HP-PS Collimator Studies Androula Alekou Daniel Spitzbart - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
hp ps collimator studies
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

HP-PS Collimator Studies Androula Alekou Daniel Spitzbart - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Oct 08, 2023 408 likes •784 views

HP-PS Collimator Studies Androula Alekou Daniel Spitzbart androula.alekou@cern.ch daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch 13.11.2013 Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013 Outline Code Additional secondary collimators at 90

slide-1
SLIDE 1

HP-PS Collimator Studies

Androula Alekou Daniel Spitzbart

androula.alekou@cern.ch daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch

  • 13.11.2013
slide-2
SLIDE 2

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Outline

  • Code
  • Additional secondary collimators at 90°
  • Influence of
  • primary/scraper thickness & material
  • halo size
  • smear size
  • Jaw opening

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

New automated code

  • Executable


+ Mathematica

  • Takes into account the different loss types
  • Losses into the aperture
  • Exceeding threshold values of SixTrack
  • Outputfile with statistics for all runs
  • Option for saving the last part of the track for plotting
  • Faster, lesser storage used

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

New automated code

  • Example track

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Positions

  • Basically 6 Collimators (two stage system):
  • 2 Primaries/PC (scrapers) - horizontal / vertical
  • 4 Secondaries (absorbers) - 2 horizontal / 2

vertical

  • For Np=2.5, Ns=3.0
  • Np - aperture primary collimators, Ns - aperture of secondary collimators

HP 1 VP 1 HS 1 HS 2 VS 1 VS 2

  • pt. phase [°]

33.57 146.43 33.57 146.43 phase [°] 32.8 143.1 32.2 147.1 s-Pos [m] 315.57 315.67 331 386 329 364.4

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Use of additional collimators at 90°

  • Np=2.5, Ns=3.0
  • Better efficiency with additional collimators at 90°

0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 Thickness @mD 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Inefficiency

Inefficiency

Additional 90° Normal setup

used properties: 2.5 sigma halo 0.016 sigma smear graphite primaries tungsten secondaries

HS 90 VS 90

  • pt. phase [°]

90 90 phase [°] 88.8 90.2 s-pos[m] 362.4 352.5

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Inefficiency

variation of primary thickness secondary material: tungsten smear size 0.016

0.0005 0.0010 0.0015 0.0020 0.0025 0.0030 0.0035 0.0040Primary thickness @mD 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 Inefficiency

Copper primaries

0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016

Primary thickness @mD

0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20

Inefficiency

Graphite primaries

halo 2.5 H halo 2.5 V halo 2.6 V

0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.0010Primary thickness @mD 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 Inefficiency

Tungsten primaries

2.5 H 2.5 V 2.6 H 2.6 V

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Cleaning speed

0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 Primary thickness @mD 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 Cleaning speed

Graphite primaries

2.5 H 2.5 V 2.6 H

0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.0010Primary thickness @mD 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 Cleaning speed

Tungsten primaries

2.5 H 2.5 V 2.6 H 2.6 V 0.0010 0.0015 0.0020 0.0025 0.0030 0.0035 0.0040Primary thickness @mD 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Cleaning speed

Copper primaries

8

lower value - faster cleaning

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 6mm

graphite

calculated losses - checked trajectory -> hit aperture sixtrack losses - threshold value (angle, radius) exceeded

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistics

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

300 350 400 450 500

s-Pos @mD

20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

9

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 19mm

graphite

With thicker primary -> area of losses moved towards begin of collimator area

  • losses more distributed between collimators

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistics

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

300 350 400 450 500

s-Pos @mD

20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

10

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 5mm

320 340 360 380 400 420s-Pos @mD

  • 100
  • 50

50 100

x ê y ê r @mmD

Absorbed particles, x

11

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 5mm

320 340 360 380 400 420s-Pos @mD

  • 100
  • 50

50 100

x ê y ê r @mmD

Lost particles, x

12

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 19mm

320 340 360 380 400 420s-Pos @mD

  • 100
  • 50

50 100

x ê y ê r @mmD

Absorbed particles, x

thicker primary -> particles receive more kick

13

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 19mm

320 340 360 380 400 420s-Pos @mD

  • 100
  • 50

50 100

x ê y ê r @mmD

Lost particles, x

14

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Conclusion of tracks

  • With thicker scrapers -> more kick
  • if we want a better impact parameter at the

