TJR 9/24/031 Update: Geant4 Simulations of the MICE Beamline – Absolute Normalization Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology 9/24/03 (With thanks.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 MICE Beamline: Plans for initial commissioning. Kevin Tilley, 16 th November. - 75days until commissioning Target, detectors, particle production Upstream.
Advertisements

January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 1 MICE Beamline Analysis Using g4beamline Including Jan 25 Updates for Kevin’s JAN04 Beamline Design Tom Roberts.
Akihisa TOYODA, KEK. Outline g-2/EDM beamline Final Focus(FF) optimization Requirements Option 1: 1-Solenoid case Option 2: 3-Quads case Option 3: 1-Solenoid.
TJR Feb 10, 2005MICE Beamline Analysis -- TRD SEPT041 MICE Beamline Analysis – TRD SEPT04 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. February 10, 2005.
Pion yield studies for proton drive beams of 2-8 GeV kinetic energy for stopped muon and low-energy muon decay experiments Sergei Striganov Fermilab Workshop.
Particle ID in the MICE Beamline MICE Collaboration Meeting 30 March Paul Soler, Kenny Walaron University of Glasgow and Rutherford Appleton Laboratory.
D. Huang, MICE video conference1 Proton and Pion productions: preliminary simulation & measurements Dazhang Huang.
Pion capture and transport system for PRISM M. Yoshida Osaka Univ. 2005/8/28 NuFACT06 at UCI.
Paul drumm, mutac jan MICE Beamline Optics Design Kevin Tilley, RAL, 12th June MICE Needs Generic Solution Pion Injection & Decay Section (a) Inputs.
TJR 12/12/2004G4BeamlineSlide 1 G4Beamline A “Swiss Army Knife” for Geant4 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc.
Emittance–momentum matrix1 Demonstrating the emittance-momentum matrix Mark Rayner, MICE Video Conference, 21 January Initial 4D.
March 30, 2004 TJR1 MICE Upstream Particle Identification Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology March 30, 2004.
Slide 1 MICE Beamline Design and Commissioning Review 16 th Nov 2007 Simulation comparison / tools / issues Henry Nebrensky Brunel University There are.
TJR Sept 22, 2004MICE Beamline Analysis -- SEPT041 MICE Beamline Analysis – SEPT04 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. September 22, 2004.
July 5, 2007 TJRMICE B1+B2 Only1 MICE Running with B1 and B2 Only Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology.
KEK Beam Test Koji YOSHIMURA KEK MICE Collaboration Meeting Koji YOSHIMURA KEK MICE Collaboration Meeting
TJR 10/30/031 MICE Beam rates Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology 10/30/03.
June 13, Geant4 Simulations of the MICE Beamline Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology June13, 2003.
March 30, 2004 TJR1 MICE Target Source Calculations Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology March 30, 2004.
11-FEB-2004 TJR1 MICE Beamline TOF Analysis Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Techology February 11, 2004.
Beam line summary paul drumm for beam line group.
K.Walaron Fermilab, Batavia, Chicago 12/6/ Simulation and performance of beamline K.Walaron T.J. Roberts.
3/31/2005 KEK, Japan 1 G4Beamline for KEK test K. Yonehara Illinois Institute of Tech.
Beam line characterization with the TOFs1 Demonstrating the emittance-momentum matrix Mark Rayner, CM26 California, 24 March Initial.
TJR August 2, 2004MICE Beamline Analysis1 MICE Beamline Analysis JUNE04 Including a proposal for a JUNE04A Configuration Tom Roberts Illinois Institute.
Beamline-to-MICE Matching Ulisse Bravar University of Oxford 2 August 2004 MICE performance with ideal Gaussian beam JUNE04 beam from ISIS beamline (Kevin.
Downstream e-  identification 1. Questions raised by the Committee 2. Particle tracking in stray magnetic field 3. Cerenkov and calorimeter sizes 4. Preliminary.
TJR 11/03/2003Slide 1 g4beamline A “Swiss Army Knife” for Geant4 Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology.
May 22, 2008 TJRMICE Beamline Collimation and Correction 1 Tom Roberts Carol Johnstone Muons, Inc.
TJR 7/30/031 Geant4 Simulations of the MICE Beamline Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology 7/30/03.
March 30, 2004 TJR1 MICE Beamline Performance with New Magnet Descriptions Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology March 30, 2004.
