recent results in analysis of errors in fringe scans by shintake monitor (ipbsm) atf2 topical...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM)
ATF2 Topical MeetingJuly 8 , 2013
KEK
ATF2 Topical Meeting
Jacqueline Yan, S. Komamiya
( University of Tokyo, Graduate School of Science )Y. Kamiya ( University of Tokyo, ICEPP )
T.Okugi, T.Terunuma, T.Tauchi, K.Kubo, J. Urakawa (KEK)
113/07/08
![Page 2: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
OutlineOutline
Beam Time Beam Time Status of Status of 2013 Spring 2013 Spring Run Run
IPBSM PerformanceIPBSM Performance & &
Error studiesError studies
•Statistical FluctuationStatistical Fluctuation•M reduction FactorsM reduction Factors
Summary Summary & &
PlansPlans 2
Recent Updates …..Recent Updates …..• Relative Position Jitter (Phase Jitter)Relative Position Jitter (Phase Jitter)• Polarization related issuesPolarization related issues
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
![Page 3: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Stable IPBSM performance in beam tuningreiteration of linear /nonlinear knobs in aim of small σy
Recent Beamtime Status (174 deg mode)
ATF2 Topical Meeting
ex ) consecutive 10 fringe scans
preliminary
Time passed
preliminary
10 x x*, 1 x y*
13/07/08
3
174 ° mode ”consistency scan”
M 〜 0.306 ± 0.043 (RMS) correspond to σy 〜 65 nmBest record
from Okugi-san’s Fri operation meeting slides
![Page 4: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Studies@30 deg (2-8 deg) mode
IPBSM phase drift studyDedicated data for IPBSM error study• H and V relative position jitter• slow drifts (see next page and Okugi-san ‘s slides) Study of wake-field effects Ex) intensity dependence /ref cavity & bellows scan• consistency between Cherenkov and CsI results Cherenkov S/N ~ 15, CsI S/N ~ 3
high M at 30 deg
Demonstration of Demonstration of StabilityStability:Consistency scan ( x 26)
fitted M = 0.655 +/- 0.010 ICT: 2.5 - 3.5E9
preliminary
6/20 – 21
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
4
![Page 5: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
13/07/08
Phase Drift (initial phase vs time)
final set of scans on 3/8@174 degfinal set of scans on 3/8@174 deg
(initial phase) (initial phase) vs (time)vs (time)
6 deg (6/14: 1:00 am)drift ~ 93 mrad / min (73 nm / min at IP)
26 consecutive scans over 1 hr @ 30 deg (6/21) generally stable overall : init. phase = 2.01 +/- 0.05 rad (~ 2.5%)
33 mrad / min (5.5 nm / min @IP)
long range scans
typicaltypical
heavyheavy
Drift varies for different periods
stablestable
ATF2 Topical Meeting
![Page 6: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Comp SignalComp Signal Jitter Jitter
BGBG jitterjitter
13/07/08
*scaled by S/N
iCT monitor fluctuation
Relative beam –laser positionRelative beam –laser position
* Intrinsic CsI detector energy resolution
detector energy resolution
Signal Jitter Sources
< 10%
under investigation
< 1 %
~ 3 %
6 - 7 % ( PIN-PD signal)
< 5 % ICT monitor accuracy
measured Comp sig energy normalized by beam intensity
varies with beam condition and S/N
Spring, 2013: 174 deg modecontribution to Sig Jitter ΔEsig / Esig, avgSignal FluctuationSignal Fluctuation
< 1.5 % (photo-diode)
offline veto for timing, power
Maybe few % from each of Δy and Δx
signal jitter derived directly from actual fringe signal jitter derived directly from actual fringe scans scans (peaks)(peaks) :: typically typically ~~ 25% 25%
ATF2 Topical Meeting 6
jitterjitter (( RMSRMS )) 〜 〜 1.3 ns1.3 ns
Relative timing cutRelative timing cut (beam – laser)(beam – laser)e.g. 1-sigma
![Page 7: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
•hard to separate from other fluctuation sources hard to separate from other fluctuation sources (laser pointing jitters, drifts, ect….)(laser pointing jitters, drifts, ect….)•Vary over timeVary over time
Phase Jitter / Relative Position JitterPhase Jitter / Relative Position Jitter
Can’t push all fluctuation to phase jittersCan’t push all fluctuation to phase jitters
fitted energy jitters with contributions from statistics, timing, BG , and Δx
preliminary
take high statistics scans (Nav ~ 100) under optimized conditions for dedicated analysistake high statistics scans (Nav ~ 100) under optimized conditions for dedicated analysis
derive horizontal rel position jitter Δx using high statistic laserwire scan
if if Δy < 0.3 * σy Δy < 0.3 * σy (ATF2 beamline design)(ATF2 beamline design) CΔy > 90 % for σy* = 65 nmCΔy > 90 % for σy* = 65 nm
Issue 1: Δy Issue 1: Δy M reduction M reduction
residual M reduction factors must be assessed in order to derive the true beamsize !!!
