Location of the LW detector- Simulation of the LW signals Lawrence Deacon RHUL ATF2 meeting August 23 rd 2006 KEK.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EXTRACTION BEAM LOSS AT 1 TEV CM WITH TDR PARAMETERS Y. Nosochkov, G. White August 25, 2014.
Advertisements

ATF2 Interaction Point Beam Size Monitor (Shintake Monitor) Status T. Yamanaka, M. Oroku, Y. Yamaguchi, S. Komamiya ( Univ. of Tokyo ), T. Suehara, Y.
Latest laser-wire results ● How does a Laser-Wire work? ● Latest ATF results ● Focusing optics ● Latest PETRA results University of Oxford: Nicolas Delerue,
27 June 2006Ken Moffeit1 Comparison of 2mrad and 14/20 mrad extraction lines Ken Moffeit ILC BDS 27 June 06.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project IR Working Group Summary Tom Markiewicz LC R&D Workshop, UCSC June 29, 2002.
Mark Rayner, Analysis workshop 4 September ‘08: Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing, slide 1 Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing Analysis.
Background comparison between 20 mrad and 2 mr crossings Takashi Maruyama SLAC Machine-Detector Interface Workshop SLAC January 6-8, 2005.
Status of ongoing studies for comparing 2-mrad and 20-mrad IRs T. Maruyama SLAC.
M. Woods (SLAC) Beam Diagnostics for test facilities of i)  ii) polarized e+ source January 9 –11, 2002.
Overview of Extraction Line Designs and Issues
Relative Error on Parameter Pessimistic Estimate Optimistic Estimate β function at the LW 3% 1% LW readout error 2% 1% Laser spot waist 10% Laser Pointing.
UK/EU Plans for ATF2 G.A. Blair ATF2-IN2P3-KEK kick-0ff meeting, Annecy, 8 th October 2006 Overview EUROTeV UK.
Measurements of stray field in the NLCTA area Josef Frisch, Peter Tenenbaum, Tor Raubenhemier.
Y. Ohnishi / KEK KEKB-LER for ILC Damping Ring Study Simulation of low emittance lattice includes machine errors and optics corrections. Y. Ohnishi / KEK.
ATF2 Magnets ATF2 Magnets 11Mar '08, Weekly MtgCherrill Spencer Status Report ATF2 FD quads 1 Status Report on the ATF2 “Final Doublet” quads being made.
AWAKE Electron Spectrometer Simon Jolly, Lawrence Deacon, Matthew Wing 28 th January 2015.
Laser-wire Measurement Precision Grahame Blair Beijing- BILCW07, 6 th February 2007 Introduction Overview of errors Ongoing technical work in this area.
Matching recipe and tracking for the final focus T. Asaka †, J. Resta López ‡ and F. Zimmermann † CERN, Geneve / SPring-8, Japan ‡ CERN, Geneve / University.
Laser Wire: :LBPM G A Blair EUROTeV Scientific Workshop, Uppsala 27 th August 2008 Introduction Emittance extraction Experimental programme Laser R&D Summary.
ATF1/2 laser-wires Stewart T. Boogert on behalf of UK Extraction line laserwire collaboration A. Aryshev, G. Blair, S. Boogert, A. Bosco, L. Corner, L.
Commissioning Status of Shintake Monitor (IP-BSM) T. Yamanaka, M. Oroku, Y. Yamaguchi, Y. Kamiya, S. Komamiya (Univ. of Tokyo), T. Okugi, N. Terunuma,
ILC Beam Delivery System / MDI Issues for LCC-phase (~
Laser-wire at ATF2 and PETRA Grahame Blair CERN, 18 th October 2007 Introduction Overview of errors Ongoing technical work in this area Plans for the future.
27 MAY 2008NANOBEAM A laser-wire scanner for the ATF extraction line Alexander Aryshev, Stewart Boogert, Grahame Blair, Gary Boorman a Lawrence.
19 July 2006Ken Moffeit1 Comparison of 2mrad and 14/20 mrad extraction lines Ken Moffeit (via Eric Torrence) VLCW06 19 July 06.
1 Overview of Polarimetry Outline of Talk Polarized Physics Machine-Detector Interface Issues Upstream Polarimeter Downstream Polarimeter Ken Moffeit,
Mark Rayner 14/8/08Analysis Meeting: Emittance measurement using the TOFs 1 Emittance measurement using the TOFs The question: can we use position measurements.
