Rough Estimation of energy spread produced in Final Focus line and effects to chromatic correction in ILC and ATF 201301018 minor change 201402 Kiyoshi.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Paul Emma SLAC January 14, 2002 BERLIN CSR Benchmark Test-Case Results CSR Workshop.
Advertisements

Beam Dynamics in MeRHIC Yue Hao On behalf of MeRHIC/eRHIC working group.
ILC Accelerator School Kyungpook National University
1 Bates XFEL Linac and Bunch Compressor Dynamics 1. Linac Layout and General Beam Parameter 2. Bunch Compressor –System Details (RF, Magnet Chicane) –Linear.
Bunch compressors ILC Accelerator School May Eun-San Kim Kyungpook National University.
1 ILC Bunch compressor Damping ring ILC Summer School August Eun-San Kim KNU.
Linear Collider Bunch Compressors Andy Wolski Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory USPAS Santa Barbara, June 2003.
S. N. “ Cavities for Super B-Factory” 1 of 38 Sasha Novokhatski SLAC, Stanford University Accelerator Session April 20, 2005 Low R/Q Cavities for Super.
Synchrotron Radiation What is it ? Rate of energy loss Longitudinal damping Transverse damping Quantum fluctuations Wigglers Rende Steerenberg (BE/OP)
Bunch compressor design for eRHIC Yichao Jing and Vladimir Litvinenko FLS2012, Newport News, VA 3/8/2012.
Effects of wake fields in ATF2 low aperture kicker and IP nano-BPMs Karl Bane April 19, 2005.
MERLIN 3.0 only considers first order (dipole) modes. Kick is linearly proportional to offset. For offsets close to the axis this is a reasonable approximation.
Karl Bane AC Wake--Measurement, April 7-8, Resistive Wall Wakes in the Undulator Beam Pipe – Theory, Measurement Karl.
Super-B Factory Workshop January 19-22, 2004 Beam pipes M. Sullivan 1 Detector Beam Pipe Diameter Discussion M. Sullivan Super-B Factory Workshop Hawaii.
Super-B Factory Workshop January 19-22, 2004 Accelerator Backgrounds M. Sullivan 1 Accelerator Generated Backgrounds for e  e  B-Factories M. Sullivan.
Beam-Beam Optimization for Fcc-ee at High Energies (120, 175 GeV) at High Energies (120, 175 GeV) Dmitry Shatilov BINP, Novosibirsk 11 December 2014, CERN.
Simulation of IP beam size with orbit jitter + wakefield in EXT-FF ATF2 Project Meeting K.Kubo.
ATF2 Progress Report For CLIC Workshop Kiyoshi KUBO.
Working Group 3 Summary M. Sullivan / Y. Funakoshi.
CSR calculation in ERL merger section Tsukasa Miyajima KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization 8 November, 2010, 13:30 Mini Workshop on CSR.
ATF2 Javier Resta Lopez (JAI, Oxford University) for the FONT project group 5th ATF2 project meeting, KEK December 19-21, 2007.
Impedance and Collective Effects in BAPS Na Wang Institute of High Energy Physics USR workshop, Huairou, China, Oct. 30, 2012.
1/18 The Distribution of Synchrotron Radiation Power in the IR C. H. Yu IR Overview SR Distribution in the IR The Protection of SR Power.
CLIC main detector solenoid and anti-solenoid impact B. Dalena, A. Bartalesi, R. Appleby, H. Gerwig, D. Swoboda, M. Modena, D. Schulte, R. Tomás.
Y. Ohnishi / KEK KEKB-LER for ILC Damping Ring Study Simulation of low emittance lattice includes machine errors and optics corrections. Y. Ohnishi / KEK.
The impact of undulators in an ERL Jim Clarke ASTeC, STFC Daresbury Laboratory FLS 2012, March 2012.
October 31, BDS Group1 ILC Beam Delivery System “Hybrid” Layout 2006e Release Preliminary M. Woodley.
Matching recipe and tracking for the final focus T. Asaka †, J. Resta López ‡ and F. Zimmermann † CERN, Geneve / SPring-8, Japan ‡ CERN, Geneve / University.
