1 / 34

Beam Physics requirements Triplet and LSS aperture and optics matchability

Optics challenges for Phase I: Towards a complete solution with new concepts and possible benefits for the nominal LHC optics S. Fartoukh for the LIUWG. Beam Physics requirements Triplet and LSS aperture and optics matchability A few words on nominal low- b optics

burt
Download Presentation

Beam Physics requirements Triplet and LSS aperture and optics matchability

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Optics challenges for Phase I: Towards a complete solution with new concepts andpossible benefits for the nominal LHC opticsS. Fartoukh for the LIUWG • Beam Physics requirements • Triplet and LSS aperture and optics matchability • A few words on nominal low-b optics • “High gradient” option (135 T/m) • “Medium gradient” option (126 T/m) • “Low gradient” option (112 T/m) • Chromatic aberrations • Off-momentum b-beating and non-linear chromaticity: strategy of correction and implementation. • Vertical & Horizontal spurious dispersion: strategy of correction and results. • Coming back to the aperture: exact evaluation of the off-momentum aperture. • Conclusions S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  2. Beam Physics requirements (1/2) • Peak luminosity increased by a factor of 2:  Reduction ofb*from 55 cm to ~ 25 cm(50% increase in lumi) • Beam intensity increased from1.15 to 1.4× 1011 p/bunch (50% increase in lumi) • Sufficient aperture in the triplet, D1 and in the LSS • n1 ~ 79 in the triplet/D1 with a X-angle of 450 mrad (10 s b-b separation with V/H Xing in IP1/5 whichmight simplify into H/H scheme after gaining experience with b-b running the nominal LHC). • Possibility to re-use the actual TCT (max. aperture of 58 mm) and if possible, re-use the TAN and the Y-chamber as-is (or shifted). • Increased beam-clearance in the LSS, n1~9-10 (to be confirmed) might be needed to avoid the implementation of new collimation and protection devices: n1=7 is excluded (which justified the TCT’s to protect the triplet), n1~12 is OK (actual min. value of n1 reached in Q5.R1.b1 for b*=55cm). S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  3. Beam Physics requirements (2/2) • Correction of the chromatic aberrations • Target momentum window:dp ~ 1-1.5 ×10-3 (~opening of the momentum collimators @ 7TeV for abort gap cleaning). • Regular behavior of Q(dp), i.e. minimization of non-linear chromaticity Q’’, Q’’’,… (avoid off-momentum particles to be trapped into resonance and erratically lost in the ring, or head-tail instability e.g. during off-momentum measurement). • Minimize the linear and non-linear off-momentum beta-beat in the triplet (aperture) and in the two collimation IR’s (collimation inefficiency) • When applicable, correction of the H & V spurious dispersion induced by the V/H crossing angle in IP1/5 (gain aperture margin) and in IR3 (collimation inefficiency). • Main ingredients: • Use of 32 sextupole families up to the ultimate strength of 600 A (2 sectors per triplet will be needed). • Reasonable (<4-5 mm) V&H orbit bumps in the 4 arcs adjacent to IP1 & 5. • 1. & 2. only works after a substantial modification of the overall LHC optics (rephasing the 8 LHC sectors and non low-beta IR’s)  see next slides. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  4. Triplet and LSS aperture and optics matchability (1/5) • Assumption on the triplet and D1 aperture • 120 mm (unless specified differently) • Available beam clearance(from previous discussions at the LIUWG but would need to be updated for octagonal shape beam-screens  see N. Kos, LIUWG#14): Inner beam-screen dimensions (assuming 2 capillaries and nominal rectellipse shape): Gap/Radius = 42.65 / 50.25 mm for Q2, Q3, D1 32.65 / 40.25 mm for Q1 Values indicated in red might be a bit pessimistic for various reasons and would merit further discussions to gain a couple of mm in both transverse planes S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  5. A few words on the nominal LHC low-b optics Aperture and optics matchability (2/5) b_max=4400m Triplet “reciprocal focal distance”: 1/P ~ (a/b)exit ~ 1/1000 m-1 with bexit ~ 2km and aexit = b’exit /2~ 2 at the Q3 exit and