ILC collimation using Beam Delivery Simulation (BDSIM) S. T. Boogert, L. Nevay, J. Snuverink, H. Garcia Morales ALCWS KEK, Tsukuba, Japan 20 th April 2015.
Simulations Report E. García, UIC. Run 1 Geometry Radiator (water) 1cm x 2cm x 2cm with optical properties Sensitive Volume (hit collector) acrylic (with.
Nov Beam Catcher in KOPIO (H. Mikata Kaon mini worksyop1 Beam Catcher in the KOPIO experiment Hideki Morii (Kyoto Univ.) for the KOPIO.
Tests of spectrometer screens Introduction Layout Procedure Results Conclusions L. Deacon, B. Biskup, S. Mazzoni, M.Wing et. al. AWAKE collaboration meeting,
ATF2 background and beam halo study D. Wang(IHEP), S. Bai(IHEP), P. bambade(LAL) February 7, 2013.
G4Beamline Simulated Electron Distribution within the HPRF Cavity 2/15/20121.
Interaction Region Backgrounds M. Sullivan for the MEIC Collaboration Meeting Oct. 5-7, 2015.
Magnetized hadronic calorimeter and muon veto for the K +   +  experiment L. DiLella, May 25, 2004 Purpose:  Provide pion – muon separation (muon veto)
Design options for emittance measurement systems for the CLIC RTML R Apsimon.
Interaction Region Issues M. Sullivan for the EIC User Group Meeting Jan. 6-9, 2016.
ILC EXTRACTION LINE TRACKING Y. Nosochkov, E. Marin September 10, 2013.
Cherrill Spencer, SLAC. MDI Workshop Jan '05 1 Impact of Crossing Angle Value on Magnets near the IP Overview of several unusual quadrupole designs that.
1 M. Sullivan IR update IR Update M. Sullivan for the 3 rd SuperB workshop SLAC June14-16, 2006.
Summary of Tuning, Corrections, and Commissioning ( Short summary of ATF2 meeting at SLAC in March 2007 ) and Hardware Issues for beam Tuning Toshiyuki.
Taikan SUEHARA et al., LCWS2007 & DESY, 2007/06/01 R&D Status of ATF2 IP Beam Size Monitor (Shintake Monitor) Taikan SUEHARA, H.Yoda, M.Oroku,
MEIC Detector and IR Integration Vasiliy Morozov, Charles Hyde, Pawel Nadel-Turonski MEIC Detector and IR Design Mini-Workshop, October 31, 2011.
3/10/061 Smith- Purcell radiation bunch profile diagnostics / Laser wire Lawrence Deacon, LCUK Meeting, Durham 25/9/06.
14/06/2007Hayg GULER (LLR)1 ATF2 line studies with BDSIM using two different beam inputs parameters.
2nd ATF2 Project Meeting (May 30, 2006)M. Woodley [SLAC]1 ATF2 Layout/Optics (v3.3) nBPM (SLAC) nBPM (KEK) FONT Compton / laserwire ODR Existing ATF Extraction.
Initial Study of Synchrotron Radiation Issues for the CEPC Interaction Region M. Sullivan SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory for the CEPC14 Workshop.
ILC BDS Commissioning Glen White, SLAC AWLC 2014, Fermilab May 14 th 2014.
MAIN DUMP LINE: BEAM LOSS SIMULATIONS WITH THE TDR PARAMETERS Y. Nosochkov E. Marin, G. White (SLAC) LCWS14 Workshop, Belgrade, October 7, 2014.
Design challenges for head-on scheme Deepa Angal-Kalinin Orsay, 19 th October 2006.
ODR Diagnostics for Hadron Colliders Tanaji Sen APC.
Hardwares for commissioning 2 nd ATF2 Project Meeting KEK, Tsukuba, Japan 5/ 31/ 2006 T.Okugi (KEK)
M. Sullivan Apr 27, 2017 MDI meeting
Update of the SR studies for the FCCee Interaction Region
Emittance Diagnostics
Cherrill Spencer, SLAC Member of ATF2 Magnet Team
M. Sullivan for the SLAC SuperB Workshop Jan , 2009
M. Sullivan International Review Committee November 12-13, 2007
The Interaction Region
M. Boscolo, K. Bertsche, E. Paoloni, S. Bettoni,
Analysis of 14/20 mrad Extraction Line Energy Chicane
Beam Size Monitor Model
Final Focus Synchrotron Radiation
Cherrill Spencer, SLAC Member of ATF2 Magnet Team
3rd ATF2 Project Meeting, December 18-20, 2006
ATF Intrabeam Scattering Results
ATF2 Layout/Optics (v3.6) Existing ATF Extraction Line
M. Boscolo, K. Bertsche, E. Paoloni, S. Bettoni,
ILC Beam Switchyard: Issues and Plans
CLIC luminosity monitoring/re-tuning using beamstrahlung ?
Presentation transcript:

Location of the LW detector- Simulation of the LW signals Lawrence Deacon RHUL ATF2 meeting August 23 rd 2006 KEK

Possible Locations ● Between BH5 and QD6 ● Between QD6 and QF5 ● Further downstream

BDSIM screenshots ● Green line is a photon. It passes through QD6 and QF5 and hits SF5. ● BH5 must have a window ● Holes would need to be drilled in yoke of SF5 for detection further downstream. This would affect the magnetic fields BH5 QD6 QF5 SF5 Possible Detector Locations

< QD6 ● Space is 0.55m ● Could fit aerogel Cerenkhov (detector we are currently using at ATF) if extra mirrors are used to reflect the cerenkhov light hoizontally before it is reflected down into the PMT ● Very difficult to fit current calorimeter in. ● Could limit detector choices. ● Laserwire signal between 2cm and 5cm from beamline

QD6 > QF5 ● Laserwire signal would pass through gap between pole tips ● Bolt heads need to be shortened

QD6 > QF5 ● Space is 1.6m – space required for BPM ● Can put larger detectors at this location ● Laserwire signal approx. 15cm from beam line

Simulations ● ATF2 laser wire simulated using BDSIM

Quadrupole Model ● Modelled in BDSIM as shown ● Red is iron ● Green is copper (part of coils) ● Dimensions match technical drawing

Simulation materials/ apertures ● Beam pipe radius= 2.14cm (except in apertures) ● Beam pipe material is aluminium throughout (should be steel in drifts and copper in magnets?) ● Magnet material is Iron (small part of quad is copper) ● BH5 is vacuum (window to allow photons through) ● Apertures between pole tips and coils in quarupoles

Simulation Apertures

Simulation Beam Parameters at Start of EXT ● Energy cutoff = 1MeV ● Energy= 1.28GeV ● SigmaE= 0.8 e-3 ● Horizontal emittance= 2.0 e-9 ● Normalized vertical emittance= 3.0e-9

Simulation Beam Parameters at Start of EXT ● Beta x = ● Beta y = ● Alpha x = ● Alpha y = ● From mad files (Mark Woodley, SLAC)

Laser Wire Parameters ● Position: extraction line at MW0X (between QD18X and QD19X) ● Wavelength= 532nm ● Spotsize= 15 microns

Simulated e- Beam at Start of EXT/Laserwire ● Top: y ● Bottom: x ● Left: start ● Right:at laserwire ● Units: microns

Simulated Compton Scattered Photon Spectrum ● Photon spectum at laserwire IP ● Units: GeV ● High energy cutoff agrees with theory ● Artificial cutoff below 1MeV

Laserwire Photons at IP ● Left: xp/yp ● Right: x/y

Comparison of Detector Locations ● Particle distribution x y ● Left: <QD6 ● Right: QD6>QF5

Comparison of Detector Locations ● Left: primary particles Right:not primary particles ● Top: QF5

Comparison of Detector Locations ● Secondary particles were scattered over large angles. ● Secondary particle number and energy could fluctuate more than that of primary particles ● Compared energy for different sampler (detector) sizes at both locations and ● Standard deviation in the energy/energy for different sampler sizes at both locations ● Statistics are from 10 shots with 1000 scattered photons each (will be higher will shorter wavelength laser). ● Assumed that detector is uniformly sensitive to edge. Further simulation required to include effects of mirrors etc.

Comparison Of Detector Locations ● Energy per shot/ GeV ● One shot scatters 1000 photons from e- beam. Increases with shorter laser wavelength. May go to shorter wavelength in future. ● Top: at < QD6 ● Bottom: at QD6<QF5

Comparison of Detector Locations ● standard devation in energy/energy ● Around 2.5% fluctuations and 9.5 GeV at <QD6 and 3.5% fluctuations and 8GeV at QD6<QFF ● Detector area should be 5m by 5cm to maximise signal?

Best Location ● The difference in signal between the two locations is not great ● More space in the second location provides more flexibility ● Laser wire signal is further from beam line at second location so more space is available ● The background at one location could be higher than at the other ● Will bolt heads may need to be shortened in QD6 for second location?

Future Work ● Simulate background ● Compare simulations with ATF results ● To do this the current detector must be calibrated ● Test new detector setup ● Try calorimeter ● Try simulations with different e- beam optics ● Simulate detector: lead, aerogel, mirrors.