MI Large Aperture Quad (WQB) Project Part 2 – Installation & Operation Beams-doc #2479.

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

Emittance dilution due to misalignment of quads and cavities of ILC main linac revised K.Kubo For beam energy 250 GeV,
Emittance dilution due to misalignment of quads and cavities of ILC main linac K.Kubo For beam energy 250 GeV, TESLA-type optics for 24MV/m.
Proton Beam Measurements in the Recycler Duncan Scott On Behalf of the Main Injector Group.
Author - Title (Footer)1 LINEAR LATTICE ERRORS AT THE ESRF: MODELING AND CORRECTION A. Franchi, L. Farvacque, T. Perron.
Ultra Low Vertical Emittance at the Australian Light Source Mark Boland on behalf of Rohan Dowd 1.
University of Dortmund Marc Grewe, IWBS 2004, Grindelwald, CH 1/21 Orbit Correction Within Constrained Solution Spaces.
Sergey Antipov, University of Chicago Fermilab Mentor: Sergei Nagaitsev Injection to IOTA ring.
April 24, 2008 FNAL ILC SCRF Meeting 1 Main Linac Superconducting Quadrupole V. Kashikhin, T. Fernando, J. DiMarco, G. Velev.
Alignment and Beam Stability
The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme.
Beam based calibration for beam position monitor 15-SEP-2015 IBIC2015 Melbourne M. Tejima, KEK TUBLA01.
Main Linac Integration Work Packages Chris Adolphsen Dec 11, 2007 High Priority Items in Red.
Accelerator Physics Issues Shekhar Mishra Sept 17-19, 1996 Main Injector DOE Review.
1 Status of EMMA Shinji Machida CCLRC/RAL/ASTeC 23 April, ffag/machida_ ppt & pdf.
August 05, Startup 2013 Machine Status:  Proton Source Commissioning and Studies RFQ Injector Line (RIL) Linac Booster  Main Injector Startup.
Orbit Control For Diamond Light Source Ian Martin Joint Accelerator Workshop Rutherford Appleton Laboratory28 th -29 th April 2004.
FLS2006 Workshop, HamburgEduard Prat, DESY DISPERSION MEASUREMENT AND CORRECTION IN THE VUV-FEL (FLASH) Winni Decking, Torsten Limberg, Eduard Prat 37th.
October 4-5, Electron Lens Beam Physics Overview Yun Luo for RHIC e-lens team October 4-5, 2010 Electron Lens.
1 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Storage Ring Commissioning Samuel Krinsky-Accelerator Physics Group Leader NSLS-II ASAC Meeting October 14-15, 2010.
‘BBA’ Goals Understand BPM performance –validate use for precision optics tests –justify & specify hardware/software upgrades Beam – Based ‘Alignment’
Optimization of Field Error Tolerances for Triplet Quadrupoles of the HL-LHC Lattice V3.01 Option 4444 Yuri Nosochkov Y. Cai, M-H. Wang (SLAC) S. Fartoukh,
Beam Loss Simulation in the Main Injector at Slip-Stacking Injection A.I. Drozhdin, B.C. Brown, D.E. Johnson, I. Kourbanis, K. Seiya June 30, 2006 A.Drozhdin.
Main Injector Lambertson Aperture Scans David Johnson and Ming-Jen Yang March 17, 2006.
Low emittance tuning in ATF Damping Ring - Experience and plan Sendai GDE Meeting Kiyoshi Kubo.
Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy SNS Injection and Extraction Systems Issues and Solutions by M. Plum for the SNS team and our BNL collaborators.
Frequency Map Analysis Workshop 4/2/2004 Peter Kuske Refinements of the non-linear lattice model for the BESSY storage ring P. Kuske Linear Lattice My.
AP2 Line & Debuncher Studies Status Keith Gollwitzer Antiproton Source January 9, 2006 Many people involved with providing the hardware and software that.
Proton Plan PMG 9/27/07 E Prebys 1 Proton Plan Status Eric Prebys.
F All Experimenters' Mtg - 2 Jun 03 Weeks in Review: 05/19/03 –06/02/03 Keith Gollwitzer – FNAL Stores and Operations Summary Standard Plots.
