P.-R Kettle MEG Review July 2005 1 Beam Transport & Target Systems BTS Success Novosibirsk 24/5/2005 18:15 300 A 300 A.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Panda Solenoid Timelines. General Layout constraints and HOLD POINTS.
Advertisements

1 MICE Beamline: Plans for initial commissioning. Kevin Tilley, 16 th November. - 75days until commissioning Target, detectors, particle production Upstream.
EMMA Magnet Design Ben Shepherd Magnetics and Radiation Sources Group ASTeC STFC Daresbury Laboratory.
P.-R. KettleMEG-Review February MEG Beam Line Studies  E5 Z-Branch NOW !!! NOW !!!
P.-R. KettleMEG Review July MEG Beam Line Studies.
P.-R Kettle MEG Review February Beam Line & Target Status Topics to be Addressed: Results of Beam Line Commissioning Phase Results of Beam.
1 G4MICE studies of PID transverse acceptance MICE video conference Rikard Sandström.
F.Brinker, DESY, July 17 st 2008 Injection to Doris and Petra Fitting the detector in the IP-region Radiation issues Beam optic, Target cell Polarisation.
experimental platform
Bogdan Wojtsekhowski, Jefferson Lab Experimental search for A’ for APEX collaboration 1.
ZQNA Electrostatic Quadrupoles for ELENA Transfer Lines 1.Conceptual design 2.Performance 3.Engineering details 4.Interfaces 5.Production planning D. Barna,
RF background, analysis of MTA data & implications for MICE Rikard Sandström, Geneva University MICE Collaboration Meeting – Analysis session, October.
Solenoid-Based Focusing Lens for a Superconducting RF Proton Linac Presentation prepared for AEM 11/08/20101I. Terechkine.
1 Cryostat assembly, integration and commissioning procedures M.Olcese Version: 07 May 2008.
PAIR SPECTROMETER DEVELOPMENT IN HALL D PAWEL AMBROZEWICZ NC A&T OUTLINE : PS Goals PS Goals PrimEx Experience PrimEx Experience Design Details Design.
G.N. Kulipanov, N.A.Mezentsev, A.V. Philipchenko, K.V. Zolotarev
Malte HildebrandtMEG Review Meeting, 14th February 2007 Report of Run Coordinator Run 2006 Summary Malte Hildebrandt MEG Review Meeting, 14th February.
HPS Test Run Setup Takashi Maruyama SLAC Heavy Photon Search Collaboration Meeting Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, May 26-27,
MICE: overview K. Long, 18 March, Contents ► Introduction ► Beam line ► Infrastructure ► MICE steps ► Phase II (comment) ► Conclusions.
MQXF Cold-mass Assembly and Cryostating H. Prin, D. Duarte Ramos, P. Ferracin, P. Fessia 4 th Joint HiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting November 17-21, 2014.
Peter-Raymond Kettle MEG Review February MEG Commissioning & Engineering Run 2007.
SHMS Optics and Background Studies Tanja Horn Hall C Summer Meeting 5 August 2008.
Feb 10, 2005 S. Kahn -- Pid Detectors in G4MicePage 1 Pid Detector Implementation in G4Mice Steve Kahn Brookhaven National Lab 10 Feb 2005.
Results from Step I of MICE D Adey 2013 International Workshop on Neutrino Factories, Super-beams and Beta- beams Working Group 3 – Accelerator Topics.
1 W.Ootani ICEPP, University of Tokyo MEG experiment review meeting Feb , PSI W.Ootani ICEPP, University of Tokyo MEG experiment review meeting.
HPS Collaboration Meeting JLAB, May Tracker Design Status M.Oriunno, SLAC.
1 Fulvio TESSAROTTO the new RICH beam pipe the new RICH beam pipe - pipe production, gluing and tests - measurement and removal of the old pipe - fixation.
FAST KICKER STATUS Fabio Marcellini On behalf of LNF fast kickers study group* * D. Alesini, F. Marcellini P. Raimondi, S. Guiducci.
PSI July 2002MuEGamma Review Meeting1 Beam Line Status update 1.  E5 Test Beam Overview : Aims + RequirementsAims + Requirements Zone Layout + Measurement.
February 13, 2012 Mu2e Production Solenoid Design V.V. Kashikhin Workshop on Radiation Effects in Superconducting Magnet Materials (RESMM'12)
Spectrometer Solenoid Fabrication Status and Schedule Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab MICE RAL October 20, 2008.
Peter-Raymond Kettle Tokyo - Topical Meeting, March Beam Monitoring Basis for Discussion only Beam Rate Beam Rate Beam Profile Beam Profile Beam.
Update on CHANTI F. Ambrosino, T. Capussela, D. Di Filippo, P. Massarotti, M. Napolitano, L. Roscilli, G. Saracino Università degli Studi di Napoli «Federico.
The Stripping Foil Test Stand in the Linac4 Transfer Line
Status of and Installation Plan for DC Gas Control System and Target Work Scheduling Meeting 4 August 2006 PSI W. Molzon, Feng Xiao.
SksMinus status Hyperball collaboration meeting 2009/3/11 K. Shirotori.
Study Plan of Clearing Electrode at KEKB Y. Suetsugu, H. Fukuma (KEK), M. Pivi, W. Lanfa (SLAC) 2007/12/191 ILC DR Mini Work Shop (KEK) Dec.
RSVP AGS Upgrade Projects MECO RSVP Preliminary Baseline Review Brookhaven National Lab April 6-8, 2005 D. Phillips.
7 November 2003 Status of CNGS NBI presented by K. Elsener 1 Status of CNGS Konrad Elsener CERN – Accelerators+Beams Division.
Peter-Raymond Kettle MEG Review February BeamBeam LineLine StatusStatus.
UK Neutrino Factory Meeting Front End Test Stand (F.E.T.S.) Engineering Status by P. Savage 22nd April 2009.
Magnetized hadronic calorimeter and muon veto for the K +   +  experiment L. DiLella, May 25, 2004 Purpose:  Provide pion – muon separation (muon veto)
RSVP AGS Upgrade Projects MECO RSVP Preliminary Baseline Review Brookhaven National Lab April 6-8, 2005 D. Phillips.
P.-R. KettleMEG Review January MEG – Beam Line Studies Present Status & Overview since July 2002.
 A model of beam line built with G4Beamline (scripting tool for GEANT4)  Simulated performance downstream of the AC Dipole for core of beam using  x.
Plan for test station Marta Bajko For the Technical Review of FReSCa2 June 2015 Saclay Paris.
Cryostat & LHC Tunnel Slava Yakovlev on behalf of the FNAL team: Nikolay Solyak, Tom Peterson, Ivan Gonin, and Timergali Khabibouline The 6 th LHC-CC webex.
Electron Spectrometer: Status July 14 Simon Jolly, Lawrence Deacon 1 st July 2014.
Mike Struik / LHC-CRI INSTRUMENTATION FEEDTHROUGH SYSTEM FOR LHC MACHINE ARC QUADRUPOLE MAGNETS. 123rd LHC Vacuum Design Meeting 19 April 1999.
P.-R. KettleMEG-Review July MEG Beam Line Studies  E5 Z-Branch Collaborative Effort !!! Effort !!!  E5 Z-Branch Collaborative Effort !!! Effort.
A. Baldini PSI July 05 Overview of the experiment MEG is being built (Beam line, Magnet, LXe, DC, TC, Elect., Software) Delays in some items: O(months)
OsC mtg 15/10/2014 MICE Step IV Alan Grant. Content Step IV – Construction Status – Finances – Schedule – Risks – Summary 2.
L. Sermeus TE-ABT-FPSELENA IIC meeting 3 th April Review of ELENA Injection kicker Luc Sermeus on behalf of WP 2.8 (with informations from EN-MME)
Muons, Inc. Feb Yonehara-AAC AAC Meeting Design of the MANX experiment Katsuya Yonehara Fermilab APC February 4, 2009.
CHATS-AS 2011clam1 Integrated analysis of quench propagation in a system of magnetically coupled solenoids CHATS-AS 2011 Claudio Marinucci, Luca Bottura,
Operation Status of the RF Systems and Taiwan Photon Source
MICE Spectrometer Solenoids Step IV running
Teleconf ACS – FREIA 28th March 2017
CBM magnet overview of the BINP work
An active target for MEG2, a status report
Final doublet: future activity plan
CLAS12 Beamline Configurations
Design of the MANX experiment
The 11T cryo-assembly: summary of design and integration aspects
Challenges for FCC-ee MDI mechanical design
Preparation of the CLAS12 First Experiment Status and Time-Line
Advanced Research Electron Accelerator Laboratory
November 7, 2008 The meeting on RIKEN AVF Cyclotron Upgrade Progress report on activity plan Sergey Vorozhtsov.
as a prototype for Super c-tau factory
IR Beam Transport Status
Presentation transcript:

