W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Background characterization strategy  MD goals  Background sources  Operational procedures  Open questions.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
DS Quench TEST 2  MOTIVATION and METHOD: 1. Achieve 500kW on beam 1 – TCP7 collimators.(so far 500kW with beam 2 and 235kW over 1s with beam 1 were reached.
Advertisements

1 Accelerator Physics Aspects LHCb Accelerator Physics Aspects LHCb CERN SL/AP n Layout n Crossing Scheme n Luminosity n Collision.
Beam commissioning strategy Global machine checkout Essential 450 GeV commissioning System/beam commissioning Machine protection commissioning.
W. KozaneckiMDI meeting, 5 May 06 Slide 1 Online DCH background analysis  Compare on-line DCH background ratio to Martin's offline analysis  Can we identify.
W. KozaneckiMCC AP meeting, 8 Mar 07  MD goals  Experimental procedure  HER-only x & y scans + high-current extrapolation  [LER only X & y scans +
W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC meeting, Dec 04Slide 1 Run-4 Beam-beam Performance Summary  Time evolution of beam currents, spot sizes, tunes & luminosity.
PEP-II B Factory Machine Status and Upgrades John T. Seeman for the PEP-II Staff SLAC DOE Site Review April 9, 2003.
W. KozaneckiMDI meeting, 19 Mar 04 Separating the luminosity background from the non-colliding beam-gas contribution  Principle  the problem  the beam-gas.
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.
W. KozaneckiPEP-II MAC Review, 9-11 Oct 03 Beam-beam: Experimental Status  Introduction: PEP-II collision parameters & recent performance  Interplay.
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.
W. KozaneckiMDI meeting, 16 Jan 2004 BaBar-wide Background monitoring  Motivation  institutionalize...  through a weekly report to PEP-II/BBR meeting.
SLAC Accelerator Department The PEP-II Accelerator John T. Seeman Assistant Director of the Technical Division Head of the Accelerator Department SLUO.
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.
January 15, 2005D. Rubin - Cornell1 CESR-c Status -Operations/Luminosity December/January vs September/October -Machine studies and instrumentation -Simulation.
SLAC Accelerator Department The PEP-II Accelerator Status and General Plans John T. Seeman Assistant Director of the Technical Division Head of the Accelerator.
W. KozaneckiMCC AP meeting, 24 Apr 06 Slide 1 Using the gas-induced beam blowup to measure vertical IP beam sizes  Principle  heat PR02 VP8020.
Sat/Sun 26/27 th March Sat 18h20: Stable beams. Fill #1653. Sun 10h02: Stable beams continued. vdM scans. Length calibrations. 16h59: Beam dump. Delivered.
Future Very High Luminosity Options for PEP-II John T. Seeman For the PEP-II Team e+e- Factories Workshop October 13-16, 2003.
Beam Commissioning Workshop, 19th January Luminosity Optimization S. White, H. Burkhardt.
W. KozaneckiMCC AP meeting, 29 July 04  Goal: measure the luminosity degradation associated with  parasitic crossings  horizontal crossing angle  Principle.
Simulation of direct space charge in Booster by using MAD program Y.Alexahin, N.Kazarinov.
Status of crab crossing studies Presented by NAKANISHI Kota (KEK) 2008/1/25.
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.
