H.Schmickler, LTC 26-9-2006

Critical Review of US-LARP activitieson accelerator systems

Based on contributions for/by:

• IR upgrade studies, beam-beam compensation, e-cloud simulations: Oliver Bruening, Werner Herr, Frank Zimmermann

• Beam Instrumentation: Rhodri Jones

• Collimation: Ralph Assmann

• Beam Commissioning: Roger Bailey

H.Schmickler, LTC 26-9-2006

Outline• 2006 = 1st year of full US-LARP funding• Time for a critical review:

- accelerator systems: LTC 27th of September- magnet R&D, hardware commisioning:Special AT meeting on 4th of october feedback to collaboration meeting (end of October, close to BNL)

• Information on LHC@FNAL and LAFS• Sensitive issue: Payment of US collaborators (PJAs)• Detailed technical feedback• Conclusions

H.Schmickler, LTC 26-9-2006

LHC@FNAL

• New bilateral collaboration FNAL – CERN in order to build and operate a CCC copy at FNAL

• Initiative by FNAL (Erik Gottschalk et al.) originally motivated for remote operation of LHC experiments

• Extended to accelerator control now• Remote Operation and diagnostics has been part

of LARP conceptual mandate in the beginning; dropped for low priority.

• LHC@FNAL very active; leads to PJAS at CERN; contributing to LHC controls; work supervised by Mike Lamont and Pierre Charrue

H.Schmickler, LTC 26-9-2006

LAFS (= LHC Accelerator Fermilab Software?)

• Newly proposed bilateral collaboration FNAL-CERN• Collaboration agreement on the desks of the big chiefs• Will make available for controls/operational software

efforts up to ten PJAS (a bit optimistic…)• Today focus of work:

- Role based access - Sequencing - Snap Shot Analysis Software (Tevatron Operations Tool)

• Work defined by Mike Lamont, Eugenia Hatziangeli, Pierre Charrue

• Team at FNAL: Dave McGinnis et al.

H.Schmickler, LTC 26-9-2006

PJAS at CERN• Very sensitive issue: US –PJAS will come to work at CERN based

on several different collaboration agreements- US-LARP, LAFS, LHC@FNAL, others…

• In terms of payment they should all be treated the same;i.e. salary by home institute + 4 (5) ksfr/month extra allowance

• The collaboration agreements are different:1) LAFS and LHC@FNAL: PJAS allowance paid by CERN2) US-LARP: PJAS funding (mainly for beam commissioning or subsystem commissioning) is part of US-LARP commitment!CERN does NOT pay PJAS allowance3) EXTRA resources demanded by CERN for hardware commissioning: LARP has proposed itself for organization of this help; CERN pays PJAS allowance!

• We have to get this clear, otherwise we end up in a big mess.

Feedback on USLARP CollaborationsLHC IR upgrade studies:

LTC; 27.9.2006 AB-ABP Feedback 6

mainly organized through the CARE / ESGARD HHH network

main deliverable: optics solutions for new IR layout

USLARP is mainly involved in Ni3Sn upgrade studies which

are based on the nominal LHC layout no new optics required

main contribution was the proposal for flat beam operation at

LUMI’05 in Archidosso (however, follow-up optics studies

were carried out at CERN)

other deliverables: magnetic TAS:

very little progress after 3 years of discussion!

right now all collaborators seem to mainly follow their own agenda

the collaboration could clearly benefit from better coordination!

Feedback on USLARP CollaborationsLHC optics and commissioning studies:

LTC; 27.9.2006 AB-ABP Feedback 7

mainly organized through direct contacts between CERN & LBNL

main deliverables:

diagnostics tools (procedures) for measuring -beat in the LHC (% level)

proposal for correction algorithm based on measurements

collaboration works well and first results have been discussed in the LHCCWG

at CERN.

collaboration benefits greatly by ‘on site’ residence of a USLARP

Toohig fellow facilitates communication and prepares an eventual active

USLARP contribution to the LHC commissioning

Toohig fellow will also participate now in LUMI’06 workshop before the return

to BNL

Feedback on USLARP Collaborationselectron cloud studies:

LTC; 27.9.2006 AB-ABP Feedback 8

mainly organized through direct contacts between CERN & LBNL & BNL

main deliverables:

independent simulation tool to the code that has been developed

at CERN cross check and confidence in simulation results

perform simulation studies for the LHC at LBNL

outsourcing (only 0.2 FTE working on e-cloud at CERN)

