W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Machine-Detector Interface  Issues  Machine Backgrounds, Present & Future  BaBar involvement in Accelerator.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Dec/02/04 Su DongCaltech Trigger/DAQ/Online workshop1 Level 1 Trigger: Introduction L1 trigger objects and strategy Implementation features L1 composition.
Advertisements

June 28, 2004 BBBTF Steven H. Robertson McGill University, Institute of Particle Physics 1 Beam Background Simulation with B A B AR with B A B AR June.
Upcoming Review of the Hall D Photon Beam and Tagger Richard Jones, University of Connecticut, for the GlueX collaboration GlueX Collaboration Meeting.
W. KozaneckiMCC AP meeting, 8 Mar 07  MD goals  Experimental procedure  HER-only x & y scans + high-current extrapolation  [LER only X & y scans +
PEP-II B Factory Machine Status and Upgrades John T. Seeman for the PEP-II Staff SLAC DOE Site Review April 9, 2003.
W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Background characterization strategy  MD goals  Background sources  Operational procedures  Open questions.
Guy Wormser, Super B-Factory Workshop, Jan 04 1 Current Background Situation in BaBar “Always a concern, often an issue but never a showstopper” zThe background.
RF de-bunching problem  The Beam Phase module measures the phase of each individual bunch and makes an average that is passed to the Low Level for updating.
1 IR Vacuum M. Sullivan MAC Review Jan , 2006 M. Sullivan for the Machine Advisory Committee Review January 18-20, 2006 IR Vacuum.
MAC Review December 13-15, 2004 IR Upgrade M. Sullivan 1 Interaction Region Upgrade M. Sullivan for the Machine Advisory Committee meeting December 13-15,
June 2-4, 2004 DOE HEP Program Review 1 M. Sullivan for the PEP-II Team DOE High Energy Physics Program Review June 2-4, 2004 PEP-II Status and Plans.
F.Brinker, DESY, July 17 st 2008 Injection to Doris and Petra Fitting the detector in the IP-region Radiation issues Beam optic, Target cell Polarisation.
Super-B Factory Workshop January 19-22, 2004 Accelerator Backgrounds M. Sullivan 1 Accelerator Generated Backgrounds for e  e  B-Factories M. Sullivan.
M. WeaverPEP-II MAC Review,15-17 Nov’07  Operational issues  radiation aborts  background monitoring  Background extrapolations  model comparisons.
Topics from this weeks 2E34 meeting M. Weaver Jan 6, 2006.
MDI meeting, Nov First look at Transient Recorder data Livio Piemontese Stan Ecklund and Mark Petree have installed – in the IR2 alcove – a 32.
W. KozaneckiMDI meeting, 16 Jan 2004 BaBar-wide Background monitoring  Motivation  institutionalize...  through a weekly report to PEP-II/BBR meeting.
Super-B Factory Workshop January 19-22, 2004 Super-B IR design M. Sullivan 1 Interaction Region Design for a Super-B Factory M. Sullivan for the Super-B.
W. KozaneckiMDI meeting, 9 Mar 07  MD goals  Experimental procedure  HER-only x & y scans + high-current extrapolation  [LER only X & y scans] + high-current.
IR vacuum M. Sullivan PEP-II meeting Feb. 22, 2007.
Radiation-protection experience at Belle / summary of beam abort system 22 September, 2003 T.Tsuboyama (KEK)
Working Group 3 Summary M. Sullivan / Y. Funakoshi.
Future Very High Luminosity Options for PEP-II John T. Seeman For the PEP-II Team e+e- Factories Workshop October 13-16, 2003.
Internal target option for RHIC Drell-Yan experiment Wolfram Fischer and Dejan Trbojevic 31 October 2010 Santa Fe Polarized Drell-Yan Physics Workshop.
Background Issues: Real Time Radiation Measurement S.M.Yang EPC.IHEP Mini-Workshop on BEPCII Background Study March 2008 Institute of High Energy.
W. KozaneckiIR summary, BES-III workshop Interaction Region: a terse summary  Accelerator issues  Parameter comparison with PEP-II/KEKB  IR layout 
