Evaluation of 1GHz vs 2GHz RF frequency in the damping rings

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ILC Accelerator School Kyungpook National University
Advertisements

Page 1 Collider Review Retreat February 24, 2010 Mike Spata February 24, 2010 Collider Review Retreat International Linear Collider.
Bunch compressors ILC Accelerator School May Eun-San Kim Kyungpook National University.
1 ILC Bunch compressor Damping ring ILC Summer School August Eun-San Kim KNU.
1 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES NSLS-II ASAC-2007, April. 23, 2007 Injection System with a Booster in Separate Tunnel T. Shaftan for the NSLS-II team.
Damping ring K. Ohmi LC Layout Single tunnel Circumference 6.7 km Energy 5 GeV 2 km 35 km.
SuperB and the ILC Damping Rings Andy Wolski University of Liverpool/Cockcroft Institute 27 April, 2006.
July 22, 2005Modeling1 Modeling CESR-c D. Rubin. July 22, 2005Modeling2 Simulation Comparison of simulation results with measurements Simulated Dependence.
ALPHA Storage Ring Indiana University Xiaoying Pang.
Sergey Antipov, University of Chicago Fermilab Mentor: Sergei Nagaitsev Injection to IOTA ring.
The Overview of the ILC RTML Bunch Compressor Design Sergei Seletskiy LCWS 13 November, 2012.
Frank Zimmermann, CLIC “Away Day” 28 March 2006  x * Limitations and Improvements Paths Damping Rings Maxim Korostelev, Frank Zimmermann.
Fast Ion Instability Studies in ILC Damping Ring Guoxing Xia DESY ILCDR07 meeting, Frascati, Mar. 5~7, 2007.
Comparison between NLC, ILC and CLIC Damping Ring parameters May 8 th, 2007 CLIC Parameter working group Y. Papaphilippou.
Update of 3.2 km ILC DR design (DMC3) Dou Wang, Jie Gao, Gang Xu, Yiwei Wang (IHEP) IWLC2010 Monday 18 October - Friday 22 October 2010 Geneva, Switzerland.
Beam dynamics on damping rings and beam-beam interaction Dec 포항 가속기 연구소 김 은 산.
Lattice design for IBS dominated beams August th, 2007 Yannis PAPAPHILIPPOU IBS ’07 – Intra Beam Scattering mini workshop, The Cockcroft Institute,
1 Simulations of fast-ion instability in ILC damping ring 12 April ECLOUD 07 workshop Eun-San Kim (KNU) Kazuhito Ohmi (KEK)
1 Proposal for a CESR Damping Ring Test Facility M. Palmer & D.Rubin November 8, 2005.
Damping Ring Parameters and Interface to Sources S. Guiducci BTR, LNF 7 July 2011.
ILC Damping Ring Alternative Lattice Design ( Modified FODO ) ** Yi-Peng Sun *,1,2, Jie Gao 1, Zhi-Yu Guo 2 Wei-Shi Wan 3 1 Institute of High Energy Physics,
The SPS as a Damping Ring Test Facility for CLIC March 6 th, 2013 Yannis PAPAPHILIPPOU CERN CLIC Collaboration Working meeting.
Bunch Separation with RF Deflectors D. Rubin,R.Helms Cornell University.
The Introduction to CSNS Accelerators Oct. 5, 2010 Sheng Wang AP group, Accelerator Centre,IHEP, CAS.
S. Bettoni, R. Corsini, A. Vivoli (CERN) CLIC drive beam injector design.
Evaluation of 1GHz vs 2GHz RF frequency in the damping rings Yannis PAPAPHILIPPOU and Alexej Grudiev.
LER Workshop, Oct 11, 2006Intensity Increase in the LER – T. Sen1 LHC Accelerator Research Program bnl-fnal-lbnl-slac  Motivation  Slip stacking in the.
Emittance reduction by a SC wiggler in the ATF-DR September 16 th, 2009 Yannis PAPAPHILIPPOU and Rogelio TOMAS ATF2 weekly meeting.
ILC Damping Rings: Configuration Status and R&D Plans Andy Wolski Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory January 19, 2006.
Parameter scan for the CLIC damping rings July 23rd, 2008 Y. Papaphilippou Thanks to H. Braun, M. Korostelev and D. Schulte.
Evaluation of 1GHz vs 2GHz RF frequency in the damping rings April 16 th, 2010 Yannis PAPAPHILIPPOU and Alexej Grudiev.
FCC-ee injector complex including Booster Yannis Papaphilippou, CERN Thanks to: M.Aiba (PSI), Ö.Etisken (Ankara Un.), K.Oide (KEK), L.Rinolfi (ESI-JUAS),
C. Biscari, D. Alesini, A. Ghigo, F. Marcellini, LNF-INFN, Frascati, Italy B. Jeanneret, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland CLIC DRIVE BEAM FREQUENCY MULTIPLICATION.
CLIC Frequency Multiplication System aka Combiner Rings Piotr Skowronski Caterina Biscari Javier Barranco 21 Oct IWLC 2010.
Third ILC Damping Rings R&D Mini-Workshop KEK, Tsukuba, Japan December 2007 Choosing the Baseline Lattice for the Engineering Design Phase Andy Wolski.
ILC DR Lower Horizontal Emittance, preliminary study
CEPC APDR Study Zhenchao LIU
Bocheng Jiang SSRF AP group
Alternative/complementary Possibilities
CLIC Damping ring beam transfer systems
Large Booster and Collider Ring
PSB rf manipulations PSB cavities
First Look at Nonlinear Dynamics in the Electron Collider Ring
Discussion on Emittance Evolution through FCC-e+e-
sx* Limitations and Improvements Paths
Update of Damping Ring parameters
Bunch Separation with RF Deflectors
Beam Loading Effect in CEPC APDR
Yannis PAPAPHILIPPOU CERN
ANKA Seminar Ultra-low emittance for the CLIC damping rings using super-conducting wigglers Yannis PAPAPHILIPPOU October 8th, 2007.
CEPC Injector Damping Ring
LHC (SSC) Byung Yunn CASA.
CLIC damping rings working plan towards the CDR
Damping Ring parameters for the new accelerating structure
Status of CTC activities for the Damping rings
Evaluation of 1GHz vs 2GHz RF frequency in the damping rings
Proposal for a CESR Damping Ring Test Facility
Damping Ring parameters for the new accelerating structure
Kicker and RF systems for Damping Rings
ANKA Seminar Ultra-low emittance for the CLIC damping rings using super-conducting wigglers Yannis PAPAPHILIPPOU October 8th, 2007.
Kicker specifications for Damping Rings
Kicker and RF systems for Damping Rings
Gap Transient Suppression using Increased Bunch Density
Damping Ring parameters with reduced bunch charge
Update on ERL Cooler Design Studies
Fanglei Lin, Yuhong Zhang JLEIC R&D Meeting, March 10, 2016
MEIC New Baseline: Part 7
Fanglei Lin JLEIC R&D Meeting, August 4, 2016
3.2 km FODO lattice for 10 Hz operation (DMC4)
JLEIC electron ring with damping wigglers
Presentation transcript:

