MICE Beamline Commissioning

MICE Beamline Commissioning

Linda R. Coney

NFMCC Meeting 16 January 2010

Linda R. Coney – 16 Jan 2010

Outline

Overview of MICE beam line 2009 Run Goals Target

Operation Stability

Detector Commissioning , e, p, and beams

Beam optics optimization and measurements Upstream Quadrupoles Decay Solenoid Muon beam emittance measurements

Conclusions

2


MICE Beam Line

TOF2 attached to front of KL and installed end of November

3


Goals for Running in 2009

Begin MICE Step I Commission new target Commission detectors

GVA1, CKOVa, CKOVb, TOF0, TOF1, FNAL Beam Profile Monitors, KL High intensity running for study of ISIS activation Commission Decay Solenoid Calibrate TOF system Calibrate CKOV and KL Perform Beam Studies:

Beam loss vs. Particle Rate Optimize Upstream Beamline (Q1, Q2, Q3) Decay Solenoid optimization

Optimize DAQ for increased particle rate Measure muon beam emittance

4


Outline


Operation Stability



Conclusions

5


Target Operations

50,000 pulses of redesigned target in test stand in R78 New target installed in ISIS August 2009

Run at base rate (50 Hz/32) and with ISIS at 50 Hz (Normal User Run)

Inspected after 12k, 22k, 42k, 63k – PASSED Target is working beautifully – NO problems Target stability checked every 5000 pulses

Process to monitor target behavior agreed upon with ISIS Target timing wrt ISIS MS signal monitored Coordinating Beam Loss measured by MICE with that

measured by ISIS Target Operation: 112,000 pulses to date

Machine Physics – 8 days of MICE running September User Run – 10 days Nov/Dec User Run – 12 days

6

MICE target path

ISIS cycles

MS marker

ISIS losses


Target Monitoring

Target stability checked every 5000 pulses Study Beam Center Distance (BCD) to monitor target

stability Clear difference between BCD distribution for

functioning target and failing target Failing target has much broader spread T2 distribution 3-4 times as broad Interpreted as target “sticking”

Target BCD very stable7


Target Data Taking

Target Operation Studies: Search for ideal timing with respect to ISIS cycle

Also a function of target depth ISIS Beam loss vs particle rate study

Increase target depth, producing ISIS beam loss of 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 1, 2, 3 and 4 V

In 2008, maximum ISIS beam loss 50 mV Found edge of beam at injection need to

avoid next pulse on out-swing Studies of different accelerations: modified

drive voltages on capacitor bank ISIS machine study: beam bump at MICE

target

8

Normal BLMs around ISIS with MICE target inactive (Sector 7)

Target operating at 2V beamloss


Target Operations

Beamloss (in Sector 7) for the 13 hour run at 1V Two distinct peaks (although only fitted a single

Gaussian) Double structure due to ISIS beam wandering in cyclic

pattern Not due to variation in target depth!

Survey of target area after long 1V run Slight activation (max. 500 Sieverts/hour) in

couple of spots near target No impact on measurements around the rest of

ISIS ISIS suggests repeat at 5V beamloss

9

Activation StudyActivation Study

Beam Loss VariationBeam Loss Variation


ISIS Beam Bump Study

BEAM BUMP TEST (last 2ms of cycle): D. Adams & M. Popovic 1ms-long kick generated to change nominal orbit New orbit kept stable for another 1ms All brought back to the nominal trajectory The test was performed as follows:

0- use nominal trajectory setting (ISIS) 1- set target BCD for 50 mV losses 2- align target dip minimum with the extraction edge 3- record dip depth and delay 4- extract target 5- introduce the bumped orbit 6- insert target until produce 50mV loss again 7- record dip depth and delay

Results depth of ~5mm reproduced the 50mV loss (predicted value was 7mm) ISIS beam closer to target reduces depth needed to generate a defined beamloss faster

insertion, better control of next pulse clipping Bumped orbit well controlled locally Rest of orbit very stable

10


Beam Loss vs Particle Rate Study

Beamline set for 300 MeV/c - beam Losses calculated using fit to curve of BLM7SUM

peak Error bars (tiny) just from rms/sqrt(#counts)

