Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byIlene Nicholson Modified over 8 years ago
1
Recycler Operation and studies Week Nov. 10- Nov.16 2006 Meiqin Xiao
2
Operations We had transverse emittance blow up several times, which were related to the damper System: The A-B amplifiers where replaced and a low pass filter were removed from the vertical damper on Thursday Without the low pass filter, some higher harmonics have the wrong phase for damping. This was verified at (588-10.466) and (588-10.534)frot Friday. The low pass filter has been restored and the phase advance has been verified.
3
The transverse emittance appears to be blowing up (from flying wire data) (Saturday) A huge response on the damp output. This is more indicative of a damper problem than a real instability. Both the horizontal and vertical damper phases were checked. No large errors were found to account for the transverse emittance blowups noted over the weekend.
4
Beam loss and emittance growth just as we were starting shot setup (Wednesday) It was decided to switch the damper to the new upgrade. However, there are some problems with the new damper system and had to revert back to the old system. The new system can be repaired/modified. But it’s not ready yet to re-install till now. Currently we are on the old system, we wrote a procedure on what to do if the event occurs again.
5
Poor Transfer efficiency problem (over the weekend) Shot # Transfer Time Accumulator (mA) Recycler (e10) Eff (%) Start End unstashed Start End Stashed 4689 11/10/2006 12:38 104.19 19.39 85.00 89.99 158.95 71.59 81.32 4693 11/10/2006 19:52 52.59 10.99 41.80 43.93 79.07 36.09 84.46 4694 11/10/2006 22:35 51.99 10.79 41.20 78.69 113.47 35.71 84.42 4695 11/11/2006 1:17 52.59 8.59 44.20 113.05 149.84 37.98 83.61 4696 11/11/2006 4:16 52.39 6.99 45.40 149.29 187.13 38.85 83.35 4697 11/11/2006 7:13 51.99 2.19 39.80 186.17 219.25 33.87 83.12 The only thing that is certain at this point is that the majority of the beam loss happens on the transfer from Main Injector to Recycler. We looked at the trim settings and orbits (beamline and ring), they were O.K. We also examined Main Injector flying wire data and found no relationship between the profile and the efficiency of the transfers. Even with lower emittance beam, we had reduced transfer efficiencies(80%). It turns out that it’s due to a large energy mismatch between the Accumulator and the MI.
7
Pelletron tripped during the weekend, and re-set unproperly. This event happened at a low Pelletron voltage. The gun was never closed and was emitting a beam, keeping the gun (BIASV) voltage at 12 kV. Increase of the Pelletron voltage increased radiation, tripping the Pelletron. We already wrote a procedure and pasted on the web to guide on-call person to do the resetting if the Pelletron tripped again
8
Studies we have done Rapid transfer attempt – Cons & Dave VANDER MEULEN First two regular transfer just as a normal shot setup, and then return the Pbar source to stacking for 15 min while leaving the recycler in the shot setup mode, then the rapid transfer of 1 parcel of beam to the recycler. Success!!!, able to transfer in 91 sec stacking to stacking, efficiency: ~87%
9
With the current mining waveforms the peak pbar density and energy spread is large – not good from the point of beam stability Schematic of Current Mining Improvements in Momentum Mining for Tevatron Shots – Chandra
10
Comparing current and proposed mining Current Mining Proposed Mining Mini-Bucket Sharp Rise Softer (190ns) 185E10pbars RF Waveform 245E10pbars
11
Comparison of WCM data 15.5E10 pbars T(H,V)~(3.1,2.9)pi LT~1400 hrs (061010)* 27.2E10 pbars T(H,V)~(8,8)pi LT~700 hrs (061113) Conclusions: For the same bunch intensity the peak density can be reduced by a factor of ~ 2 by using (13-10-13) type bucket Total intensity normalized to unity Current Proposed 20.5E10 pbars T(H,V)~(6, 7)pi (~5% reduction during cooling for about 30 min) LT~600hrs (060828)
12
Studies request Apply soft mining bucket for Tev shot – Chandra Boomerang study – Cons BPM response to local 3-bump at 702 BL22 to check QM702 – Cons, Meiqin
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.