MDI meeting, March 19, 2004 Categorizing radiation aborts Livio Piemontese When something really bad happens to the beams, they are aborted. An optimized.
SHMS Optics Studies Tanja Horn JLab JLab Hall C meeting 18 January 2008.
IR summary M. Sullivan Nov. 3, 2011 JLAB MEIC IR workshop.
M. WeaverPEP-II MAC Review, Dec 04  Operational issues  radiation aborts  radiation-dose and background monitoring  Background characterization.
CesrTA Experimental Plan M. Palmer for the CesrTA Collaboration November 17, 2008.
July 7, 2008SLAC Annual Program ReviewPage 1 PEP-II in Run 7 and Transition Planning John T. Seeman Assistant Director PPA/LCLS.
GEANT4-BASED SIMULATION STUDY OF PEP-II BEAM BACKGROUNDS IN THE BABAR DETECTOR AT THE SLAC B-FACTORY W. S. Lockman, SCIPP, University of California, Santa.
ILC MDI workshop January 6-8, 2004 PEP-II IR M. Sullivan 1 Interaction Region of PEP-II M. Sullivan for the ILC MDI workshop January 6-8, 2005.
Interaction Region Backgrounds M. Sullivan for the MEIC Collaboration Meeting Oct. 5-7, 2015.
SVTRAD Upgrades M. Bruinsma1Sept. 22nd 2003 SVTRAD Upgrades M. Bruinsma September 22, 2003 Background Workshop, SLAC Motivation.
Working Group D Backgrounds M Sullivan for everyone in WG D IRENG07 Sept 20, 2007.
LHC-CC Validity Requirements & Tests LHC Crab Cavity Mini Workshop at CERN; 21. August Remarks on using the LHC as a test bed for R&D equipment.
August 4-5, 2004 PEP-II Post Run 4 Review 1 M. Sullivan PEP-II Post Run 4 Review August 4-5, 2004 IR Summary and Issues.
1 M. Sullivan IR update IR Update M. Sullivan for the 3 rd SuperB workshop SLAC June14-16, 2006.
1 Run7 startup M. Sullivan MAC Review Nov , 2007 M. Sullivan for the PEP-II Team Machine Advisory Committee Review November 15-17, 2007 Run 7 Startup.
M. WeaverB-Factory Operations Review April 24, 2006 BaBar Backgrounds Matt Weaver B-Factory Operations Review April 24, 2006.
Ion effects in low emittance rings Giovanni Rumolo Thanks to R. Nagaoka, A. Oeftiger In CLIC Workshop 3-8 February, 2014, CERN.
Beam Physics Issue in BEPCII Commisionning Xu Gang Accelerator physics group.
ILC IP SR and PEP-II M. Sullivan for the ILC IR engineering workshop IRENG07 Sept 17-21, 2007.
William Lockman UC Santa Cruz May 6, 2005MDI meeting G4 simulation: status and validation strategy Goals Contributors Status Needed plots Future tasks.
9 October 2003S. DeBarger PEP-II Vacuum Status PEP-II Machine Advisory Committee.
Beam Background Simulation at Belle/KEKB Motivation SR background Particle background Feedback to the detector design SR alarm Summary O. Tajima (Tohoku.
November 16-18, 2004 Belle High Luminosity Workshop 1 M. Sullivan High Luminosity workshop (HL6) November 16-18, 2004 IR Vacuum Summary and Issues.
Synchrotron Radiation Absorption and Vacuum Issues in the IR at PEP-II and a Higgs Factory John Seeman, SLAC October 11, 2014 HF2014 Beijing.
Primary Design Parameters July 13,2001 S. Childress Page 1 NuMI Besides design specifications driven by physics and Main Injector beam parameters, significant.
JLEIC MDI Update Michael Sullivan Apr 4, 2017.
presented by W. Kozanecki (CEA-Saclay) for the BaBar - PEPII MDI group
The Interaction Region
John T. Seeman DOE PEP-II Operations Review April 26, 2006
Beam-beam limits: MD proposal
Machine Background Status & issues in BaBar/PEP-II
The PEP-II Interaction e+e- Factories Workshop
PEP-II Status and Plans e+e- Factories Workshop
Interaction Region Design Options e+e- Factories Workshop
Trigger Background Experience & Predictions
Radiation Abort Policy
Accelerator R&D Results from the B-factory
DIRC Background Status
Long term projections summary
BEPCII Background Issues: Collimators and Masks
Summary of Washington DOE Review
Background characterization: MD plan
Some of the Points Raised During my JLAB Visit
IR/MDI requirements for the EIC
Presentation transcript:

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Machine-Detector Interface  Issues  Machine Backgrounds, Present & Future  BaBar involvement in Accelerator Performance Improvements  Summary W. Kozanecki, CEA-Saclay

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03  The Issues  Backgrounds   operational efficiency (this coming run)  long-term projections (2005 & beyond)  New IR design  background simulations: can BaBar live with predicted levels?  make it all fit (unavoidable hardware changes!) [ this topic likely to g r o w in importance]  Accelerator Performance Improvements  background remediation  beam dynamics  instrumentation  IR geometry, orbits & optics  BaBar-based accelerator diagnostics

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Backgrounds: what has happened so far  Try & revive the ‘Background Group’  Strong (and largely successful) effort at  awareness-raising in BaBar (“work on backgrounds? why?”)  recruiting help  Identified subdetector background contact persons (SBC)  Regular MDI meetings (~ every other week)  Background Workshop: Sep 03  In-depth review of radiation-abort policies: “make BaBar & PEP-II transparent to each other”  Run-4 backgrounds: operational issues, vulnerabilities, long-term projections  Launch the background-simulation effort

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Background Sources I (  )  Synchrotron-radiation X-rays  Power: mostly separation dipoles  Background: mostly HER IP quadrupoles  Duck it if you can! else mask it, but watch out for multiple bounces  Masking very effective: SR backgrounds not a problem in BaBar so far  Cool it well - or else!  Lost-particle backgrounds  Bremsstrahlung: e + gas -> e’ +  (E’ < E) By now, almost exclusively from the last few (tens of) m ==> vacuum!  Coulomb scattering: e + gas -> e’ (E’ = E, but  ) Potentially from the whole ring, depending on limiting apertures and on pressure profile. In practice no longer an issue  Touschek : similar to bremsstrahlung BaBar: neglected so far. Should be checked for very-high current operation.  Luminosity (e + e - => e +’ e -’  )  Elm shower debris (radiation + occupancy) + beam-wall p’s (trigger)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 # Xtls > 10 MeV Single-beam backgrounds EMC vs. I +, I - I DCH vs. I + Two-beam backgrounds % occpcy (> 1 MeV) EMC vs. I (I + = 1100) - L1 trigger rate vs. I- (I + = 1100)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Background Projections Background Projections (based on bgds measured in 2000, then 2002) High-Luminosity Model (JS, PEP-II AP Note 130) combined with (  - I - +  - I - 2 ) + (  + I + +  + I + 2 ) +  L Drift Chamber Bakground Projection (July 2000 characterization)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 SVT Bakground Projection Pain threshold: ∫dose ~ 2 MRad  Horiz. plane: ~ 2 MRad by , then MRd/y  Other : ~ 0.25 MRad by 2004, then ~ 0.1 MRad/y DIRC Bakground Projection Pain threshold: PM rate ~ 200 kHz (dead time ~ 300 kHz, 500 kHz) Note how different the relative contributions are between subdetectors July 2000 characterization

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Recent background history: DCH LER current Luminosity Compare measured DCH background to that expected at the same LER current, HER current & Luminosity, based on the Feb characterization

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Background Sources II (  )  Lost-particle backgrounds  Lost-particle backgrounds (continued)  Beam-beam (?) tails ~ Coulomb-like signature ==> collimation ? ( LER !)  elm shower debris in incoming detector straight (esp. LER?)  ‘steady state’ : DCH, IFR – but also SVT (dose + occupancy)  Spikes & fluctuations  DCH, TRG  Radiation bursts  spikes (“fast aborts”)  trapped events  Injection backgrounds  30-90% of SVT dose  45% of EMC dose (CsI calorimeter)  ~ 50% radiation aborts

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Recent background history: SVT, IFR SVTIFR endcap predicted (2002) measured

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 DCH current steady-state level HER lifetime 400 sec Manual abort Radiation bursts Fast (auto) abort

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Injection Backgrounds (Numbers are in krad, (%) is of dose in stable beams) SVT Radiation dose from January to June 2003