Counts in GVA1

11A. Dobbs


Beam Loss vs Particle Rate Study II

Beamline set for 300 MeV/c - beam Losses calculated using fit to curve of BLM7SUM

loss peak Error bars (tiny) just from rms/sqrt(#counts)

Counts in FNAL BPM1

12A. Dobbs


Next: Beam Loss vs Particle Rate

Repeat analysis using integrated beam loss rather than fit to peak method ISIS determines MICE losses using integration over full cycle

Rate vs beam loss plots as function of particle type Uses TOF for PID and rate counter Cannot use BPMs for this as beam content may change between them Can use current data for this study

Repeat study with positive particles Repeat study with muon beamline Take more data points at higher beam loss

13


Outline


Operation Stability



Conclusions14


MICE Beamline and Detectors

15


Time of Flight Counters

TOF0, TOF1 installed for September & Nov/Dec User Runs TOF2 installed in late November Horizontal and vertical bars Have proven to be invaluable in beamline commissioning

Tof-0

0.48 m

10 x 4cm scintillator barsx = 1.15 cmt = 50 ps

Tof-1

0.48 m

7 x 6cm scintillator barsx = 1.73 cmt = 50 ps 16


Data Taking Program: Positive Particles

Detector Calibration: 300 MeV/c pions - 4000 target pulses (translates to about 330,000 particles

used for calibrating the TOF system) 250 MeV/c pions - 350 target pulses (also for TOF) 200 MeV/c pions - 450 pulses (also for TOF)

300 MeV/c positrons - 1500 target pulses (CKOV and KL calorimeter) 150 MeV/c positrons - 1200 target pulses (CKOV and KL calorimeter)

Beam Studies:

330 MeV/c pions to study Decay Solenoid effects on beam optics - 2000 pulses

Muon Beams: 444 MeV/c pi+ to mu+ beam - 500 pulses

17


333 MeV/c pion beam

Sept 10 with 500mV losses

18


333 MeV/c proton beam

Sept 06

19


444 MeV/c pi+ to mu+ beam

Motivation to switch beam polarity

20


444 MeV/c pi- to mu- beam

After switched to negative beam

21


Data Taking Program:Negative Particles

In October – switched beamline polarity Detector Calibration:

300 MeV/c - 2800 target pulses (TOF system) 300 MeV/c electrons - 5750 target pulses (TOF, CKOV and KL calorimeter) 150 MeV/c electrons - 1200 target pulses (TOF, CKOV and KL calorimeter)

Beamline Studies: 300 MeV/c for particle rate vs beam loss study – 400 pulses 300 MeV/c for spill gate vs particle rate study – 500 pulses

330 MeV/c for particle rate vs beam loss study – 2400 pulses 50mV, 100mV, 200mV, 300mV, 400 mV, 500 mV losses

Optimization of Upstream Beamline - 330 MeV/c Q1,Q2,Q3 scans – 1100 pulses

Muon Beams – Emittance Measurements 444 MeV/c to 250 MeV/c beam - 1500 337 MeV/c to 250 MeV/c beam – 1550 444, 420, 400, 360, 337 MeV/c to 250 MeV/c beam – 500 pulses

22


Data Taking Program with TOF2

End of November – TOF1 moved, TOF2 installed Detector Calibration with TOF1 trigger:

300 MeV/c : 6500 target pulses (calibrating TOF system & target delay study)

250 MeV/c : -500 target pulses (TOF system)

300 MeV/c electrons - 3000 target pulses (TOF,CKOV and KL)

Muon Beams - Emittance measurement data 444 MeV/c to 250 MeV/c beam - 9100 pulses 337 MeV/c to 250 MeV/c beam – 1000 pulses 444 MeV/c to 200 MeV/c beam – 1000 pulses 444 MeV/c to 300 MeV/c beam – 1000 pulses 400 MeV/c to 225 MeV/c beam – 2000 pulses 337 MeV/c to 200 MeV/c beam – 2600 pulses

23


TOF Calibration

Many TOF bars to calibrate Need lots of data! Last year’s data……..This year… TOF system with TOF2 in progress

