Hall C Users Meeting 31 January 2009

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Robert Michaels HAMC Hall A Analysis Workshop 09 C HAMC = Hall A Monte Carlo ROOT / C++ Design Somewhat like SAMC & genercone For HRS only. Uses LeRose.
Advertisements

Measuring the Neutron and 3 He Spin Structure at Low Q 2 Vincent Sulkosky College of William and Mary, Williamsburg VA Experimental Overview The.
Optics and magnetic field calculation for the Hall D Tagger Guangliang Yang Glasgow University.
1 MICE Beamline: Plans for initial commissioning. Kevin Tilley, 16 th November. - 75days until commissioning Target, detectors, particle production Upstream.
Hall C SHMS Fringe Field Analysis Michael Moore Hall C Winter Meeting
Chris A. Mack, Fundamental Principles of Optical Lithography, (c) 2007
Jin Huang & Vincent Sulkosky Massachusetts Institute of Technology Boson 2010 Workshop Sept 20, JLab.
Yury CHESNOKOV Crystal Collimation workshop, March 7, 2005 CALIBRATION of CMS CALORIMETERS with LHC PROTON BEAM DEFLECTED BY CRYSTAL CALIBRATION of CMS.
Hall D Photon Beam Simulation and Rates Part 1: photon beam line Part 2: tagger Richard Jones, University of Connecticut Hall D Beam Line and Tagger Review.
Optics and magnetic field calculation for the Hall D Tagger Guangliang Yang Glasgow University.
Tagger and Vacuum Chamber Design. Outline. Design considerations. Stresses and deformations. Mechanical assembly.
Single-view Metrology and Camera Calibration Computer Vision Derek Hoiem, University of Illinois 02/26/15 1.
Two-dimensional and wide dynamic range profile monitor using OTR/fluorescence screens for diagnosing beam halo of intense proton beam Y. Hashimoto, T.
Tagger and Vacuum Chamber Design. Outline. Design considerations. Stresses and deformations. Mechanical assembly.
T. Horn, SHMS Optics Update SHMS Optics Update Tanja Horn Hall C Users Meeting 31 January 2009.
Bogdan Wojtsekhowski, Jefferson Lab Experimental search for A’ for APEX collaboration 1.
SolidWorks: Extruded Cuts, Fillets, and Patterns Introduction to Robotics.
PAIR SPECTROMETER DEVELOPMENT IN HALL D PAWEL AMBROZEWICZ NC A&T OUTLINE : PS Goals PS Goals PrimEx Experience PrimEx Experience Design Details Design.
Optics and magnetic field calculation for the Hall D Tagger Guangliang Yang Glasgow University.
1 Coordinate Detector: prototype design The Coordinate Detector (CDET): Three independent vertical planes with 15 cm plastic shield in front, all planes.
Possible Spectrometer for eA Collider Seigo Kato Faculty of Science, Yamagata University, Yamagata , Japan Presented to the workshop "Rare-Isotope.
Telecommunications JBCardenas © 1982 Com3 1Q1516 Antenna Design JBC © 198 v A2,2 Key design requirements 1.Provide the theoretical computations of shapes.
Using the Alphabet of lines. Drawing should be near bottom left corner. The front view shows how wide and how tall the object is.
Status of the Beamline Simulation A.Somov Jefferson Lab Collaboration Meeting, May 11, 2010.
Apex Target Marco Oriunno, April 23, Design and fabrication by: Marco Oriunno, Dieter Walz, Jim McDonald, Clive Field, Douglas Higginbotham, and.
HKS Analysis Status Report HKS Analysis Status Report Liguang Tang (Hampton/JLAB) Hall C User Meeting, Jan. 15, 2011 HKS has data taken in 2005 (E01-011)
SHMS Optics and Background Studies Tanja Horn Hall C Summer Meeting 5 August 2008.
A Study of Mapping for g2p instead of Reconstruction? Jixie Zhang Nov 27, 2012.
AWAKE Electron Spectrometer Simon Jolly, Lawrence Deacon, Matthew Wing 28 th January 2015.
