FRONTEND DESIGN & OPTIMIZATION STUDIES HISHAM KAMAL SAYED BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY June 26, 2014 Collaboration: J. S. Berg - X. Ding - V.B. Graves.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Neutrino Factory Front End (IDS) -Chicane & Absorber David Neuffer C. Rogers, P. Snopok, C. Yoshikawa, … January 31, 2012.
Advertisements

Bunched-Beam Phase Rotation David Neuffer Fermilab.
Magnetic Configuration of the Muon Collider/ Neutrino Factory Target System Hisham Kamal Sayed, *1 H.G Kirk, 1 K.T. McDonald 2 1 Brookhaven National Laboratory,
1 Neutrino Factory Front End (IDS) and Variations David Neuffer G. Prior, C. Rogers, P. Snopok, C. Yoshikawa, … August 2011 NuFACT99 -Lyon.
Particle Production of a Carbon/Mercury Target System for the Intensity Frontier X. Ding, UCLA H.G. Kirk, BNL K.T. McDonald, Princeton Univ MAP Spring.
Bunched-Beam Phase Rotation- Variation and 0ptimization David Neuffer, A. Poklonskiy Fermilab.
Pion capture and transport system for PRISM M. Yoshida Osaka Univ. 2005/8/28 NuFACT06 at UCI.
1 Muon Bunching for a Muon Collider David Neuffer FNAL August 3, 2010.
1 RAL + Front End Studies International Design Study David Neuffer FNAL (January 5, 2009)
V.Daniel Elvira Status Report on Cooling Simulations using GEANT4 Motivation: Explore a realistic design of a 44/88 MHz based cooling channel for a -factory.
Harold G. Kirk Brookhaven National Laboratory Meson Production Efficiencies IDS Target Meeting CERN December 17, 2008.
1 Front End Studies and Plans David Neuffer FNAL (November 10, 2009)
Μ-Capture, Energy Rotation, Cooling and High-pressure Cavities David Neuffer Fermilab.
V.Daniel Elvira Status Report on Cooling Simulations using GEANT4 Motivation: Explore a realistic design of a 44/88 MHz based cooling channel for a -factory.
1 Energy-Phase Rotation with a proton absorber David Neuffer September 27, 2011.
Simulation Study Results Study: Replace LiH-based cooler with gas-filled transport and rf cavities Results: Beam Cooling is significantly improved. Final.
NF Front End Meeting, April 27, 2010 Initial Cooling with HFOFO Snake Y. Alexahin, FNAL APC.
1 Neutrino Factory Front End (IDS) and Variations David Neuffer November 23, 2010.
Operated by Brookhaven Science Associates for the U.S. Department of Energy Optimized Parameters for a Mercury Jet Target X. Ding, D. Cline, UCLA, Los.
-Factory Front End Phase Rotation Optimization David Neuffer Fermilab Muons, Inc.
Helical Cooling Channel Simulation with ICOOL and G4BL K. Yonehara Muon collider meeting, Miami Dec. 13, 2004 Slide 1.
1 Front End Capture/Phase Rotation & Cooling Studies David Neuffer Cary Yoshikawa December 2008.
Institutional Logo Here Harold G. Kirk DOE Review of MAP (FNAL August 29-31, 2012)1 The Front End Harold Kirk Brookhaven National Lab August 30, 2012.
Muons within Acceleration Acceptance Cuts at End of Transverse Cooling Channel TOWARDS A GLOBAL OPTIMIZATION OF THE MUON ACCELERATOR FRONT END H. K. Sayed,
Muons, Inc. AAC Feb M. A. C. Cummings 1 Uses of the HCC Mary Anne Cummings February 4, 2009 Fermilab AAC.
1 Front End – present status David Neuffer March 31, 2015.
Energy deposition for intense muon sources (chicane + the rest of the front end) Pavel Snopok Illinois Institute of Technology and Fermilab December 4,
Ajit Kurup, C. Bontoiu, M. Aslaninejad, J. Pozimski, Imperial College London. A.Bogacz, V. S. Morozov, Y.R. Roblin Jefferson Laboratory K. B. Beard, Muons,
Source Group Bethan Dorman Paul Morris Laura Carroll Anthony Green Miriam Dowle Christopher Beach Sazlin Abdul Ghani Nicholas Torr.
Quantitative Optimisation Studies of the Muon Front-End for a Neutrino Factory S. J. Brooks, RAL, Chilton, Oxfordshire, U.K. Tracking Code Non-linearised.
