1 / 8

Direct TOF measurements on EMMA Yuri Saveliev EMMA Commissioning workshop 02-04 December 2009

Direct TOF measurements on EMMA Yuri Saveliev EMMA Commissioning workshop 02-04 December 2009. What accuracy .... ?. ~ 0.5ps should be OK. Experiment on ALICE was planned but. BPM raw signals detection on a fast scope ST1-BPM-02 & AR1-BPM-01

chase
Download Presentation

Direct TOF measurements on EMMA Yuri Saveliev EMMA Commissioning workshop 02-04 December 2009

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. Direct TOF measurements on EMMA Yuri Saveliev EMMA Commissioning workshop 02-04 December 2009

  2. What accuracy .... ? ~ 0.5ps should be OK ....

  3. Experiment on ALICE was planned but ... • BPM raw signals detection on a fast scope • ST1-BPM-02 & AR1-BPM-01 • Move AR1 and measure change in TOF between the two BPMs Instead: TOF between buncher and INJ-BPM-02 for setting the buncher zero-cross phase

  4. Buncher setup: LeCroy, 2.5GHz; 20GS/s

  5. Buncherzero-cross setting • no averaging of measurements • no attempt to maximise accuracy • not the best available scope • < 10ps accuracy always

  6. Proposed TOF measurements on EMMA : I e-beam L1 > L2 (to get both signals within 100-300ps from each other on the scope) L3 ~ 10m ( to “spoil” the signal due to cable dispersion Scope : 12.5GHz; 40GS/s Reference : signal zero-crosses (rather than peaks) Multishot averaging Disadvantage: need large time range on the scope Expected : < 1ps accuracy (perhaps even 0.5ps) BPM1 BPM2 L2 L1 L3 SCOPE

  7. Proposed TOF measurements on EMMA : II e-beam L1 > L2 (to get both signals within ~100ps from each other on the scope) L1, L2 ~ 10m ( to “spoil” the signal due to cable dispersion) Phase shifter ? Scope : 12.5GHz; 20GS/s Reference : signal zero-crosses (rather than peaks) Multishot averaging Disadvantage: lower sampling rate BPM1 BPM2 L2 L1 SCOPE Expected : < 1ps accuracy (perhaps even 0.5ps)

  8. Proposed TOF measurements on EMMA : III e-beam • L1 > L2 by ~ 20m • to get both signals within ~100ps from each • other on the scope • trigger from BPM1 • injected bunch from BPM1 • one turn bunch from BPM2 • Scope : 12.5GHz; 20GS/s • Advantage: larger time difference to measure (x43) • Disadvantage: ??? BPM1 BPM2 L2 L1 SCOPE BPM1 BPM2

More Related