The magnetic field uniformity and gradient of the B0 coils inside the lower cryostat for the nEDM experiment. S.Balascuta , dr. Ricardo Alarcon ASU Dr.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CH 8: Systems of Particles and Extended objects
Advertisements

Unit 1 Day 16: Electric Potential due to any Charge Distribution
Magnetic Field Finite-Element Calculations for the Upper Cryostat S. Balascuta, R. Alarcon Arizona State University B. Plaster, B. Filippone, R. Schmid.
Magnetic fields R&D update B. PlasternEDM November 2007 Collaboration Meeting Results from prototype studies of a 1/6-scale B 0 coil with Results from.
Magnetic shielding calculations and also Petr Volegov Andrei Matlashov Michelle Espy LANL, P-21, SQUID team Igor Savukov.
W. M. Snow Physics Department Indiana University/IUCF EDM collab meeting Monitoring the Cold Neutron Beam (During Experiment) What to measure (fluence.
Halliday/Resnick/Walker Fundamentals of Physics 8th edition
Creating and Measuring Very Uniform Magnetic Fields for a Polarized 3 He Target Mark Fassler, Tatsuya Katabuchi, and Thomas B. Clegg, University of North.
Electric field calculation for the neutron EDM SNS experiment. Septimiu Balascuta Ricardo Alarcon ASU, 02/07/2008.
Today’s Concept: Ampere’s Law
Cryostat and Magnet Status Report UIUC EDM Collaboration Meeting LANL June 20, 2005.
Quadrupole Magnetic Design for an Electron Ion Collider Paul Brindza May 19, 2008.
Lecture 19-Wednesday March 11 Magnetic Forces on Moving Charges Mass Spectrometers.
Another Route to CP Violation Beyond the SM – Particle Dipole Moments Dave Wark Imperial/RAL WIN05 Delphi June 10, 2005.
1 G4MICE studies of PID transverse acceptance MICE video conference Rikard Sandström.
Electricity and Magnetism
Copyright © 2007, Pearson Education, Inc., Publishing as Pearson Addison-Wesley. Magnets and the magnetic field Electric currents create magnetic fields.
Proportionalities R A aA a  ? 1. R- r 2. R+ r 3. R 2 / r 2 4. R 2 / r 5. R/ r 6. r /R a A r.
Surface Area and Volume of Spheres
Status of the Polarized 3He Target
Magnetism Magnetic field- A magnet creates a magnetic field in its vicinity.
The Magnetic Field of a Solenoid AP Physics C Montwood High School R. Casao.
Chapter 29 Magnetic Fields Due to Currents In this chapter we will explore the relationship between an electric current and the magnetic field it generates.
DHB, nEDM Collab. Mtg, 15/16 Apr 04 UIUC Test System (Beck, Chandler, Hertzog, Kammel, Newman, Peng, Sharp, Williamson, Yoder; Blackburn, Kenyon, Thorsland)
1 The 3 He Injection Test for the nEDM Experiment 10/2008 Xiaofeng Zhu D. Dutta, H. Gao, M. Busch, Q. Ye, T. Mestler, X. Qian, W. Zheng Duke University.
Robin Wines. Verbal agreement with BNL to acquire 48D48 magnet Contact at BNL indicates 4 of these magnets in storage BNL agrees to disassemble magnet.
1 Plan of the injection test 02/2007 nEDM H. Gao, M. Busch, Q.Ye, T. Mestler, X. Qian, W. Zheng, X. Zhu Duke University And others in nEDM collaboration.
EDM Magnetic Shielding (WBS 5) and Magnets (WBS 6) B. Filippone and B. Plaster Caltech Internal Cost and Schedule Review February 11, 2004.
Motivation Polarized 3 He gas target Solenoid design and test 3 He feasibility test Summary and outlook Johannes Gutenberg-Universit ä t Mainz Institut.
1 Preparation for the 3 He Injection Test 11/2007 MIT/BATES D. Dutta*, H. Gao, M. Busch, Q. Ye, X. Qian, W. Zheng, X. Zhu ( Duke University) ASU, BU, Caltech,
