LLRF regulation of CC2 operated at 4˚K Gustavo Cancelo for the AD, TD & CD LLRF team.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tom Powers Practical Aspects of SRF Cavity Testing and Operations SRF Workshop 2011 Tutorial Session.
Advertisements

of LFD Compensation Study S1 Global Cryomodule
Lorentz force detuning measurements on the CEA cavity
Stephen Molloy RF Group ESS Accelerator Division
Power Requirements for High beta Elliptical Cavities Rihua Zeng Accelerator Division Lunds Kommun, Lund
Piezo Studies and Temperature Measurements Ruben Carcagno May 11, 2005.
Laser to RF synchronisation A.Winter, Aachen University and DESY Miniworkshop on XFEL Short Bunch Measurement and Timing.
Capture Cavity 1at A0 SIMCON2.1 with MATLAB  closed loop with max gain ( 250 )  RMS amplitude noise ≈ 0.07%  RMS phase Noise ≈ 0.2°  closed.
Capture Cavity 2 Update Tim Koeth April 3 rd Testing at 4.5K.
XFEL The European X-Ray Laser Project X-Ray Free-Electron Laser Review of LLRF system based on ATCA standard, Dec 3-4, 2007 Piezodriver and piezo control.
E. KAKO (KEK) 2009' Sept. 30 Albuquerque Global Design Effort 1 Cavity Test Items in S1-G Cryomodule Eiji Kako (KEK, Japan)
LLRF System for Pulsed Linacs (modeling, simulation, design and implementation) Hooman Hassanzadegan ESS, Beam Instrumentation Group 1.
Professor Walter W. Olson Department of Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering University of Toledo Loop Shaping.
RF Cavity Simulation for SPL Simulink Model for HP-SPL Extension to LINAC4 at CERN from RF Point of View Acknowledgement: CEA team, in particular O. Piquet.
LLRF Cavity Simulation for SPL
LLRF ILC GDE Meeting Feb.6,2007 Shin Michizono LLRF - Stability requirements and proposed llrf system - Typical rf perturbations - Achieved stability at.
LLRF-05 Oct.10,20051 Digital LLRF feedback control system for the J-PARC linac Shin MICHIZONO KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (JAPAN)
1 FNAL SCRF meeting 31/10/2015 Comments from LLRF Shin Michizono (KEK) Brian Chase (FNAL) Stefan Simrock (DESY) LLRF performance under large dead time.
Recent LFD Control Results from FNAL Yuriy Pischalnikov Warren Schappert TTF/FLASH 9mA Meeting on Cavity Gradient Flatness June 01, 2010.
1Matthias LiepeAugust 2, 2007 LLRF for the ERL Matthias Liepe.
Tom Powers LLRF Systems for Next Generation Light Sources LLRF Workshop October 2011 Authored by Jefferson Science Associates, LLC under U.S. DOE.
W. 3rd SPL collaboration Meeting November 12, 20091/23 Wolfgang Hofle SPL LLRF simulations Feasibility and constraints for operation with more.
RF Cavity Simulation for SPL
Marc Ross Nick Walker Akira Yamamoto ‘Overhead and Margin’ – an attempt to set standard terminology 10 Sept 2010 Overhead and Margin 1.
Frank Ludwig, DESY Content : 1 Stability requirements for phase and amplitude for the XFEL 2 Next LLRF system for optimized detector operation 3 Limitations.
W. 5th SPL collaboration Meeting CERN, November 25, 20101/18 reported by Wolfgang Hofle CERN BE/RF Update on RF Layout and LLRF activities for.
ILC FAST TUNER R&D PROGRAM at FNAL Status Report CC2 Piezo Test Preliminary Results Ruben Carcagno (on behalf of the FNAL FAST TUNER Working Group) 4/5/06.
Cold Tuner test overview S1-Global at KEK 5-9 July 2010.
Chapter 6: Frequency Domain Anaysis
John Carwardine 21 st October 2010 TTF/FLASH 9mA studies: Main studies objectives for January 2011.
R.SREEDHARAN  SOLEIL main parameters  Booster and storage ring low level RF system  New digital Booster LLRF system under development  Digital LLRF.
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Department of Energy Kirk Davis.
