larp accelerator systems overview: how are we doing? vladimir shiltsev bnl - fnal- lbnl - slac us...

LARP Accelerator Systems Overview:How are we doing?

Vladimir Shiltsev

bnl - fnal- lbnl - slacUS LHC Accelerator Research Program

LARP Collaboration Meeting 04/26/2006 - Shiltsev 2

Content• What’s new after October’05 Collaboration Meeting

– LARP Org Chart changes, communication, DocDB– FY06 Budget – spendings to date– RC review + Lumi Review

• DoE Review Nov’05 LARPAC May’06 DoE Review Jun’06• R&D Progress:

– Instrumentation– Commissioning– Collimation– Accelerator Physics

• New Proposals


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)

Changes: Wolfram to lead AP

Be discussed at this meeting:

• Finish some L3 tasks

• Introduce new L3 tasks

• any org structure for new initiatives?


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 – US-CERN meetings ~ once/yr

• LARP Doc DB is functioning:– 162 docs uploaded from Oct’05-Apr’06


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

0.9M/3.6M=25%thru 5 mos

Feb.28, 2006

(compare with 31% MAG)


That tops the list of my worries…• 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 $$ freed after diagnostics development and

fabrication finished in 2007

This collaboration meeting is to address all that: – L2s will report Friday


Speaking of Reviews: Nov’05 DoE

• “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”.


TCFB on RHIC ramp

P.Cameron


Luminosity Monitor - I

• 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

• Beam test planned for RHIC run VI

• System intragation planning at CERN– TAN instrumentation workshop on March 10

• Final Design Review at LBL• Monday April 24


Luminosity Monitor - II• Technical Challenges

– Extremely high radiation levels • up to ~250 Grad

– Signal processing to avoid pileup• 25 ns bunch spacing

• Status– Completed R&D and FDR

• 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– Data acquisition issues –

discussed at Apr25 mtg at LBL– Next revision of EDMS is needed– Final Design Review 06/19/06 at

CERN

LARP Hardware Commissioning Tasks

Installation Oversight

Since DOE Review Last Fall:

• First USLHC String (Q1-Q3/Feedbox/D1) transported to tunnel

• LARP Oversight and technology transfer for USLHC interconnects

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

• Limited LARP oversight planned for all US deliverable installations

Photos from Jan 2006 IR 8L installation


• 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.

• Short term HC support from US experts as needed

Proposed Profile for LARP Hardware Commissioners

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Nov Jan

MarMay Ju

lySep Nov Ja

nMar

May July

Sep Nov

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 coincides with anticipated peak commissioning period FY07.

Commissioning of US Deliverables and General HC

LARP Hardware Commissioning Tasks


Several US visitors to CERN in January/February 06

Nearly continuous presence for ~6 weeks Chamonix workshop Beam Commissioning logistics Software CCC opening get to know LHC beam principals

Informal review of LHC Beam Commissioning structure completed

(results presented at this meeting)

Beam Commissioning ‘Expression of Interest’(to be introduced at this meeting)

Refining areas of involvement, beginning to assign names/share with CERN counterparts

Gearing up for LARP presence during SPS running, more so for Sector test

More detail in Breakout session

Beam Commissioning Status


LHC@FNAL Status 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

More detail in Breakout session


Status of Phase II Rotating Collimator Project at 10-06-2005 Pheasant Run LARP Mtg.

• SLAC and CERN agree on an initial set of specifications for the first mechanical prototype RC1– Put a new vacuum tank with cylinder jaws that fits LHC spatial constraints on

a CERN Phase I base and use CERN Phase I scheme for jaw alignment and cooling input

– Provide 12kW cooling to each 136mm x 95cm jaw through flexible tubing– Relax 25um flatness tolerance but provide flexible jaw support and a central

stop mechanism to ensure thermal bowing is AWAY from beam• 400 um sagitta for 1 hr beam lifetime engineering steady state• 1200 um sagitta for 12min beam lifetime 10 second transient


Progress since 10-06-2005

• RC1 Prototype Conceptual Design Report– reviewed and accepted by CERN and suggestions

incorporated– independent review 12/15/05

• Lou Bertolini-LLNL, Alex Makarov-FNAL, Bill Turner (LBL)• Major Findings: Fine, but ….

