E. Todesco CAN WE IMPROVE THE MAGNETIC CYCLE/MODEL AND THEIR EFFECTS? E. Todesco For the FiDeL team: C. Alabau Pons, L. Bottura, M. Buzio, L. Deniau, L.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme.
Advertisements

Author - Title (Footer)1 LINEAR LATTICE ERRORS AT THE ESRF: MODELING AND CORRECTION A. Franchi, L. Farvacque, T. Perron.
Beam commissioning strategy Global machine checkout Essential 450 GeV commissioning System/beam commissioning Machine protection commissioning.
* IP5 IP1 IP2 IP8 vertical crossing angle at IP8 R. Bruce, W. Herr, B. Holzer Acknowledgement: S. Fartoukh, M. Giovannozzi, S. Redaelli, J. Wenninger.
Magnetic Behavior of LHC Correctors: Issues for Machine Operation W. Venturini Delsolaro AT-MTM; Inputs from A. Lombardi, M. Giovannozzi, S. Fartoukh,
The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme.
Updates to WISE for LHC run II Per Hagen May 2015.
E. Todesco FIELD MODEL AT 7 TEV N. Aquilina, E. Todesco CERN, Geneva, Switzerland On behalf of the FiDeL team CERN, 17 th June.
Field Description of the LHC FiDeL - Status and Plan Presented by L. Bottura based on contributions of many MARIC and LHCCWG
LHC Technical Committee, 23/05/20071 LHC Commissioning Phases Squeeze presented by Massimo Giovannozzi on behalf of the LHCCWG Particular thanks to S.
The implementation of hysteresis in the FIDEL model and implications for the LHC operation P. Hagen November 2010.
1 / 23 Workshop Chamonix XV January 2006, L'Esplanade du Lac, Divonne-les-Bains S. Sanfilippo Transfer Function of the.
Elias Métral, LHC Beam Commissioning Working Group meeting, 08/06/2010 /191 SINGLE-BUNCH INSTABILITY STUDIES IN THE LHC AT 3.5 TeV/c Elias Métral, N. Mounet.
The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme.
Optimization of Field Error Tolerances for Triplet Quadrupoles of the HL-LHC Lattice V3.01 Option 4444 Yuri Nosochkov Y. Cai, M-H. Wang (SLAC) S. Fartoukh,
LSA/FiDeL1 Deliverables Commissioning:Commissioning: Transfer functions [MB, MQ, MQY, MQM, MQX etc…] DC components Decay prediction Snapback prediction.
Chromaticity correction (without RCS.A78B2) Thanks to: F. Roncarolo, E.Todesco, M.Lamont, J.Wenninger.
Injection Energy Review D. Schulte. Introduction Will review the injection energy So could answer the following questions: Which injection energy can.
AT-MEL, CERN, 1211 Geneva 23 R.Wolf-LHCCWG Magnet Setup Cycling for LHC R. Wolf for the FQWG et al. Contents -Overview -Details of individual cycles.
E. Todesco EXPERIENCE WITH FIELD MODELING IN THE LHC E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland Thanks to the FiDeL team CERN, Space charge th April 2013.
How precisely can we control our magnets? Experience and impact on the expected control of machine parameters (tune and chromaticity) Thanks to: M.Lamont,
LHC progress Sunday 3rd May 2015 Coordination: Mike Lamont, Wolfgang Hofle.
Faster ramp rates in main LHC magnets Attilio Milanese 7 Oct Thanks to M. Bajko, L. Bottura, P. Fessia, M. Modena, E. Todesco, D. Tommasini, A. Verweij,
The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme.
E. Todesco MAGNET (RE)Training E. Todesco Magnets, Superconductors and Cryostats Group Technology Department, CERN LHC risk review, 5 th March 2009 Acknowledgements:
FCC ramp – first stab Mike Lamont. I’(t) = 0 to avoid a voltage discontinuity “it has been shown that if I’(t) is kept low at the end of the snapback,
