LARP Accelerator Systems Synthesis Vladimir Shiltsev bnl - fnal- lbnl - slac US LHC Accelerator...

LARP Accelerator Systems Synthesis

Vladimir Shiltsev

bnl - fnal- lbnl - slacUS LHC Accelerator Research Program

LARPAC 05/11/2006 - Shiltsev 2

Content

• What’s new after October’05 Collaboration

Meeting

– LARP Org Chart changes, communication, DocDB, Web

– FY06 Budget – spending to date

– DoE Review Nov’05; RC review + Lumi Review

– LARP Collaboration Meeting Apr’06 @ LBL

• Accelerator Systems Progress Highlights

• New proposals

– “hard deliverables” vs new proposals

– “Gang of 5+1”

– Stream of consideration & approval process


Accelerator Systems Org Chart

V.ShiltsevAccelerator Systems

Instrumentation:A.Ratti

Tune Feedback(P.Cameron)

Luminometer(A.Ratti)

Schottky Monitor(A.Jansson)

Commissioning:M.Syphers

Beam Commiss-ing(E.Harms)

IR Coms-ing(M.Lamm)

Collimators R&D:T.Markiewicz

Efficiency Studies(A.Drees)

Rotating Collim.(T.Markiewicz)

Tertiary Collim(N.Mokhov).

Irradiation Studies(N.Simos)

Accel Physics:W.Fischer

E-cloud(M.Furman)

IR & Beam-Beam(T.Sen)

Wire Compens’n(T.Sen)

Recent Changes:

Wolfram Fischer (BNL) to lead AP


Communication/Coordination

• Communication within LARP: – VideoConf of all AS L2s+Steve ~once/mos

– One-on-one meetings (site visits, reviews, etc) ~once/qrtr

– Collaboration meetings ~twice/year

• Communication with CERN– First “long-termers” (P.Limon et al)

– Visits (HC, BC, Instr, etc) >1/mos

– Workshops (e.g. TAN) and reviews (e.g. RC) ~once/qrtr

– LARP Collab Meetings ~twice/yr

– US-CERN meetings ~ once/yr

• LARP Doc DB is functioning:– ~280 docs uploaded from Oct’05-Apr’06


• Introduced in Oct’05 Collab Mtg (FNAL)

• Main tool at the Apr’06 Collab Mtg (LBL)

• Management of– Agenda

• Anyone can/may do it, but should be “convener” or session chair

• No need to keep agenda externally

– Talks/documents• The speaker is

responsible for maintaining the integrity of his/her document

https://larpdocs.fnal.gov/LARP-private/DocDB/https://larpdocs.fnal.gov/LARP-private/DocDB/


• USLARP.org web site– Uses Plone

• A widespread wiki implementation

– Elliott McCrory is working on making this site useful• Jump point to other web resources

– Anyone can modify the content/layout• You have your own username/password

• There are lots of LARP web sites– LBNL– BNL– Fermilab

• AD & TD

– SLAC• ?

Web pages


FY06 Accelerator Systems Budget

Pete got extra 150k$ to cover past investments BNL BC funds

redistributed to FNAL and LBL -60k$

RC hardware start delayed -350k$

Nick got extra +50k$ for PhII irradition

extra +30k$To build BB-Wires


Accel.Syst. Spendings

1.2M/3.6M=33%thru ½ year

Mar.31, 2006


Topics

• Make sure that we achieve all milestones– And spend $$ approx as planned

• Reviews– Be prepared and pass numerous reviews (small and big one)

• Next year planning/budget– Have clear understanding of what will we do next year

• New initiatives– Should always have a healthy pressure of new proposals– Now anticipate some $$ to be freed after diagnostics

development and fabrication finished in 2007


DoE Review of LARP November 2005

• “The review committee was very pleased with the presentations on beam instrumentation and accelerator physics. In addition, they found the idea of participation in the development of a remote control room a very interesting possibility for enhancing interactions with CERN from afar via the Fermilab project “LHC@FNAL”.