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Beam Transport & Target Systems BTS Success Novosibirsk 24/5/ : A 300 A

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Beam Line & Target Status Topics to be Addressed: Beam Transport System (i) Degrader / BTS optimization (ii) Layout - fixed Beam Line Components Status * (i) Separator- undergoing HV-conditioning * (ii) Beam Transport Solenoid BTS – being commissioned  E5 (iii) Vacuum System (beam line + BTS)- being assembled (iii) Cryogenic Transfer Lines LN 2 LHe – installed He-Bag & Target Systems Schedule 2005 Summary + Critical Points Topics to be Addressed: Beam Transport System (i) Degrader / BTS optimization (ii) Layout - fixed Beam Line Components Status * (i) Separator- undergoing HV-conditioning * (ii) Beam Transport Solenoid BTS – being commissioned  E5 (iii) Vacuum System (beam line + BTS)- being assembled (iii) Cryogenic Transfer Lines LN 2 LHe – installed He-Bag & Target Systems Schedule 2005 Summary + Critical Points

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Beam Transport System Status Status Beam Transport System Status Status

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Beam Transport System As previously reported Beam Line Commissioning 2004 concluded with phase space measurements In vacuum up to the INJECTION into the BTS (without BTS !!!) (without BTS !!!) As previously reported Beam Line Commissioning 2004 concluded with phase space measurements In vacuum up to the INJECTION into the BTS (without BTS !!!) (without BTS !!!) Using real data  SIMULATE Phase Space & Back-Track to Triplet II  Forward-Track with Fringe Field of BTS + COBRA up to Target in COBRA  Forward-Track with Fringe Field of BTS + COBRA up to Target in COBRA using GEANT using GEANT Input Data to GEANT to study Degrader/Target + BTS/COBRA layout Input Data to GEANT to study Degrader/Target + BTS/COBRA layout “waist”