absorbers, this is needed

  • Beam blows up at the quadrupole area at s=340m
  • in H plane, defocussing - focussing -> issue
  • in V plane, focussing - defocussing -> smaller

problem

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 0.2mm

tungsten

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistics

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

300 350 400 450 500

s-Pos @mD

20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

16

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 0.6mm

tungsten

Losses moved to towards front of collimator area also peak of losses at s=340 (QP area) as seen before

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistics

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

300 350 400 450 500

s-Pos @mD

20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

17

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

V halo 0.3mm

tungsten

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistics

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

300 350 400 450 500

s-Pos @mD

20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

18

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

V halo 0.7mm

tungsten

Losses also moved to towards front of collimator area no peak of losses at s=340 (QP area) -> V plane gets focussed first -> beamsize does not increase that much

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistics

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

300 350 400 450 500

s-Pos @mD

20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

19

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 0.8mm

copper

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistics

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

300 350 400 450 500

s-Pos @mD

20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

20

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

H halo, 2mm

copper

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistics

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

300 350 400 450 500

s-Pos @mD

20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

Behavior quite similar to tungsten

21

HP1/VP1 VS1/HS1 VS90 HS90/VS2 HS2

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Bigger jaw opening

  • Np=3.0, Ns=3.5
  • Inefficiency increases, more losses

  • > Horizontal beam size increases significantly at

s=340m (QP) - can be also seen at other setup, but more important here

  • More studies to be done on that topic

HP 1 VP 1 HS 1 HS 2 VS 1 VS 2

  • pt. phase [°]

31 149 31 149 phase [°] 30 152.4 29.1 147.5 s-Pos [m] 315.55 315.59 329.6 391.6 327 364.5

22

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Halo size / smear size

  • If halo is exactly the size of the scrapers, a lot of

particles never hit a collimator -> small efficiency

] σ smear [ 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 Efficiency 0.435 0.44 0.445 0.45 0.455 0.46 0.465 0.47

Efficiency vs smear (halo=const=2.5)

Np=2.5 Ns=3.0

Data for more smear points needed

] σ smear [ 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 Efficiency 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45

Efficiency vs smear (halo=const=3)

Np=3.0 Ns=3.5

23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Variation of halo size

  • If halo is exactly the size of the scrapers, a lot of

particles never hit a collimator -> small efficiency

] σ halo [

2.5 2.55 2.6 2.65 2.7 2.75 2.8 2.85 2.9

Efficiency 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

Efficiency vs halo (smear=const=0.016)

Np=2.5 Ns=3.0

] σ halo [

3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8

Efficiency

0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9

Efficiency vs halo (smear=const=0.016)

Np=3.0 Ns=3.5

24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Variation of smear size

] σ smear [ 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 Efficiency 0.898 0.9 0.902 0.904 0.906 0.908 0.91 0.912 0.914 0.916

Efficiency vs smear (halo=const=3.1)

Np=3.0 Ns=3.5 halo=3.1

Data for more smear points needed

] σ smear [ 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 Efficiency 0.785 0.79 0.795 0.8 0.805 0.81 0.815 0.82 0.825 0.83 Efficiency vs smear (halo=const=3)

Np=2.5 Ns=3.0 halo=3

25

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Summary

  • Additional secondaries increase efficiency, lower

inefficiency, better cleaning speed

  • More kick with tungsten, copper -> faster cleaning
  • Graphite: inefficiency not very sensitive to change
  • f thickness, absorptions in primaries
  • Tungsten: in simulations so far best in inefficiency/

cleaning speed (both small values), differences in H/V halo -> maybe use different scrapers

