Target/Beam Interaction M. Apollonio, A. Dobbs - IC 27/11/20081MICE Target Workshop - IC.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

1April, UKNF09 - Lancaster1 MICE Beamline m. apollonio.

Advertisements

1 MICE Beamline: Plans for initial commissioning. Kevin Tilley, 16 th November. - 75days until commissioning Target, detectors, particle production Upstream.

EXAMPLE DATA: Beam: K - ; E = 4,2 GeV ; m K =m p /2 Target: Hydrogen atoms; R nucleus =10 -5 R atom me = mp/2000.

Summary of MICE 4/4/2008 shift during the ISIS machine-physics period Goals for 04 Apr08 MICE shift: 1. Radiation survey in MICE Hall with target operating,

The MICE Target Lara Howlett University of Sheffield.

MICE TARGET OPERATION C. Booth, P. Hodgson, R. Nicholson, P. J. Smith, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy University of Sheffield, England.

ISIS Related Issues for MICE Adam Dobbs Proton Accelerator Development Meeting, RAL 24 th March /03/20111A. Dobbs.

TJR Feb 10, 2005MICE Beamline Analysis -- TRD SEPT041 MICE Beamline Analysis – TRD SEPT04 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. February 10, 2005.

MICE Beam Loss vs Particle Rate Adam Dobbs, ISIS Meeting, 18 th December 2009.

ISIS-MICE TGT alignment m. apollonio IC purpose: understand sources of reduced rate comment: probably a 2 nd order effect CAVEAT: result still preliminary,

MICE Particle Rate and ISIS Beam Loss Adam Dobbs, Target – ISIS Meeting, 17 th September 2010.

Particle Production of a Carbon/Mercury Target System for the Intensity Frontier X. Ding, UCLA H.G. Kirk, BNL K.T. McDonald, Princeton Univ MAP Spring.

D. Huang, MICE video conference1 Proton and Pion productions: preliminary simulation & measurements Dazhang Huang.

MICO Alain Blondel 17 March MICO Alain Blondel 17 March MICE target test-run March 2008 Friday 14/03/2008 6:00-> 18:00 Saturday 15/03/2008.

Target Shaft Simulation with G4Beamline M. Apollonio, IC.

On MICE Coordinate System Yury Ivanyushenkov RAL.

Could CKOV1 become RICH? 1. Characteristics of Cherenkov light at low momenta (180 < p < 280 MeV/c) 2. Layout and characterization of the neutron beam.

June 13, Geant4 Simulations of the MICE Beamline Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology June13, 2003.

March 30, 2004 TJR1 MICE Target Source Calculations Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology March 30, 2004.

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

124/3/2010CM26 - Riverside1 m. apollonio ( ,P) matrix.

Luminosity Monitor Commissioning MICE Collaboration Meeting March 2010 Paul Soler, David Forrest Danielle MacLennan.

K.Walaron Fermilab, Batavia, Chicago 12/6/ Simulation and performance of beamline K.Walaron T.J. Roberts.

3/31/2005 KEK, Japan 1 G4Beamline for KEK test K. Yonehara Illinois Institute of Tech.

Target Test Report Given permission for a maximum of 5000 actuations. Performed 3679 actuations, 3654 with the gate valve open. Ran target at 0.4 Hz to.

TJR August 2, 2004MICE Beamline Analysis1 MICE Beamline Analysis JUNE04 Including a proposal for a JUNE04A Configuration Tom Roberts Illinois Institute.

Target Specifications & History (to avoid reinventing a broken wheel!) 2 nd December 2009 Chris Booth The University of Sheffield.

Target/Beam Interaction M. Apollonio, A. Dobbs - IC 27/11/20081MICE Target Workshop - IC.

ISIS Beam Protection System and MICE operation. Dean Adams 29 Nov 07 Presented by Chris Rogers.

MOM - M.ApollonioAccel. R&D/Physics and IADR - RAL - 19/3/ Summary of MICE operations – 14/15 March 2008 AIMS - establish MICE beamline in ISIS synchrotron.

14/1/20097 January 2009MICE CM23 - Harbin - Beamline Session1 MICE Beamloss Data Adam Dobbs.

Where: I T = moment of inertia of turbine rotor.  T = angular shaft speed. T E = mechanical torque necessary to turn the generator. T A = aerodynamic.

GRD - Collimation Simulation with SIXTRACK - MIB WG - October 2005 LHC COLLIMATION SYSTEM STUDIES USING SIXTRACK Ralph Assmann, Stefano Redaelli, Guillaume.