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Degrader + BTS/COBRA Optimization Studied: 1. BTS/COBRA Distance vs. Degrader segmentation & Bfield (Cryo.-Cryo. Gap): minimum (200 mm), intermediate(300 mm), maximum(400 mm) (Cryo.-Cryo. Gap): minimum (200 mm), intermediate(300 mm), maximum(400 mm) 2. BTS/COBRA Polarity (+/+), (-/+) radial de-focussing/focussing Studied: 1. BTS/COBRA Distance vs. Degrader segmentation & Bfield (Cryo.-Cryo. Gap): minimum (200 mm), intermediate(300 mm), maximum(400 mm) (Cryo.-Cryo. Gap): minimum (200 mm), intermediate(300 mm), maximum(400 mm) 2. BTS/COBRA Polarity (+/+), (-/+) radial de-focussing/focussing Max. B+ve Max. B-ve Weak Gap dependence (4%) Weak Gap dependence (4%) strong polarity dependence strong polarity dependence (15%) (15%) Weak Gap dependence (4%) Weak Gap dependence (4%) strong polarity dependence strong polarity dependence (15%) (15%) strong degrader segmentation strong degrader segmentation dependence (25%) dependence (25%) strong degrader segmentation strong degrader segmentation dependence (25%) dependence (25%) Gap 400 mm Gap 400 mm -/+ Polarity -/+ Polarity Degrader BTS Degrader BTS Gap 

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Beam Transport System Layout SepSep Trip I Trip II ASCASC BTSBTS COBRACOBRA XX YY Distances Fixed: Platform + COBRA surveyed into Zone surveyed into Zone Distances Fixed: Platform + COBRA surveyed into Zone surveyed into Zone

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Beam Line Component Status Status Beam Line Component Status Status

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Component Status: Separator BeamUpstreamSide 2371 mm Properties V max 200kV D plates 19cm L eff 70cm Properties V max 200kV D plates 19cm L eff 70cm MEG Vertical Separator MEG Vertical Separator Delayed by ~ 8 weeks: due to HV feed-through problems – now solved due to HV feed-through problems – now solved HV (+ve) supply changed to (–ve) one - technical HV (+ve) supply changed to (–ve) one - technical HV-electrode on top, want e + deflected down HV-electrode on top, want e + deflected down !!! HV Conditioning Tests in front of  E5 !!! expected ready for beam time expected ready for beam time MEG Vertical Separator MEG Vertical Separator Delayed by ~ 8 weeks: due to HV feed-through problems – now solved due to HV feed-through problems – now solved HV (+ve) supply changed to (–ve) one - technical HV (+ve) supply changed to (–ve) one - technical HV-electrode on top, want e + deflected down HV-electrode on top, want e + deflected down !!! HV Conditioning Tests in front of  E5 !!! expected ready for beam time expected ready for beam time April 2005 May 2005 June 2005

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Component Status BTS Beam Transport Solenoid BTS Beam Transport Solenoid BTS Schedule delayed by ~ 7 weeks: 5 weeks delay during manufacture 5 weeks delay during manufacture 2 weeks transportation (papers stolen at Russian border) 2 weeks transportation (papers stolen at Russian border) nevertheless nevertheless !!! Novosibirsk Crew did a “Very Good Job” !!! !!! Novosibirsk Crew did a “Very Good Job” !!! BTS arrived PSI 8th July BTS arrived PSI 8th July Beam Transport Solenoid BTS Beam Transport Solenoid BTS Schedule delayed by ~ 7 weeks: 5 weeks delay during manufacture 5 weeks delay during manufacture 2 weeks transportation (papers stolen at Russian border) 2 weeks transportation (papers stolen at Russian border) nevertheless nevertheless !!! Novosibirsk Crew did a “Very Good Job” !!! !!! Novosibirsk Crew did a “Very Good Job” !!! BTS arrived PSI 8th July BTS arrived PSI 8th July Coil Manufacture - epoxying End March 2005 End May 2005 Performance Tests – Novosibirsk Novosibirsk Crew

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July BTS Performance Tests - Novosibirsk Performance Tests Performance Tests BINP Novosibirsk th May 2005 BINP Novosibirsk th May 2005Tested: maximum Design Current (300 A) maximum Design Current (300 A) Quench Detection / Protection Systems Quench Detection / Protection Systems (fast switch 30 ms  Shunt Resistor 90% power load) (fast switch 30 ms  Shunt Resistor 90% power load) Linearity Response (max. dev. ~ 0.4%) Linearity Response (max. dev. ~ 0.4%) LHe Consumption Rate (3.6 l/hr) LHe Consumption Rate (3.6 l/hr) Magnetic Field Measurements Magnetic Field Measurements Performance Tests Performance Tests BINP Novosibirsk th May 2005 BINP Novosibirsk th May 2005Tested: maximum Design Current (300 A) maximum Design Current (300 A) Quench Detection / Protection Systems Quench Detection / Protection Systems (fast switch 30 ms  Shunt Resistor 90% power load) (fast switch 30 ms  Shunt Resistor 90% power load) Linearity Response (max. dev. ~ 0.4%) Linearity Response (max. dev. ~ 0.4%) LHe Consumption Rate (3.6 l/hr) LHe Consumption Rate (3.6 l/hr) Magnetic Field Measurements Magnetic Field Measurements Flexible Cryogenic Design via: dedicated transfer lines (PSI) dedicated transfer lines (PSI) dewar operation (BINP) dewar operation (BINP) both (emergency) both (emergency) Flexible Cryogenic Design via: dedicated transfer lines (PSI) dedicated transfer lines (PSI) dewar operation (BINP) dewar operation (BINP) both (emergency) both (emergency) 0.7  Shunt Resistor All measurements & tests successful tests successful except except Bfield measurements which were influenced by by steel support structure All measurements & tests successful tests successful except except Bfield measurements which were influenced by by steel support structure

