Status Recent Changes Outlook - Indico

1y ago
22 Views
2 Downloads
2.94 MB
16 Pages
Last View : 1d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Adele Mcdaniel
Transcription

RTML Update Status Recent Changes Outlook Frank Stulle, Beam Physics Meeting 2011-06-29

Old Status @ IWLC2010 Complete set of lattices, all sub-systems connected and tracking can be done from the exit of the damping rings to the entrance of the main linac, though it excludes the delay loop behind the damping rings ISR, CSR and (partially) short range wakes studied Good static performance, i.e. within specs Rough idea of misalignment tolerances, micron range, tightest in turn around loops, DFS works if lattices pre-alignment to 100µm (sextupoles 50µm) Considered sufficient for CLIC CDR All we had to do was to write the RTML section for the CDR.(and we did ;-) ) BC2 RF and Chicanes e Vertical Transfer Spin Rotator e Central Arc IP Main Linac BC2 RF and Chicanes Long Transfer Line e e Central Arc and Vertical Transfer Damping Rings Booster Linac e BC1 RF and Chicane Turn Around Loop e e

Evolution Since the CDR has been delayed, there was time to perform more studies: Misalignment has been studied in more detail, but not in every detail. Long range wakes in the booster linac have been simulated. Short range wakes in the BC2 RF have been studied better. Impact of incoming beam jitter has been evaluated.

Misalignment in the Turn Around Loops TAL lattice should have small ISR emittance dilution and should be isochronous, i.e. strong quads are required (the strongest ones are at maximum dispersion.) many strong sextupoles needed to correct chromaticity. Each turn around loop consists of 822 magnets and is 2 km long. A trivial but important remark: Outgoing beam position jitter depends only on our knowledge of BPM position and BPM resolution at the end of the loop! Outgoing beam position has to stay within 10% of beam size, in vertical plane 1 µm beam size 100 nm tolerance 100 nm BPM resolution.

Misalignment in the Turn Around Loops 100 µm rms quads and bends, 50 µm rms sextupoles, 1 µm rms BPMs, 100 nm BPM resolution p90 6.2 nm rad after DFS This is what we can expect as static performance 1 µm rms all magnets, 1 µm rms BPMs, 100 nm BPM resolution p90 5.6 nm rad after SVD This is something like a worst case for the dynamic performance and set an upper limit when DFS has to be used again.

Misalignment in the Turn Around Loops The limit are the sextupoles. If performance of the TAL should get better, the sextupoles must get weaker. That means also the quadrupoles must get weaker. But beam sizes in the dipoles must remain small to limit emittance dilution due to ISR, i.e. focusing must stay strong. And the loop should remain isochronous. or may be not. Do we REALLY need this?

Long Range Wakes in the Booster Linac 100 µm / 100 µrad RMS cavity and quadrupole misalignment, 10 µm BPM misalignment with respect to quadrupole axis, 1 µm BPM resolution, no incoming beam jitter, after applying dispersion free steering, with single and multi bunch wakes, no HOM damping RMS 502.6 nm rad 90th percentile 506.1 nm rad RMS 5.9 nm rad 90th percentile 6.9 nm rad

Long Range Wakes in the Booster Linac Amplification factors for beam jitter entering the booster linac according to Daniel's PAC09 paper “Multi-bunch calculations in the CLIC main linac” no HOM damping: Fc 3.8 Frms 1.7 Fworst 62 with HOM damping (Q 30): Fc 1.0 Frms 1.1 Fworst 5.0 too strong jitter amplification, even worse than main linac within specs: Fc 1.5 Frms 1.5 Fworst 5 During these studies optimized slightly the lattice, i.e. slightly stronger focusing, 72deg phase advance The same lattice is now used for BC1 RF HOM damping will be mandatory. And it will be even more important for CLIC500 due to double charge

Incoming Beam Jitter 5% rms incoming electron beam jitter (Gaussian) 90% of cases within 8% jitter, no correction, no misalignment, plots show distribution at the end of the RTML, normalized values, no ISR, no wakes p90 504 nm rad p90 4.6% p90 4.3% p90 5.3 nm rad p90 3.7% p90 4.6%

