Loading in 5 sec....

EMMA – Orbit CorrectionPowerPoint Presentation

EMMA – Orbit Correction

- By
**galya** - Follow User

- 126 Views
- Uploaded on

Download Presentation
## PowerPoint Slideshow about ' EMMA – Orbit Correction' - galya

**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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

Contents

- Orbit distortion in EMMA
- Vertical orbit correction
- Linear approximation method
- Corrector magnet strengths
- Conclusion

Orbit distortion in EMMA

- Rapid acceleration in a non-scaling FFAG ensure that effects of integer ‘resonances’ are not seen in the orbit distortion.
- Standard harmonic correction is not applicable since the phase advance between lattice elements varies with momentum.

Vertical orbit correction - Introduction

- It is planned to include 16 vertical corrector magnets in EMMA, one in every other cell apart from in the injection and extraction cells. Corrector magnet strengths will remain constant during acceleration.
- The problem of finding the optimal corrector magnet strengths is a multidimensional minimisation. Two methods considered – brute force search and linear approximation.
- PTC used to track in EMMA. Displaced quadrupoles with fringe field included. Cavities added so that the accelerated orbit distortion is calculated.

Brute force search (1)

PTC tracking code used to calculate vertical orbit distortion. Corrector strengths varied, one at a time, in the range -30 to 30 mrad. Search for minimum in orbit distortion.

Brute force search (2)

Optimise corrector magnet strengths

Magnet misalignments

Cancel distortion at BPMs

PTC

Vertical Corrector deflections

Brute force search (3)

“Experiment” simulation

Magnet misalignments

BPM measurements

PTC

Optimise corrector magnet strengths

No Magnet misalignments

Cancel distortion at BPMs

PTC

Vertical Corrector deflections

Brute force search (4)

- Tracking in perfectly aligned lattice with BPM distortion measurements and optimising corrector magnet deflections produces similar results to tracking in misaligned lattice.

Brute force search summary

- Advantage:
- Robust, works at all acceleration rates.

- Disadvantages:
- Slow – many PTC runs required in scanning through possible corrector strengths.

Linear Approximation method

- Use differential algebra (DA) to find, to first order, dependence of orbit distortion on corrector magnet strengths.
- Build up set of first order Taylor coefficients that relates the vertical position measurement made at each BPM and at each turn to each corrector magnet strength.
- Linear least squares problem solved to find optimal . The target is to cancel the orbit distortion measured at each BPM, turn-by-turn.

Determining Taylor coefficients in simulation

- Plug the magnet misalignments into PTC. The code contains a DA subroutine that allows the Taylor coefficients to be calculated. The expansion is done about zero corrector deflection.
- In real experiment the magnet misalignments may be difficult to determine with accuracy.

Determining Taylor coefficients in practice

- Find Taylor coefficients from BPM measurements by introducing a small deflection at one corrector magnet and noting the change in distortion and dividing by deflection. Repeat for each corrector magnet.
- At fast acceleration rates (e.g. 120 kV per cavity), the result agrees well with DA calculation in PTC.

Determining Taylor coefficients in practice

- For slow acceleration rates (e.g. 60 kV per cavity) the linear approximation becomes more inaccurate as the number of turns increases.

Compare linear approximation to PTC

- Error in orbit distortion calculated by linear approximation method grows with corrector magnet deflection and with number of turns taken to complete acceleration.

60 kV per cavity, 50 micron misalignment, 10 seeds

Linear Approximation method summary

- Advantages:
- Substantially faster than brute force search. No tracking required.

- Disadvantages:
- More inaccurate at slower acceleration rates and at greater corrector magnet deflections.

Correction results

100 misalignment cases included. The mean misalignment is 50 microns.

The results for 16 correctors and 4 correctors are shown. In the latter case, the 4 correctors available are the first four of the 16.

Corrector magnet strengths

Single most effective corrector magnet out of 16 included

Deflections defined at 15 MeV

Corrector magnet strengths

Compare inclusion of single most effective corrector magnet and all 16 magnets

Compare correction methods

Single most effective corrector magnet only is included for 20 random error seeds at 120kV per cavity.

Effect of changing acceleration speed

- Use brute force method to calculate corrector strength at a range of voltages
- Single most effective corrector magnet included
- Only one error seed studied to date. Further work needed.

Required corrector magnet field strength

Relate magnet deflection angle to corrector magnetic field times length

- Rigidity (15 MeV)= 0.051 T m
- B.L = 13 G m.
- B = 325 G
- Requirements rule out printed circuit magnets

Conclusions (1)

- The optimal corrector magnet deflections calculated by a relatively quick linear approximation method produced results consistent with a brute force search
- However, the linear approximation method becomes more inaccurate at slower acceleration rates and at greater magnet misalignments.
- It was found that it is advantageous to have 16 corrector magnets. The four most effective of these correctors account for, on average, 95% of the total correction achieved.

Conclusions (2)

- Average corrector magnet strengths rise with the level of magnet misalignments. The maximum corrector deflection angle found is about 20mrad at 15 MeV.
- Increasing the number of correctors does not reduce the maximum deflection required.
- More work needs to be done to determine how the corrector magnet strengths depend on the acceleration rate.

Download Presentation

Connecting to Server..