2009300 MeV/c

increased statistics

2009 330 MeV/c

2008

(Peaks overlap)

e

24


TOF Calibration: Time Resolution

Different calibration done for September and Nov/Dec Runs Discrimination threshold changed and improved time resolution September: TOF0 – 52 ps, TOF1 – 68 ps Nov/Dec: TOF0 – 51 ps, TOF1 – 58 ps TOF1 completely calibrated, TOF0 all but slab0 and slab9 in both planes

25


Cherenkovs

Two aerogel Cherenkov counters Installed downstream of Q6 and TOF0 Used to separate e// 220-350 MeV/c e// calibration data taken Sample electron data shown

26


e/ Identifier

KL lead/scintillating fiber calorimeter module Installed on temporary support with TOF1 in

September Moved downstream and mounted with TOF2 in

November Calibration in progress Electron data taken FADCs all working DAQ restructured & ok

Electron Muon Ranger (EMR) Triangular prismatic scintillator bars Being constructed at UGeneva Installation later this year

27


Outline


Operation Stability



Conclusions28


Upstream Beamline

29


Optimization of Upstream Beamline: Q1,Q2,Q3 scan

Q1-2-3 varied from nominal value

Charged particles counted downstream of Decay Solenoid

Compared to MC Charged -, -, e-

Use MC to predict effect for single current changes

verify in the next run

14

nominal config.

data

MC

30


f1-only (MC) DATA

• Q1 scan• Good agreement

between data and MC for variation of only Q1


0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

31


f2-only (MC) DATA

• Q2 scan• Agreement

between data and MC not as good as that for Q1


320.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

32



Q3 scan Data not agree

with MC Q3 could be

more sensitive to small misalignment

f3-only (MC) DATA

330.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

33


Decay Solenoid Optimization

330 MeV/c pion beam DS nominal setting 550 A (3.1T) Vary +/- 10% and study profile in TOF0 Check data vs MC (our understanding of BL)

Run 1121 DS lower 0.30T Run 1123 Nominal DS

Run 1125 DS up 0.30T

TOF0

TOF1

34

Study still in progress


Muon Beam Studies at MICE!

The MICE experiment takes 17000 target pulses of muon beam data!

~170,000 at TOF1 Muon beam studies begin!

Worldwide celebrations

ensue!

Locals in Britain express strong support for the experiment

BlimeBlimey!y!

MuonsMuons!!

35

Extra!

Extra

!

Extra! Extra!


Muon Beam Data

Preliminary muon rate survey 337 MeV/c - to 250 MeV/c -

beam Varied target depth to study muon

rate as function of beam loss VERY preliminary!

Muon Beams - Emittance measurement data 444 MeV/c to 250 MeV/c beam - 10,600 pulses 337 MeV/c to 250 MeV/c beam – 2500 pulses 444 MeV/c to 200 MeV/c beam – 1000 pulses 444 MeV/c to 300 MeV/c beam – 1000 pulses 400 MeV/c to 225 MeV/c beam – 2000 pulses 337 MeV/c to 200 MeV/c beam – 2600 pulses

36


Muon Beam Emittance Measurements

Purpose: generate the elements of the “emittance-momentum matrix” Study performance at every portion of a full cooling channel

Can we use the TOFs to demonstrate the matrix elements?

Q1Q1 Q2Q2 Q3Q3 Q4Q4 Q5Q5 Q6Q6 Q7Q7 Q8Q8 Q9Q9DK solDK sol D2D2D1D1

TOF1TOF1TOF0TOF0TargetTarget

DiffuserDiffuser

Cooling channel Cooling channel and spectrometersand spectrometers

33 66 1010

140140

200200

240240

Initial Initial 4D 4D NN (mm) (mm)

Abso

rber

Abso

rber

PPzz (

MeV

/c)

(M

eV

/c)