M. WeaverPEP-II MAC Review, Dec 04  Operational issues  radiation aborts  radiation-dose and background monitoring  Background characterization.
DESY: From High Energy Physics to Synchrotron Radiation Accelerator Operation in a changing Environment Michael Bieler DESY: From High Energy Physics to.
ION COMMISSIONING REVISITED 1 Thanks to: John Jowett, Walter Venturini. Matteo Solfaroli.
RADWG-RADMONLHC Beam Loss Rates1 Beam Loss mechanisms Where? Beam loss in cycle – when? Totals per fill: before and during physics Totals per annum Comparison.
R. Assmann - LHCCWG Two Beam Operation R.W. Aßmann LHCCWG Acknowledgements to W. Herr, V. Previtali, A. Butterworth, P. Baudrenghien, J. Uythoven,
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.
First Collision of BEPCII C.H. Yu May 10, Methods of collision tuning Procedures and data analysis Luminosity and background Summary.
Monday :00 Injection for physics fill # :00 Stable beams fill #1816, luminosity ~1.2x1033 cm-2s-1 11:08 Beams dumped. QPS trigger on detector.
M. WeaverB-Factory Operations Review April 24, 2006 BaBar Backgrounds Matt Weaver B-Factory Operations Review April 24, 2006.
Beam Physics Issue in BEPCII Commisionning Xu Gang Accelerator physics group.
LHC Machine Operational Status and Plans LHCC, 22nd September 2010 Steve Myers (On behalf of the LHC team and international collaborators)
William Lockman UC Santa Cruz May 6, 2005MDI meeting G4 simulation: status and validation strategy Goals Contributors Status Needed plots Future tasks.
Plan for 500 GeV Development Vadim, Mei. Goals 1.Explore polarization transmission to the 500 Gev CM energy. 2. Inspect the luminosity aspects (with 2.
Bunch by bunch feedback systems for KEKB Makoto Tobiyama KEK Accelerator Laboratory.
Tue 23/8 – Wed 24/8 09:00 Start 90 m optics run – Preparation and verification of the collimation functions – Re-generation of functions for Transverse.
presented by W. Kozanecki (CEA-Saclay) for the BaBar - PEPII MDI group
Ralph Assmann, Giulia Papotti, Frank Zimmermann 25 August 2011
Top-Up Injection Schemes
Last 24 hours RQ4.L1 Lost going into collision Test ramp Storm
-9:00: Test IP transverse adjustment (CMS) and optics verification.
Beam-beam limits: MD proposal
Beam-beam Effects in Hadron Colliders
Machine Background Status & issues in BaBar/PEP-II
Top-Up Injection for PEP-II and Applications to a Higgs Factory
Fill 1410 revisited Peak luminosity 1.4e32 Beam current 2.68/2.65 e13
Beam-beam Experience at PEP-II
Wednesday Morning 8: :30 end of fill study - octupole polarity inversion (Elias, Tatiana, Alexey, Georges, …): Goal: study the effect of the.
PEP-II Status and Plans e+e- Factories Workshop
Thursday 10th May - morning
LHC (SSC) Byung Yunn CASA.
Trickle Background Investigation
Chromaticity can make a difference…
04-05/08/2010 End of physics at ~11:00 after 18.5 hours ~120 nb-1.
Tuesday 9th November 10:02 Fill beams dumped
Wednesday 9:08 Fill 3214 dumped by OP after 5:26 hours in stable beams
Summary Thursday h21: Stable beams fill #1303.
Tuesday Access for RF & QPS (others in the shadow) until ~18:00.
Beam spot size measurements
Long term projections summary
Background characterization: MD plan
Luminosity performance comparison: 5-6 Jun vs. 23 Dec 03
Another Immortal Fill….
MEIC New Baseline: Part 7
Saturday 29th October Friday during IP2 1 m squeeze test
Presentation transcript:

W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Background characterization strategy  MD goals  Background sources  Operational procedures  Open questions  Appendix: a few useful links W. Kozanecki

MD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 MD goals  Main goal: characterize beam-current dependence of  machine-induced backgrounds  all BaBar ‘detectors’: SVT, DCH, EMC, DIRC, IFR + TRG, ODF  dedicated background monitors SVTRAD pin diodes + diamonds CsI counters BLM’s  beam-beam performance  specific luminosity  vertical & horizontal spot sizes in LER & HER  loss collimators in PR12 (HER), PR04 + PR02 (LER)  Parasitically: measure thermally-induced motion of IR components  using a ‘witness’ bunch in HER (1mA) when varying LER current, & vv  take advantage of slow ‘current staircase’ to measure thermal time constants

W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Background sources  Beam-gas (bremsstrahlung + Coulomb)  HEB only: B Hbg ~ a H *I H + b H *I H 2 (a H, b H > 0)  LEB only: B Lbg ~ a L *I L + b L *I L 2 (a L, b L > 0)  beam-gas cross term: B LHbg ~ c LH * I L * I H (LEB+HEB, out of collision)  Luminosity (radiative-Bhabha debris)  B P ~ d P * L (strictly linear with L)  Beam-beam tails  from HER tails: B H, bb ~ b H,bb *I H + terms non linear in L, I L /bunch ( & I H /bunch ?)  from LER tails: B L, bb ~ b L,bb *I L + terms non linear in L, I H /bunch ( & I L /bunch ?)  Touscheck  LER only; signature somewhat similar to bremsstrahlung  B LT non-linear with charge density in bunch  B I : LER injection (trickle) background

W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Proposed baseline parametrization B = B P + B bb + B Hbg + B Lbg + B LHbg + B LT + B I = a0 (from no-beam data ?) + d P * L (from colliding-beam data) + B bb (I b L, I b H ) (from colliding-beam data) + a H *I H + b H *I H 2 (from single-beam HER data) + a L *I L + b L *I L 2 (from single-beam LER data) + c LH * I L * I H (from 2-beam, non-colliding ?) + B LT (LER only, vary V RF ?) + B I (differential, trickle – coasting ?)

W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Proposed operational procedure: colliding beam measurements  Keep I L ~ constant (1.85 A), vary I H (> 0.2 A, 0.2 A steps)  non-trickle  LER trickle ?  Keep I H ~ constant (1.5 A ?), vary I L (> 0.25 A, 0.25 A steps)  non-trickle  LER trickle ?

W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Proposed operational procedure: single-beam measurements  Vary I L : A, 0.25 A steps, no HEB  no LER bunches in buckets (LFB permitting)  1.5 mA in HER bunch 3400  Vary I H : A, 0.20 A steps, no LEB  no HER bunches in buckets (LFB permitting)  1.5 mA in LER bunch 3400  Separate beams vertically by 2 * 400 microns (feasibility!)  Keep I L ~ constant (1.85 A), vary I H (> 0.2 A, 0.4 A steps)  Keep I H ~ constant (1.5 A ?), vary I L (> 0.25 A, 0.5 A steps)  LER Touscheck backgrounds  3 possible ways to vary charge density (method tbc)  vary LER RF voltage (  bunch length): clean but delicate  vary transverse size using tunes: easy, but ill-defined conditions  use terser pattern & increase bunch current (1.5 mA/b -> 2.5 mA/ b?)

W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Proposed operational procedure: general guidelines  BaBar taking data!  Perturb as adiabatically as possible  start with stable machine in delivery mode  avoid acrobatics (collisions first, then single-beam, then non- colliding...)  change Babar run #s etc while machine is filling  At each current setting:  optimize tunes  on lifetime (single beam, for beam-gas measurement)  on luminosity (in collision)  reset vertical IP angles in both rings  check SLM & interferometer settings  start a new run ?  Witness bunches (single-beam only, conditions permitting)  1.5 mA in bucket 3400 in LER when ramping HER (& vv)  requires additional 100-bucket gap at end of high-current train

W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Open questions  Likely prerequisites  ‘routine’ 8-station running in HER  decent stored-beam & trickle backgrounds during preceding owl shift  Trigger rmix ?  Run duration/# evts per beam setting  Data samples  Do we want one (or more) zero-current run(s) for pedestals etc?  Do we really need to measure the cross-term contribution?  Do we really need to measure the trickle contribution?  Reproducibility checks: strategy?  Do we need to change run #  at each current setting?  between trickle & non-trickle?  Touscheck background measurement procedure ?  Need volunteer(s) to analyze CsI & BLM data!

W. KozaneckiMD planning meeting, 20 Jan 04 Learning from the past: a few useful links...  General link for 2002 studies: & follow-up postings  SVT 2002 studies:  DCH grounds/ DIRC studies:  EMC  links tbd  evidence for a luminosity term