First Collision of BEPCII C.H. Yu May 10, Methods of collision tuning Procedures and data analysis Luminosity and background Summary.
Recent Work Towards Increasing the AP2 & Debuncher Aperture – Keith Gollwitzer – May 9, Recent Work Towards Increasing the AP2 & Debuncher Aperture.
Kiyoshi Kubo Electron beam in undulators of e+ source - Emittance and orbit angle with quad misalignment and corrections - Effect of beam pipe.
Dave Johnson July 12, 2010 NOvA/ANU Recycler Upgrades Review Optics, Apertures, and Operations Nova-doc 4930.
Orbit related issues of the spin tune control at RHIC V.Ptitsyn, M.Bai, W.MacKay, T.Roser.
ATF2 beam operation status Toshiyuki OKUGI, KEK The 9 th TB&SGC meeting KEK, 3-gokan Seminar Hall 2009/ 12/ 16.
Beam Based Optics Measurements CTF3 Collaboration meeting CERN Yu-Chiu Chao, TJNAF.
Dave Johnson July 12, 2010 NOvA/ANU Recycler Upgrades Review Optics, Apertures, and Operations Nova-doc 4930.
PSB H- injection concept J.Borburgh, C.Bracco, C.Carli, B.Goddard, M.Hourican, B.Mikulec, W.Weterings,
MEIC Detector and IR Integration Vasiliy Morozov, Charles Hyde, Pawel Nadel-Turonski MEIC Detector and IR Design Mini-Workshop, October 31, 2011.
Interaction Region Design and Detector Integration V.S. Morozov for EIC Study Group at JLAB 2 nd Mini-Workshop on MEIC Interaction Region Design JLab,
August 12, Machine Status: 2013  Proton Source Commissioning and Studies RFQ Injector Line (RIL) Linac : Roof hatch installed Booster : Magnet.
Corrections for multi-pass eRHIC lattice with large chromaticity Chuyu Liu ERL workshop 2015 June 7, 2015.
Lecture 4 Longitudinal Dynamics I Professor Emmanuel Tsesmelis Directorate Office, CERN Department of Physics, University of Oxford ACAS School for Accelerator.
Status of RHIC Polarization Studies. Summary of Polarization Studies during Run09 Tune scans: – Nearby 0.7 – Near integer tune Polarization ramp measurement.
CERN –GSI/CEA MM preparation meeting, Magnetic Measurements WP.
Antiproton Acceptance Steve Werkema DOE Review February 24, 2004.
8 th February 2006 Freddy Poirier ILC-LET workshop 1 Freddy Poirier DESY ILC-LET Workshop Dispersion Free Steering in the ILC using MERLIN.
Booster Corrector Review, Oct. 10 th, 2006 E. Prebys Introduction/Specifications Eric Prebys Proton Plan Manager.
TBT Data & Lattice Measurement for Recycler Ming-Jen Yang December 17, 2014.
Ultra-low Emittance Coupling, method and results from the Australian Synchrotron Light Source Rohan Dowd Accelerator Physicist Australian Synchrotron.
Threading / LTC/ JW1 How difficult is threading at the LHC ? When MADX meets the control system … J. Wenninger AB-OP &
Simulation for Lower emittance in ATF Damping Ring Kiyoshi Kubo Similar talk in DR WS in Frascati, May 2007 Most simulations were done several.
From Beam Dynamics K. Kubo
BEAM TRANSFER CHANNELS, INJECTION AND EXTRACTION SYSTEMS
Alignment and beam-based correction
Orbit Response Matrix Analysis
Orbit Control For Diamond Light Source
Coupling Correction at the Australian Synchrotron
Field quality to achieve the required lifetime goals (single beam)
MDL0L02 Dipole Field July 6, 2016.
Beam Injection and Extraction Scheme
UPDATE ON DYNAMIC APERTURE SIMULATIONS
Rogowski coils as beam position monitors
Rogowski coils as beam position monitors
Optics Measurements in the PSB
Beam dynamics requirements on MQT
Yuri Nosochkov Yunhai Cai, Fanglei Lin, Vasiliy Morozov
Upgrade on Compensation of Detector Solenoid effects
Fanglei Lin JLEIC R&D Meeting, August 4, 2016
Presentation transcript:

MI Large Aperture Quad (WQB) Project Part 2 – Installation & Operation Beams-doc #2479

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, AD Credits  Mechanical Support: L. Valerio, L. Nobrega, M. Albertus and the installation group  Electrical Support: L. Bartelson, D. Wolff  Instrumentation: J. Fitzgerald, J. Crisp, R. Webber, M. Wendt, M. Olson  ES&H: D. White  Survey: T. Sager and C. Wilson and their group  MI: I. Kourbanis, B. Brown, D. Capista, M. Yang  Other Depts: B. Hendricks, D. Johnson, F. Ostiguy, P. Prieto, R. Andrews  Funded by the Proton Plan.

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Celebration of Completion of WQBs

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Scope of the WQB Project  To design, fabricate and bench-test 9 WQBs  To design, fabricate and bench-test 9 EXWA BPMs  To install 7 WQBs and 7 EXWA BPMs during the 2006 shutdown (the rest for spares)  To install 7 trim coil power supplies  To commission the WQBs and new BPMs

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Location of WQBs Q101 Q620 Q608 Q522 Q402 Q321 Q222

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, WQB, New BPM and the Old Quads

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, IQE wide BPM to be replaced IQE wide BPM to be replaced IQE wide BPM to be replaced IQE wide BPM to be replaced

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, LAM IQB normal BPM to be replaced IQB normal BPM to be replaced IQG wide BPM to be replaced

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, De-magnetize Cone Welding (L. Valerio)  Lessons from LEP (CERN) and DESY3 (DESY) in early ‘90s  All transition pieces were heat treated before installation  Before heat treatment: μ(weld) = 1.10 ~ 1.15  After heat treatment: μ(weld) < 1.01

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, BPM 101 (EXWA 01, WQB 001)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, BPM 222 (EXWA 07, WQB 007)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, BPM 321 (EXWA 08, WQB 006)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, BPM 402 (EXWA 04, WQB 004)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, BPM 522 (EXWA 02, WQB 003)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, BPM 608 (EXWA 05, WQB 005)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, BPM 620 (EXWA 06, WQB 002)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Electron Probe downstream from Q521 (IQE) Electron probe

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Large good field region: ± 2” (an increase of ±10 mm) 2.Small tracking error throughout the cycle: integrated field error w.r.t. IQB < 10 units (0.1%) Estimate of lattice perturbation WQB Field Quality Requirements

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Relative Strength Difference between WQB and IQB Due to higher saturation Due to stronger hysteresis

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, WQB Hysteresis (upramp)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, IQB310 Hysteresis (upramp)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Hysteresis Difference between WQB and IQB

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Relative Strength Difference between WQB and IQB Including Hysteresis Effect (reset at 150A)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Trim Current with & w/o Hysteresis Effect

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Trim Current Anomaly (M. Tartaglia)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Required Trim Current Setting Including Hysteresis and Anomaly Effects

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Trim Coil & Power Supply (L. Bartelson) Trim coil turns per pole18 Max current28 A Resistance per magnet 0.75  Inductance per magnet0.03 H Power supply current control accuracy1%

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, WQB Trim Current Table

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, WQB Trim Current Plot

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, EXWA BPM (L. Valerio, J. Fitzgerald)  Electrode ID = 5.625”  Extended angle = 60   Installation specs: Offset (relative to the quad center) < 5 mils (0.13 mm) Roll < 1  (17 mrad)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Each new EXWA BPM measures both H and V. Need new scaling to translate decibels to mm. Need new offset table for database. –Horizontal beam position: pos = BPM reading + bpm_offset – survey_offset + orbit_offset – electrical_offset –Vertical beam position: pos = BPM reading + bpm_offset + survey_offset – electrical_offset New BPM Requirements

32 1. Analytic: (Chou, ANL/APS/IN/ACCPHY/89-3, 1989) A = constant R = pickup radius = 0.5 x 5.625” = mm x = difference / sum = [10^(A/20) – 10^(B/20)] / [10^(A/20) + 10^(B/20)] 2. Webber’s empirical 5 th order polynomial (beams-doc #2280): New Scaling