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03  SR + beam gas + “Lumi” (e + e -  e + e -  ) (“traditional”)  not an issue  ’05 w/ present IR geometry (&  * !)  however beam-gas in the LER may become a major contributor to the SVT  integrated dose  occupancy once the LER current is raised significantly  Beam-beam tails (SVT occupancy, DCH spikes, dead-time bursts, IFR currents) a growing limitation (including for BaBar data quality)  Interplay between BaBar radiation-abort strategy, and (primarily)  radiation bursts (spikes/trapped evts) ==> significant source of beam aborts  difficult injection (poor injection efficiency, high backgrounds, repeated aborts) ==> major inefficiencies Backgrounds  operational efficiency (’03-’04) Radiation-abort strategy Radiation bursts Injection backgrounds Beam-beam tails

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Backgrounds: long-term projections I Experimental background extrapolations  2005 (2009) Currently based on 2002 bkgd data. An updated characterization will be carried out once PEP-II stabilizes. BaBar hardware/performance limitations?  2005 (2009) (see W. Wisniewski’s talk)  extrapolation of ‘traditional’ backgrounds (in present geometry) valid  200x ?   *  ==> Coulomb still OK?  can one extrapolate beam-beam backgrounds – at all?  how to take into account evolution of injection losses  any limitations/vulnerabilities in Babar hardware or physics performance?  radiation damage?  operational limitations (power supplies, trigger/dataflow bandwidth,...)  physics performance (tracker occupancy/efficiency/resolution, calorimeter resolution)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 SVT elx threshold problem ? Projected integrated dose in SVT midplane Projected integrated dose in SVT midplane (Basis: 2002 characterization, no beam-beam tails, no injection improvements)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Extrapolated dose rates in the SVT mid-plane (stable beams) 50 mR/s ~ 10% chip occupancy Projected SVT data quality Projected SVT data quality (Basis: 2002 characterization, no beam-beam tails) “BaBar needs to better understand the implications of high beam occupancies”

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Projected DCH currents & data-flow dead time Projected DCH currents & data-flow dead time (Basis: 2002 characterization, no beam-beam tails) remedy under active study

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Backgrounds: long-term projections II Beam-beam ? Lattice mods ? (dynamic aperture) Beam-gas simulations ring: Turtle IR  Geant4 SR simulations (an intrinsic part of the new-IR design)  2 themes...  validate IR upgrade design  make sure that what we install in ’05 does not suffer from built-in flaws... ...at least for those processes we can calculate (SR, beam-gas)  understand / improve backgrounds in present machine ...that are intimately intertwined  validation requires credibility  update “old” simulations to incorporate what we learnt  simulations of present machine/detector configuration better get the ‘right’ answer (when confronted with measurements)... ...if we want to believe predictions for the upgraded IR  improve those backgrounds we canNOT calculate  both for today’s and for tomorrow’s sake!

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03  Background analysis & mitigation [BP, LP, TG: some just starting, but too few...]  Background simulations [RB, MB, GC, SM + SLAC (TF/GB)]  Fast monitoring of machine backgrounds  PEP-II [MW, C’OG, AP, GDF,...]  injection quality (SVT, EMC: dDose /dI b )  time distribution of injection triggers  data quality: occupancies, dead time,... for the stored beams in the ‘trickle’ window  more operator-friendly displays (& controls) of radiation inhibits/aborts BaBar involvement in Accelerator Performance Improvements (I) EMC L1 trigger rate

