1 / 10

Matching Injector To Linac

Matching Injector To Linac. Caveats. This is all loose and fuzzy – sort of religion We don’t have real tight control over and knowledge of the machine “functional modularity”, “beam based methods”, etc => dial it in, rather than lock it down

koren
Download Presentation

Matching Injector To Linac

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. Matching Injector To Linac

  2. Caveats • This is all loose and fuzzy – sort of religion • We don’t have real tight control over and knowledge of the machine • “functional modularity”, “beam based methods”, etc => dial it in, rather than lock it down • We have gotten it to work well enough to lase hard and reliably • Y’all are a test sample – we’ll all try to figure out how to tell people what we’ve done and how it works • Ask questions • Give advice

  3. Issues Inaccuracies/ambiguities in model-based predictions • Drive laser variations • Cathode model approximations • Injector, accelerator magnets not well characterized • Field calibrations, current control • Field inhomogenieties • Simplified field models in cavities • 3-d field details needed for accuracy • Gradient calibrations “loose” Can model trends very well, and values well - but only with extremely tight configuration control Must provide beam-based tuning algorithms

  4. Methodology • Set phases (spectrometer, miniphase) • “Calibrate” model • Quads don’t set with good precision • Use “difference orbits” to check focusing • Modify model to produce agreement with observation • Change magnet (usually quad) set-points to make model match reality • Perform multi-monitor emittance measurement • Gives notional beam properties at front end of machine • Rematch • Resets beam properties to fit within downstream acceptance

  5. Machine Model • Analysis of beam and accelerator properties requires a means of evaluating transfer matrix elements, beam envelopes, etc • Typical machine models are home-brewed, machine specific, but generally are • based on matrix-multipliers • Read parameters directly from the machine • Run fast • Have a high degree of interactivity • Can modify easily • Pull in/push out data • Optimize optics solutions, orbit corrections, etc

  6. Difference Orbits • When we phased, we “zeroed” the BPMs and looked at the effect of changing phase • The signature was the change in position at the spectrometer observation point • Method works for other parameters: zero the BPMs and see what happens when we kick beam • Can be used to establish transfer matrix elements (esp. M12, M34, M62, …) • Twiss parameter representions (betatron amplitudes) • Phase advance • Momentum compactions M55,T555, … • Basic method: • Zero BPMs • Change “something” and look at response • Corrector (M12, M34) • Beam energy (M16) • Injection phase (M55, T555,…) • Analysis of data can • Set BPM scale factors • Trap focusing errors (quad, dipole, screwdrivers, allen wrenches…) • Measure/correct compactions This measurement characterizes the lattice - and helps you use the lattice to measure the beam

  7. Multi-monitor Emittance Measurements • Beam envelopes at an observation point are defined by their value at some upstream reference + the transfer matrix • If the transfer matrix (matrices) are known, can measure spot sizes at several (more than three) places and determine beam envelopes and emittance • Form sum of square deviations between projection & observation, and minimize by varying “injected” betas

  8. Rematch • After fitting “initial” beam envelopes to reproduce in model observed spot sizes, you can see the propagated Twiss parameters • Adjust quads to make “real” betas match design acceptance values • Iterate: • Remeasure, check propagated envelopes, see if agreement improves

  9. The Dread “Matchathon” • Wailing, cursing, gnashing of teeth… • Apply same process to • linac-to-arc match, • dispersion management in arc(s), • arc-to-wiggler match, • momentum compaction (M55, T555) for bunch length compression, • wiggler-to-arc match, • arc-to-linac (reinjection) match, • energy compression (M56, T566, W5666), • Iterate • Then trim for loss suppression as you boot-strap lasing

  10. To Consider • Beam is very irregular – must consider just what you match on • Full beam size (stuff all the electrons through tight apertures) • Sigmas – fit to gaussian • Rms beam size • Usually worry about the 1st • Hard to associate “which gaussian goes with which other” when you march down the line

More Related