Upload
victor-loder
View
222
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Commissioning LHC Beam Instrumentation for Nominal
Bunch Intensities
Beam Commissioning Working Group
June 15th 2010
Rhodri Jones
(CERN Beam Instrumentation Group)
● Report from 2 MD periods● May 28th : 4 hours
● 1st go at● BPM reading v intensity studies● Studies on DCCT dependence on fill pattern● Calibration of various Fast BCT modes
● June 8th : 7 hours● 2nd go at
● BPM reading v intensity studies● Studies on DCCT dependence on fill patterns● Calibration of various Fact BCT modes
● 1st go at● Wire scanner timing calibration● BGI commissioning● PLL setting-up
● Current Status of Abort Gap Monitor
High Intensity BI LHC Commissioning
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
● BPMs work on bunch to bunch basis● Only depend on bunch intensity
● BPMs can be used in 2 sensitivity modes● High sensitivity
● From ~ 1×109 to ~5×1010
● Low sensitivity● From ~ 5×1010 to ~2×1011
● Only changes threshold for bunch detection● No gains changed● Required to make system immune from reflections generated by
imperfect cabling, connections & BPMs.
● 1st MD showed that● B2 behaved as expected● B1 had a grey zone between 3×1010 and 5×1010 where neither
sensitivity gave required results
Dependence of BPM Readings on Bunch Intensity
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
● One nominal bunch of 1×1011 slowly scraped away using a primary collimator
● Sensitivity constantly changed from high to low● Outliers due to acquisition overlapping two sensitivity ranges
● Sensitivity ranges seen to overlap as expected at around 5×1010
BPM Dependence on Intensity - Beam 2
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
02:21 02:35 02:48 03:01 03:15 03:280
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10x 10
10
UTC Time (2010-05-28)
Inte
nsity
(p/b
unch
)
B2 high sens
B2 low sens
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
x 1010
UTC Time (2010-05-28)
Inte
nsity
(p/b
unch
)
B2 high sens
B2 low sens
● One nominal bunch of 1×1011 slowly scraped away using a primary collimator● 2 fills – one for low sensitivity and
one for high sensitivity
BPM Dependence on Intensity - Beam 1
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
Low Sensitivity
High Sensitivity
Dead zone where neither setting works well
0 2 4 6 8 10 12×1010
0 2 4 6 8 10 12×1010
B1 Arc BPM variation - 5×1010 to 1×1011
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
Mean = 55mmStdev = 80mm
Mean = 53mmStdev = 76mm
B1 Arc BPM variation - 6×1010 to 1×1011
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
Mean = 11mmStdev = 50mm
Mean = 8mmStdev = 44mm
B1 LSS BPM variation - 6×1010 to 1×1011
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
Mean = 20mmStdev = 57mm
Mean = 15mmStdev = 74mm
B1 v B2 Comparison - 6×1010 to 1×1011
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
Mean = 8mmStdev = 44mm
Mean = 15mmStdev = 74mm
Arc BPMs
LSS BPMs
Mean = 21mmStdev = 60mm
Mean = 2mmStdev = 48mm
● BPM System● Max variation with intensity <200mm for 6×1010 to 1×1011
● Beam 1 behaviour in high sensitivity still to be understood for 3.5×1010 to 5×1010
● Hypothesis that intensity card is influencing B1 power supplies
● Oustanding Issues● Temperature variations (~50mm / °C)
● New software being tested to correct for this on-line● Influence of other beam on directional BPMs in the IRs
● New firmware & software using synchronous mode & bunch selection being tested to overcome this
● May also help overcome B1 issues in high sensitivity
BPM System Conclusions
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
● At these intensities the fast BCTs behave as expected
● As in SPS small % is measured in neighbouring 25ns slot
● No impact observed from bunch length variations● 250ps to 150 ps sigma
Fast BCTs at 2×1010 protons per bunch
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
● Saturation observed during first MD● Technical stop used to install attenuators for system B● Response tested during second MD
Saturation of the Fast BCT
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
System A Bunch Sum Intensity
(High Bandwidth ) loses track at
~6×1010
System B with added attenuators
Bunch Sum Intensity stays in agreement with the DCCT
Time
Tota
l Int
ensi
ty
● No issues observed with 2×1010 protons per bunch
● At 1×1011 the DCCT measurement using its highest gain range becomes dependent on the filling pattern
DCCT Performance (1/2)
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