1 Jim Thomas - LBL New Pad Plane Design Proposal & Specifications Jim Thomas, John Hammond, Bob Scheetz, Jon Wirth, etc., etc., and a cast of thousands.
SHMS Optics Studies Tanja Horn JLab JLab Hall C meeting 18 January 2008.
E Analysis update Adjust of the Splitter-HKS Side Yuncheng Han May 09, 2012 Hampton University JLab hypernuclear collaboration meeting.
GlueX Collaboration Meeting. Jefferson Lab. September 9 – 11, Review of Tagger System.
Integrated Radiation Measurement and Radiation Protection of BES Ⅲ Zhang Qingjiang, Wu protection group, accelerator center, IHEP,
Update on the Hall C Monte Carlo simulation for 12 GeV Mark Jones.
GlueX Two Magnet Tagger G. Yang University of Glasgow Part 1, 3 D Tosca analysis. Part 2, Preliminary Drawings. Part 3, Proposed Assembly Procedures (i)
Lecture 9: Inelastic Scattering and Excited States 2/10/2003 Inelastic scattering refers to the process in which energy is transferred to the target,
Collimator design and short range wakefields Adriana Bungau University of Manchester CERN, Dec 2006.
Magnetized hadronic calorimeter and muon veto for the K +   +  experiment L. DiLella, May 25, 2004 Purpose:  Provide pion – muon separation (muon veto)
14FEB2005/KWCAE2-UsersGroup Astro-E2 X-Ray Telescopes XRT Setup & Structure Performance Characteristics –Effective Area –Angular Resolution –Optical Axes.
An electron/positron energy monitor based on synchrotron radiation. I.Meshkov, T. Mamedov, E. Syresin, An electron/positron energy monitor based on synchrotron.
Progress Report on GEANT Study of Containerized Detectors R. Ray 7/11/03 What’s New Since Last Time?  More detailed container description in GEANT o Slightly.
MEIC Detector and IR Integration Vasiliy Morozov, Charles Hyde, Pawel Nadel-Turonski MEIC Detector and IR Design Mini-Workshop, October 31, 2011.
Beam collimation in the transfer line from 8 GeV linac to the Main Injector A. Drozhdin The beam transfer line from 8 GeV Linac to the Main Injector is.
Detector / Interaction Region Integration Vasiliy Morozov, Charles Hyde, Pawel Nadel-Turonski Joint CASA/Accelerator and Nuclear Physics MEIC/ELIC Meeting.
The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme.
Mitglied der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Hit Reconstruction for the Luminosity Monitor March 3 rd 2009 | T. Randriamalala, J. Ritman and T. Stockmanns.
Min Huang g2p/GEp Collaboration Meeting April 18, 2011.
Tagger and Vacuum Chamber Design Jim Kellie Glasgow University.
Eliminating one constraint for the scheduling committee Jay Benesch
y x Vincenzo Monaco, University of Torino HERA-LHC workshop 18/1/2005
Oleksiy Dolinskyy 1st December, 2014
Interaction Region and Detector
Hall C Readiness Review – Small Angle SHMS Operation
Comparison of GAMMA-400 and Fermi-LAT telescopes
SBS Magnet, Optics, and Spin Transport
Why Consider a Toroid Spectrometer Built Around Existing Hardware?
Update on GEp GEM Background Rates
Compact and Low Consumption Magnet Design The DESY Experience
HRS at small angles for e+/ e- pair for APEX
Parasitic Run Physics Simulations
CNGS Proton beam line: news since NBI2002 OUTLINE 1. Overview
Fraunhofer Diffraction
Why do BLMs need to know the Quench Levels?
HL-LHC operations with LHCb at high luminosity
Wei Luo Lanzhou University 2011 Hall C User Meeting January 14, 2011
Discussion of High Energy Proton Losses in Arc 7
Monte Carlo simulations for the ODIN shielding at ESS
A Model for Rockfall Test
CLIC luminosity monitoring/re-tuning using beamstrahlung ?
Presentation transcript:

Hall C Users Meeting 31 January 2009 SHMS Optics Update Tanja Horn Hall C Users Meeting 31 January 2009

SHMS Optics Configuration Need charged particle detection with momenta up to the beam energy (11 GeV) at forward angles down to 5.5° even with HMS at small angles Most reasonable configuration: HBQQQD Focal Plane HB Q1 Q2 Q3 DIPOLE Deflection=3 ° Deflection= 18.4 °

Collimator reduces uncertainties due to optics Q1 Q2 Q3 D +10% < δ < +15% Event loss at Q1 due to geometric effects Acceptance at dipole entrance depends on aperture and δ Events at negative δ are focused more Collimator can eliminate events that would be lost inside the dipole Reduces model dependent systematic uncertainty

Sieve Slit for Spectrometer Optics Sieve slit is used to understand the optics properties the spectrometer Figures show HMS sieve slit reconstruction data HMS X’ (individual holes) 1.8 mr X’ (columns) 1.8-2.1 mr Y’ (individual holes) 0.3-0.7 mr Y’ (rows) 0.8-1.0 mr Y (mean) 2 mm H. Blok, T. Horn, G. Huber et al., Phys. Rev. C78 (2008)

HMS collimator/slit system Sieve slit 0.508 cm holes in 7 (9) columns at 1.524 cm (2.540 cm) intervals in the horizontal (vertical) direction Center of sieve slit at 168 cm from target center No holes at +1.524/+2.540 cm and -1.524 cm/-5.080cm for orientation checks Outermost holes are at ±10.160 cm (±60.5 mr) Octagonal collimators 6.35 cm thick heavymet (90% W, 10% CuNi) HMS Collimator box D Q1 Q2 Q3

SHMS collimator/sieve system Sieve collimator in front of HB: standard optics calibration may be complicated Aperture defining slits: best location in front of HB Sieve collimator in front of Q1: optics modeling straightforward, but have to assume that perturbations due to HB are small Possible sieve collimator locations y HB Q1 Q2 Q3 D x Design will be octagonal shape Dimensions depend on location in z

Place SHMS collimator after HB Q1 SHMS collimator box No room before HB for collimator box with collimator(s) and sieve slit Assume front of collimator is at 82 cm after the HB center or at 2.58 m from the pivot Collimator is then ±0.055*258=±14.2 cm high and ±0.030*258=±7.7 cm wide Assume heavymet material for ±5cm at least need 40cm by 25cm per collimator

Slit Box Design Limitations: Width SHMS HMS Q1 HB Q2 Slit box Guiding rod options: 35-cm wide slit box is possible Move horizontally from SHMS left to beam axis Mechanical (surveyed) stop at SHMS right Guiding rods (w/ tooling balls) on top and bottom Two options: guiding rods in the back or to sides

Slit Box Design Limitations: Depth Analogous to HMS design, assume octagonal collimator thickness 6.4 cm Sieve slit is thinner (e.g., HMS: 3.175 cm thick) Two octagonal collimators Also take into account additional material for support etc. Type Thickness Box material thickness 0.9 cm Empty space for motion 0.6 cm Collimator thickness 6.4 cm Rod/tooling ball space 4.6 cm Box/material thickness Total depth of slit box 13.4 cm Sieve slit

SHMS Slit Box in Hall C Slit box fits between HB and Q1 Front of slit box is 80 cm after the HB center, or at 2.56 m from target center Sufficiently far away from HB to have minimum stray field

SHMS sieve slit design Standard calibrations of SHMS with the sieve before Q1 possible Preliminary simulations show small distortions of mid-plane symmetry FP pattern of sieve before HB shows strong delta dependence of the bending z=120cm z=258cm Size of sieve holes: 3 mrad For comparison: HMS sieve holes diameter is 0.504cm (3 mrad) Further studies of the focal plane patterns will determine the optimal design for optics reconstruction

Additional Sieve Slit before HB Special calibration sieve slit HB Q1 120 cm from target center Assume front of sieve slit is 56 cm in front of HB center or at 1.20 m from the pivot Need to cover at least ±0.055*120cm=±6.6 cm high and ±0.030*120cm=±3.6cm wide for a point target Assume heavymet material for ± 5 cm at least at the edges Assume 30 cm wide by 25 cm high sieve (note: HB gap is 35cm by 36 cm) Weighs about 40 kg, so movable by hand

Design Limitation: height of the sieve slit SHMS HMS Q1 HB Q2 Special Sieve Slit Type Thickness Wall thickness 0.9 cm (x2) Rod/tooling ball thickness 4.6 cm (x2) Sieve slit height 25.0 cm Total height of slit box 36.0 cm Additional sieve slit (simple hand motion) before HB Move horizontally from SHMS left to beam axis Only inserted for special calibration runs

Design Limitation: depth of the sieve slit Analogous to HMS design, assume octagonal sieve slit thickness 3.2 cm But cannot forget about additional materials for support Type Thickness Thickness of guide before sieve 0.5 cm Sieve slit thickness (but rod/tooling bar thickness) 3.2 cm 5.1 cm Thickness of guide after sieve Back wall material thickness 0.9 cm Total depth of slit box 6.5 cm

Next Steps Additional studies for understanding the optical properties of the SHMS including HB Look how HB distorts the “image” of a collimator or sieve slit in front of it. How does an entrance octogonal look like in position and angle space at the planned location at the entrance of Q1 – can easily be done using HB TOSCA HMS Q2 Q1’ Beamline Bender Short report on simulation results Optimization of the distance between and the size of the Q1 sieve holes and the special calibration sieve slit before HB HMS Q1 Additional techniques for calibration techniques Possibilities of H(e,e’p) for calibrations especially the HB part Target

Backup material

Q1 sieve

Special calibration sieve

Target Region Slot in Q2 for Beamline Slot in Q1’ for Beamline Vertical Slot in HB for HMS Q1 at 12° Slot in HB for Beamline