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Horizontal Fitting to Raw Data in beams-doc #2007

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Vertical Fitting to Raw Data in beams-doc #2007

35 Hendricks Offset Table Established 8 years ago in 1998 survey_offset from Thornton Murphy (missing: 522, 523, , 619, 620) bpm_offset and electrical_offset from Jim Crisp orbit_offset from Dave Johnson

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Offset of the BPM mechanical center relative to the WQB center Sign convention:  Horizontal: + pointing inward (namely, facing the proton direction, the left-hand- side is positive)  Vertical: + pointing upward  Roll: + indicating clockwise roll relative to proton direction New survey_offset (T. Sager)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Offset between the BPM mechanical and electrical center Calculated using Fitzgerald’s raw data in #2007 Sign convention:  Horizontal: + pointing outward (namely, facing the proton direction, the right-hand- side is positive)  Vertical: + pointing upward New bpm_offset (J. Fitzgerald)

38 Offset from cables and other electronics All long cables were measured and documented in beams-doc #2288. Other electronics should have no contribution: –Upstairs new electronics are calibrated to zero gain difference –Combining box and the short cables are believed to have negligible contribution Correction is done by multiplying A signal by the respective values in this listing New electrical_offset (R. Webber)

39 Lattice Measurement  1-bump - Closed Orbit Displacement from a single dipole kick:  3-bump ratio: Tune: (x) = 26.42, (y) = GeV/c: B  = T-m Steering magnet strength (T-m/A): x = , y =

40 Beta Function Measurement Change the j th steering magnet’s current by  I j and measure closed orbit change  x j at the j th BPM: Steering magnet strength (T-m/A): x = , y = Measured closed orbit matrix diagonal element GeV/c: B  = T-m Tune: (x) = 26.42, (y) = 25.44

41 3-Bump: Prediction vs. Measurement

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Reference Closed Orbit (H)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Reference Closed Orbit (V)

44 Reference Closed Orbit at WQBs BPM H402 (EXWA04) Calibrated Error between Raw Data and Polynomial Fit

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Bump Difference Orbit: V101 – 0.25 A

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Bump Difference Orbit: V101 – 0.5 A

47 1-Bump: Prediction vs. Measurement (  I > 0)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, While 3-bump measurements were in agreement with the lattice model, 1-bump results were less satisfactory. A plausible explanation is the cancellation of errors when three CODs are summed up for 3-bump. In other words, 1-bump is more sensitive to errors. Large discrepancy observed at HP620 needs further investigation.

49 1-Bump: Prediction vs. Measurement (  I < 0)

W. ChouAD/TD Seminar, Nov 2,

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Aperture and Acceptance Increase  Physical aperture:  Old IQB: D = 3.286”  New WQB: D = 4.347”  An increase of 1.06”, or 32%  Verified by 1-turn measurement  Machine acceptance:  Limited by dynamic aperture, i.e., by good field region  Increase by 50%, from 40  to 60   Verified by undetectable dose on WQBs

52 40 mm 20  10 mm 20  23mm 13mm 20mm WQB Aperture Increased by 10 mm

53 Aperture Scanning (M. Yang) 39mm (was 30mm)

54 40  32mm 18mm (good field region) 40 mm Old IQB Design Acceptance 40 

55 51 mm 60  39mm 22mm (good field region) Note: Acceptance limited by good field region, not by aperture. WQB Acceptance increase by 50% to 60 

56 51 mm 80  45mm 25mm (good field region) 10 mm Moving Lambertson 10mm, Acceptance increased to 80 

W. Chou AD/TD Seminar, Nov 2, Summary  TD did a wonderful job and delivered high quality WQB magnets to AD. It was another example of the beautiful collaboration between the two divisions.  A number of AD departments worked together seamlessly to make the installation and commissioning of the WQBs and new BPMs a success.  The WQB aperture and acceptance increases meet the requirement.  The perturbation to the lattice is minimal.  Further improvement in acceptance is possible by moving the Lambertson magnets (planned for next shutdown).  Many thanks to all people involved in this project. It was a pleasure and privilege to work with these guys.

Questions?