LONGITUDINAL (IN)STABILITY WITH BATCH INJECTION 24.5.2011 1 T. Argyropoulos, P. Baudrenghien, C. Bhat, J. E. Muller, T. Mastoridis, G. Papotti, E. Shaposhnikova,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Measurements of adiabatic dual rf capture in the SIS 18 O. Chorniy.
Advertisements

REPHASING TESTS DURING THE TWO BEAM IMPEDANCE MD P. Baudrenghien, J. Noirjean, T. Mastoridis 10/26/2012LSWG meeting 1 Oct 7 th,18:00 – Oct 8 th, 04:00.
Review of 2011 studies and priorities for 2012 LIU-SPS-BD.
PRISM experiment on EMMA Test Non-Scaling optics for PRISM ¼ of the synchrotron oscillation takes ~3 turns in EMMA and ~6 turns in PRISM. Experimental.
Bunch Flattening with RF Phase Modulation T. Argyropoulos, C. Bhat, A. Burov, J. F. Esteban Müller, S. Jakobsen, G. Papotti, T. Pieloni, T. Mastoridis,
Simulation of direct space charge in Booster by using MAD program Y.Alexahin, N.Kazarinov.
AB-ABP/LHC Injector Synchrotrons Section CERN, Giovanni Rumolo 1 Final results of the E-Cloud Instability MDs at the SPS (26 and 55 GeV/c) G.
First measurements of longitudinal impedance and single-bunch effects in LHC E. Shaposhnikova for BE/RF Thanks: P. Baudrenghien, A. Butterworth, T. Bohl,
G. Rumolo, G. Iadarola, H. Bartosik, G. Arduini for CMAC#6, 16 August 2012 Many thanks to: V. Baglin, G. Bregliozzi, S. Claudet, O. Dominguez, J. Esteban-
History and motivation for a high harmonic RF system in LHC E. Shaposhnikova With input from T. Argyropoulos, J.E. Muller and all participants.
T. Argyropoulos, LIU /04/2013 Progress in the SPS: RF studies and beam quality T. Argyropoulos, T. Bohl, J. E. Muller,, H. Timko, E. Shaposhnikova.
RF strategy, limits and issues A. Butterworth L. Arnaudon, Ph. Baudrenghien, O. Brunner, E. Ciapala, W. Hofle, J. Molendijk, E. Shaposhnikova, J. Tuckmantel,
0 1 Alternative Options in the Injectors – Preliminary Summary H. Damerau LIU-TM#8 18 October 2013 Many thanks for discussions and input to T. Argyropoulos,
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.
Production of bunch doublets for scrubbing of the LHC J. Esteban Muller (simulations), E. Shaposhnikova 3 December 2013 LBOC Thanks to H. Bartosik, T.
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,
Overview of Booster PIP II upgrades and plans C.Y. Tan for Proton Source group PIP II Collaboration Meeting 03 June 2014.
Update on Crab Cavity: Impedance (at fundamental), RF noise, operational scenario P. Baudrenghien, R. Calaga, T. Mastoridis March 21 st, th HiLumi.
Lessons from SPS studies in 2010 E. Shaposhnikova Chamonix’11 session 09: LHC injectors upgrade.
Beam breakup and emittance growth in CLIC drive beam TW buncher Hamed Shaker School of Particles and Accelerators, IPM.
Beam stability in damping ring - for stable extracted beam for ATF K. Kubo.
Elias Métral, ICFA-HB2004, Bensheim, Germany, 18-22/10/ E. Métral TRANSVERSE MODE-COUPLING INSTABILITY IN THE CERN SUPER PROTON SYNCHROTRON G. Arduini,
RF improvements over the weekend Giulia on behalf of Delphine, Philippe, Andy and many other people in the RF team LHC Beam Commissioning Working Group,
Elias Métral, SPSU Study Group and Task Force on SPS Upgrade meeting, 25/03/2010 /311 TMCI Intensity Threshold for LHC Bunch(es) in the SPS u Executive.
News on TMCI in the SPS: Injecting high intensity bunches Benoit for the MD team: T. Bohl, K. Cornelis, H. Damerau, W. Hofle, E. Metral, G. Rumolo, B.
Prepared by M. Jimenez AT Dept / Vacuum Group, ECloud’04 Future Needs and Future Directions Maximizing the LHC Performances J.M. Jimenez …when Nature persists.