• Plans for commissioning of LHC hardware are already being implemented, with the first U.S. staff member (Peter Limon) already stationed at CERN. It was reported by management that U.S. laboratories will provide staffing for this effort, and, in fact, FNAL has committed seven persons to this task. LARP and CERN will cover costs of travel and additional living expenses in the Geneva area.

• Finally, the committee again emphasized its displeasure with the lack of formality in dealings of LARP, and strongly recommended a more effective bookkeeping system for managing expenses and progress on all active tasks, and a person who would be responsible for implementing such a system”.


Task Sheets

• Task Sheets are written by L2s and approved by L2s and L1s and L0

• Most useful documents

• Objective, milestones, funds and personnel resources – all can be found on one page

• Semi-annual reports are lined up along these Task Sheets


Reporting


Fixing “…lack of formality…” : RLS


Other Directive Documents


Another Concern: Sign-Offs

• Alex Ratti developed an acceptable – for both US and CERN – 6-item SignOff Documentatation scheme

• Now – for instrumentation only• It’s model for other tasks

(Collimators, Wires, etc)


Internal Reviews

• Rotating Collimator-1 CDR Review – December 2005, chaired by W.Turner– OK, advised to design jaw support before “cut iron”

• Luminsity Monitor Final Design Review– April 2006, chaired by T.Shea– All positive, technical risks low to medium

• Schottky Monitor Final Design Review– June 2006, at CERN

• Tune FB Final Design Review– Before FY’07, m.p. at BNL


TCFB on RHIC ramp

P.Cameron

Good publicity is part of

LARP success measure–

we need to get more

articles like that!


Luminosity Monitor

• The only real-time bunch-by-bunch luminosity measurement in the LHC

– 25 ns bunch spacing, 1% resolution

• R&D phase has been completed– Demonstrated 40 MHz performance

using ALS X-ray beamline• Technical Challenges

– Extremely high radiation levels • up to ~250 Grad

– Signal processing to avoid pileup• 25 ns bunch spacing

• Project Milestones:– Final Design Review (Apr 06)– System test at RHIC (Summer 06)– Four systems complete (Winter 06-07)– Installation and integration support (07)

DAQ

TAN

FE electronics


LHC 4.8 GHz Schottky DesignLHC 4.8 GHz Schottky Design

R.PasquinelliA.Jansson

• Remarkable Progress: – Final drawings ready for CERN

inspection– Final Design Review 06/19/06 at

CERN– Will be the first LARP “thing”

delivered to CERN– Plan to be one of anchors for BC– LHC@FNAL for monitoring


• LARP commissioners receive “Project Associate” status, join a CERN group (AT/ACR or AT/MEL) for nominally one year and contribute to the groups general HC responsibilities as well as US deliverables.

Proposed Profile for LARP Hardware Commissioners

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Months Nov 2005-Dec 2007

FTE/

Mon

th

CRYO

MAGNET

• One commissioner stationed at CERN now. 3-4 additional to follow in the fall of 2006. Peak participation in Summer’07

Commissioning of US Deliverables and General HC

Since Nov’05 DOE Review:

• 1st USLHC String transported to tunnel

• LARP Oversight and technology transfer for USLHC interconnects

• Transportation and Installation of 2nd IR quad/DFBX/D1 on going.


