awake primary beamlines
DESCRIPTION
AWAKE Primary Beamlines. C. Bracco, J. Bauche, B. Goddard, E. Gschwendtner, G. Le Godec, L. Jensen, M. Meddahi, J.A. Osborne, A. Pardons, H. Vincke. Outline. TT61 Option: Preliminary Layout and Optics Studies RP and Geometric Constraints Limitations and Possible Solutions - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
AWAKE Primary Beamlines
C. Bracco, J. Bauche, B. Goddard, E. Gschwendtner, G. Le Godec, L. Jensen,
M. Meddahi, J.A. Osborne, A. Pardons, H. Vincke
Outline TT61 Option:
Preliminary Layout and Optics Studies RP and Geometric Constraints Limitations and Possible Solutions Requirements and Time Estimates
CNGS Option: Requirements and Time Estimates
Electron Beam Line
AWAKE in TT61 Line
TT60 from SPS
TI 2 to LHC
HiRadMat facility
TT61 tunnel to west hall
HiRadMat primary beam line (TT66)
AWAKE in TT61 LineBeam from SPS
HiRadMat primary beam line (TT66), fully operational, no changes in layout expected
New AWAKE beam line. Large slope of 8.5 % of TT61 tunnel some equipment of previous H3 beam line in TT61 tunnel still present
Modification of TT66
8 new switching magnets
T1 target shielding dismantled available free space for switch magnets
TT61 Existing Tunnel
8.5% slope = 4.85°
Old line: 200 GeV beam Br ~ 670 T m (protons)
New line: 450 GeV beam Br ~ 1530 T m (protons)
~1.2 m
TT61 Gallery cross section
TT4-TT5: RP Constraints
Dump 2 m underground Beam deflected by 2°
Lase
r
Plasma
Cell
Dump
1 QTLD
3MBA
2 QTLF
2 QTLF
3 QTLD
1MBB
2°
MBB and MBA: B = 2.1 T
Beam from TT61: 0 vertical angle Floor
Civil engineering works required!
TT4-TT5 TL Optics Studies Final Focusing
QD QD QD QD
QF QF QF QFMBA MBA MBA MBB
Plasma Cell
At Plasma cell entrance:bx=by=5 max=ay=0 m
QD QD QD QD
QF QF QF QFMBA MBA MBA MBB
Plasma Cell
At Plasma cell entrance:Dx = 0 mDy =-0.2 m
Beam size at Plasma cell entrance: 1 sx = 190 mm1 sy = 280 mm(Dp/p =1E-3)
TT4-TT5 TL Optics Studies Final Focusing
TT4-TT5 Area Layout
Plasma Cell
Dump E. Gschwendtner, MSWG 12/10/2012
TT5TT4
New Service gallery
Start digging the trench after the service gallery beam higher exit from TT61 at ~2 m (old 200GeV beam exit at ~1.25 m) impact on dump depth!!
Preliminary Beamline Design
+ Old Line•New Line- Tunnel
Magnets:• 8 MBS• 20 vertical bending magnets• 2 horizontal bending magnets• ~ 30 Quads (~20 in TT61 + final focusing)PC:• ~ 10 units
Preliminary Proton Beamline Design
+ Old Line•New Line- Tunnel
TT5 TT4 TT61
The 450 GeV beam does not fit in the existing tunnel !!
dump
Possible solutions
Fit the 450 GeV beam in TT61 impact on beam angle in TT4-TT5 and on dump depth RP studies!
Reduce the beam energy to respect all the geometric and RP constraints check impact on experiment
450 GeV Beam in TT61
+ Old Line•New Line- Tunnel
Magnets:• 8 MBS• 20 vertical bending magnets• 1-2 horizontal bending magnets• ~ 30 Quads (~20 in TT61 + final focusing)PC:• ~ 10 units
450 GeV Beam in TT61+ Old Line•New Line- Tunnel
dump
TT5 TT4 TT61
~1.2° angleDump depth: ~0.5 mLimit in operation (t.b.d. by RP)
Lower Energy: 300 GeV
dump
~2° angleDump depth: 1.5 m
Magnets:• 8 MBS• ~17 vertical bending magnets• 1 horizontal bending magnets• ~ 30 Quads (~20 in TT61 + final focusing)PC:• ~ 10 units
Impact on Beam Size at 300 GeVGeometric emittance e = 10.9 nm instead of e = 7.2
nm b = 5m = 234 s mm instead of 200 mm b = 3.7 m = 200 s mm: feasible!
Plasma Cell
At Plasma cell entrance:bx=by=3.7 max=ay=0 m
Aperture ok
Magnets and Power Converters
Magnets: 8 Switches ~ 20 vertical bending magnets 1-2 horizontal bending magnets # Horizontal and vertical correctors t.b.d ~ 30 Quadrupoles
Power Converters: ~10 units
Two options: Design and build new magnets and PC 3 years from
specifications + cabling Re-use existing equipment (inventory needed) cabling anyhow
needed (no manpower available during LS1) In both cases: first beam in 2017
CNGS Option
Minor modifications of the final focusing system Magnets and PC already available and in place Beam instrumentation already available and in
place Re-cabling and new services needed (?) Possible to increase the energy from 400 GeV to
440 GeV (some margin from 450GeV LHC beam needed for interlock system) really needed?
First beam in 2015 might be feasible (depending on re-cabling/services)!
Electron Beam Line
No studies have been performed up to now Normally less critical than proton beam (low
energy electrons) Design and production of magnets and PC:
TT61: in the noise of works for proton beam magnets CNGS: if new design needed first e-beam in
~2016(?)
To be defined now: electrons injected from the side of the plasma cell or
at the beginning impact on interface Laser+protons+electrons
Beam parameters
Conclusions
TT61 Option: Feasibility studies indicate that only lower beam energy can be
envisaged (tunnel size, CE work, RP constraints....) From preliminary study of lower energy beam: beam operation not
before 2017 (magnets, all beam line equipments and general services...)
CNGS Option: Most attractive to meet a sooner beam operation Less expensive as beam line and equipment already available Could be staged-installation of the experimental area towards reaching
a complete test facility
If CDR to be ready by March 2013, need to conclude during this collaboration meeting on the beam energy (and Co...) so work can proceed