Issue 2 : fluctuation source during fringe scanIssue 2 : fluctuation source during fringe scanIf Δx 〜 2.5 μm cause 〜 4 % signal jitters (assume Gaussian profile σlaser = 10 μm)
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
7
![Page 8: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
(1) “ Direct Method” compare M measured at different modes under same beam conditions observe upper limit on Mobserve upper limit on Mmeasmeas
Goals:
(2) “ Indirect Method” : evaluate each individual factor offline and “sum up”
represents the typical conditions of a particular period however …… hard to derive overall M reduction (only “worst limit “ ) ??
over-evaluate
σy
13/07/08
How to evaluate M reduction?
1st : suppress M reduction aim for Ctotal 〜 12nd: precisely evaluate any residual errors derive the “true beam size”
priorities
1) Obtain “overall” M reduction only apply to a particular data (2) (2) investigate a certain “unknown factor” investigate a certain “unknown factor” : (e.g. rel pos jitter, spatial coherence) however ,we must first …….however ,we must first …….clear up all other factors !!clear up all other factors !!Prove these factors are θ mode independentProve these factors are θ mode independent
ATF2 Topical Meeting8
![Page 9: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Error source M reduction factor
Fringe tilt (z, t)
Laser polarization Optimized to “S state” using λ / 2 plate
Relative position jitter
main theme of today’s talk !!
Phase drift under investigation
Spatial coherence under investigation , monitor by CCD (??)
Major bias if unattended to
Minor factorsprofile imbalance : negligible after focal lens scanned well power imbalance: power measured directly for each pathLaser path alignment : Resolution of mirror actuators aligning laser to beam
alignment precision is important
Could be major bias
ATF2 Topical Meeting
Spring 2013, 174 deg
drift : typically 30 - 70 mrad / min
Still quantitatively uncertain
Beamtime optimization by “tilt scan”
Individual M Reduction Factors
typical conditions of a particular period
13/07/08 9
Cleared up through measurements of laser polarization and half mirror reflective properties
![Page 10: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Deriving Relative Position Jitter Δy (phase Jitter Δφ)Deriving Relative Position Jitter Δy (phase Jitter Δφ)
10
Test validity of method using simulation
fix M from fringe scan to jitter plot
Plot signal jitter vs phase
(1) generate fringe scanAim for “realistic” ATF-like assumptions e.g. nominal σy = 70 nm, 174 deg S/N = 5, BG fluc = 20%, ICT = 1E9/bunch timing jitter, power jitter , ect…..
