MIA optics knobs and IP knobs for PEP-II optics (+ dispersion) improvement and IP matching, and its fast iteration during MD for accommodating orbit drift.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
11 October 2006Basic Layout of LER G. de Rijk1 Basic Layout of LER  The basic idea  VLHC type magnets  LER in the LHC tunnel  Layout  LER experiment.
Advertisements

Lattice Status SuperB Project Workshop SLAC, October 6-9, 2009 Yuri Nosochkov for the SuperB Lattice Team Major recent updates by P. Raimondi and S. Sinyatkin.
LER MAR13 Analysis Is MIA data less accurate than that taken in last year? Is phase measurement still Ok? Is coupling measurement still Ok? Or simply that.
2E34 Meeting and MCC News IR2 Vacuum Studies (Mike Sullivan) Plans for Lattice and Optics Work (Yunhai Cai)
Optics modeling and correction Yiton T. Yan Stanford Linear Accelerator Center Thanks to: Y. Cai, W. Colocho, F-J. Decker, M. Donald, Y. Nosochkov, J.
PEP-II B Factory Machine Status and Upgrades John T. Seeman for the PEP-II Staff SLAC DOE Site Review April 9, 2003.
Super-B Factory Workshop January 19-22, 2004 IR Upgrade M. Sullivan 1 PEP-II Interaction Region Upgrade M. Sullivan for the Super-B Factory Workshop Hawaii.
J. Turner 1/26/06 SLAC PEPII Accelerator Physics LER Steering and Optics Motivation Steering Model Preparation Hysteresis Injection Tuning.
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Abstract Magnetic Specifications and Tolerances Weiming Guo, NSLS-II Project In this presentation I briefly introduced the.
Optics measurement, modeling, and correction - PEP-II experience Yiton Yan SLAC.
ATF2 optics … 1 3 rd Mini-Workshop on Nano Project at ATF ATF2 optics, tuning method and tolerances of initial alignment, magnets, power supplies etc.
March 7, 2007 LET Issues (Cai/Kubo/Zisman) Global Design Effort 1 Low-Emittance Tuning Issues and Plans Yunhai Cai, Kiyoshi Kubo and Michael S. Zisman.
Y. Ohnishi / KEK KEKB LER for ILC Damping Ring Study Lattice simulation of lattice errors and optics corrections. November 1, 2007 Y. Ohnishi / KEK.
ATF2 Tuning Updates Glen White, SLAC Sept
FFS Issues in the 2011 autumn continuous operation Toshiyuki OKUGI (KEK) 1/13/2011 The 11 th ATF2 project meeting SLAC, USA.
6. betatron coupling sources: skew quadrupoles, solenoid fields concerns: reduction in dynamic (& effective physical) aperture; increase of intrinsic &
J. Turner 02/07/05 SLAC PEPII Accelerator Physics LER WIGGLER PLAN J. Turner, M. Donald, M. Sullivan, U. Wienands, J. Yocky Motivation and Concerns Details.
ILC BDS Static Beam-Based Alignment and Tuning Glen White SLAC 1.Aims. 2.Error parameters and other assumptions. 3.Overview of alignment and tuning procedure.
Dynamic Aperture Study for the Ion Ring Lattice Options Min-Huey Wang, Yuri Nosochkov MEIC Collaboration Meeting Fall 2015 Jefferson Lab, Newport News,
‘BBA’ Goals Understand BPM performance –validate use for precision optics tests –justify & specify hardware/software upgrades Beam – Based ‘Alignment’
R. Assmann - LHCCWG Two Beam Operation R.W. Aßmann LHCCWG Acknowledgements to W. Herr, V. Previtali, A. Butterworth, P. Baudrenghien, J. Uythoven,
LHC online modeling Mark IV LHC online modeling Mark IV Piotr Skowroński Tobias Persson Agnieszka Szczotka Jaime Coello de Portugal Lukas Malina Mattias.
U. Wienands, Y. Cai, F.-J. Decker, M. Donald, W. Kozanecki, Yu. Nosochkov, T. Raubenheimer, J. Safranek, D. Sagan., A. Seryi, K. Sonnad, C. Steier, P.
Analysis of Multipole and Position Tolerances for the ATF2 Final Focus Line James Jones ASTeC, Daresbury Laboratory.
ATF2 Tuning Summary Nov & Dec 2010 Glen White, SLAC 11 th ATF2 Project Meeting, SLAC Jan
MD Wed – Sat DayTimeMD Wed06:00UPS repair, ATS optics checks w/o beam 12:00Cycle, test ATS optics w/o beam 16: TeV: BPM offset determination for.
Orbits, Optics and Beam Dynamics in PEP-II Yunhai Cai Beam Physics Department SLAC March 6, 2007 ILC damping ring meeting at Frascati, Italy.
SLAC Accelerator Development Program: SuperB Mike Sullivan OHEP Accelerator Development Review January 24-26, 2011.
Recent MIA Results Yiton T. Yan Stanford Linear Accelerator Center Acknowledgement: Y. Cai, F-J. Decker, S. Ecklund, J. Irwin, J. Seeman, M. Sullivan,
Summary of Tuning, Corrections, and Commissioning ( Short summary of ATF2 meeting at SLAC in March 2007 ) and Hardware Issues for beam Tuning Toshiyuki.
PSB-PS TRANSFER AT 2 GEV - CONCEPTS AND OPTICS W. Bartmann, J. Abelleira et al. ABT LIU Review, 20-Nov-15.
STABILITY STUDIES OF THE PSB-TO-PS TRANSFER W. Bartmann, J. Abelleira With many inputs from: O. Berrig, J. Borburgh, S. Gilardoni, GP di Giovanni, B. Goddard,
11/18/2004 FNAL Advanced Optics Measurements at Tevatron Vadim Sajaev ANL V. Lebedev, V. Nagaslaev, A. Valishev FNAL.
Optics with Large Momentum Acceptance for Higgs Factory Yunhai Cai SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Future Circular Collider Kick-off Meeting, February.
Frank SchmidtLHCCWG - 8 May LHC On-Line Modeling The LHC On-line Model: what it is NOT! What is it then? The Team and the Tasks SDDS MAD-X Version.
IP Tuning Task Updates Glen White, SLAC January
ILC BDS Alignment, Tuning and Feedback Studies
Orbit Response Matrix Analysis
Tolerances & Tuning of the ATF2 Final Focus Line
FiDeL: the model to predict the magnetic state of the LHC
M. Sullivan for the SLAC SuperB Workshop Jan , 2009
Ben Cerio Office of Science, SULI Program 2006
Low Emittance Tuning Tests at the Diamond Light Source (Rutherford Labs) Dec R. Bartolini, S. Liuzzo, P. Raimondi SuperB XV Meeting Caltech, CA,
The Interaction Region
Non-linear Beam Dynamics Studies for JLEIC Electron Collider Ring
DA Studies with crossing angles and higher order corrections
ATF2 IP Tuning Task Simulation Updates
First Look at Nonlinear Dynamics in the Electron Collider Ring
The PEP-II Interaction e+e- Factories Workshop
Nonlinear Dynamics and Error Study of the MEIC Ion Collider Ring
Updates on IR and FF for super-B factory
Analysis of Nonlinear Dynamics
Orbit Response Matrix Studies
Status and Plan for the PEP-II Lattices
Optics Measurements in the PSB
with Model Independent
IR Lattice with Detector Solenoid
M. E. Biagini, LNF-INFN SuperB IRC Meeting Frascati, Nov , 2007
Triplet corrector layout and strength specifications
Yuri Nosochkov Yunhai Cai, Fanglei Lin, Vasiliy Morozov
Multipole Limit Survey of FFQ and Large-beta Dipole
Progress on Non-linear Beam Dynamic Study
First Look at Error Sensitivity in MEIC
Multipole Limit Survey of Large-beta Dipoles
G. Wei, V.S. Morozov, Fanglei Lin MEIC R&D Meeting, JLab, Oct 27, 2015
Upgrade on Compensation of Detector Solenoid effects
Fanglei Lin JLEIC R&D Meeting, August 4, 2016
DYNAMIC APERTURE OF JLEIC ELECTRON COLLIDER
A TME-like Lattice for DA Studies
Error Sensitivity in MEIC
Presentation transcript:

MIA optics knobs and IP knobs for PEP-II optics (+ dispersion) improvement and IP matching, and its fast iteration during MD for accommodating orbit drift 1.Virtual HER – requires 10 to 16 minutes MIA fitting if the BPM data are good. 2.HER Knob 4 comparing with the Virtual HER – an optics knob that simultaneously correct beta beat, coupling, dispersion, and –I for better dynamic aperture is robotic with about 20 minutes MIA fitting with this upgraded MIA capability. 3. IP knobs on HER - each knob, such as, By*, IP waist, IP tilt angle, requires 5 – 10 minutes MIA fitting. 4.Invasive orbit drift compensation – requires taking MIA data and then with 5 to 10 minutes MIA fitting. Therefore we can perform many iteration during MIA dialing in shift, to make sure that the wanted machine is indeed there. 5.Expectation: While no one can give a guarantee at any time with such a large accelerator components and variables such as BPMs and orbit, under normal condition, I assume a 16 hour dedicated MIA MD can make both machine a nice-looking optics and possibly bring the HER and LER best match at IP with MIA IP matching knobs. The bottle neck is whether we take good MIA data or not, not MIA fitting since with good MIA data, a fast convergence is always guaranteed. 6.* time mentioned above are only MIA fitting time. Data taking and transfer time as well human discussion time are not included. Yiton T. Yan Acknowledgement: Jim Turner and Gerry Yocky for preparing the dialing-in and for remarkable capability of bringing the orbit back to where it is at the time of MIA data – key to successful MIA knob dialing in and our PEP2 colleagues for their giving me ideas, suggestions, help of data taking, Chao, Seeman, Stan, William, Mike, Decker, Woodley, Uli, Dmitry, MHD, Yuri, and Yunhai, etc.

