Simulations and rf measurements of sps beam position monitors bpv and bph
Download
1 / 54

Simulations and RF Measurements of SPS Beam Position Monitors (BPV and BPH) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 92 Views
  • Uploaded on

Simulations and RF Measurements of SPS Beam Position Monitors (BPV and BPH). G. Arduini, C. Boccard, R. Calaga, F. Caspers, A. Grudiev, E. Metral, F. Roncarolo, G. Rumolo, B. Salvant, B. Spataro, C. Zannini.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Simulations and RF Measurements of SPS Beam Position Monitors (BPV and BPH)' - vito


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
Simulations and rf measurements of sps beam position monitors bpv and bph

Simulations and RF Measurements of SPS Beam Position Monitors(BPV and BPH)

G. Arduini, C. Boccard, R. Calaga, F. Caspers, A. Grudiev, E. Metral, F. Roncarolo, G. Rumolo, B. Salvant, B. Spataro, C. Zannini

Acknowledgments: J. Albertone, M. Barnes, A. d’Elia, S. Federmann, F. Grespan, E. JensenR. Jones, G. de Michele, Radiation Protection, AB-BT workshop

GSI/CERN collaboration meeting – Darmstadt, Feb 19th 2009


Agenda
Agenda

  • Context

  • Simulations

    • Creating the model

    • Time domain (Particle Studio)

    • Frequency Domain (Microwave Studio)

    • Consistency between Frequency and time domain

  • RF Measurements

    • Setup and strategy

    • Without wire

    • With wire

  • Open questions

  • Perspectives


Context
Context

  • High intensity in the CERN SPS for nominal LHC operation, and foreseen LHC upgrade

  • Need for a good knowledge of the machine beam impedance and its main contributors

  • To obtain the total machine impedance, one can:

    • Measure the quadrupolar oscillation frequency shift (longitudinal) or the tune shift (transverse) with the SPS beam

    • obtain the impedance of each equipment separately and sum their contributions:

      • Analytical calculation (Burov/Lebedev, Zotter/Metral or Tsutsui formulae) for simple geometries

      • Simulations for more complicated geometries

      • RF Measurements on the equipment

         available impedance and wake data compiled in the impedance database ZBASE

In this talk, we focus on the simulations and RF measurements of the SPS BPMs


Objective
Objective

  • Obtain the wake field and impedance of the SPS BPH and BPV

    Notes:

  • Impedance of these SPS BPMs is expected to be small, but ~200 BPMs are installed in the machine. Summed effect?

  • 2 mm gaps seen by the beam are small  would affect only high frequencies? Is that really correct?


Broader objectives for the “impedance team”:

1) Which code should we trust to obtain the wake?

2) Assess the reliability of bench measurements with wire


Agenda1
Agenda

  • Context

  • Simulations

    • Creating the model

    • Time domain (Particle Studio)

    • Frequency Domain (Microwave Studio)

    • Consistency between Frequency and time domain

  • RF Measurements

    • Setup and strategy

    • Without wire

    • With wire

  • Open questions

  • Perspectives


Creating the model
Creating the Model

SPS BPV

SPS BPH


Creating the bph model
Creating the BPH model

  • Input for simulations:

  • Technical drawings

  • Available prototype


Structure of the bph

Casing

Structure of the BPH

Perfect conductor (PEC)

vacuum

Output coax

Electrodes

Cut along y=0

Beam

Cut along x=0


Agenda2
Agenda

  • Context

  • Simulations

    • Creating the model

    • Time domain (Particle Studio)

    • Frequency Domain (Microwave Studio)

    • Consistency between Frequency and time domain

  • RF Measurements

    • Setup and strategy

    • Without wire

    • With wire

  • Open questions

  • Perspectives


Sps bph time domain simulations
SPS BPH – time domain simulations

  • Wakefield solver

  • Boundary conditions: perfect conductor except for beam pipe aperture (open)

  • Indirect testbeam wake calculation

  • 106 mesh cells

  • Simulated wake length=15 m

    • Frequency resolution ~ 0.02 GHz

    • Material modelled as perfect conductor

    • 1 cm rms Bunch length (=1)