1 IL 3 He Relaxation Jacob Yoder UIUC Feb
Focusing Lens for the SSR1 Section of PXIE Preliminary analysis of main options 3/13/2012I. Terechkine1.
The Four-Layer Conventional Magnetic Shield Brad Plaster, Caltech May 25, 2006  “Current” design  Estimated shielding factors  Production and time-scale.
Magnet development experiments B. Plaster Last collaboration meeting (February 2007) x : field direction y : “vertical” z : axial N = 40 cos θ coil 1/7-prototype.
Added Notes August 31, 2005.
Dressed Spin Simulations Steven Clayton University of Illinois nEDM Collaboration Meeting at Arizona State University, February 8, 2008 Contents 1.Goals.
EDMEDM EDM Collaboration Meeting 3-06 Jan Boissevain, P-25 March 2, 2006 NCSU EDM Experiment Design Status.
A Magnet and Refrigerator for a Drell Yan Experiment Possibly at FermiLab.
5. Magnetic forces on current
Last collaboration meeting B. Plaster nEDM February 2008 Collaboration Meeting Attention now focused on construction of a 1/2-scale prototype modified.
EDM Engineering Issues General Mechanical Considerations EDM Cryostat Plan D ANSYS EMAG Calculations ANSYS MECH Calculations 3 June ‘03 J. Boissevain.
Neutron EDM Monte Carlo Simulation Uniform E+B fields Riccardo Schmid B. Plaster, B. Filippone Chicago June 6, 2007 EDM Collaboration Meeting.
IDS120j WITHOUT RESISTIVE MAGNETS ( 20 cm GAPS AND 15.8 g/cc W BEADS ) AZIMUTHAL DPD DISTRIBUTION STUDIES FOR: BP#1, SH#1, SHVS#1/LFL, SC#1+SC#2, BeWind.
Conceptual Design of the Neutron Guide Holding Field Christopher Crawford, Yunchang Shin University of Kentucky nEDM Collaboration Meeting
EDMEDM LANL Review of EDM Cost and Schedule Jan Boissevain, P-25 February 11, 2005, Los Alamos National Laboratory EDM Reference Design Tour of the Reference.
Halliday/Resnick/Walker Fundamentals of Physics
Recent Magnetic Field Results Results from our automated field-mapper system Mappings of N = 8 and N = 40 coil –Coil field profile –Coil + Magnetic Shield.
EDMEDM EDM Collaboration Meeting 6-05 Jan Boissevain, P-25 June 20, 2005, Los Alamos National Laboratory EDM Reference Design.
Magnetic Field and Magnetic Shielding R&D
Cos θ Coil and Magnetic Shielding Progress B. Filippone and B. Plaster Caltech December 3, 2004.
WBS 6: Magnetic Shielding B. Filippone and B. Plaster Caltech December 3, 2004.
1 B-field Uniformity Issues Two Basic Problems Depolarization of n and 3 He due to field gradients –Discussed in Pre-Proposal (2002) –Provided specification.
Electric field calculation for the neutron EDM SNS experiment. Septimiu Balascuta Ricardo Alarcon ASU, 02/07/2008.
AP Physics ST Solenoid Magnetic Flux Gauss’s Law in Magnetism
5. Magnetic forces on current
SNS Injection Fields and Coils
Quench estimations of the CBM magnet
Polarized Internal Gas Target in a Strong Toroidal Magnetic Field
Charged Particles Moving in Simultaneous Electric and Magnetic Fields
Halliday/Resnick/Walker Fundamentals of Physics
Electricity and Magnetism
The superconducting solenoids for the Super Charm-Tau Factory detector
Magnetism Challenge.
Let’s look in detail at each of these four ways of using flux change or motion to produce an emf. Method 4…
The Motion of Charged Particles in Magnetic Fields
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics,
Chapter 32 Problems 6,7,9,16,29,30,31,37.
Superconducting Magnets
nEDM Preliminary Engineering Review Magnets & Magnetic Shielding
Chapter 29 Magnetic Fields Due to Currents
Presentation transcript:

The magnetic field uniformity and gradient of the B0 coils inside the lower cryostat for the nEDM experiment. S.Balascuta , dr. Ricardo Alarcon ASU Dr. Brad Plaster, Dr. Brad Filippone Caltech February 12, 2006

The Model of the Lower Cryostat in TOSCA (Post-processor) R=60 cm, L=396 cm Saddle “cosine theta coils” Cryoperm shield (R=62.23 cm, L=397.51 cm, thickness 0.1016 cm (.04 inch)). Superconducting shield (R=62.87 cm, L=397.51 cm, thickness 0.0254 cm (.01 inch)). Four mumetal shields (all 0.062 inch thick, L=610 cm) with radii:106.85 cm,111.93 cm 117.02 cm and 122.1 cm.

The problem of the false EDM of the neutron. A false nEDM can arise from two sources: 1. The presence of magnetic field gradients. 2. The effective magnetic field of a particle moving in the electric field. B0=10mG For ultra cold neutrons If then

Circular cosθ and “modified” coils. Y N=4 K=0 N=4, K=0.3 I1 N=8, K=0 Y 1 1’ 1 1 2’ 2 2 3’ 3 2 4’ 4 X(2) X X’(2) X I2L I2R R R Define the ratio K: K=(x (j) - x’ (j))/ x (j) A B x‘ (j)= x (j) * (1-K) J=1,…, N/2 J=1,…, N/2 x(j)=(2j-1)*R/N

Field uniformity and average field gradient for a system of 40 cosθ coils (k=0) and modified coils (K from 0.001 to 0.002) inside the Cryoperm, Superconductor and 4 Mumetal shields.

|<dBx/dx>|/B0<1E-6 only if K>1.6E-3 and K<1.88E-3. The average volume field gradient for a system of 40 modified coils (with different K and no errors in position) placed inside the Cryoperm, Superconductor and 4 Mumetal shields. Y 12 cm X 10 cm 7.6 cm -25 cm < z < 25 cm The relative average volume gradient inside the right cell (40 modified coils) |<dBx/dx>|/B0<1E-6 only if K>1.6E-3 and K<1.88E-3.

The average volume field gradient for a system of 40 modified coils (with different K and no errors in position) placed inside the Cryoperm, Superconductor and 4 Mumetal shields. For 40 Coils (K=1.6E-3) DS= 0.048 mm (coil1) to 0.92 mm (coil 15). The 40 Coils (K=1.88E-3) DS =0.056 mm (coil 1) to 1.27 mm (coil 15). This requires a precision better then 1 mm in the location of the coil (difficult to achieve in practice).

10 sets of 40 coils (K=0.00174) with random (Gaussian) errors (added to the position of the coils). If the position of the 40 coils (K=0.00174) have no errors then <dBx/dx>/B0=0.006228E-6 (1/cm). Statistics <dBx/dx>/B0(right cell) <dBx/dx>/B0 (left cell) Max |<dBx/dx>|/B0 7.24E-6 3.839E-6 Standard deviation 3.365E-6 2.218 E-6 Mean -0.964 E-6 -0.299 E-6 (1/cm)

N=40 coils (K1) and M=8 coils (K2) with no errors in location of the coils (K1=K2). I1 and I2 are the electric currents through the N=40 and the M=8 coils respectively. K1=K2 B0(mG) I1(mA) I2(mA) 0.01 10 14.5 50.76 0.00174 24.88 6.59 0.0 24.9 -10.71 Figure 1(a). The average volume gradient of the field inside the N=40 coils + M=8 coils (K1=K2) with no errors in position versus the ratio I2/I1. For an optimum ratio I2/I1 , |<dBx/dx>/B0| is zero.

40+8 modified coils with errors in the location of the coils for K=0 (I2/I1=-0.5) and K=0.01 (I2/I1=4). A B Figure 1 (A, B): For 10 sets of 40 +8 coils with random errors in position of the coils with K=0 (FIG A) and K=0.01 (FIG B). Fig 1 A: Mean=-0.71 E-6 1/cm Standard dev=3.213 E-6 1/cm Fig 1 B: Mean=1.63 E-6 1/cm. Standard dev=1.954 E-6 1/cm.

The sum of the average gradients <dBx/dx>/B0 in the left and in the right cells can be decreased by adjusting one of the electric currents I2L or I2R while the other one is left unchanged.

The average volume electric field <dBx/dx> inside the left and right cells can be made smaller then 1E-8 (1/cm) by adjusting the electric currents I2L and I2R through the M=8 coils. Before and after the adjustment B0 remains essentially the same (41.8 mG for E1 and 43.33 mG). Set of 40 + 8 coils K=0.01 1) I1=60mA I2L=I2R= 210mA I2L/I1=3.5 <dBx/dx>/B0 (1/cm), left / right Step 2) I1=60 mA I2R=210 mA ( 1/cm) Left Cell Right Cell 3) I1=60 mA I2R and I2L are both increased dBx/dx>/B0 (1/cm) Left Cell Right Cell B0 (mG) E1 Left cell 1.879E-6 I2L=210.019 mA 2.088E-6 I2L = 223.5 mA I2R = 223.481 mA -0.041 E-6 41.8 Right cell -2.234E-6 -2.079E-6 0.0049 E-6 E2 5.647E-6 I2L=209.64 mA 3.209E-6 I2R=231.2 I2L=230.8 0.183 E-6 43.33 -0.357E-6 -3.215 E-6 -0.21 E-6

Conclusion If two set of coils (N=40 andM=8) are built with the same K and with currents I1 and I2 then the electric current I2 (through the M=8 coils) can be adjusted such that the average gradient of the field is minimized The sum of the average volume gradients in both cells can be made zero if the electric currents through the coils with centers on +OX (I2R) is allowed to be different then the current through the coils with centers on -OX (I2L). This difference depends on the “errors” in the position of the coils. The average value of the relative ratio (I2L-I2R)/I2L is smaller then 1%.