Introduction D. Schulte for K. Kubo and P. Tenenbaum.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
10/23/07RTML EDR Oct GDE1 Cornell Plans for RTML EDR Work G. Dugan Cornell LEPP.
Advertisements

Q20: The X-band collider has much tighter requirements for the alignment of the beam orbit with the structure axis, yet the basic instrumental precision.
Issues in ILC Main Linac and Bunch Compressor from Beam dynamics N. Solyak, A. Latina, K.Kubo.
Tests of DFS and WFS at ATF2 Andrea Latina (CERN), Jochem Snuverink (RHUL), Nuria Fuster (IFIC) 18 th ATF2 Project Meeting – Feb – LAPP, Annecy.
Nick Walker KEK-DESY meeting 7 th March 2005.
SLAC ILC Accelerator: Luminosity Production Peter Tenenbaum HEP Program Review June 15, 2005.
Luminosity Stability and Stabilisation Hardware D. Schulte for the CLIC team Special thanks to J. Pfingstner and J. Snuverink 1CLIC-ACE, February 2nd,
Feed forward orbit corrections for the CLIC RTML R. Apsimon, A. Latina.
Ground Motion + Vibration Transfer Function for Final QD0/SD0 Cryomodule System at ILC Glen White, SLAC ALCPG11, Eugene March 21, 2011.
Summary of AWG4: Beam Dynamics A. Latina (CERN), N. Solyak (FNAL) LCWS13 – Nov 11-15, 2013 – The University of Tokyo, Japan.
Verification of Beam-Based Alignment Algorithms at FACET A. Latina, J. Pfingstner, D. Schulte (CERN) E. Adli (Univ. of Oslo) With the collaboration of:
August 9, 2007M. Palmer1 CESR Machine Studies Planning Overview Principal Projects Other Milestones and Dates Machine Studies Schedule Proposed Plan.
UK/EU Plans for ATF2 G.A. Blair ATF2-IN2P3-KEK kick-0ff meeting, Annecy, 8 th October 2006 Overview EUROTeV UK.
March 7, 2007 LET Issues (Cai/Kubo/Zisman) Global Design Effort 1 Low-Emittance Tuning Issues and Plans Yunhai Cai, Kiyoshi Kubo and Michael S. Zisman.
Main Linac Integration Work Packages Chris Adolphsen Dec 11, 2007 High Priority Items in Red.
8/28/07RTML EDR KOM1 Cornell Plans for RTML EDR Work G. Dugan Cornell LEPP.
For Draft List of Standard Errors Beam Dynamics, Simulations Group (Summarized by Kiyoshi Kubo)
ILC Start-End Simulations Glen White, SLAC May 13, 2014 AWLC14, Fermilab.
Feed forward orbit corrections for the CLIC RTML R. Apsimon, A. Latina.
@ Fermilab May 15-17, 2006, FNAL KIRTI RANJAN – DOE Review1 ILC Simulation for RDR Kirti Ranjan Fermilab.
Beam Physics Work D.S List of Workpackages Area packages Main beam electron source (Steffen Doebert) Main beam positron source (Steffen.
Summary of WG1 K. Kubo, D. Schulte, P. Tenenbaum.
D. Angal-KalininEUROTeV Annual Meeting, DESY WP2 : Beam Delivery System D. Angal-Kalinin ASTeC, STFC, Daresbury Laboratory 4 th EUROTeV Annual.
DESY GDE Meeting Global Design Effort 1 / 12 Status of RTML Design and Tuning Studies PT SLAC.
Beam dynamics on damping rings and beam-beam interaction Dec 포항 가속기 연구소 김 은 산.
Project Management Mark Palmer Cornell Laboratory for Accelerator-Based Sciences and Education.
Simulations Group Summary K. Kubo, D. Schulte, N. Solyak for the beam dynamics working group.
Dynamic Tuning Selected Highlights Freddy Poirier (DESY) ILC accelerator physics group meeting 28 th January 2008.
ILC Beam Delivery System / MDI Issues for LCC-phase (~
Luminosity expectations for the first years of CLIC operation CTC MJ.
December Ground Motion Group Global Design Effort 1 LET Status report, December 06 Paul Lebrun Fermilab CD/AMR.
CLIC Beam Physics Working Group D. Schulte
Report of 2 nd ILC Workshop (Snowmass) Working Group Kiyoshi KUBO references: Slides of the plenary talks in the workshop by P.Tenembaum and.
CLIC main activities and goals for 2018 Design and Implementation studies: CDR status: not optimized except at 3 TeV and not adjusted for Higgs discovery,
