L. Keller 3/18/02 Beam-Gas-Bremsstrahlung and Coulomb Scattering in the NLC Beam Delivery System Conditions for Calculation: 1. Program is DECAY TURTLE.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ideas and Speculations for the Headon Extraction Line L. Keller Oct. 19, Give up the 3.5 m Separation between the Charged Dump and the Incoming.
Advertisements

Question from the GDE : Could local “doughnut” type muon spoilers like those in SLC be substituted for the 5 meter magnetized wall? 5m magnetized wall.
1 Vacuum Requirements in the Detector Region from Beam Gas and other Considerations Takashi Maruyama (SLAC) LCWA 2009, Albuquerque October 2, 2009.
Zero Degree Extraction using an Electrostatic Separator Take another look at using an electrostatic separator and a weak dipole to allow a zero degree.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project  IR background issues and plans for Snowmass Jeff Gronberg/LLNL Linear Collider Workshop October 25, 2000.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project NLC IR Layout and Background Estimates Jeff Gronberg/LLNL For the Beam Delivery Group LCWS - October 25, 2000.
Super-B Factory Workshop January 19-22, 2004 IR Upgrade M. Sullivan 1 PEP-II Interaction Region Upgrade M. Sullivan for the Super-B Factory Workshop Hawaii.
Background Studies Takashi Maruyama SLAC ALCPG 2004 Winter Workshop January 8, 2004.
Super-B Factory Workshop January 19-22, 2004 Accelerator Backgrounds M. Sullivan 1 Accelerator Generated Backgrounds for e  e  B-Factories M. Sullivan.
27 June 2006Ken Moffeit1 Comparison of 2mrad and 14/20 mrad extraction lines Ken Moffeit ILC BDS 27 June 06.
Super-B Factory Workshop January 19-22, 2004 Super-B IR design M. Sullivan 1 Interaction Region Design for a Super-B Factory M. Sullivan for the Super-B.
K. Moffeit 6 Jan 2005 WORKSHOP Machine-Detector Interface at the International Linear Collider SLAC January 6-8, 2005 Polarimetry at the ILC Design issues.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project Backgrounds Update Tom Markiewicz SLAC LCWS Cornell 15 July 2003.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project IR Working Group Summary Tom Markiewicz LC R&D Workshop, UCSC June 29, 2002.
Background comparison between 20 mrad and 2 mr crossings Takashi Maruyama SLAC Machine-Detector Interface Workshop SLAC January 6-8, 2005.
Beam Crossing Angle for  Tohru Takahashi Hiroshima University International Linear Collider January 2005 MDI Workshop SLAC.
A.Seryi, Nov 22, 2005, slide 1 Evaluation of Aug9 2mrad Use 2mrad extraction, version Aug 9, Use high.
Status of ongoing studies for comparing 2-mrad and 20-mrad IRs T. Maruyama SLAC.
IR Beamline and Sync Radiation Takashi Maruyama. Collimation No beam loss within 400 m of IP Muon background can be acceptable. No sync radiations directly.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project NLC Backgrounds What’s New? Tom Markiewicz LC’99, Frascati, Italy October 1999.
Design of the Photon Collimators for the ILC Positron Helical Undulator Adriana Bungau The University of Manchester Positron Source Meeting, July 2008.
1/18 The Distribution of Synchrotron Radiation Power in the IR C. H. Yu IR Overview SR Distribution in the IR The Protection of SR Power.
October 31, BDS Group1 ILC Beam Delivery System “Hybrid” Layout 2006e Release Preliminary M. Woodley.
January 10, 2007M. Woodley (SLAC)1 ILC Beam Delivery System “Interim Working Assumption” 2006e Release European LC Workshop, January , Daresbury.
Ijaz Ahmed Ijaz Ahmed Helmut Burkhardt Andrea Latina Beam-Halo Generation Study in CLIC CLIC Beam Dynamics Meeting, CERN: 13/02/08.
Backgrounds in the NLC BDS ISG9 December 10 – Takashi Maruyama SLAC.
Page 1 Overview and Issues of the MEIC Interaction Region M. Sullivan MEIC Accelerator Design Review September 15-16, 2010.
LCWS2004 Paris 1 Beam background study for GLC Tsukasa Aso, Toyama College of Maritime Technology and GLC Vertex Group H.Aihara, K.Tanabe, Tokyo Univ.
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,
GEANT4-BASED SIMULATION STUDY OF PEP-II BEAM BACKGROUNDS IN THE BABAR DETECTOR AT THE SLAC B-FACTORY W. S. Lockman, SCIPP, University of California, Santa.
Global Design Effort ILC Crab Cavity Overview and requirements Andrei Seryi SLAC on behalf of ILC Beam Delivery and Crab-Cavity design teams Joint BNL/US-LARP/CARE-HHH.
BES-III Workshop Oct.2001,Beijing The BESIII Luminosity Monitor High Energy Physics Group Dept. of Modern Physics,USTC P.O.Box 4 Hefei,
October 2005 Qweak Collaboration Meeting Detailed Design of Shield House and Collimators wrt Backgrounds Yongguang Liang Just getting started – will probably.
ATF2 background and beam halo study D. Wang(IHEP), S. Bai(IHEP), P. bambade(LAL) February 7, 2013.
Interaction Region Backgrounds M. Sullivan for the MEIC Collaboration Meeting Oct. 5-7, 2015.
1 O. Napoly ECFA-DESY Amsterdam, April 2003 Machine – Detector Interface : what is new since the TDR ? O. Napoly CEA/Saclay.
Recent Studies on ILC BDS and MERIT S. Striganov APD meeting, January 24.
Interaction Region Issues M. Sullivan for the EIC User Group Meeting Jan. 6-9, 2016.
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.
Electron cloud in Final Doublet IRENG07) ILC Interaction Region Engineering Design Workshop (IRENG07) September 17-21, 2007, SLAC Lanfa Wang.
THIN FILMS FOR CLIC ELEMENTS Outline Motivation The role of MME-CCS DB and MB transfer lines Main beam Main beam quadrupoles Other issues conclusions CLIC.
ILC IP SR and PEP-II M. Sullivan for the ILC IR engineering workshop IRENG07 Sept 17-21, 2007.
Simulation of heat load at JHF decay pipe and beam dump KEK Yoshinari Hayato.
1 O. Napoly ECFA-DESY Amsterdam, April 2003 Machine – Detector Interface : what is new since the TDR ? O. Napoly CEA/Saclay.
DRAFT Simulation of Errant Beams in the BDS How many bunches will damage beamline components or quench SC coils? Analysis Steps 1.Use TRANSPORT with BDS.
MDI Simulations at SLAC Takashi Maruyama, Lew Keller, Thomas Markiewicz, Uli Wienands, SLAC MAP Collaboration Meeting, FNAL June 21, 2013.
Initial Study of Synchrotron Radiation Issues for the CEPC Interaction Region M. Sullivan SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory for the CEPC14 Workshop.
E+/e- Backgrounds at BEPCII/BESIII JIN Dapeng Aug. 22, 2011.
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.
1 April 1 st, 2003 O. Napoly, ECFA-DESY Amsterdam Design of a new Final Focus System with l* = 4,5 m J. Payet, O. Napoly CEA/Saclay.
JLEIC MDI Update Michael Sullivan Apr 4, 2017.
M. Sullivan Apr 27, 2017 MDI meeting
Update of the SR studies for the FCCee Interaction Region
M. Sullivan for the SLAC SuperB Workshop Jan , 2009
M. Sullivan International Review Committee November 12-13, 2007
The Interaction Region
Neutron and Photon Backscattering from the ILC Beam Dump
Beam-Gas Inelastic scattering in CEPC partial double ring
AD & I : BDS Lattice Design Changes
ILC Baseline BDS Collimation Depth Calculations
The PEP-II Interaction e+e- Factories Workshop
CEPC main ring magnets’ error effect on DA and MDI issues
Higgs Factory Backgrounds
Discussion of High Energy Proton Losses in Arc 7
Dark current in TESLA linac
Yuri Nosochkov Yunhai Cai, Fanglei Lin, Vasiliy Morozov
Summary of the FCCee IR Workshop Jan 2017 at CERN
Sha Bai CEPC AP meeting Work summary Sha Bai CEPC AP meeting
Presentation transcript:

L. Keller 3/18/02 Beam-Gas-Bremsstrahlung and Coulomb Scattering in the NLC Beam Delivery System Conditions for Calculation: 1. Program is DECAY TURTLE modified for BGB and Coulomb scattering. Used at PEP-I, SLC, PEP-II, and PEP-N. Now called Lost Particle TURTLE (LPTURTLE). 2. BDS model is P. Raimondi, BDS112, with E beam = 500 GeV. 3 Residual gas is 62% H 2, 22% CO, 16% CO 2 by pressure (L. Eriksson). This gives a radiation length of 771 m at 1 atm. 4. Start with P = 50 nTorr ==> Lrad = 1.17 x m, N e- = 1.4 x / pulse train 5. LPTURTLE forces BGB and coulomb scattering uniformly along the 1433 m beam line. 6. Output histograms in PAW (T. Fieguth format, modified for NLC BDS). Make separate histograms for BGB electrons, BGB photons, and coulomb scattered electrons, then combine. 7. Apertures (radius): Octupoles 0.8 cm, 1.0 cm3 absorbers in FF cm Sextupoles 1.0 cmVertex detector 1.2 cm Quadrupoles 1.0 cm, 2.0 cmEnergy slit 0.34 cm (1.7%) Dipoles 5.0 cmNew coll. at Z=55m, 0.5 cm