Evaluation of 1GHz vs 2GHz RF frequency in the damping rings CLIC Beam dynamics meeting Evaluation of 1GHz vs 2GHz RF frequency in the damping rings Yannis PAPAPHILIPPOU and Giovanni RUMOLO February 10th, 2010

Background Baseline: RF frequency of 2GHz, 1 train of 312 bunches spaced by 0.5ns produced and transmitted along injector complex and DRs. But: Power source and RF design needs R&D (high-peak power, short train, transient beam loading) Alternative solution: RF frequency of 1GHz with 2 trains of 156 bunches and bunch spacing of 1ns, separated by half the damping ring circumference minus the length of a train A delay line with an RF deflector is needed downstream of the DRs for recombining the two trains and providing the nominal 2GHz bunch structure.

1 vs. 2GHz in the PDR Larger bunch spacing (1 vs. 0.5 nm) halves harmonic number (1326 vs. 2581), and increases momentum acceptance by 40% (1.7 vs. 1.2%), thereby making the capture efficiency of the positron beam even better For keeping the same momentum acceptance, the RF voltage can be reduced (~10 vs. 6.8MV) All the rest of the parameter changes are as the same as for the damping rings 3

1 vs 2 GHz in the DR Parameter DR @ 1GHz DR @ 2 GHz Circumference [m] 493.16 Harmonic number 1645 3290 Energy Loss/turn [MeV] 5.74 Damping times [ms] (1.62,1.64,0.82) Number of wigglers 76 0-current emittances [nm,nm,eVm] (230,3.7,2870) 0-current mom. spread/bunch length [%/mm] 0.11/0.9 RF Voltage/Stat. phase [MV/deg] 8.4/43 6.5/62 Momentum compaction factor 6.5 x 10-5 Steady state emittances [nm,nm,eVm] (440,4.8,4210)* St. state mom. spread/bunch length [%/mm] 0.13/1.1 Space charge tune-shift -(0.01,0.21) Peak/Average current [A] 0.65/0.124 1.3/0.124 Peak/Average power [MW] 3.8/0.9 7.6/0.9 Kicker rise / revolution time [ns] 667/1645 1489/1645 * Using Bane approximation. Piwinski theory gives (340,4.8,3820) 4