The CLIC decelerator Instrumentation issues – a first look E. Adli, CERN AB/ABP / UiO October 17, 2007.
BDS Andrei Seryi, Deepa Angal-Kalinin, Emmannual Tsesmelis, Rogelio Tomas, Andrea Latina, Daniel Schulte Detectors Civil engineering.
ATF2 Software tasks: - EXT Bunch-Bunch FB/FF - IP Bunch-Bunch FB - FB Integration Status Javier Resta-Lopez JAI, Oxford University FONT meeting 1th August.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project P. Tenenbaum DR  IP  DR Simulations Collaboration + MAC Meeting May 2002 “Now Bliss is Everywhere…”
1 Alternative ILC Bunch Compressor 7 th Nov KNU (Kyungpook National Univ.) Eun-San Kim.
Beam Dynamics WG Summary N.Solyak, K.Kubo, A.Latina LCWS 2014 – Oct 6-10, 2014 – Belgrade, Serbia.
GG3 Operations & Reliability (Availability) Eckhard Elsen Tom Himel
02/04/2009 AS-TAGL Mtg Global Design Effort 1 CesrTA Update Mark Palmer CLASSE.
Beam Dynamics WG K. Kubo, N. Solyak, D. Schulte. Presentations –N. Solyak Coupler kick simulations update –N. Solyak CLIC BPM –A. Latina: Update on the.
13 September 2006 Global Design Effort 1 ML (x.7) Goals and Scope of Work to end FY09 Nikolay Solyak Fermilab Peter Tenenbaum SLAC.
Low Emittance Generation and Preservation K. Yokoya, D. Schulte.
Global Design Effort: Controls & LLRF Americas Region Team WBS x.2 Global Systems Program Overview for FY08/09.
Emittance Tuning Simulations in the ILC Damping Rings James Jones ASTeC, Daresbury Laboratory.
1 DFS Studies on the Main Linac with Rnd-walk-like motion (preliminary) Accelerator Physics Meeting 02 october 2007 Freddy Poirier.
1 DFS Studies on the Main Linac with Rnd-walk-like motion LET Beam Dynamics Workshop 12 th December 2007 Freddy Poirier.
DMS steering with BPM scale error - Trial of a New Optics - Kiyoshi Kubo
Main Linac Tolerances What do they mean? ILC-GDE meeting Beijing Kiyoshi Kubo 1.Introduction, review of old studies 2.Assumed “static” errors.
Introdcution to Workpackage/Activity Reflection D. Schulte.
Beam Based Optics Measurements CTF3 Collaboration meeting CERN Yu-Chiu Chao, TJNAF.
Simulations - Beam dynamics in low emittance transport (LET: From the exit of Damping Ring) K. Kubo
Warren Funk, Daniel Schulte, Tetsuo Shidara Curved, Piece-Wise or Laser Straight Tunnel Beam dynamics favours laser straight tunnel Kryogenics favours.
Progress in 2006 of ELAN- BDYN and INSTR D. Schulte G. Blair.
Main and Drive Beam Dynamics Working Group Caterina Biscari, Daniel Schulte Attending people ~ 20 ± 5 Presentations ~ 18 (7 from CERN) CL IC 07.
DRAFT: What have been done and what to do in ILC-LET beam dynamics Beam dynamics/Simulations Group Beijing.
BDS, Start to End Simulation, Simulation Codes Summary D. Schulte.
IoP HEPP/APP annual meeting 2010 Feedback on Nanosecond Timescales: maintaining luminosity at future linear colliders Ben Constance John Adams Institute,
07 June 2006Peter Tenenbaum1 Ring to Main Linac and Low Emittance Transport SLAC DOE Review Accelerator Breakout.
15-August-2005Peter Tenenbaum for WG1 Convenors 1 Low Emittance Transport and Beam Dynamics (WG1) Snowmass Meeting “I hear the roar of the big machine,
ILC Main Linac Beam Dynamics Review K. Kubo.
Frank Stulle, ILC LET Beam Dynamics Meeting CLIC Main Beam RTML - Overview - Comparison to ILC RTML - Status / Outlook.
J. Alexander + Cornell accelerator group Cornell University
For Discussion Possible Beam Dynamics Issues in ILC downstream of Damping Ring LCWS2015 K. Kubo.
DFS Simulations on ILC bunch compressor
CLIC Klystron-based Design
Accelerator Physics Technical System Group Review
Feed forward orbit corrections for the CLIC RTML
Presentation transcript:

Introduction D. Schulte for K. Kubo and P. Tenenbaum

Programme Wednesday –Lattice Design –Main Linac Thursday –Beam delivery system –Ring to main linac –RDR preparation Friday –Polarisation –Instrumentation Saturday –Summary

Areas for LET Work Performance predictions (our core work) Lattice design (help area systems) Instrumentation requirements (help technical system) Availability (help global systems) Machine protection issues (help global system) Subjects are linked For now worry about RDR and post RDR –RDR: Studies that affect cost –Post RDR: Worry about performance –Cannot cleanly separate the two –Need to decide on the fly

Lattice Design At Snowmass we agreed on conceptual design Need to define –Which lattices have priority –Who is working on them –Where are additional needs –What do we want to modify with respect to Snowmass

Main Linac Design needs to be agreed on Work for alignment studies is ongoing Results seem to differ somewhat –Need to understand differences Beam-based alignment is crucial –Need to understand details to ensure correctness Curved linac needs verification Tuning bumps seem to be very effective –Needs detailed study and benchmarking Specific questions –Emittance measurement stations in main linac –Instrumentation requirements, e.g. BPMs, wake measurement in cavities –Long list from Main Linac Area Group

Ring to Main Linac Transport Lattice design –Many parts Need to specify diagnostics needs –Detailed understanding of Alignment procedures Tuning procedures Feedback systems –Also will allow performance prediction Integrated studies are important –E.g. interaction of bunch compressor and main linac/BDS

Interaction Region Need to evaluate reference lattices BDS alignment and tuning is crucial –Alignment seems to be less covered than main linac –Will also be relevant for ATF2 –E.g. definition of tuning knobs Need to verify that instrumentation is sufficient Need to study beam-beam tuning/ beam properties reconstruction procedures Need to understand post collision line Feedback is important –Dispersion can create a problem due to energy jitter –Stability requirements, e.g. ground motion needs to be determined

RDR Preparation Many of the things we do will have impact on the cost –Lattice design –Tolerance studies –Instrumentation requirements –Performance studies We need to react to input from area leaders Need to decide on priorities –Understand what people are doing –Try to find volunteers –Make sure that they deliver Start with lattices Need to see how to organise other work

Polarisation Issues Polarisation is important for the electrons and for the positrons as an upgrade Need to ensure that all sub-systems are compatible with polarisation preservation Need to understand generation of polarised positrons (and electrons) Need to improve simulation tools, e.g. only CAIN contains polarisation for beam-beam interaction Need to understand relevance of polarisation measurements (averaged vs correlated effects)

Instrumentation Will be important for all sub-system Need to agree on ways to specify the needs –E.g. BPM resolution, long term stability etc. –Will need studies to determine what is relevant Need studies to determine specification values Direct cost impact Iterative process with instrumentation experts –They will tell us if they can provide us with what we want –And how much it costs –Trade-off cost vs performance

Performance Studies Will last longer than RDR –But parts are need for the RDR Need to develop simulation codes –Benchmarking –Additional effects Need to develop optimisation strategy –Alignment –Tuning –Feedback –Flight simulator –Benchmarking of algorithms Need to understand imperfections/models –Pre-alignment –Ground motion –Instrumentation performance

Conclusion Your accelerator physics working group needs you