entrance n1>12 in the LSS  no tertiary needed n1~7 in the triplet  TCT needed b_Q4=1500m Typical n1 plot in collision in LSS1/5 (from Q13 to Q13) b_Q5=900m • The reciprocal focal distance P will be shown to be an extremely important indicator: • quite independent on b* (up to b* ~1m) but very dependant on the detailed triplet layout. • LSS aperture: low P (i.e. basically larger aexit in the relevant transverse plane) means lower b function and therefore increased aperture in the LSS at constant b* and “constant LSS”. • optics matchability to the arcs: on the other hand, “at constant LSS”, too low Palways makes the matching difficult if not impossible: LSS/DS quad. strength going to 0 (e.g. Q4/Q5) or above nom. (e.g. Q7). S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  6. With a ~10% overestimated gradient(historically based on LPR1000)  Two categories of optics, both obtained with a symmetric triplet of slightly different layout and gradient. No quad displacement in the LSS Aperture and optics matchability (3/5) b crossing-point pushed against D2  new b-b wires location to be defined. b crossing-point well in between D1 and D2 as for the nom. optics • Case Ia: • Triplet matched with ~ nominal rec. focal (P = 891 m) • No problem of matchability to the arc (LSS quad. strength well in range, beta<200 m in the DS, natural phase advance  inj. optics easy to find)  Aperture problem expected in the LSS (next slide). • Case Ib: • Triplet matched with stronglyreduced P (P=328 m) • First indications of matchability problems (Q7 close to 200 T/m, Q4/Q5 “goes to zero” ~7-15 T/m), i.e. concept of inner/outer triplet comes back.  Optimized for the LSS aperture (next slide). S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  7. Case Ia (beam1): • Margin in the 120 mm triplet/D1 (n1~7.58) • Strong aperture restriction in the TAN (n1<6) • 58 mm max. TCT opening not an issue • Very small or no margin in D2/Q4 • Restriction in Q5 (n1~6.5)  Much too far from the target n1=9 in the LSS (even after beam-screen rotation in D2/Q4/Q5) TCT. (in-going beam in between TAN & D2) IR1 (V-Xing) Q3/D1 TAN D2/Q4 Q5 IR5 (H-Xing) • Case Ib (beam1): • Slightly improved margin in the 120 mm triplet/D1 (n1~88.5) • n1=7 almost reached in the TAN • n1>10 reached in the LSS! IR5 (H-Xing) IR1 (V-Xing) S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  8. Summary for cases Ia and Ib (~135 T/m): • Optics with standard (a/b)exit (case Ia) are excluded by the LSS aperture unless LSS magnets (D2/Q4/Q5) are displaced (next cases). • Optics with strongly increased (a/b)exit (case Ib) solve the LSS aperture problem but are at the limit of matchability for MQX gradient lower than ~135 T/m (next cases) • Realistic Case Ib-bis with 110 mm D1/MQX aperture could be an economical solution to envisage (i.e. with nominal LSS), compromising on b* (30-35 cm) if opening the coll. is needed: No margin in the triplet/D1: n1 ~ 6.77 for b*=25 cm (Case Ib with 110 mm aperture assumed for MQX/D1) …But, this corresponds to an non-standard LHC low-beta optics still to be looked at into details (Q4/Q5/Q7 collision strength, squeezed sequence, injection optics) IR1 (V-Xing) IR1 (V-Xing) S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  9. With a more realistic gradient for 120 mm: ~126T/m  Againtwo categories of optics: with disp. of D2/Q4/Q5 towards the arcs, or with nom. LSS but strongly reduced triplet focal,to fulfill the LSS aperture constraints. Aperture and optics matchability (4/5) b anomalies start to be visible in the LSS • Case IIb: • Triplet matched with nominal LSS and P further reduced to P=345 m.  Matchability problems: Q7 sticks to 200 T/m, Q4/Q5 “goes to zero”, • The natural IR phase cannot be reached limiting the highest possible injection b* (for a squeeze at constant IR phase).  Sufficient aperture expected in the LSS. • Case IIa: • Triplet matched with P=450 m, and displacing the TAN/D2/Q4 and Q5 • No problem of strength and matchability to the arcs.  inj. optics easy to find (see next slides).  