USLARP to specify best conditioning scenario during startup

little results in ‘03 / ’04 but bug fixes and new results in ’05 / ‘06

measurements in RHIC and simulations at BNL

provides network for studying e-cloud effects in existing machines

collaboration provides USLARP with insight into effect at LHC and helps

during preparing active USLARP support during LHC commissioning

cooling capacityat low & high L

OLD POSINSTw/o rediffused

NEW POSINSTw/o rediffused

ECLOUDLTC40

e-cloud heat load in LHC dipole with old & new POSINST w/o re-diffused e- and ECLOUD result (Miguel Furman)

note:re-diffusedelectronsincreaseheat load ~2x

Feedback on USLARP Collaborationsbeam-beam studies (simulation and theory):

LTC; 27.9.2006 AB-ABP Feedback 10

mainly organized through direct contacts between CERN & LBNL

main deliverables:

collaboration on beam-beam simulations with LBL (J. Qiang and

M. Furman) on strong-strong simulations on coherent effects and

emittance growth. Same programs are used for RHIC studies.

studies showed potential problem for partially overlapping beams

Results have been quantitatively confirmed with other programs.

studies now extended to commissioning and beam finding scenarios,

including runs with low luminosity (i.e. 450 GeV)

exchange of results and discussions on regular basis

Feedback on USLARP Collaborationsbeam-beam studies (simulation and experiments):

LTC; 27.9.2006 AB-ABP Feedback 11

mainly organized through direct contacts between CERN & LBNL & FNAL

main deliverables:

experimental and simulation setup for long range beam-beam

collision compensation using wires at RHIC in BNL:

compensation of single LR collision in RHIC MDs in ’05/‘06

simulation of 60-120 lumped LR collisions in measurement using wires

compensation with two BBLRs for beams colliding head on

explore & demonstrate feasibility of LR compensation for

implementation in the LHC.

collaboration works well and first RHIC MD results have been discussed with

CERN. However, usefulness of RHIC set-up (only one long range collision point

and scalability to LHC is not obvious).

Long-range beam-beam effect in RHIC at 100 GeV

• LR at s=10.6m• Octupoles on in Yellow• Blue beam moved

measurement of losses vs. separation (Wolfram Fischer)

beam-beam simulation for RHIC experiment (Ji Qiang): emittance growth vs. tunes for different separations

4 separation5 separation

6 separation

US-LARP Instrumentation PackagesInstrumenting the TAN – Luminosity monitors for IR1 and IR5

• Started with LBNL as part of theUS-LHC construction project Initial R&D very promising Problems with US-LARP budget

approval slowed things downconsiderably a few years ago, along with a lack of CERN manpower for effective follow-up.

Due to this, CERN limits collaboration with LBNL to luminosity and longitudinal profile monitoring is abandoned

Recent injection of new manpower by LBNL and a pressing installation schedule have served to advance the project significantly

It does now look as if the deliverables will be installed just in time

US-LARP Instrumentation PackagesTune, Coupling and Chromaticity Feedback – BNL & FNAL

• Started as bilateral agreement betweenCERN & BNL – later integrated intoLARP with additional support from FNAL Original deliverable was for complete PLL tune system

• Was never really viable for such a critical LHC system• New system (BBQ) is CERN designed and built, but based on the lessons learned

from the RHIC system Testing of this system at both RHIC and Tevatron has been invaluable in the

continued development of the system. Understanding the effect of coupling on the PLL and its subsequent

measurement at RHIC was a major leap forward. RHIC has now successfully tested both tune and coupling feedback using a

CERN BBQ front-end Both parties currently working on demonstrating chromaticity feedback This has been a very positive collaboration which will hopefully ensure that

the LHC starts up with a viable PLL tune meter capable of being used for tune, chromaticity and coupling feedback.

US-LARP Instrumentation PackagesLHC Schottky monitoring – FNAL

• Accepted as part of LARP in October 2006 A strong driving force both on the CERN side

(Fritz Caspers) and FNAL side (RalphPasquinelli) has ensured that 4 Schottkymonitors are now being assembled forinstallation at CERN next month

This has been a model collaboration with bothsides open to new ideas while working towardsa common goal.

• Time was invariably helped by the very tighttime constraints imposed on the project!