26

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Further steps

  • H+V halo combined
  • some simulations done, but also check with different

HP1 / VP1 thickness

  • different smear/halo/aperture sizes
  • Tried splitting function of HS1 to get rid of losses at

s=340m - more simulations needed

  • More studies for different material with Np=3.0, Ns=3.5
  • Efficiency vs smear for halo=2.6sigma (Np=2.5, Ns=3.0)
  • Rerun for more smear points for halo=3.1 (Np=3.0,

Ns=3.5)

  • In progress: changing halo and smear simultaneously
  • Change to new optics
  • Increase statistics

27

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Backup slides

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

h halo, 16mm

350 400 450 500s-Pos @mD 20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles

Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistcs

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

beamsize v plane

320 340 360 380 400 420s-Pos @mD

  • 100
  • 50

50 100

x ê y ê r @mmD

Absorbed particles, y

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

beamsize v plane

320 340 360 380 400 420s-Pos @mD

  • 100
  • 50

50 100

x ê y ê r @mmD

Absorbed particles, y

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

V halo, 0.8mm

copper

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistcs

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

350 400 450 500s-Pos @mD 20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles

Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

V halo, 2mm

copper

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collimator Number 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of absorbed particles

Collimator Statistcs

8 - HS90 7 - VS90 6 - VS2 5 - HS2 4 - VS1 3 - VP1 2 - HS1 1 - HP1

350 400 450 500s-Pos @mD 20 40 60 80

Number of lost particles

Losses

calculated losses sixtrack losses

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Np: 2.5 Ns: 3.0 haloC: 2.5 smear: 0.01

h1 Entries 939 Mean 347.4 RMS 26.72

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Absorptions 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

h1 Entries 939 Mean 347.4 RMS 26.72

Absorptions

h2

Entries 110 Mean 362.2 RMS 26.77

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Losses 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

h2

Entries 110 Mean 362.2 RMS 26.77

Losses

HP/VP HS1 VS1 HS2 VS2

Np: 3.0 Ns: 3.5 haloC: 3 smear: 0.03

h1

Entries 865 Mean 347.4 RMS 28.16

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Absorptions 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

h1

Entries 865 Mean 347.4 RMS 28.16 Absorptions

h2

Entries 119 Mean 370 RMS 25.96

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Losses 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

h2

Entries 119 Mean 370 RMS 25.96

Losses

HP/VP HS1 VS1 HS2 VS2

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Np: 2.5 Ns: 3.0 haloC: 3.0 smear: 0.08

h1 Entries 1656 Mean 352.8 RMS 28.59

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Absorptions 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

h1 Entries 1656 Mean 352.8 RMS 28.59

Absorptions h2

Entries 239 Mean 374 RMS 23.49

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Losses 10 20 30 40 50 60

h2

Entries 239 Mean 374 RMS 23.49

Losses

HP/VP HS1 VS1 HS2 VS2

Np: 3.0 Ns: 3.5 haloC: 3.1 smear: 0.04

h1 Entries 1830 Mean 349 RMS 28.99

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Absorptions 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

h1 Entries 1830 Mean 349 RMS 28.99 Absorptions

h2 Entries 1 Mean RMS

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Losses 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

h2 Entries 1 Mean RMS

Losses

HP/VP HS1 VS1 HS2 VS2

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Daniel Spitzbart / daniel.spitzbart@cern.ch / 13-11-2013

Np: 2.5 Ns: 3.0 halo: 2.6 smearC: 0.016

h1

Entries 1747 Mean 356.6 RMS 30.21

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Absorptions 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 h1

Entries 1747 Mean 356.6 RMS 30.21

Absorptions

h2 Entries 204 Mean 371 RMS 26.69

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Losses 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

h2 Entries 204 Mean 371 RMS 26.69 Losses

HP/VP HS1 VS1 HS2 VS2

Np: 3.0 Ns: 3.5 halo: 3.1 smearC: 0.016

h1

Entries 1711 Mean 347 RMS 28.17

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Absorptions 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 h1

Entries 1711 Mean 347 RMS 28.17

Absorptions h2

Entries 196 Mean 370 RMS 27.11

s [m] 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Losses 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

h2

Entries 196 Mean 370 RMS 27.11 Losses

HP/VPHS1 VS1 HS2 VS2