum & Angle Resolution Beam focused after the FFB Protons with different  p/p launched with  x spread around nominal 60 GeV/c trajectory Red hashed band indicates  10  beam stay-clear |  x | >  p/p = 0 |  x | > 3  p/p = 0

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Electron FFB Quads nearest to IP are inside strong solenoid fringe field  either permanent-magnet or super-conducting quadrupoles Consider hybrid electron FFB design (P. Nadel-Turonski & A. Bogacz): first two quads are permanent-magnet, subsequent quads are super- conducting (smaller OD) Outer radius of a permanent-magnet quad (M. Sullivan) depending on the inner radius and field gradient: r inner = 20 mm, G = 15 T/m  r outer = 23.4 mm Permanent-magnet quad – can be placed closer to IP – covers smaller solid angle  greater acceptance

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Hybrid Electron FFB Optics at 3 GeV/c Drift lengths: 3, 0.25, 0.25, 1, 0.2 m Quad lengths: 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.3 m Quad inner radii: 2, 2, 2, 4, 4 cm; quad outer radii: 3, 3, 9, 11, 11 cm Quad strengths: -15.0, 15.0, -5.87, 7.70, T/m

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Hybrid Electron FFB Optics at 5 GeV/c Drift lengths: 3, 0.25, 0.25, 1, 0.2 m Quad lengths: 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.3 m Quad inner radii: 2, 2, 2, 4, 4 cm; quad outer radii: 3, 3, 9, 11, 11 cm Quad strengths: -15.0, 15.0, -14.7, 20.4, T/m

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Hybrid Electron FFB Optics at 11 GeV/c Drift lengths: 3, 0.25, 0.25, 1, 0.2 m Quad lengths: 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.3 m Quad inner radii: 2, 2, 2, 4, 4 cm; quad outer radii: 3, 3, 9, 11, 11 cm Quad strengths: -15.0, 15.0, -34.0, 45.6, T/m

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Detector / IR Layout n p e

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Upstream Ion / Downstream Electron Side Electron FFB – 4 m distance to IP? – 1  polar angle acceptance – Superconducting quads (solenoid fringe field, small size, large aperture) – Electron beam focused inside spectrometer dipole? Ion FFB – First quad immediately after first electron quad at ~4.5-5 m – Ion quads interleaved with electron quads

V.S. Morozov 02/03/2012 Conclusions Completed the study of forward ion tagging, a few design choices to be made Request to nuclear physics – Come up with specs for detector resolution requirements – this will help to motivate and make the design choices, in particular, quantify the advantages of focused vs parallel downstream ion beam To do list – Design forward electron tagging and upstream ion FFB – Design optimization, e.g. acceptance of the FFB using genetic algorithm – Integration into the ring optics, such as decoupling, dispersion compensation, understanding effect of large-aperture quadrupoles on the optics, etc. – Evaluation of the engineering aspects, such as magnet parameters, electron and ion beam line separation, etc.