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03  Beam dynamics  beam-beam simulations [IN (Caltech), YC (Slac ARD)]  beam-beam experiments, monitoring of beam-beam performance  Instrumentation  gated camera in LER & HER [D. D., Slac Exptl Grp C + A. Fisher +...] beam-beam effects (flip-flop, ‘raining buckets’, parasitic crossings) electron-cloud effects  development of an X-ray beam-size monitor for the LER: SLAC + zone-plate approach: J A (Caltech) pin hole approach: JK (LBL), HDS  SVTRAD sensor & electronics upgrade [B P et. al. (Stanford); MB/DK et. al. (Irvine) (initiated & funded by BaBar)]  CsI background sensors [JV, Slac Exptl Grp B]  IR geometry, orbit & optics  IR orbit monitoring & stability, IP & ring orbit feedbacks  on-line monitoring of IP position  PEP-II control system [RB, Slac; GDF, Caltech;..]  on-line monitoring of luminous spot sizes  PEP-II control system [MW (Slac); GDF (Caltech); MB/GR (Nikhef);...] BaBar involvement in Accelerator Performance Improvements (II)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Summary  BaBarians... ...have (re-started) contributing significantly to the machine  “BaBar-based machine diagnostics “ a growing & important effort  But more help is needed, esp. on medium- & long-term issues  BaBar vulnerabilities better understood  short term: SVT elx chip, DCH data flow, IFR aging  medium term: SVT (& EMC ?) integrated dose, tracker occupancies, physics systematics  ?? implications of lattice mods (   dyn. aperture) for backgrounds?  Most urgent short-term gains  injection (lack of reproducibility, abort cascades, ++dose, fatigue)  beam-beam tails (more agressive and/or upgraded collimation)  radiation bursts (“dust events”)  Most significant long-term gain potential  LER vacuum in last 20 m (?) [tbc by updated bgd characterization]  injection (30-90% of integrated dose in SVT & EMC)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Appendix: radiation bursts (aka ‘dust’ events)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03  Statistical study of trapped event properties (T. Schietinger, 1999)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03  SVT diode pattern during trapped events  typical, but not universal

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 An odd sequence of slow radiation bursts (2003) ? ?

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 An odd sequence of slow radiation bursts (c’td) ?

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 A collection of fast radiation spikes (stored beams)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Geometry of some detectors useful for such studies (East)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Radiation bursts: “summary”  Statistical study of trapped event properties (T. Schietinger, 1999)  SVT diode pattern during trapped events  A collection of recent slow & fast radiation bursts  Some guesses...  NEG dust from near IR pumps?  gas ‘bubbles’? (would explain correlation with current increases)  possibly some incorrectly latched fast beam instabilities (RF, TFB ?) ...but certainly no coherent picture nor robust interpretation

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Spare slides

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 PEP-II Mid-Project Evaluation Resources Ewan Paterson, TD Persis Drell, RD Bill Wisniewski, Babar Resources Ewan Paterson, TD Persis Drell, RD Bill Wisniewski, Babar Parameters,  L dt Parameters,  L dt John Seeman, Stan Ecklund Jonathan Dorfan, Co-ordinator Lattice/Model Tor Raubenheimer Uli Wienands Vacuum Systems Nadine Kurita Scott DeBarger RF System Ron Akre Ray Larsen Feedback Systems Eric Colby Dmitry Teytelman Reliability/Uptime Roger Erickson Name #2 Machine/Detector Interface Witold Kozanecki Guy Wormser New IR Design Mike Sullivan Name #2 Diagnostics Mark Ross Steve Smith Injection Franz-Josef Decker Name #2 Controls Tom Himel Rusty Humphrey stricly speaking

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Fast Abort Changes  Will leave abort settings during stable beams unchanged  Forgiveness (2 Rad) cannot be increased as that endangers the SVT  Increasing threshold (~1 R/s) could result in running at >1R/s for 10 minutes, which we do not want to try  We can try to change settings during injection  There is no immediate danger to the SVT as it is not biased  The increase in dose (a few krad/year) would be regained if we can get rid of 10-20% of the aborts  Suggested change: Increase forgiveness by factor 3 over stable beams (e.g. 6-8 rads) Set threshold at 2 times stable beams (~2rad/s) instead of 5 times  Would like to have causes of aborts, which still occur be identified and logged by operators Brian Petersen, 3 Oct 03

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Slow Abort Changes  We will enable “extend” button for 10-minute timer, but restrict it to 10 additional minutes  We will monitor it for abuse (of course)  Activate 10 minute timer for the diamonds  Suggest to replace BW:MID diode with BW diamond  Use threshold of 75 mrad/s? Changes can be implemented by next week Brian Petersen, 3 Oct 03

