1. 124/3/2010CM26 - Riverside1 m. apollonio ( ,P) matrix

2. 224/3/2010CM26 - Riverside2 - the goal of MICE is demonstrating Ionisation Cooling … - … for a variety of initial - emittances - momenta - ideally covering a continuos space ( ,P) - practically studying some discrete points - i.e. defining a matrix - the choice for it is: -  = 3 / 6 / 10 mm rad - P  = 140 / 200 / 240 MeV/c (at the centre of the H2 absorber) General Introduction (*) 700mV ~ 20 mu-/spill

3. 324/3/2010CM26 - Riverside3 (*) 700mV ~ 20 mu-/spill 3,140 3,200 3,240 6,140 6,200 6,240 10,140 10,200 10,240 P (MeV/c) eN (mm rad) - finding the element (3,240) means to find the BL optics that matches the MICE optics for a beam of 3 mm rad at a P=240 MeV/c - the element (10,200) is the BL optics matching a MICE beam with 10 mm rad at P=200 MeV/c This pair is our goal: how do we get it?

4. 424/3/2010CM26 - Riverside4 (*) MICE note 176 BL Diffuser MICE     - Hyp.:  is known (~1 mm rad trace space) - we proceed backward: - fix P/  N in the cooling channel - fix the optics in the cooling channel (  ) - solve the equations giving  and t at the US face of the diffuser (*)       t

5. 524/3/2010CM26 - Riverside5 - So the question becomes: - how do we “tell” the beamline to be  at US_Diff? - solution(s) - we optimise the BL by varying Q4-Q9 - let us break the BL in two parts: US and DS - in what follows I mean a    beamline Q4 Q1 Dipole1 DK solenoid Q2Q3 Dipole2 Q5Q6Q7Q8Q9   - US part: we can optimise the MAX number of pions - but not much magic left … - DS part: - choose Q4-Q9 - shoot a beam - check  at Diffuser vs “target” values - repeat

6.    beam line: typical  spectrum at the exit of the DS - Rationale - select  u.s. of DKSol with D1 - select  d.s. of DKSol with D2 - back scattered muons == purity 24/3/20106CM26 - Riverside

7. 24/3/2010CM26 - Riverside7 3,140 3,200 3,240 6,140 6,200 6,240 10,140 10,200 10,240 we already have an initial solution: the “central value” Key Point - materials in the BL cause energy loss - (also emi_growth) - in order to have P_mice=200 MeV/c we need to define P_D2 properly - then we define Ppi_tgt - how? - the best choice is dictated by beam purity

8. 24/3/2010CM26 - Riverside8  kinematic limits 250 MeV/c 195 MeV/c

9. 24/3/2010CM26 - Riverside9 Will it work? Pdiff = 215 In the original scheme the pi  mu beamline is Ppi=444  Pmu=256 Best separation PI/MU  acceptance NB.: PD2=256 MeV/c becomes Pdif=215 MeV/c

10. 24/3/2010CM26 - Riverside10 3,140 Pdif=151  =0.2  =0.56m t=0.0mm 3,140 Pdif=151  =0.2  =0.56m t=0.0mm 3,200 Pdif=207  =0.1  =0.36m t=0.0mm 3,200 Pdif=207  =0.1  =0.36m t=0.0mm 3,240 Pdif=245  =0.1  =0.42m t=0.0mm 3,240 Pdif=245  =0.1  =0.42m t=0.0mm 6,140 Pdif=148  =0.3  =1.13m t=5.0 6,140 Pdif=148  =0.3  =1.13m t=5.0 6,200 Pdif=215  =0.2  =0.78m t=7.5mm 6,240 Pdif=256  =0.2  =0.8m t=7.5mm 6,240 Pdif=256  =0.2  =0.8m t=7.5mm 10,140 Pdif=164  =0.6  =1.98m t=10mm?? 10,140 Pdif=164  =0.6  =1.98m t=10mm?? 10,200 Pdif=229  =0.4 b=1.31m t=15.5mm 10,200 Pdif=229  =0.4 b=1.31m t=15.5mm 10,240 Pdif=267  =0.3  =1.29m t=15.5mm 10,240 Pdif=267  =0.3  =1.29m t=15.5mm

11. 24/3/2010CM26 - Riverside11 195 350 Pdiff = 148 215 256 Ppi (tgt) = 350 i.o.t. accommodate several mu momenta another “shortcut” scheme was adopted (aug 2009): Define one lower Ppi ~ 350/360 and several different Pmu (we lose in purity …)  acceptance

12. Q4 Q1 Dipole1 DK solenoid Q2Q3 Dipole2 Q5Q6Q7Q8Q9 d.s. BL tuning: match to diffuser  P  =208 MeV/c P  =444 MeV/c  P  =214 MeV/c fix D1 fix D2 P  =255 MeV/c 1224/3/2010CM26 - Riverside12

13. 24/3/2010CM26 - Riverside13 - a first round of the BL optimised (e,P) matrix has been produced in august 2009 (“shortcut”) - however the few data taken in november reveal a pretty strange look - one thing I dislike is using only one momentum for the pion (US) component and Select the backward going muons

14. http://mice.iit.edu/bl/MATRIX/index_mat.html 1424/3/2010CM26 - Riverside

15. RUN 1174-1177 – PI- (444MeV/c)  MU- (256 MeV/c) at D2 ~29. NB: DTmu(256)= DTmu(300) * beta300/beta256 = 28.55 *.943/.923 = 29.13 0.94326 9 PI- should be here: 30.44 24/3/201015CM26 - Riverside

16. ? RUN 1201 – PI- (336.8MeV/c)  MU- (256 MeV/c) at D2 PI- should be here: 30.44 MU- should be the same as before … what is that? 24/3/201016CM26 - Riverside

17. 24/3/2010CM26 - Riverside17 y x x’ y’ COV-MAT Generate Gaussian Beam with defined COV-MAT (arbitrary statistics) G4Beamline Generation up To DS

18. 24/3/2010CM26 - Riverside18 a)Consider all 9 cases: one Ppi + one Pmu per case (no “shortcuts”) b)Define initial BL currents (from scaling tables) c)Check tuning with G4Beamline d)use simulation output at DS to infer the COV-MAT of the beam e)Generate a Gauss-beam with that CovMat: a)E.g. MatLab tool, fast + any number of particles … f)Propagate / optimise this beam in the DS section a)By hand (GUI tool) b)By algorithm (GA) g)check results versus real data … wrap-up …

19. 24/3/2010CM26 - Riverside19