– Do not ‘cut metal’ until jaw support and stop scheme developed» In progress

– Check thin-Cu over Stainless for performance √ No improvement– Increase engineering effort

• Full time engineer (Steve Lundgren) and designer hired 3 April

• Current Activities:– Braze tests of cooling coils beginning– Prep for full cooling & deformation tests– Acquisition of Phase I support & mover assemblies– Redrawing of CERN parts for US fabrication


FY06 Goals of Phase II Rotating Collimator Project and Beyond

• Work Plan outlined 10/6/20051. Single jaw thermal test: one jaw with internal helical cooling channels to

be thermally loaded for testing the cooling effectiveness and measuring thermal deformations.

2. Full RC1 prototype: a working prototype for bench top testing of the jaw positioning mechanism, supported to simulate operation in all necessary orientations, but not intended for mounting on actual beamline supports with actual beamline, cooling, control and instrumentation connections.

1. Deliverables listed 10/6/20051. Final version of RC1 CDR: Awaiting support/stopper design2. External review of RC1 CDR: √3. Performance report on RC1:

• Progress delayed ~6 months due to reviews & manpower issues• New Plan: 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


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)• Other Potential Candidates: Super Invar, Gum Metal, 3D Carbon-Carbon

Material Irradiation Studies


E-cloud since last Mtg• Completed updated simulations of ecloud power deposition in LHC

dipoles– M. Furman and V. Chaplin, PRST-AB 9, 034403 (March 20, 2006)

• Tedious exploration of parameter space with 2D code POSINST (see below)– Peak SEYmax now constrained to be <~1.2 for nominal intensity & bunch

spacing– Code improvements

• 3D self-consistent code (WARP/POSINST)– Jean-Luc Vay (LBNL) now 20% LARP funded (starting FY06)– Initial qualitative results for one bunch in one FODO cell (LARP mtg, Apr. 05)– New results for a train of 5 bunches with more detailed model (see below)– Code improvements

• RHIC studies– Feb. 2006: two CERN e– detectors installed (some not LARP funded, but

important)• Common pipe region in IP10, warm section

– Polarized proton beams for this run– Ping He doing RHIC simulations; calibration barely started


Sample simulation: ecloud at LHC dipoles(Furman and Chaplin, PRST-AB 9, 034403)

• ecloud power deposition– POSINST code– LHC arc dipole magnet– key parameters: Nb, tb, max– current result: maxmust be <1.2-

1.3 (achievable but not easy)

dP dz

tb=25 nsNb=1e11

1.15e11

tb=25 ns

tb=75 ns

: cooling capacity available for EC power deposition


Sample 3D self-consistent simulations (WARP/POSINST)

(courtesy J.-L. Vay)

WARP/POSINST-3DT = 4.65s

experimentsimulation Oscillations

Electrons bunching

Beam ions hit end plate

WARP/POSINST-3DT = 0.3s

•LHC FODO cell• can now follow batch of bunches with photo- e– and secondary e–

• snapshot from run with 5 bunches:

• Benchmark code against HCX experiment (LBNL)

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


Future Plans• 3D self-consistent simulations:

– Study long-term behavior of beam• This is a nontrivial exercise that may require code improvements• Main new concern: slow emittance growth (Benedetto et. al.

PRSTAB 8 124402 (2005) et. seq.)• Also: address “old” concern” (ecloud-induced head-tail instability)

• Summer student to come to LBNL for 12 weeks this summer– Simulate optimal conditioning scenario for LHC– Understand leftover details from SPS measurements– Contribute (time permitting) to 3D self-consistent simulations

• RHIC:– Analyze collected data obtained with CERN detectors– Complete simulations– Understand ecloud sensitivities and correlate them to other

observables (eg., P rise)


IR LayoutsBaseline LayoutQuads firstToo many parasitics

Dipoles first layout

Early separation but ….