• General Remarks on all US-LARP instrumentation packages Role of beam commissioners needs to be clarified between labs & LARP

• Who can come, for how long and when Support is required for the software integration of these systems

• Who does what still to be clarified between LHC@FNAL / BI / CO

http://www-project.slac.stanford.edu/ilc/larp/

Status of LARP Activities on Collimation

Work driven through monthly video meetings BNL – CERN – FNAL – SLAC!

Talks and info on web site (see above).

US coordination: T. Markiewicz, SLAC

SLAC – Phase 2 collimator for LHC beam tests: Work proceeding well. Dedicated SLAC work force increased. Cutting metal at SLAC.

FNAL – Study tertiary collimators (TCT) IR1/IR5: After initial delays and complaints recently results presented for IR5. Confirms TCT design choices gain factor 5-10. Completed once IR1 is done.

BNL – Radiation tests for collimator materials: Important experimental radiation data for CFC material. Good news on radiation resistance though damage concern remains.

BNL – Comparison RHIC loss maps with predictions: Very limited progress. CERN doctoral student (G. Robert-Demolaize) will join BNL/RHIC on January 1st. Continue work…

SLAC Collimator Design and Prototyping: Rotatable LHC Collimator

First prototype with helical cooling circuit(SLAC workshop)

Design with 2 rotatable Cu jawsStrong SLAC commitment and effort:

Theoretical studies, mechanical design, prototyping.

New full time mechanical engineer hired.

Looking for SLAC post-doc on LHC collimation!

Collimator Infrastructure @ SLAC in Construction

The “clean tent”

Support table Cooling Heating and power Instrumentation

Next steps @ SLAC:

Assembly of prototype jaw.

Heating (20 kW) and cooling test.

Deformation tests.

FNAL: IR1/5 Radiation from Beam Halo with TCT’s

Peak power density in Q3 SC coils: 6.e-5 mW/g

Peak absorbed dose: a few kGy/yr

Peak residual dose: 7 Sv/hr

Many more results (heating in SC triplet magnets, radiation, IR5 background):

http://www-project.slac.stanford.edu/ilc/talks/larp/2006-08-23/mokhov-tct-aug06.ppt

IR1 to be done to complete job. Use CERN/FLUKA set-up for LHC operation!?

BNL: Radiation Tests on Collimator Materials

Serious DAMAGE of 2D CFC after heavy irradiation exposure

10102020 p p shot on CFC collimator material (phase 1):

1) Good radiation resistance!

2) Damage!

Dose much higher than yearly dosehigher than yearly dose on most exposed LHC collimators (~1016 p/year).

Work to extrapolate to LHC lossesextrapolate to LHC losses (FLUKA team).

Further work ongoing/planned for phase 2 materials.

View from the CERN SideLARP collimation activities focus internationally available expertise on LHC

collimation, are useful for CERN and are productive:

SLAC: Phase 2 prototype collimator for LHC beam tests in 2008 or 2009! SLAC is working

very persistently and is dedicated (hiring of additional staff). Cutting metal at SLAC…

FNAL: Beam loss and radiation studies in IR1 and IR5 give important insights for study of

tertiary collimators and background. After some delays and complaints very good results are

now presented. Important reference data for LHC operation.

BNL: Tests of material make use of a unique radiation facility for test and analysis at BNL.

Important reference data for LHC operation and for improving with phase 2 materials.

BNL: Beam loss maps for RHIC have been recorded. Limited progress in analysis and

comparison with simulation. Work reinforced as a core member of the CERN collimation

team joins BNL/RHIC after completion of his PhD.

Issues:

Agree to complete and finish FNAL studies after results are available? Requires to put CERN

resources for setting up IR1 and IR5 FLUKA models. Gain in terms of fast reaction time to

possibly critical IR issues!