Preliminary Results from First Blade Tuner Tests in HTS Yuriy Pischalnikov Warren Schappert Serena Barbannoti Matteo Scorrano.
LLRF_05 - CERN, October 10-13, 2005Institute of Electronic Systems Superconductive cavity driving with FPGA controller Tomasz Czarski Warsaw University.
John Carwardine January 16, 2009 Some results and data from January studies.
LINAC 4 – Control System and Adaptive Feedforward Design Anirban Krishna Bhattacharyya BE – RF – FB.
XFEL The European X-Ray Laser Project X-Ray Free-Electron Laser Wojciech Jalmuzna, Technical University of Lodz, Department of Microelectronics and Computer.
Warren Schappert Yuriy Pischalnikov FNAL SRF2011, Chicago.
Superconducting RF: Resonance Control Warren Schappert PIP-II Machine Advisory Committee 10 March 2015.
Overview of long pulse experiments at NML Nikolay Solyak PXIE Program Review January 16-17, PXIE Review, N.Solyak E.Harms, S. Nagaitsev, B. Chase,
FLASH RF gun developments. Sven Pfeiffer for the LLRF team FEL Seminar Hamburg,
Matthias Liepe. Matthias Liepe – High loaded Q cavity operation at CU – TTC Topical Meeting on CW-SRF
1 Tuner performance with LLRF control at KEK Shin MICHIZONO (KEK) Dec.07 TTC Beijing (Michizono) S1G (RDR configuration) - Detuning monitor - Tuner control.
LFD and Microphonics Suppression for PIP-II Warren Schappert April 15, 2014.
Overview Step by step procedure to validate the model (slide 1 and 2) Procedure for the Ql / beam loading study (slide 3 and 4)
Microphonics Suppression in SRF cavities for Project X Yuriy Pischalnikov Warren Schappert Project X Collaboration Meeting Berkeley, April 11, 2012.
SRF Cavities Resonance Control. CW mode of operation (FNAL’s experience). Yu. Pischalnikov W. Schappert FNAL TTC CW SRF Meeting, Cornell University, 12June,
Longitudinal dynamic analysis for the 3-8 GeV pulsed LINAC G. Cancelo, B. Chase, Nikolay Solyak, Yury Eidelman, Sergei Nagaitsev, Julien Branlard.
A CW Linac scheme for CLIC drive beam acceleration. Hao Zha, Alexej Grudiev 07/06/2016.
LLRF for PXIE Brian Chase For the Project X LLRF Collaboration 1 PX Collaboration Meeting, April 2012 Berkeley - B. Chase.
Microphonics Discussion For LLRF Design Review Tom Powers 13 June 2016 Not for release outside of JLAB There are several MSWord documents located at: M:\asd\asddata\C100Microphonics2016.
RF Issues with Configuration Options Project X retreat Nov 2, 2010 Brian Chase, Julien Branlard, Gustavo Cancelo, Warren Schappert, Yuriy Pischalnikov.
Microphonics Discussion For LLRF Design Review Tom Powers 13 June 2016 Not for release outside of JLAB There are several MSWord documents located at: M:\asd\asddata\C100Microphonics2016.
Latest Results on Beam Loaded Experiments at FLASH/TTF Shilun Pei October 27,
Cost Optimization Models for SRF Linacs
Areal RF Station A. Vardanyan
Test of the dressed spoke cavity
LLRF Research and Development at STF-KEK
Control Systems EE 4314 Lecture 12 March 17, 2015
TTC Topical Workshop - CW SRF, Cornell 12th – 14th June 2013
SCRF 21-25/Apr/2008 Measurement & Calculation of the Lorentz Detuning for the transient response of the resonant cavity Introduction “Two.
ILC LLRF Status Ruben Carcagno, Brian Chase
Outlook of future studies to reach maximum gradient and current
Cavity resonance control
LLRF Functionality Stefan Simrock How to edit the title slide
CEPC RF Power Sources System
LLRF Comments on the RF cluster and Distributed RF schemes
High gradients in TESLA nine-cell cavities
Resonance Control for Narrow-Bandwidth, SRF Applications
Strategic Communications at TRIUMF
Presentation transcript:

LLRF regulation of CC2 operated at 4˚K Gustavo Cancelo for the AD, TD & CD LLRF team

Objectives of this talk Show good regulation results operating CC2 at NML (pulsed mode). – Validate the combined RF plus active resonant control approach. – Validate the fixed feed forward plus PI (proportional + integral) closed loop control, by comparison to only FF and P. – Raise awareness that the good numbers are obtained at the cost of RF power overhead and a control system working on the linear region of the RF klystron. Show some “integrated microphonic” numbers. Show that have good working LLRF systems and we keep improving them. – Some LLRF components can be used or adapted for Project X R&D. – New LLRF equipment is also needed.

CC2 operated in pulsed mode (800µs flattop) Feedforward ON & Feedback OFF Feedforward & Feedback ON RF amplitude and phase look flat, but how flat are they?

FF LLRF Control +++ r d= n= x y e u K Resonance control:FF (piezo) v P: plant. C: controller. FF: feed forward control. r: reference. e: error. u: control drive. d: load disturbance. x: process states. n: measurement noise. y: observed output. LLRF control regulates measured error signals. The beam will see measurement noise that the regulator won’t see. P: CC2 This four transfer functions are particularly important Beam LFD Microphonics Transmitter noise d Receiver noise ADC noise Master Osc.

CC2 detuning CC2 has been operated at 4.5˚K and shows large detuning fluctuations of up to ±500 Hz. The oscillations mainly come from cryogenic pressure fluctuations.

Proportional control closed loop gain K P =20 The stability of the gradients is greatly improved by the PI control and higher gains. – rms values of10 -4 for amplitude and 0.01 degrees for phase after the first 20 or 30μs of the flattop. During the first few tens of microseconds, a small overshoot or undershoot is observed for very large cavity detuning. The integral part of the PI control rejects large low frequency disturbances and has 0 steady state error and a settling time of few tens of microseconds. Proportional + integral control closed loop gain K P =100, Ki=6.2 million r/s Vertical scale x30 times smaller σ=10 -4 σ=0.01 degrees overshoot ~300 RF pulses plotted together

Gradient overshoot The overshoot shows a strong correlation with the amplitude of the detuning. CC2 gradient amplitude follows a square law and the phase a tangent law as a function of the detuning.

Forward and reflected power The PI control is an effective regulator as long as there is enough RF power available and the RF operates in the linear region. A cavity detuned by 500Hz (~2 half bandwidths) requires 4 times more power. Pfor/Pref crosstalk Pref not zero because QL not matched

Piezo tuners and RF control 7 hr run combining both piezo and RF control. The piezo is used to track and compensate low frequency fluctuations of pulse to pulse detuning. These fluctuations are attributed to cryogenic pressure fluctuations. The piezo is not compensating LFD at this point. During the run, the pressure fluctuates 0.34% rms with a dominant noise component of 3.7 minutes. Piezo OFFPiezo ON σ = 272 Hzσ = 51 Hz

RF regulation with piezo ON The peak to peak overshoot is 4 x for amplitude and 0.04 degrees for phase, that is 10 to 15 times smaller than with piezo OFF. The rms regulation for the rest of the flattop is smaller than 2 x and degrees respectively Zoomed in

Integrated microphonics Since we sample at 1 Hz, the microphonic spectrum is folded many times around the 0.5 Hz Nyquist frequency. A~30 minute run shows an rms of 30Hz Calculated as the difference in cavity detuning at the end two consecutive pulses

Summary and (near) future work Excellent field regulation achieved with RF and resonance (piezo) control. – RF and resonance control can work together. RF power must be available for control. For Project X the RF disturbances will be of the same nature but with different values and order of importance. We have good working LLRF systems and we keep improving them. Near future work – Study the performance of the PI control near klystron saturation. – For that we need to lower the high voltage and operate the CC2 at high gradient. We count on active LFD compensation Resonant frequency tracking with piezo may be needed.