CLIC programme at FACET Update on CERN-BBA A. Latina, J. Pfingstner, G. De Michele, D. Schulte (CERN) E. Adli (Univ. of Oslo), J. Resta Lopez (IFIC) In.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Matching Injector To Linac. Caveats This is all loose and fuzzy – sort of religion We dont have real tight control over and knowledge of the machine –
Advertisements

Q20: The X-band collider has much tighter requirements for the alignment of the beam orbit with the structure axis, yet the basic instrumental precision.
Issues in ILC Main Linac and Bunch Compressor from Beam dynamics N. Solyak, A. Latina, K.Kubo.
Tests of DFS and WFS at ATF2 Andrea Latina (CERN), Jochem Snuverink (RHUL), Nuria Fuster (IFIC) 18 th ATF2 Project Meeting – Feb – LAPP, Annecy.
FACET Status ESTB 2011 Workshop Christine Clarke March 17 th 2011.
FACET: A National User Facility Carsten Hast SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory.
1 Latest CLIC FFS Tuning Results Americas Workshop on Linear Colliders Thanks to: Rogelio Tomas Garcia, Yngve Inntjore Levinsen, Andrea Latina, Oscar Roberto.
Henrik Loos High Level 17 June 2008 High Level Physics Applications for LCLS Commissioning Henrik Loos.
Feed forward orbit corrections for the CLIC RTML R. Apsimon, A. Latina.
LCLS-II Transverse Tolerances Tor Raubenheimer May 29, 2013.
Direct Wakefield measurement of CLIC accelerating structure in FACET Hao Zha, Andrea Latina, Alexej Grudiev (CERN) 28-Jan
Tests of Dispersion-Free Steering at FACET (CERN-BBA) A. Latina, J. Pfingstner, D. Schulte (CERN) E. Adli (Univ. of Oslo/SLAC) In collaboration with: F.J.
Ground Motion + Vibration Transfer Function for Final QD0/SD0 Cryomodule System at ILC Glen White, SLAC ALCPG11, Eugene March 21, 2011.
Main beam performance tests at FACET and at existing or future FELs (FELs based on Xband technology) Andrea Latina CLIC Workshop 2014 – Feb –
Summary of AWG4: Beam Dynamics A. Latina (CERN), N. Solyak (FNAL) LCWS13 – Nov 11-15, 2013 – The University of Tokyo, Japan.
FACET Machine Performance and Expectations M. Sullivan for the FACET Accelerator group SAREC Review July 25, 2013.
Verification of Beam-Based Alignment Algorithms at FACET A. Latina, J. Pfingstner, D. Schulte (CERN) E. Adli (Univ. of Oslo) With the collaboration of:
Beam Tests of DFS & WFS at FACET Andrea Latina, J. Pfingstner, D. Schulte, D. Pellegrini (CERN), E. Adli (Univ. of Oslo) With the help of F.J. Decker,
Technical Board ATF2 GM FF progress report A.Jeremie ATF2 GM System team: K.Artoos, C.Charrondière, A.Jeremie, J.Pfingstner (a lot of figures from him),
ILC Start-End Simulations Glen White, SLAC May 13, 2014 AWLC14, Fermilab.
Feed forward orbit corrections for the CLIC RTML R. Apsimon, A. Latina.
ILC Feedback System Studies Nikolay Solyak Fermilab 1IWLC2010, Geneva, Oct.18-22, 2010 N.Solyak.
WP: Parameters and design. Plans from IFIC, Valencia Javier Resta López on behalf of the IFIC accelerator group ( IFIC (CSIC-UV),
Energy Spectrometer for the ILC Alexey Lyapin University College London.
CERN, BE-ABP-CC3 Jürgen Pfingstner Verification of the Design of the Beam-based Controller Jürgen Pfingstner 2. June 2009.
Simulations Group Summary K. Kubo, D. Schulte, N. Solyak for the beam dynamics working group.
FACET Update ARD Status Meeting Christine Clarke April 14 th 2011.
December Ground Motion Group Global Design Effort 1 LET Status report, December 06 Paul Lebrun Fermilab CD/AMR.
The CLIC decelerator Instrumentation issues – a first look E. Adli, CERN AB/ABP / UiO October 17, 2007.
July 19-22, 2006, Vancouver KIRTI RANJAN1 ILC Curved Linac Simulation Kirti Ranjan, Francois Ostiguy, Nikolay Solyak Fermilab + Peter Tenenbaum (PT) SLAC.
1 Henrik Loos 1 13 Sep 2011 APE Meeting Recent Activities H. Loos 09/13/2011.
Beam Dynamics WG Summary N.Solyak, K.Kubo, A.Latina LCWS 2014 – Oct 6-10, 2014 – Belgrade, Serbia.