LHC Beam Commissioning

Accelerator Systems commissioners will

Organized on task groups of 3-4 people

(e.g. instrument operations+ developer+controls+physicist)

• LARP is heading toward having (at least) a double presence in the LARP instruments groups

• Will require coordination between L2s of “Instrumentation” and “Commissioning”


Beam Commissioning Progress


EoI Circulated


LHC@FNAL Start-Up Committee’s work

complete Endorsement

received from Fermilab

Directorate Affected Fermilab

Divisions/Sections (AD, PPD, CD, FESS)

LARP management CMS management

Construction plans in development

Funds set aside/awaiting DOE approval

Center planned to be open in September 2006


PHASE-I: Irradiation and Analysis of 2D Carbon-Carbon at BNLGOALS: Determine resilience of 2D CC against irradiation damage and assess

how the critical property of thermal expansion changes with irradiation

assembly irradiation

Post-irradiation Analysis

RESULT: PHASE-I 2D Carbon-Carbon self anneals irradiation ramage through thermal cycling in both strong and weak directions. Therefore, it is expected to meet the 25 it is expected to meet the 25 micronmicron condition set as goal

Phase-II LHC Collimator Material Irradiation Planned for May 2006

• Primary Materials: Annealed Copper and Glidcop (85% Cu – 15% Al) – done! (May 4, 2006)done! (May 4, 2006)• Other Potential Candidates: Super Invar, Gum Metal, 3D Carbon-Carbon

Material Irradiation Studies


Rotating Collimator: Rescheduled

• Slip schedule ~6 months– Single jaw tests,

support/stopper design & write-up by EOFY06

– RC1 performance report by mid FY07

– $400k returned to LARP management in FY06 adjustment

– Expect slippage of Jan 2008 beam-testable RC2 delivery consistent with CERN’s latest schedule

• RC task is one of “hard deliverable” and requires closer attention at SLAC and LARP to avoid any further slippages


Satisfactory Benchmarking (POSINST)

experimentsimulation

• Benchmark code against HCX experiment (LBNL)

• expt. and sim. agree quantitatively on characteristics of e– oscillations observed in magnetic quadrupole flooded with electrons:


Wire Compensator

In CY06 – construct and install a wire compensator in RHIC, downstream of Q3 in IR6

• RHIC beam-beam experiments in April 2006

Motivation: Test of wire compensation in 2007

Determine if a single parasitic at top energy causes beam losses that need to be compensated. Similar experiment done last year at injection energy - found strong effects at separations ≤ 6σ.

2 experiments done so far – April 5th, April 12th

• Beam-beam simulations of 2006 experiments

Motivation: Tests and improvements of codes, predictions of observations in 2006 and of wire compensation

Four groups FNAL, SLAC: LBL; University of

Kansas


• Recently initiated (minor) activities: – Flux jumps effects

– dB/B measurements

• Potential new L3 tasks (need feasibility studies): – AC dipole

– Crystal collimation

– Longitudinal Density Monitor

– e-lenses for Head-on B-B Compensation

– Crab cavities

• Considerations on Large Scale Improvements:– 1.5TeV Injector in LHC tunnel LER-LHC

– Optical Stochastic Cooling

New Initiatives (Apr’06 Coll.Mtg.)


Consideration Process• “Gang of 5+1” is formed to consider/propose that

(L2s+VS+SP)

• General requirements:

– Interesting subject, development should push up the state of the accelerator physics and technology in the US

– Of interest for LHC

– Collaboration of >1 Lab, Universities welcome

– Not at expense of current unfinished tasks

– Right time and budget scale

• Considerations finished and decision taken:

– Either before start of FY’07 (better @ LARP Exec.Comm. June 5)

– After presentation of feasibility study results at the Collab Mtg

Then, L3 task formed, one of L2s picks it up plan, RLS, $$, etc


Common questions to answer

• Title/subject

• Leader and participants

• Objectives

• Deliverables

• Time scale/schedule

• Resources needed:– Add’l man-power (and type eng, phys, techs)

– $$ Travel

– $$ Labor

– $$ M&S and Equipment


Flux JumpsAn accelerator magnet would need to demonstrate no or sufficiently small fluctuations

How small?

preliminary estimates show that 1 unit of d(b3) will result in ~2 units of Q’ jumps if residual dispersion controlled to better than 1 cm at I

tune jumps and nonlinear effects need to be studied (AccelPhys)


dB/B FluctuationsLHC tolerance: dB/B~3e-10

LHC screen: light and feels 20 K He flow turbulence; B-flux is constant at 3kHzdB/B ~ dR/R need dR < 1A to blow horizontal emittance

