1 / 25

Update: Geant4 Simulations of the MICE Beamline – Absolute Normalization

Update: Geant4 Simulations of the MICE Beamline – Absolute Normalization. Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology 9/24/03 (With thanks to Paul Drumm for great assistance). Updates from 9/24/03 video discussion. Target intersecting beam: 10 mm 2 => 2 mm 2 Layout of beamline added

dinh
Download Presentation

Update: Geant4 Simulations of the MICE Beamline – Absolute Normalization

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. Update:Geant4 Simulations of the MICE Beamline –Absolute Normalization Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology 9/24/03 (With thanks to Paul Drumm for great assistance)

  2. Updates from 9/24/03 video discussion • Target intersecting beam: 10 mm2 => 2 mm2 • Layout of beamline added • G4beamline input file added (gives geometrical details)

  3. Goals • Compute the absolute normalization of the beamline • Mu/sec at Diffuser1 • Good Mu/sec through the MICE detector • Singles rates in the beamline • Generate lots of muons at Diffuser1 to use in optimization studies of the MICE detector

  4. MICE Beamline Layout Diffuser1 Here B2 = 30° Decay Solenoid, 3 T Old line (ignore) Q3 B1 = 60° Q2 Q1 Angle = 25° MICE Target ISIS Beam

  5. G4beamline Input File (1 of 3) # define basic parameters; startEvent comes from the commandline param pionP=300.0 muP=200.0 histoFile=$startEvent histoUpdate=100000# sigma<0 means flat distribution, that half-width beam rectangular beamWidth=4.22 beamHeight=2 meanMomentum=$pionP particle=pi+\ sigmaXp=-0.0143 sigmaYp=-0.0369 sigmaP=-55 nEvents=100000000 # define the decay solenoid; put into a group so it can be rotated (all other elements # can be rotated on their own) coil default material=Cu dR=5.0 dZ=5.0coil Decay innerRadius=200.0 outerRadius=250.0 length=5000.0solenoid DecayS coilName=Decay current=47.94 color=1,0,0group DecaySolenoid place DecayS rename=''endgroup # define shielding. Tubs = tube solid tubs SolenoidBody innerRadius=250 outerRadius=1000 length=5000 kill=1tubs TargetShield innerRadius=101.6 outerRadius=1000 length=1 kill=1

  6. G4beamline Input File (2 of 3) # define the magnets param Q1g=-1.0879963 Q2g=1.2981088 Q3g=-0.61072278 idealquad Q1 fieldLength=853.44 fieldRadius=101.6 gradient=$Q1g \ ironRadius=381 ironLength=1104.9 ironColor=0,.6,0 kill=1idealquad Q2 fieldLength=853.44 fieldRadius=101.6 gradient=$Q2g \ ironRadius=381 ironLength=1104.9 ironColor=0,0,.6 kill=1idealquad Q3 fieldLength=853.44 fieldRadius=101.6 gradient=$Q3g \ ironRadius=381 ironLength=1104.9 ironColor=0,.6,0 kill=1mappedmagnet B1 mapname=RALBend1 Bfield=-0.9646 \ fieldWidth=660.4 fieldHeight=152 fieldLength=2000 fieldColor='' \ ironLength=1397 ironHeight=1320 ironWidth=1981 ironColor=1,1,0 kill=1mappedmagnet B2 mapname=RALBend1 Bfield=-0.3512 \ fieldWidth=660.4 fieldHeight=152 fieldLength=2000 fieldColor='' \ ironLength=1397 ironHeight=1320 ironWidth=1981 ironColor=1,1,0 kill=1 # define detectors (tracks which intersect them are put into an NTuple) detector Diffuser1 radius=250 length=1.0 color=0,1,1asciifile Diffuser1a radius=250 length=1.0 file=$startEvent

  7. G4beamline Input File (2 of 3) # Place the defined elements into the beamline. # The z coordinate is the centerline of the beamline; x=beam left, y=up. # Each corner bends the beamline appropriately (Y30 => rotate around y by 30 degrees) place TargetShield z=2441place Q1 z=3000place Q2 z=4400place Q3 z=5800place B1 z=7855.8 rotation=Y30.0 x=250corner B1c z=8000 rotation=Y60.0place DecaySolenoid z=12200place SolenoidBody z=12200place B2 z=16135 rotation=Y15.8 x=175corner B2c z=16185 rotation=Y31.7place Diffuser1 z=18800place Diffuser1a z=18801

  8. The Bottom Line Protons/sec in accelerator: 3.7×1016 Protons/sec intersecting target: 1.7×1012 Pions/sec into beamline accept.: 3.0×106 Pi+ + Mu+ /sec at Diffuser1: 37k Mu+/sec at Diffuser1: 25k Good Mu+/sec through the detector: 54 All of these “per sec” occur during the 1 ms per second when our target is in the beam and our RF is active.

  9. Comparison to the MICE proposal • Mu+/sec at Diffuser1: • MICE Proposal: 3,000 • This computation: 25,000 • Major differences: • 700 MeV/c protons → 800 MeV/c • Target geometry: • Height = 2 mm → 10 mm • Diffuser1 geometry: • r=20 cm → 25 cm • Diffuser1-B2 = 3 m → 2 m • These differences account for a factor of ~6

  10. The Details (1 of 2)

  11. The Details (2 of 2)

  12. Additional Slides(From my 7/30/03 talk) The following plots are all at Diffuser1.

  13. MICE Beam Layout and Tune • Layout from “LAYOUT-MICE 14May03” • Bend 1 is 60°, Bend 2 is 30° • Target to Diffuser1 is 18.8 m • Quad (Type IV) and Bending Magnet (Type I) parameters are from RAL drawings and tables. • Fringe fields for Bending Magnets were computed via Laplace’s equation; quads are ideal (no fringe fields). • Bend 1 is tuned for 300 MeV/c pions • Bend 2 is tuned for 200 MeV/c muons • Quads are tuned for maximum mu/pi ratio at Diffuser1 (using minuit) – the triplet is configured DFD (~20% better than FDF) • Target re-oriented so a long edge is along the beam.

  14. Input Beam • Pi+ beam • 200 MeV/c < P < 400 MeV/c (uniform) • dxdz and dydz generated to cover Q1 aperture (uniform) • Target is 10 mm high, 10*cos(25°) mm wide (uniform) • All materials kill tracks instantly, without secondaries

  15. Momentum at Diffuser1

  16. P at Q1 for mu+ at Diffuser1

  17. Mu+ Correlation Matrix (normalized) P < 250 MeV/c

  18. Mu+ X vs Y

  19. Pi+ X vs Y

  20. Mu+ X vs P

  21. Pi+ X vs P

  22. Mu+ X’ vs P Note where X’=0 is.

  23. Pi+ X’ vs P Note where X’=0 is.

  24. Mu+ X vs X’ Note where X’=0 is.

  25. Pi+ X vs X’ Note where X’=0 is.

More Related