DataData

MICE note 176 Apollonio, Cobb

M. Rayner

37

Q4Q1

Dip

ole1

DK solenoidQ2 Q3

Dip

ole2

Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9

dnstream BL tuning: match to diffuser

P=444 MeV/c

fix D1 fix D2

Marco Apollonio - Imperial College 38


Measuring (,P) from DATA

- Rationale- check if an optics produces the foreseen () at diffuser- measure (and P) of the muon beam- measure beam spread (sigx) and divergence (sigx’ = sig(px/pz))

- How?- use TOF0 / 1 as (x,y) stations- define muon sample- track mu’s in the Q7-8-9 triplet- infer x’, y’ (x,x’) (y,y’)- scatter plots give phase spaces

Mark Rayner’stools

39


Muon Beam Measurement

Use PID on December’s scaled decay beam line data Define muon sample

“Central” beamline optics444 MeV/c 250 MeV/c at D2

6-200Runs 1380-1397 and 1391-1393

Intermediate momentum beam line with scaled quad currents

Runs 1407-1408444 MeV/c 225 MeV/c at D2

6-140(rescaled currents)Runs 1409-1411

337 MeV/c 200 MeV/c at D2

M. Rayner 40


Reconstruction procedure

Iterative calculation of increasingly good s=z+ and P Begin with P from P/E=z/t

1 Calculate a linear transfer map at P from TOF0 to TOF1 (top hat quadrupoles) 2 Deduce x0’ and y0’ from x1 and y1

3 Integrate ds while tracking the initial trace space vector through the beam line 4 Make a better estimate of P from P/E=s/t 5 Make a small Bethe-Bloch correction for the energy loss in air between the TOFs

M. Rayner 41Marco’s=6mm pabsorber=200 MeV/c centre of the -p matrix beam


Muon Beam Measurement:x and y trace space

Truth Recon’d det. sim. Data

M. Rayner42


Goals for Running in 2009 Revisited

Begin MICE Step I Commission new target Commission detectors

GVA1, CKOVa, CKOVb, TOF0, TOF1, FNAL Beam Profile Monitors, KL High intensity running for study of ISIS activation Commission Decay Solenoid Perform Studies:

Decay Solenoid optimization - in progress Beam loss vs. Particle Rate - in progress Optimize Upstream Beamline (Q1, Q2, Q3)

Calibrate TOF system Calibrate CKOV and KL ongoing Optimize DAQ for increased particle rate ongoing Measure muon beam emittance – started – ongoing

43


Conclusions

Beamline is working! – negative or positive particles New target operating smoothly - Systematic monitoring of performance Decay Solenoid routinely operated – factor 5 increase muon rate Major increase in loss limits 50 mV (2008) 1V (2009) DAQ increase in efficiency: <50 particles/spill (2008) ≤ 200 part/spill (2009) Beam loss vs particle rate shows linear dependence

Detectors are working! TOF0, TOF1 calibrated – TOF2 next Need more data for TOF2, KL EMR installation – Summer2010

Muon beam optics physics is happening! Upstream beamline is tuned Initial measurement of muon beam emittance Muon Rate Study – in progress More (,P) matrix data in February/March

44


Target Operations

Beamloss (in Sector 7) for the 13 hour run at 1V Two distinct peaks (although only fitted a single

Gaussian) Double structure due to ISIS beam wandering in cyclic

pattern Not due to variation in target depth!

Survey of target area after long 1V run Slight activation (max. 500 Sieverts/hour) in

couple of spots near target ISIS suggests repeat at 5V beamloss

9

Activation StudyActivation Study

Beam Loss VariationBeam Loss Variation


Target Operations II

Target I stability from 16 Sept 2009 Characteristic double peak due to inherent 0.15 mm position resolution and the pulse by

pulse capture position deltaD for 5th = .13 and for 16th = .12 Running at same depth – consistent behavior

6


Decay Solenoid

Operation of Decay Solenoid is now routine Provides gain of ~5 in particle flux

Without DS With DS

34


Decay Solenoid

Operation of Decay Solenoid is now routine Provides gain of ~5 in particle flux

Without DS With DS

35


Beam Stop Open!

Remote operation of Beam Stop


TOF Calibration

Time of Flight spectra for several beam optics and species

26

MICE Beamline Commissioning

Documents

Transcript of MICE Beamline Commissioning