First attempts at CERN (2006):

~1e-8 noise in quad/no screen~1e-7 with air flow

http://www.cerncourier.com/main/article/39/6/15/1


dB/B: Plan of Action• Perform dB/B measurements at CERN inside

– Dipole (cold, high current)

– Quadrupole (same)

– Measure vibrations of the screen and LB quadrupoleMeasure vibrations of the screen and LB quadrupole

• Will take about 1 year

• Cost:– 2-3 more trips to CERN ~6k$

– Low-noise pre-amp ~5k$

• Goal: conclude on dEmm/dt and need of FB

• Consider: use of Tune FB BBQ and kicker - ?


AC dipole

• Recent good results from the Tevatron

• Formal proposal for LHC at Collab meeting (Apr ’06)

• Collaboration formed including Fermilab (A.Jansson, M.Syphers), UT Austin (R.Miyamoto, S.Kopp), BNL (M. Bai, R. Calaga) and CERN (H.Schmickler, J.Serrano)

First AC dipole data in the Tevatron


• Objective– Investigate the conceptual design of ac dipole for LHC

• System design (Magnet, power system, tuning range)• test system

– the principles either at Tevatron or RHIC • Physics motivations and relevant beam experiments at RHIC

and Tevatron

• Financing– LARP: R&D– CERN: Final systems, funding available earliest at 2008– NSF through university program

• Deliverables– conceptual design report– Test system(s)– Relevant beam studies at Tevatron and RHIC

• Detailed feasibility study plan by June 12 (DoE R)

AC dipole collaboration


Longitudinal Density Monitor(DeSantis, Byrd, Zolotorev)

Fiberoptic coupler/lens

Electro-optic modulator

InGaAs PD

Fiberoptic

Fiberoptic

PC

Fast pulser50 ps @ 40 MHz

Data acquisition board (ADC)• Presented at the LARP Coll.Mtg.• CERN interest is limited as they already have abort gap

monitors (enough for start-up)• LDM can be a very useful tool for high luminosity operation• …Under consideration for LARP

• Fresh Idea: Couple SyncLite to optical fiber, deliver signal upstairs and process it there with electro-optical modulator

• 50 ps slices, 10 s integration, resolves 0.5M p (!)

• To see ~1e-5 tails of main bunches and ghost bunches


Head-on beam-beam compensation

• If beam sizes and shapes are matched (e=p)

• for LHC N_p=1.1e11, N_ip=4, for 10kV electrons (beta=0.2) one needs N_e=4.4e11 or J_e=1.2 A in L=3 m long e-beam

• approx Gaussian e-current distribution with rms = 0.3-0.5 mm

… or donut shape?


Challenges of Head-On Compensation

• Total current is not a challenge

• Optimum beam profile (vs

bunchlength/beta*, Qx,y)

• Compression to 0.3-0.5 mm is

doable, though not easy

• Keeping beam straight within 0.03-

0.05 mm

• Beam-beam centering within 0.03-

0.05 mm

• Will bending sections do harm?


e-Lens configurations


Head-On BBC Action Path

• Form an LHC eCompensation Task Force with a charge to perform feasibility study in ~1 year

– FNAL, BNL, SLAC, LBL, UKansas

• Goal is to explore parameter space and effectiveness of head-on BBC in LHC and RHIC

Cost: buried in Accel Physics “Beam-Beam” task

In case of positive outcome, next steps may include:

• Design of the TEL for RHIC 2007 ~200k$ SWF

• Construction of TEL for RHIC 2008-2009 ~1300k$ M&S

• Demonstrate head-on compensation 2009-2010 ~200k$ SWF

• Build TELs for LHC 2011-2012 ~1100k$ M&S

• Install TELs in LHC and commission 2012-2014 ~200k$ SWF

Total: 3,000k$


Q’s to Answer:• Will Gaussian or truncated Gaussian e-current density distribution

work (improve lifetime and reduce diffusion rates)?– Straightforward tracking with a weak-strong code– Is partial compensation helpful?

