Injector Setup for G0 and HAPPEX & Lessons Learned

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
5/3/2015J-PARC1 Transverse Matching Using Transverse Profiles and Longitudinal Beam arrival Times.
Advertisements

Page 1 Collider Review Retreat February 24, 2010 Mike Spata February 24, 2010 Collider Review Retreat International Linear Collider.
Chris Tennant Jefferson Laboratory March 15, 2013 “Workshop to Explore Physics Opportunities with Intense, Polarized Electron Beams up to 300 MeV”
Reduced Gun Simulations 1. Comparison 60MV/m Gun vs 50MV/m Gun, Flat Top Laser Pulse 2. Comparison for the worst case: Gun50+Gauss Laser Pulse 3. Summary.
MERLIN 3.0 only considers first order (dipole) modes. Kick is linearly proportional to offset. For offsets close to the axis this is a reasonable approximation.
M. Woods (SLAC) Beam Diagnostics for test facilities of i)  ii) polarized e+ source January 9 –11, 2002.
Modelling of the ALICE Injector Julian McKenzie ASTeC STFC Daresbury Laboratory IOP Particle Accelerators and Beams Group Status and Challenges of Simulation.
Longitudinal transfer function a.k.a. (M 55 ) measurements at the JLab FEL Pavel Evtushenko, JLab  Jlab IR/UV upgrade longitudinal phase space evolution.
Low Emittance RF Gun Developments for PAL-XFEL
ASTRA Injector Setup 2012 Julian McKenzie 17/02/2012.
I.V. Bazarov, ERL advisory mtg, Sept 2012 CLASSE Cornell University CHESS & ERL Cornell Laboratory for Accelerator-based ScienceS and Education (CLASSE)
AAC February 4-6, 2003 Protons on Target Ioanis Kourbanis MI/Beams.
October 4-5, Electron Lens Beam Physics Overview Yun Luo for RHIC e-lens team October 4-5, 2010 Electron Lens.
G 0 Coordinator Update & “To-Do List” Joe Grames William & Mary, June 5-6, 2006  Hall C Beam Line Tasks  Accelerator Preparation Tasks  Beam Halo 
1 Design of Proton Driver for a Neutrino Factory W. T. Weng Brookhaven National Laboratory NuFact Workshop 2006 Irvine, CA, Aug/25, 2006.
FLASH II. The results from FLASH II tests Sven Ackermann FEL seminar Hamburg, April 23 th, 2013.
Overview: Primary Sensitivities Nov S. Childress Page 1 NuMI Overview: NuMI Primary Beamline Sensitivities NuMI requirements are for a very large.
Accelerator Science and Technology Centre Extended ALICE Injector J.W. McKenzie, B.D. Muratori, Y.M. Saveliev STFC Daresbury Laboratory,
ICFA-HB 2004 Commissioning Experience for the SNS Linac A. Aleksandrov, S. Assadi, I. Campisi, P. Chu, S. Cousineau, V. Danilov, G. Dodson, J. Galambos,
R.Chehab/ R&D on positron sources for ILC/ Beijing, GENERATION AND TRANSPORT OF A POSITRON BEAM CREATED BY PHOTONS FROM COMPTON PROCESS R.CHEHAB.
T. Limberg Position of the 3rd Harmonic System. Injector (with first Bunch Compression Stage) 2 European XFEL MAC May 2010 T. Limberg.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project Tor Raubenheimer Beam Delivery System Design Differences American Linear Collider Physics Meeting SLAC January 8.
Parameter [units]Tune-up beam"low" chargehigh currenthigh charge Kin. injection energy [MeV]2.0 – Maximum beam energy [MeV]16 –
3 MeV test stand measurement plans A. Lombardi for the LINAC4 team 10/01/2013BCC MeV test stand measurements1.
July LEReC Review July 2014 Low Energy RHIC electron Cooling Jorg Kewisch, Dmitri Kayran Electron Beam Transport and System specifications.
Capture and Transport Simulations of Positrons in a Compton Scheme Positron Source A. VIVOLI*, A. VARIOLA (LAL / IN2P3-CNRS), R. CHEHAB (IPNL & LAL / IN2P3-CNRS)
Optimization Objectives Top Level Questions 10 MeV – Incorporate studies on operability, cost etc. 50 MeV – More stringent beam specs  Optimize 50 MeV.
Robert R. Wilson Prize Talk John Peoples April APS Meeting: February 14,
S. Bettoni, R. Corsini, A. Vivoli (CERN) CLIC drive beam injector design.
Awake electron beam requirements ParameterBaseline Phase 2Range to check Beam Energy16 MeV MeV Energy spread (  ) 0.5 %< 0.5 % ? Bunch Length (
LCLS-II Injector layout design and study Feng Zhou 8/19/2015.
Summary of ions measurements in 2015 and priorities for 2016 studies E. Shaposhnikova 3/02/2016 Based on input from H. Bartosik, T. Bohl, B. Goddard, V.
X-band Based FEL proposal
MAX IV linac overview and scope of automation Sara Thorin.
PAL-XFEL Commissioning Plan ver. 1.1, August 2015 PAL-XFEL Beam Dynamics Group.
B. Marchetti R. Assmann, U. Dorda, J. Grebenyuk, Y. Nie, J. Zhu Acknowledgements: C. Behrens, R. Brinkmann, K. Flöttmann, M. Hüning,
Bunch Shaping for Future Dielectric Wakefield Accelerators W. Gai Mini-Workshop on Deflecting/Crabbing RF Cavity Research and application in Accelerators.
Parity Quality Beam (PQB) B-Team Meeting September 10, 2008.
Polarized Injector Update
Beam Commissioning Adam Bartnik.
Multi-bunch Operation for LCLS, LCLS_II, LCLS_2025
Options and Recommendations for TL and Dumps
Beam-beam effects in eRHIC and MeRHIC
Test of Optical Stochastic Cooling in CESR
Jeffrey Eldred, Sasha Valishev
G0 Backward Angle Accelerator Preparations
CEBAF Injector Overview
BC2 Commissioning Parameters
G0 Accelerator Planning Meeting (11/1/05)
The Cornell High Brightness Injector
Cornell Injector Performance
Accelerator Issues Raised in Hall A Parity Collaboration Meeting, April B-Team Meeting April 29, 2009.
Progress activities in short bunch compressors
Thoughts on why G0 needed position feedback and HAPPEX didn't
Thoughts on why G0 needed position feedback and HAPPEX didn't
Analysis of Multi-Turn ERLs for X-ray Sources
Capture and Transmission of polarized positrons from a Compton Scheme
Injector: What is needed to improve the beam quality?
Advanced Research Electron Accelerator Laboratory
Injector Topics for Discussion
Test of Booster at UITF Reza Kazimi (12/12/18)
MEBT1&2 design study for C-ADS
Modified Beam Parameter Range
Injector Experimental Results John Schmerge, SSRL/SLAC April 24, 2002
CEPC Injector Linac beam dynamics
MEIC Polarized Electron Source
Comparison between 4K and 2K operation performance of CEBAF injector cryomodules Grigory Eremeev Monday, August 19, 2019.
CEPC injector beam dynamics
Update on ERL Cooler Design Studies
Hall A Beam Parameters Table
Presentation transcript:

Injector Setup for G0 and HAPPEX & Lessons Learned Reza Kazimi

Layout of the Injector

Beam Requirements During G0 Run Beam Parameters   Hall A Hall B G0 in Hall C Current 100mA Few nA 40mA Charge/bunch 0.2 pC 2e-17 C 1.3 pC Energy 1-5 GeV sE/E 2.5x10-5 <10-4 5.0x10-5 Size at target >100 mm <1000mm 100mm <200 mm Divergence -- 100mrad 100 mrad Fractional Beam Halo 100Hz/mA @R=3mm <10-3 @ >0.5mm <10-6 @ R>3mm Polarization >70%

Challenges How to transport high bunch charge beam in the injector How to transport high and low bunch charge beams simultaneously through the injector How to maintain parity quality

Solution Extra bunching was done early in the injector to compensate for the space charge effect The longitudinal optics were changed to accommodate the extra energy spread due to over-bunching The laser spot size was increased to make a larger beam with lower space charge Transverse optics were modified to deliver a larger beam with minimized optical aberrations RF phase drifts were stabilized to maintain the beam quality

G0 Injector Model Verified by Measurements Transmission rate vs. prebuncher amplitude Bunch longitudinal profile: PARMELA Confirms longitudinal model Bunch longitudinal profile: Measured Emittance vs. Beam Current Bunch longitudinal profile: Measured vs. model Transverse model within factor of 2

HAPPEX-II Beam Requirements Beam Parameters   Hall A Current 100mA Charge/bunch 0.2 pC Energy 3.2 GeV sE/E < 10-3 Size at target > 100 mm < 1000mm Divergence 200 mrad Fractional Beam Halo 100Hz/mA @R=3mm Polarization > 70%

HAPPEX-II Injector Setup Most improvements made for G0 were also applicable to the HAPPEX experiment We had essentially the same setup as G0, with less prebunching

Lessons Learned There was significant value in keeping the beam centered on optical elements, both in reducing the space charge effects and in maintaining the parity quality. Errors in longitudinal bunch setup due to RF drifts caused asymmetries both in current intensity and position. (We now have better RF stability so this problem should not be as significant this time around.) We can run high and low current bunches in the injector while maintaining bunch length and energy spread; however, it is best to avoid simultaneously running experiments with difficult beam specs.

Lessons Learned (Continued) There was orbit-related sensitivity with current asymmetry around the quarter-cryo which was not fully understood. This showed up both during the G0 run and HAPPEX. The Operations staff need to be more involved in the process and have more information on what is being changed, monitored and measured so they can be more effective in helping their customer.

END