Getting Beam to NuMI (It’s a worry!) Peter Kasper.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PIP and the Booster Notch Bob Zwaska October 12, 2011 PIP Meeting.
Advertisements

1 Proton Upgrades at Fermilab Robert Zwaska Fermilab March 12, 2007 Midwest Accelerator Physics Collaboration Meeting Indiana University Cyclotron Facility.
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.
Near Term* Plans for the Fermilab Proton Source Eric Prebys FNAL Accelerator Division *Near term = “prior to proton driver”
Re-commissioning the Recycler Storage Ring at Fermilab Martin Murphy, Fermilab Presented August 10, 2012 at SLAC National Laboratory for the Workshop on.
NOvA meeting PIP Update W. Pellico. PIP Goals and Scope (Provided in 2011 – Directorate S. H. / DOE Talk ) Goals: Specific to the issues surrounding the.
Paul Derwent 30 Nov 00 1 The Fermilab Accelerator Complex o Series of presentations  Overview of FNAL Accelerator Complex  Antiprotons: Stochastic Cooling.
Proton Plan PMG 3/22/07 E Prebys 1 Proton Plan Status February Eric Prebys.
A U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science Laboratory Operated by The University of Chicago Argonne National Laboratory Office of Science U.S. Department.
Storage Ring : Status, Issues and Plans C Johnstone, FNAL and G H Rees, RAL.
Proton Plans at Fermilab Robert Zwaska - Fermilab Science and Engineering at Henderson- DUSEL Capstone Workshop Stony Brook University May 5, 2006 Outline.
Commissioning of the Fermilab Accelerators for NuMI Operation Robert Zwaska University of Texas at Austin NBI 2003 November 7, 2003.
F MI High Power Operation and Future Plans Ioanis Kourbanis (presented by Bruce Brown) HB2008 August 25, 2008.
Antiproton Source Capabilities and Issues Keith Gollwitzer & Valeri Lebedev Accelerator Division Fermilab 1.
Run II DOE Review - Booster Eric Prebys Booster Group Leader FNAL Beams Division.
Proton Plan Director’s Review 8/15/06 Prebys 2006 Shutdown Eric Prebys, FNAL Accelerator Division.
Proton Driver: Status and Plans C.R. Prior ASTeC Intense Beams Group, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory.
AAC February 4-6, 2003 Protons on Target Ioanis Kourbanis MI/Beams.
F Project X Overview Dave McGinnis October 12, 2007.
Proton Planning Eric Prebys FNAL Accelerator Division.
EDM2001 Workshop May 14-15, 2001 AGS Intensity Upgrade (J.M. Brennan, I. Marneris, T. Roser, A.G. Ruggiero, D. Trbojevic, N. Tsoupas, S.Y. Zhang) Proton.
J-PARC Accelerators Masahito Tomizawa KEK Acc. Lab. Outline, Status, Schedule of J-PARC accelerator MR Beam Power Upgrade.
Proton Study Meeting 4/19/05 Eric Prebys 1 Proton Plan Stage I Eric Prebys.
Recent RF Development at Fermilab Weiren Chou and Akira Takagi Fermilab, U.S.A. July 7, 2003 Presentation to the FFAG03 Workshop July 7-12, 2003, KEK.
F 1 MW Proton Beam for Neutrinos Dave McGinnis AAC Meeting May 10, 2006.
F Proton Plan Eric Prebys, FNAL Accelerator Division.
Diagnostics in the Fermilab Proton Source (Linac + Booster) Eric Prebys FNAL Beams Division.
AEM – Special Report Linac Current Stability and Modulation June 25, 2007 Presented by: Doug Moehs Philippians 4:6-7 (Doug) Do not be anxious about anything,
Booster Issues for NuMI Eric Prebys FNAL Beams Division.
Overview of Booster PIP II upgrades and plans C.Y. Tan for Proton Source group PIP II Collaboration Meeting 03 June 2014.
Accelerator Issues Fermilab Antiproton Experiment Keith Gollwitzer Antiproton Source Department Accelerator Division Fermilab.
Proton Plan PMG 7/7/05 E Prebys 1 Proton Plan Status June Report Eric Prebys.
WG2 (Proton FFAG) Summary G.H. Rees. Proton Driver Working Group  Participants: M. Yashimoto, S. Ohnuma, C.R. Prior, G.H. Rees, A.G. Ruggiero  Topics:
Getting the Booster to 2010 Eric Prebys December 20, 2002 Outine Longevity Issues Non-radiation related Radiation related Personnel Performance Issues.
Fermilab and Muons Proton Driver (for ν-Factory, μ + -μ - Collider, …) David Neuffer Fermilab.
What’s Up in the Booster Eric Prebys February 27, 2002 and March 6, 2003.
Doug Michael Sep. 16, GeV protons 1.9 second cycle time 4x10 13 protons/pulse 0.4 MW! Single turn extraction (10  s) 4x10 20 protons/year 700.
Proton Plan Expectations Eric Prebys AD/Proton Source.
Proton Source Improvement Workshop Cogging W. Pellico Dec 6&
Proton Plan PMG 2/22/07 E Prebys 1 Proton Plan Status January Eric Prebys.
The Introduction to CSNS Accelerators Oct. 5, 2010 Sheng Wang AP group, Accelerator Centre,IHEP, CAS.
Status of the Accelerator Complex Keith Gollwitzer Antiproton Source Accelerator Division Fermilab 2009 Fermilab Users’ Meeting.
High Intensity Booster Operations William Pellico PIP II collaboration Nov. 9 th 2015.
Users' Mtg - 4 Jun 08 FNAL Accelerator Complex Status Ron Moore Fermilab – AD / Tevatron Dept.
SNuMI: WBS 1.1 Booster Upgrades Eric Prebys $642K FY06$ (no contingency, no G&A) xx% contingency Main Injector & Recycler BNB NuMI Tunnel Booster Ring.
F A Fermilab Roadmap Dave McGinnis May 28, f Fermilab Roadmap - McGinnis Timelines  Divide the road map into three parallel paths  ILC - Energy.
Proton Planning Eric Prebys FNAL Accelerator Division.
Proton Plan PMG 10/13/05 E Prebys 1 Proton Plan Status September Report Eric Prebys.
Setting BLM Limits in the Booster The Booster is now delivering all the protons needed by the collider program, and about 40% of the protons needed by.
The Proton Source (mostly Booster) in the “Collider Era” Eric Prebys February 3, 2003.
Early Beam Injection Scheme for the Fermilab Booster: A Path for Intensity Upgrade Chandra Bhat Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory DPF2015, ANN ARBOR,
Proton Plan Director’s Review 8/15/06 Prebys Proton Plan Answers to Questions Director’s Review August 2006 Eric Prebys.
F Possible Proton Capabilities at Fermilab Dave McGinnis April 16, 2007.
Beam time structures 1 At any particular instance of time there will be only one kind of beam in the MI. It will be either protons or anti-protons. The.
F Proton Plan Eric Prebys, FNAL Accelerator Division.
NuFACT06 Muon Source at Fermilab David Neuffer Fermilab.
Toward a Proton Plan Eric Prebys Fermilab Accelerator Division.
LER Workshop, Oct 11, 2006Intensity Increase in the LER – T. Sen1 LHC Accelerator Research Program bnl-fnal-lbnl-slac  Motivation  Slip stacking in the.
PAC Meeting, December 12, Prebys 1 The Problem.
Limitations to Total Booster Flux Total protons per batch: 4E12 with decent beam loss, 5E12 max. Average rep rate of the machine: –Injection bump magnets.
F Project X: Recycler 8.9 GeV/c Extraction D. Johnson, E. Prebys, M. Martens, J. Johnstone Fermilab Accelerator Advisory Committee August 8, 2007 D. Johnson.
HP-PS beam acceleration and machine circumference A.LachaizeLAGUNA-LBNO General meeting Paris 18/09/13 On behalf of HP-PS design team.
Neutrino Factory by Zunbeltz, Davide, Margarita, Wolfgang IDS proposal.
Maximum Credible Beam Loss in the Main Injector D. Capista January 26, 2012.
FFAG Studies at BNL Alessandro G. Ruggiero Brookhaven National Laboratory FFAG’06 - KURRI, Osaka, Japan - November 6-10, 2006.
Proton Economics Eric Prebys FNAL Accelerator Division.
Acknowledgments: LIU-PT members and deputies, H. Bartosik
CNGS Primary Beam Results 2010
JLEIC ion fullsize booster (2256m) space charge limit (Δν=0
Updated MEIC Ion Beam Formation Scheme
Presentation transcript:

Getting Beam to NuMI (It’s a worry!) Peter Kasper

The Fermilab Accelerator Components Preaccelerator êH- ions from 0 to 750 keV Linac êH- ions from 0.75 to 400 MeV Booster ( m circumference ) êProtons from 0.4 to 8 GeV êLinac beam is injected over multiple Booster turns êMagnets pulse resonantly at 15 Hz Main Injector ( 7 x m circumference ) êProtons from 8 to 120 GeV êCan be loaded with up to 6 Booster batches

Booster Injection System ORBMP magnets P+P+ Booster êBooster intensity given by Linac current (50-55 mA), number of turns, and “acceleration efficiency”. êTypically turns of e11 p/turn êLimit is determined by beam loss which is not linear w.r.t. number of turns H-H- Foil P+P+ P+P+ P+P+ Ring magnet

Typical Injection System MI circumference is 7  Booster circumference MI intensity is determined by Booster Intensity Can fit only 6 Booster batches since a gap is needed to allow time for the injection kicker’s field to dissipate. êSlip stacking gets round this limitation P+P+ P+P+ Ring magnet Injection kicker P+P+ Ring magnet

Time Structure of Beam Time structure of the beam is defined by:- ê Booster RF Ô 37.8 MHz at injection Ô 52.8 MHz at extraction ê Booster beam energy   = at extraction ê Booster circumference = m  Booster batch =  52.8 /  c = 84 bunches  length = 84/52.8 = 1.6  sec ê NuMI beam = 5 x Booster batches