fringe scan
vertical jitter
σpos: horizontal jitter from Δy (Δφ)
(2) obtain Δy from fitting
Model
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
![Page 11: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Deriving Δy (Δφ) : Deriving Δy (Δφ) : Test of Method using SimulationTest of Method using Simulation
11
various Δy inputs ---
10% * σy
first 5 seeds
extracted ideal
Compare Nav = 100 and Nav = 10
extracted Δy agree with input within errors
35 % * σy 20% * σy
assume nominal σy = 70 nm
Nav = 10Nav = 100
test with 14 nm Δy input
first 5 seeds
also observed effect of input vertical jitters light jitter ( 〜 10%), S/N = 5 heavy jitter ( 〜 20%) , S/N = 2
signal jitters disturb precision in Δy extraction ( i.e. large errors)
less vulnerable for large statistics (e.g. Nav = 100)
M reduction from Δy
Δy inputs
Fitted M
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
![Page 12: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Deriving Δy (Δφ) : Deriving Δy (Δφ) : apply to actual dataapply to actual data
ATF2 Topical Meeting12
Note: • errors are only from fitting (we may have other systematic effects•Not enough (large Nav) data yet for drawing any conclusions
fix M from fringe scan to jitter plot
Δy = 71.0 +/- 15.9 nm Δφ = 434 .0 +/- 97.0 mrad
Fitted σy : 141.3 +8.9 – 9.0 nm
Corrected σy : 122.2 +10.2 – 10.1 nm
Fitted σy : 64.9 +2.7 – 2.5 nm
Corrected σy : 60.6 +2.8 – 2.7 nm
Δy = 23.2 +/- 9.6 nm Δφ = 549.0 +/- 177.4 mrad
M reduction due to Δy about 85 – 95% (?)
Nav = 100, 30 deg, 5/19
Nav = 10, 174 deg, 3/8
preliminary
preliminary
13/07/08
very preliminary attempts !!
no Nav = 100 data available for 174 deg
![Page 13: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Deriving Δy (Δφ) : Current StatusDeriving Δy (Δφ) : Current Status
possibly valid model for deriving Δy (Δφ) (???)BUT !!!!! be aware of limitations on reliability
When applied to actual data…….• Slow drifts, other large jitters, • conditions always changing•how realistic were assumptions in test simulation ??
how to apply this method reliably ?? resolve slow drifts (laser & e beam) and large jitters
take large Nav data occasionally under appropriate conditions•further development of method • optimize data taking scheme
Proposal / PlanProposal / Plan
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
13
![Page 14: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
laser polarization related issue are cleared up
Just after injection onto vertical table• very close to linearly S polarization • very little polarization related M reduction
polarization measurement
λ/ 2 plate setting
13/07/08
ATF2 Topical Meeting
90 deg cycle“P contamination”: Pp/Ps = (1.46± 0.06) %
Set-up
IPBSM laser optics is designed for pure linear S polarization
even more precise evaluation planned in autumn (hardware prepared)
individual measurements for upper and lower paths near IP
also measured reflective properties of “half mirror”
Rs = 50.3 %, Rp = 20.1 % Match catalog specifications !!
half mirror
14
power ratio
![Page 15: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
ATF2 Topical Meeting15
lower
“S peaks” (maximum M) also yield best power balance Minimize M reduction
15
S peak
P peak
45 deg between S and P
During Beamtime “λ/2 plate scan “ to maximize M
laser polarization and power balanceand power balance
Rotate λ/2 plate angle
lens
upper
power meter
investigate power balance: U vs L path
90 deg 180 deg
Rotate λ/2 plate and measure high power Immediately in front of final focus lenses
13/07/08
M reduction factor due to power imbalance
![Page 16: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Mismatch in axis between fringe and beam
transverse longitudinal
laser path observed on lens: precision ~ 0.5 mm (few mrad)
Fringe TiltFringe Tilt
issues: • Position drifts • e beam rotation in transv
Current method : “ tilt scan”fringe pitch / roll adjustment: Ctilt : 70 - 80% if uncorrected
directly use e beam as reference for tilt adjustment
16(study of fringe tilt by Okugi-san)
important adjustment to eliminate M reduction
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
ex fringe pitchM 0.07 0.32
Mirrors for adjusting tilt M174L Y
(8.9 mm 9.01 mm )
![Page 17: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
as an indispensible device for achieving ATF2 ‘s Goals
< Status > contribute with stable operation to continuous beam size tuning Consistent measurement of M 〜 0.3 ( 174 ° mode) at low beam intensity
correspond to σy ~ 65 nm (assuming no M reduction) after correction for relative position jitter : maybe 〜 60 nm ??
< dedicated studies of e beam and IPBSM errors > Clearing up of residual M reduction factors First attempts at evaluation of relative position jitter the most unknown and possibly most dominant error source ??