    • FFT calculated by particle studio


Bph time domain simulations
BPH - Time domain simulations

Wake is calculated at the location of the beam  “Total” impedance (dipolar + quadrupolar+…)

Vertical

Longitudinal

Horizontal

y

y

y

x

x

x

s (mm)

s (mm)

s (mm)

1.90GHz

1.29GHz

1.08GHz

2.58GHz

Same resonance frequencies as longitudinal

1.69GHz

0.97GHz

2.14GHz

1.68GHz

1.92GHz

0.55GHz

 Negative imaginary part of the vertical impedance.



Remark 1 4 wake length and particle studio fft
Remark 1/4 : Wake length and particle studio fft

3 meters wake

20 meters wake

 Need for long wakes to obtain a sufficient frequency resolution

 Particle Studio FFT seems to introduce more ripple


Remark 2 4 how about low frequencies
Remark 2/4: How about “low” frequencies?

Z/n=Z/(f/f0)

Imaginary part of the longitudinal Impedance (in Ohm)

 = 20 cm

Low frequency imaginary longitudinal impedance is Z/n ~ 1 mΩ


Remark 3 4 comparing the full bph with the simple structure with slits
Remark 3/4 : Comparing the full BPH with the simple structure with slits


At f 1 06 ghz

longitudinal electric field Ezon plane x=0 at f=1.06 GHz

At f=1.06 GHz

Simple Structure

Simple Structure with slits

Full BPH structure

 The gaps are small, but the electrode are so thin that the cavities behind the electrodes perturb the beam down to low frequencies (~1GHz)


Effect of matching the impedance at electrodes coaxial ports in particle studio simulations bph
Effect of matching the impedance at electrodes coaxial ports in Particle Studio simulations (BPH)

Electrodecoaxial port

In particle studio, ports can be defined and terminated

Modes are damped by the “perfect matching layer” at the coaxial port


Effect of matching the impedance at electrodes coaxial ports in particle studio simulations bpv
Effect of matching the impedance at electrodes coaxial ports in Particle Studio simulations (BPV)

Modes are damped by the “perfect matching layer” at the coaxial port


And for the real long sps bunch bph
And for the real long SPS bunch ?(BPH) in Particle Studio simulations (BPV)


Sps bpv time domain simulations
SPS BPV – time domain simulations in Particle Studio simulations (BPV)

  • Wakefield solver

  • Boundary conditions: perfect conductor except for beam pipe aperture (open)

  • Indirect testbeam wake calculation

  • 106 mesh cells

  • Simulated wake length=15 m

    • Frequency resolution ~ 0.02 GHz

    • Material modelled as perfect conductor

    • 1 cm rms Bunch length (=1)

    • FFT calculated by particle studio


Bpv time domain
BPV - Time domain in Particle Studio simulations (BPV)

Wake is calculated at the location of the beam  “Total” impedance (dipolar + quadrupolar+…)

Vertical

Longitudinal

Horizontal

y

y

y

x

x

x

s (mm)

s (mm)

s (mm)

2.22GHz

0.73GHz

1.13GHz

2.22GHz

1.97GHz

1.58GHz

1.14GHz

~ same resonance frequencies longitudinal

1.97GHz

 Negative imaginary part of the vertical impedance, again.


Agenda3
Agenda in Particle Studio simulations (BPV)

  • Context

  • Simulations

    • Creating the model

    • Time domain (Particle Studio)

    • Frequency Domain (Microwave Studio)

    • Consistency between Frequency and time domain

  • RF Measurements

    • Setup and strategy

    • Without wire

    • With wire

  • Open questions

  • Perspectives


Sps bph frequency domain simulations
SPS BPH – Frequency domain simulations in Particle Studio simulations (BPV)

  • Eigenmode AKS solver

  • 2 106 mesh cells

  • Material modelled as perfect conductor

  • Shunt impedance, frequencies and quality factor obtained from MWS Template postprocessing

  • Longitudinal shunt impedance: Rs=Vz2/W along z at (x,y)=(0,0)

  • Transverse shunt impedance: Rs=Vz2/W along z at (x,y)=(x,0) or (0,y)

  • Boundary conditions : perfect conductor.