Accelerator systemAccelerator system

Accelerator systemAccelerator system

Accelerator system

Activity 1

Activity 2

Activity n

LTC Sep 27LTC Sep 27thth 06 : 06 : LHC commissioning organisation LHC commissioning organisation

Machine CoordinatorWeekly responsibility

3 needed

Accelerator SystemsAs required

Defined responsibilities

CommissionerScheduled shifts years 1,2Pool of at least 7 needed

EICScheduled shifts long term

7 needed

OperatorScheduled shifts long term

7 needed

G.ArduiniG.Arduini

R.AssmannR.Assmann

M.GiovannozziM.Giovannozzi

S.FartoukhS.Fartoukh

J.UythovenJ.Uythoven

J.WenningerJ.Wenninger

F.ZimmermannF.Zimmermann

A.ButterworthA.Butterworth

M.AlbertM.Albert

G.CrockfordG.Crockford

R.GiachinoR.Giachino

G.H.HemelsoetG.H.Hemelsoet

D.JacquetD.Jacquet

L.NormannL.Normann

F.PirotteF.Pirotte

A.ReyA.Rey

R.SuykerbuykR.Suykerbuyk

E.VeyrunesE.Veyrunes

S.RedaelliS.Redaelli 01.0601.06

M.GruweM.Gruwe 01.0601.06

R.AlemanyR.Alemany 08.0608.06

L.PonceL.Ponce 08.0608.06

W.VenturiniW.Venturini 01.0701.07

EIC6EIC6 04.0704.07

EIC7EIC7 04.0704.07

R.BaileyR.Bailey

M.LamontM.Lamont

O.BruningO.Bruning

P.CollierP.Collier

Accelerator systems Contact

Technical Services

TI operations P.Sollander

Controls H.Schmickler

Electrical supply J.Pedersen

Cooling and ventilation J.Inigo-Golfin

Access & safety systems T.Pettersson

Hardware Commissioning

Cryogenics L.Serio

Main Ring Magnets Performance A.Siemko

Insertion Magnets Performance R.Ostojic

PIC B.Puccio

QPS K.H.Mess

Power converters F.Bordry

Beam Commissioning

Beam vacuum N.Hilleret OK

Magnetic Optics Commissioning J.P.Koutchouk

Beam Machine Protection Systems R.Schmidt

Radiation Protection D.Forkel-Wirth

Radiation Monitoring T.Wijnands

Beam Transfer V.Mertens OK

RF T.Linnecar OK

Beam Instrumentation R.Jones OK

Collimation R.Assmann

High level controls M.Lamont

Operational phases R.Bailey

Accelerator physics O.Bruning OK

Experimental Conditions H.Burkhardt

TakeAs

Given

DevelopThese

US LARP involvementUS LARP involvement

No involvement in core team working 24/7 in the CCCNo involvement in core team working 24/7 in the CCC

Interest expressed in many Accelerator SystemsInterest expressed in many Accelerator Systems Mostly Mostly

AP, BI (see slides)AP, BI (see slides) Controls (not LARP, but rather LHC@FNAL)Controls (not LARP, but rather LHC@FNAL) CollimatorsCollimators

And a little onAnd a little on Beam transferBeam transfer Snapback, ramp, squeezeSnapback, ramp, squeeze Machine protectionMachine protection

So nearly all covered by other LARP chaptersSo nearly all covered by other LARP chapters

Our present scheme does not explicitly have a pool of Our present scheme does not explicitly have a pool of experienced people for general troubleshootingexperienced people for general troubleshooting Perhaps this is something that we needPerhaps this is something that we need If soIf so this is a role where this is a role where the right USthe right US staffstaff could contribute could contribute

Beam Instrumentation – R.Garoby, R.Jones

Activity Responsible Other CERN LARP

ScreensE.BravinA.Guerrero

H.Burkhardt (AP)G.Arduini (AP)

BCTP.OdierD.BelohradM.Ludwig

H.Burkhardt (AP)J.Jowett (AP)

BPM and orbitR.JonesL.Jensen

J.Wenninger (OP)W.Herr (AP)I.Papaphilippou (AP)

BLMB.DehningE.HolzerS.Jackson

L.Ponce (OP)R.Assmann (AP)H.Burkhardt (AP)B.Jeanneret (AP)S.Gilardoni (AP)

PLL for Q, Q’, CR.JonesM.GasiorP.Karlsson

S.Fartoukh (AP)O.Berrig (AP)J.Wenninger (OP)

C.Y.TanP.Cameron

Profile monitorsS.HutchinsJ.KoopmanA.Guerrero

H.Burkhardt (AP)S.Gilardoni (AP)M.Giovannozzi (AP)

A.Jansson

Schottky monitorsF.Caspers (RF)R.JonesS.Bart-Pedersen

E.Metral (AP)C.Carli (AP)F.Zimmermann (AP)