SummarySummary
ATF2 Topical Meeting
Maintain / improve beamtime performance : e.g. stability, precision continue to assess residual systematic errors. Especially focus on Δy derive the “true beam size” aim for stable measurements of σy < 50 nm within this run
GoalsGoals
Shintake Monitor (IPBSM)
Towards confirming σy = 37 nm
13/07/08 17
![Page 18: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
ATF2 Topical Meeting
Backup
13/07/08 18
![Page 19: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Deriving Δy (Δφ) : Deriving Δy (Δφ) : apply to actual dataapply to actual data very preliminary examples
M reduction due to Δy about 85 – 95%
Current Status:Current Status:
possibly valid model for deriving Δy (Δφ) (???)
BUT !!!!! be aware of limitations on reliability
When applied to actual data…….• Slow drifts, other large jitters, • conditions always changing•how realistic were assumptions in test simulation ??
how to apply this method reliably ?? resolve slow drifts (laser & e beam) and large jitters
take large Nav data occasionally under appropriate conditions•further development of method • optimize data taking scheme
Proposal / PlanProposal / Plan
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
19
![Page 20: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Crossing angle θ
174° 30° 8° 2°
Fringe pitch 266 nm 1.03 μm 3.81 μm 15.2 μm
Lower limit 20 nm 80 nm 350 nm 1.2 μm
Upper limit 110 nm 400 nm 1.4 μm 6 μm
)2/sin(2
ykd
M
dy
)cos(ln2
2
Measures σy* = 20 nm 〜 few μm with < 10% resolution
Expected PerformanceExpected Performance
select appropriate mode according to beam focusing
ATF2 Topical Meeting
σσyy and M and M for each θ modefor each θ mode
13/07/08 20
![Page 21: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Laser interference scheme
k_1
B_1
k_2
B_2
phase scan by optical delay
x
y
Θ
Φ
Time averages magnetic field causes inverse Compton scattering
・ phase shift at IP α・ wave number component along y-axis 2ky = 2k sin φ・ modulation depends on cosθ
S-polarized laser
Wave number vector of two laser paths
Fringe pitch
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
21
![Page 22: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Calculation of beam size
phase [rad]
Signal energy [a.u.]
0 2π
Save
Small beamLarge beam
Small beam size
S+
Large beam size
S-
Total signal energy measured by γ-detector
Convolution of ・ Laser magnetic field : Sine curve・ Electron beam profile : Gaussian
M : Modulation depth
Laser magnetic field Electron Beam profile with beam size σy along y-direction
S± : Max / Min of Signal energy
phase [rad]
Signal energy [a.u.]
0 2π
Save
Small beamLarge beam
Small beam size
S+
Large beam size
S-
phase [rad]
Signal energy [a.u.]
0 2π
Save
Small beamLarge beam
Small beam size
S+
Large beam size
S-
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
22
![Page 23: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
23
![Page 24: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Phase control by optical delay line
piezo stage
Optical delay line (~10 cm) Controlled by piezo stage
piezostage
laser beam
Δ stage
Movement by piezo stage : Δstage
Phase shift
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
24
![Page 25: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Other studies using IPBSMOther studies using IPBSM
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
25
Beam intensity scan
others: •Test various linear / nonlinear tuning knobs• IPBSM systematic error studies
“Reference Cavity scan” in high β region
(ex: 30 deg mode)
wakefield studies
Check linearity of BG levels in IPBSM detector Observe “steepness” of intensity dependence compare with other periods to test effects of orbit tuning and / or hardware improvement for wake suppression
(ex: 30 deg mode)beam intensity 5E9 / bunch
BG level
![Page 26: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
IPBSM phase drift studyIPBSM phase drift study 6/20-21by plotting initial phase of the last Bellows y pos scan (ICT : 1.5-2.5E9/bunch)
slight drift about 25 +/- 5 mrad convert to 3.3 – 5.0 nm / min at IP
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
26
![Page 27: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
27
![Page 28: Recent Results in Analysis of Errors in Fringe Scans by Shintake Monitor (IPBSM) ATF2 Topical Meeting July 8, 2013 KEK ATF2 Topical Meeting Jacqueline](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062409/5697bf841a28abf838c86f85/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
13/07/08ATF2 Topical Meeting
28