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Results BTS Performance Tests - Novosibirsk Main Specifications L Cryo 2810 mm D Bore 380 mm D Coil / mm D Coil / mm L Coil 2630 mm B Max <0.55 T B Max <0.55 T I max 300 amps L Max 0.98 H E Stored 44 kJ Main Specifications L Cryo 2810 mm D Bore 380 mm D Coil / mm D Coil / mm L Coil 2630 mm B Max <0.55 T B Max <0.55 T I max 300 amps L Max 0.98 H E Stored 44 kJ Coils: double layer double layer cable dia mm cable dia mm 1865 / 1980 windings 1865 / 1980 windings 40% NiTi 40% NiTi RRR ~ 100 RRR ~ 100Coils: double layer double layer cable dia mm cable dia mm 1865 / 1980 windings 1865 / 1980 windings 40% NiTi 40% NiTi RRR ~ 100 RRR ~ 100 Linearity (B vs. I) better 0.4% up to 300 A B TOT deviates from expected due to Steel support structure !!! Needs to be re-measured at PSI !!! “Acceptance Tests” “Acceptance Tests” B TOT deviates from expected due to Steel support structure !!! Needs to be re-measured at PSI !!! “Acceptance Tests” “Acceptance Tests”

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July BTS Preparations PSI Preparations for BTS Installation in  E5 Preparations for BTS Installation in  E5 cryogenic lines for LHe & LN 2 ready for connection cryogenic lines for LHe & LN 2 ready for connection valve chamber ready for mounting on BTS valve chamber ready for mounting on BTS power supply tested & ready power supply tested & ready Preparations for BTS Installation in  E5 Preparations for BTS Installation in  E5 cryogenic lines for LHe & LN 2 ready for connection cryogenic lines for LHe & LN 2 ready for connection valve chamber ready for mounting on BTS valve chamber ready for mounting on BTS power supply tested & ready power supply tested & ready Valve Chamber Couples BTS to LHe transfer Line contains containsJoule-Thompson Valves for control Valve Chamber Couples BTS to LHe transfer Line contains containsJoule-Thompson Valves for control LHe Transfer Line Refrigerator unit Above  E5 LHe Transfer Line LHe line

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July BTS arrival PSI BTS arrival PSI BTS arrival PSI *** 8th July *** *** 8th July *** Acceptance Tests Acceptance Tests assembly / survey assembly / survey vacuum / leak tests  vacuum / leak tests  cryogenic installation  cryogenic installation  electrical installation electrical installation cool-down cool-down quench detection / quench detection / protection tests protection tests Bfield measurements Bfield measurements BTS arrival PSI BTS arrival PSI *** 8th July *** *** 8th July *** Acceptance Tests Acceptance Tests assembly / survey assembly / survey vacuum / leak tests  vacuum / leak tests  cryogenic installation  cryogenic installation  electrical installation electrical installation cool-down cool-down quench detection / quench detection / protection tests protection tests Bfield measurements Bfield measurements “ On route PSI” “ On route PSI” ~ 6500 km ~ 6500 km Novosibirsk - PSI “ On route  E5” “ On route  E5” 8th July th July 2005  E5  E5 14th July 2005  E5  E5 !!! Problems !!! !!! Problems !!! welding joint tower / cryostat welding joint tower / cryostat damaged in transport damaged in transport  Re-welded OK  Re-welded OK cryogenic connection valve- cryogenic connection valve- chamber / LHe transfer line chamber / LHe transfer line not compatible  To workshops  To workshops Use dewar system LHe Use dewar system LHe !!! Problems !!! !!! Problems !!! welding joint tower / cryostat welding joint tower / cryostat damaged in transport damaged in transport  Re-welded OK  Re-welded OK cryogenic connection valve- cryogenic connection valve- chamber / LHe transfer line chamber / LHe transfer line not compatible  To workshops  To workshops Use dewar system LHe Use dewar system LHe LN 2 Valve Valvechamber *** Dmitry Reports: 18th July 11:00 coil superconducting 20:00 *** 283A reached *** (nominal ~ 200A ) (nominal ~ 200A ) *** Dmitry Reports: 18th July 11:00 coil superconducting 20:00 *** 283A reached *** (nominal ~ 200A ) (nominal ~ 200A )

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July He-Bag & Target System Status Status He-Bag & Target System Status Status

