1 / 13

Staging and Energy upgrade scenarios

Staging and Energy upgrade scenarios. K.Kubo. Staging?. If we want to start operation with half cavities, how to distribute them?. A. ML. BDS. No cavities. Full. B. ML. BDS. Sparse cavities (e.g. every other place). A will be better from beam dynamics, preserving low emittance beam.

jakeem-barlow
Download Presentation

Staging and Energy upgrade scenarios

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. Staging and Energy upgrade scenarios K.Kubo

  2. Staging? If we want to start operation with half cavities, how to distribute them? A ML BDS No cavities Full B ML BDS Sparse cavities (e.g. every other place) A will be better from beam dynamics, preserving low emittance beam. But, how important?

  3. Simulation for Final Ebeam 125 GeV A ML BDS No cavities Full 15 GeV 125 GeV B ML BDS Sparse cavities (every other place) No cavities C (for comparison) ML BDS Low gradient (all cavities installed) No cavities Same Optics

  4. Vertical emittance along the linac, mean of 100 random seeds. “Standard errors” (except Q roll) and Dispersion Matching Steering 125 GeV C 250 GeV 125 GeV A 125 GeV B No significant difference between A (fill cavities in 1st part) and B (sparsely distributed cavities)

  5. “Standard” Error in ML

  6. Vertical emittance along the linac, mean of 100 random seeds. “Standard errors” (except Q roll) and Dispersion Matching Steering Zero bunch charge (no wakefield) 125 GeV C 125 GeV B 250 GeV 125 GeV A Most emittance growth is from wakefield. Further correction for wakefield (wake bump) can reduce emittance close to this figure.

  7. Comparison of different choices for 125 GeV and 175 GeV 250 GeV for comparison With and without wakefield No significant difference between A (fill cavities in 1st part) and B (sparsely distributed cavities)

  8. Energy upgrade (ECM 500 -> 1000 GeV) • Review of old story. • FODO or FOFODODO lattice? • 3 or 4 modules/quad?

  9. Upgrade Ebeam from 250 to 500 GeV ML (15-25 GeV) Special mag. BC (5-15 GeV) ML (25-250 GeV) Move to upstream Keep for 275 – 500 GeV New part (25-275GeV)

  10. Weak magnets for Ebeam 275 – 500 GeV 3 modules/quad FODO 3 modules/quad FOFODODO Strengths of quads in E_beam >250 = Strength at 250 GeV Or, K1 ~ 1/E_beam Strengths of quads at E_beam = 500 = Strength at 250 GeV K1(E_beam > 250 GeV) = ½ K1(E_beam< 250GeV) FOFODODO can make dispersion in downstream part small. Loose tolerance of BPM scale error in DMS correction.

  11. Simulation results of DFS with “standard” static errors average of 40 seeds

  12. Simulation results of DFS with “standard” static errors + BPM Scale error 5% average of 40 seeds

  13. SUMMARY • Two stagingscenarios (fill first part and sparsely distribute) are both OK. • “Fill first part” is better, but probably not important. • Upgrade scenarios from 500 GeV ECM to 1TeVin TDR is OK • FOFODODO lattice in high energy part, with weak quad strength.

More Related