Sufficient aperture expected in the LSS (next slide). S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  10. Case IIa (beam1): • Margin in the 120 mm triplet/D1 (n1~7.58) • TAN almost at n1~7 • 58 mm max. TCT opening not an issue  n1>910 reached in the LSS: if needed, b.s. rotation could further increase the beam-clearance in D2/Q4/Q5 TCT. (in-going beam in between TAN & D2) Q3/D1 TAN D2/Q4 Q5 IR5 (H-Xing) IR1 (V-Xing) • Case IIb (beam1): • Margin in the 120 mm triplet/D1 (n1~7.58) • n1~ 67 in the TAN (slight reduction w.r.t. case IIb due to slight change in X-scheme & spurious dispersion) • n1>910 reached in the LSS: if needed, b.s. rotation could further increase the beam-clearance in D2/Q4/Q5  Aperture of Q8.R starts to be visible (due to matchability problem, see previous slide) Q8 and adjacent MB’s IR1 (V-Xing) IR5 (H-Xing) S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  11.  Beam-screen rotation could substantially improve the LSS aperture if needed: • Applied to Q4.R & D2.R for beam1, and Q4.L & D2.L for beam2. • Applied to both apertures of the four Q5’s. •  See LPR1050 for more details n1=11 n1=9 TCT. (in-going beam in between TAN & D2) Q3/D1 TAN D2/Q4 Q5 Case IIa-beam1 IR5 (H-Xing) Case IIa-beam1 IR5 (H-Xing) After b.s. rotation in Q5.L, D2,R, Q4.R & Q5.R W/o b.s. rotation in LSS magnets S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  12.  Injection optics and aperture for cases IIa and IIb: • Case IIa at injection: • Easy squeeze sequence at constant phase, easy injection optics. • Noparticular aperture problem(with the standard spec. n1=7/6.7 at QF/QD) • b* limited to 14 m@ 450 GeVby the Q5/Q6 aperture (compared to 17 m for the nom. LHC). • bmaxlimited to ~ 250 m in the triplet (as for nom.): FQ non critical at injection Case IIa-IR5-beam1: n1 plot @ 450 GeV for b*= 14 m, qc= 180 mrad and sep. =2 mm • Case IIb at injection: Difficult injection optics and squeeze sequence at constant IR phase • b* limited to 7 m@ 450 GeV, at the limit of the IR tunability at injection (non- natural IR phase ~2.6/2.1) • Noparticular aperture problem(with the standard spec. n1_qf/qd=7/6.7 at inj.) • bmax ~ 460 m in the triplet: FQ @ 450 GeV will have to be optimized Case IIb-IR5-beam1: n1 plot @ 450 GeV for b*= 7 m, qc= 250 mrad and sep. =2 mm S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  13. Summary for cases IIa and IIb (120 mm & 126 T/m): • Case IIb (nominal LSS, focalreduced by a factor 3 w.r.t. nom.) is not recommended due to difficult matchability and lack of tunability (poor or zero intersection between the inj. and coll. optics tunability diagrams): - LSS quad at very low gradient (Q4/Q5) and KQ7=200 T/m in collision. - Strong limitation on the injection b* and apparently non-smooth squeeze sequence. • Case IIais expensive but looks to be one possible solution: • Triplet matched with 50% reduction of the rec. focal, with a good matchability and no limitation for the injection b* (but the usual one given by the Q5/Q6 aperture at injection). • LSS aperture partially recovered by moving D2, Q4, Q5 ( n1~9) and possibly further optimized by tilting the b.s ( n1~11).  In both cases, the triplet aperture margin (Dn1~0.51 w.r.t. n1=7) is not be usable by the primary beam if the TAN and therefore the Y chamber are not upgraded. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  14. With a low gradient for 120 mm: ~112T/m No solution found w/o moving Q4 and sufficiently low P to get n1_LSS > 7. • Tricky but possiblesolution with P~400 m can be found by moving LSS magnets. However the LSS aperture (mainly Q5) approaches n1=7. Aperture and optics matchability (5/5) Q5.L Q5.R TAN..R TAN..L 10 mm additional hidden margin for 130 mm aperture triplet/D1 • Matched with P~400 m, only Q4 displaced, and b* =27 cm • b* =27 cm at the limit for the correction of chromatic aberrations ( next chapter) • LSS quad strengths are worrying: KQ8/9~200 T/m, KQT~123 T/m, KQ7~205 T/m • w/o b.s. rotation, Q5 aperture close to n1=7 (would be ~6.5 for b* =25 cm)  MQX margin not usable by the beam if the TAN is not changed • Corrector package combined to the non-IP side of Q3 • reduced intercon. length • no specific impact on the X scheme but orbit correct-ability to be checked. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  15. Chromatic aberrations (1/8)Linear and non-linear chromaticity, off-momentum b-beating • Linear chromaticity: • Nominal LHC: IMQX ~ 350 • Upgrade:IMQX ~ 800 850 • Q’MQX ~ -65 per IR, i.e. ~ DQ’nat. induced by the 8 LHC sectors! • Q’’ and linear off-momentum b-beating (see LPR308): • The off-momentum beta-beating goes with twice the betatron phase and can reach ~100% for d=10-3. • By phasing IR1 and IR5, it can be cancelled in half of the ring but then is almost maximized in the other half for the nom. LHC tunes (0.31/.32): • Cancelling by other means, i.e. sextupoles, the off-momentum beta-beating in the triplet automatically kill the triplet contribution to Q’’. However the sextupoles themselves might induce a non-negligible residual Q’’ (next slides) • Third (higher) order chromaticity Q’’’ and signature by second (higher) order off-momentum b-beating: Depending on the sextupoles settings (i.e. 1 or 2 sextupole sectors to compensate for one triplet) significant Q’’’ and non- linear off-momentum beta-beating can be generated (next slides). S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  16. Chromatic aberrations (2/8)Linear and non-linear chromaticity, off-momentum b-beating • W/o specific correction,but the usual compensation of Q’ by the MS’s (one family per plane) - Results obtained plugging directly the case IIa optics and layout into the LHC sequence w/o any rephasing. - Plotting the amplitudes Wx,y of the linear off-momentum b-beating along the machine: IP1 IP3 IP5 IP7 IP1 Optics IIa-Beam2 Optics IIa-Beam1 • Different behaviors beam1/beam2 due to differences between the IR1/5 phase advances ( beam1/beam2 phase split in IR2, IR3, IR7, IR8). The Montague’s functions Wx,y can reach 1’000 in the triplets, IR3 and/or IR7, i.e. ~100% change of the b-functions for d=10-3(even more due to higher order effects). S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  17. Chromatic aberrations (3/8)Linear and non-linear chromaticity, off-momentum b-beating • Strategy Ia: with IR phasing (p/2 between IR1 and IR5 and correction of the IR2/3/7/8 b-b phase splits). W ~ 1000 in IR3 W ~ 0 in IR7 and in the new triplets Min. momentum window: d = 10-3 Mon. collimator: d = 1.5×10-3 IP1 IP3 IP5 IP7 IP1 Bucket: d = 0.36×10-3 Optics IIa-Beam1 Wx,y (s) Qx,y(d)  Linear off-momentum b-beat minimized in IR7 but maximized in IR3 collimation inefficiency (mainly relevant in the H-plane for IR3)? • Q’ corrected to 2 units: 40%- 68% of Imax (600A) needed in SF-SD, respectively. • No Q’’, but huge Q’’’(basically, because the phase advance from IP1 to IP5 is no longer p/2 for non-zero d) which is the indication of largenon-linear off-momentum b-beat (next slide). S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  18. Db(d)/b(0) [%] • in the triplet of IR1 • Lin. term corrected  Large sec. order • Db(d)/b(0) [%] • in the triplet of IR5 • Lin. term corrected  Large sec. order Optics IIa-Beam1 Optics IIa-Beam1 • Db(d)/b(0) [%] • in IP3 • Lin. term not corrected  Large sec. order • Db(d)/b(0) [%] • in IP7 • Lin. term corrected • Some higher order effects. Optics IIa-Beam1 Optics IIa-Beam1 S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  19. Chromatic aberrations (4/8)Linear and non-linear chromaticity, off-momentum b-beating  Strategy Ib: with IR phasing and cabling the sextupole families into two per plane for Q’’’ minimization (unbalance of Q’ correction between sectors): • 31%-51% of Imax (600A) in the SF-SD families of sectors 12, 23, 34 & 45 • 51%-83% of Imax (600A) in the SF-SD families of sectors 56, 67, 78 & 81 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP3 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP1 Qx,y(d) Min. mom. window: d = 10-3 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP5 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP7 Optics IIa-Beam1 • Net improvement but not fully satisfactory (IR3!) • Back-up solution to keep in mind S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  20. Chromatic aberrations (5/8)Linear and non-linear chromaticity, off-momentum b-beating  Strategy IIa-1: • Using the SF1/2 and SD1/2 families in flip-flop mode in the sectors adjacent to IR1 and IR5 (sectors 81,12,45 and 56) to generate an off-momentum b-beating wave  so-called b’-sectors • MS families used in