Loss maps of RHIC Guillaume Robert-Demolaize, BNL CERN-GSI Meeting on Collective Effects, 2-3 October 2007 Beam losses, halo generation, and Collimation.

AGS pp Status Feb. 20, 2015 RSC Meeting Haixin Huang.

STRIPLINE KICKER STATUS. PRESENTATION OUTLINE 1.Design of a stripline kicker for beam injection in DAFNE storage rings. 2.HV tests and RF measurements.

Simulating the MICE target M. Apollonio, A. Dobbs - IC 27/11/20081MICE Target Workshop - IC.

(+) session, PAC09 Vancouver – TH6PFP056 Introduction The Muon Ionisation Cooling Experiment (MICE, fig. 1c) at RAL[1]

Target material and thickness considerations Alain Blondel, with thanks to Dean Adams and Dan Kaplan Priority for rebuild is to have a target mechanism.

Target Shaft Simulation with G4Beamline M. Apollonio, IC.

October 4-5, Electron Lens Beam Physics Overview Yun Luo for RHIC e-lens team October 4-5, 2010 Electron Lens.

Luminosity Monitor UKNF Meeting 7 June 2010 Paul Soler, David Forrest Danielle MacLennan.

Status of Scaling FFAG Phase Rotation ICOOL Simulations Ajit Kurup ISS Machine Group Meeting 27 th July 2006.

Particle Production in the MICE Beamline IPAC10 Linda Coney, UC Riverside, Adam Dobbs, Imperial College London, Yordan Karadzhov, Sofia University The.

1 Photogrammetry of TT7. 2 Front view Distribution of all targets All the plots are in the magnet reference system.

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

RAL Muon Beam Line Properties. ISIS 70 MeV H- injection Ring accelerates up to 800 MeV in about 10 ms 50 Hz cycle - Dual Harmonic System ~ 2 x 1.5 MHz;

MICE TARGET OPERATION C. Booth, P. Hodgson, P. J. Smith, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy University of Sheffield, England. 1 – The MICE Experiment2 - The.

Update for muon studies Helmut Vincke. Additional dump calculations Two options were studied: Option 1: beam is bend by 2 degree towards soil and beam.

Simulations Report E. García, UIC. Run 1 Geometry Radiator (water) 1cm x 2cm x 2cm with optical properties Sensitive Volume (hit collector) acrylic (with.

MICE Run Plan Sept/Oct 2009 m. apollonio – IC MACHINE PHYSICS USERs RUN NO SHIFT A B C D E.

March 18, 2008 TJRMICE Beamline Status1 MICE Beamline Status (March 18, 2008) Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. Illinois Institute of Technology.

Chapter 9 Rotational Dynamics.

Beam Dynamics in the ESS Linac Under the Influence of Monopole and Dipole HOMs A.Farricker 1, R.M.Jones 1, R.Ainsworth 2 and S.Molloy 3 1 The University.

Instrumentation and Simulations for Target Test MICE Collaboration Meeting 22 October Bill Murray 1, Paul Soler 1,2, Kenny Walaron 1,2 1 Rutherford.

Carbon Target Design and Optimization for an Intense Muon Source X. Ding, UCLA H.G. Kirk, BNL K.T. McDonald, Princeton Univ MAP Winter Collaboration.

MICE Target Failure UKNFIC Meeting Adam Dobbs - when and why 4 th July 2008.

ISIS Beam and MICE Target Simulation MICE Collaboration Meeting Adam Dobbs 19 th Oct 2008.

Nufact02, London, July 1-6, 2002K.Hanke Muon Phase Rotation and Cooling: Simulation Work at CERN new 88 MHz front-end update on cooling experiment simulations.

M. apollonio 7/7/2010CM27 - RAL11 Beam-Line Analysis …

Hcal Geometry and Assembly Videoconference January 2008, 24th.

A Student on MICE Adam Dobbs, Imperial College Goldsmith’s Particle Physics Summer School 21 st July 2009.

Min Huang g2p/GEp Collaboration Meeting April 18, 2011.

Tracking simulations of protons quench test

Beam-Line Analysis m. apollonio 7/7/2010 CM27 - RAL 1.

Introduction Goal: Can we reconstruct the energy depositions of the proton in the brain if we are able to reconstruct the photons produced during this.

- chambers & absorbers -

Rotate Around (0,0) By 180 Stretch Scale factor ½ In x and y directions Stretch Scale factor 2 In x and y directions Reflect In line y=x Stretch Scale.