• Is there a better distribution?– from first principles, theory, analytical consideration – Effects are beta_TEL/beta*/sigma_z; or dP/P– check in numerical tracking

• Importance of e-pbar(p) interaction in bending sections– Which of three configurations is better?– Is the choice tune dependent?

• Lifetime deterioration due to e-p misalignment: – e-beam straightness tolerances – relative e-p displacement, angle

• Effect of low-frequency variations dJ, dX on beam lifetime• Ion cleaning efficiency tolerances• Cross-interaction with wires in LHC – if there is any• e-beam effect on coherent stability or strong-strong beam-beam

effects


1.5 TeV SuperFerric Injector in LHC tunnel1.5 TeV SuperFerric Injector in LHC tunnel

J.JohnstoneT.Sen, H.Piekarz


Summary LER-LHC

• Title: LER – A 1.5 TeV Injector Accelerator for the LHC• Leader & Participants: Henryk Piekarz, Steve Hays, Yuenian Huang,

John Johnstone, Gijs de Rijk, Lucio Rossi, Tanaji Sen, Vladimir Shiltsev

• Objectives: Determine feasibility of the LER accelerator • Deliverables: A preliminary design of the LER accelerator• Time scale/schedule: One year• Resources needed: - Travel ($50 K) - Low Field VLHC magnet test at 1.6 T ($50K)

Plan of Action : Make preliminary studies, prepare several presentations and attend LER-LHC Workshop at CERN (July 5, 2006) see its outcome and CERN position before committing any further resources


Amplifier average power (W)

Damping time, sec

Lead ionsUndulator: period-=7 mfield = 10 T, number of periods = 3

Damping time for protons ~ 5 hours at 1kW amplifier power

Optical Stochastic Cooling

A.ZholentsM.Zolotorev

Plan of Action : support letter for OSC demonstration experiment (NSF)

wait for results

•Bypass optics

•Optical amplifier

•Proof-of-principle with electrons

Needs for R&D:


BackUp Slides


B-field is frozen at high frequencies


• FY2006:– Design and construct a wire compensator – Install wire compensator in RHIC in summer 2006, downstream of Q3 in IR6– Perform theoretical studies to test the compensation and

robustness• FY2007:

– Study the wire compensation in RHIC with 1 proton bunch in each beam and nominal conditions at flat top and 1 parasitic interaction.

– Beam studies to test tolerances on: beam-wire separation compared to beam-beam separation, wire current accuracy and

current ripple• FY2008:

– Decide on scope of work for the LHC wire compensation

Wire Beam-Beam Compensation Overall Plan


Contiguous with helical tube inside jaw.

Formed after assembly-brazing of jaw and installation of bearing on stub-shaft

Exits through support shaft per CERN design

Material: CuNi10Fe1, 10mm O.D., 8mm I.D.

Stub-shaft (bearing not shown)

Support shaft

Detail of flex cooling supply tube

Relaxed (as shown)

# coils

4

O.D. 111mm (4.4in)

full 360° rotation # coils 5

O.D. 91mm (3.6in)

torque 9.1N-m (81in-lb)


• L2 Leader: Tom Markiewicz (SLAC)• FY06 budget 850 k$ • Goals:

– The LHC cleaning system must have exceptional efficiency to meet its design parameters, significantly beyond the state-of-the-art that is achieved in existing colliders. It is crucial for the success of the LHC that different paths are explored in order to optimize the design, hardware and operational procedures for the LHC collimation system. In view of the exceptional difficulty for the LHC it is essential to pursue parallel R&D studies in- and outside of CERN. The phased approach for the LHC collimation system will allow to test various proposals and to implement the best solutions in an already defined upgrade path to nominal performance. The LHC Collimator R&D will complement the work at CERN and will be performed in close

• L3 tasks:– Cleaning Efficiency Studies– Rotating Collimators R&D– Tertiary Collimators Studies– Material Irradiation Studies

1.3 LHC Collimation R&D


• L3 Leader: Angelika Drees (BNL)• FY06 budget 50 k$ • Goals:

– The ultimate goal of this sub program is to bench mark code(s), in particular SIXTRACKwColl, in a variety of aspects with RHIC beams.

