Intensity Evolution Estimate for LHC

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
R. Bruce, M. Giovannozzi, S. Redaelli With essential input from G. Arduini, R. De Maria, S. Fartoukh, M. Fitterer, R. Tomas, J. Wenninger, aperture team.
Advertisements

Collimation with retracted TCSGs R. Bruce, R. Kwee, S. Redaelli.
LHC Collimation Working Group – 19 December 2011 Modeling and Simulation of Beam Losses during Collimator Alignment (Preliminary Work) G. Valentino With.
Critical beam losses during Commissioning & Initial Operation Guillaume Robert-Demolaize (CERN and Univ. Joseph Fourier, Grenoble) with R. Assmann, S.
Collimation MDs LHC Study Working Group Daniel Wollmann for the Collimation-Team, BLM-Team, Impedance-Team, … LHC Study Working Group,
Lot’s of time lost due to cryo problem in IR8. Major impact, therefore review of MD program… Start discussion here, please let us know your input. Will.
GRD - Collimation Simulation with SIXTRACK - MIB WG - October 2005 LHC COLLIMATION SYSTEM STUDIES USING SIXTRACK Ralph Assmann, Stefano Redaelli, Guillaume.
Loss maps of RHIC Guillaume Robert-Demolaize, BNL CERN-GSI Meeting on Collective Effects, 2-3 October 2007 Beam losses, halo generation, and Collimation.
6/14/11 Collimation Upgrade Plan & Questions R. Assmann, CERN for the collimation team 14/6/2011 LHC Collimation Project Review.
External Review on LHC Machine Protection, CERN, Collimation of encountered losses D. Wollmann, R.W. Assmann, F. Burkart, R. Bruce, M. Cauchi,
CONTENT: Beam characteristics and parameters Filling schemes Operational settings OP procedure and COLL setting Planning Shift breakdown To define the.
Ralph Assmann What Do We Want To Measure (in 2009) R. Assmann S. Redaelli, V. Previtali CERN/BE discussed with W. Scandale CERN/EN26/3/2009CC09  See also.
Concept of a Collimation System with Enhanced Operational Stability and Performance.
ION COMMISSIONING REVISITED 1 Thanks to: John Jowett, Walter Venturini. Matteo Solfaroli.
Partikeldagarna, Göteborg 21 September 2007 LHC: Status and Plans Lyn Evans.
Luminosity expectations for the first years of CLIC operation CTC MJ.
Preparation of Review R. Assmann et al CWG, CWG R. Assmann.
Elias Métral, LHC Beam Commissioning Working Group meeting, 08/06/2010 /191 SINGLE-BUNCH INSTABILITY STUDIES IN THE LHC AT 3.5 TeV/c Elias Métral, N. Mounet.
R. Assmann - LHCCWG Two Beam Operation R.W. Aßmann LHCCWG Acknowledgements to W. Herr, V. Previtali, A. Butterworth, P. Baudrenghien, J. Uythoven,
Machine development - results and plans – critical results, what’s to be done? R. Assmann 15/07/2011 R. Assmann for the LHC MD coordination team (R. Assmann,
Updates on FLUKA simulations of TCDQ halo loads at IR6 FLUKA team & B. Goddard LHC Collimation Working Group March 5 th, 2007.
Injection Energy Review D. Schulte. Introduction Will review the injection energy So could answer the following questions: Which injection energy can.
LHC-CC Validity Requirements & Tests LHC Crab Cavity Mini Workshop at CERN; 21. August Remarks on using the LHC as a test bed for R&D equipment.
Collimator settings for 2012 R. Bruce, R. Assmann for the collimation team
R. Assmann, June 2009 Operational Experience with the LHC Collimation System R. Assmann, CERN 8/6/2009 for the Collimation Project Team Visit TU Munich.
Β*-dependence on collimation R. Bruce, R.W. Assmann C. Alabau Pons, F. Burkart, M. Cauchi, D. Deboy, M. Giovannozzi, W. Herr, L. Lari, G. Muller, S. Redaelli,
CONTENT: Beam characteristics and MP concerns BI configuration Operational settings Collimators Planning Shift breakdown Thanks to: P.Baudrenghien, G.Bellodi,
Cryo back at 17:30 Beam back at 19:00 IR2 aperture until ~03:00 Since then no beam from the SPS:  Connector problem on MKD  Connector eroded, needs to.
Progress with Beam Report to LMC, Machine Coordination W10: Mike Lamont – Ralph Assmann Thanks to other machine coordinators, EIC’s, operators,
RHIC Status April 8, 2011 RSC Meeting Haixin Huang.
Collimation Aspects for Crab Cavities? R. Assmann, CERN Thanks to Daniel Wollmann for presenting this talk on my behalf (criticism and complaints please.
Turnaround time in modern hadron colliders & store-length optimization
Operating IP8 at high luminosity in the HL-LHC era
LHC Wire Scanner Calibration
Ion Commissioning: Thursday & Friday
Tracking simulations of protons quench test
Transverse Damping Requirements
1st LHC MD Period Started
LHC Commissioning with Beam
Cryo Problem MD Planning Tue (1.11.) C B Day Time MD MP Tue 01:00
MPI-ATL Calor Meeting 7-Sep-2009 H. Oberlack MPI für Physik, Munich
Wednesday September 14th
Joint Meeting SPS Upgrade Study Group and SPS Task Force
Plan for Collimator Commissioning
Beam-beam Effects in Hadron Colliders
MD2490 Measurement of the TMCI threshold at flat-top
MD Report 24 June 2012 Machine coordinators: Barbara Holzer, Mike Lamont MD Coordinators: Ralph Assmann, Giulia Papotti, Frank Zimmermann MD#2 News & Plan.
Β*-reach in 2017 R. Bruce, S. Redaelli, R. De Maria, M. Giovannozzi, A. Mereghetti, D. Mirarchi Acknowledgement: collimation and optics teams, BE/ABP,
Status of LHC Operations
Proton Intensity Evolution Estimates for LHC
Summary of Week 16 G. Arduini, J. Wenninger
J. Uythoven, W. Venturini Delsolaro, CERN, Geneva
LHC Collimation Requirements
Summary of Week 26 Main aims: G. Arduini, B. Holzer, M. Lamont
04-05/08/2010 End of physics at ~11:00 after 18.5 hours ~120 nb-1.
Collimation after LS1: cleaning and β* reach
LHC Beam Operations Past, Present and Future
Saturday 7th May Sat – Sun night
Collimation margins and *
Friday 23rd March 08:00 Access
(on behalf of the LHC team)
Summary Thursday h21: Stable beams fill #1303.
Collimators: Operations - Baseline Assumptions
MD Planning Fri – Sat (1. – 2.7.)
Summary for LPC (March 7th, Ralph Assmann)
Another Immortal Fill….
Feedbacks & Stabilization Getting them going
Operational Results of LHC Collimator Alignment using Machine Learning
Operational Results of LHC Collimator Alignment using Machine Learning
Saturday 29th October Friday during IP2 1 m squeeze test
Presentation transcript:

Intensity Evolution Estimate for LHC R. Assmann, CERN/BE 3/3/2009 Commissioning Meeting “Cassandra has always been misunderstood and misinterpreted as a madwoman or crazy doomsday prophetess.” L. Fitton Ralph Assmann

LHC Proton Intensity Limit Impossible to predict the future precisely. Especially as LHC enters into new territory with intensities above 0.5% of its nominal design value. However, baseline assumptions have been agreed for the design of the LHC, taking into account experience with previous projects (ISR, SppS, Tevatron, HERA, …). All checked and supported by external experts. Simulations predict performance limitation from beam losses, based on clear physics process (“single-diffractive scattering”) and limitation in off-momentum phase space coverage in LHC collimation. Here, take baseline assumptions and assume simulations results are correct. Add some evolution to these values. Calculate performance. Concentrate on collimation efficiency (assume impedance less severe). Values for 7 TeV, lower energy requires more work. Assume announced quench limit! All is ongoing work… Ralph Assmann

Result: Achievement Factor Beyond World Record in Stored Energy Coll. Phase I Coll. Phase II Looks very ambitious, doesn’t it? better worse Ralph Assmann

Recent Reference Chiara will present PhD in BE seminar on March 12th, 14h15. PhD report available for download from web site LHC collimation project: http://www.cern.ch/lhc- collimation- project/PhD/bracco-phd- thesis-2009.pdf Ralph Assmann

