P. A. POSOCCO CERN – BE/ABP Intra-Beam stripping at SPL: should we be worried? 5 th SPL Collaboration meeting.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Copyright, 1996 © Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc. Beyond Piwinski & Bjorken-Mtingwa: IBS theories, codes, and benchmarking Jie Wei Brookhaven National.
Advertisements

R. Miyamoto, Beam Physics Design of MEBT, ESS AD Retreat 1 Beam Physics Design of MEBT Ryoichi Miyamoto (ESS) November 29th, 2012 ESS AD Retreat On behalf.
R Scrivens, CERN, ABI Workshop, 12/2008 The Feschenko Bunch Shape Monitor User experience at CERN Developed by INR, Troitsk. High resolution bunch shape.
Experience with Bunch Shape Monitors at SNS A. Aleksandrov Spallation Neutron Source, Oak Ridge, USA.
Benchmark of ACCSIM-ORBIT codes for space charge and e-lens compensation Beam’07, October 2007 Masamitsu AIBA, CERN Thank you to G. Arduini, C. Carli,
Halo calculations in ATF DR Dou Wang (IHEP), Philip Bambade (LAL), Kaoru Yokoya (KEK), Theo Demma (LAL), Jie Gao (IHEP) FJPPL-FKPPL Workshop on ATF2 Accelerator.
SPACE CHARGE EFFECTS IN PHOTO-INJECTORS Massimo Ferrario INFN-LNF Madison, June 28 - July 2.
A. Bay Beijing October Accelerators We want to study submicroscopic structure of particles. Spatial resolution of a probe ~de Broglie wavelength.
Space Charge meeting – CERN – 09/10/2014
Parameter sensitivity tests for the baseline variant Konstantin Lotov, Vladimir Minakov, Alexander Sosedkin Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS,
AGS Polarized Proton Development toward Run-9 Oct. 3, 2008 Haixin Huang.
Simulation of direct space charge in Booster by using MAD program Y.Alexahin, N.Kazarinov.
J. Rodnizki SARAF, Soreq NRC HB2008, August, 2008 Nashville TN Lattice Beam dynamics study and loss estimation for SARAF/ EURISOL driver 40/60 MeV 4mA.
Matching recipe and tracking for the final focus T. Asaka †, J. Resta López ‡ and F. Zimmermann † CERN, Geneve / SPring-8, Japan ‡ CERN, Geneve / University.
DTL: Basic Considerations M. Comunian & F. Grespan Thanks to J. Stovall, for the help!
Beam dynamics on damping rings and beam-beam interaction Dec 포항 가속기 연구소 김 은 산.
Simulation of direct space charge in Booster by using MAD program Y.Alexahin, A.Drozhdin, N.Kazarinov.
1 EPIC SIMULATIONS V.S. Morozov, Y.S. Derbenev Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility A. Afanasev Hampton University R.P. Johnson Muons, Inc. Operated.
F Project-X Related Issues in Recycler A.Burov, C.Gattuso, V.Lebedev, A.Leveling, A.Valishev, L.Vorobiev Fermilab AAC Review 8/8/2007.
PROTON LINAC FOR INDIAN SNS Vinod Bharadwaj, SLAC (reporting for the Indian SNS Design Team)
ERHIC design status V.Ptitsyn for the eRHIC design team.
Overview of Booster PIP II upgrades and plans C.Y. Tan for Proton Source group PIP II Collaboration Meeting 03 June 2014.
Flat-beam IR optics José L. Abelleira, PhD candidate EPFL, CERN BE-ABP Supervised by F. Zimmermann, CERN Beams dep. Thanks to: O.Domínguez. S Russenchuck,
FNAL 8 GeV SC linac / HINS Beam Dynamics Jean-Paul Carneiro FNAL Accelerator Physics Center Peter N. Ostroumov, Brahim Mustapha ANL March 13 th, 2009.
Damping Ring Parameters and Interface to Sources S. Guiducci BTR, LNF 7 July 2011.
ICFA-HB 2004 Commissioning Experience for the SNS Linac A. Aleksandrov, S. Assadi, I. Campisi, P. Chu, S. Cousineau, V. Danilov, G. Dodson, J. Galambos,
Beam breakup and emittance growth in CLIC drive beam TW buncher Hamed Shaker School of Particles and Accelerators, IPM.
Update on injection studies of LHC beams from Linac4 V. Forte (BE/ABP-HSC) Acknowledgements: J. Abelleira, C. Bracco, E. Benedetto, S. Hancock, M. Kowalska.
