1 / 22

Antiproton Acceptance

Explore projects led by Jim Morgan and Keith Gollwitzer to boost antiproton collection efficiency through lithium lens gradient enhancement and AP2 beamline improvements. Learn about the goals, motivations, and progress of the initiatives.

leoi
Download Presentation

Antiproton Acceptance

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. Antiproton Acceptance Two Projects: • High Gradient Lithium Lens Project Leader: Jim Morgan • AP2 Beamline and Debuncher Acceptance Improvements Project Leader: Keith Gollwitzer Steve Werkema

  2. Antiproton AcceptanceBasic Layout • Scope of Antiproton Acceptance projects: • Target station - downstream of target • AP2 beamline • Debuncher ring Steve Werkema

  3. Antiproton AcceptanceMotivation Increase the number of antiprotons collected from the target by: • increasing the gradient of the collection lens • increasing the admittance of the AP2 beamline and the Debuncher MARS model of`p phase space distribution at the center of the target Dp/p < 2.25%, contains only`p’s within acceptance of Li Lens Steve Werkema

  4. 29 cm 81cm 3° Pulsed Magnet Li Lens Target Antiproton AcceptanceHigh Gradient Lithium Lens - Parameters Steve Werkema

  5. V. Lebedev October 2001 Antiproton AcceptanceHigh Gradient Lithium Lens - Motivation • 12% increase in`p yield by raising the gradient from 745 T/m to 1000 T/m • Factor of 2.1 increase in`p yield by raising the gradient to 1000 T/m and doubling the AP2/Debuncher Admittance Note: The`p yield improvement per gradient increase is greater at larger admittances Steve Werkema

  6. Antiproton AcceptanceHigh Gradient Lithium Lens – Present Performance Operation at gradients greater than 745 T/m significantly degrades the lifetime of the lens. Steve Werkema

  7. Antiproton AcceptanceHigh Gradient Lithium Lens – Goals & Action Plan • Goal:Operate a Lithium lens -- • at a gradient of at least 1000 T/m • for at least 10 million pulses • ActionPlan(in process for past 5 years): • Liquid Li Lens development at BINP • Improve present Li Lens design • FEA model of present design • Autopsies of failed lenses • Better measurement & control of Li pre-load • New solid Li Lens design (began 2000) Steve Werkema

  8. Antiproton AcceptanceHigh Gradient Lithium Lens – Present Li Lens Steve Werkema

  9. Antiproton AcceptanceHigh Gradient Lithium Lens – Status • Liquid Lithium Lens development Project terminated in FY 2002 without producing a viable lens prototype. • Existing Lens improvements • FEA: Peak stresses during lens operation are well below the fatigue strength of the titanium septum  failure initiated by another mechanism • Autopsies of five failed lenses: • 4 septum fractures, 1 water leak (control) • Preliminary analysis suggests that cracking had been initiated prior to pulsing the lens • Result: Improved quality control during fabrication of new lenses Steve Werkema

  10. Antiproton AcceptanceHigh Gradient Lithium Lens – New design Features: • Diffusion bonded titanium body • Thicker septum • Li buffer volumes eliminated Prototype #1 is under construction Steve Werkema

  11. Antiproton AcceptanceHigh Gradient Lithium Lens – Near Future • Complete and test new lens design prototype #1 • Lens #22 autopsy Longest lived lens, did not fail during pulsing • Refine and expand FEA model • Operate a lens constructed with improved quality control procedures Operate for 1 month at 745 T/m then increase to 820 T/m • Construct 2 new lenses with a thicker septum (20% – 50% thicker) Steve Werkema

  12. Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – Motivation `p phase space distribution exiting the lens for a gradient of 750 T/m. Dp/p < 2.25% Blue dots are horizontal, Red dots are vertical (i.e. 2 points per`p). Note: the 20 p and 40 p ellipses represent two different AP2 lattices. The AP2 optics has been adjusted to match Li lens aperture. Goal:35 p mm-mrad transverse admittance Steve Werkema

  13. V. Lebedev November 2001 Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – AP2 Lattice Steve Werkema

  14. Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – Parameters †There are several locations where the physical aperture is known to be less than the admittance indicated in this table (e.g. Band 4 cooling pickups and kickers, Debuncher quadrupole D4Q4, DRF2 and DRF3 cavities). Steve Werkema

