A Comparison of Step 3 & Step 4
description
Transcript of A Comparison of Step 3 & Step 4
A Comparison of Step 3 & Step 4
Timothy Carlisle, OxfordCM 28
Step 3
Matching Step 3
Step 3 rematched for 830 mm spool piece
Calc. B(z) & BetaFn with the following:
Minimize F at 1 point in a const. field region in 2nd Tracker.
3
F = 0.5*(βγ0 - αα0 + β0γ)
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]Many solutions...
140
120
100
80604020
Beta Fn. [cm]
Step 3 Empty: 6mm e beam
M1 = 158.9M2 = 92.4
SigPz = 1 MeV/c, 100k muons
Beta Fn. [cm]
Bz [T] on Axis
Emittance [mm]
Av. Pz [MeV/c
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
140120100
80604020
6.08
6.06
6.04
6.02
6
43210
-1-2-3-4
202
201.5
201
200.5
200
199.5
Amplitude Cooling...
Step 3 empty Step 4 empty
Amp OUT
Amp IN
Amp OUT
Amp IN
6mm beam, SigPz = 1 MeV/c, 100k muons
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Amplitude Cooling...
Step 3: LiH Step 4: LH2
6mm beam, SigPz = 1 MeV/c, 100k muons
Amp OUT
Amp IN
Amp OUT
Amp IN
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 100
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15LH2 - Step 4
Theoretical Cooling Performance
Input beam emittance [mm]
de/e
2
2 30
0.014 GeV
2tn nd dE
dz E dX Em X
1 2 3 4
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
Step 3
EmptyLiHTotal CoolingTheory
de/e
Input beam emit-tance [mm]
8
cooling
heating
G4MICE : 100k mu, SigPz =1 MeV/c
1 2 3 4
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
Step 4
EmptyLH2Total CoolingTheory
cooling
heating
Input beam emittance [mm]
de/e
Focus Coil switched off
No LH2
Minimized Fn at z= -0.3 m~ centre of 2nd Tracker
Range of solutions:
10
F = 0.5*(βγ0 - αα0 + β0γ)
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-4 -2 0z [m]
16014012010080604020
43210
-1-2-3-4
Step IV but without FCBz [T] on
Axis
Beta Fn. [cm]
Step 3: Empty Step 4: EmptyStep 4: No FC currents
Transmission
1000 mu1% 400 mu
0.4%400 mu0.4%
within Tracker
Transmitted
Quality cut: Amp < 16*Av. e
Raw Beam
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
100
99.5
99
98.5
98
97.5
100
99.8
99.6
99.4
99.2
90
100
99.8
99.6
99.4
99.2
90
6mm beam, SigPz = 1 MeV/c, 100k muons
ConclusionsClearly more difficult to measure cooling in Step 3
~10 x more heating than Step 4Step 3 cooling disagrees with theory
e0 < theory – don’t know why (same in ICOOL)
Need to include Tracker reconstruction...
It appears we can run Step 4 without FC currents Is this useful – Trackers?
Can we run Step 4 with no currents in M1,M2 & FC? Alignments?
Extras...
Step 3 – comparison with existing data..
Empty Channel LiH absorber
14
cooling
heating
heating
Black Data: 100k mu, SigPz =1 MeV/c, G4MICE
Marco Data: 10k mu, SigPz = big (10%), ICOOL – note 199
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Input emittance [mm]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Input emittance [mm]
5%
2%
0
6%
3%
0-2%-4%
Step3 Empty: 1mm e beamSigPz = 1 MeV/c, 100k muons
B(z) on Axis
M1 = 158.9M2 = 92.4
Emittance [mm]
Beta Fn. [cm]
Bz [T] on Axis
Av. Pz [MeV/c
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
43210
-1-2-3-4
140120100
80604020
200.4
200.3
200.2
200.1
200
Step 3 LiH: 6mm e beam
M1 = 158.9M2 = 92.4
SigPz = 1 MeV/c, 100k muons
Beta Fn. [cm]
Bz [T] on Axis
Emittance [mm]
Av. Pz [MeV/c
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-6 -4 -2 0
z [m]
140120100
80604020
5.9
5.85
5.8
5.75
5.7
43210
-1-2-3-4
210208206204202200198196194
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
Step 4 Empty: 6mm e beamSigPz = 1 MeV/c, 100k muons
Beta Fn. [cm]
Bz [T] on Axis
Emittance [mm]
Av. Pz [MeV/c
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-6 -4 -2 0 2
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]5.952
5.95
5.948
5.946
5.944
5.942
43210-1-2-3-4
202
201.5
201
200.5
200
140120100
80604020
Beta Fn. [cm]
Step 4 LH2: 6mm e beam SigPz = 1 MeV/c, 70k muons
Bz [T] on Axis
Av. Pz [MeV/c
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
z [m]
-6 -4 -2 0 2
z [m]
-6 -4 -2 0z [m]
5.9
5.7
43210-1-2-3-4
208206204202200198196
140120100
80604020
Beta Fn. [cm]
Emittance [mm]
Output AmpSq
Step 3 Empty Step 4 Empty
Step 3 LiH Step 4 LH2