Bph simulation 30 first modes obtained with the eigenmode solver
BPH simulation : 30 first modes obtained with the eigenmode solver

longitudinal mode

horizontal mode

vertical mode

Transverse modes should show a strong transverse gradient of the longitudinal shunt impedance


Sps bpv frequency domain
SPS BPV – Frequency domain solver

Eigenmode AKS solver

2 106 mesh cells

Material modelled as perfect conductor

Shunt impedance, frequencies and quality factor obtained from MWS

template postprocessing

Boundary conditions perfect conductor.


BPV simulation : 30 first modes obtained with the eigenmode solver

longitudinal mode

horizontal mode

vertical mode

Transverse modes should show a strong transverse gradient of the longitudinal shunt impedance


Agenda4
Agenda solver

  • Context

  • Simulations

    • Creating the model

    • Time domain (Particle Studio)

    • Frequency Domain (Microwave Studio)

    • Consistency between Frequency and time domain

  • RF Measurements

    • Setup and strategy

    • Without wire

    • With wire

  • Open questions

  • Perspectives


Are frequency simulations and time domain simulations consistent?

BPH case

Vertical

Longitudinal

Horizontal

1.90GHz

1.29GHz

1.08GHz

Same resonance frequencies as longitudinal

1.69GHz

0.97GHz

2.14GHz

1.68GHz

1.92GHz

0.55GHz

 Most of the modes are observed in both time and frequency domain.

Reasonable agreement


Are frequency and time domain simulations consistent? consistent?

BPV case

Vertical

Longitudinal

Horizontal

2.22GHz

0.73GHz

1.13GHz

2.22GHz

1.58GHz

1.97GHz

1.14GHz

~ same resonance frequencies longitudinal

1.97GHz

 More mixing between time and frequency domain modes than for the BPH. Coupling?


Comparison with bruno bph longitudinal
Comparison with Bruno (BPH longitudinal) consistent?

1.90GHz

1.08GHz

1.68GHz


Comparison with bruno bph vertical
Comparison with Bruno (BPH vertical) consistent?

1.29GHz

1.69GHz

0.97GHz

2.14GHz

1.92GHz

0.55GHz



Agenda5
Agenda consistent?

  • Context

  • Simulations

    • Creating the model

    • Time domain (Particle Studio)

    • Frequency Domain (Microwave Studio)

    • Consistency between Frequency and time domain

  • RF Measurements

    • Setup and strategy

    • Without wire

    • With wire

  • Open questions

  • Perspectives


Setup for the measurement
Setup for the measurement consistent?

SPS BPH

SPS BPV


Measurement strategy
Measurement strategy consistent?

  • Not ideal to measure the impedance with a wire (small signal expected, radioactive device, tampering with the device would mean reconditioning before being able to put it back in the machine).

  • Idea: first, try to measure S-parameters from the available N-ports at the BPM electrodes, to benchmark the simulations and the measurements

N connectors

Linked to BPM

Electrodes

with a coax


Measurement setup
Measurement setup consistent?

  • VNA parameters

    • Number of point: 20001 (max)

    • IF bandwidth: 1 kHz

    • Linear frequency sweep between 1 MHz and 3 GHz

    • 2-port calibration (short, open load for each port + transmission)

    • Port 1 is next to the beam pipe

    • Port 2 is next to the flange


Agenda6
Agenda consistent?

  • Context

  • Simulations

    • Creating the model

    • Time domain (Particle Studio)

    • Frequency Domain (Microwave Studio)

    • Consistency between Frequency and time domain

  • RF Measurements

    • Setup and strategy

    • Without wire

    • With wire

  • Open questions

  • Perspectives


S parameters measurements for the bph
S parameters measurements for the BPH consistent?

S11

S22

Not much difference between S11 and S22


Simulations and measurements bph
Simulations and measurements BPH consistent?

