ELENA transfer lines Glenn Vanbavinckhove, Wolfgang Bartmann, Dani Barna and Ranko Ostojic Many thanks to: Francois Butin, Olivier Choisnet, Damien Brethoux, Stephane Maridor, TE-ABT-BTP
● Discussions with people from the experiments ● General integration overview ● Full beam-line simulation ● Error studies ● Conclusions ● Outlook
Discussions with people from the experiments: AEGIS – ATRAP – Special thanks to: Michael Doser, Stephan Ettenauer
Quadrupole Monitor Handover point Bend Corrector AEGIS First proposal
Doublet moved before deflector m m 1 4 m 3 m 0 0 1 1 AEGIS Second proposal
Doublet moved before + BPM corrector AEGIS Final proposal
ATRAP 1 & 2 ● First discussion with ATRAP: First proposal of handover point, currently under – discussion in the ATRAP collaboration Request from ATRAP to have a “peephole”, – currently being investigated
ATRAP 1 & 2 Red current Blue proposed ATRAP 1 0.9 m 0.6 m 3.2 m 0.3 m FLOOR 2.3 m 1.55 m
General integration overview – LNE50 – LNE00->LNE07 – Critical point around LNE07-LNE01-LNE50 – Future possible assembly
General integration overview
LNE50- GBAR 1.9m BPM Longitudinal pickup Doublet+ corrector
LNE00-LNE07 Source LNE02 LNE01 LNE03 LNE04 LNE07 LNE06 LNE00 LNE05
Critical point LNE07-LNE01-LNE05
A possible future assembly ● Currently 4 assemblies: Singlet – Singlet + corrector – Doublet – Doublet+corrector – ● Proposed to go for one assembly: Quad Corrector Quad ● All elements will be installed, but only active elements will be connected (and have feed-troughs )
Active A possible future assembly Non-active T.b.d (see error studies)
Full beam simulation
Full beam simulation ● Goal : independent check to see if simulation in MADX is correct ● Full beam simulation of a line was conducted in Comsol and C++ (Runge–Kutta) ● Comparison of the optics and voltages between MADX and Comsol ● First simulation has been conducted on a dummy line, preliminary results are shown: Next step → simulation for a complete line – → including dispersion
Full beam simulation Quad Voltage [Kv] 1 -9.319 2 9.228 3 -8.219 4 4.674
Error studies Goal of the error studies ● Assumptions ● Lines used during the studies ● Results: trajectory mismatch ● Results: monitor reading error ● Results: quadrupole misalignment ● Results: all errors together ● What if a monitor is installed at every monitor ●
Error studies Goal of the error studies ● y Assumptions r a ● n i m i l Lines used during the studies e ● r P Results: trajectory mismatch ● Results: monitor reading error ● Results: quadrupole misalignment ● Results: all errors together ● What if a monitor is installed at every monitor ●
Goal of the error studies ● To identify maximum misalignments of the monitors, correctors, quadrupoles, bends,... Current alignment of the BPM is 1-2 mm (M. Hori) – Quad displacement < 0.74 mm (D. Barna) – Quad rotation < 20 mrad (D. Barna) – Error on the voltage ~0.01 (J. Baillie) – Trajectory stability at extraction +/- 3 mm from AD (T. – Eriksson, L. Bojtar)
Assumptions ● No errors applied on fast deflectors and bends ● Maximum trajectory deviation due to the error applied should not exceed 10 mm in the lines. ● Combined effect of the misalignments should be less then 20 ● Assumption that trajectory correction for LNE00 + LNE07 would be combined
Lines during the studies
Results (Trajectory mismatch)
Results (Monitor reading error)
Results Quadrupole misalignments (horizontal plane) Up to 30% error on the optics → beam size could be between 0.7 & 1.3 mm (ignoring dispersion, similar effect)
Results Quadrupole misalignments (vertical plane) For the beam size calculation we assumed at 20% optics error
Results (All misalignments + trajectory fluctuation + reading error)
What if a monitor is installed at every assembly? ● For LNE00+LNE07 this means an increase from 6 to 11 monitors (46% increase) ● In most cases the extra monitors are being installed at the defocussing quad
What if a monitor is installed at every assembly?
Conclusions ● Integration ● Error studies
Conclusions Integration ● Integration has been started: First implementation of the different elements in the – ELENA transfer lines First feedback has been provided and have let to – several minor changes ● Discussing with AEGIS & ATRAP provided us with valuable feedback: AEGIS line has been adjusted to provide more space – for a possible pulse drift tube ATRAP handover point is currently under discussion – ● Full beam simulation comparison between Comsol/c++ and MAD is showing promising results.
Conclusions Error studies ● First preliminary error studies for the combined LNE00+LNE07 were conducted: 1-2 mm monitor alignment is not sufficient, – target alignment for monitor should be < 1 mm Results will be be used to re-evaluate the – location of monitors/correctors and add an extra monitor/corrector where needed ● Installing a monitor/correction assembly at every monitor is in current setting only beneficial for vertical plane, maybe alternating?
Outlook
Outlook ● Continue with integration of the transfer lines: Currently at version 4 for the lines – ● Discussions with people from the other experiments will start soon ● Systematic error studies: All lines – Define limits for alignments tolerances of the different – elements Define limit for alignment (internal & external) for the – monitors
The end (thanks for the last two years … !)
Recommend
More recommend