Beam dynamics on damping rings and beam-beam interaction Dec 포항 가속기 연구소 김 은 산.
Beam observation and Introduction to Collective Beam Instabilities Observation of collective beam instability Collective modes Wake fields and coupling.
Simulation of Beam Instabilities in SPring-8 T. Nakamura JASRI / SPring-8
Page 1 Overview and Issues of the MEIC Interaction Region M. Sullivan MEIC Accelerator Design Review September 15-16, 2010.
Beam Dynamics in MeRHIC Mike Blaskiewicz On behalf of MeRHIC/eRHIC working group.
A bunch compressor design and several X-band FELs Yipeng Sun, ARD/SLAC , LCLS-II meeting.
ATF2 background and beam halo study D. Wang(IHEP), S. Bai(IHEP), P. bambade(LAL) February 7, 2013.
Collimator wakefields - G.Kurevlev Manchester 1 Collimator wake-fields Wake fields in collimators General information Types of wake potentials.
Impedance of the CLIC-DRs: What we know so far and what else we need to study…. E. Koukovini-Platia M. Barnes, A. Grudiev, N. Mounet, Y. Papaphilippou,
Kiyoshi Kubo Electron beam in undulators of e+ source - Emittance and orbit angle with quad misalignment and corrections - Effect of beam pipe.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project Tor Raubenheimer Beam Delivery System Design Differences American Linear Collider Physics Meeting SLAC January 8.
Main Linac Tolerances What do they mean? ILC-GDE meeting Beijing Kiyoshi Kubo 1.Introduction, review of old studies 2.Assumed “static” errors.
July LEReC Review July 2014 Low Energy RHIC electron Cooling Jorg Kewisch, Dmitri Kayran Electron Beam Transport and System specifications.
Brief review of past studies on Wakefield ATF2 Proj. Mtg K.Kubo.
Measurement of the Electron Cloud Density in a Solenoid Field and a Quadrupole Field K. Kanazawa and H. Fukuma KEK June 2009 CTA09 1.
Lecture 4 Longitudinal Dynamics I Professor Emmanuel Tsesmelis Directorate Office, CERN Department of Physics, University of Oxford ACAS School for Accelerator.
Problems of charge compensation in a ring e+e- higgs factory Valery Telnov Budker INP, Novosibirsk 5 rd TLEP3 workshop, FNAL, July 25, 2013.
Professor Philip Burrows John Adams Institute for Accelerator Science Oxford University ACAS School for Accelerator Physics January 2014 Longitudinal Dynamics.
Wakefield effect in ATF2 Kiyoshi Kubo
Wakefield of cavity BPM In ATF2 ATF2 Project Meeting K.Kubo.
ILC DR Lower Horizontal Emittance, preliminary study
Intensity dependence of Beam size at IP and Wakefield in ATF2
Wakefield issues due to a slotted foil for a THz source
Accelerator Physics Topic VIII Coherent Synchrotron Radiation
T. Agoh (KEK) Introduction CSR emitted in wiggler
Large Booster and Collider Ring
Sven Reiche UCLA ICFA-Workshop - Sardinia 07/02
Electron cloud and collective effects in the FCC-ee Interaction Region
FCC-ee: coupling impedances and collective effects
First Look at Nonlinear Dynamics in the Electron Collider Ring
Luminosity Optimization at 250GeV
Updates on IR and FF for super-B factory
E-cloud instability at CESR TA
Na Wang and Qing Qin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing
CEPC Injector Damping Ring
LHC (SSC) Byung Yunn CASA.
LCLS bunch length monitor utilizing coherent radiation
Final Focus optics for Possible New B-Line
Parameter Optimization in Higgs Factories Beam intensity, beam-beam parameters, by*, bunch length, number of bunches, bunch charge and emittance.
Beam-Beam Effects in High-Energy Colliders:
Bunch Compression Experiment in VUV-FEL BC3
Fanglei Lin JLEIC R&D Meeting, August 4, 2016
Presentation transcript:

Rough Estimation of energy spread produced in Final Focus line and effects to chromatic correction in ILC and ATF minor change Kiyoshi KUBO

Energy change after bend in FF affect chromatic correction Energy changes after bending magnet (for dispersion creation) in FF affect chromaticity correction [1] Energy dependent horizontal displacements at sextupole magnets deviate from design (smeared) For perfect chromaticity correction, energy of each particle should not change in designed dispersive (non-zero horizontal dispersion) region Beam size is expressed as Relative energy change should be much less than 1E-4

Possible sources of energy change in FF Space charge Resistive wall wake Structure (discontinuities) wake – Crab cavity – Cavity BPM Synchrotron radiation – Incoherent (SR) – Coherent (CSR) Each effect is (very roughly) estimated as follows.

ILC BDSATF2 Space charge7E-112E-9 Resistive wall wake1.1E-52.4E-7 Incoherent SR*1.5E-5< 4.2E-7 Coherent SR< 1.3.E-6< 1.8E-6 Crab cavities wake1E Cavity BPM wake1.4E-5**5E-6 Roughly estimated energy spread induced by each effect, Relative to beam energy, which should be compared with * This effect is included in ILC FF design ** If similar design of ATF, scaled ½, used See next 8 pages for estimation of each effect

Space charge Longitudinal electronic field is roughly [2], ILC BDS (E b 100GeV)ATF2 q  C  z (m) /  3.2E-9 / 3E-4 / 2E51E-9 / 7E-3 / 2.6E3 b (m) / a (m)5E-3 / 1E-612E-3 / 1E-6 max. E s (V/m)5.5E Relevant beamline length (m)50021  = eE s L/(mc 2  ) 7E-11 (for 100 GeV)2E-9 Negligible

Resistive wall wake [2, 3, 4] Standard deviation of energy loss of Gaussian bunch beam due to resistive wall wake is approximately where,  is the loss factor which is approximately ILC BDS (E b 100GeV)ATF2 q  C  z (m) /  3.2E-9 / 3E-4 / 2E51E-9 / 7E-3 / 2.6E3 b (m)5E-312E-3  (  -1 m -1 ) 5.9E7 (Copper)1.4E6 (Stainless)  /L  (V/m/nC) Relevant beamline length, L50021  E/E 1.1E-5 (for 100 GeV)2.7E-7

Incoherent SR Energy spread increase in bending field is roughly, ILC BDS (E b 250GeV)ATF2  4.9E52.6E3  of bends (m) 2.0E4/2.4E4/6.7E4min L of bends (m)24/26.4/14.4Total 1.8 Sqrt(  E 2 ) (eV) 3.8E6< 5.4E2  ~ sqrt(  E 2 )/(mc 2  ) 1.5E-5< 4.2E-7 There are three different types of bending magnets. (This effect is already included in ILC FF design.)

Coherent SR The effect is expressed as a wakepotential, which is roughly [3], Energy change is wakepotential times bunch charge times length, ILC BDS (E b 100GeV)ATF2 q  C  z (m) /  3.2E-9 / 3E-4 / 4.9E51E-9 / 7E-3 / 2.6E3 min.  (m) 2E419 W (V/C/m)6.1E111.3E12 Total bend length, L (m)651.8  E (eV) < 1.3E5< 2.3E3  ~  E/(mc 2  ) < 1.3.E-6< 1.8E-6

Wakefield of structures, discontinuities Crab cavities (only in ILC BDS, not in ATF2) Cavity BPM Other discontinuities

Crab cavity in ILC BDS Loss factor of a crab cavity was estimated as 23.5 V/pC in the reference [5]. There will be two cavities per beam, and for 3.2 nC bunch, energy change will be about 150 keV. Which is order of a 1E-6 of the beam energy. Not significant.

Cavity BPM – ATF2 ATF2 Longitudinal wakepotential of a reference cavity of BPM system (aperture 16 mm) in ATF2 was calculated as about 0.7 V/pC – for 7 mm length bunch [6]. – Scaling for dipole cavity (aperture 20 mm), 0.7x(16/20) 2 ~ 0.45 V/pC Energy change in one BPM is about 0.45 keV for 1nC bunch. Total about 14 BPMs in the relevant beam line – energy change is about 6.3 keV, about 4.8E-6 of the beam energy. Not significant compare with 1E-4 (1/chromaticity)

Cavity BPM - ILC ILC BDS (Rough Scaling from the ATF2 case) Assume similar BPM design, scaled by the aperture (~1/2), and similar number of BPMs, wakepotential scale as aperture^(-2),  factor 2 2 Bunch length 0.3 mm, bunch charge 3.2 nC, assume proportional to line density,  factor (7/0.3)x(3.2/1) Beam energy ~100 times higher  factor 1/100 Total factor is about 3 and relative energy change will be 1.4E-5 It may have a small visible effect. – May use BPM with larger aperture. – Or may use stripline BPM for large beta locations.

Wakefield of other discontinuities Strength of additional Wake is expected to be comparable to or smaller than that of cavity BPM. In ATF2, it will not be significant. In ILC BDS careful design is required.

SUMMARY Energy change after the first bend in FF line can affect beam size at IP. Relative energy change should be much smaller than 1/chromaticity ~ 1E-4. Rough estimation of space charge, resistive wall wake, structure (crab cavity, cavity BPM) wake, incoherent radiation and coherent radiation are made. For ILC BDS FF, – Resistive wall wakefield (5 mm radius, 500 m long copper pipe) and Incoherent synchrotron radiation have some effects. – Wakefield of cavity BPMs and other discontinuities may have some effects (~1% beam size increase, if simply scaled from ATF2 cavity BPM ). Careful design required for BPMs and beam pipe. – Other effects will be small. For ATF2 FF – All effects are small.

References [1] K. Oide, private communication. [2] A. Chao, “Physics of collective beam instabilities in high energy accelerators” [3] “Handbook of Accelerator Physics and Engineering”, ed. A. Chao, et.al.. [4] K. Yokoya, private communication. [5] C. Adolphsen et al., “Design of the ILC crab cavity system,” EUROTEV-REPORT (2007), DOI: / [6] A. Lyapin,