Other beam-induced background at the IP

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EXTRACTION BEAM LOSS AT 1 TEV CM WITH TDR PARAMETERS Y. Nosochkov, G. White August 25, 2014.
Advertisements

Beam-Beam Effects for FCC-ee at Different Energies: at Different Energies: Crab Waist vs. Head-on Dmitry Shatilov BINP, Novosibirsk FCC-ee/TLEP physics.
CLIC Energy Stages D. Schulte1 D. Schulte for the CLIC team.
GUINEA-PIG: A tool for beam-beam effect study C. Rimbault, LAL Orsay Daresbury, April 2006.
1 ILC Bunch compressor Damping ring ILC Summer School August Eun-San Kim KNU.
Solenoid effects and compensation B. Dalena, D. Swoboda, R. Tomás.
CARE07, 29 Oct Alexej Grudiev, New CLIC parameters. The new CLIC parameters Alexej Grudiev.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project  IR background issues and plans for Snowmass Jeff Gronberg/LLNL Linear Collider Workshop October 25, 2000.
27 June 2006Ken Moffeit1 Comparison of 2mrad and 14/20 mrad extraction lines Ken Moffeit ILC BDS 27 June 06.
An Introduction to the Physics and Technology of e+e- Linear Colliders Lecture 7: Beam-Beam Effects Nick Walker (DESY) DESY Summer Student Lecture 31 st.
August 2005Snowmass Workshop IP Instrumentation Wolfgang Lohmann, DESY Measurement of: Luminosity (precise and fast) Energy Polarisation.
Ground Motion + Vibration Transfer Function for Final QD0/SD0 Cryomodule System at ILC Glen White, SLAC ALCPG11, Eugene March 21, 2011.
Karsten Büßer Beam Induced Backgrounds at TESLA for Different Mask Geometries with and w/o a 2*10 mrad Crossing Angle HH-Zeuthen-LC-Meeting Zeuthen September.
CLIC main detector solenoid and anti-solenoid impact B. Dalena, A. Bartalesi, R. Appleby, H. Gerwig, D. Swoboda, M. Modena, D. Schulte, R. Tomás.
BeamCal Simulations with Mokka Madalina Stanescu-Bellu West University Timisoara, Romania Desy, Zeuthen 30 Jun 2009 – FCAL Meeting.
Simulation of Beam-Beam Background at CLIC André Sailer (CERN-PH-LCD, HU Berlin) LCWS2010: BDS+MDI Joint Session 29 March, 2010, Beijing 1.
Page 1 Overview and Issues of the MEIC Interaction Region M. Sullivan MEIC Accelerator Design Review September 15-16, 2010.
19 July 2006Ken Moffeit1 Comparison of 2mrad and 14/20 mrad extraction lines Ken Moffeit (via Eric Torrence) VLCW06 19 July 06.
BES-III Workshop Oct.2001,Beijing The BESIII Luminosity Monitor High Energy Physics Group Dept. of Modern Physics,USTC P.O.Box 4 Hefei,
ATF2 background and beam halo study D. Wang(IHEP), S. Bai(IHEP), P. bambade(LAL) February 7, 2013.
1 O. Napoly ECFA-DESY Amsterdam, April 2003 Machine – Detector Interface : what is new since the TDR ? O. Napoly CEA/Saclay.
CLIC Energy Stages D. Schulte1 D. Schulte for the CLIC team.
Simulation on beam loss from radiative Bhabha process Y. Funakoshi KEK.
ILC EXTRACTION LINE TRACKING Y. Nosochkov, E. Marin September 10, 2013.
Ken Moffeit SLAC LCWA09 1 Polarization Considerations for CLIC Ken Moffeit, SLAC 2009 Linear Collider Workshop of the Americas 29 September to 3 October.
Event Generation of Tim Barklow SLAC October 21, 2010.
Beam-Beam interaction SIMulation: GUINEA-PIG C. Rimbault, LAL Orsay CARE 05, Geneva, November 2005.
Systematic limitations to luminosity determination in the LumiCal acceptance from beam-beam effects C. Rimbault, LAL Orsay LCWS06, Bangalore, 9-13 March.