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July He-Bag / Target System - General (I) Desired Beam Characteristics (I) Desired Beam Characteristics transport maximum number µ + to the target (vacuum / He, large ΔP) transport maximum number µ + to the target (vacuum / He, large ΔP) maximize µ + stopping-rate in the target (small ΔP, vacuum /He) maximize µ + stopping-rate in the target (small ΔP, vacuum /He) minimize beam spot size & multiple scattering (vacuum / He, degrader close to target) minimize beam spot size & multiple scattering (vacuum / He, degrader close to target) minimize background from decays or Bremsstrahlung (degrader far from away, vacuum / He) minimize background from decays or Bremsstrahlung (degrader far from away, vacuum / He) (II) Desired Target Requirements (II) Desired Target Requirements depolarizing target (isotropic e +, non-metal) depolarizing target (isotropic e +, non-metal) minimum target size (low-Z) minimum target size (low-Z) minimize material traversed by decay e + &  (slanted target) minimize material traversed by decay e + &  (slanted target) minimize generation of annihilation photons (large X 0, low-Z e.g. CH2) minimize generation of annihilation photons (large X 0, low-Z e.g. CH2) (I) Desired Beam Characteristics (I) Desired Beam Characteristics transport maximum number µ + to the target (vacuum / He, large ΔP) transport maximum number µ + to the target (vacuum / He, large ΔP) maximize µ + stopping-rate in the target (small ΔP, vacuum /He) maximize µ + stopping-rate in the target (small ΔP, vacuum /He) minimize beam spot size & multiple scattering (vacuum / He, degrader close to target) minimize beam spot size & multiple scattering (vacuum / He, degrader close to target) minimize background from decays or Bremsstrahlung (degrader far from away, vacuum / He) minimize background from decays or Bremsstrahlung (degrader far from away, vacuum / He) (II) Desired Target Requirements (II) Desired Target Requirements depolarizing target (isotropic e +, non-metal) depolarizing target (isotropic e +, non-metal) minimum target size (low-Z) minimum target size (low-Z) minimize material traversed by decay e + &  (slanted target) minimize material traversed by decay e + &  (slanted target) minimize generation of annihilation photons (large X 0, low-Z e.g. CH2) minimize generation of annihilation photons (large X 0, low-Z e.g. CH2)   Consequences: Consequences: vacuum window interface to COBRA vacuum window interface to COBRA He-atmosphere inside COBRA He-atmosphere inside COBRA slanted, non-metallic, low-Z, large X 0 target slanted, non-metallic, low-Z, large X 0 target Consequences: Consequences: vacuum window interface to COBRA vacuum window interface to COBRA He-atmosphere inside COBRA He-atmosphere inside COBRA slanted, non-metallic, low-Z, large X 0 target slanted, non-metallic, low-Z, large X 0 target  

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July COBRA-EnvironmentCOBRA-Environment (III) COBRA Environment Requirements (III) COBRA Environment Requirements thin vacuum window at entrance COBRA (190µ Mylar) thin vacuum window at entrance COBRA (190µ Mylar) safety measures against vacuum window rupture (safety seals !!!) safety measures against vacuum window rupture (safety seals !!!) must maintain DC & TC dimensions & insertion concepts must maintain DC & TC dimensions & insertion concepts stringent constant differential He-pressure between DCs & COBRA (~few µb) stringent constant differential He-pressure between DCs & COBRA (~few µb) no He-leakage to TC PMs (N 2 -Bag) no He-leakage to TC PMs (N 2 -Bag) frequent / less frequent access to Downstream side for calibration frequent / less frequent access to Downstream side for calibration & monitoring purposes ( e.g. Cockroft-Walton,  - CEX) & monitoring purposes ( e.g. Cockroft-Walton,  - CEX) possibility to exchange targets ( LiF, LH 2, CH 2 etc.) possibility to exchange targets ( LiF, LH 2, CH 2 etc.) (III) COBRA Environment Requirements (III) COBRA Environment Requirements thin vacuum window at entrance COBRA (190µ Mylar) thin vacuum window at entrance COBRA (190µ Mylar) safety measures against vacuum window rupture (safety seals !!!) safety measures against vacuum window rupture (safety seals !!!) must maintain DC & TC dimensions & insertion concepts must maintain DC & TC dimensions & insertion concepts stringent constant differential He-pressure between DCs & COBRA (~few µb) stringent constant differential He-pressure between DCs & COBRA (~few µb) no He-leakage to TC PMs (N 2 -Bag) no He-leakage to TC PMs (N 2 -Bag) frequent / less frequent access to Downstream side for calibration frequent / less frequent access to Downstream side for calibration & monitoring purposes ( e.g. Cockroft-Walton,  - CEX) & monitoring purposes ( e.g. Cockroft-Walton,  - CEX) possibility to exchange targets ( LiF, LH 2, CH 2 etc.) possibility to exchange targets ( LiF, LH 2, CH 2 etc.) COBRA Target System Target Insertion tube tube EndCapUSEndCapDSVacuumwindow Consequences Consequences 1.Thin beam line Vacuum Window 2.COBRA End-Cap Flanges + HE-seals (US,DS) 3.Target Insertion Tube & support system (separate He-environment) (TISS) system (separate He-environment) (TISS) 4.Target System (TS)  *** PSI staged Engineering Design Project *** PSI staged Engineering Design Project started – design & construction *** started – design & construction *** (i)US-flange, (ii) DS-flange, (iii) TISS, (iv) TS (i)US-flange, (ii) DS-flange, (iii) TISS, (iv) TS – design & Construction ready – Feb – design & Construction ready – Feb Consequences Consequences 1.Thin beam line Vacuum Window 2.COBRA End-Cap Flanges + HE-seals (US,DS) 3.Target Insertion Tube & support system (separate He-environment) (TISS) system (separate He-environment) (TISS) 4.Target System (TS)  *** PSI staged Engineering Design Project *** PSI staged Engineering Design Project started – design & construction *** started – design & construction *** (i)US-flange, (ii) DS-flange, (iii) TISS, (iv) TS (i)US-flange, (ii) DS-flange, (iii) TISS, (iv) TS – design & Construction ready – Feb – design & Construction ready – Feb. 2006