Conditions for calculation (cont.): 8. Octupoles off, apertures in place. 9. Final doublet” includes two quadrupoles, two sextupoles, one octupole. All final doublet apertures and 1 st quadrupole in dump line are 1.0 cm radius.

3 Rough Estimate of Rates BGB N BGB /pulse train = t ln(E 2 /E 1 ) N e-, where, E 2 = maximum photon energy = E beam E 1 = minimum photon energy = 0.01 E beam t = # of radiation lengths in 1500 m beam line at 50 nTorr = (1500/1.17 x ) = 1.28 x rl N e- = 1.4 x / pulse train N BGB = 825 electrons and photons/pulse train in the BDS Coulomb Scattering N coul = 4.52 x P(Torr) N e- (1/E beam ) 2 (L beam )(1/θ min 2 - 1/θ max 2 ) where, Θ min = rad, Θ max = 2 x rad E beam = 500 GeV L beam = 1500 m N coul = 190 electrons/pulse train in the 500 GeV/electron

Table 1. Hits and Energy Deposited Near IP (per pulse train) No new collimator for BGB P = 50 nTorr CoulombAll lost BGB chargedBGB photonsScattering particles Hit LocationN E dep N E dep N E dep N E dep (GeV) (GeV) (GeV) (GeV) Downstream Quad Vertex Detector cm QD ~ SD00.1 ~ QF10.2 ~ SF ~ Octupole (Z=16m)

Table 1. Hits and Energy Deposited Near IP (per pulse train) New horizontal collimator at 55m from IP, half-aperture = 0.5 cm P = 50 nTorr CoulombAll lost BGB chargedBGB photonsScattering particles Hit LocationN E dep N E dep N E dep N E dep (GeV) (GeV) (GeV) (GeV) Downstream Quad Vertex Detector ~ cm QD ~ SD00.1 ~ QF10.2 ~ SF ~00.01 ~0 Octupole ~ ~0 (Z=16m)

Compare NLC with TESLA TDR TESLA TDR, p. IV-138: P = 5 x mbar (of CO) = 5 x atm = 3.8 nTorr of CO 1 R.L. of CO = atm,(NLC used R.L. = atm (different gas)) TESLA Result: “3 x electrons/bunch crossing leave the beam pipe near the IP” (no information about aperture and beam pipe sizes). Scale NLC Results to TESLA: NLC = (8.5/pulse train) (3.8 nT/50 nT)(771/304)(2 x /1.4 x ) = 23 x /pulse train (NLC) vs. 3 x /bunch crossing (TESLA) Why a factor of ≈ 8 different? Need to understand the TESLA result in detail to make sure we are comparing the same conditions.

Summary and Conclusions 1. For a residual gas pressure of 50 nT get 8.5 hits/pulse train (1627 GeV) on apertures within ±15 m of the IP, and 2.5 hits/pulse train (360 GeV) on a 1.2 cm radius vertex detector. 2. If the residual gas pressure was reduced to 1 nT in the last 250 m of the BDS, the above rates would be 0.2 and 0.05 hits/pulse train respectively. 3. Adding a new collimator 55 m from the IP intercepts nearly all of the BGB photons and those BGB electrons which would otherwise have hit the outboard end of the final doublet 4. There are not enough beam-gas-bremsstrahlung and coulomb scatters to cause a muon problem, even at 50 nT. Future Work 1. Use GEANT for a BGB calculation. Need to make the radiation length of the residual gas large enough to force a statistically significant number of interactions, but small enough to make secondary interactions negligible, probably about 1% r.l. 2. Find out the details of the TESLA BGB calculation and understand the difference between the NLC and TESLA results. 3. Estimate the feasibility and cost of pumping the last 250 m of BDS beam line to pressure of 1 nT. 4.For input to the detector GEANT simulation, use LPTURTLE to write out ntuples for particles that hit the vertex detector and other objects near the IP. 5.Put beam-gas-bremsstrahlung, coulomb scattering, and inverse Compton scattering in the new Woodley/Raimondi version of TURTLE.