1 / 11

Follow-up PSB H- chicane magnets: Inconel vacuum chamber option & consequences on beam dynamics

Follow-up PSB H- chicane magnets: Inconel vacuum chamber option & consequences on beam dynamics. E. Benedetto LIU-PSB Meeting, 26/9/2013. Aim. Evaluate differences wrt space charge between: Ceramic chamber Inconel chamber (eddy currents inducing multipolar errors)

ivana
Download Presentation

Follow-up PSB H- chicane magnets: Inconel vacuum chamber option & consequences on beam dynamics

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. Follow-upPSB H- chicane magnets: Inconel vacuum chamber option & consequences on beam dynamics E. Benedetto LIU-PSB Meeting, 26/9/2013

  2. Aim • Evaluate differences wrt space charge between: • Ceramic chamber • Inconel chamber (eddy currents inducing multipolar errors) • See presentation LIU-PSB on 30/5/2013 • Very intense LHC beam (last presentation) • Today results for: • LHC type beam, still with painting, Ex*=1.2um, Np=160e10 • Isolde type beam, Np=1e13, Ex*=9um, Ey*=6um NB: THESE RESULTS ARE VALID IN RELATIVE, i.e. for ourcomparison, WHILE FOR THE ABSOLUTE VALUE MORE WORK IS NEEDED, bothfrom the PSB opticsmodeling AND code debugging/benchmarking

  3. Limitations • The model is very simple • Double harmonics • Acceleration • No errors & non-linearities in the lattice except… • The only errors are in the chicane magnets, i.e <1/16 machine (and QNO correctors) NB: THESE RESULTS ARE VALID IN RELATIVE, i.e. for ourcomparison, WHILE FOR THE ABSOLUTE VALUE MORE WORK IS NEEDED, bothfrom the PSB opticsmodeling AND code debugging/benchmarking

  4. ``Very intense`` lhcbeam(see30/5/13) E* (um) RED: ceramic GREEN: inconel, no compensation BLUE: inconel Vertical Horizontal Np=350e10 Qh=4.28, Qv=4.55 turns • Large growth in horizontal, due to (too) large DQ & integer crossing

  5. LHC type beam (producedwith 20t painting) E* (um) RED: ceramic GREEN: inconel, no compensation BLUE: inconel Vertical Horizontal Np=160e10 Qh=4.28, Qv=4.55 turns • No more growth in horizontal

  6. Isolde beam(1/4) • Produced byC.Braccowithoptimized painting bumpfunction(seeFollow-up H- injection review: https://indico.cern.ch/conferenceTimeTable.py?confId=158153#20111109 ) • WithOrbit (by Chiara) up to turn159, to have completefall of painting bump thenconverted(EB) in PTC-Orbitcoordinates: • Small differences in bucketshape and residual phase offset  produceartificiallosses in the code of ~12% Needsoptimization

  7. Isolde likebeam(2/4) E* (um) RED: ceramic GREEN: inconel, no compensation BLUE: inconel Horizontal Vertical Np=1000e10 Qh=4.28, Qv=4.55 turns • Horizontal emittance dominated by losses

  8. Isolde likebeam(3/4) RED: ceramic GREEN: inconel, no compensation BLUE: inconel Np) Np=1000e10 Qh=4.28, Qv=4.55 turns • >12% losses, mostlyartificial, due to non-perfectRF capture  relative is OK!

  9. Isolde likebeam(4/4) Uncapturedbeam, lost on the innerside of the vacuum chamber y (mm) Vertical losses RED: ceramic GREEN: inconel, no compensation BLUE: inconel X (mm) • >12% losses, mostlyartificial, due to non-perfectRF capture

  10. PSB Space-Charge activities ongoing • Code consolidation (Highest priority! within SC study-group) • Injection chicane (discussed in Friday’s Injection meetings) • Add quadrupolar component in the BSW1 model • Optimum shape for bump decay • Benchmark with 160 MeV measurements (part of V.Forte’s Thesis) • Add alignment & quads errors (V. Forte, with input from M. McAteer) • High intensity beams: set-up PTC-Orbit simulations (past work done with Orbit) and losses localization (M. Kowalska, TS starting next week) • Evaluate impact of new H- injection @ 160MeV • LHC beams: Find optimum WP for max brightness, Effect of integer, resonance compensation, machine model • Losses & halo for high intensities/large emittance

  11. Conclusions: inconel vs. ceramic ? • Confirmedconclusions of presentation30/5/13: (http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=254489) for the beams of interest • No showstoppersfor the inconel chamber are found, but compensation isrequired • Simulations results are validonly in relative, to discriminatebetweenceramic and inconel chamber • optics model as simple as possible, • no errorsexcept in BSW magnets • A documentis in preparation

More Related