Microwave Measurement of Recycler Electron Cloud: Jeffrey Eldred 12/19/14.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Principles of Electronic Communication Systems
Advertisements

Beam-based Measurements of HOMs in the HTC Adam Bartnik for ERL Team, Daniel Hall, John Dobbins, Mike Billing, Matthias Liepe, Ivan Bazarov.
Long RAnge Navigation version C
Fundamentals of Data & Signals (Part II) School of Business Eastern Illinois University © Abdou Illia, Spring 2015 (February18, 2015)
Measurements of adiabatic dual rf capture in the SIS 18 O. Chorniy.
Chapter-3-1CS331- Fakhry Khellah Term 081 Chapter 3 Data and Signals.
Chi-Cheng Lin, Winona State University CS412 Introduction to Computer Networking & Telecommunication Theoretical Basis of Data Communication.
TRANSMISSION FUNDAMENTALS Review
Page 1 Return Path Testing Seminar Presented by Sunrise Telecom Broadband … a step ahead.
Chapter 2 Fundamentals of Data and Signals
Chapter 2: Fundamentals of Data and Signals. 2 Objectives After reading this chapter, you should be able to: Distinguish between data and signals, and.
3.1 Chapter 3 Data and Signals Copyright © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display.
1 Chapter 2 Fundamentals of Data and Signals Data Communications and Computer Networks: A Business User’s Approach.
Presented by Dr.J.L Mazher Iqbal
Fundamentals of Frequency Modulation
TRF Noise Floor Related Question Prepared by Bill Wu.
Analysis of ATF EXT/FF Orbit Jitter and extrapolation to IP (Data of ) ATF2 Project Meeting K. Kubo.
Microwave diagnostics for electron cloud detection on the SPS F. Caspers, E. Mahner, T. Kroyer B. Henrist, J.M. Jimenez Thanks to the SPSU study team members.
Lecture 1 Signals in the Time and Frequency Domains
Data Communications & Computer Networks, Second Edition1 Chapter 2 Fundamentals of Data and Signals.
General Licensing Class G8A – G8B Signals and Emissions Your organization and dates here.
Radio Communication SL – Option F.1. Radio communication includes any form of communication that uses radio (EM) waves to transfer information –TV, mobile.
COMMUNICATION SYSTEM COMMUNICATION :
1 Electron Cloud Measurements at the Fermilab Main Injector Bob Zwaska Fermilab ECloud07 Workshop April 9, 2007.
The 2008 SPS electron cloud transmission experiment: first results F. Caspers, E. Mahner, T. Kroyer B. Henrist, J.M. Jimenez Thanks to the SPSU study team.
TE Wave Measurements Of Electron Cloud At CesrTA J. Byrd, M. Billing, S. De Santis,M. Palmer, J. Sikora ILC08 November 17 th, 2008.
Performance Improvement of APS Booster Ring Dipole Magnet Power Supplies Ju Wang The 3 rd Workshop on Power Converters for Particle.
AB-ABP/LHC Injector Synchrotrons Section CERN, Giovanni Rumolo 1 Final results of the E-Cloud Instability MDs at the SPS (26 and 55 GeV/c) G.
More on Propagation Module B Copyright 2001 Prentice Hall.
Mathilde FAVIER Fellow in BE/BI/QP Mathilde FAVIER BE/BI-QPSCHOTTKY STATUS - BI DAY - December 6th
#3191, 14 Oct 2012 Cabling installed to allow fast BPM electronics on injector BPMs System is flexible enough to allow different INJ-BPMs to be used (not.
Monitoring of background events in 2010 run Giuseppe Zito 06/11/2015 PFG/MIG Topical meeting on beam background.
© 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies 1 Principles of Electronic Communication Systems Third Edition Louis E. Frenzel, Jr.
The 2008 SPS electron cloud transmission experiment: first results F. Caspers, E. Mahner, T.Kroyer Acknowledgements to B. Henrist, J.M. Jimenez, J.M. Laurent,