E. Todesco ENERGY OF THE LHC AFTER LONG SHUTDOWN 1 ( ) C. Lorin, E. Todesco and M. Bajko CERN, Geneva Switzerland With relevant inputs from colleagues.
Β*-dependence on collimation R. Bruce, R.W. Assmann C. Alabau Pons, F. Burkart, M. Cauchi, D. Deboy, M. Giovannozzi, W. Herr, L. Lari, G. Muller, S. Redaelli,
7 th March 2008 Magnet Modelling N. Sammut On behalf of the FIDEL Working Group.
Saturday 11.9 ● From Friday – Minimum required crossing angle is 100  rad in 2010 – Plenty of aperture at triplets: > 13  (n1 > 10) – Can stay with 170.
Progress with Beam Report to LMC, Machine Coordination W10: Mike Lamont – Ralph Assmann Thanks to other machine coordinators, EIC’s, operators,
Ramping faster? Mike Lamont Ralph Steinhagen. I’(t) = 0 to avoid a voltage discontinuity “it has been shown that if I’(t) is kept low at the end of the.
“ Decay & snapback in main LHC dipoles vs injection current”, LUMI-05, Arcidosso, 1 September 2005, Page 1/4 During ramps, boundary-induced.
Tune: Decay at Injection and Snapback Michaela Schaumann In cooperation with: Mariusz Juchno, Matteo Solfaroli Camillocci, Jorg Wennigner.
E. Todesco THE LHC MAGNETIC MODEL AT 6.5 TEV E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland With contributions from N. Aquilina, L. Bottura, R. De Maria, L. Deniau,
Hybrid Fast-Ramping Synchrotron to 750 GeV/c J. Scott Berg Brookhaven National Laboratory MAP Collaboration Meeting March 5, 2012.
Collimation Aspects for Crab Cavities? R. Assmann, CERN Thanks to Daniel Wollmann for presenting this talk on my behalf (criticism and complaints please.
Expected field quality in LHC magnets E. Todesco AT-MAS With contributions of S. Fartoukh, M. Giovannozzi, A. Lombardi, F. Schmidt (beam dynamics) N. Catalan-Lasheras,
AGS FY11 Summary RHIC Spin Collaboration Meeting 5/6/11.
First evaluation of Dynamic Aperture at injection for FCC-hh
Alignment and beam-based correction
Transverse Damping Requirements
LHC Commissioning with Beam
Minimum Hardware Commissioning – Disclaimer
FiDeL: the model to predict the magnetic state of the LHC
E. Todesco for the QBT CERN, Geneva Switzerland
Field quality update and recent tracking results
Optimization of Triplet Field Quality in Collision
Impact of remanent fields on SPS chromaticity
Chromaticity decay and snapback
Tune and Chromaticity: Decay and Snapback
Field model deliverables for sector test and commissioning: when and what? The implementation of an accurate magnetic model will be vital for efficient.
Status of Magnet Setup Cycling for LHC
Monday h00: Ramp 10 A/s (chromaticity, crossing angle non-closure, beta-beating): At 7m and 3.5m, put in one by one crossing angles, calculated.
Field quality to achieve the required lifetime goals (single beam)
LHC Beam Commissioning WG Meeting
Status of LHC Operations
UPDATE ON DYNAMIC APERTURE SIMULATIONS
J. Uythoven, W. Venturini Delsolaro, CERN, Geneva
Friday March 4th 08h32: Access for beam dump system.
LHC OPERATION AND SUPPORT
Planning at 5 o’clock meeting Friday
BI cont. *** Summary Matching Monitor test *** We only had ~15minutes of inject and dump, but managed to see a profile with ~9e9 p (!)
Global aperture measurements at 450 GeV with 170 mrad crossing angle
LHC Closed Orbit For Beam 2
Collimation margins and *
Machine Tolerances in Cleaning Insertions
Optics Measurements in the PSB
Triplet corrector layout and strength specifications
Another Immortal Fill….
Presentation transcript:

E. Todesco CAN WE IMPROVE THE MAGNETIC CYCLE/MODEL AND THEIR EFFECTS? E. Todesco For the FiDeL team: C. Alabau Pons, L. Bottura, M. Buzio, L. Deniau, L. Fiscarelli, J. Garcia Perez, M. Giovannozzi, P. Hagen, M. Lamont, G. Montenero, V. Remondino, S. Redaelli, F. Schmidt, R. Steinhagen, M. Strzelczyk, R. Tomas, E. Todesco, W. Venturini Delsolaro, J. Wenninger, L. Walckiers Evian, 8 th December 2010 Workshop on commissioning

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December contents Precycle How many types we had? Has it been followed? Can we made it shorter ? Chromaticity Decay at injection – how to include ? During ramp – can be improved ? Tune Decay at injection Hysteresis issue

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December HOW DID WE PRECYCLE THE LHC ? Four combinations of precycle and cycle ramp rates and currents We started rather far from nominal No experience on decay and snapback in this regime 2 A/s never explored in SM18 Since September 3 we are at 10 A/s With same parameters for physics cycle and precycle What still missing w.r.t. nominal The energy... still at 6 kA This should give smaller decay and snapback (about ½) 2 A/s 10 A/s 2 A/s 10 A/s Combination of ramp and precycles in 2010 [N. Aquilina]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December HOW DID WE PRECYCLE THE LHC ? The LHC from the first day of operations uses the previous physics run as a precycle! If the physics run terminates abnormally one has to precycle Procedure followed at 97% in 2010 Precycle type in 2010 for all ramps [N. Aquilina]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December HOW DID WE PRECYCLE THE LHC ? The LHC from the first day of operations uses the previous physics run as a precycle! 54% of the ramps used previous physics cycle Precycle takes 90 minutes In average 45 minutes/ramp spent to precycle At this stage of operation is not dominant in the turn around time Anyway, it could be improved Dominated by the MQM MQY – one could study possibilities to make it shorter Other comments Special ramp-down when an access will be given (to avoid ramping up dipoles If a circuit trips, can we ignore it? General receipt is in CERN-ATS

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December contents Precycle How many types we had? Has it been followed? Can we made it shorter ? Chromaticity Decay at injection – how to include ? During ramp – can be improved ? Tune Decay at injection Hysteresis issue

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December CHROMATICITY DECAY AT INJECTION How long we usually stay at injection? At least 30 minutes, in general 1-2 h, in average 5 h Measurements at SM18 showed that after 30 minutes most of the b 3 decay is ended (at 50 A/s ramp rate) Therefore we decided to correct the full decay via static trims thinking that in 2010 we always inject when decay is ended The option has been anyway coded and is available [M. Strzelczyk] Time at injection for all ramps in 2010 [N. Aquilina] Decay of b3 over s in 20 cases [N. Aquilina, L. Deniau, N. Sammut]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December CHROMATICITY DECAY AT INJECTION Beam measurements show decay on longer times The size of decay is in agreement with FiDeL (~0.5 units b 3, i.e., units of chromaticity – but in the LHC is much slower! In 2010 variability in injection time changes chromaticity of Since trims of the previous injection are kept, one can inject on negative chromaticity and lose the beam Chromaticity versus time at injection, beam1 (blue), beam2 (red) [W. Venturini Delsolaro]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December BEAM MEASUREMENTS Measurements from M. Pojer Continuous measurements of chromaticity during injection (1 h) About 4 units in 1 h – this after 1 h at injection Compatible with previous measurements Chromaticity versus time at injection, horizontal (green), vertical (beige) [M. Pojer] Here chromaticity has been trimmed up by 4 units

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December CHROMATICITY DECAY AT INJECTION How the EIC cope with this? Manual trim based on experience – no general strategy The trim is on the lattice sextupoles (MSF/D) whereas it should go on the MCS Solution for 2011 Use the process to correct decay at injection through MCS already prepared [M. Strzelczyk] But change the FiDeL time constant according to beam measurements and Measure periodically decay at injection in 2011 Measure decay in dipoles with 10 A/s and 6 kA for 10 h? But on one dipole probably this is not enough