Reducing space-charge Parameter DR @ 1GHz DR @ 2 GHz Circumference [m] 420.56 Harmonic number 1402 2805 Energy Loss/turn [MeV] 4.20 Damping times [ms] (1.88,1.91,0.96) Number of wigglers 52 0-current emittances [nm,nm,eVm] (280,3.7,4400) 0-current mom. spread/bunch length [%/mm] 0.11/1.4 RF Voltage/Stat. phase [MV/deg] 4.9/59 4.4/73 Momentum compaction factor 7.6 x 10-5 Steady state emittances [nm,nm,eVm] (480,4.5,5960)* St. state mom. spread/bunch length [%/mm] 0.13/1.6 Space charge tune-shift -(0.006,0.12) Peak/Average current [A] 0.66/0.145 1.3/0.145 Peak/Average power [MW] 2.8/0.6 5.5/0.6 Kicker rise / revolution time [ns] 623/1403 1247/1403 * Using Bane approximation. Piwinski theory gives (310,4.4,6100) 5

Damping rings (I) In the DRs, the harmonic number reduction, raises the equilibrium longitudinal emittance (bunch length). In order to keep it to the same level (IBS effect), the RF voltage should be increased reducing stationary phase (RF bucket becomes more linear). For shorter ring (space charge reduction), stationary phase gets increased (quite big for 2GHz), i.e. voltage should be increased and momentum compaction factor reduced (relaxing arc cell focusing) Extraction kicker rise time becomes smaller but it is still long enough (620-670ns). This might eliminate the possibility to use IGBT switches. The 2-train structure may require two separate extraction kicker systems (two pulses of equal size and flat top of 160ns as in the present case) or one kicker with a longer flat top (1μs). RF frequency of 1GHz is closer to existing high-power CW klystron systems used in storage rings or designed for NLC damping rings (714MHz). An extrapolation of this design should be straightforward. Larger bunch spacing reduces peak current and power by a factor of 2 (beam loading reduction) 6

Damping rings (II) The e-cloud production and instability is reduced with the larger bunch spacing. In the e- rings, the fast ion instability will be less pronounced due to the larger bunch spacing by doubling the critical mass above which particles get trapped (not allowing the trapping of H2O+ and probably CO+). The reduced number of bunches per train will reduce the central ion density, the induced tune-shift and will double the rise time of the instability, thus relaxing the feedback system requirements. A bunch-by-bunch feedback system is more conventional at 1 than at 2 GHz 7

Delay line layout Two configurations: an α-shape (as in CTF3) or an Ω-shape In the α-shape the same RF deflector can be used for both injection and extraction (maybe also jitter feedback), whereas the Ω-shape should use 2RF deflectors or a kicker and RF deflector α-delay line Ω-delay line RF deflector RF deflector RF Deflector / kicker 8

Delay line layout II The α-shape has a circumference equal to half the damping ring length (~260m) The Ω-shape is larger by the length of the (straight) line between the injection and the extraction point It can be divided in 3 arcs with opposite bending angle satisfying the relationship There is a geometrical relationship imposed to the length of the straight line depending on the bending angles and the arcs radii The optics can be tuned to be isochronous for not perturbing the longitudinal beam characteristics α-delay line Ω-delay line RF deflector RF deflector RF Deflector / kicker 9

Delay line impact Delay line does not contribute to emittance growth due to incoherent or coherent synchrotron radiation due to low energy and relatively short length Any systematic trajectory errors corrected by orbit correctors and proper choice of optics functions and phase advances. The systematic energy loss will be roughly half of the damping rings (~same energy and bending radius), i.e. 500keV, which is around 0.16% of energy difference. Corrected with RF cavities of a few hundred kV. Can be used for timing jitter feedback if special optics used Main issue: stability of RF deflector for keeping (horizontal) emittance growth small (<10% of the beam size). Experience with the CTF3 RF deflectors instrumental (uniformity of 1%) for determining and achieving the requested tolerances. 10

RF deflector stability The angular deflection of the kicker is defined as Large beta functions and π/2 phase advance necessary for minimizing kicks Injected beam position at the septum Typically, injection is dispersion free Number of injected beam sizes set to Nx=6-10 The thickness of the septum cannot be smaller than 2-3mm Kicker jitter produces a beam displacement transmitted up to the IP. Typically a tolerance of σjit ≤0.1σx is needed Translated in a relative deflection stability requirement as As beam size is around 10-5 m, position at the septum dominated by septum thickness The tolerance remains typically a few 10-3 (more relaxed for larger beam sizes and lower septum thickness) Maybe a double RF deflector system can further relax the tolerance

Summary 1GHz 2GHz Larger momentum acceptance in the PDR Simpler RF system (including LLRF for beam loading compensation) RF system (power source and beam loading) very challenging (feasibility item according to ACE) Two stream instability effects reduction Simpler feedback system Delay line for train recombination (cost) RF deflector jitter tolerance