#1 Energy matching It is observed that the orbit of an injected proton beam is horizontally displaced towards the outside of the ring, by about  x~1 mm.
1 Outline Analog and Digital Data Analog and Digital Signals Amplitude Modulation (AM) Frequency Modulation (FM)
Physical Layer PART II. Position of the physical layer.
F. Caspers, S. Federmann. Contents  Further observations and confirmation on intermodulation effects  Analysis and explanation of the gain variation.
Electron energy stability: analysis from snapshot data and temperature stabilization Recycler Departmental Meeting May 21, 2008 A. Shemyakin 1.Analysis.
Effective drift velocity and initiation times of interplanetary type-III radio bursts Dennis K. Haggerty and Edmond C. Roelof The Johns Hopkins University.
Amplitude Modulated Radio Frequency Transmission System Instructor: Dr. Fu By: Megan Myles, David Jackson, and Edwin Wambwa.
COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS (5marks)
Chapter 2 Fundamentals of Data and Signals
Wednesday ● 02h04: Stable beams # b x 121b. – Peak luminosity 1.2e25 cm-2 s-1 ● 08h32: Beams dumped on request. – Length=6h28. Rampdown.
Receive Antenna Performance Comparison. Receive Antenna Monitoring The receive antenna was installed in its permanent location inside the chamber A spectrum.
LCWA09 – October 1 st S. De Santis Measurements of the Electron Cloud Density by TE wave propagation in Cesr-TA M. Billing, J. Calvey, B. Carlson, S. De.
 To define and explain frequency modulation (FM) and phase modulation (PM)  To analyze the FM in terms of Mathematical analysis  To analyze the Bessel.
Gustavo Cancelo Analysis of the phase shift error between A and B signals in BPMs BPM project.
Part 1 Principles of Frequency Modulation (FM)
F. Caspers, S. Federmann, E. Mahner, B. Salvant, D. Seebacher 1.
Principles & Applications
Beam Diagnostics Seminar, Nov.05, 2009 Das Tune-Meßverfahren für das neue POSI am SIS-18 U. Rauch GSI - Strahldiagnose.
ApEx needs for CeC PoP Experiment December 11, 2015.
Measurements Of Electron Cloud Density By Microwave Transmission J. Byrd, M. Billing, S. De Santis, A. Krasnykh, M. Palmer, M. Pivi, J. Sikora, K. Sonnad.
Electron Cloud Modeling for the Main Injector Seth A. Veitzer 1 Paul L. G. Lebrun 2, J. Amundson 2, J. R. Cary 1, P. H. Stoltz 1 and P. Spentzouris 2 1.
Chapter Four: Angle Modulation. Introduction There are three parameters of a carrier that may carry information: –Amplitude –Frequency –Phase Frequency.
LEReC BPM Status P. Cernigla, R. Hulsart, R. Michnoff, Z. Sorrell June 2, 2016.
Principles of Electronic Communication Systems. Chapter 5 Fundamentals of Frequency Modulation.
Electron Cloud Measurement Summary for the April 2014 Run
Spread Spectrum Audio Steganography using Sub-band Phase Shifting
Principles of Electronic Communication Systems
Optical Feedback in a Curved-Facet Self-Pulsing Semiconductor Laser
CESRTA Measurement of Electron Cloud Density by TE Wave and RFA
Series of high-frequency slowly drifting structure mapping the magnetic field reconnection M. Karlicky, A&A, 2004, 417,325.
Fundamentals of Data & Signals (Part II)
Perceptual Echoes at 10 Hz in the Human Brain
Threshold Behavior in the Initiation of Hippocampal Population Bursts
Quantum squeezing of motion in a mechanical resonator
e-cloud Measurements by TE Wave Reflectometry on PEP-II
Tuesday 20 September 2011.
Presentation transcript:

Microwave Measurement of Recycler Electron Cloud: Jeffrey Eldred 12/19/14

Microwave Measurement Schematic ~ 2 GHz carrier frequency is propagated through beampipe. The presence of ecloud causes a phase-delay The phase modulation occurs at the beam harmonics ~90 kHz. The spectrum analyzer should see 90 kHz sidebands on either side of the carrier frequency.

S21 Measurement: Comparison of setups & amplifiers

S21 Measurements Previously, the microwave setup was connected to BPMs VP201 and VP203; Now we are connected to VP130 and VP202 which should the same distance and have a similar sequence of accelerator components. Somehow this came with a significant drop in transmission in the measurement range GHz. Its not an error in the way the cables are connected and its not a fault in the amplifier. For the result presented today, we use 2.06 GHz as our carrier frequency.

Fig. 1-1: Transm. at Old Setup and New Setup

Fig. 2-1: Transm. with each Amplifier

Spectrum Measurement: 90 kHz sidebands of 2.06 GHz signal

Fig. 2-1: Spectrum at 2.06 GHz Blue line: Carrier signal sent while beam running Red line: Beam running but no carrier signal.

Fig. 2-2: Spectrum at 2.06 GHz Green line: Measurement made from subtract “beam only” background from “signal + beam”.

Zero Span Measurement: Sideband height over the ramp cycle

Data-taking procedure Previously, I showed a frequency spectrum with a carrier frequency, sidebands, and noise at beam harmonics. The measurements track the (lower) sideband amplitude over the course of the Recycler cycle. “Zero-span” trace. The carrier frequency is GHz. Measurements performed at four different time intervals. Measurements taken with and without carrier signal. Each measurement is an average of 50 Recycler cycles. Four such averages are taken for each condition. Next I take the average and standard deviation of these four datasets and each point is calculated independently. In order to see the sidebands more clearly and test their statistical significance, its necessary to subtract the beam background.

Fig. 3-1: Sideband Height over RR cycle Blue line: Carrier signal sent while beam running Red line: Beam running but no carrier signal.

Fig. 3-2: Sideband Height over RR cycle (current) Green line: Measurement made from subtract “beam only” background from “signal + beam”.

Fig. 3-4: Sideband Height after first injection Blue line: Carrier signal sent while beam running Red line: Beam running but no carrier signal.

Fig. 4-4: Sideband height after first injection Green line: Measurement made from subtract “beam only” background from “signal + beam”.

Notes Like all other RR ecloud measurements, the ecloud signal is composed of a series of peaks right after a batch injection that are gradually decreasing in height and separated at half-synchrotron periods. In this case the signal appears solely after the first batch injection and no significant signal after other injections. When there is no beam, the spikes at injection (in the beam background) completely disappear.

Comparison to Previous Microwave Measurement

Fig. 3-2: Sideband Height over RR cycle (current) Green line: Measurement made from subtract “beam only” background from “signal + beam”.

Fig. 5-1: Sideband Height over RR cycle (prev.) Green line: Measurement made from subtract “beam only” background from “signal + beam”.

Fig. 3-4: Sideband after first injection (current) Blue line: Carrier signal sent while beam running Red line: Beam running but no carrier signal.

Fig. 5-2: Sideband after first injection (prev.) Blue line: Carrier signal sent while beam running Red line: Beam running but no carrier signal.

Comparison to Previous Microwave Measurement In current microwave measurement, only the peaks after the first injection are significant. In previous microwave measurements, the peaks after the second injection is highest, then the first, then the rest. The carrier frequency and the BPM location changed, but that wouldn't be responsible for this difference. In the previous measurement the first batch was at lower intensity and in the current measurement all batches are at the same intensity.

Comparison to Recycler Instability The batch-dependence of the microwave electron cloud measurements matches the batch-dependence of the Recycler instability (although the threshold is now much higher). There is no straightforward way to connect them: – Originally our ecloud models had the instability be batch-selective, not the ecloud density. – Recent measurements showed the instability does not depend on the separation between batches. – The instability threshold is now much higher.

Comparison to Simultaneous RFA measurement

Fig. 3-2: Sideband Height over RR cycle (current) Green line: Measurement made from subtract “beam only” background from “signal + beam”.

Fig. 6-1: RFA signal at the same time.

Comparison to Simultaneous RFA Measurement In the Microwave measurement the ecloud signal appears only after the first batch injection In the RFA measurement, the ecloud signal that appears after the first batch injection is always small than the ecloud signal that appears after subsequent injections. Neither batch-dependence matches the loss monitor. There is a lot of variability in the RFA measurements, but they all keep this same general structure. Why don't they match? – The beampipe around the RFA is still scrubbing. – The RFA is only in a field-free region. – Neither fact really explains the difference.

Fig. 7-1: Beampipe outgassing by RFA.

No Conclusion; Just Discussion!