Bunched-Beam Phase Rotation for a Neutrino Factory David Neuffer Fermilab.
Bunched-Beam Phase Rotation and FFAG -Factory Injection David Neuffer Fermilab.
Bunched-Beam Phase Rotation for a Neutrino Factory David Neuffer, Andreas Van Ginneken, Daniel Elvira Fermilab.
Front-End Design Overview Diktys Stratakis Brookhaven National Laboratory February 19, 2014 D. Stratakis | DOE Review of MAP (FNAL, February 19-20, 2014)1.
Harold G. Kirk Brookhaven National Laboratory Target Considerations for Nufact and Superbeams ISS Meeting RAL April 26, 2006.
K. McDonald NFMCC Collaboration Meeting Jan 14, The Capture Solenoid as an Emittance-Reducing Element K. McDonald Princeton U. (Jan. 14, 2010)
1 EPIC SIMULATIONS V.S. Morozov, Y.S. Derbenev Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility A. Afanasev Hampton University R.P. Johnson Muons, Inc. Operated.
1 of 12 Stephen Brooks JAI Advisory Board, February 2006  Neutrino Factory Muon Beam Production Studies.
Muon cooling with Li lenses and high field solenoids V. Balbekov, MAP Winter Meeting 02/28-03/04, 2011 OUTLINE  Introduction: why the combination of Li.
-Factory Front End Phase Rotation Gas-filled rf David Neuffer Fermilab Muons, Inc.
1 Front End for MAP Neutrino Factory/Collider rf considerations David Neuffer May 29, 2014.
Harold G. Kirk Brookhaven National Laboratory Progress in Quad Ring Coolers Ring Cooler Workshop UCLA March 7-8, 2002.
1 Front End – present status David Neuffer March 17, 2015.
1 International Design Study Front End & Variations David Neuffer January 2009.
Chicane simulation update Pavel Snopok Front end phone meeting January 14,
 Stephen Brooks / RAL / April 2004 Muon Front Ends Providing High-Intensity, Low-Emittance Muon Beams for the Neutrino Factory and Muon Collider.
Studies on pion/muon capture at MOMENT Nikos Vassilopoulos IHEP, CAS August 11, 2015.
Stephen Brooks / RAL / May 2004  Optimisation of the RAL Muon Front End Design.
1 Front End – present status David Neuffer March 3, 2015.
Carbon Target Design and Optimization for an Intense Muon Source X. Ding, UCLA H.G. Kirk, BNL K.T. McDonald, Princeton Univ MAP Winter Collaboration.
Institutional Logo Here July 11, 2012 Muon Accelerator Program Advisory Committee Review (FNAL July 11-13, 2012)1 The Front End.
Simulating the RFOFO Ring with Geant Amit Klier University of California, Riverside Muon Collaboration Meeting Riverside, January 2004.
Context of the Neutrino Factory Neutrino factory (2018) –4MW proton driver –p +   +   +  e + e  Linear e + e − collider (2014/5) –Leptons at 0.4.
S. Bettoni, R. Corsini, A. Vivoli (CERN) CLIC drive beam injector design.
Nufact02, London, July 1-6, 2002K.Hanke Muon Phase Rotation and Cooling: Simulation Work at CERN new 88 MHz front-end update on cooling experiment simulations.
1 Muon Capture for a Muon Collider David Neuffer July 2009.
Bunched-Beam Phase Rotation - Ring Coolers? - FFAGs? David Neuffer Fermilab.
Adiabatic buncher and (  ) Rotator Exploration & Optimization David Neuffer(FNAL), Alexey Poklonskiy (FNAL, MSU, SPSU)
1 Front End – gas-filled cavities David Neuffer May 19, 2015.
1 Front End – present status David Neuffer December 4, 2014.
Research and development toward a future Muon Collider Katsuya Yonehara Accelerator Physics Center, Fermilab On behalf of Muon Accelerator Program Draft.
Uses of the HCC Mary Anne Cummings February 4, 2009 Fermilab AAC
Integrating Chicane in G4BeamLine
+-- Collider Front end- Balbekov version
X. Ding, UCLA MAP Spring 2014 Meeting May 2014 Fermilab
David Neuffer Cary Yoshikawa March 2009
Parametric Resonance Ionization Cooling of Muons
Final Cooling For a High-Luminosity High-Energy Lepton Collider
Muon Front End Status Chris Rogers,
Uses of the HCC Mary Anne Cummings February 4, 2009 Fermilab AAC
Presentation transcript:

FRONTEND DESIGN & OPTIMIZATION STUDIES HISHAM KAMAL SAYED BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY June 26, 2014 Collaboration: J. S. Berg - X. Ding - V.B. Graves - H.G. Kirk - K.T. McDonald - D. Neuffer - R. B. Palmer - P. Snopok - D. Stratakis - R.J. Weggel

F RONT END DESING & OPTIMIZATION 6/26/14 OUTLINE Goal : Optmize number of useful muons and limit the proton beam power energy transmitted to the first RF cavity in the buncher Involved systems: -Carbon target geometry -Capture field -Chicane design -Be absorber 1- Target geometry parameters: Carbon target length, radius, and tilt angle to solenoid axis 2- Target Capture field: constant field length - taper length - end field 3- Chicane parameters: Length - curvature – focsuing field 4- Be absorber thickness and location 5- Energy deposition in the target area + Chicane will be evaluated and involved in the optimization – future work.

M UON B EAM PRODUCTION 6/26/14 Production and acceleration of muon beam High energy proton beam on Hg or graphite target Captured pion beam has a large emittance Pions decay into muons with even larger emittance Transverse phase space ε T(rms) ~ 25 mm-rad Longitudinal phase space Large momentum spread Challenges with muon beams: - Short lifetime ~ 2 μs - Require fast and aggressive way of reducing the muon beam transverse and longitudinal emittance to deliver the required luminosity

T APERED C APTURE S OLENOID OPTIMIZATION Inverse-Cubic Taper - Initial peak Field B 1 – Taper length z – End Field B 2 B1B1 B2B2 Taper Length z 1 -z 2 Target Solenoid on axis field 6/26/14 -Impact of the Peak field on the number and phase space of the captured pions -Impact of taper length on the number and phase space of the captured pions/muons -Impact of the end field on the number of captured muons

N EW S HORT T ARGET CAPTURE WITH REALISTIC SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNETS 6/26/14 On axis field [scale /20 T] Target Magnets Decay channel Triplet Taper Magnets New baseline Muon Target Capture Magnet : Short Taper length = 5 m B = T, 20 – 2.5 T 20 – 3.5 T 5 m (R. Weggel) V. Graves

CARBON TARGET GEOMETRY OPTIMIZATION 6/26/14

CARBON TARGET GEOMETRY OPTIMIZATION 6/26/14  Target geometry parameters (channel includes target + chicane + decay channel):  Carbon target length -- radius -- tilt angle to solenoid axis  Proton beam size  Objective: optmize at z=70 m Σ π+μ+κ within pz < 450 MeV/c (to compensate for the Be absorber effect) pt < 150 MeV/c Initial lattice in G4Beamline – using GEANT4 physics list QGSP  B z = 20 to T over variable taper length  Initial protons K.E. = 6.75 GeV - σ t = 2 ns  Tracking includes target + chicane + decay channel  The optmization run 6 hours on 240 cores at NERSC using Multiobjective – Multivariable parallel genetic algorithm

CARBON TARGET GEOMETRY OPTIMIZATION 6/26/14 Optimal working point 1-2 mm Optimal working point 1-3 degrees  Optimizing the target geomtery and proton beam parameters.  Objective is the muon count at end of decay channel

CARBON TARGET GEOMETRY OPTIMIZATION 6/26/14 Optimal working point cm Optimal working point ~ 1 cm, but r < 1 cm not studied  Optimizing the target geomtery and proton beam parameters.  Objective is the muon count at end of decay channel

CARBON TARGET GEOMETRY OPTIMIZATION 6/26/14 Optimal working point for C-target  Proton beam size 1-2 mm  C–rod Length 80 cm  C–rod radius < 1 cm Beam + target angle to solenoid axis 2-3 degree (50-75 mrad)

D EPENDENCE OF TRANSVERSE EMITTANCE & C APTURE EFFICIENCY ON P EAK F IELD Emittance growth due to betatron oscillation decohenrce:  Pions created at the target  Small radial extent (small transverse emittance)  Large spread in energy and axial point of origin  Particles with different energy and different transverse amplitude rotate over the transverse phase space at different oscillation frequencies.  Strong solenoid field stabilizes the emittance growth by reduction of axial extend  The final projected transverse emittance is smaller for higher fields MARS Simulation of π + & μ + production from 8 GeV proton beam on Hg target. - Emittance calculation from covariance matrix - particle count at end of the target 6/26/14 Limit of operation of solenoids in high radiation area

CARBON TARGET GEOMETRY OPTIMIZATION 6/26/14 Optmization of the target end field and decay channel – (no buncher- rotator RF) Points with differing colors have different target geomtry parameters