Calibration of energies at the photon collider Valery Telnov Budker INP, Novosibirsk TILC09, Tsukuba April 18, 2009.
Mokka simulation studies on the Very Forward Detector components at CLIC and ILC Eliza TEODORESCU (IFIN-HH) FCAL Collaboration Meeting Tel Aviv, October.
2 February 8th - 10th, 2016 TWIICE 2 Workshop Instability studies in the CLIC Damping Rings including radiation damping A.Passarelli, H.Bartosik, O.Boine-Fankenheim,
1 O. Napoly ECFA-DESY Amsterdam, April 2003 Machine – Detector Interface : what is new since the TDR ? O. Napoly CEA/Saclay.
IoP HEPP/APP annual meeting 2010 Feedback on Nanosecond Timescales: maintaining luminosity at future linear colliders Ben Constance John Adams Institute,
Luminosity at  collider Marco Zanetti (MIT) 1. Intro,  colliders basics Luminosity at  colliders Sapphire simulation Alternative approaches Luminosity.
MAIN DUMP LINE: BEAM LOSS SIMULATIONS WITH THE TDR PARAMETERS Y. Nosochkov E. Marin, G. White (SLAC) LCWS14 Workshop, Belgrade, October 7, 2014.
1 Updated comparison of feedback implementation for e + e - and e - e - modes of operation with realistic errors in the BDS M. Alabau Pons, P. Bambade,
Review of Alignment Tolerances for LCLS-II SC Linac Arun Saini, N. Solyak Fermilab 27 th April 2016, LCLS-II Accelerator Physics Meeting.
Initial proposal for the design of the luminosity calorimeter at a 3TeV CLIC Iftach Sadeh Tel Aviv University March 6th 2009
Beam-Beam interaction SIMulation: GUINEA-PIG
From Beam Dynamics K. Kubo
FCC-ee Interaction Region design
Polarization of final electrons/positrons during multiple Compton
BeamCal Simulation for CLIC
Benchmarking MAD, SAD and PLACET Characterization and performance of the CLIC Beam Delivery System with MAD, SAD and PLACET T. Asaka† and J. Resta López‡
New algorithms for tuning the CLIC beam delivery system
Cross section of the process
Beam-beam effects in eRHIC and MeRHIC
Large Booster and Collider Ring
γ γ-> hadron Background Events at CLIC
The MDI at CEPC Dou Wang, Hongbo Zhu, Huamin Qu, Jianli Wang, Manqi Ruan, Qinglei Xiu, Sha Bai, Shujin Li, Weichao Yao, Yanli Jin, Yin Xu, Yiwei Wang,
Very Asymmetric Collider for Dark Matter Search below 1 GeV
CLIC BDS tuning and luminosity signal
GUINEA-PIG++ Workshop on Spin Simulation Tools, 9-11 Nov 2010, DESY
Beam-beam R&D for eRHIC Linac-Ring Option
Tony Hill Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Beam beam simulations with disruption (work in progress...)
Hongbo Zhu (IHEP, Beijing) On behalf of the CEPC Study Group
LHC (SSC) Byung Yunn CASA.
Linear Colliders Linear Colliders 4 lectures
Interaction Region Design Options e+e- Factories Workshop
Study of e+ e- background due to beamstrahlung for different ILC parameter sets Stephan Gronenborn.
Explanation of the Basic Principles and Goals
Sha Bai CEPC AP meeting Local double ring MDI Sha Bai CEPC AP meeting
Parameter Optimization in Higgs Factories Beam intensity, beam-beam parameters, by*, bunch length, number of bunches, bunch charge and emittance.
CLIC Interaction Region when beams meet detectors
Beam-Beam Effects in High-Energy Colliders:
Start-to-End Simulations for the TESLA LC
The Effects of Beam Dynamics on CLIC Physics Potential
Crab Crossing Named #1 common technical risk (p. 6 of the report)
CLIC luminosity monitoring/re-tuning using beamstrahlung ?
Presentation transcript:

Other beam-induced background at the IP B. Dalena (CEA-IRFU/SACM) Contributions from: D. Schulte and J. Esberg

Outline Beam-Beam backgrounds at CLIC 3 TeV CM energy Expected Rates Machine imperfections Machine induced backgrounds Synchrotron radiation from the final doublet 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Beam-Beam interaction Particles rates produced during beam-beam interaction are expected to be high at CLIC 3 TeV CM energy They impact the interaction region design Spent beams particles Beamstrahlung photons Coherent pairs Incoherent pairs Bhabhas and radiative bhabhas Hadrons from  collisions Rates, energy and angles distributions computed with GUINEA-PIG (+ PYTHIA for hadronization) 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Spent beams and beamstrahlung photons e+ e- strongly focused in the electromagnetic field of the opposite bunch emit photons Average energy loss due to the radiation ΔE/EBS ~29% Average emitted photons per beam particle n ~ 2.1 per beam particle  Long tail at low energy of the spent beam 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

<  > ~ 1 quantum regime Coherent processes Conversion of a beamstrahlung photon into e+e- pairs in the strong electromagnetic field of the other bunch charge distribution rate of e+e- pairs creation is small for Ecm < 1 TeV at CLIC nominal center of mass energy it is important <  > ~ 1 quantum regime conversion of virtual photon (trident cascade) are also possible at CLIC energies 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Incoherent pairs & hadrons Incoherent e+e- pairs production from real-real, virtual-real and virtual-virtual photons scattering Incoherent μ+μ- pairs production, through the same processes, is also possible but much smaller rate e+ e-    hadrons (hadronization from Pythia) Cross sections increase with energy Visible in the detector 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Radiative Bhabhas e+ e-  e+ e-  at lowest order and for leptons scattered at small angles the cross section can be factorized into two parts: e+ e+  equivalent photon spectrum e-   e- Compton scattering Energy of the e- and photons up to quite all the beam energy Confined at relative small angles 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

CLIC crossing angle c = 10 mrad A cone of half aperture of 10 mrad contains most of the particles produced after collision N.B.  is defined with respect to the beam axis in the collision reference system c = 10 mrad 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Luminosity spectrum 1% single bunch energy spread due to RF structures beamstrahlung smears the center of mass energy spectrum coherent processes contribute to the low energy tail of the spectrum ~4% total (1% from e- e- or e+ e+ collisions) 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Beams parameters and Luminosity Beam-Beam products per BX [*] Backgrounds rates Beams parameters and Luminosity Total Luminosity [1034 cm-2 s-1] 5.9 Peak Luminosity 2.0 fr [Hz] 50 Nb 312 t [ns] 0.5 N 0.372e+10 z [m] 44 x /y [nm]/[nm] 660/20 *x /*y 45/1 Beam-Beam products per BX [*] ΔE/EBS 29 % n 2.1 (x N) Ncoherent 66e+7 Ntrident 67e+5 Nincoh_pairs 330e+3 Nincoh_muons 12.50 NHadrons 3.2 Nrad_bhabhas 110e+3 [*] GUINEA-PIG The emittance values include the budgets for imperfections The actual values depend on the single machine and can change during operation 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Beam-Beam Jitter the relative change in luminosity correspond roughly to the same change in the beam-beam background rates (except for the coherent processes with vertical offsets) B. D. and D. Schulte WEPE025, IPAC’10 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Beam emittances Beam-Beam products increase/decrease together with luminosity if the emittances of the two beams decrease/increase (except for the coherent processes with vertical emittance change) B. D. and D. Schulte WEPE025, IPAC’10 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Machine imperfections and corrections Due to the budget for imperfections forseen luminosity and background rate can be higher than nominal (up to 50% and 40% respectively) example: corrected machines (after BBA) ground motion following ATL low (A = 0.5×10−6 (μm)2/(ms)) applied to main LINAC only[3] luminosity and background values show a linear correlation [3] V. Shiltsev IWAA 1995, vol. 4, p 352 B. D. and D. Schulte WEPE025, IPAC’10 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Machine-induced background: photon fans Spectrum of emitted photons peaks at few MeV Maximum photon cone for an envelope covering 15x and 55y arXiv:1104.2426 [physics.acc-ph] 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Conclusion At CLIC 3 TeV cm energy background rates from beam-beam interaction can be high Their knowlegde is important for the interaction region design (quite important energy is deposited in the detector and extraction region) They affect the luminosity (smearing the CM distribution and adding 4% to the total luminosity) Nominal values account for imperfections  luminosity and background may increase ( up to 50% and 40% respectively) Photon fans from the final doublet are contained in the extraction cone aperture 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Beam charge Perfect machines but low intensity beam 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Luminosity during operation BBA FB FB FB Emittance budget: 5 nm rad (static imperfections) Emittance budget: 5 nm rad (dynamic imperfections) 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11

Machine imperfections (static) Inputs: main LINAC “standard” magnets and cavities misalignments[1] vertical plane only Beam Based Alignment applied[2] Beam parameters: z = 44 m N = 3.72 e+09 x = 660 nm rad y = 10 nm rad Results ~30% more luminosity on average with respect to nominal luminosity ~25% more background on average with respect to nominal background fluctuation ~5% (rms/<value>) in the background values from one bunch to the other [1] BD and D. Schulte WEPE025 IPAC’10 [2] D. Schulte TH6PFP045 PAC’09 28 September 2011 B. Dalena, LCWS11