normal mode in the other sectors to compensate for Q’ Q’-sectors • Strength limitation for the SD’s in the Q’ sector (twice less efficient than the SF’s) but some margin in the b’-sector. • mcell as close as possible to p/2 is needed for efficiency (otherwise decoherence of the b’-wave) and to avoid the generation of residual Q’’ by the MS themselves  Inj. Optics has to be changed and substantial left/right tunability of IR1 & IR5 is needed • Large high order effects (Q’’’, b’’(d)) expected (interleaved scheme with strong source of chrom. errors spaced by p/2 and not p). • The SF2 & SD2 families will change sign during the squeeze in the b’-sector. • The phasing condition is actually a bit more complicate due to non-negligible coupling between the SF and SD families. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  21. Strategy IIa-2: -Problem of strength is solved • Still high order effects expected • (interleaved sources of chromatic errors). • Zero-xing during squeeze  Strategy IIa-2 & IIa-3: • If needed (strength limitation in one of the two type of sectors), partial or full mergingof the Q’ and b’-sector functionalities. • Strategy IIa-3: A priori best scheme but …SD families pushed to 950-1000 A in the b’-sectors (~600 A for SF’s). S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  22. Qx,y (d)  huge Q’’’ b’(d) well corrected in IR3 &IR7 and in the triplets but sizeable higher order effects Wx,y (s) • Strategy IIa-1: Illustration by setting the arc cell phase advance to p/2 in all sectors and assuming no limitation for the IR tunability(fake trombone matrices installed in IR1/5 for satisfying the phasing conditions and in IR2/4/6/8 for the overall tune). Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP3 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP7 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP5 S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  23. Qx,y (d)  Almost linear in the H-plane  Huge Q’’’ in the V-plane Wx,y (s) • Strategy IIa-2 for SD’s and IIa-3 for SF’s: Marginal high order in the H-plane, still sizeable in the V-plane . Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP7 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP3 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP5 S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  24. Wx,y (s) Qx,y (d)  Almost linear in both planes • Strategy IIa-3 both for SF’s & SD’s: Db(d)/b(0) < 5% over the full d-range. Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP3 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP7 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP5 S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  25. Same quantitative and qualitative conclusions obtained when trying to interchange the “Q’- and b’-sectors”: strategies IIb, IIc, IId,… • The b’-sectors for the SF’s are the Q’-sectors for the SD’s, and vice-versa • Q’-sectors: 12, 45, 56 & 81 • b’- sectors: 23, 34, 67 & 78 • Q’-sectors: 23, 45, 67 & 81 • b’-sectors: 12, 34, 56 & 78 • The generation of the b’(d)-wave and the correction of the MQX contribution to Q’ needs to be done in the same sectors to get rid of Q’’’, b’’(d),.., and avoid zero-xing of RSF/D during squeeze. • Not allowed due to strength limitation in SD’s , but non-issue for the nominal LHC! S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  26. Chromatic aberrations (6/8)Linear and non-linear chromaticity, off-momentum b-beating • Strategy III…last chance: Two b’-sectors per triplet constraining the arc cell and IR phase advances all around the ring. • SD families just strong enough: 600 A required (2% more would be welcome). • No zero-crossing during the squeeze. • Non-interleaved scheme (strong SD or SF spaced by ~p) • small high order effects expected • Injection Optics has to be changed (phasing conditions). In additionthe arc tune-shift quadrupoles (acting independently on both beams) gets a non-zero nominal setting because the left (resp. right) phase advances of IR1 & 5 cannot be equalized for the two beams, i.e. the IR now extends up to Q22 with some impact on the aperture @ 450 GeV(CO budget to be tighten by ~0.3 mm). • The adjustment of the fractional part of the tune becomes tricky, and impose to detune in a subtle way the above phasing conditions: e.g. dephasing sector 45 by –DQ/2 and sector 34 by +3DQ/2 give a tune shift of +DQ while warranting that the b’-wave still arrive with the right phase in the triplet.  