June 22, 2004 TJR1 MICE Beamline Rate Dependency on Pi+ Momentum, and Downstream PiD Distributions Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology June 22,
Oct 15, 2003 Video Conference Energy Deposition Steve Kahn Page 1 Energy Deposition in MICE Absorbers and Coils Steve Kahn October 15, 2003.
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.
Chris Rogers, Analysis Parallel, MICE CM17 Progress in Cooling Channel Simulation.
Walaron Diagnostics MICE Collaboration Meeting Berkley 9/2/ Beamline Diagnostics Kenny Walaron University of Glasgow / RAL.
Oct 15, 2003 Video Conference Energy Deposition Steve Kahn Page 1 Energy Deposition in MICE Absorbers and Coils Steve Kahn November 2, 2003.
HLab meeting 10/14/08 K. Shirotori. Contents SksMinus status –SKS magnet trouble –Magnetic field study.
(+) session, PAC09 Vancouver – TH6PFP056 Introduction The Muon Ionisation Cooling Experiment (MICE, fig. 1c) at RAL[1]
Energy deposition for intense muon sources (chicane + the rest of the front end) Pavel Snopok Illinois Institute of Technology and Fermilab December 4,
Tracking Studies of Phase Rotation Using a Scaling FFAG Ajit Kurup FFAG07 12 th – 17 th April 2007.
3 GeV,1.2 MW, Booster for Proton Driver G H Rees, RAL.
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.
Quantitative Optimisation Studies of the Muon Front-End for a Neutrino Factory S. J. Brooks, RAL, Chilton, Oxfordshire, U.K. Tracking Code Non-linearised.
Beam line commissioning Preparations for Phase1 Kevin Tilley For Paul Drumm & the beam line group.
March 2, 2011 TJRG4beamline Validation1 G4beamline Validation Tom Roberts Muons, Inc.
Update Chris Rogers, Analysis PC, 13/07/06. State of the “Accelerator” Simulation Field model now fully implemented in revised MICE scheme Sanity checking.
Beam MC activity A.K.Ichikawa for beam group For more details,
S. Kahn 5 June 2003NuFact03 Tetra Cooling RingPage 1 Tetra Cooling Ring Steve Kahn For V. Balbekov, R. Fernow, S. Kahn, R. Raja, Z. Usubov.
RAL Muon Beam Line Properties. ISIS 70 MeV H- injection Ring accelerates up to 800 MeV in about 10 ms 50 Hz cycle - Dual Harmonic System ~ 2 x 1.5 MHz;
TJR August 2, 2004MICE Beamline Analysis1 MICE Beamline Analysis JUNE04 Including a proposal for a JUNE04A Configuration Update – August 03, 2004 (new.
Oct 15, 2003 Video Conference Energy Deposition Steve Kahn Page 1 Energy Deposition in MICE Absorbers and Coils Steve Kahn November 2, 2003.
Geant4 Simulation of the Beam Line for the HARP Experiment M.Gostkin, A.Jemtchougov, E.Rogalev (JINR, Dubna)
March 18, 2008 TJRMICE Beamline Status1 MICE Beamline Status (March 18, 2008) Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. Illinois Institute of Technology.
Studies on pion/muon capture at MOMENT Nikos Vassilopoulos IHEP, CAS August 11, 2015.
Instrumentation and Simulations for Target Test MICE Collaboration Meeting 22 October Bill Murray 1, Paul Soler 1,2, Kenny Walaron 1,2 1 Rutherford.
Muons, Inc. TJR NuFact06 August 28, 2006G4BeamlineSlide 1 G4Beamline A “Swiss Army Knife” for Geant4 Tom Roberts Muons,
1 Beamline Session Talk #TimePresenterTalk Title 19:00C. BoothMICE Target Development Status 29:15T.J.RobertsTarget Source Calculations 39:30P.SolerParticle.
G4MICE/G4Beamline interface Kenny Walaron. Before March ’04 Collaboration Meeting G4MICE  Initially modelled cooling channel G4Beamline  Initially modelled.
Simulating the RFOFO Ring with Geant Amit Klier University of California, Riverside Muon Collaboration Meeting Riverside, January 2004.
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.
G4beamline Introduction and New Features A “Swiss Army Knife” for Geant4. Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. Januaary 23, 2014 TJRG4beamline1.
This presentation will describe the state of each element in the beam line with regards to the current update being undertaken. Firstly, it will describe.
MICE. Outline Experimental methods and goals Beam line Diagnostics – In HEP parlance – the detectors Magnet system 2MICE Optics Review January 14, 2016.
G4beamline Spin Tracking Tom Roberts, Muons, Inc. In G4beamline 2.12, the tracking of muon and electron spins is introduced: – decay of pions into polarized.
Beam-Line Analysis m. apollonio 7/7/2010 CM27 - RAL 1.
IF Separator Design of RAON
Update on GEp GEM Background Rates
K. Tilley, ISIS, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, UK Introduction
Presentation transcript:

TJR 9/24/031 Update: Geant4 Simulations of the MICE Beamline – Absolute Normalization Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology 9/24/03 (With thanks to Paul Drumm for great assistance)

TJR 9/24/032 Updates from 9/24/03 video discussion Target intersecting beam: 10 mm 2 => 2 mm 2 Layout of beamline added G4beamline input file added (gives geometrical details)

TJR 9/24/033 Goals Compute the absolute normalization of the beamline –Mu/sec at Diffuser1 –Good Mu/sec through the MICE detector –Singles rates in the beamline Generate lots of muons at Diffuser1 to use in optimization studies of the MICE detector

TJR 9/24/034 MICE Beamline Layout ISIS Beam B2 = 30° Decay Solenoid, 3 T B1 = 60° MICE Target Q1 Q2 Q3 Diffuser1 Here Old line (ignore) Angle = 25°

TJR 9/24/035 G4beamline Input File (1 of 3) # define basic parameters; startEvent comes from the commandline param pionP=300.0 muP=200.0 histoFile=$startEvent histoUpdate= # sigma<0 means flat distribution, that half-width beam rectangular beamWidth=4.22 beamHeight=2 meanMomentum=$pionP particle=pi+\ sigmaXp= sigmaYp= sigmaP=-55 nEvents= # define the decay solenoid; put into a group so it can be rotated (all other elements # can be rotated on their own) coil default material=Cu dR=5.0 dZ=5.0 coil Decay innerRadius=200.0 outerRadius=250.0 length= solenoid DecayS coilName=Decay current=47.94 color=1,0,0 group DecaySolenoid place DecayS rename='' endgroup # define shielding. Tubs = tube solid tubs SolenoidBody innerRadius=250 outerRadius=1000 length=5000 kill=1 tubs TargetShield innerRadius=101.6 outerRadius=1000 length=1 kill=1

TJR 9/24/036 G4beamline Input File (2 of 3) # define the magnets param Q1g= Q2g= Q3g= idealquad Q1 fieldLength= fieldRadius=101.6 gradient=$Q1g \ ironRadius=381 ironLength= ironColor=0,.6,0 kill=1 idealquad Q2 fieldLength= fieldRadius=101.6 gradient=$Q2g \ ironRadius=381 ironLength= ironColor=0,0,.6 kill=1 idealquad Q3 fieldLength= fieldRadius=101.6 gradient=$Q3g \ ironRadius=381 ironLength= ironColor=0,.6,0 kill=1 mappedmagnet B1 mapname=RALBend1 Bfield= \ fieldWidth=660.4 fieldHeight=152 fieldLength=2000 fieldColor='' \ ironLength=1397 ironHeight=1320 ironWidth=1981 ironColor=1,1,0 kill=1 mappedmagnet B2 mapname=RALBend1 Bfield= \ fieldWidth=660.4 fieldHeight=152 fieldLength=2000 fieldColor='' \ ironLength=1397 ironHeight=1320 ironWidth=1981 ironColor=1,1,0 kill=1 # define detectors (tracks which intersect them are put into an NTuple) detector Diffuser1 radius=250 length=1.0 color=0,1,1 asciifile Diffuser1a radius=250 length=1.0 file=$startEvent

