1. Optimization of beam envelop at the injection point of PS Chenghui Yu Jan. 30, 2012

2. Contents Beam envelop in the injection region Optimization of beam size at the injection point Plan of machine studies to test the calculation Summary

3. Beam envelop at the injection point of PS Circulating beam and injection beam in the injection region For TOF and CNGS beams

4. Beam envelop in the injection region of PS For TOF and CNGS beams (1.4 GeV) Aperture checking for circulating beam Aperture checking for injection beam (KFA45=4.3mrad)

5. Beam envelop in the injection region of PS For TOF and CNGS beams (1.4 GeV) Cross section checking in the injection region for circulating beam 3.7mm

6. Beam envelop in the injection region of PS For TOF and CNGS beams (1.4 GeV) Cross section checking in the injection region for injection beam

7. Beam envelop in the injection region of PS For TOF and CNGS beams (2.0 GeV) Aperture checking for circulating beam Aperture checking for injection beam

8. Beam envelop in the injection region of PS For TOF and CNGS beams (2.0 GeV) Cross section checking in the injection region for circulating beam 7.3mm

9. Beam envelop in the injection region of PS For TOF and CNGS beams (2.0 GeV) Cross section checking in the injection region for injection beam

10. Beam envelop in the injection region of PS Both circulating and injection beams can pass aperture checking except at the septum where the beam envelop should be optimized. It’s also a possible source of beam loss during the operation. Problem 1.4GeV Beam separation at injection point is -0.4 mm 2.0GeV Beam separation is 5.0 mm Same as the width of septum

11. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Scheme 1: Tuning by existing QKE16 (2.0GeV) betaX, betaY and DispersionX at injection point vs. the strength of QKE16

12. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Scheme 1: Tuning by existing QKE16 (2.0GeV) Beam size at injection point vs. the strength of QKE16 Different QKE16 strength (blue: -40A, red: 0, green: 90A) Beam separation is 12.0 mm while QKE16=90A

13. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Scheme 1: Tuning by existing QKE16 (2.0GeV) Aperture checking for circulating beam Aperture checking for injection beam

14. Cross section checking in the injection region for circulating beam Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Scheme 1: Tuning by existing QKE16 (2.0GeV) 13.3mm

15. Cross section checking in the injection region for injection beam Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Scheme 1: Tuning by existing QKE16 (2.0GeV)

16. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Scheme 1: Tuning by existing QKE16 (2.0GeV) Large optics distortion BetaX BetaY DispX → → →

17. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Local optics distortion BetaX BetaY DispX → → → Scheme 2: Tuning by new QKE33/65 which overlaps the enlarged inj. region (2.0GeV)

18. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Scheme 2: Tuning by new QKE33/65 (2.0GeV) betaX, betaY and DispersionX at injection point vs. the strength of QKE33/65

19. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Beam size at injection point vs. the strength of QKE33/65 Different QKE33/65 strength (red: 0, blue: 130A) Beam separation is 12.0 mm while QKE33/65=130A Scheme 2: Tuning by new QKE33/65 (2.0GeV)

20. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Aperture checking for circulating beam Aperture checking for injection beam Scheme 2: Tuning by new QKE33/65 (2.0GeV)

21. Cross section checking in the injection region for circulating beam Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Scheme 2: Tuning by new QKE33/65 (2.0GeV) 11.3mm

22. Cross section checking in the injection region for injection beam Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Scheme 2: Tuning by new QKE33/65 (2.0GeV)

23. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Local optics distortion Other possible scheme Statistic of possible QKE pair which phase advance is 720 degree around injection region

24. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Local optics distortion Other possible scheme Statistic of possible QKE pair which phase advance is 360 degree around injection region

25. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Other possible scheme 33/49 QKE pair which phase advance is 360 degree. But within the enlarged injection region. HI and LHC h=9 beam QKE33/49=90A KFA53=1.25mrad beam separation =10.6mm KFA53 strength is larger than other cases (0.97mrad). Injection bump should be adjusted according to different QKE33/49 strength.

26. Optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS Summary

27. Plan of machine studies to test the calculation For the TOF beam at energy of 1.4GeV, SigmaE=1.5×10-3 HorEmit=10/(GAMMA*BETA) VerEmit=5/(GAMMA*BETA) For the TOF beam at energy of 1.4GeV, QKE16=80A, Beam separation is 7.5mm. At 1.4GeV scan the position of septum (5mm width) and monitor the beam loss.

28. Summary Both circulating and injection beams can pass aperture checking except at the septum where the beam envelop should be optimized. It’s a possible source of beam loss during TOF beam injection. The optimization of beam size at the injection point of PS can be done by the existing QKE16. But the optics distortion is large. New QKE33/65 is a good solution to optimize the beam size at the injection point. The optics distortion is controlled within injection region. The mechanical space is confirmed. The interface parameters at the injection point with transfer line is still under checking by Wolfgang. Machine study can be performed at 1.4GeV to test the calculation.