Step IV Studies Timothy Carlisle Oxford. Intro. CM28 – Step III vs Step IV Cooling formula & G4MICE disagree on – Also observed in ICOOL (note #199 –

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 1 MICE Beamline Analysis Using g4beamline Including Jan 25 Updates for Kevin’s JAN04 Beamline Design Tom Roberts.

Advertisements

CM31: Multiple Scattering in GEANT4 Timothy Carlisle University of Oxford.

Emittance definition and MICE staging U. Bravar Univ. of Oxford 1 Apr Topics: a) Figure of merit for MICE b) Performance of MICE stages.

“Amplitude Cooling” in Step III & IV Timothy Carlisle.

Tracker Reconstruction Stuff Timothy Carlisle Oxford.

MICE analysis meeting - (01/06/2006) 1 few words on emittance growth in step III M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.

1 PID, emittance and cooling measurement Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE Analysis phone conference.

1 26 Nov 2010 SOLID ABSORBERS Solid absorbers will provide first cooling demonstration –This is important for a number of reasons! Can use only solids.

1 Downstream PID update Rikard Sandström PID phone conference

OPTICS UPDATE Ulisse Bravar University of Oxford 3 August 2004.

MICE analysis meeting - (6/4/2006) 1 Update on MICE – step III M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.

MICE analysis meeting - (21/09/2006) 1 Transmittance, scraping and maximum radii for MICE STEPVI M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.

1 Statistics Toy Monte Carlo David Forrest University of Glasgow.

Chris Rogers, MICE CM16 Wednesday Plenary Progress in Cooling Channel Simulation.

MICE analysis meeting - (26/3/2006) 1 Update on MICE – step III M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.

MICE CM - Fermilab, Chicago - (11/06/2006) 1 A (short) history of MICE – step III M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.

Beamline-to-MICE Matching Ulisse Bravar University of Oxford 2 August 2004 MICE performance with ideal Gaussian beam JUNE04 beam from ISIS beamline (Kevin.

1 Downstream PID update - How cooling section affects TOF measurement Rikard Sandström PID phone conference

30 June 2004MICE VC1 MICE  functions Since last VC report: –New Mike Green configurations for decreased spacing between focus and matching coils of 400mm,

Beam Parameter Study - preliminary findings Tim Carlisle.

MICE Experiments Introduction Introduction Disclaimers Disclaimers Assumptions Assumptions Baseline programme Baseline programme Full programme Full programme.

MICE analysis meeting - (18/5/2006) 1 STEPIII: ICOOL vs G4MICE M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.

M.apollonioam M. Apollonio University of Oxford update on STEP III.

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.

Overview of Experiment and Parameter Choices presented by Giles Barr.

04/01/2006MICE Analysis Meeting1 MICE phase III M. Apollonio, J. Cobb (Univ. of Oxford)

Helical Cooling Channel Simulation with ICOOL and G4BL K. Yonehara Muon collider meeting, Miami Dec. 13, 2004 Slide 1.

Chris Rogers, Analysis Parallel, MICE CM17 Progress in Cooling Channel Simulation.

1 Chris Rogers MICE Collaboration Meeting 11th Feb 2005 Tracking and Cooling performance of G4MICE.

Stats update Was asked to provide comparison between toy mc and g4mice at two points along z (middle of first and third absorbers) 10,000 events, step.

Diffuser Studies Chris Rogers, IC/RAL MICE VC 09 March 2005.

Analysis of MICE Chris Rogers 1 Imperial College/RAL Thursday 28 October, With thanks to John Cobb.

RF background, analysis of MTA data & implications for MICE Rikard Sandström, Geneva University MICE Collaboration Meeting – Analysis session, October.

Timothy Carlisle, Oxford CM 28. Step 3 Matching Step 3  Step 3 rematched for 830 mm spool piece  Calc. B(z) & BetaFn with the following:  Minimize.

1 Simulations of MICE March 2005 BENE Week Rikard Sandström Geneva University.

CM37 Alain Blondel step IV physics success 1 « STEP IV operations : Physics »

Emittance measurement: ID muons with time-of-flight Measure x,y and t at TOF0, TOF1 Use momentum-dependent transfer matrices to map  path Assume straight.

M.apollonioCM17 -CERN- (22/2-25/2/2007)1 M. Apollonio – University of Oxford sizes for PID & shields.

Results from Step I of MICE D Adey 2013 International Workshop on Neutrino Factories, Super-beams and Beta- beams Working Group 3 – Accelerator Topics.

17 June 2008PC Analysis PC Schedule 2008 Tuesdays alternate weeks 29 April  13 May  27 May (1 week before CM21)  17 June 1 July (JC away – can.

TJR 01/21/2003Slide 1 Simulations of the Study 2 Cooling Channel with Realistic Absorber Windows Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology.

M ULTIPLE S CATTERING RAL Timothy Carlisle 1.

Multiple Scattering (MSC) in Geant4 Timothy Carlisle Oxford.

1 Beam and Target Issues Chris Booth 5 th May 2004.

MICE at STFC-RAL The International Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment -- Design, engineer and build a section of cooling channel capable of giving the.

Marco apollonio/J.CobbMICE coll. meeting 16- RAL - (10/10/2006) 1 Transmittance, scraping and maximum radii for MICE STEPVI M. Apollonio – University of.