Incoming Beam Jitter 5% rms incoming electron beam jitter (Gaussian) 90% of cases within 8% jitter, no correction, no misalignment, plots show distribution at the end of the RTML, normalized values, with ISR, with short range wakes p90 559 nm rad p90 6.0 nm rad p90 5.8% p90 13.7% p90 9.6% p90 8.7%

Incoming Beam Jitter These studies revealed that the problem is actually the BC2 RF. The beam jitter was well transported through the rest of the RTML. x [nm rad] The BC2 RF lattice just has never been optimized and utilized pretty weak focusing. 41 6 BC2 RF s [m] 10% rms jitter, no ISR, with single bunch wakes, red line shows 90th percentile of single bunch emittances

Incoming Beam Jitter After adapting BC2 RF lattice to match the start of the main linac performance is o.k. Though it could certainly be better. Now the transport lines need some improvements. Especially the one in front of the booster linac seems to induce some emittance growth. And unfortunately, it seems I made it a little worse. no wakes, 10% rms jitter: emit x: p90 511.6 nm rad, xn: p90 8.5%, xpn: p90 8.3%, growth projected emit x 3.6 nm rad old 1.9 nm rad emit y: p90 5.5 nm rad, yn: p90 7.9%, ypn: p90 6.5%, growth projected emit y 0.4 nm rad old 0.3 nm rad with single bunch wakes, 10% rms jitter: emit x: p90 511.6 nm rad, xn: p90 8.8%, xpn: p90 9.3%, growth projected emit x 3.8 nm rad old 16.1 nm rad emit y: p90 5.4 nm rad, yn: p90 9.1%, ypn: p90 7.9%, growth projected emit y 0.3 nm rad old 0.3 nm rad

New Status The general RTML layout is unchanged. But a couple of lattices have been revised: - BC1 RF - Booster Linac - BC2 RF BC1 has also been slightly adjusted to fit to the damping ring parameters, 1.8 mm initial bunch length instead of 1.6 mm. I tried to improve the turn around loops, but failed. though I can tell you that it really looks most promising to allow some R56. There is still a lot room for improvements all along the RTML. The static performance is a little worse (more CSR in BC1), but the dynamic performance is better (less wakes). BC2 RF and Chicanes e Vertical Transfer Spin Rotator e Central Arc IP Main Linac BC2 RF and Chicanes Long Transfer Line e e Central Arc and Vertical Transfer Damping Rings Booster Linac e BC1 RF and Chicane Turn Around Loop e e

Outlook (post CDR) The current RTML lattice is nice for the CDR, but anyone who looks into the details will see that nobody would build the RTML like that. But before changing lattices a few basic questions need to be answered: - How does the 6D phase space look like at the entrance of the RTML? This is important for the tuning of the bunch compression system. - What is worse, static or dynamic bunch quality degradation? There is some trade-off to be done during lattice design. - Is it really acceptable to place both spin rotators at the start of the RTML? How much loss of e polarization is allowed? - Which performance is expected from the feed-forward system and which parameters should it correct? - How strong are long range wakes in the 12 GHz cavities of the BC2 RF? In case the BC2 RF needs to be shorted this will impact the whole bunch compression system. And may be the TAL if it has a non-zero R56. - .there might be more.

Outlook (post CDR) Once it's time for some lattice design: - Turn around loop lattice (incl. central e- arc) must get another revision to relax alignment tolerances further without increasing ISR. - Re-optimize the full bunch compression scheme. Could we allow stronger CSR in BC2 to allow some decompression in the TAL? That would make TAL lattice A LOT easier! - Improve vertical arcs to make quads and sextupoles weaker. There is not much to gain here, but the lattices are crappy ;-) - All lattices must be checked for their performance and potential for simplifications.

