pip-ii injector test lebt operation for the rfq · 14 l. prost et al. | pip-ii injector test lebt...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ
L. Prostfor A. Shemyakin, J.-P. Carneiro and B. Hanna, and all other PI-Test team membersPIP-II Technical Meeting26 July 2016
![Page 2: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline
• LEBT transport scheme (reminder)
• Case studies in the LEBT– Profile measurements and simulations– Emittance measurements
• LEBT tuning for operation– Setup– RFQ transmission measurements
• Conclusion
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ2
![Page 3: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
LEBT beam transport concept (reminder)• Ion source generates a uniform spatial density distribution
– Velocities have a Gaussian distribution• Completely neutralized beam transport from the ion source
through Solenoid #1• At the image plane of Solenoid #1, the distribution becomes
uniform again*
– Neutralization is interrupted here• Phase advance over the remaining length of the LEBT is kept
low– Beam distribution stays close to uniform and emittance growth
is suppressed
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ3
* theoretically, at a fixed location downstream of Solenoid #1, the beam current density distribution may be uniform or Gaussian depending of the solenoid current setting i.e. phase advance
![Page 4: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
LEBT beam transport concept illustration• PIC-like simulations through one solenoid
– Initial distribution has a uniform current density distribution but Gaussian in the velocity space
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ4
![Page 5: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
LEBT transport scheme (reminder)
• High vacuum pressure– Gas load from ion source
• Neutralizing particles confined by potential barrier
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ5
IS RFQ
Solenoid #1 Solenoid #2 Solenoid #3Chopper
Neutralized section Un‐neutralized section
Potential barrier• Low vacuum pressure
– Vacuum pumping station– Limits rate of production of
neutralizing particles• Clearing electric field
– Sweeps neutralizing particles out of the beam path
![Page 6: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Profiles measurements• Same ion source settings, different solenoid #1 currents
– 5 mA (DCCT), near the end of a 1 ms pulse
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ6
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
‐1.5 ‐1 ‐0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Sign
al intensity, m
A
Displacement, cm
Solenoid #1 = 155 A
Solenoid #1 = 140 A
1D beam profiles at the scrapers. Dashed curves arefits, assuming a uniform (green) or a Gaussian (red)distribution, normalized to give the same integral
![Page 7: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Profiles – Measurements vs. Simulations• Simulations initialized with measured Twiss
parameters at the exit of the ion source– Distribution of particles is ideal (Uniform
density and Gaussian in velocity space)
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ7
Comparison of a 1D current densitydistribution from a back propagatedphase portrait (blue circles) and auniform distribution fit (red)
0
5
10
15
20
‐3 ‐1 1 3
Bin intensity, a.u.
X, mm
Backpropagation
‐0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
‐1.5 ‐1 ‐0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Displacement, cm
155 A 140 A
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
‐1.5 ‐1 ‐0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Displacement, cm
155 A 140 A
Phase space distribution at the exit of the ion source
Measurements
Simulations
Note: Binning interval (horizontal axis) is the same for simulations and measurements
![Page 8: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Phase space measurements
• Phase space distributions for 2 different focusing solutions but the same ion source tune
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ8
BC
Sol. #1[A]
Sol. #2[A]
Sol. #3[A]
n (rms)[m]
[m]
B 154 187 223.5 0.25 -8.9 2.2C 143 158 240 0.16 -8.2 2.2
5 mA, 50 schopped pulse near the end of a 1.5 ms IS pulse
![Page 9: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Phase space measurements vs. simulations• Measurements
– Blue = -8.9 ; Blue = 2.2 m– Red = -8.2 ; Red = 2.2 m
• Simulations– Blue = -21.3 ; Blue = 6.1 m– Red = -16.7 ; Red = 4.4 m
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ9
0 100 2000
1
2
3
4
0 100 2000
1
2
3
4
Blue ≡ Case BRed ≡ Case C
1 envelopes
cm
cm
• Measurements– Blue = 0.25 mm mrad– Red = 0.16 mm mrad
• Simulations– Blue = 0.26 mm mrad– Red = 0.14 mm mrad
0 100 20090
92
94
96
98
100
0.06
0.1
0.14
0.18
0.22
0.26
Tran
smis
sion
[%]
Emitt
ance
(n, r
ms)
[mm
mra
d]
0
2
4
6
0
![Page 10: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Corresponding profiles simulations near EID #2• As expected from the model, the simulated profile for the
case that leads to the smaller measured emittance is uniformnear the theoretical transition from neutralized to un-neutralized transport (i.e. ~EID #2)
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ10
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
‐0.6 ‐0.4 ‐0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Bin intensity, a.u.
