nlc - the next linear collider project “slow” feedback requirements: deflections and luminosity...
Post on 22-Dec-2015
227 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project
“Slow” Feedback Requirements: Deflections
and LuminosityLinda Hendrickson
IPBI Meeting, SLAC
June 26, 2002
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Overview:1. Deflection feedback and ground motion simulations: keeping the beams in collision, train-train. (~timescale: 120 Hz)
2. Luminosity optimization: Maximizing luminosity and stabilizing higher-order aberrations. (~timescale: 30 minutes)
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Feedback timescales: NLC simulations (Andrei Seryi et al, 2002)
Uncorrected With SLC-style IP deflection feedback
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Feedback timescales: NLC simulations (Andrei Seryi, PAC 2001)
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Instrumentation for “Slow” Feedback, Needed by Control System:IP Beam position monitors (2 incoming+2 outgoing, X&Y, * 2 beams)
Good resolution (< 1 um per S. Smith )Low noise, not subject to erroneous results from beam spraySlow/low offset drift (offsets calibratable with luminosity or defl. scan)Low latency (<<< 1/120 sec)
Luminosity monitor(s)Good resolution (~10%, comparable to real luminosity jitter?)Low latency (< 1/120 sec)Multiple monitor options are desirableReturns maximum signal for maximum luminosity! (no systematics)
Other instrumentation(?):Intensity monitor (defl and lum normalization, consistent timescale)Beam timing monitor, ala SLC?Crab cavity phase monitor?Detector background signals, needed in realtime!
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Actuators for “Slow” Feedback, Needed by Control System:
IP Correctors or kickers (X&Y, * 2 beams)Fast response (<< 1/120 sec) Slower correctors with larger range needed for longer-term drifts
FF sextupole orbit feedback correctors (X&Y, 2 phases?, 2 beams)Fast response (<~ 1/120 sec)
Luminosity Optimization controlsX and Y sextupole offsets; skew quadrupole strengths (per Y.
Nosochkov)Prefer fast response (< 1/10 sec ala SLC)Prefer equal speeds in a multiknob (less susceptible to systematics)Minimal hysteresis (reproducibility of actuator settings)
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Feedback timescales: NLC vs SLC feedback design response:
(It helps to assume a faster control system: low-latency BPMs, fast IP kickers/correctors)
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Feedback timescales for Luminosity Optimization: SLC experience (Nan Phinney, Pantaleo Raimondi, and the SLC team):
A.F.A.R.A! (As Fast As Reasonably Achievable) Fast response to upstream tuning, supports higher order
optimizations.Want < 30 minutes to optimize all, from untuned state (10-30
minutes typical SLC running)Typical SLC optimization scenario: optimize 10 parameters
every 2 hours, plus on user request:2 beams: X&Y waist; X&Y eta; couplingEstimated < 2% luminosity loss due to dithering
Possible NLC optimization scenario: optimize 10-13 parameters every 2 hours, plus on user request:
2 beams: X&Y waist; X&Y eta; coupling; crab cavity phase(?) 1 beam: compressor phase(?)
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Luminosity Optimization in the SLC:
Original Scan method: Minimize beam width-squared from deflection scans
(subject to meas error ~20-40% luminosity)
Dither Method: Maximize luminosity while moving
multiknob up and down by small amounts, average 1000’s
of pulses
Bhabha
BSM
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Luminosity Optimization in the SLC: Comparative Resolution of Scan Method vs Dither Method
Dither
Scan
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
SLC Optimization : typical feedback command changes over 3 days. June, 1998
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
SLC Optimization : typical old-scan-method command changes over 3 days. June, 1997
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
SLC Optimization : Typical optimization cycle over 12 hours; June, 1998
Normalized luminosity during dither cycle (arb units)
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
And now… “The Movies”! courtesy of Andrei Seryi and the NLC accelerator physics group
Damping Ring >> IP << Damping Ring Consistent ground motion simulations (2 beams, one continuous
ground, with P(ω,k) spectrum (elastic waves, slow ATL, systematic motion, technical noises)
SLC-style IP deflection feedback MATLAB (simulation driver, feedback calculations,
display&analysis) LIAR (linac tracking with structures, wakefield calculations: beam
slice representation) DIMAD (tracking engine run within LIAR; for bunch compressors,
bends, sextupole,octupole tracking; particle representation) Guinea Pig (beam-beam code; interfaced to LIAR-DIMAD via
MATLAB; gives us the deflection and luminosity “measurements”)
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear ColliderGround motion models
• Based on data, build modeling P(,k) spectrum of ground motion which includes:
– Elastic waves– Slow ATL motion– Systematic motion– Technical noises at
specific locations, e.g. FD)
1E-4 1E-3 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
0.1
1
10
100
"Model A"
"Model C"
"Model B"
Inte
grat
ed r
ms
mot
ion,
nm
Frequency, Hz
Example of integrated spectra of absolute (solid lines) and relative motion for 50m separation obtained from the models
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear ColliderP(,k) is then used to generate x(t,s) and y(t,s) and beams GO
Example of Mat-LIAR modeling
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear ColliderIntermediate ground motion
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear ColliderZoom into beginning of e- linac …
Transition from linac to transfer line
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear ColliderNoisy ground motion
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear ColliderQuiet ground motion
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear ColliderBeam-beam collisions calculated by Guinea-
Pig [Daniel Schulte]
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Pulse #100, Z-Y
calculated by Guinea-Pig
[Daniel Schulte]
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Pulse #100, Z-X
calculated by Guinea-Pig
[Daniel Schulte]
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
Pulse #100, X-Y
calculated by Guinea-Pig
[Daniel Schulte]
Next Linear ColliderNext Linear Collider
CONCLUSIONS? Controlling deflections and luminosity optimization will be at
least as difficult for NLC as for SLC. Need tools that are at least as good! (i.e. fast, reliable, low-latency instrumentation and controls).
Future work for NLC: Optimization of 120-Hz deflection feedback response for
expected ground motion.
More complete simulations of NLC tuning: sextupole orbit correction, optimization with luminosity jitter, realistic imperfections, upstream tuning; IP angle feedback? Etc…
top related