NuMI Protons/Year with Run IIb Assume Booster can deliver 5e12 p/batch Assume MI accelerates 6 batches  1 batch is extracted to the  p source ê5 batches are extracted to NuMI NuMI intensity = 2.5e13 p/cycle Assume MI acceleration cycle is 22 Booster cycles êTotal cycle time = ( )/15 = 1.87 sec Assume 1 year = 2e7 seconds ( 63% up time ) ê NuMI gets 2.68e20 p/year

NuMI Protons/Year with CKM MI cycle time is increased by 1 sec due to time required for slow extraction to CKM Assume MI accelerates 6 batches ê 5 batches are extracted to NuMI  1 batch is extracted to CKM ( no  p ) NuMI intensity = 2.5e13 p/cycle Assume 1 year = 2e7 seconds ( 63% up time ) ê NuMI gets 1.74e20 p/year ê CKM gets 0.35e20 p/year

Effect of Slip Stacking Assumed time line ( other scenarios possible ) ê Inject 6 Booster batches into MI ê Use RF to vary velocities of individual batches ê Allow batches to overlap then recapture Ô Takes ~2 Booster cycles ê Repeat process twice more to add 5 more batches. Intensity to NuMI = ( )  5e12 = 4.5e13 Cycle time = (  2 ) / 15 = 2.60 sec Gain = ( 4.5 / 2.5 )  ( 1.87 / 2.60 ) = 1.29

Demands on the Booster The Booster is the primary limit to NuMI’s intensity NuMI’s demands on the Booster ê5e12 p/cycle ê5.8e16 p/hr ( 7.5e16 p/hr with slip stacking ) ê4.3 Hz rep rate ( 5 Hz with slip stacking ) Ô 2 conditioning cycles are needed prior to each burst ( 15 Hz ) of beam cycles MiniBooNE: 5e12 p/cycle, 1.0e17 p/hr, and 7.2 Hz To date, only the per cycle requirement has been achieved.

Rep Rate Issues The main magnets cycle continuously at 15 Hz Other systems do not ê Pulsed magnets and their power supplies etc. Ô ORBMP ( injection magnets ) Ô MP02 and MP02 ( extraction septa ) –Overheat at 2.5 Hz –Replacement MP02 magnet is currently under test Ô Kickers Ô BEXBMP ( extraction magnets ) ê RF cavities and their power supplies etc. ê Needed upgrades have been done or are in progress

Hourly Rate is Limited by Radiation It is permitted to accelerate up to 1.8e17 p/hr BUT... êOnly if you can do so without tripping the safety system êThe above ground areas around the Booster are protected by ~50 interlocked radiation detectors There are no well defined limits to the allowed activation within the tunnel ( 1 watt/m for SNS/ORNL ) BUT... êMaintenance issues impose practical limits

Performance vs. Time Performance: Detector closest to its trip point êNormalized to trip its trip point êScaled to an intensity of 1.2e16 p/hr (Run IIb)

Performance vs.. Cycle Intensity Surprisingly little if any dependency NuMI trip point would be at 0.2 Green points represent best performance periods Best Performance Periods

Worst detectors are protecting office space Offices can receive no more than 100 mr/yr Year averages is 5  < hourly limit

Problem Areas: West Towers Best performance is still 8 higher than allowed at NuMI intensities ( 1.5  trip point ) ê Contain office areas ê Located above extraction region Situation has greatly improved over past several years ê Steel shielding added above the extraction region ê Beam notched (see later) to avoid extraction losses To do :- ê Minor shielding upgrade  factor 6 ê Collimator system to relocate losses

The Notch Create a gap (notch) in the beam ( 4-5 RF buckets ) at 400 MeV ( low energy  less radiation ) Fire extraction kickers so that the current rise time coincides with the gap being inside the magnets Avoids intolerable high energy losses on the extraction septum Good for MiniBooNE or single batch injection into MI ê Booster uses notch position to set the timing Unsolved timing problems exist for multi-batch injection ê MI sets timing based on location of 1st batch

Problem Areas: East Towers Best performance is 5.6 higher than allowed at NuMI intensities ( just over trip point ) ê Contain office areas ê Losses are dominated by the creation of the notch To do :- ê Minor shielding upgrade  factor 6 ê Use “pinger” to create notch over multiple turns Ô Works like resonant extraction Ô Needs R&D to make efficient at high intensity ê Collimator system to relocate losses

Activation in the Tunnel Have started systematically monitoring activation levels throughout the tunnel Several ft locations have been noted Will become 10  worse at NuMI intensities! ê No focussed plan as yet ê Requires controlling actual losses Ô E.g. collimator system ê Argues against extreme measures to solve above ground problems

Conclusion Most Booster problems will (hopefully) be solved before NuMI runs ê MiniBooNE sets the most stringent limits Some are unique to NuMI ê Notch timing issues NuMI’s requests cannot be met without raising the cycle intensity ê 7.5e12 ( 6.3e12 with slip stacking ) gives 4e20 p/yr ê This will require some R&D on space charge issues Assistance will be greatly appreciated!