Displacement, cm
Meas. B Meas. C
1D beam profiles 20 cm downstream of EID #2 from simulationscorresponding to measurements settings B (orange) and C (blue). Dashed curves are fits, assuming a uniform (green) or a Gaussian(red) distribution.
![Page 11: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
LEBT transport scheme - Conclusion• Convincing evidence that the transport scheme with an un-
neutralized section was realized:• Ion source current density distribution sufficiently close to uniform
(with help of scraping upstream of 1st solenoid)• Appropriate tuning of the phase advance through the 1st solenoid
such that the beam current density distribution is again uniform at the transition to the un-neutralized section
• Limited neutralization downstream of the kicker (good vacuum)• Low emittance at the end of the beam line
• Concurrently, improper tuning of the beam line leads to:• Unsatisfactory current density profile• Large emittance at the end of the beam line even with some
scraping upstream
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ11
![Page 12: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Current LEBT configuration with RFQ
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ12
DCCT
Collimator
Chopper
LEBT scraper assembly
T. Hamerla
Ion Source
Beam stop
Vacuum valve
ToroidEmittance scanner
Solenoid #1 Solenoid #2 Solenoid #3
RFQ
• Beam stop for personnel protection– Will be removed when bending dipole magnet is installed
![Page 13: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
y = 0.9733x ‐ 0.198R² = 0.9999
‐6
‐4
‐2
0
2
4
6
‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6
x meas., m
m
x calc., mm
LEBT basic tuning• Two components
– Twiss functions (→ IS settings, Solenoid currents)– Alignment (→ Position and angle of the beam at the entrance of
the RFQ)• Use tools and knowledge from commissioning activities
– Preferred optics solution including IS settings– Position & angle ‘bumps’ at the entrance of the RFQ
• Maximize transmissionthrough the RFQ– Not good enough for fine
tuning → Need to evaluateemittances
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ13
Data from phase space measurements
E.g.: Horizontal MULT 05/28/15
![Page 14: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Transmission alone is not the best criterion to assess performance• According to simulations, the RFQ transmission for a properly
matched beam should be 99.8%– Relatively little dependence on Twiss functions
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ14
Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration meeting). Transmission >99% for all data points.
– Unfortunately, I am unaware of similar simulations for the effect of the input emittance on transmission
![Page 15: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Transmission measurements setup• Identical, cross-calibrated current transformers before and
after the RFQ– Transmission efficiency: R50TOC/(L20TOC-L30ZPC)
• For averaged values “C” → “A”– Caveat: absolute values not very accurate due to background
subtraction difficulties and other ‘noise’ (e.g.: RF pulse)
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ15
Current transformer
(L20TOC)
Current transformer
(R50TOC)
Last LEBT solenoid Bunching
cavity
LEBT scraper (L30ZPC)
![Page 16: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Transmission for operation (based on 6/27/16 data)
• Best settings (IS on “high side”) 138.2/158/238.3 A for Solenoids #1, 2 and 3 respectively– 86% → 88-89% steering– 86% through 9-mm hole with LEBT scraper <0.2 mA
• Nominal settings before RFQ installation (7/6/15; IS on “high side”) 138.2/158/244.8 A for Solenoids #1, 2 and 3 respectively– 86%– 86% through 9-mm hole with LEBT scraper ~0.3 mA (min.
achievable)
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ16
≡ Difference may be easily explained with ‘known’ IS dri
Probably ~100% in reality
![Page 17: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Measurements for case studies B & C• IS and LEBT settings same as Cases B & C measurements
on earlier slides– Except for steering– Measured Twiss parameters before RFQ installation are not
“matched” to the RFQ’s • “Low emittance” beam (Case C) transmission is ~5% higher
than the “High emittance” beam (Case B)– Data from 6/10/16– Mismatch is supposed to be the same– Best ‘operational’ settings were 15-20% higher !!