1 DR -> IP Beam Transport Simulations with Intra-Train Feedback Glen White, SLAC Jan 19 th 2006.
Beam Dynamics WG K. Kubo, N. Solyak, D. Schulte. Presentations –N. Solyak Coupler kick simulations update –N. Solyak CLIC BPM –A. Latina: Update on the.
Beam-Based Alignment Tests at FACET and at Fermi A. Latina (CERN), E. Adli (Oslo), D. Pellegrini (CERN), J. Pfingstner (CERN), D. Schulte (CERN) LCWS2014.
E211 - Experimental verification of the effectiveness of linear collider system identification and beam-based alignment algorithms A. Latina (CERN), E.
Placet based DFS simulations in the ILC Main Linac. Some preliminary results of error scans open for discussion Javier Resta Lopez JAI, Oxford University.
J. Pfingstner Imperfections tolerances for on-line DFS Improved imperfection tolerances for an on-line dispersion free steering algorithm Jürgen Pfingstner.
Kiyoshi Kubo Electron beam in undulators of e+ source - Emittance and orbit angle with quad misalignment and corrections - Effect of beam pipe.
SASE optimization with OCELOT Sergey Tomin other co-workers: I. Agapov, G. Geloni, I. Zagorodnov.
Low Emittance Generation and Preservation K. Yokoya, D. Schulte.
CERN, BE-ABP (Accelerators and Beam Physics group) Jürgen Pfingstner Adaptive control scheme for the main linac of CLIC Jürgen Pfingstner 21 th of October.
Main Linac Tolerances What do they mean? ILC-GDE meeting Beijing Kiyoshi Kubo 1.Introduction, review of old studies 2.Assumed “static” errors.
Emittance preservation in the main linacs of ILC and CLIC Andrea Latina (CERN) Kiyoshi Kubo (KEK) LCWS University of Texas at Arlington - Oct
… Work in progress at CTF3 … Davide Gamba 01 July 2013 Study and Implementation of L INEAR F EEDBACK T OOLS for machine study and operation.
Introduction D. Schulte for K. Kubo and P. Tenenbaum.
Emittance preservation in the RTML of ILC and CLIC Andrea Latina (CERN) Nikolay Solyak (FNAL) LCWS University of Texas at Arlington - Oct
Tuning Techniques And Operator Diagnostics for FACET at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Chris Melton SLAC Accelerator Operations.
Direct Wakefield measurement of CLIC accelerating structure in FACET Hao Zha, Andrea Latina, Alexej Grudiev (CERN) 18/06/2015 High Gradient work shop 2015.
ATF2 Software tasks: - EXT Bunch-Bunch FB - IP Bunch-Bunch FB - FB Integration Status and plans Javier Resta-Lopez JAI, Oxford University ATF2 commissioning.
Beam-based alignment techniques for linacs Masamitsu Aiba, PSI BeMa 2014 workshop Bad Zurzach, Switzerland Thanks to Michael Böge and Hans Braun.
8 th February 2006 Freddy Poirier ILC-LET workshop 1 Freddy Poirier DESY ILC-LET Workshop Dispersion Free Steering in the ILC using MERLIN.
Progress in CLIC DFS studies Juergen Pfingstner University of Oslo CLIC Workshop January.
Simulation for Lower emittance in ATF Damping Ring Kiyoshi Kubo Similar talk in DR WS in Frascati, May 2007 Most simulations were done several.
Studies of emittance preservation methods and the status of their experimental validation Erik Adli 1, W. Farabolini 2, Reidar Lillestol 1, Jürgen Pfingstner.
Effects of Accelerating Cavities on On-Line Dispersion Free Steering in the Main Linac of CLIC Effects of Accelerating Cavities on On-Line Dispersion Free.
From Beam Dynamics K. Kubo
LCLS Commissioning & Operations High Level Software
FACET Tests Update A. Latina, J. Pfingstner, D. Schulte,
RF-kick in the CLIC accelerating structures
In collaboration with P. N. Burrows, A. Latina and D. Schulte
Steering algorithm experience at CTF3
ILC Z-pole Calibration Runs Main Linac performance
New algorithms for tuning the CLIC beam delivery system
Adaptive Alignment & Ground Motion
LCLS Commissioning & Operations High Level Software
Beam-Based Alignment Results
The Proposed Conversion of CESR to an ILC Damping Ring Test Facility
High Level Physics Applications for LCLS Commissioning
Orbit Bumps in PEP-II to Maximize Luminosity
Presentation transcript:

CLIC programme at FACET Update on CERN-BBA A. Latina, J. Pfingstner, G. De Michele, D. Schulte (CERN) E. Adli (Univ. of Oslo), J. Resta Lopez (IFIC) In collaboration with: F.J. Decker and N. Lipkowitz (SLAC) CLIC Project Meeting – May 24, 2013

2 FACET FACET (Facility for Advanced Accelerator Experimental Tests) is a new User Facility at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory. Experiments apply for beam time to a scientific committee. The first User Run started in spring 2012 with 20 GeV, 3 nC electron beams. The facility is designed to provide short (20 μm) bunches and small (20 μm wide) spot sizes. FACET experiments: CLIC experiments Other experiments (not covered in this update) : Plasma wake field acceleration, dielectric structure acceleration, Smith-Purcell radiation, magnetic switching, teraherz generation …. and more

CLIC programme CLASSE: Measurement of long-range wakefields in the CLIC accelerating structures at FACET (G. De Michele) (postponed) Measurement of short-range wakefields in the collimators at End-Station B (ESTB) (J. Resta-Lopez) (pending) Experimental Verification of System Identification algorithms and Beam-Based Alignment (BBA) Techniques at FACET (A. Latina, E. Adli, J. Pfingstner, D. Schulte) (ongoing) 3

CERN-BBA Motivation: Testing BBA techniques Misalignment and BPM precision values Relevant beam parameters at injection Emittance growth with static imperfections, after beam-based alignment. The result is the average of 100 random seeds. 4 Beam-Based Alignment: Dispersion-Free Steering

The challenge: System Identification and BBA SYSID: inferring the model using an automatic kick-measurement system identification algorithm (for instance, Recursive Least-Square) Challenge: the simulations utilise an ideal model which in reality we don’t know. The right-hand figure shows the emittance growth after dispersion-free steering, using an imperfect model. The result is the average of many seeds. 5 SysID convergence Impact of SysID on BBA

T-501 (E-211) history Last year: T-501 – We got ~12 hours of effective beam-time: we run SYSID, and managed to excite orbit bumps Last quarter of 2012 – the SAREC committee (SLAC Accelerator Research Experimental Program Committee) accepted our proposal for continuing our tests at SLC-FACET – We’ve been promoted from T-501 to E-211 (i.e. from test- beam to full featured experiment) March 11 – 18, 2013 – We got 32+ hours of beam-time 6

Lessons from last year Last year we managed to control the orbit, but not the dispersion. Lessons we learned: Try to avoid incoming dispersion Avoid to use N_bpms > N_correctors Measures we took: We decided to focus on the first half of the linac N_bpms ~ N_correctors We picked the ‘best’ correctors in X/Y, matched by ‘best’ BPMS in X/Y (i.e. those located at large betas) We run extensive flight-simulations of realistic on-line conditions before the experiment 7

Setup We run with a ‘pencil beam’ – 1 nC charge Linac was in no compression mode – 1.5 mm bunch length (reduced wakes w.r.t. nominal charge 3nC, but still quite long bunches) We focused on sectors LI04 thru LI08 (500 meters of Linac) – Dispersion was created off-phasing (by 90 o ) one klystron in sector LI02 8

Beam-time Schedule & Program Beamtime: March 11 (6pm-8am) 14 hours March 12 (12am-8am) 8 hours March 15 (12am-8am) 8 hours March 16 (12am-8am) 8 hours Our program: 0) preparation 1)commissioning of our new software for the on-line; orbit response measurement (SYSID) 2)dispersion response measurement and orbit control excitation (SYSID+ 1:1 steering) 3)orbit correction and dispersion correction (take proof-of-principle plots) (BBA) 4)orbit correction and dispersion correction with emittance measurement (BBA+emittance measurement) 9

SCP, SLAC Control Program SLC, SLAC Linac facet_getMachine(); facet_setMachine(); Preparation 10 Us trying to steer the beam Our BBA routines (Matlab)

Us trying to steer the beam SCP, SLAC Control Program SLC, SLAC Linac PLACET placet_getMachine(); placet_setMachine(); Preparation: Flight Simulator 11 x Our BBA routines (Matlab)

Results: SysID + orbit control Focused on Sectors 04 through 08 (500 m of linac!) Used 52 correctors in total (1h15 acquisition time) Measured orbit and dispersion (2h30 in total) Applied Orbit and DFS Response matrix 12 We excited a bump in X

Dispersion-Free Steering Bunch profile at S18 before correction We spoiled the orbit using correctors in sector 3 (ahead of our region) We iterated DFS Bunch profile at S18 after correction

Dispersion-Free Steering Tried some other BPM configurations; selecting every 2nd for correction, versus every BPM, did not result in large difference in correction results.

16 Before correction After 3 iterations Incoming oscillation/dispersion is taken out and flattened; emittance in LI11 and emittance growth significantly reduced. After 1 iteration S19 phos, PR185 : Emittance Growth and Dispersion-Free Steering Emittance at LI11 (iteraton 1) X: 43.2 um Y: um Emittance at LI11 (iteration 4) X: 3.71 um Y: 0.89 um

Conclusions and Future Steps We succeeded in proving the effectiveness of DFS to correct the emittance, and in showing the goodness of the SysID algorithms. Completed proof of principle case. The responses after one day are still effective -> (no need to re- measure the model); verified by applying same DFS after 1 day -> no significant change in the resulting machine Tried various BPM configurations: did not result in large difference in correction results Varied parameters w1_w0 and SVD cut, but ended up going back to best parameters we found in simulation (w1_w0 = 10, svd_cut = 0.95) Explore new beam-based algorithms to further improve the results 17

Flattening LI11-18 On the spur of our success : We have been asked to correct the second part of the linac: LI11-18 (900m) We managed to flatten orbit and dispersion (gaining a factor 3 in both axes) But, the emittance did not show significant improvement – The reason might be that with such a long bunch, the wakefield- induced emittance growth is larger than the dispersive one – more studies / simulations are needed Wake-Free Steering? 18

Wake-Free Steering (WFS) Measure the system response to a change in the bunch charge, and use the correctors to minimize it Preliminary simulation result: 19