Optimization Objectives Top Level Questions • 10 MeV – Incorporate studies on operability, cost etc. • 50 MeV – More stringent beam specs Þ Optimize 50 MeV design including beam specs & all other performance/cost metrics Þ Solution should work for 10 MeV beam requirements Þ What about June? Some Prerequisites: • Realistic and Optimal components (Standardized?) • Firm up beam specs out of Gun (as much as
19
Embed
Optimization Objectives Top Level Questions 10 MeV Incorporate studies on operability, cost etc. 50 MeV More stringent beam specs Optimize 50 MeV.
Structuree of the Optimization Program Currently : Optimizer InstructionsConfig. Astra Needed : Optimizer Config. Instructions Astra Module Implementation is reasonably straightforward Optimal Set
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Optimization Objectives
Top Level Questions
• 10 MeV – Incorporate studies on operability, cost etc.• 50 MeV – More stringent beam specs
Þ Optimize 50 MeV design including beam specs & all other performance/cost metrics
Þ Solution should work for 10 MeV beam requirementsÞ What about June?
Some Prerequisites:
• Realistic and Optimal components (Standardized?)• Firm up beam specs out of Gun (as much as possible)• Outstanding benchmarking issues• Optimizer driving Track• Beam from photocathode?
Current state
• Prototypes exist in various design codes at 10 MeV (Target: March 20)
• Optimization driver extension (multiple-modules) in progress (New task)
Next
• Finalize on objectives (Target: March 20) • Take care of prerequisites (Some old, some new)• 50 MeV prototypes? (New task, partly existing)
Extended optimizer will be used to
• Refine prototypes• Look for global optimum
Structuree of the Optimization Program
Currently:
Optimizer
Instructions Config.
Astra
Needed:
Optimizer
Config.
Instructions
Astra
Module
Module
Module Module
Implementation is reasonably straightforward
Optimal Set
Optimization Objective
Beam propertiesLow bunch charge scenario High bunch charge scenario
Bunch charge 16 pc 100 pc
Rep rate 650 MHz <100 MHz
Energy 10 MeV 50 MeV
Emittance 50 m (4 RMS Norm.) 10 m (RMS Norm.)
Beam size (95%) 5 mm on target ??
Bunch length 1ps
Momentum spread 10-3
Max. beam envelope x<5 mm for E>2 MeV?
Halo/Particle loss ??
Optimization ObjectiveBeam properties
• Emittance, size, E/E, correlation, phase space parameters• Halo, particle loss Use 95% envelope etc. (Other measure for halo?)• Parameter at strategic locations / Global limits (x<5 mm for E>2 MeV?)
Transport properties Operability• 6D response matrix to determine diagnostic/tuning effectiveness
Geometry – Mainly through constraints
Components• Strength within operable range (constraint?)• Reality check• Different “species” of elements
Cost• Construction• Operation
Robustness• Error sensitivity
Need to distinguish between objective and constraint
Need other “Evaluators”
Components • Reasonable operating range of identified components• Necessary for standardized components
Geometry – Mainly through constraints
Cost - Need to formulate
Robustness - Separate study
High rightness option motivated hardware decisions (gun, 7-cell, ...) Continuation with standardized elements Realistic layout with diagnostic/control - to be translated to
quantitative design specsScope of PAC paper and how far we are from it.
High rightness option motivated hardware decisions
• Gun 200 keV•May be necessary given current optimization results• Does not impact 16 pC configuration (so far)
• 7-Cell Cavity •More efficient HOM damping• Only relevant for high brightness•Will change 16 pC configuration
• Decision is preferable before launching into next level of design detail to avoid retrofit.• Same with all other components (time to freeze into standard
ones)• Still keep several prototypes, but with specs spelled out to the
best of known optimum
Understanding operation/tuning requirements in detail Requirement on design parameters (Mij’s, ’s, ……) Requirement on physical dimensions
These are most likely the driving factors of the photo-fission design
What/Where Measure Control
BaselineBeam current Energy at 10 MeVEnergy at 50 MeVPhase at buncherPhase at SRF cavitiesOrbit (Everywhere)Phase SpaceLongitudinal phase space after buncher z:
dP/P:z:dP/P:
Longitudinal phase space at 10 MeV z:dP/P:
z:dP/P:
Transverse phase space after buncher <Xi Xj> <Xi Xj>
Transverse phase space after cpatures <Xi Xj> <Xi Xj>
Transverse phase space at 10 MeV <Xi Xj> <Xi Xj>Transverse phase space at 50 MeV <Xi Xj> <Xi Xj>TransportTransport properties – Longitudinal(<1 MeV)
Mij Mij
Transport properties – Transverse(Everywhere)
Mij Mij Cylindrical symmetry all the way?
Transport properties / Operability What to measure? What to control? Where? To What accuracy?
Operation/Tuning Scheme for the first 10 MeV
Physical Dimension?
5 FEET
Again, maybe time to incorporate such considerations into the basic layout before launching into next level detail• Avoid inoperable final design• Avoid having to redesign from scratch due to dimension