Module 5 A quick overview of beam dynamics in linear accelerators
INTENSITY LIMITATIONS (Space Charge and Impedance) M. Zobov.
By Verena Kain CERN BE-OP. In the next three lectures we will have a look at the different components of a synchrotron. Today: Controlling particle trajectories.
July LEReC Review July 2014 Low Energy RHIC electron Cooling Jorg Kewisch, Dmitri Kayran Electron Beam Transport and System specifications.
Lecture17(Course Summary).PPT - E. Wilson - 3/3/ Slide 1 COURSE SUMMARY A Design Study of a Compressor ring for A Neutrino Factory MT 2009 E. J.
RMS Dynamic Simulation for Electron Cooling Using BETACOOL He Zhang Journal Club Talk, 04/01/2013.
S. Bettoni, R. Corsini, A. Vivoli (CERN) CLIC drive beam injector design.
HINS Linac Simulations : Benchmarking, Jitter and Stripping. Jean-Paul Carneiro FNAL Accelerator Physics Center Accelerator Physics and Technology Workshop.
Concept Preliminary Estimations A. Kolomiets Charge to mass ratio1/61/8 Input energy (MeV/u) Output energy (MeV/u)2.5(3.5) Beam.
Marcel Schuh CERN-BE-RF-LR CH-1211 Genève 23, Switzerland 3rd SPL Collaboration Meeting at CERN on November 11-13, 2009 Higher.
2 February 8th - 10th, 2016 TWIICE 2 Workshop Instability studies in the CLIC Damping Rings including radiation damping A.Passarelli, H.Bartosik, O.Boine-Fankenheim,
Awake electron beam requirements ParameterBaseline Phase 2Range to check Beam Energy16 MeV MeV Energy spread (  ) 0.5 %< 0.5 % ? Bunch Length (
Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Depart. Of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Alex Bogacz,
Prospects for generating high brightness and low energy spread electron beams through self-injection schemes Xinlu Xu*, Fei Li, Peicheng Yu, Wei Lu, Warren.
Pushing the space charge limit in the CERN LHC injectors H. Bartosik for the CERN space charge team with contributions from S. Gilardoni, A. Huschauer,
Intra-Beam scattering studies for CLIC damping rings A. Vivoli* Thanks to : M. Martini, Y. Papaphilippou *
R. Miyamoto, MEBT Lattice Optimization, ESS AD Beam Physics Internal Review 1 MEBT Lattice Optimization Ryoichi Miyamoto (ESS) For Beam Physics Group,
B. Marchetti R. Assmann, U. Dorda, J. Grebenyuk, Y. Nie, J. Zhu Acknowledgements: C. Behrens, R. Brinkmann, K. Flöttmann, M. Hüning,
Operated by JSA for the U.S. Department of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Alex Bogacz IDS- NF Acceleration Meeting, Jefferson Lab,
Operated by JSA for the U.S. Department of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Alex Bogacz 1 Recirculating Linac Acceleration  End-to-end.
Frank Stulle, ILC LET Beam Dynamics Meeting CLIC Main Beam RTML - Overview - Comparison to ILC RTML - Status / Outlook.
HP-PS injection and extraction status W. Bartmann, B. Goddard HP-PS meeting, 20-November 2013.
Collision with a crossing angle Large Piwinski angle
Physics design on the main linac
Andrei Shishlo ORNL SNS Project Florence, Italy November 2015
Electron Cooling Simulation For JLEIC
Stefano Romeo on behalf of SPARC_LAB collaboration
Tunable Electron Bunch Train Generation at Tsinghua University
Wakefield Accelerator
Jeffrey Eldred, Sasha Valishev
Multiturn extraction for PS2
LHC (SSC) Byung Yunn CASA.
Beam-Beam Interaction in Linac-Ring Colliders
Advanced Research Electron Accelerator Laboratory
A Design Study of a Compressor ring for
MEBT1&2 design study for C-ADS
Physics Design on Injector I
Summary of Beam Cooling Parallel Session
Linac Diagnostics Commissioning Experience
He Zhang MEIC R&D Meeting, 07/09/2015
Update on ERL Cooler Design Studies
MEIC New Baseline: Luminosity Performance and Upgrade Path
Presentation transcript:

P. A. POSOCCO CERN – BE/ABP Intra-Beam stripping at SPL: should we be worried? 5 th SPL Collaboration meeting

How it started…  SNS experienced uniform losses all along the Super Conducting part  The residual radiation is about 30mrem/h at 30cm  They calibrated the losses with laser wire profile system giving: ≤10 -4 loss 2 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting Inter cryo SNS Laser pulse ~ 7 nsec 700 ns Mini- pulses ~600  s Macro -pulse

First attempts to understand the problem  Scraping at low energy:  lower localized losses but still a uniform pattern along the linac  Longitudinal emittance measurements:  found some longitudinal halo partially mitigated with a linac retuning. The simulations didn’t predict it…  High order magnetic components in the quads equipped with steerers not taken into account for the linac design:  sextupole: since it is proportional to the corrector current (normally very low) it is an issue only for very mismatched beams  dodecapole: they may excite a high order resonance at 60 degs (the design phase advance is around this value for all the linac length). Reducing the focalization helps reducing the pile-up loss component, but not the baseline. 3 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting

 After a lot of work they managed to reduce the losses down to  Not an issue anymore in terms of power loss for SPL, but still an unsolved problem  V. Lebedev had the idea of the Intra Beam Stripping and applied first to SNS and then to the ProjectX design Discovering the truth 4 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting

Intra-Beam stripping cross section [1] Semi-empirical formula: with: Bohr radiusFine structure constant Ion relative velocity Minimum β SPL relative velocity range Cross-section measured at LEAR [2] (1987) 5 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting

Fractional Loss [1] 6 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting Particle loss rate in the beam frame: where ½ factor to remove the double counting Evaluating the velocity distribution for each r For a Gaussian distribution: Which becomes in the lab frame: F is a form factor which is =2/√3 (max) when all 3 velocity spreads are equal Cross section independent of the velocity

Envelopes 7 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting

SPL main parameters 8 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting

Beta Functions along SPL 9 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting horizontal vertical longitudinal

Un-normalized emittances 10 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting horizontal vertical longitudinal

RMS Beam Sizes 11 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting horizontal vertical longitudinal

Velocity distributions (beam frame) 12 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting horizontal vertical longitudinal

Fractional Loss along SPL [3] High Current 13 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting Calculated with a script developed at FNAL

Power Loss (High Current) 14 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting

Mitigating the IBS  Keeping the beam power constant, the power loss is proportional to the bunch peak current  Reducing the transverse focalization increases the beam size and reduces the velocity spread, but:  The transverse phase advance must be higher than the longitudinal one for stability  The focalization must compensate at least the cavity defocusing force for every particle in the phase space (space charge has to be included)  Reducing the longitudinal focalization:  Reducing the accelerating gradient / efficiency  Reducing the synchronous phase / non linearity  Reducing the cavity frequency / general linac design 15 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting

What can we do for SPL? 16 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting Phase advance: Stability / resonances Phase advance/m: matching Since we don’t want losses taking place because of a bd design against the theoretical predictions: Let’s reduce the peak bunch current! or, in other words, Let’s go for the low-current option !

References 1. V. Lebedev et al. “Intrabeam Stripping in H- linacs”, Proceedings of LINAC-2010, THP M. Chanel et al., “Measurement of the H- beam stripping cross section by observing a stored beam in LEAR”, Phys. Lett. B, volume 192, number 3-4, 2 July F. Ostiguy, private communication. 4. J. Galambos and Y. Zhang, various articles and talks about SNS commissioning and performances. 17 5th SPL Collaboration Meeting