Chromaticity correction (without RCS.A78B2) Thanks to: F. Roncarolo, E.Todesco, M.Lamont, J.Wenninger.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LHC progress Saturday 2 nd May 2015 Coordination: Mike Lamont, Wolfgang Hofle.
Advertisements

Mystery unable to inject: timing, BIS, SIS… 8:15 to 12: 30 Injection/LBDS studies  Fine delay adjustment of injection kickers  Synchronization of MKI.
● Morning: – Squeeze and collide. – Smooth, orbit rather well under control (max. excursion ~ 0.2 mm at TCT, roughly sigma). Orbit evolution at the.
Proton beams for the East Area The beams and their slow extraction By : Rende Steerenberg PS/OP.
● 08:30 Loaded by mistake squeeze function to 2 m  Dumped beams ● 10:30-13:00 Test of new algorithm for long. Emittance blow-up to minimize oscillations.
E. Todesco FIELD MODEL AT 7 TEV N. Aquilina, E. Todesco CERN, Geneva, Switzerland On behalf of the FiDeL team CERN, 17 th June.
Thursday 21/4 07:30: End of fill #1727. Beam dumped. ALICE compensator magnet fault. Delivered ~6.7 pb -1 in 7.5 h. 11:30 Stable beam # bunches/beam.
ION COMMISSIONING REVISITED 1 Thanks to: John Jowett, Walter Venturini. Matteo Solfaroli.
J. Pfingstner Jitter studies February 12, 2014 Optics corrections in the ATF damping ring Jürgen Pfingstner, Yves Renier.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. 13 Linear Correlation and Regression Analysis.
7 May 2009Paul Dauncey1 Tracker alignment issues Paul Dauncey.
ADT Tune Measurement F. Dubouchet, W. Hofle, D. Valuch Acknowledgement: R. Calaga, F. Roncarolo, E. Bravin, shift crews New developments and tests on August.
E. Todesco EXPERIENCE WITH FIELD MODELING IN THE LHC E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland Thanks to the FiDeL team CERN, Space charge th April 2013.
1) orbit reponse measurements indicated no obvious BPM polarity errors (Kajetan) 2) confirmed consistency between synchronous and IIR- based orbit estimates.
Heat load analysis for Inner Triplet and Stand Alone Modules H. Bartosik, J. Hulsmann, G. Iadarola and G. Rumolo LBOC meeting 28 October 2014 Based on.
How precisely can we control our magnets? Experience and impact on the expected control of machine parameters (tune and chromaticity) Thanks to: M.Lamont,
LHC progress Sunday 3rd May 2015 Coordination: Mike Lamont, Wolfgang Hofle.
FCC ramp – first stab Mike Lamont. I’(t) = 0 to avoid a voltage discontinuity “it has been shown that if I’(t) is kept low at the end of the snapback,
E. Todesco CAN WE IMPROVE THE MAGNETIC CYCLE/MODEL AND THEIR EFFECTS? E. Todesco For the FiDeL team: C. Alabau Pons, L. Bottura, M. Buzio, L. Deniau, L.
7 th March 2008 Magnet Modelling N. Sammut On behalf of the FIDEL Working Group.
Tune: Decay at Injection and Snapback Michaela Schaumann In cooperation with: Mariusz Juchno, Matteo Solfaroli Camillocci, Jorg Wennigner.
RHIC Status April 8, 2011 RSC Meeting Haixin Huang.
07:00 Dump fil #2219, 123 pb -1 delivered. Trim TDI parking position to +/- 55 mm in the collimator BP trimmed the temperature kicker limit to 62 degrees.
Beam Diagnostics Seminar, Nov.05, 2009 Das Tune-Meßverfahren für das neue POSI am SIS-18 U. Rauch GSI - Strahldiagnose.
Monday 19 th March 07:33 Lost (another) beam in the squeeze, beyond 2 m, B2 hits 1/3 resonance. 08:30 Start (another) ramp  Try to correct coupling and.
(Towards a) Luminosity model for LHC and HL-LHC F. Antoniou, M. Hostettler, Y. Papaphilippou, G. Papotti Acknowledgements: Beam-Beam and Luminosity studies.
LHC Collimation Working Group Monday, 21 March 2016 Analysis of collimator BPMs in the 2015 run A.Valloni, G. Valentino with input from R. Bruce, A. Mereghetti,
LHC Wire Scanner Calibration
Wednesday
LHC Status Tue Morning 22-Aug
FiDeL: the model to predict the magnetic state of the LHC
Saturday 24 March 2012.
Impact of remanent fields on SPS chromaticity
Chromaticity decay and snapback
Tune and Chromaticity: Decay and Snapback
Update on Chromaticity Measurements
Tune and Chromaticity Measurements during the 10 A/s Ramp(s)
Beam-beam Effects in Hadron Colliders
Asynchronous free ATS optics for LHC & HL-LHC S. Fartoukh, BE-ABP
LHC Emittance Measurements and Preservation
LHC Beam Commissioning WG Meeting
LHC Status Wed Morning 13-April R. Assmann, B. Holzer et al
Wednesday /Thursday 09-11:00 Verification of the LSS6 interlocked BPMs: took longer to fill due to some problems with RF cavities in the PS. In the mean.
Machine availability reaching well over 80%
Tuesday TOTEM and transverse loss map (1) OK
Tuesday 23/11/10 8:00 Physics fill #1511 dumped
Wednesday Morning 8: :30 end of fill study - octupole polarity inversion (Elias, Tatiana, Alexey, Georges, …): Goal: study the effect of the.
Summary of Week 16 G. Arduini, J. Wenninger
Friday 31st August & night
Saturday 2/4/ :00-09:00 Problems with SPS:
Wednesday 8th August & night
Week 35 – Technical Stop and Restart
Planning at 5 o’clock meeting Friday
Saturday – Morning 7:36 beams dumped
Wednesday 9:08 Fill 3214 dumped by OP after 5:26 hours in stable beams
Saturday 7th May Sat – Sun night
Friday 23rd March 08:00 Access
Summary Thursday h21: Stable beams fill #1303.
Summary of week 19 Machine Coordinators: G. Arduini, M. Lamont Main aim: Luminosity production.
Saturday Nov Stop proton operation. Switch back to ions
Thursday 26th July 13:21 Fill 2880 beam dumped
LHC FMCM Project 1.
LHC Status Tue Morning 22-Aug
Thursday 30th September De-bunching test
LHC Morning Meeting - G. Arduini
Another Immortal Fill….
31/3/2010 Difficult day… but at the end stable beams.
15/12/2009 Vacuum interlock in sector 78 understood  out-gassing of a Penning gauge ignited as a result of ionization or dust arcing In conclusion: NO.
Wednesday 6.10 Morning: Quench test at 450 GeV
Tuesday
Presentation transcript:

Chromaticity correction (without RCS.A78B2) Thanks to: F. Roncarolo, E.Todesco, M.Lamont, J.Wenninger

Outline & Measurement method Matteo Solfaroli2 Q raw data Clean the data Fit a sin function with variable A Calculate Q’ Q’ function smoothing Elaborate data depending on needs  Q’ decay at injection (state of art)  Q’ during ramp  Q’ decay at flat-top  B3 to Q’ measurements  Q’ knob verification (OP w/o RCS.A78B2)

OP without RCS.A78B2 Matteo Solfaroli3 INJECTION B3 decay RAMP Snapback B3 variation (momentum change) FLATTOP B3 decay B2 compensation is calculated as for B1 then multiplied to a 8/7=1.14 factor The RCS.A78B2/B3 function has been equally distributed on the other circuits The B2 global_B3 knob has been multiplied by a 8/7=1.14 factor (effect of about 0.2 Q’ units) RCS.A78B2/B3 sec B3 Q’ min sec B3 ~7 B3 units Example of H corr

B3 decay at injection Matteo Solfaroli4 B1 Q’H ~ +2.5 Q’V ~ -2 B2 Q’H ~ +2.5 Q’V ~ B3 units B3 decay not correctly compensated (kind of expected), but the good news is that there is no visible difference between the beams Trims on lattice sext to get Q’~8 before going into the ramp

B3 decay at injection Matteo Solfaroli5 Example of horizontal corrections The problems seen during the scrubbing were likely due to: Not good control of the tune decay (due to lack of reproducibility) High precision required over a much larger window than in standard operation Q’ min July 4 th

Ramping w/o RCS.A78B2 6Matteo Solfaroli First ramp: At about 800 sec the B2Q’V starts growing and B2Q’H goes down then passes negative…B2 is dumped around 1080 sec after the ramp start Third ramp: Both beams survive! Q’ (re-)measured along the ramp (small corrections implemented) and at flattop Second ramp: Both beams survive the ramp, but are dumped about 30 sec after flattop is reached (electrical glitch caught by FMCM RD1.LR5)

Ramp 7Matteo Solfaroli B3 compensation at injection not perfect, about 2/3 Q’ units are not into the snapback correction but in the lattice sextupole Q’ along the ramp is well controlled (+-2) No visible effect from the missing RCS

Flattop 8Matteo Solfaroli Very good control of small (~0.05 units) B3 decay at flattop Small (visible on V??) effect from the missing RCS as the trim was reverted and not put back Tune decay not compensated (QFB during squeeze)

B3 to Q’ measurement Matteo Solfaroli9 Old assumption : 1 B3 unit = -43 Q’ units in H 35 Q’ units in V Values measured during Run1 New measurements 1 B3 unit = B1 H ~ Q’ unit V ~ 35.3 Q’ unit B2 H ~ -42 Q’ unit V ~ 35 Q’ unit 0.3 B3 units swing in 10 steps crosscheck with 1 unique step back (not shown)

Q’ knob check Matteo Solfaroli10 Knob measurements 2 steps of 5 units B1 H -> 2 to 12 V -> 15 to 5 B2 H -> 2.2 to 12.2 V -> 14 to 4

Matteo Solfaroli11 Q’ today +6 all along (~10) +8 the last point (~12) +6 all along (~9) +8 the last point (~12) +10 (+13) +12 (+15) +10 (+13) B1H B1V B2H B2V +12 (+15) +10 (+13) +10 (+13) sec Q’

Linear Fit: On-momentum tune Chroma Momentum - Offset Online Q’ estimate V1 -> the naïve approach Matteo Solfaroli12 K.Fuchsberger

4 Fit parameters Initial guess 4 Fit parameters Online Q’ estimate V2 Matteo Solfaroli13 K.Fuchsberger

Worked very reliably for several fills Next improvement steps: Q’ trace (e.g. to observe evolution during ramp) Feed Forward Error Estimation Online Q’ K.Fuchsberger 14Matteo Solfaroli

Conclusions 15Matteo Solfaroli  The exclusion of RCS.A78B2 has been fairly transparent (NO difference between the beams)  B3 injection decay  The B3 injection decay is correctly compensated for the operational purpose (windows of about 1 hour at constant Q’)  It would be a plus to verify the powering history dependence with some additional measurements  Snapback & ramp  Quite a good control of Q’ during ramp and snapback (+-2 units)  A measurement with slower ramp start could maybe gives us more info?? (details to be studied)   The correction for B3 decay at flat-top (0.05 units) has been implemented and the Q’ is well controlled (tune decay not negligible, but corrected with the QFB during the squeeze (if used))