Residual but sizeable Q’’ is expected(the b’-wave is not zero at the sextupole)  correctable by the arc MO’s if needed. The SD efficiency and then the minimum achievable b* depend (smoothly) on the working point. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  27. A new phasing configuration of the LHC has been found to allow the b’(d) correction in collision, with controllable and/or correctable side effects (b’’(d), Q’’, Q’’’). • New injection optics re-matched accordingly (courtesy of M.Aiba, M.Giovannozzi, T.Risselada, R.Tomas). • Pushing the MSD’s up to 600A+e allows a full correction of the chromatic aberration up to b*~2527 cm (depending on the MQX aperture) for the nom. LHC working point (.31/.32). • Not all WP’s yet tested, but good indication that none will dramatically affect the min. possibleb*(large vertically tunability IR4 and comfortable margin in the SF strength). • This new injection optics still needs fine tuning and detailed verifications: • Aperture @ 450 GeV: expected loss of Dn1~0.10.2 (~0.5 mm at the highest beta locations). • Linear imperfection (systematic b2 induced beta-beating, a2 correct-ability?..) • DA@ 450 GeV (x-y phase split reduced in the arcs  non-linear driving terms a priori more excited, but magnet sorting at installation and actual field quality better than initially expected). S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  28. Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP1 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP3 Wx,y (s) Db(d)/b(0) < 5-10% over the full range. Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP5 Db(d)/b(0) [%] in IP7 Residual Q’’ (~30007000) (b’(d,s) ≠ 0 at the sextupoles) Q(d) linear after MO correction (~200/450A needed in OF/OD) Qx,y (d) w/o MO Qx,y (d) with MO S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  29. Chromatic aberrations (7/8)H & V spurious dispersion induced by the X-schemes • Reminder onthe beam related tolerance budget … about 15 mm for Phase I • Already challenging: all potential gain on paper has to be retro-ceded to the target n1. • Closed orbit: 3 mm • Kept unchanged while a rescaling by a factor 1.7 would be fully justified, a fortiori with one MCBX per plane and per triplet on the NIP-side of Q3. • b-beating: 20% (with no specific budget for off-momentum), i.e. 2 mm for n1=7 and bmax=12.5 km. • Kept unchanged while a rescaling by a factor 2.8 could be justified. • Spurious dispersion from the arcs: 30%, i.e. 4.5 mm for bmax=12.5 km and the usual d=0.86 10-3(i.e. 0.36 for the bucket + 0.5 for off-momentum measurement). … Perhaps d=1.5× 10-3 more suitable for off-momentum protons escaping the momentum collimator? • Overall budget, i.e. Dx,y× d, kept unchanged, at least justified for the V-dispersion, not correctable because arriving at an arbitrary phase in the triplet (see below). • V & H dispersion coming from the V & H Xing-schemes in IR1 & IR5: 5 mm in the worst case  Is exported in a given plane from one triplet to the other, at a specific phase.  Two triplets of a given IR combine in phase: effect • Can reach ~6 m for worst phase advances between IR1 and IR5. • Correctable at the source in the H-plane (IR5) via IR-rematching but no IR knobs to correct in the V-plane. • H & V arc orbit bumps tested in the past w/o success: not enough MCB strength, huge orbit in the arcs ( e.g. P. Leunissen 1999). • The new proposed LHC phasing scheme allows to revisit the above conclusion. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  30. IR1 & 5 optics IIa (beam1) – V6.500 optics IR1&5 optics IIa (beam1)– New LHC optics IP1 IP5 IP1 Dxy(s) w/o X-scheme (arc-regular from Q13 to Q13 and matched to zero in IP1,2,5 &8) Dxy(s) w/o X-scheme (arc-regular from Q22 to Q22 and matched to zero in IP1,2,5 &8) H-dispersion generated on purpose in IR3 • A bit better but still! • ~4m in MQX (both beams) • Some perturbation in IR3&7 • With X-scheme • ~ 5 - 6 m in MQX (beam1-2) • substantially modified in IR3/7 S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  31. H- Xing in IR5 Closed H-orbit bumps in sectors 45 & 56 Dx & Dy back to 020 cm in the triplets of IR1 & IR5 Closed V-orbit bumps in sectors 12 & 81 V- Xing in IR1 • Small H & V closed orbit (< 3-4mm) generated at the beginning of the IR1 &5 adjacent sectors (1 MCBH/V) and closed at the end (2MCBH or 2 MCBV). • Generate an H & V dispersion wave arriving with the right phase at the triplet to compensate for the effect of the X-angle. • Perfectly works in both planes and for both beams and allow to keep the same optics in IR1 & IR5 with the nominal H&V alternated crossing scheme. • ~3.55 mm, i.e. Dn1~1-1.5 can be retro-ceded to the beam to reach n1~9 in the triplet for 120 mm aperture. • … but with a non-zero nominal CO in the arcs, orthogonal fine tuning knobs must be defined (for orbit, tune, coupling, b*, Dx,y ,Q’ and b’(d))Robustness, operational aspects. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  32. Chromatic aberrations (8/8)Off-momentum aperture (low-b optics II-a, new LHC phasing config.) Mechanical aperture calculated “old style” (e.g. w/o taking into account the b(d) variation) Calculated with exact orbit and twiss parameters for non-zero d (i.e. including linear and non-linear b(d) and dispersion) Before b’(d) and dispersion correction d = +0.86×10-3 d = - 0.86×10-3 Before dispersion correction After b’(d) and dispersion correction After dispersion correction d = + 0.86×10-3 d = - 0.86×10-3 • After b’(d) and dispersion correction, n1 is only smoothly dependant on d. • n1(d) > 8.5-9 both in the triplet and the LSS, but the TAN. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  33. Conclusions (1/2)Open questions and to do list • TheLSS apertureis the main limiting factor. • What is the min. acceptable n1 in the LSS @ 7 TeV w/o additional absorber? • (1)..n1LSS =7+e , (2) n1LSS =9-10 or (3) n1LSS >>10?? • Could be checked quickly with the nominal LHC optics by reducing artificially the D2/Q4/Q5 aperture in LSS1 & LSS5. • Sticking to b* =25 cm, and depending on the reply to the above question,… (1) the LSS could be kept unchanged and the triplet aperture could range in between ~110 mm (no aperture margin in the triplet) ~120 mm (no matching found for 130 mm aperture triplet and n1LSS ~7), with a preference for 120 mm and a gradient pushed up to ~125 T/m, i.e. 156 T/m for the short sample limit. (2) D2/Q4/Q5 have to be moved w/o b.s. rotation (but perhaps in some Q5’s)and the triplet aperture could range in between ~110 mm (no aperture margin in the triplet) 130 mm (strength limitation in the LSS, essentially Q7), with a preference for 120 mm. (3) D2/Q4/Q5 have to be moved, b.s. rotation have to be performed (essentially Q5),additional tertiaries will be needed in front of Q5and the triplet aperture could range in between ~110 mm  130 mm. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

  34. Conclusions (2/2) • The long-standing problem (>10 years old) of theoff-momentum b-beating and vert. dispersion correctionis now solved … on paper. • But 600Aneeds to be granted in half of the MSD families to go down to b*=2527 cm depending on the triplet aperture/gradient (~21-22 cm for Nb3Sn triplets). • The aperture gain by the correction of the spurious H & V dispersion offers the possibility to open the next generation collimators from n1=6 to n1~8 (keeping 1s clearance above the secondaries for machine protection devices). • But everything is based on a new LHC injection optics for the 8 LHC sectors and the 8 LHC IR’s, which needs to be assessed @ 450 GeV in terms of settings (e.g. Iinj >3% Inom), MA, DA, collimation, machine protection,… • If no show-stopper are found, this new optics will certainly improve the performance of the nominal LHC. • Then a lot of things to be checked in parallel or a posteriori. • Detailed triplet layout (BPMS, 1 or 2 MQX types to keep bmax < 12-12.5 km, CO correctability for one MCBX per plane and per triplet on the non-IP side of Q3, …). • Triplet aperture vs beam-screen shape (rect-ellipse, octagonal,..) • An then, of course, DA, beam-beam and collimation studies @ 7 TeV. S. Fartoukh, LIUWG 28/05/2008

More Related