MARS S IMULATIONS & T RANSMISSION MARS15 Simulation: Counting muons at 50 m with K.E MeV r final =30 cm 6/26/14 Muon count at z=50 increases for longer solenoid taper Muon count within energy cut at end of decay channel Adiabatic condition: length scale over which the magnetic field changes is large compared to betatron wavelength of the helical trajectory of a particle

BUNCHER AND E NERGY PHASE ROTATOR Target: π production Drift: π’s decay to μ’s + creation of time-energy correlations Adiabatic bunch: Converts the initial single short muon bunch with very large energy spread into a train of 12 microbunches with much reduced energy spread Energy phase rotatation: Align microbunches to equal energies - RF 232 to 201 MHz - 12 MV/m Transverse ionization cooling: RF MHz 6/26/14

L ONGITUDINAL P HASE S PACE D ISTRIBUTIONS (S HORT VERSUS LONG TAPER ) 6/26/14 Long adiabatic taper 40 m Short taper 4 m z=20 m End of Decay z=80 m After buncher Temporal difference between the arrival time at a position z of a particle with a nonzero transverse amplitude and that of a particle with zero transverse amplitude Shorter bunch length Higher longitudinal phase space density

D EPENDENCE OF TIME SPREAD & TRANSVERSE EMITTANCE ON TAPER LENGTH 6/26/14 -Projected transverse emittance did not change dramatically -Longitudnal emittance decreases more dramatically Time Spread increase by 90% Implication on projected emittance Time spread dependence on taper length Muon beam emittance calculation was done at the end of the decay channel at z = 70 m Initial proton bunch has pancake temporal distribution σ t = 0 ns for this calculation

N UMERICAL N ONLINEAR G LOBAL O PTIMIZATION ALGORITHMS ON NERSC  Expensive objective evaluations on CRAY: (In collaboration with LBNL)  High performance parallel environment: N cores > 1000  Run parallel evaluations of the objective functions ( Parallel Evolutionary algorithms)  Each evaluation of the objective run in parallel to limit the cost of every evaluation (parallel Icool – G4BL, MARS.. etc.).  Implemented algorithm:  Parallel Differential Evolutionary Algorithms 6/26/14 Muon Front End Global Optimization  Multivariable optimization of the Muon Accelerator Front End:  Optimal taper length  Optimizing the broad band match to the 4D ionization cooling channel Momentum distribution of "useful muons” at end of phase rotator 24% more than previuos baseline performance End Field Limitations: - Operation of RF cavities in magnetic fields

F RONT END PERFORMANCE AT DIFFERENT END FIELDS 6/26/14 Performance of the Front end without the chicane End fields higher than 4 T do not show any improved performance

C HICANE 6/26/14 -Short taper (6 m ) integrated with the new chicane from Pavel's G4BL lattice (same parameters as in ICOOL) -Started optimizing the chicane parameters (initial values - D. Neuffer's icool lattice) -Chicane half length L (initial value L = 6.0) -Chicane radius of curvature h (initial value = /m)  Bend angle = 351 mrad -Be absorber length (initial value = mm) -On-axis field is a free parameter – optimization will be carried for B = 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 T -Chicane aperture 40 cm (might be a free parameter as well) -Objectives  minimize total KE of transmitted protons Σ KE protons  Maximize number of transmitted muons Σ π+μ+κ within 0 < p z < 450 MeV/c (to compensate for the Be absorber effect) & 0 < p t < 150 MeV/c Run 100 K particles through the chicane with initial parameters Σ KE protons = 29 GeV & Σ N mu = 4377

C HICANE 6/26/14 B 0 = 2.0 T Run 500 K particles through the chicane with automated optimization algorithm Chicane location: z = 21 m from target Absorber location: end of chicane

Run 500 K particles through the chicane with automated optimization algorithm Chicane location: z = 21 m from target Absorber location: end of chicane C HICANE 6/26/14 B 0 = 2.5 T

C HICANE 6/26/14 B 0 = 3.0 T Run 500 K particles through the chicane with automated optimization algorithm Chicane location: z = 21 m from target Absorber location: end of chicane Higher end fields increases muon transmission through the front end and also increase the total KE of the transmitted protons after the absorbers

6/26/14 C ONCLUSION & S UMMARY -New objective for front end optimization -Handle excesseive proton beam + unwanted secondaries -Capture as much muons -Energy deposition has to be integrated in the optimization study -Partitioning of energy deposited in -Chicane -Be absorber -Optmization includes -Target geomtery -Chicane field + chicane geomtery -Be absorber -Re-tune buncher & phase roation