Outlook (post CDR) Booster linac currently relies on strong HOM damping (Q 30) (for CLIC500 it will be even worse due to doubled charge). Someone has to see what can be done by improving the lattice, i.e. stronger focusing. Booster linac frequency needs to be evaluated, i.e. 2 GHz vs 4 GHz. BCs need to be re-optimized (incl. shielding) to reduce CSR. Note, that I do not believe that it makes much sense at the moment to study misalignment a lot further (may be in booster linac). And don't forget that there are some tight beam phase and energy jitter tolerances to be met at the main linac entrance. .this could have filled a whole talk on its own, but I leave it to you to read my draft paper, which hopefully will become a CLIC note. Frank Stulle “Beam phase and energy tolerances in the CLIC RTML” Whoever continues on the RTML, I wish you success and luck!

emit x: p90 511.6 nm rad, xn: p90 8.5%, xpn: p90 8.3%, growth projected emit x 3.6 nm rad old 1.9 nm rad emit y: p90 5.5 nm rad, yn: p90 7.9%, ypn: p90 6.5%, growth projected emit y 0.4 nm rad old 0.3 nm rad with single bunch wakes, 10% rms jitter: emit x: p90 511.6 nm rad, xn: p90 8.8%, xpn: p90 9.3% .

Related Documents:

Outlook 2013, Outlook 2016, or volume-licensed versions of Outlook 2019 Support for Outlook 2013, 2016, and volume-licensed versions of Outlook 2019 ends in December 2021. To continue using the Outlook integration after the end of 2021, make plans now to upgrade to the latest versions of Outlook and Windows. Outlook on the web

o Microsoft Outlook 2000 o Microsoft Outlook 2002 o Microsoft Outlook 2003 o Microsoft Outlook 2007 o Microsoft Outlook 2010 o Microsoft Outlook 2013 o Microsoft Outlook 98 o Microsoft PowerPoint 2000 o Microsoft PowerPoint 2002 – Normal User o Microsoft PowerPoint 2002 – Power User o Microsoft PowerPoint 2002 – Whole Test

Outlook 2003 with Exchange 2010 still gives an excellent email experience and the improvements made in Outlook 2007, Outlook 2010 and Outlook 2013 are relatively minor. Outlook 2003 was the first version of Outlook capable of connecting to an Exchange server over the Internet, as opposed to an Exchange server located on the same LAN.

Outlook Integration with Salesforce Page 1 of 19 Outlook Integration with Salesforce This guide will help you set up the Outlook Integration add-in, which replaces the Salesforce for Outlook app you may be familiar with, within Outlook and Outlook on the Web to connect to Salesforce, and show you how to log emails, events and meetings to Salesforce.

Outlook 2016 Setup Instructions Page 1 of 18 How to Configure Outlook 2016 to connect to Exchange 2010 Currently Outlook 2016 is the version of Outlook supplied with Office 365. Outlook 2016 will install and work correctly on any version of Windows 7, Windows 8 or Windows 10. Outlook 2016 won't install on Windows XP or Vista.

Outlook 2010 – Mail, Calendar, Contacts, Notes & Tasks Page 3 Figure 1 – Microsoft Outlook – Outlook Today View Outlook 2010 Window The Outlook window for the Mail, Calendar, Contacts, Tasks and Notes folders are similar in that they contain the Standard Toolbar, a Navigation Pane, and a Viewing Window. Each window provides different viewing options specific to the folder.

User Setup Guide for Outlook (2010) Note: This setup guide is for Outlook 2010. Account configuration may look differently on other versions of Outlook. However, the configuration settings provided in this guide will function for any version of Outlook. The following guide will walk you through several easy steps to configure Outlook to work .

For users with Outlook 2010 and Exchange 2010 on Windows, use the Amazon Chime Add-In for Outlook on Windows. Supported Outlook versions: Microsoft Outlook 2010 Outlook 2013 Outlook 2016 Supported Exchange versions: Office 365 On-premises Exchange Downloading Amazon Chime. Amazon Chime User Guide. Amazon Chime User Guide.