  15. Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – Scope • Identification of limiting apertures • Technical Division documentation and drawing survey • Optical survey and alignment • Beam studies • LBL focus on Debuncher Injection Channel • Correction of known limiting apertures • Beamline element alignment • Orbit control • More AP2 trim dipoles • Debuncher moveable quad stands • Element redesign • Instrumentation issues • BPMs Steve Werkema

  16. V. Lebedev November 2001 Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – AP2 Aperture Beam envelopes in AP2 line for an admittance of 40 p mm-mrad. Aperture limitations are shown by the vertical lines extending from the top of the plot. Synchrotron size is shown for an energy spread of 2.5%. The aperture information in this plot is incomplete and somewhat out of date. Updated information is being developed by the Tech. Div. Documentation and drawing survey. Steve Werkema

  17. Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – Status (1) The following projects are presently underway: • AP2 and Debuncher documentation survey (Tech. Div.) Determine physical aperture everywhere in beamline from drawings and other documentation. Expected completion: Fall 2003 • Optical Survey and Alignment Not yet started. Survey work will proceed as resources permit during maintenance and scheduled shutdowns. Expected completion: Fall 2003 • Instrumentation • AP2 BPMs • Presently unusable for reverse protons due to kicker ground surge • Relocation of BPM electronics – Estimated Completion: Fall 2003 • DAQ hardware & software upgrade – Estimated completion: Fall 2004 • Debuncher BPM upgrade • One sector (1/6) of new electronics installed and being tested • Remaining 5 sectors to be installed during Summer 2003 shutdown • Completion of software development expected by Fall 2003 • Beam commissioning complete by mid 2004 Steve Werkema

  18. Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – Status (2) Projects presently underway (continued): • Orbit Control • AP2 line trim dipoles • 4 NDB dipole trims have been installed in the AP2 line during the past year • Install moveable stands on selected Debuncher quads • Cables were pulled during the January 2003 shutdown. No new stands have been installed. • Install existing 10 stands in Summer 2003 shutdown • Install an additional 20 stands during Summer 2004 shutdown • Expected Completion: Fall 2004 • Critical examination of Debuncher injection channel (LBL – Ina Reichel, Mike Zisman, John Corlett) • Review of Debuncher injection design – propose upgrades • Develop beam based alignment procedures • Status: Work started in April 2003. Presently collecting documentation and developing optics model. Steve Werkema

  19. Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – Status (3) Projects presently underway (continued): • Redesign/Relocation of Beam line components Aperture restrictions already identified: • Replace/modify band 4 stochastic cooling pickups and kickers • Replace quad D4Q4 • Move RF cavities DRF2 and DRF3 Steve Werkema

  20. Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – Completed Studies Beam studies completed within the past year • Reverse proton studies • Re-commission and develop various beam manipulation procedures (Debuncher, AP2, DRF3, DRF1) (40 hr) Problem: have not yet been able to see beam on AP2 BPMs • Debuncher BPMs (Re-commission old electronics and prototype testing of new electronics) (8 hr) • Aperture measurements (4 hr) • Stacking studies • AP2 line orbit correction (12 hr) • Measure AP2 + Debuncher admittance (develop measurement techniques) (20 hr) • Measure AP2 + Debuncher momentum aperture (8 hr) Steve Werkema

  21. Antiproton AcceptanceAP2 & Debuncher Acceptance – The Future • Complete documentation survey • Complete Debuncher BPM upgrade • Install Debuncher moveable quad stands • Element redesign • Beam Studies • Commission new hardware • Develop procedures (upgrade and test software & controls) • Correct AP2 and Debuncher orbits Note: much of the studies plan requires the new Debuncher BPMs and/or completed installation of the moveable quad stands. Steve Werkema

  22. Antiproton AcceptanceConclusion – What difference does it make? Present`p yield: 1610-6`p/POT Expected`p yield: 3610-6`p/POT  52 1010`p/hr delivered to the Accumulator for stacking For: 81012 POT/pulse (slip stacking) 2.0 sec cycle time Steve Werkema

More Related