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July End-Cap Flanges & He-Bag seals COBRAcryostat US US End-Cap End-Cap Flange Flange N 2 -Bag Beam pipe pipe Engineering Design Concept Upstream End-Cap BeamCOBRA Design Design Allows open access to TCs + withdrawal withdrawal without affecting He-environment Mounting Mounting 1.N 2 -Bag 2.TC-rails 3.End-Cap + He-Bag He-Bag 4.TCs 5.Beam pipe with BTS with BTS 6.Couple He- Bag rings to Bag rings to vac. window vac. window Design Design Allows open access to TCs + withdrawal withdrawal without affecting He-environment Mounting Mounting 1.N 2 -Bag 2.TC-rails 3.End-Cap + He-Bag He-Bag 4.TCs 5.Beam pipe with BTS with BTS 6.Couple He- Bag rings to Bag rings to vac. window vac. window He-Bag He-Bagcomposition Sandwich Sandwich CH 2 /EVAL/CH 2 He-Bag He-Bagcomposition Sandwich Sandwich CH 2 /EVAL/CH 2 Insertion TCs TCsHe-BagRupture Seals Seals He-Baginnersealingrings

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Target Optics - momentum Goal: maximize stop-density (min. target size) Question: optimum beam momentum? Answer: 28.2 MeV/c Goal: maximize stop-density (min. target size) Question: optimum beam momentum? Answer: 28.2 MeV/c Momentum-Spectrum: Momentum-Spectrum:Data: whole Beam Line optimized for each data point + 2-D Scan for each point !!! Theory:  -Kinematic Edge (29.79 MeV/c)  -Kinematic Edge (29.79 MeV/c) Theoretical func. P 3.5 folded with Gaussian ΔP/P + Const. Cloud µ + contribution  Fitted to data  2 /dof = 0.94 P cent = (28.16  0.02) MeV/c  P/P = (7.7  0.3) % FWHM P beam = (28.2  0.9) MeV/c  2 /dof = 0.94 P cent = (28.16  0.02) MeV/c  P/P = (7.7  0.3) % FWHM P beam = (28.2  0.9) MeV/c  + range vs. P  + range vs. P (fixed  P/P~ 7.7% FWHM) straggling ~11 % straggling ~11 % characteristic P 3.5 characteristic P 3.5  + range vs. P  + range vs. P (fixed  P/P~ 7.7% FWHM) straggling ~11 % straggling ~11 % characteristic P 3.5 characteristic P 3.5  + Stopping Rate vs. P  + Stopping Rate vs. P (fixed  P/P~ 7.7% FWHM fixed 400  CH 2 target) as p > relative stop rate relative stop rate < as p > beam rate > as p > beam rate > Optimal Stop Rate Optimal Stop Rate at P~28.2 MeV/c at P~28.2 MeV/c  + Stopping Rate vs. P  + Stopping Rate vs. P (fixed  P/P~ 7.7% FWHM fixed 400  CH 2 target) as p > relative stop rate relative stop rate < as p > beam rate > as p > beam rate > Optimal Stop Rate Optimal Stop Rate at P~28.2 MeV/c at P~28.2 MeV/c straggling ~ 11% P 3.5 Rel.  stops P 3.5 Norm.  -stops Norm.

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Target Optics - degrader Many solutions studied – 2 main categories Single Node SNM SNM Double Node DNM DNM BTS DMNDMN  Beam envelope (cm)  Beam divergence (mrad ) Momentum Profile (MeV/c) BTS COBRA (1) DNM – Solution (190  Mylar Window) (190  Mylar Window) BTS / COBRA unlike BTS / COBRA unlike polarities polarities B BTS = kG B BTS = kG degrader 480  CH 2 at degrader 480  CH 2 at centre BTS centre BTS beam  ~ 12.5 mm beam  ~ 12.5 mm (1) DNM – Solution (190  Mylar Window) (190  Mylar Window) BTS / COBRA unlike BTS / COBRA unlike polarities polarities B BTS = kG B BTS = kG degrader 480  CH 2 at degrader 480  CH 2 at centre BTS centre BTS beam  ~ 12.5 mm beam  ~ 12.5 mm  P ~ 4.2 MeV/c  P ~ 2 MeV/c  P ~ 4.5 MeV/c Transmission Efficiency (%) Efficiency (%)Transmission T BTS ~ 98% T BTS+COBRA ~ 88% 3% decays 9% straggling TransmissionEfficiency T BTS+Deg = 98% T BTS+Deg = 98% T BTS+deg+COBRA = 88% T BTS+deg+COBRA = 88% T Sep+TII+Clli = 86.5% T Sep+TII+Clli = 86.5% Expected Stopping Rate R  = 9.6·10 7  + /s at 1.8mA 4cm Tg at 1.8mA 4cm Tg (1.7·10 8  + /s at 1.8mA 6cm Tg) BTS COBRA

