1. First approach to the SuperB Rings M. Biagini, LNF-INFN April 26th, 2006 UK SuperB Meeting, Daresbury

2. SuperB Rings A new SuperB scheme came out from the 2 nd SuperB Workshop held in Frascati in March 2006 A document was written for the CERN Strategy Group and INFN Roadmap and can be found at the: http://www.pi.infn.it/SuperB/http://www.pi.infn.it/SuperB/ The rings have same length and beam parameters as the ILC Damping Rings An attempt to scale the ILCDR lattice to the SuperB energies has been done Scaling to 3 Km length has also been performed

3. SuperB sketch e + DR e- IP FF -FF Electron ring: 4 GeV Positron ring: 7 GeV

4. SuperB Rings Parameters

5. The ILCDR OCS lattice has been used as a baseline for the SuperB Damping Rings The 2 SuperB rings have asymmetric energies of 4 and 7 GeV Two configuration for 6 Km and 3 Km circumference were studied Emittances and damping times were kept constant Lattice symmetry was respected Magnetic elements were kept the same, with fewer wigglers

6. ILCDR Parameters OCS

7. OCS ILC Wiggler cell FODO cell 135°/90° FODO cells 10 wiggler cells, 1.6 T

8. OCS lattice, 6.1 Km ILC Damping Rings, 10 wiggler sections 4 GeV: same wiggler sections and field, same bend length 7 GeV: same wiggler field, double bend length, less wiggler sections (6) No Final Focus yet ILCDR Scaling

9. 4 GeV OCS ring, 6 Km Wiggler cell FODO cell 135°/90° FODO cells 10 wiggler cells, 1.6 T

10. 135°/90° FODO cells 8 wiggler cells, 1.6 T FODO cell Wiggler cell Double length bends 7 GeV OCS ring, 6 Km

11. DR 5 GeVSBF 4 GeVSBF 7 GeV C (m)6113.92 B w (T)1.6 L bend (m)5.6 11.2 B bend (T)0.10.0780.136 Uo (MeV/turn) 9.335.6610.68  x (ms) 2228.826.  s (ms) 1114.413  x (nm) 0.560.57 F rf (MHz)650 6 Km rings

12. 3 Km Rings The OCS lattice has many free drifts and a relatively low number of quadrupoles and bends  quite easy to shorten the ring Quadrupole strengths and beta peaks are higher though No optimization performed yet, but possible

13. SBF 4 GeVSBF 7 GeV C (m)3006. B w (T)1.6 L bend (m)5.611.2 B bend (T)0.0780.136 Uo (MeV/turn)4.67.8 N. wigg. cells84  x (ms) 17.518.  s (ms) 8.89.  x (nm) 0.54 EE 1.1x10 -3 1.45x10 -3 I beam (A)2.51.4 P beam (MW)11.510.9 Total Wall Power (66% transfer eff.): 34 MW cm  E =0.9x10 -3

14. 4 GeV, 3Km

15. 7 GeV, 3Km

16. Quadrupole gradients comparison Gradients for SB4 and SB7 were not optimized yet. Can still be lowered by changing drifts in cells Dispersion Suppressor to be optimized

17. Possible issues of 3 Km ring Same as ILCDR, that is: Find good dynamic aperture HER e-cloud instability  curved electrodes LER Intra Beam Scattering Fast Ion Instability  gaps in train

18. M. Pivi – L. Wang – T. Raubenheimer - P. Raimondi, SLAC Curved clearing electrodes

19. using POSINST M. Pivi – P. Raimondi, SLAC, Mar 2006 Near the bunch core: no e-cloud !

20. Intra Beam Scattering DR Baseline Configuration Document, Feb. 06  x growth  z growth  y growth  E growth OCS lattice, 5 GeV

21. Conclusions 2 ring lattices for asymmetric energies have been studied by simply scaling the ILCDR OCS lattice Both 6 and 3 km lattices look feasible, is seems also possible to further scale down the length A lot of work still needed: –Insertion of Final Focus –Dynamic aperture study –Collective effects study Beam instabilities will be different due to different energies and need to be studied especially for the LER Full synergy with ILCDR