Error: Magnet Alignment Errors PhD C. Bracco Ralph Assmann

Impact of Imperfections on Inefficiency (Leakage Rate) worse better PhD C. Bracco Ralph Assmann

Impact of Alignment Errors on Inefficiency (Leakage Rate) worse Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 better Predicted inefficiency over 20 different seeds of magnet alignment errors. PhD C. Bracco Ralph Assmann

Collimation Phase II: Ideal Cleaning Inefficiency versus Re(Tune Shift) R. Assmann, T. Weiler, E. Metral Ideal Performance worse Phase I worse better Phase II better Ralph Assmann

Input: Cleaning Efficiency better [%/m] Coll. Phase I Coll. Phase II worse Ralph Assmann

… as Inefficiency (Leakage Rate) … worse Coll. Phase I Coll. Phase II better Ralph Assmann

A Look at Tevatron Efficiency D. Still ~ factor 2 improvement per year Ralph Assmann

Input: Peak Loss Rate Design worse better Ralph Assmann

Remarks Beam Loss Rate The LHC beams will have most of the time > 20h beam lifetime! Original assumption for stored LHC beams: Min. intensity lifetime = 20 h (after 20 min about 1% of beam lost). However, every accelerator experiences regular reductions of beam lifetime due to various reasons: Machine changes in operational cycle: Snapback, ramp, squeeze Crossing of high-order resonances during operational cycle. Operator actions during empirical tuning (tune, orbit, chromaticity, coupling, …) with some small coupling of parts of beam to instabilities… A 1 second drop in beam lifetime is sufficient to have a quench and to end the fill. Collimation must protect against these loss spikes. Collimator design assumption changed to: Min. intensity lifetime = 0.2 h (after 10s about 1% of beam lost). Based on real world experience (SppS, HERA, Tevatron, RHIC, ISR, …). Ralph Assmann

Input: BLM Threshold better Typical HERA threshold? worse Ralph Assmann

Putting it together: Performance Model The various important input parameters have been put together into a preliminary performance model. Due to the short notice for this talk, please take results with some care. I will need to check. Also, some assumptions are questionable and possibly too optimistic (BLM threshold immediately at design value). However, should give some good idea about what we are looking at and what are the main parameters expected to limit the LHC performance. Such an approach takes into account the agreed assumptions, the technical results and the simulations of achievable performance. Ralph Assmann

Result: Intensity Evolution (preliminary) Limit from Collimation Maximum in LHC Collimation limited Beam-beam limited Ralph Assmann

Result: Fraction of Nominal Intensity (preliminary) World Record Stored Energy Ralph Assmann

Result: Fraction of Nominal Intensity (preliminary) Coll. Phase I Coll. Phase II Ralph Assmann

Input: Evolution of b* Present Triplets Triplet Phase I Ralph Assmann

Input: Evolution of Bunch Intensity Ralph Assmann

Result: Instantaneous Luminosity (preliminary) Not fully correct – need to improve model! Ralph Assmann

From Peak to Integrated Luminosity LEP Example Can look into a LEP model which can be applied to LHC. Note: LHC much more complex and sensitive than LEP! Ralph Assmann

Conclusion Put together baseline assumptions, as defined years ago and explicit supported by persons with real-world collider experience (Tevatron, SppS, RHIC, HERA, LEP, SLC, PEP-2, ISR). Put together available performance simulations around collimation and beam loss. Other high intensity side effects assumed OK (electro-magnetic noise, heating from image currents, instabilities, …). Used info as input parameters to model for intensity reach of the LHC. Introduced some evolution in input parameters, based on my personal judgment and experience in various colliders. Should be discussed. Obtain performance estimates versus time based on technical arguments. Will not claim that this is the truth but this is the best possible estimate! We cannot rely on hand waving arguments! Technical experts should support the assumptions in any estimate that is established! Ralph Assmann

“Best Possible Estimate” (Preliminary) Year Total number protons % of nominal Stored Energy [MJ] Factor beyond Tevatron/HERA 2010 1.02E+13 3 11.5 6 2011 2.56E+13 8 28.7 14 2012 4.09E+13 13 45.9 23 2013 5.05E+13 16 56.6 28 Note, that considerable uncertainties can affect these results. However, results are not in coherent with simulation results! Ralph Assmann