Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. Illinois Institute of Technology

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The US 5 Year Muon Acceleration R&D Program To Boldly Go… MICE Collaboration Meeting Harbin January, 2009.
Advertisements

January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 1 MICE Beamline Analysis Using g4beamline Including Jan 25 Updates for Kevin’s JAN04 Beamline Design Tom Roberts.
December 10, 2008 TJRParticle Refrigerator1 The Particle Refrigerator Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. A promising approach to using frictional cooling for reducing.
PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
12/5/2008NuMu Collaboration Friday Meeting 1 Status Report on MANX Proposal Draft Bob Abrams Muons, Inc.
FIGURE OF MERIT FOR MUON IONIZATION COOLING Ulisse Bravar University of Oxford 28 July 2004.
TJR Feb 10, 2005MICE Beamline Analysis -- TRD SEPT041 MICE Beamline Analysis – TRD SEPT04 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. February 10, 2005.
Particle ID in the MICE Beamline MICE Collaboration Meeting 30 March Paul Soler, Kenny Walaron University of Glasgow and Rutherford Appleton Laboratory.
Changing the absorbers: how does it fit in the MICE experimental programme? Besides the requirement that the amount of multiple scattering material be.
March 30, 2004 TJR1 MICE Upstream Particle Identification Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology March 30, 2004.
CHIPP Sept 2005Jean-Sébastien GraulichSlide 1 What is MICE  Muon Ionisation Cooling Experiment  What is Ionisation Cooling ? Cooling = Reduction of Beam.
TJR Sept 22, 2004MICE Beamline Analysis -- SEPT041 MICE Beamline Analysis – SEPT04 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. September 22, 2004.
Alain Blondel MICE: Constraints on the solenoids 2.Field Homogeneity: or ? this will be dictated by the detector requirements. TPG will be.
1 G4MICE studies of PID transverse acceptance MICE video conference Rikard Sandström.
MICE FAC Alain Blondel 7 October   MICE The International Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment MICE CM19.
11-FEB-2004 TJR1 MICE Beamline TOF Analysis Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Techology February 11, 2004.
K.Walaron Fermilab, Batavia, Chicago 12/6/ Simulation and performance of beamline K.Walaron T.J. Roberts.
Chris Rogers, MICE CM16 Wednesday Plenary Progress in Cooling Channel Simulation.
MICE: The International Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment Diagnostic Systems Tracker Cherenkov Detector Time of Flight Counters Calorimeter Terry Hart.
MICE analysis meeting Alain Blondel 5 August MICE -- what running strategy? disclaimer: of course we will evolve the running strategy as problems.
1 PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
Mark Rayner, Analysis workshop 4 September ‘08: Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing, slide 1 Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing Analysis.
An updated Baseline Design for MICE From proposal to technical reference Paul Drumm, Dec 2003.
February 24, 2007MICE CM171 6D MANX A Muon Cooling Demonstration Experiment; How it might fit with MICE. Tom Roberts Muons, Inc.
1 EMCal design MICE collaboration meeting Fermilab Rikard Sandström.
May 12, 2004 TJR1 Effects of Downstream Iron Shield Position on MICE Good- Mu+ Rates Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology May 12, 2004.
May 12, 2004 TJR1 Effects of Upstream ParticleID Counters on MICE Good-Mu+ Rates Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology May 12, 2004.
MICE magnetic measurements Sequence of events and MICE hall movements Alain Blondel – 10-April 2012 revision from 13 December 2012.
MICE Video meeting Alain Blondel 7 December MICE -- what running strategy? reflections on steps I and II.
A. Kurup, I. Puri, Y. Uchida, Y. Yap, Imperial College London, UK R. B. Appleby, S. Tygier, The University of Manchester and the Cockcroft Institute, UK.
Emittance measurement: ID muons with time-of-flight Measure x,y and t at TOF0, TOF1 Use momentum-dependent transfer matrices iteratively to determine trace.
Fast TOF for Muon Cooling Experiments Robert Abrams Muons, inc.
MICE CM15 wrap-up Alain Blondel 11 June MICE News Collaboration meeting 8-11 June 2006 at Fermilab complete review of the project. for those who.
Emittance measurement: ID muons with time-of-flight Measure x,y and t at TOF0, TOF1 Use momentum-dependent transfer matrices to map  path Assume straight.
Particle Production in the MICE Beam Line Particle Accelerator Conference, May 2009, Vancouver, Canada Particle Production in the MICE Beam Line Jean-Sebastien.
ICHEP 2012 Melbourne, 7 July 2012 Paul Soler on behalf of the MICE Collaboration The MICE Beam Line Instrumentation (Trackers and PID) for precise Emittance.
MICE VC Alain Blondel 1 MICE NEWS MICE VC Next Collaboration meeting will be Jun at IIT and the 19th at Fermilab right before the.
MICE magnetic measurements: AFC considerations Alain Blondel see a previous discussion for reference in CM35 (Feb 2013 slides by V. Blackmore, A. Blondel.
MICE input beam weighting Dr Chris Rogers Analysis PC 05/09/2007.
MICE FAC Alain Blondel 21 september   MICE The International Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment BRIEF STATUS OF MICE.
MCTF 8/17/06 A. Bross MTA Activities and Plans MCTF August 17, 2006 A. Bross.
MICE at STFC-RAL The International Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment -- Design, engineer and build a section of cooling channel capable of giving the.
MICE CM16 Goals Alain Blondel 8 October MICE CM 16 Collaboration meeting 8-11 October 2006 at RAL Goals of the meeting thanks to John Cobb & Marco.
MCTF Andreas Jansson MUTAC Meeting 8-10 April MCTF EXPERIMENTAL ACTIVITES - towards demonstrating 6D cooling.
Project Managers Report CM40 Collaboration Board – Rome Roy Preece 28 th October 2014.
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting Rutherford Appleton Lab Tuesday 25 th April 2006 M. Ellis.
March 2, 2011 TJRPhysics Processes Missing from our Current Simulation Tools 1 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. This is the current list − Please help us to complete.
MICE FAC open session Alain Blondel 1   MICE The International Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment.
Pre-CM33 schedule planning SuperMICO meeting, June 6th Motivation: For all of us to understand the main drivers behind the top-level MICE schedule So that.
1 Search for Worst-Case Forces MICE Video Conference, September 8, 2004 Yury Ivanyushenkov Applied Science Division, Engineering and Instrumentation Department,
Recent Studies on ILC BDS and MERIT S. Striganov APD meeting, January 24.
CHIPP Aug 2010J.S. GraulichSlide 1 MICE and the Neutrino Factory Jean-Sebastien Graulich, Geneva.
MICE CM20 Alain Blondel 10 February The International Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment MICE CM20 Spokesmouse remarks.
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting U.C. Irvine Monday 21 st August 2006 M. Ellis & A. Bross.
(one of the) Request from MPB
Muons, Inc. Feb Yonehara-AAC AAC Meeting Design of the MANX experiment Katsuya Yonehara Fermilab APC February 4, 2009.
MICE. Outline Experimental methods and goals Beam line Diagnostics – In HEP parlance – the detectors Magnet system 2MICE Optics Review January 14, 2016.
MICE. Outline Experimental methods and goals Beam line Diagnostics – In HEP parlance – the detectors Magnet system 2MICE Optics Review January 14, 2016.
Comments on the February DOE Review
Muon Ionisation Cooling Experiment Overview
INTERIM REPORT on MANX after MICE
M. Migliorati, C. Vaccarezza INFN - LNF
MICE Collaboration Meeting Saturday 22nd October 2005 Malcolm Ellis
Using MICE to verify simulation codes?
Why Consider a Toroid Spectrometer Built Around Existing Hardware?
Design of the MANX experiment
Physics Processes Missing from our Current Simulation Tools
K. Tilley, ISIS, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, UK Introduction
The Detector System of the MICE Experiment
IR/MDI requirements for the EIC
Presentation transcript:

Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. Illinois Institute of Technology Simulation Issues - and - MICE Interim Report on MANX after MICE (Two talks for the price of one.) Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. Illinois Institute of Technology February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues As author of one of the primary simulation programs used in current muon collider design studies, I am keenly aware of some of the limitations of current simulation codes. And I am surely blind to others! As an example, extrapolating from current measurements of energy loss and multiple scattering to a full cooling channel has a ratio comparable to extrapolating from a rifle to 0.1 c. Clearly some humility is needed! Or rather, some EXPERIMENTS are needed… February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE All programs are prone to “garbage in, garbage out” Complex simulation programs are even more prone to this. − This is old hat and I won’t discuss it Simulation programs make many approximations. − This is old hat and I won’t discuss it Simulation programs have many parameters to select. − This is old hat and I won’t discuss it Simulation programs require enormous CPU resources. − This is old hat and I won’t discuss it Real systems are very complex and difficult to represent in a simulation program − This is old hat and I won’t discuss it Etc…. February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE Existing programs do not implement all relevant physics phenomena. − This is worth a discussion Electromagnetic processes – the essence of muon cooling Accurate multiple scattering models (tails become important…) Accurate energy straggling model Correlation between multiple scattering and energy loss Effect of magnetic field on multiple scattering Thick vs. thin absorbers Realistic 3-d EM fields (e.g. waveguide ports, HOM correctors, …) February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE Collective processes (vacuum) space charge  in progress wake fields coherent synchrotron radiation beam-beam interactions electron cloud effects Collective processes (in matter)  starting space charge screening by material bunch-induced polarization of material causing intensity-dependent energy loss and instability effects of matter on wake fields coherent bremstrahlung for all the above, consider dependency on material properties, head-tail differences, and bunch-to-bunch effects (i.e. time dependence) February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues Decays and Interactions in macroparticle models Polarized muon processes Normalization uncertainties Pion production models Distortions of mercury target In short, there are many known physics processes not implemented in current simulation programs. Some are surely important for muon collider design. Many of them have never been measured. Measuring EM processes in a thick absorber is a good start. February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