SPS proton beam for AWAKE E. Shaposhnikova 13 th AWAKE PEB Meeting With contributions from T. Argyropoulos, T. Bohl, H. Bartosik, S. Cettour.
Elias Métral, LHC Beam Commissioning Working Group meeting, 30/11/2010 /241 PRELIMINARY FINDINGS FROM INSTABILITY MEASUREMENTS DURING THE 75ns AND 50ns.
Damping of Coupled-bunch Oscillations with Sub-harmonic RF Voltage? 1 H. Damerau LIU-PS Working Group Meeting 4 March 2014.
Coupled-bunch oscillation feedback studies 1 H. Damerau LIU-PS Working Group Meeting 20 February 2013 Many thanks to R. Garoby, S. Gilardoni, S. Hancock,
Momentum slip-stacking of the nominal I-LHC beam in the SPS Particle simulations (preliminary) T. Argyropoulos, E. Shaposhnikova LIU-SPS BD WG 30/01/2014.
LER Workshop, Oct 11, 2006Intensity Increase in the LER – T. Sen1 LHC Accelerator Research Program bnl-fnal-lbnl-slac  Motivation  Slip stacking in the.
Beam loss and radiation in the SPS for higher intensities and injection energy G. Arduini 20 th November 2007 Acknowledgments: E. Shaposhnikova and all.
Lumi scan limits checked (in preparation for next fill VdM scans).  Trims of up to 150 um per beam in IP1 & IP2 both planes both beams were done (IP5.
RF measurements during floating MD in Week 40 3 rd of October 2012 LIU-SPS BD WG 25/10/2012 Participants: T. Argyropoulos, H. Bartosik, T. Bohl, J. Esteban.
Outcome of beam dynamics simulations - Scenarios, requirements and expected gains s LIU-SPS Coordination meeting 26/08/2015 A. Lasheen, E. Shaposhnikova,
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.
Longitudinal Limitations of Beams for the LHC in the CERN PS 0.
Update on RF parameters A.Lachaize11 th HPPS design meeting04/09/13.
HP-PS beam acceleration and machine circumference A.LachaizeLAGUNA-LBNO General meeting Paris 18/09/13 On behalf of HP-PS design team.
AB-ABP/LHC Injector Synchrotrons Section CERN, Giovanni Rumolo 1 Preliminary results of the E-Cloud Instability MDs at the SPS G. Rumolo, in.
Juan F. Esteban Müller P. Baudrenghien, T. Mastoridis, E. Shaposhnikova, D. Valuch IPAC’14 – Acknowledgements: T. Bohl, G. Iadarola, G. Rumolo,
RF manipulations in SIS 18 and SIS 100 O. Chorniy.
Injection scheme for ultimate storage ring with double RF system Bocheng Jiang SSRF AP group SINAP. CAS LOWεRING 2014.
Loss of Landau damping for reactive impedance and a double RF system
Ralph Assmann, Giulia Papotti, Frank Zimmermann 25 August 2011
Harmonic system for LHC
Beam dump at 03:00:
Longitudinal beam parameters and stability
Saturday 21st April 00:33 Interlock during ramp on BLM HV
Tuesday Nov 16th Fill 1492 into physics around 07.30
Wednesday 5th September - morning
New AD Production Beam in the PSB
Multiturn extraction for PS2
Wednesday /Thursday 09-11:00 Verification of the LSS6 interlocked BPMs: took longer to fill due to some problems with RF cavities in the PS. In the mean.
The SPS 800 MHz RF system E. Shaposhnikova for BE/RF
Monday 18 October : Collimation system
Tuesday 23/11/10 8:00 Physics fill #1511 dumped
MD#2 News & Plan Tue – Wed (19. – 20.6.)
The LHC25ns cycle in the PS Triple splitting after 2nd injection
News on TMCI in the SPS: Injecting high intensity bunches
Beam dynamics requirements after LS2
MD#2 News & Plan Tue – Wed (19. – 20.6.)
Tue/Wed 12/ :00 Probe beam back again
Collective effects in the SPS and LHC (longitudinal plane)
PSB magnetic cycle 900 ms MeV to 2 GeV
Injection design of CEPC
Wednesday 14:30 Fill 2011 dumped.
Tuesday 6th April 8:00 Injection studies 16:00 RF studies
Friday During the night from Thursday to Friday: by mistake, SPS longitudinal blow-up was not active  Smaller transverse emittance from the.
Presentation transcript:

LONGITUDINAL (IN)STABILITY WITH BATCH INJECTION T. Argyropoulos, P. Baudrenghien, C. Bhat, J. E. Muller, T. Mastoridis, G. Papotti, E. Shaposhnikova, D. Valuch A special mention for J.E. Muller and T. Mastoridis that have extracted and processed all the data presented here Many thanks also to the OP-crew on charge during the MD, for their kind assistance: R. Alemany Fernandez, R. Giachino, D. Jacquet, and A. Macpherson LSWG meeting The MD took place on May 8 th, 6:00-10:00 Presented by P. Baudrenghien BE-RF

Motivation LSWG meeting 2  Long lasting dipole oscillations have been observed at injection in the LHC, with 50 ns bunch spacing, 1.5 ns 4- sigma bunch length, 0.5 eVs (at SPS extraction), and 1.2E11 p/bunch  During the MD we have studied these oscillations with four different fillings, varying the total beam current (keeping intensity per bunch constant), the number of bunches per batch and the distance between batches  We wanted to identify a coupled-bunch instability (function of total beam current and batch spacing) from a single-bunch instability,... or a measurement artefact....

Motivation (cont’d) LSWG meeting 3  We also intended to vary the longitudinal emittance of the injected bunch and the capture voltage but, due to the lack of time (4 hours allocated, 2+ hours of useful data gathering), this is postponed to the next MD  The MD took place at injection energy only  Beam parameters. Nominal:  Single bunch intensity 1.2E11p with some dispersion along the batch  Transverse emittances B1H 2.3  m, B1V 1.9  m, B2H 2.3  m, B2V  m  SPS adjusted to 1.5 ns 4-sigma length (0.5 eVs)

Fill1: 12b + 36b + 36b at close spacing LSWG meeting 4 Left: Phase oscillation of the first and last bunches of the three batches for Fill1. Top: Amplitude of dipole oscillation (min, max, mean over all bunches of a given batch). Bottom: Bunch length from BQM averaged per batch. Evolution for Fill 1, Beam1.  Intended to be used as a reference  First injected a pilot in bucket 1, followed by a first train of 12b starting in bucket 410  We waited 15 minutes to let the oscillation decrease and take measurements, then injected a second train of 36b starting in bucket 991 (0.875 us between the two batches).  Again we waited 15 minutes and injected a third train of 36b starting in bucket 2061 (0.875 us between second and third batch) Anti-damping Damping

Fill2: 12b + 36b + 36b at large spacing LSWG meeting 5  We wanted to see the influence of batch spacing: The filling was as in Fill1 except that the last two batches were spaced by half a turn: Pilot in bucket 1, 12 b train starting in bucket 410, 36b train starting in bucket 991 and 36b train starting in bucket  But the beam was not kept long enough to give useful data: not enough time to see any damping

Fill3: 12b + 36b + 72b at close spacing LSWG meeting 6 Top: Amplitude of dipole oscillation (min, max, mean over all bunches of a given batch). Bottom: Bunch length from BQM averaged per batch. Evolution for Fill 3, Beam1.  Influence of batch length  batches as in Fill1 but the last batch contained 72b: Pilot in bucket 1, 12b train starting in bucket 411, 36b train starting in bucket 991 and 72b train starting in bucket 2061 Damping

Fill4: 12b + 36b Parasitic during next MD setting-up LSWG meeting 7 Top: Amplitude of dipole oscillation (min, max, mean over all bunches of a given batch). Bottom: Bunch length from BQM averaged per batch. Evolution for Fill 4, Beam2.  We have two batches only: Pilot in bucket 1, 12 b train starting in bucket 410 followed by a 36b train starting in bucket 991  Comparing to Fill3, we should see the possible influence of total beam current: 48b versus 120b  Beam 2 only Anti-dampingDamping

“Stable” length LSWG meeting 8 Top right: Log[OscAmplitude] and bunch length function of time for one bunch. Left: Bunch length at the stab-instab limit, corrected for bunch intensity. All batches, all fills.  For each bunch we follow the amplitude of the dipole oscillation and its length  The “stable length” is the reading when we switch from anti-damping to damping  There is no variation inside a bunch train  No variation between beams, batches, fills…

Tentative conclusions (1) LSWG meeting 9  The MD has confirmed the long-lasting dipole oscillations  It has revealed the existence of two regimes at injection: A first 5-10 minutes during which the dipole oscillation grows in amplitude, followed by damping with a time constant ~ 30 min  The bunch length evolution differs in these two regimes, fast during growth of dipole oscillation, and slower thereafter  We have measured fills with very different total intensity, number of bunches per batch and distance between batches. We see not much difference  Neither do we see a difference within one batch (head to tail)  This suggests that it is not coupled-bunch instability  The observations suggest a dependence on bunch length with a stab-instab threshold around ns

Tentative conclusions (2) LSWG meeting 10  Broadband stability criteria  The RHS is proportional to  With 6 MV capture voltage in 2011 (instead of 4 MV in 2010), the mismatch leads to 1.2 ns long bunches, compared to the 1.5 ns (2010)  During the ramp we keep the bunch length constant but raise the voltage. That increases the threshold.

Next MD LSWG meeting 11  The next step is to complete the MD plans: Multi-bunch injections.  Vary the emittance at injection (both shorter – 1.3 ns, 0.35 eVs - and longer SPS bunches – 1.7 ns, 0.7 eVs)  Vary capture voltage. From matched 3 MV to 8 MV. Big effect on length  Phase kick with stable beam  Synchronize b-by-b phase acquisition with each injection to see the initial phase pattern (transient beam loading in the SPS cavities?)  We need time to measure the very slow damping....

I thank you for your attention… LSWG meeting