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Target Optics – degrader cont. (2) SNM Solutions ( no degrader in BTS) (2) SNM Solutions ( no degrader in BTS) (125  Mylar Window) (125  Mylar Window) either combine Degrader + Target (asymmetric stop distribution) either combine Degrader + Target (asymmetric stop distribution) or move degrader slightly upstream of target (e.g. use as end-wall of target insertion tube) or move degrader slightly upstream of target (e.g. use as end-wall of target insertion tube) (2) SNM Solutions ( no degrader in BTS) (2) SNM Solutions ( no degrader in BTS) (125  Mylar Window) (125  Mylar Window) either combine Degrader + Target (asymmetric stop distribution) either combine Degrader + Target (asymmetric stop distribution) or move degrader slightly upstream of target (e.g. use as end-wall of target insertion tube) or move degrader slightly upstream of target (e.g. use as end-wall of target insertion tube)targettarget e+e+e+e+ beam degraderdegrader  e+e+e+e+ targettarget beam SNM SNM DNM DNM unlikepolarityunlikepolarity like polarity like polarity COBRA Spot size vs B BTS Combined Tg + Deg upstream Deg. 15 cm Conclusions SNM (no BTS degrader) Conclusions SNM (no BTS degrader) Combined Sol n : gives  ~ 10 mm for 125  Mylar Window Combined Sol n : gives  ~ 10 mm for 125  Mylar Window with 190  Mylar  ~ 11.5 mm with 190  Mylar  ~ 11.5 mm no straggling loss only 3% decay loss no straggling loss only 3% decay loss Expected Rate R  ~ 1.06·10 8  + /s at 1.8mA 4 cm Tg. Expected Rate R  ~ 1.06·10 8  + /s at 1.8mA 4 cm Tg. BUT annihilation radiation potential worse - needs to be simulated BUT annihilation radiation potential worse - needs to be simulated Upstream Sol n : gives similar results to DNM  ~ 12.5 mm Upstream Sol n : gives similar results to DNM  ~ 12.5 mm annihilation radiation potential worse - needs to be simulated annihilation radiation potential worse - needs to be simulated Conclusions SNM (no BTS degrader) Conclusions SNM (no BTS degrader) Combined Sol n : gives  ~ 10 mm for 125  Mylar Window Combined Sol n : gives  ~ 10 mm for 125  Mylar Window with 190  Mylar  ~ 11.5 mm with 190  Mylar  ~ 11.5 mm no straggling loss only 3% decay loss no straggling loss only 3% decay loss Expected Rate R  ~ 1.06·10 8  + /s at 1.8mA 4 cm Tg. Expected Rate R  ~ 1.06·10 8  + /s at 1.8mA 4 cm Tg. BUT annihilation radiation potential worse - needs to be simulated BUT annihilation radiation potential worse - needs to be simulated Upstream Sol n : gives similar results to DNM  ~ 12.5 mm Upstream Sol n : gives similar results to DNM  ~ 12.5 mm annihilation radiation potential worse - needs to be simulated annihilation radiation potential worse - needs to be simulated

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Target & Insertion Tube Target Geometry ( for beam  = 10mm) L PROJ = mm,  = 21.8 °, a = 60.3 mm, L TRUE = mm material: CH 2 + Rohacell / Mylar Slanted Target must be thicker – multiple scattering loss on downstream-side !!! Target Simulation underway: check of optimum angle  check of optimum angle  dependence on target thickness (multiple scattering, dependence on target thickness (multiple scattering, background, acceptance, timing, resolution) background, acceptance, timing, resolution) material considerations material considerations decay particle hit distributions on end-cap materials & decay particle hit distributions on end-cap materials & associated background acceptance associated background acceptance Target Geometry ( for beam  = 10mm) L PROJ = mm,  = 21.8 °, a = 60.3 mm, L TRUE = mm material: CH 2 + Rohacell / Mylar Slanted Target must be thicker – multiple scattering loss on downstream-side !!! Target Simulation underway: check of optimum angle  check of optimum angle  dependence on target thickness (multiple scattering, dependence on target thickness (multiple scattering, background, acceptance, timing, resolution) background, acceptance, timing, resolution) material considerations material considerations decay particle hit distributions on end-cap materials & decay particle hit distributions on end-cap materials & associated background acceptance associated background acceptance L PROJ L TRUE

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Target & Insertion Tube + survey Target Insertion Tube & Support System (TISS) Material: Rohacell (PMI) closed cell foam, maybe + EVAL foil? Rohacell (PMI) closed cell foam, maybe + EVAL foil? wall thickness probably 2 mm Rohacell 31 wall thickness probably 2 mm Rohacell 31 length ~ 1500 mm length ~ 1500 mm dia. ~150 mm dia. ~150 mm  Weight ~ 51 g  Weight ~ 51 g simulations concerning background from simulations concerning background from e + interactions in TISS underway e + interactions in TISS underway Target Insertion Tube & Support System (TISS) Material: Rohacell (PMI) closed cell foam, maybe + EVAL foil? Rohacell (PMI) closed cell foam, maybe + EVAL foil? wall thickness probably 2 mm Rohacell 31 wall thickness probably 2 mm Rohacell 31 length ~ 1500 mm length ~ 1500 mm dia. ~150 mm dia. ~150 mm  Weight ~ 51 g  Weight ~ 51 g simulations concerning background from simulations concerning background from e + interactions in TISS underway e + interactions in TISS underway Target Insertion Tube Flange lateral + verticalmove-ment Survey aspects: target plane determined outside wrt. survey markers target plane determined outside wrt. survey markers on rohacell support rings (laser tracker) on rohacell support rings (laser tracker) possible temporary thin cross-wires on support rings possible temporary thin cross-wires on support rings for axial + radial alignment (break afterwards) for axial + radial alignment (break afterwards) radial adjustment made with TISS end-flange radial adjustment made with TISS end-flange axial position set by TISS (self-positioning) axial position set by TISS (self-positioning) Survey aspects: target plane determined outside wrt. survey markers target plane determined outside wrt. survey markers on rohacell support rings (laser tracker) on rohacell support rings (laser tracker) possible temporary thin cross-wires on support rings possible temporary thin cross-wires on support rings for axial + radial alignment (break afterwards) for axial + radial alignment (break afterwards) radial adjustment made with TISS end-flange radial adjustment made with TISS end-flange axial position set by TISS (self-positioning) axial position set by TISS (self-positioning)  -target system