TJR 9/24/037 G4beamline Input File (2 of 3) # Place the defined elements into the beamline. # The z coordinate is the centerline of the beamline; x=beam left, y=up. # Each corner bends the beamline appropriately (Y30 => rotate around y by 30 degrees) place TargetShield z=2441 place Q1 z=3000 place Q2 z=4400 place Q3 z=5800 place B1 z= rotation=Y30.0 x=250 corner B1c z=8000 rotation=Y60.0 place DecaySolenoid z=12200 place SolenoidBody z=12200 place B2 z=16135 rotation=Y15.8 x=175 corner B2c z=16185 rotation=Y31.7 place Diffuser1 z=18800 place Diffuser1a z=18801

TJR 9/24/038 The Bottom Line Protons/sec in accelerator:3.7×10 16 Protons/sec intersecting target:1.7×10 12 Pions/sec into beamline accept.:3.0×10 6 Pi + + Mu + /sec at Diffuser1:37k Mu + /sec at Diffuser1:25k Good Mu + /sec through the detector:54 All of these “per sec” occur during the 1 ms per second when our target is in the beam and our RF is active.

TJR 9/24/039 Comparison to the MICE proposal Mu + /sec at Diffuser1: –MICE Proposal: 3,000 –This computation: 25,000 Major differences: –700 MeV/c protons → 800 MeV/c –Target geometry: Height = 2 mm → 10 mm –Diffuser1 geometry: r=20 cm → 25 cm Diffuser1-B2 = 3 m → 2 m These differences account for a factor of ~6

TJR 9/24/0310 The Details (1 of 2)

TJR 9/24/0311 The Details (2 of 2)

TJR 9/24/0312 Additional Slides (From my 7/30/03 talk) The following plots are all at Diffuser1.

TJR 9/24/0313 MICE Beam Layout and Tune Layout from “LAYOUT-MICE 14May03” –Bend 1 is 60°, Bend 2 is 30° –Target to Diffuser1 is 18.8 m Quad (Type IV) and Bending Magnet (Type I) parameters are from RAL drawings and tables. Fringe fields for Bending Magnets were computed via Laplace’s equation; quads are ideal (no fringe fields). Bend 1 is tuned for 300 MeV/c pions Bend 2 is tuned for 200 MeV/c muons Quads are tuned for maximum mu/pi ratio at Diffuser1 (using minuit) – the triplet is configured DFD (~20% better than FDF) Target re-oriented so a long edge is along the beam.

TJR 9/24/0314 Input Beam Pi+ beam 200 MeV/c < P < 400 MeV/c (uniform) dxdz and dydz generated to cover Q1 aperture (uniform) Target is 10 mm high, 10*cos(25°) mm wide (uniform) All materials kill tracks instantly, without secondaries

TJR 9/24/0315 Momentum at Diffuser1

TJR 9/24/0316 P at Q1 for mu+ at Diffuser1

TJR 9/24/0317 Mu+ Correlation Matrix (normalized) XYdxdzdydzPt X Y dxdz dydz P t P < 250 MeV/c

TJR 9/24/0318 Mu+ X vs Y

TJR 9/24/0319 Pi+ X vs Y

TJR 9/24/0320 Mu+ X vs P

TJR 9/24/0321 Pi+ X vs P

TJR 9/24/0322 Mu+ X’ vs P Note where X’=0 is.

TJR 9/24/0323 Pi+ X’ vs P Note where X’=0 is.

TJR 9/24/0324 Mu+ X vs X’ Note where X’=0 is.

TJR 9/24/0325 Pi+ X vs X’ Note where X’=0 is.