March 2, 2011 TJRPhysics Processes Missing from our Current Simulation Tools 1 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. This is the current list − Please help us to complete.

PID simulations Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE collaboration meeting RAL.

MCS: Multiple Coulomb Scattering Sophie Middleton.

J-PARC でのハイパー核ガンマ線分光実験用散乱粒子磁気スペクトロメータ検出器の準備状況東北大理, 岐阜大教 A, KEK B 白鳥昂太郎, 田村裕和, 鵜養美冬 A, 石元茂 B, 大谷友和, 小池武志, 佐藤美沙子, 千賀信幸, 細見健二, 馬越, 三輪浩司, 山本剛史, 他 Hyperball-J.

30 June 2004MICE VC Farley’s paper on absorbers Very rough notes, rather late at night.... not as pedagogic as I would wish. ‘Standard’ treatment of dE/dX.

RF background, update on analysis Rikard Sandström, Geneva University MICE Analysis phone conference, October 30, 2007.

Radiation Shielding Assessment for MuCool Experimental Enclosure C. Johnstone 1), I. Rakhno 2) 1) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Illinois.

Simulating the RFOFO Ring with Geant Amit Klier University of California, Riverside Muon Collaboration Meeting Riverside, January 2004.

Re-tuning MICE June 1 st 2010 Tim Carlisle. Intro At the moment MICE coil currents optimized for: central Pz = 0 RF No LH2 want to rematch M1 & M2 in.

Measuring Multiple Scattering in Step IV Timothy Carlisle Oxford See MICE Note 374 for updated results.

1 OPTICS OF MICE STEP V.0 Ulisse Bravar University of New Hampshire 26 June 2005.

M. Ellis - MICE Collaboration Meeting - Wednesday 27th October Sci-Fi Tracker Performance Software Status –RF background simulation –Beam simulation.

MICE Step IV Lattice Design Based on Genetic Algorithm Optimizations Ao Liu on behalf of the MICE collaboration Fermilab Ao Liu on behalf of the MICE collaboration.

(one of the) Request from MPB

MICE S TEP IV P HYSICS ‘D ELIVERABLES ’ V. Blackmore MAP 2014 Spring Meeting 30 th May, /15 AKA “What will we learn from Step IV?”

CM Nov 2009 DOES MICE NEED STEP III ? Somewhat hard to understand MICE Schedule… –If the gods are (un)kind it’s possible that SS1, SS2 & FC1 are.

1Malcolm Ellis - G4 Physics Validation Meeting - 17th July 2006 MuScat Validation of G4  Muon Scattering (MuScat) Experiment u Motivation: Ionisation.

Uncertainties in Cooling Simulations R.C. Fernow BNL Synergy Workshop FNAL 13 June 2008.

Marco apollonioAnalysis Meeting (9/12/2006)1 transmission vs amplitude with a finite size diffuser M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.

Brunel University London Field-off LiH Energy Loss Rhys Gardener CM45 – July 28th.

Beam Energy-Loss measurement

Field-on measurement of multiple scattering

Using MICE to verify simulation codes?

Physics Processes Missing from our Current Simulation Tools

Presentation transcript:

Step IV Studies Timothy Carlisle Oxford

Intro. CM28 – Step III vs Step IV Cooling formula & G4MICE disagree on – Also observed in ICOOL (note #199 – Marco/John Cobb) Step IV, 63mm LiH + AFC inc. windows [from CM28]

Cooling formula assumes Gaussian approximation: PDG: From Moliere G4MICE  GEANT 4: uses Lewis Theory, “develops a theory valid for any angle by using Legendre polynomials and then goes over into the small Angle”...simple then!

PxPx PzPz 58cm LH 2 G4MICE: N  =10,000 pencil beam on axis no fields Compare PDG with scattering in G4MICE.

ZXoXo x [cm] LH Li Be C Al Ti Cu LiH Polyethylene (C 2 H 4 ) Polystyrene (C 8 H 8 ) 2.68 Absorbers in Step IV scaled so  E = const. Instead fix the scattering angle    scaled to 63mm LiH = const.

Scattering Angle LH 2 Li Carbon CuAl LiH Atomic Number Z

Energy Loss MeV Atomic Number Z LH 2 LiH CarbonCu Al

Scattering isn’t so simple to predict it seems. Energy Loss seems fine however. MICE acceptance limited to – i.e. measure up to Carbon (maybe Aluminium) Find in G4MICE in different materials, for: p z = 207 MeV/c N  = 10,000  Pz = 1MeV/c    = 41cm

Absorber study  LH 2 C

Equilibrium Emittance Atomic Number Z LH 2 Li LiH Be C PolyE

15.9cm LH2 Target MuScat Experiment Measured muon scattering. Compared with – GEANT (10yrs old now) – ELMS

Summary Cooling formula/Moliere disagree with G4MICE – 1.5-2x less than predicted – Particularly bad with LH 2 MuScat – Moliere & GEANT overestimate scattering at low Z – ELMS code much better G4MICE uses GEANT however... – Is this closer to MuScat? – ELMS in MAUS?

Scattering Angle (Li fraction) Li mass fraction (m Li /m Li +m LH2 ) LH 2 Li LiH