Triplets Doublets


IR Optics Issues

Pole tip field [T]

Aperture [mm]

Quads 1st

Dipoles 1st: tripletsDipoles 1st: doublets

101110

101 107 104

IR Magnet apertures and fields

Energy Deposition Major issue in all optics, but dipole designs more challenging.Beam-beam interactions Demonstration of wire compensation would favor quads 1st. Chromaticity and Nonlinear Correctors Corrector strengths lower with quads 1st but independent control of 2 beams with dipoles 1st.Luminosity gain with lower L* Larger gain with quads 1st.Flux jumps in IR magnets Chromaticity jumps small (~2 units) with Δb3 = 1 in both optics if spurious dispersion in IR is controlled to ~1cm at IP. Nonlinear effects need to be studied


Beam-beam experiments, simulations

• 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 Analysis to be presented by W. Fischer• Beam-beam simulations of 2006 experiments Motivation: Tests and improvements of codes, predictions of

observations in 2006 and of wire compensation Four groups FNAL: V. Ranjbar, T. Sen; SLAC: A. Kabel; LBL: J. Qiang;

University of Kansas: J. Shi Website: http://www-ap.fnal.gov/~tsen/RHIC for information exchange and results

http://www-ap.fnal.gov/~tsen/RHIC


Beam-beam simulation results

BBSIM (VR, TS) simulations for lifetime show a linear dependence on separation

FNAL

Kansas

LBL

SLAC

Emittance growth

Losses

Relative Lifetime

No sextupoles


RHIC long-range beam-beam compensator design

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


• AC dipole • dB/B measurements• Crystal collimation• Super-SyncLite• e-lenses for Head-on B-B Compensation• Crab cavities• 1.5TeV Injector in LHC tunnel LER-LHC• Optical Stochastic Cooling

New Initiatives to discuss


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


Work hard and be inventive!


Back Ups

Slides


• 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) #

coils4

O.D. 111mm (4.4in)

full 360° rotation # coils 5O.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 layout136mm 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 @ RHICSPS : ~ d5 [measured 11/09/04]

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


AC dipole• Recent results

from the Tevatron• Collaboration

formed including Fermilab, BNL and CERN.

• Formal proposal for LHC at this meeting

First AC dipole data in the Tevatron


SyncLite Fiber: ghost bunches measurement (DeSantis, Byrd, Zolotorev)

• Time resolution: 50 ps

• Max integration time: 10 s

• Sensitivity: 5 105 p

LHC Requirements

Fiberoptic coupler/lens

Electro-optic modulatorInGaAs PD

Fiberoptic

Fiberoptic

PCFast pulser50 ps @ 40 MHz

Data acquisition board (ADC)5 105 protons emit ~30 photons/turn in a 10% bandwidth.The electro-optic modulator/fast pulser combination can map the entire LHC ring, with the required resolution, every 500 orbits.In the allowed integration time, every single 50 ps-long region is sampled 200 times.A 70% QE photodiode would accumulate >4000 counts.We can estimate a total of -6/8 dB from the coupling into the optical fiber and the various insertion losses.Main noise sources are the modulator extinction ratio (~ 3 10 -3) and the photodiode dark current (~ nA)


New Initiatives: dB/B Fluctuations

10 100 1000 100001E-11

1E-10

1E-9

1E-8

1E-7

1E-6

1E-5

TevLHCVLHC

Equi

vale

nt d

B/B

*

Frequency, Hz

Tevatron Stand-Alone Dipole measurements (Proc. PAC’01)

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

Can be measured at CERN MMF and in Tev

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


1.5 TeV SuperFerric Injector in LHC tunnel1.5 TeV SuperFerric Injector in LHC tunnelJ.JohnstoneT.Sen, H.Piekarz


• 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 overview: how are we doing? vladimir shiltsev bnl - fnal- lbnl - slac us...

Documents