– We plan to install and implement at BNL accelerator tracking code identical with the one used at CERN (K2, SIXTRACK with Collimators, i.e. SIXTRACKwColl) and perform simulations of collimation efficiencies and loss maps which will then be compared to simulation results from earlier studies done at RHIC with other codes (Teapot, K2, ACCSIM) and with data. Various data sets at two energies are available.

– During the RHIC proton run collimator setup procedures should be implemented into the RHIC control system and tested with beam under real operating conditions.

1.3.1 Cleaning Efficiency Studies


• FY2006: – debug the code – compare with other simulation and data, test

setup procedures, – finish reports

Cleaning Efficiency Studies: Overall Plan


• L3 Leader: Tom Markiewicz (SLAC)• FY06 budget 720 k$ • Goals:

– The ultimate goal is a successful design for low impedance, high efficiency LHC secondary collimators. The design will be validated with a sufficient but small (1-3) number of prototypes and beam tests. The design specifications and the prototypes are the primary deliverables. The time scale is set by the desirability of testing the prototypes with LHC beam in 2008/09. Then, CERN will decide whether or not to proceed with the rotating collimator design. If a decision is made to proceed, this sub-project will provide an engineering drawing package to CERN and will support the effort to commission the collimators once they are manufactured and installed by CERN.

1.3.2 Rotating Collimators


June 15-17 CERN/SLAC Collaboration Meeting

• Attendees– CERN: Ralph Assmann (Project Leader, Tracking),

Allesandro Bertarelli (Mechanical Eng.), Markus Brugger (Radiation Issues), Mario Santana (FLUKA)

– SLAC: Tom Markiewicz, Eric Doyle (ME), Lew Keller (FLUKA), Yunhai Cai (Tracking), Tor Raubenheimer

• Radiation Physics Group: Alberto Fasso, Heinz Vincke

• Results– Agreement on basic design of RC1 (1st rotatable

prototype)– Transfer of many of CERN mechanical CAD files– Lists of

• Further studies required• Outstanding Engineering Issues requiring more design work• Project Milestone List & Action Items List

– Test Installation of “New FLUKA”


Conceptual Design of RC1 (1 of 2)

• Mechanics must fit within CERN Phase I C-C envelope– 224mm center-to-center with 88mm OD beampipes– 1480mm longitudinal flange-to-flange– 25mm adjustment/jaw (22.5mm relative to beam w/±5mm

allowed beam center motion• and use Phase I alignment and adjustment scheme

– Two 75cm Cu cylindrical jaws with 10cm tapered ends, 95cm overall length with axes connected to vertical mover shafts

– 136mm OD with 9mm taper– Each jaw end independently moved in 10um steps– Vacuum vessel sized to provide 8mm clearance to adjacent

beam and allow gross/fine 0°, 45°, 90° positions• Relaxed mechanical deformation specifications

– <25 um INTO beam guaranteed by adjustable mechanical stop(s)

• Ride on groove deep enough to not be damaged in accident case• Adjustable between ±5 and ±15 sigma (2-6mm) & centered on

beam– <325 um (750um) AWAY FROM beam @ 0.8E1p/s loss (4E11p/s)

• Flexible support on adjustment


Proposed layout

136mm diameter x 950mm long jaws, vacuum tank,jaw support mechanism and support base derived from CERN Phase I


•Stop prevents gap closing as jaw bows inward due to heat

•Jaw ends spring-loaded to the table assemby … move outward in response to bowing