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Possible Longer Term Changes  Should separate “forgiveness” from protection against very fast spikes  Very quickly abort beams on dose rates of 0.1 to 1krad/s  Allow rates of Rad/s for a little longer (x2-4?) than today  Requires the SVTRAD1.5  Abort only one beam?  Not clear that HER and LER always clearly separated during aborts  Gain in integrated dose will be minimal as most aborts would be of the HER  Would require new electronics in IR-2 alcove (previous electronics were done by Mark Petree) Brian Petersen, 3 Oct 03

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 MID Radiation Doses Until Now Budget is set to reach 4 Mrad by 7/ (to be lowered?) FW:MID is consistently overestimated in Run 3

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 TOP Module Doses until 2009 TOP modules look OK, except if FE:TOP becomes MID module BW:TOP and FW:TOP doses are probably overestimated 85-90% of the dose is supposed to come from injection

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 BABAR scorecard today X: visible effect with non-zero impact - : visible effect with no impact ? : yet unknown fixed: det upgrade to fix a significant issue G. Wormser, Bgd Workshop summary, 24 Sep 03

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 BABAR scorecard July 2004 G. Wormser, Bgd Workshop summary, 24 Sep 03

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 BABAR scorecard July 2006 G. Wormser, Bgd Workshop summary, 24 Sep 03

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 BABAR scorecard 2009 G. Wormser, Bgd Workshop summary, 24 Sep 03

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Architecture of background simulations (1)  Synchrotron Radiation  MAGBENDS / QSRAD: stand-alone programs  SR background calculations: an intrinsic component of IR re-design  shouldn’t these be interfaced to GEANT?  Beam-gas  step 1: LP-TURTLE transports particles around 1 ring turn  full model of ring optics (treated as transport line)  start with ‘nominal’ beam at IP  beam-gas scattering randomly around ring (bremsstrahlung or Coulomb scattering)  transport ‘secondaries’ (e’,  )  simplified model of IR apertures (simple geometry, no showering!)  those particles lost ‘near’ the IP are scoring plane input to step 2  step 2: full GEANT simulation of detector + near-IR ( m)  see Mario Bondioli’s talk

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Architecture of background simulations (2)  Beam-beam  full simulation of beam-beam tails impractical  focus on collimation studies  optimize collimator placement/relocation (SM)  understand main characteristics of collimator secondaries (HB)  provide guidance for machine experiments  use Turtle machinery  Strategy considerations  improve/update description of magnetic fields & apertures (TF, GC)  many fundamental features easier to understand at Turtle level   first round of IR-upgrade design validation will be done this way (RB)  GEANT-level simulation essential (MB, GB, GC)  to benchmark computations against data  to make sure there are no “alligators” hiding in new design  absolute background predictions always suspect  even when benchmarked against experiments. However... ...ratios (new design /present machine) much more reliable.

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Lost-particle backgrounds IP Normalized to: - uniform pressure profile of 1 nT - 1 A beam current IP Coulomb scattering in Arcs (y- plane) e - Brems- strahlung in last 26 m (x-plane) Vacuum pipe / mask apertures

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 The “Background Zones” reflect the combined effect of....  beam-line geometry (e.g. bends)  optics at the source and at the detector distant(good!)  aperture restrictions, both distant (good!) & close-by (bad!) X (mm) Zone 1 X (mm) Zone 2 Zone 3 X (mm) IP Zone 4 Coulomb scattering in Arcs Bremmsstrahlung in field-free region Bremmsstrahlung

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Benchmarking of simulations: comparing “predicted” and measured background levels  Radiation patterns  for a given sensor type: independent of absolute calibration  among different sensors: compare fractional derivatives  Absolute background levels  sensor calibration!  absolute pressure profile !  Global consistency/sanity checks  operational experience in MCC

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Pressure-bump experiment: NEG heating in BaBar straight Vacuum gauge reading (nT) Create localized P-bumps NEG heating DIPS on/off Measure response of background monitors Compare relative measured & simulated monitor response to validate Monte Carlo Different regions ==> diff. patterns diff. abs. levels Abort diode signal (mR/s)

W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Compare measured & predicted dose rates in HER: Monte Carlo lost-particle simulation (Turtle + BBSIM) validated by p-bump experiments Computed pressure profile in detector straight section (N 2 -equivalent, not vac.-gauge units!) Average ring pressure (from lifetime) for arcs & distant straights Understanding the absolute level of HER backgrounds (Sep 99)