Basilio Bona DAUIN – Politecnico di Torino

Presentation transcript:

Target/Beam Interaction M. Apollonio, A. Dobbs - IC 27/11/20081MICE Target Workshop - IC

Motivations: optimise secondary production minimising dangerous losses in ISIS assess better orientation/shape of the shaft for secondary production a work at “four hands”: A. Dobbs, ORBIT simulation of ISIS ring / interaction with target / comparison with data taken from MICE shifts, MA, G4Beamline simulation of secondary production with a set of shafts 27/11/20082MICE Target Workshop - IC

ORBIT Results 27/11/20083MICE Target Workshop - IC A. Dobbs

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs4 Target Orientations (variable depths) “Short-Fat” – 1mm along z – axis, 10mm along x - axis “Long-Thin” – 10mm along z – axis, 1mm along x – axis (true orientation) “Reduced” – 1mm along z – axis, 1mm along x - axis 27/11/20084MICE Target Workshop - IC x y s

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs5 Injection losses MICE target losses Short-Fat: 27mm above axis, -1 to 10ms 27/11/20085MICE Target Workshop - IC zoom last 2 ms

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs6 Long-Thin: 27mm above axis, -1 to 10ms (NB: present config) 27/11/20086MICE Target Workshop - IC

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs7 Short-Fat: 27mm above axis, 8 to 10ms 27/11/20087MICE Target Workshop - IC

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs8 Long-Thin: 27mm above axis, 8 to 10ms 27/11/20088MICE Target Workshop - IC

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs9 Long-Thin: 26mm above axis, 8 to 10ms 27/11/20089MICE Target Workshop - IC

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs10 Long-Thin: 27mm above axis, 25 0 rotation, 8 to 10ms NB At present there remains an ambiguity in the direction of the rotation, clockwise or anti-clockwise. If / when this is resolved it will be published in an updated version of this document. 27/11/200810MICE Target Workshop - IC

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs11 Reduced (1mm^2): 27mm above axis, 8 to 10ms 27/11/200811MICE Target Workshop - IC

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs12 Reduced: 26mm above axis, 8 to 10ms 27/11/200812MICE Target Workshop - IC

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs13 Reduced: 25mm above axis, 8 to 10ms 27/11/200813MICE Target Workshop - IC

25/11/08ORBIT Results, Adam Dobbs14 Reduced: 24mm above axis, 8 to 10ms 27/11/200814MICE Target Workshop - IC

Circular-solid 6mm radius: 27mm above axis, 8 to 10ms 27/11/200815MICE Target Workshop - IC

G4Beamline Studies 27/11/200816MICE Target Workshop - IC M. Apollonio

27/11/200817MICE Target Workshop - IC - is there a better shape for the target or orientation? - how many secondaries (pi) do we get at the Q1 bore (per impinging proton?) - what about materials? ISIS p trajectory Q o MICE TGT

10 mm X Z 25 deg Q1-TGT axis 25 deg lost to Q1 secondaries production 20<theta<30 propagation to plane A acos(Pz/Ptot)>20 && acos(Pz/Ptot)<30 rotation & propagation to plane B A A B C shift & align with Q1-TGT axis LONG SLIM 18

25 deg FAT SHORT TILTED TGT 10 o / 25 o 27/11/200819MICE Target Workshop - IC

25 deg Cylinder: OD=6mm/ID=4.7 mm Materials: Ti Be Al 27/11/200820MICE Target Workshop - IC

Tgt_long_slim_rot0: y:x Nprimaries=100M 27/11/200821MICE Target Workshop - IC A

Tgt_long_slim: y:x rotation 25 deg + shift /11/200822MICE Target Workshop - IC B NB: this particles (ROOT file) are shooting towards Q1and can be used as an input beam for further simulations

27/11/200823MICE Target Workshop - IC at Q1 plane in Q1 bore C

27/11/200824MICE Target Workshop - IC

27/11/200825MICE Target Workshop - IC

27/11/2008MICE Target Workshop - IC

27/11/200827MICE Target Workshop - IC CONCLUSIONS - neither the shape nor the orientation of a target seem to alter significantly the production of secondaries to Q1 - the overall material volume intercepted by the beam is the main parameter (reasonable) - material other than Ti (lower A/rho) generate less secondaries (in particular pions) -a good balance should be found between weight / mechanical stiffness / and pion production -a hollow cylinder is a good solution, certainly does not worsen the performances of the present configuration