• Not optimal steering for either case ?
• Quad scans in MEBT (7/18/16 & 7/19/16) do not indicate that the emittance out of the RFQ is different between cases B and C
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ17
![Page 18: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Conclusions
• Nominal settings obtained from LEBT commissioning are virtually the same as the settings that presently give best transmission through the RFQ– Measurements (beam size, emittance) taken before the RFQ
installation indicate that the transport scheme with un-neutralized section is realized
• At least qualitatively (i.e. trends), there is good agreement between simulations and measurements
• Transmission measurements of the case studies do not contradict conclusions from LEBT commissioning– Present quality/stability of the measurements (e.g.: toroids)
does not allow to be more quantitative
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ18
![Page 19: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
References
• “Low Emittance Growth in a LEBT with Un-neutralized Section”, IPAC 2016 paper (http://accelconf.web.cern.ch/AccelConf/ipac2016/papers/tupmr033.pdf) and poster presentation
• “Scheme for Low Energy Beam Transport with a non-neutralized section”, arXiv:1504.06302(https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.06302)
• PIP-II Technical Meeting, “LEBT Commissioning Update”, March 24, 2015
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ19
![Page 20: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Additional slides
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ20
![Page 21: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Maximum vs. partial neutralization transport schemes• Beam potential profile along the beam line tailored by means of biasing electrodes
(located in solenoids #1 and #2, a.k.a. EID #1 & #2), the kicker plate and/or an additional electrode downstream (EID #3 or LEBT scraper)– Maximum neutralization: EID #1 @ +50V, EID #2 and kicker plate grounded,
EID #3 or LEBT scraper @ +50V– Partial neutralization: EID #1 & #2 @ +50 V, kicker plate at -300 V, EID #3 or
LEBT scraper positively biased or grounded
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ21
0 100 2000
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0
1 103
2 103
3 103
4 103
5 103xyNeutralizationBz
z, cm
2.5
sigm
a en
velo
pes,
cm
Bz,
G
zkickerstart zkickerend
0 100 2000
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0
1 103
2 103
3 103
4 103
5 103xyBz
z, cm
2.5
sigm
a en
velo
pes,
cm
Bz,
G
zkickerstart zkickerend
Partial neutralization scheme
Complete neutralization transport
For illustration only
Zero current Full current
![Page 22: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Space-charge ‘enhanced’ configuration (i.e. partial neutralization scheme)
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ22
• Positive biasing of electrically isolated diaphragms to contain ions
• Clearing field at the chopper• Vacuum downstream of
solenoid #2: low 10-7 torr• Chopped beam
5 ms
3 ms
Ion source extractor voltage
Chopper voltage
0 kV
‐5 kV
1 ms‐300 V
+40 V +40 V
‐300 V
Ions trap
Ion clearingApproximate location of RFQ 1st vane
![Page 23: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Configuration without ion clearing (i.e. maximum neutralization scheme
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ23
• Positive biasing of electrically isolated diaphragms• No DC offset at the kicker
plate• Chopped beam
5 ms
3 ms
Ion source extractor voltage
Chopper voltage
0 kV
‐5 kV
1 ms
+40 V +40 V
Grounded
Ions trapApproximate location of RFQ 1st vane
![Page 24: PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for the RFQ · 14 L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ 7/26/2016 Simulations from J. Staples (2012 Project X collaboration](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042105/5e841f0d9aac173060283ac0/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Relative transmission measurements• Various issues with instrumentation currently prevent
absolute measurements to better than 10-20%– ISNS dump > IMEBT toroid !!– Relative measurements
are sufficient foroptimization of theoptics and trajectories
7/26/2016L. Prost et al. | PIP-II Injector Test LEBT Operation for RFQ24
DCCTLEBT toroid
MEBT toroid
SNS dump