1 Chris Rogers Imperial College 18 May 2006 TOF II Justification.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Acceptance & Scraping Chris Rogers Analysis PC
Advertisements

PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
1 Progress report on Calorimeter design comparison simulations MICE detector phone conference Rikard Sandström.
1 Angular Momentum from diffuser Beam picks up kinetic angular momentum (L kin ) when it sits in a field –Canonical angular momentum (L can ) is conserved.
FODO-based Quadrupole Cooling Channel M. Berz, D. Errede, C. Johnstone, K. Makino, Dave Neuffer, Andy Van Ginneken.
1 Emittance Calculation Progress and Plans Chris Rogers MICE CM 24 September 2005.
Changing the absorbers: how does it fit in the MICE experimental programme? Besides the requirement that the amount of multiple scattering material be.
Analysis Meeting – – Slide 1 Beam momentum measurement using TOFs: progress report Analysis Meeting, February 2008 Mark Rayner.
Alain Blondel MICE: Constraints on the solenoids 2.Field Homogeneity: or ? this will be dictated by the detector requirements. TPG will be.
OPTICS UPDATE Ulisse Bravar University of Oxford 3 August 2004.
1 Downstream scraping and detector sizes Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE collaboration meeting CERN.
1 PID Detectors & Emittance Resolution Chris Rogers Rutherford Appleton Laboratory MICE CM17.
1 PID status MICE Analysis phone conference Rikard Sandström.
Downstream transversal sizes Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE detector meeting.
PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
A Few Words on Emittance Chris Rogers MICE vc 27/05/05.
1 G4MICE downstream distributions G4MICE plans Rikard Sandström Universite de Geneve MICE collaboration meeting 27/6-05.
Chris Rogers, MICE CM16 Wednesday Plenary Progress in Cooling Channel Simulation.
Simulated real beam into simulated MICE1 Mark Rayner CM26.
1 Downstream PID update - How cooling section affects TOF measurement Rikard Sandström PID phone conference
30 June 2004MICE VC1 MICE  functions Since last VC report: –New Mike Green configurations for decreased spacing between focus and matching coils of 400mm,
Beam Parameter Study - preliminary findings Tim Carlisle.
1 Emittance Calculation Progress and Plans Chris Rogers Analysis PC 18 August 2005.
1 PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
TOF Resolution Required to measure bunch length ~ 0.5 ns RMS from RF Bucket size For 1e-3 emittance measurement resolution of TOF should be
Oct 15, 2003 Video Conference Energy Deposition Steve Kahn Page 1 Energy Deposition in MICE Absorbers and Coils Steve Kahn October 15, 2003.
1 Status Update Chris Rogers Analysis PC 20th April 06.
Mark Rayner, Analysis workshop 4 September ‘08: Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing, slide 1 Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing Analysis.
Overview of Experiment and Parameter Choices presented by Giles Barr.
1 Emittance Exchange in MICE ● How would one measure emittance exchange? ● Build a cell of a cooling ring? ● Expensive ● Manpower-consuming ● Nice to demonstrate.
Chris Rogers, Analysis Parallel, MICE CM17 Progress in Cooling Channel Simulation.
1 Tracker Window & Diffuser Radius vs Scraping Aperture Chris Rogers Analysis PC 6th April 06.
1 Chris Rogers MICE Collaboration Meeting 11th Feb 2005 Tracking and Cooling performance of G4MICE.
1 EMCal design MICE collaboration meeting Fermilab Rikard Sandström.
Diffuser Studies Chris Rogers, IC/RAL MICE VC 09 March 2005.
Critical Issues for MICE Chris Rogers MICE CM 15.
Analysis of MICE Chris Rogers 1 Imperial College/RAL Thursday 28 October, With thanks to John Cobb.
Oct 15, 2003 Video Conference Energy Deposition Steve Kahn Page 1 Energy Deposition in MICE Absorbers and Coils Steve Kahn November 2, 2003.
ABSTRACT The International Design Study for the Neutrino Factory (IDS- NF) baseline design 1 involves a complex chain of accelerators including a single-pass.
1 Front End Capture/Phase Rotation & Cooling Studies David Neuffer Cary Yoshikawa December 2008.
FFAG-ERIT R&D 06/11/06 Kota Okabe (Kyoto Univ.) for FFAG-DDS group.
M.apollonioCM17 -CERN- (22/2-25/2/2007)1 M. Apollonio – University of Oxford sizes for PID & shields.
2002/7/02 College, London Muon Phase Rotation at PRISM FFAG Akira SATO Osaka University.
Results from Step I of MICE D Adey 2013 International Workshop on Neutrino Factories, Super-beams and Beta- beams Working Group 3 – Accelerator Topics.
A 3 Pass, Dog-bone Cooling Channel G H Rees, ASTeC, RAL.
Muon cooling with Li lenses and high field solenoids V. Balbekov, MAP Winter Meeting 02/28-03/04, 2011 OUTLINE  Introduction: why the combination of Li.
MICE at STFC-RAL The International Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment -- Design, engineer and build a section of cooling channel capable of giving the.
Oct 15, 2003 Video Conference Energy Deposition Steve Kahn Page 1 Energy Deposition in MICE Absorbers and Coils Steve Kahn November 2, 2003.
1 PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
PID Detector Requirements for Emittance Measurement Chris Rogers, MICE PID Review, Thursday Oct 12.
26 Oct 2010PC Physics Requirements of Software from Chris R ~19 Oct. My.
Simulating the RFOFO Ring with Geant Amit Klier University of California, Riverside Muon Collaboration Meeting Riverside, January 2004.
18 th March 2008Measuring momentum using the TOFsSlide 1 Measuring momentum using TOF0 and TOF1 Progress report Mark Rayner (Oxford/RAL) Analysis Meeting,
Nufact02, London, July 1-6, 2002K.Hanke Muon Phase Rotation and Cooling: Simulation Work at CERN new 88 MHz front-end update on cooling experiment simulations.
1 Error study of non-scaling FFAG 10 to 20 GeV muon ring Shinji Machida CCLRC/RAL/ASTeC 26 July, ffag/machida_ ppt.
Monte Carlo simulation of the particle identification (PID) system of the Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment (MICE) Mice is mainly an accelerator physics.
Mark Rayner – Analysis SessionCM25, 4 November The TOF detectors: Beyond particle identification Mark Rayner The University of Oxford MICE CM25.
Muons, Inc. Feb Yonehara-AAC AAC Meeting Design of the MANX experiment Katsuya Yonehara Fermilab APC February 4, 2009.
MICE. Outline Experimental methods and goals Beam line Diagnostics – In HEP parlance – the detectors Magnet system 2MICE Optics Review January 14, 2016.
1 6D Cooling Chris Rogers, ASTeC-STFC Topical Workshop 23 Oct 2007.
Marco apollonioAnalysis Meeting (9/12/2006)1 transmission vs amplitude with a finite size diffuser M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.
DEC  x / m  y / m quads undulators vertical correctors chicane 1chicane 2chicane 3.
Brunel University London Field-off LiH Energy Loss Rhys Gardener CM45 – July 28th.
Beam Energy-Loss measurement
MICE Step IV Lattice Design Based on Genetic Algorithm Optimizations
C. Rogers, ASTeC Intense Beams Group Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Using MICE to verify simulation codes?
Muon Front End Status Chris Rogers,
Design of the MANX experiment
The Detector System of the MICE Experiment
Presentation transcript:

1 Chris Rogers Imperial College 18 May 2006 TOF II Justification

2 TOF2 resolution justification The need for longitudinal emittance Detector resolution vs emittance resolution Some parts of this talk may come up in the CM Plenary Overview

3 PDG Energy Loss through LH2 In material beam  (E) changes because of Energy straggling (dominant) Width of energy loss distribution Curvature of dE/dx Muons with lower energy lose more energy than the reference particle This is longitudinal emittance growth that we should measure PDG

4 RF Bucket 40 o Phase I plot t-t RF vs E-E ref for a single muon over a long beamline In longitudinal phase space, muons are contained in an “RF bucket” Optical “aberrations” cause emittance growth over ~ 10s of cells Random effects (energy straggling) from passing through material cause muons to get knocked out of the RF bucket This is also longitudinal emittance growth Energy straggling switched ONEnergy straggling switched OFF Position of reference particle z=0 z=275 metres z=190 metres z=0 Contours in total energy

5 Longitudinal beta function (Periodic SFoFo) Set up the beam so that the longitudinal phase space structure is periodic over a MICE 2.75 m cell Define “longitudinal beta function”  // ~  (t)/  (E) Choose  // ~ ns/MeV for periodic “matched”  // Compare with a non-periodic structure Deliberately introduce a mismatch by choosing  // ~ 0.05 ns/MeV initially ~Periodic (“matched”)  // Deliberately unmatched  // Energy straggling switched OFF Repeating structure made up of 4 x 2.75 m SFoFo lattices LH2  // [m]

6 Longitudinal Emittance (Periodic SFoFo) Slightly small  (E) ~ 10 MeV,  (t) ~ 0.25 ns Much larger and I start falling out of the bucket I haven’t cut on muons inside the bucket for this plot Two effects to be measured Growth due to optical “aberrations” (quite significant) Growth due to energy straggling Alternatively count directly the number of muons in the RF bucket Energy Straggling Optical aberrations

7 90 o Phase (Periodic SFoFo) MICE default is to have RF at 90 o phase Then there is no “bucket” May be possible to run at 40 o in MICE V But can still measure emittance growth due to energy straggling z=0 z=40 metres  // with RF at 40 o  // with RF at 90 o

8 MICE Channel Much harder to match MICE is fundamentally not periodic due to pz loss 40 o ) Difficult to prevent emittance growth No RF cavities in the tracker/matching section But I should be able to do better than this with some more faff