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Schedule 2005 Changes 2005: (compared to previous schedule) Changes 2005: (compared to previous schedule) Separator schedule + 8 weeks Separator schedule + 8 weeks BTS Schedule + 7 weeks BTS Schedule + 7 weeks COBRA end-cap + target design + manufacture extended COBRA end-cap + target design + manufacture extended Changes 2005: (compared to previous schedule) Changes 2005: (compared to previous schedule) Separator schedule + 8 weeks Separator schedule + 8 weeks BTS Schedule + 7 weeks BTS Schedule + 7 weeks COBRA end-cap + target design + manufacture extended COBRA end-cap + target design + manufacture extended Critical Path Critical Path Commissioning Part 1 too short for BTS/COBRA Commissioning Part 1 too short for BTS/COBRA phase space measurements  Dec. Part 2 final Target measurements  first beam 2006 final Target measurements  first beam 2006 Critical Path Critical Path Commissioning Part 1 too short for BTS/COBRA Commissioning Part 1 too short for BTS/COBRA phase space measurements  Dec. Part 2 final Target measurements  first beam 2006 final Target measurements  first beam 2006

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July Summary + Critical Path Summary: beam transport system up to COBRA defined beam transport system up to COBRA defined COBRA + Platform surveyed into position COBRA + Platform surveyed into position All beam transport elements now manufactured All beam transport elements now manufactured MEG Separator being conditioned MEG Separator being conditioned BTS successfully tested in Novosibirsk & delivered PSI (8th July) BTS successfully tested in Novosibirsk & delivered PSI (8th July) BTS reached current of 283A during commissioning at PSI (18th July) BTS reached current of 283A during commissioning at PSI (18th July) All cryogenic lines installed to zone All cryogenic lines installed to zone all vacuum system available all vacuum system available engineering project for COBRA end-caps + target Insertion & support system underway engineering project for COBRA end-caps + target Insertion & support system underway manufacture to be completed Feb manufacture to be completed Feb. 2006Summary: beam transport system up to COBRA defined beam transport system up to COBRA defined COBRA + Platform surveyed into position COBRA + Platform surveyed into position All beam transport elements now manufactured All beam transport elements now manufactured MEG Separator being conditioned MEG Separator being conditioned BTS successfully tested in Novosibirsk & delivered PSI (8th July) BTS successfully tested in Novosibirsk & delivered PSI (8th July) BTS reached current of 283A during commissioning at PSI (18th July) BTS reached current of 283A during commissioning at PSI (18th July) All cryogenic lines installed to zone All cryogenic lines installed to zone all vacuum system available all vacuum system available engineering project for COBRA end-caps + target Insertion & support system underway engineering project for COBRA end-caps + target Insertion & support system underway manufacture to be completed Feb manufacture to be completed Feb Critical Points: COBRA phase space measurement delayed until Dec (delays Separator + BTS) COBRA phase space measurement delayed until Dec (delays Separator + BTS) Final measurements with target delayed until first beam 2006 Final measurements with target delayed until first beam 2006 Critical Points: COBRA phase space measurement delayed until Dec (delays Separator + BTS) COBRA phase space measurement delayed until Dec (delays Separator + BTS) Final measurements with target delayed until first beam 2006 Final measurements with target delayed until first beam 2006

P.-R Kettle MEG Review July  -Beam Results (re-cap) First  - Beam Studies with MEG Beam: for calibration purposes in the experiment  - p→  0 n,  - p →  n 55 → 83 MeV  s and 129 MeV  s Data taken from: P-spectrum measurements MeV/c P-spectrum measurements MeV/c  s detected above 30 MeV/c (pulse-ht. + RF tof)  s detected above 30 MeV/c (pulse-ht. + RF tof) dedicated  - runs at 56 MeV/c & 103 MeV/c dedicated  - runs at 56 MeV/c & 103 MeV/c 56 MeV/c interesting since max. momentum 56 MeV/c interesting since max. momentum that can be transported to COBRA with that can be transported to COBRA with good optics SNM in BTS good optics SNM in BTS dedicated CEX run at 112 MeV/c dedicated CEX run at 112 MeV/c First  - Beam Studies with MEG Beam: for calibration purposes in the experiment  - p→  0 n,  - p →  n 55 → 83 MeV  s and 129 MeV  s Data taken from: P-spectrum measurements MeV/c P-spectrum measurements MeV/c  s detected above 30 MeV/c (pulse-ht. + RF tof)  s detected above 30 MeV/c (pulse-ht. + RF tof) dedicated  - runs at 56 MeV/c & 103 MeV/c dedicated  - runs at 56 MeV/c & 103 MeV/c 56 MeV/c interesting since max. momentum 56 MeV/c interesting since max. momentum that can be transported to COBRA with that can be transported to COBRA with good optics SNM in BTS good optics SNM in BTS dedicated CEX run at 112 MeV/c dedicated CEX run at 112 MeV/c Provisional Results Provisional Results  - Integral Spot Rates MHz  - Integral Spot Rates MHz for 1,8mA Proton Current & 4cm Target E Normalized to Momentum Slit Settings: FS41L/R 250/280 FS43L/R 240/220 FS41L/R 250/280 FS43L/R 240/ MeV/c R  = 7.6 ·10 6  - /s slits open R  = 7.2 ·10 5  - /s slits70/70 R  = 7.2 ·10 5  - /s slits70/70 56 MeV/c R  = 7.6 ·10 6  - /s slits open R  = 7.2 ·10 5  - /s slits70/70 R  = 7.2 ·10 5  - /s slits70/70 e-e-e-e- μ-μ-μ-μ- ----