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian december CHROMATICITY DURING RAMP We have  6 measurements of chromaticity during ramp [R. Steinhagen] FiDeL error during snapback: ±7 units – chromaticity is negative  FiDeL error after snapback during ramp: ±3 units – difficult to do better Decay at 3.5 TeV: 7 units Tracking precision is sufficient for operation – but it could be improved in the snapback part Static model Decay at 3.5 TeV Chromaticity during the 10 A/s ramps, 6 cases blue: horizontal - red: vertical [R. Steinhagen]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December CHROMATICITY DURING RAMP Error during snapback (the pyramid): two possible causes Trim at injection decreases linearly with time up to 120 s If this trim vanishes too rapidly this can create the pyramid Static model Decay at 3.5 TeV

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December CHROMATICITY DURING RAMP Error during snapback (the pyramid): two possible causes If the snapback time constant is wrong one also gets a pyramid But it should be much, much longer … (factor 5-10) Static model Decay at 3.5 TeV

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December contents Precycle How many types we had? Has it been followed? Can we made it shorter ? Chromaticity Decay at injection – how to include ? During ramp – can be improved ? Tune Decay at injection Hysteresis issue

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December TUNE DECAY There is evidence of tune decay at injection About over 1 h soon after precycle As far as I understand not an issue But it could be included Origin: could be decay in the quadrupoles 0.005/60= 1.2 unit – compatible with meas. Decay of tune at injection on 1 st Oct 2010 [M. Pojer] Decay of tune at injection in Tevatron [G. Annala, et al.] Decay of MQ transfer function[L. Deniau]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December contents Precycle How many types we had? Has it been followed? Can we made it shorter ? Chromaticity Decay at injection – how to include ? During ramp – can be improved ? Tune Decay at injection Hysteresis issue

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December HYSTERESIS Hysteresis is a ghost which is periodically hunting our nights … since years Two issues: IR quads during squeeze, having current ramping down Correctors, which are trimmed down and up by EiC and feedback Implemented strategy When the dI/dt < 0 the model automatically changes hysteresis branch [M. Strzelczyk] With smoothing needed for not tripping the power converters and QPS Measured transfer function during squeeze [W. Venturini Delsolaro] Psycho, 50 years celebration [A. Hitchcock]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December HYSTERESIS Problems - 1 For small changes of currents, one has jumps whereas the magnet in reality stays on the same branch Not nice, not necessary, and can induce beam losses [X. Buffat] Required gradient during squeeze [M. Strzelczyk] Corresponding current in PC [M. Strzelczyk] Measured transfer function during squeeze [W. Venturini Delsolaro]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December HYSTERESIS Problems - 2 When trims are first tried on actual settings and then incorporated, the branching causes a small difference – seen for beta beating correction This gives negligible effects on beta beating, but it is not nice Difference between trims at 3.5 TeV and incorporated trims [R. Tomas]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December HYSTERESIS Estimates show that in squeeze the impact of hysteresis is small Going to 1.1 m becomes important (10-50 units) in a few cases which are well known a priori (mainly MQM) – if neglected this gives 10% beta beating No evidence of problems related to hysteresis, neither in correctors nor during squeeze We propose to remove it – we will include as trim for the few magnets that need it, and for  * that needs it Error in units due to neglecting hysteresis during squeeze [P. Hagen]

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December CONCLUSIONS Precycling Is correctly followed – 50% of times previous physics cycle is used Decay of chromaticity ~20 units of decay, as expected by FiDeL, but on much longer times It is an issue for operation – should now be included It will be in 2011, parameters based on beam measurements Chromaticity during ramp Tracked within ±7 units – we can improve the initial part

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December CONCLUSIONS Tune decay About units, possibly due to MQ – could be automatically tracked Hysteresis No evidence of problems related to hysteresis, neither in correctors nor during squeeze Some side effects due to its implementation We propose to remove it – we will include it only if really needed

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks for discussions and comments EIC: R. Alemany Fernandez, A. Macpherson, V. Kain, G. Papotti, M. Pojer, L. Ponce, S. Redaelli, W. Venturini Delsolaro R. Steinhagen: feedback chromaticity and tune M. Lamont, M. Strzelczyk: controls and strategies

E. Todesco LHC magnetic model – Evian December WE’RE GETTING FAMOUS!