LARP – Present & Near term future

Tanaji Sen

May 24, 2005

Present activities Beam commissioning – better definition and more participation Near term goals

T. Sen LARP - Near term goals 2

IR, Energy Deposition and Beam-beam accomplishments in FY05

IR Optics design - Matched optics for both the quadrupole first and dipole first designs

were developed for β* ~0.25m. - Doublet focusing with the dipole first design was also examined for

the first time. Energy Deposition with open mid-plane dipoles - Mitigated by splitting first dipole in two and placing an absorber in

between Collimation Tertiary collimators shown to mitigate against beam induced halos Beam-beam experiments at SPS and RHIC - Wire compensation experiments at SPS. Accurate prediction of

relative wire tolerance. - Experiment at RHIC showed impact of parasitic interaction at

distances less than 7 sigma. Remote participation

T. Sen LARP - Near term goals 3

Instrumentation accomplishments in FY05

• Schottky monitor proposal for the LHC This will be the only instrument in the LHC for bunch by bunch

tunes. Successful measurement of bunch by bunch tunes in the Tevatron has helped to make the case.

• Tune tracker Collaboration with CERN and BNL has helped the Tevatron. The

BBQ method proposed by CERN has improved sensitivity of the

method. Origin of 60 Hz lines understood.

T. Sen LARP - Near term goals 4

Commissioning accomplishments in FY05January ‘05: 3 AD staff were invited to CERN for the ‘Chamonix’ workshop

March ’05: visit by US personnel (EH, MS, DS) to review/discuss list of tasks, plan for CERN staff visits to Fermilab, remote data sharing

Spring/Summer ’05: series of visits to Fermilab by CERN/LHC operations staff to partner laboratories build relationships

commence effort on Remote Monitoringdiscuss LHC/OP task list

Remote Access: Committee charged by Director with constructing a plan for the Fermilab Remote Operations Center Preliminary report due July 2005, Final report due December 2005

T. Sen LARP - Near term goals 5

LARP involvement in Commissioning

CERN point of viewIn the present US-LARP proposal, resources are allocated for “Beam

Commissioning and Accelerator Physics” activities from 2004 onwards, rising to significant numbers by 2007. In the discussions to date, we have made the point that the US-LARP commitment has to be made with long-term individual commitments of around 12 months, and that US staff should come to perform a specific role in the beam commissioning work. It has also been clearly said that CERN has to maintain sufficient expertise, particularly on shift, to ensure long-term exploitation of the machine

With this in mind, we feel that a very limited number of US-LARP resources could participate in the shift rota. Rather, they would be best suited to the accelerator physics and equipment group support activities

R. Bailey (CERN)

T. Sen LARP - Near term goals 6

Accelerator systems to be looked at1. SPS extraction, transfer, injection and first turn 2. Multi turn losses and BIS dependability3. Protection devices other than collimators4. Collimation system and Halo cleaning - DS5. Clean Beam Extraction6. Radio protection7. Beam Instrumentation - AJ, RP, CYT8. Vacuum conditions during operation and electron cloud9. Reference magnet system10. RF systems and longitudinal beam dynamics11. Transverse feedback12. Experimental solenoids and compensations13. Experimental equipment (Roman pots, velo)14. Beam in the injectors15. Ion beam in the injectors16. Orbit feedback system17. Filling efficiency and flat bottom conditions18. Ramp and squeeze losses and overall quality19. Machine protection system20. Optics21. Mechanical aperture22. Machine Impedance and collective instabilities23. Dynamic aperture24. Lattice corrector settings25. Triplet corrector settings26. Lifetimes27. Separation schemes28. Crossing angle schemes29. Collisions and luminosity steering30. Experimental conditions31. Ions

• Points to address for each system– What is the

specification with beam

– What measurements are needed

– What tools are needed

– What beam is needed

– How much time is needed

Priorities needed !

R. Bailey, CERN

T. Sen LARP - Near term goals 7

Beam Commissioning - Next Steps

Identify the areas of interest to you and let me know

Establish contacts with the right people at CERN Become familiar with the issues and priorities Example: Dean Still’s contact with the LHC collimation group

Define the FNAL contribution clearly Example: SDA type application for post-mortem analysis

Continue the dialog with CERN contacts

Plan for an extended stay at CERN (6 -12 months) when commissioning starts

Commissioning Strategieso R. Bailey’s and M. Lamont’s talks at the LARP Collaboration Meeting, April 05o //cern.ch/lhc-commissioningo //cern.ch/lhc-injection-test

T. Sen LARP - Near term goals 8

LARP in AD – Near term plans FY05-06

• IR design: Designs for quads first, dipoles first (triplet focusing, doublet focusing) valid from injection to collision, nonlinear corrections. These will define the upgrade path.

• Energy Deposition: Calculations for the different IR designs under normal and accidental conditions

• Tertiary Collimators: Protection of IR components from losses at secondary collimators and beam halo

• Wire compensation: Proposal for installing wire compensator in RHIC (summer 06) and beam studies to test compensation of parasitics. Submitted for DOE Review June 2005

• IR Mini-Workshop: October 5-6, 2005 3 topics: IR designs & Energy Deposition, Beam-beam compensation,

Crab cavities• Schottky Monitor: Proposal to design monitor based on 1.7GHz

Monitor. Submitted for DOE Review June 2005• Tune tracker: Continuing collaboration with BNL on BBQ system• Beam Commissioning: Some contacts set up. More needs to be

done• Remote Access: Hardware commissioning (?), Injector start up,

Sector test, First beam