2×1010 per injection 1×1011 per injection
Bunch at 1001
Bunch at 3001
Bunch at 11001
Grey = DCCTBlue = Fast LowBWRed = Fast HighBW (suffering from saturation)
● At 1×1011 the DCCT measuring in gain range 3 seems insensitive to the filling pattern
DCCT Performance (2/2)
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
Dashed Blue = What it should beGreen = BCTDC A toggling from range 3 to 4Gray = BCTDC B toggling from range 3 to 4
● Fast BCT System● Add attenuators to operational systems suring next technical stop
● Ensure that this only affects the high bandwidth channel and not the low bandwidth providing the beam presence flag
● Need to understand the remaining calibration issues● Why raw calibration still needs tweaking to align fast BCT with DCCT● The cause and effect of the signal tail in the trailing 25ns slot
● Fast BCT dependence on bunch length● Look carefully at response during ramp when no longitudinal blow-up is applied to verify
that observed intensity variations with bunch length were due to saturation
● DCCT System● Switch to gain range 3 just above 1×1011 protons to avoid fill pattern
dependence● Currently investigating possibility to eliminate Range 4 for SMP data
● Investigations continuing for source of this problem
● Correcting the intensity stored in the logging database● Requested by experiments● Currently working with CO to store corrected data in logging
● Correction of known errors – e.g. DC offset & fast BCT signal tail
BCT System Conclusions
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
● test
Wirescanner StudiesSignal Dependence on Acquisition Delay
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
B2 Horizontal
B2 Vertical1
50
100
800
50
1
1000
800Slot number
Need to space bunches by ~900 slots to measure individual sizes
Slot selection now available from OP app.
● Started testing without beam● Effect of emergency
HV shutdown on pressure
● Various scenarios tested
● One set of parameters led to a pressure rise to
10-6 mbar● Resulted in vacuum
valve closure
Rest Gas Ionisation Monitor (BGI) Commissioning
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
● Conclusion● Emergency HV shutdown procedure will be modified to ensure
that it does not lead to a rise in pressure which could close the valves & dump the beam
● First images seen with 2 bunches of 1×1011 protons
● Gas pressure of 10-8 mbar
● Tests then carried out on signal level with respect to main parameters● MCP voltage, gas pressure etc.● Not possible to vary the BGI magnet current (interlock issue to be followed-up)
First Images from the BGI
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
● BBQ sensitivity is so good PLL has been put on back burner but it does have advantages
● Less likely to jump onto spurious peaks● Can track tune without need for predefined windows● May be easier to make compatible with damper● Has built-in demodulation for chromaticity
measurement
● Beam 2:● Only one scan was possible in time allowed ● The scan was performed with debris of other tests
(very low intensity)!● Measurement indicates SNR better in H than V
● Would have been easy to obtain stable lock on either
● Poor look of V plane phase an artifact of wraparound due to incorrect phase offset correction
● Beam 1:● Just few minutes available for tests on this beam● Not possible to excite with the PLL system
● Hardware being investigated
Tune PLL Commissioning
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
● A bug in the software of the LHC abort gap monitor combined with insufficient hardware interlocks led to irreparable damage to both of the installed photomultiplier tubes (PMTs)
● 2 PMTs with 2 new amplifiers have been installed● A CERN spare and one kindly provided by the LARP collaboration
(Berkeley)● Spare PMT has lower sensitivity probably due to ageing
● Not an issue for operation
● 3 new PMTs have been ordered to arrive this summer
● New HV power supplies with output limitation are at CERN● SW to control them currently being developed & tested
● The abort gap monitor is operational again for both beams● It will be only be possible/safe to put the AG system into an automated
mode after replacing the power supplies (next tech stop)● Working at fixed Voltage only has small impact on system operation
Status of the LHC Abort Gap Monitors
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
Status of the LHC Abort Gap Monitors
Beam Commissioning Working Group – 15th June 2010 Rhodri Jones
Little difference between expected signal at 450GeV and at 3.5TeV