R.PasquinelliA.Jansson

Luminosity monitorsE.BravinS.Bart-Pedersen

R.Assmann (AP)F.Zimmermann (AP)

Toohig Fellow

Accelerator physics – O.Bruning

Activity Responsible Other CERN LARP

Optics

O.Bruning, S.FartoukhM.Giovannozzi, W.HerrT.RisseladaY.Papaphilippou

V.Ranjibar

M.Syphers

A.Jansson

Beta beatingM.GiovannozziR.Tomas Garcia R.Calaga

Aperture

B.Jeanneret, W.HerrF.Schmidt, F.ZimmermannY.Papaphilippou

E.Harms

Toohig fellow

ImpedenceF.RuggieroE.Metral, F.Zimmermann Toohig fellow

Lattice correctors

S.Fartoukh, F.SchmidtY.Papaphilippou

M.Martens

M.Syphers

V.Ranjibar

Triplet correctors S.Fartoukh, F.Schmidt T.Sen, M.Syphers

Lifetimes J.Jowett, F.Zimmermann X.Zhang

Separation / CrossingW.Herr, F.ZimmermannY.Papaphilippou

Collisions and beam-beam W.Herr, R.AssmannR.Moore, J.AnnalaE.HarmsLuminosity

W.Herr, R.AssmannH,Burkhardt

Summary (1/3)Summary (1/3)

Administartion problem of PJAS payment to be Administartion problem of PJAS payment to be communicated (again) and to be respected in all communicated (again) and to be respected in all branches of the collaboration.branches of the collaboration.

New initiatives (LHC@FNAL, LAFS) popping up. New initiatives (LHC@FNAL, LAFS) popping up. These are well matched to the immediate needs of These are well matched to the immediate needs of the LHC. the LHC. New US-LARP collaboration proposals as discussed New US-LARP collaboration proposals as discussed during / after the collaboration meeting of April 2006during / after the collaboration meeting of April 2006(LTC) found by far less enthusiastic CERN reactions.(LTC) found by far less enthusiastic CERN reactions.For US-LARP to rethink its strategy…For US-LARP to rethink its strategy…

US-LARP is receptive for criticism and the proposal US-LARP is receptive for criticism and the proposal of corrective measures: example: collimation of corrective measures: example: collimation simulation studies at FNAL, engineering approach simulation studies at FNAL, engineering approach for luminosity monitors at LBL…for luminosity monitors at LBL…

Summary (2/3)Summary (2/3)

LHC IR upgrade studies: Better Coordination requiredLHC IR upgrade studies: Better Coordination required E-Cloud simulations: Positive results, Should be E-Cloud simulations: Positive results, Should be

maintained at that low level of effortmaintained at that low level of effort B-B compensation: Completely unclear if work in the B-B compensation: Completely unclear if work in the

US at RHIC is relevant for LHC: Should be worked out US at RHIC is relevant for LHC: Should be worked out in a reviewin a review

B-B simulations: Good resultsB-B simulations: Good results LHC lumi monitors: Reduced Scope (IP1 and IP5 only), LHC lumi monitors: Reduced Scope (IP1 and IP5 only),

good progress to deliver in time.good progress to deliver in time. Tune and Chromaticity feedback: Good results, Tune and Chromaticity feedback: Good results,

technology driven by CERN, active collaborationtechnology driven by CERN, active collaboration Schottky Monitors: Good progress due to strong Schottky Monitors: Good progress due to strong

engagement on CERN and FNAL side.engagement on CERN and FNAL side.

Summary (3/3)Summary (3/3)

In general all BI: Software design, coding and testing In general all BI: Software design, coding and testing not defined. Needs to be done now in collaboration not defined. Needs to be done now in collaboration with AB-CO and AB-OP.with AB-CO and AB-OP.

4 different labs involved in collimation activity4 different labs involved in collimation activity…working pretty well.…working pretty well.

Beam Commissioning: Long iterations for the past 2 Beam Commissioning: Long iterations for the past 2 years. Present US-LARP involvement/commitment years. Present US-LARP involvement/commitment only on present collaboration items.only on present collaboration items.From CERN the future LHC operations teams are well From CERN the future LHC operations teams are well defined and slots/roles are made available for outside defined and slots/roles are made available for outside collaborators. US-LARP has to manifest further collaborators. US-LARP has to manifest further interest now.interest now.