HER22NOV05 MIA fitted optics Dispersion is fitted without using extra variables, i.e. no corrector is used to fit the dispersion.

Comparing MIA fitting time with several LINUX PC’s at SLAC MIA fitting computers MIA with 12 Greens no Dispersion (HER) no normal-quad-skews (Clock time) MIA with 12 Greens with Dispersion (HER) no normal-quad skews (Clock time) Pepoptics (no share)* 7 min 47 sec12 min 40 sec Liveoak (no share) 6 min 22 sec10 min 9 sec Noric01 (no share) 6 min 55 sec10 min 46 sec Noric-02 (share) 7 min 25 sec11 min 10 sec Stream (no share) 7 min 43 sec12 min 43 sec Field (no share) 11 min 38 sec18 min 24 sec * Pepoptics has the maximum ram and therefore is suitable (no virtual memory used) for MIA 30 greens and all normal-skews and one-turn-map fitting.

Knob 4 (right: wanted machine) Producing a knob needs about 5 to 20 minutes after a virtual machine is done and is pretty robotic since we can use all convenient magnets and we know both the geometric and chromatic information.

Knob 4 Magnets strength changes to be shown at end of this talk through web direct.txt file (copied to this power pointer make alignment no good).

IP beta_Y* knob use QF7, QD6, QF5, QD4 in addition to trombones and global, local skews. Shown is the case that the by* is reduced by 0.5 mm while others are kept as much the same as that before the knob as can be seen by the overlap.

IP waist_Y knob use QF7, QD6, QF5, QD4 in addition to trombones and global, local skews. Shown is the case that the waist Y is shifted by 1 mm while others are kept as much the same as that before the knob as can be seen by the overlap.

Invasive orbit Minor Drift accommodation Once we have the approachable wanted model obtained timely. We can assume the BPM gains and cross couplings are the same and therefore fitting the wanted model to the updated MIA data is quite fast with variable magnet not including sextupole feed-downs. 5 minutes. And the inverse of that should be dialed in. This can be done very fast if online model fit.

Conclusion 1.Expectation: While no one can give a guarantee at any time with such a large accelerator components and variables such as BPMs and orbit, under normal condition, I assume a 16 hour dedicated MIA MD can make both machine a nice-looking optics and possibly bring the HER and LER best match at IP with MIA IP matching knobs. The bottle neck is whether we take good MIA data or not, not MIA fitting since with good MIA data, a fast convergence is always guaranteed.

Suggestion for buying Pepoptics 2 If we have two Pepoptics’s at the MIA MD time, we could run MIA in two Pepoptics’s, one for the HER and the other for the LER. If we could run HER and LER MIA fitting in a separate computer, we could come up with many iterations to make sure the optics is what the best we can have at the end of the shift(s). From the last page running time comparison, the new Pepoptics 2 shhuld have 50% faster speed. It is the time to upgrade computer. Although SLAC has other computers to use, it could be time sharing at the MD time and could not have enough ram memory. So pepoptics 2 should also have large ram memory just as Pepoptics.