•May use two stops to control tilt

•Slot deep enough to avoid damage in accident

•Stop far enough from beam to never be damaged & is out of way at injection

Adjustable gap-defining stop


Rigid round-square transition

Spring loaded fingers ground two jaws through range of motion

Jaw support & gap adjustment borrowed from CERN

RF Contact Overview


LHC Phase I 2D carbon-carbon Irradiation Specimen at BNL BLIP Facility

117 MeV or 200 MeV BNL LiNAC Protons (depending on the isotope production requirements downstream)

Preliminary Assessment:2D CC specimens normal to the planes of reinforcing fibers and close to the center of the beam (receiving high dose) experienced degradation.Less degradation was seen in the specimens along the reinforcement.

NOTE: Total dose received MUCH HIGHER than what LHC collimator jaws will see.

Status:Phase I Carbon-Carbon irradiation completedSample activation measurements completedThermal Expansion of specimens startedPLANNING of FY06 Post-Irradiation and Follow-up Irradiation Studies


Phase-II LHC Collimator Material Irradiation Planned for May 2006

Primary Materials: Annealed Copper and

Glidcop (85% Cu – 15% Al)

Other Potential Candidates: Super Invar, Gum Metal,

Also: 2D Carbon-Carbon and

3D Carbon-Carbon

Test for physical properties (thermal conductivity, thermal expansion)

And

Stress-Strain (mechanical properties)


POST IRRADIATION ANALYSIS REVEALED THAT PHASE-I 2D Carbon-Carbon Self Anneals Irradiation Damage through thermal cycling in both strong and weak directions. Therefore, it is expected to meet the 25 micron condition set as goal

Annealing along strong (fiber plane) direction Annealing along weak direction

Shown is annealing under different levels of irradiation damage


PHASE-I: Irradiation and Analysis of 2D Carbon-Carbon at BNLGOALS: Determine resilience of 2D CC against irradiation damage and assess

how the critical property of thermal expansion changes with irradiation

assembly

irradiation

Beam exposure and irradiation damage assessment

Post-irradiation Analysis

At irradiation levels several orders of magnitude than what the LHC collimator jaws will see the 2D CC suffers structurallyfrom irradiation exposure


Physics: Long Range @ RHIC

SPS : ~ d5 [measured 11/09/04]

Tevatron: ~ d3 [measured in HEP stores, TEL] RHIC : ~ d4 or d2 [measured 04/28/05, scan 4]


• L2 Leader: Michael Syphers (FNAL)• FY06 budget 1,140 k$ • Goals:

– There is an overall benefit to the U.S. high-energy physics program if the LHC turns on rapidly and successfully. Our experimental physics groups have invested heavily in the LHC project, and the science produced there thus represents a return on the U.S. investment. A healthy and strong HEP activity at LHC will surely be necessary to secure future accelerator-based HEP projects in the U.S. The information gained during the commissioning will be available in a timely manner and will have maximum positive effect on U.S. plans for LHC

• L3 tasks:– Beam Commissioning– Hardware Commissioning– Toohig Fellowship– New Initiatives

1.2 LHC Commissioning


• FY2006:– S/N study of low intensity bunches in Tevatron– Design pick-up structure, study PLL DAB board for DAQ– complete an “integration document”, signed off by both

parties, and entered into CERN EDMS – Design and build front-end electronics Q1– Joint LARP and CERN review of the proposed design

• FY2007:– Adapt Fermilab analysis software– Hardware commissioning at CERN without beam

• FY2008:– Hardware commissioning at CERN with beam

• FY2009:– Beam studies of chromaticity measurements, ramp effects

Schottky Monitors Overall Plan

LARP Accelerator Systems Synthesis Vladimir Shiltsev bnl - fnal- lbnl - slac US LHC Accelerator...

Documents

Transcript of LARP Accelerator Systems Synthesis Vladimir Shiltsev bnl - fnal- lbnl - slac US LHC Accelerator...