  • Measurement and simulations are shifted in frequency

  • Frequency shift seems to increase with frequency


Measurements hfss and particle studio simulations bph
Measurements, HFSS and Particle Studio simulations(BPH) consistent?

HFSS simulation: courtesy of F. Roncarolo


This benchmark with measurements without wire indicate that the model is not completely wrong. But do they give information on impedance peaks, by any chance?

Let’s compare with the BPH time domain simulation!

Apparently yes!!!

Observed S21 peaks are the longitudinal impedance frequency peaks

 Useful for more than just the benchmark!


Comparison between measurements and simulations bpv
Comparison between measurements and simulations BPV the model is not completely wrong.

Similar conclusions as for the BPH


And if we compare with time domain
And if we compare with time domain? the model is not completely wrong.

Again, agreement between time domainand frequency domain is not so good as with the BPH

 To be understood


Agenda7
Agenda the model is not completely wrong.

  • Context

  • Simulations

    • Creating the model

    • Time domain (Particle Studio)

    • Frequency Domain (Microwave Studio)

    • Consistency between Frequency and time domain

  • RF Measurements

    • Setup and strategy

    • Without wire

    • With wire

  • Open questions

  • Perspectives


Measurements with wire only bpv
Measurements with wire (only BPV) the model is not completely wrong.

CST model

Available BPV prototype equipped with a wire. However, nobody has looked inside for a long while


Bpv s 21 measurements and simulations with and without wire
BPV S the model is not completely wrong. 21 Measurements and simulations with and without wire

Port 2

Port 1

Measurement with wire behaves like the measurement without wire

Measurement without wire behaves like both simulations


Powering the wire transmission should yield the longitudinal impedance
Powering the wire: the model is not completely wrong. Transmission should yield the longitudinal impedance

Port 4

Port 3

Still a frequency-dependant frequency shift between measurements and simulations


Agenda8
Agenda the model is not completely wrong.

  • Context

  • Simulations

    • Creating the model

    • Time domain (Particle Studio)

    • Frequency Domain (Microwave Studio)

    • Consistency between Frequency and time domain

  • RF Measurements

    • Setup and strategy

    • Without wire

    • With wire

  • Outlook

  • Open questions


Outlook and future plans
Outlook and future plans the model is not completely wrong.

  • Reasonable agreement between time domain, frequency domain, eigenmode, and bench RF measurements.

  • The agreement seems better for the BPH than for the BPV

  • Powering the electrode without the wire gives information on the impedance related resonances.

  • From simulations, putting a wire in the BPV affects moderately the impedance spectrum.

  • Not discussed here: Time Domain Simulations of both BPH and BPV indicate that the ouput signals (corrected by the time delay) at both electrodes are not equal when the bunch is centered. This could explain difficulties to calibrate these specific BPMs.

  • Future plans:

    • Check dipolar, quadrupolar, coupled and higher order terms of the wake, and ways to obtain these terms in frequency domain.

    • Use the same approach to simulate the SPS kickers (much larger impedance contribution is expected)

    • Explore more in detail the effect of finite resistivity.

    • Effect of these wakes on the SPS beam


Some open questions
Some open questions… the model is not completely wrong.

  • Negative impedance for both BPV and BPH. Convention?

  • Linux version of CST?

  • How to decouple dipolar and quadrupolar terms in frequency domain for structures with no symmetry?

  • Are there limitations to calculating the transverse wake from the longitudinal?

  • Open boundary condition for low energy beams? (important for the PS Booster and the PS)

  • FFT in particle studio?

  • Which windowing should we use?


Adding the ceramic spacers
Adding the ceramic spacers the model is not completely wrong.

Ceramic insulator spacers designed to mechanically stabilize the thin electrodes

(homemade at CERN, cf BPH/BPV technical specs, 1973)

BPH

BPV

BPV

BPV


Taking into account the losses bpv
Taking into account the losses (BPV) the model is not completely wrong.

The casing is not PEC.

Stainless Steel 304L conductivity: 3 106 S/m

Taking into account the losses does not fundamentally change the S21.


Thank you for your attention
Thank you for your attention! the model is not completely wrong.


ad