MICE Interim Report on MANX After MICE Tom Roberts, IIT “The MICE collaboration members generally strongly support the idea of a follow-up experimental program in ionization cooling studies. […] The concept of helical cooling channel seems very promising and the synergy with muon colliders is exciting.” − Alain Blondel, MICE Spokesperson This is a summary of a report presented by Malcolm Ellis at the recent MICE Collaboration Meeting (Jan. 14, Harbin, China). Prepared by: John Cobb (chair), Chris Rogers, Malcolm Ellis, Yoshi Kuno February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE MICE has convened a committee to consider follow-on possibilities; MANX is by far the most advanced, and the only one considered at this time The questions suggested by the MICE Executive Board: Space-consistency in the MICE hall Scope and adequacy of proposals in view of existing MICE instrumentation, and Infrastructure Consistency of time scales Comment on resources available from MANX and MICE Good use of MICE infrastructure resources February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE MANX proposal assumes much of MICE will exist MICE is a collaboration Infrastructure is not (yet) a facility Operated by MICE collaborators Instrumentation is not owned ‘in common’ by MICE Individual owners of instrumentation may have own preferences or funding agency constraints ‘MICE’ itself cannot agree to support any new initiative – a new collaboration would be needed MANX – or any new cooling experiment – at RAL would probably require substantial UK involvement RAL is small part of MICE Not same relationship to users as CERN or Fermilab February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE Two possible configurations: MANX with matching Off-Axis MANX – reduces cost of the magnet 350 MeV/c  150 MeV/c New fiber tracker planes inside matching and HCC New high-resolution TOF counters (<5 psec resolution) Being developed February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE Off-Axis MANX The MICE committee did not consider the off-axis configuration of MANX, believing the spectrometer solenoids had not been designed to handle off-axis forces This is not actually a show-stopper: “The cold mass support system for the spectrometer solenoid is quite robust. […] I think that the supports can carry 200 kN in the radial direction while carrying 450 kN in the axial direction.” − Mike Green Of course the overall system must be properly engineered, including quench forces The off-axis configuration puts the downstream spectrometer closer to the iron magnetic shield wall, which must be considered (forces, field distortions, infrastructure) February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

MANX After MICE Conclusions – I MANX with matching fits in the MICE hall Off-Axis MANX should also fit effects of the magnetic shield wall? MICE spectrometers appear more than adequate for transverse planes Large volume of LHe needs new infrastructure; ditto for LH2 Placement of new TOF counters needs to be considered The down-stream PID detectors may be too small, if the downstream TOFs need additional space February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

MANX After MICE Conclusions – II 350 MeV/c is within the magnet capabilities of the beamline Higher pi/mu ratio at 350 MeV/c makes particle ID important MICE Cherenkov counters may be inadequate Investigating – can probably be made to work TOF1-TOF0 give ~7 sigma separation for pi/mu at 350 MeV/c Also: larger absorber means higher pi/mu ratio may be OK Matching from spectrometer to HCC at 350 MeV/c probably cannot be done with the current design Needs to be considered in the MANX magnet design Perhaps reducing initial momentum to 240 MeV/c reduces or eliminates the problems with 350 MeV/c February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

MANX After MICE Conclusions – III Timescale to follow MICE in 2013 seems rather optimistic Need selection of configuration Need engineering of HCC itself and in MICE hall Need to construct the HCC magnet Need simulations of performance, resolutions, etc. Need high-resolution TOF development Resources are very tight February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

MANX After MICE Conclusions – IV MICE is not a facility, and MICE as a collaboration cannot commit to a follow-on experiment A new collaboration is required All groups must agree on a program & apply for new funding Within the MICE collaboration, there is qualified support for MANX (and for other potential follow-on experiments) The MICE committee believes that STFC would most likely support a new initiative No show-stoppers have been found. February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE

Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE “The MICE collaboration members generally strongly support the idea of a follow-up experimental program in ionization cooling studies. […] The concept of helical cooling channel seems very promising and the synergy with muon colliders is exciting.” − Alain Blondel, MICE Spokesperson February 4, 2009 TJR Simulation Issues / MANX After MICE