Powered by Indico
v3.2.8
31st March 2023: ammendment approved
Done:
M4.1.1 (M30 July 2022, DESY) Identify common beam physics interests, define necessary software developments
M4.1.2 (M30 July 2022, DESY) Definition of the work organisation for beam dynamics studies
M4.1.3 (M32 September 2022, ESRF) Define work organisation and contributors to the tasks identified in M4.1.1
M4.1.4 (M36 Jan 2023, DESY) Beam Diagnostics: Definition of the work organization for beam diagnostics studies
D4.1.1 (M38 March 2023, ESRF) Preliminary technical report with proof of principle validation on simplified test cases
To do:
M4.1.5 (M42 Jul 2023, ESRF) Beam Diagnostics: Selection of the shaker device
D4.1.2 (M48, January 2024, DESY) Final technical report with detailed beam dynamics studies and documentation for EBS and/or PETRA IV
D4.1.3 (M48, Januray 2024 DESY) Technical report on beam diagnostics studies with detailed documentation.
12th June 2023
Eurizon Task 4.1
participants:
SL Simone Liuzzo YES
LH Lina Hoummi NO
SW Simon White NO
LC Lee Carver NO
NC Nicola Carmignani YES
IA Ilya Agapov NO
JK Joachim Keil NO
TH Thorsten Hellert NO
BV Bianca Veglia NO
LM Lukas Malina NO
EM Elaf Musa NO
MB Micahel BOESE NO
Zhe Zhang NO
Ryan Russel NO
For diag meetings:
HS Holger Schlarb NO
GK Gero Kube YES
SJ Szymon Jablonski YES
SP Sven Pfeiffer YES
SM Sajjad Mirza YES
KS Kees Scheidt NO
BR Benoit Roche YES
EB Elena Buratin YES
FE Friederike Ewald YES
Meeting for Diagnostics
presentation from Sven Pfeiffer
update from January.
M4.1.5 was supposed to be late, due to simulations. stripline kicker or shaker?
different shaker for beam blow up for electron dump.
stripline kicker designed
tilted stripline? Advise of ESRF ?
no answer yet from the Beam physics group concerning amplitude and frequency range needed.
NOt yet possible to answer M4.1.5
interaction MBFB - emittance shaker
B.Roche: thanks for nice presentation. Emittance control is the task. You mention that operation will be at zero chromaticity. This is not compatible with emittance blow-up. It will be difficult to help if the operation is at zero chromaticity.
S.P.: we have to keep in mind that zero chroma operation will be done (request from direction) but likely operation at >5 units. We are waiting for simulations in order to state from which chroma we can use emittance stabilization with shaker. Also checking what is the impact of emittance control in presence of other active system (as MBFB).
B.R. : thinks that the strengths of the shakers of MBFB will be enough based on EBS experience. no need to blow up a lot the emittance. Only 10pm (still very small) is needed. Needs small power. 8 striplines in a row, seem far more than needed.
S.P. : some striplines already obsolete.
S.P. : Would it be usefull to have a plot vertical emittance vs vertical shaker strength.
B.R. : at ESRF wide band of noise, convenient not to select the tune exactly. If narrower signal, less power, but more sensitive. The plot is ratio emittance increase vs dipolar oscillation vs chromaticity.
S.L. : simulations may not be run (for ESRF direction).
N.C. : no updates on simulations, measurement on machine during MDT. The measurement was linked to EURIZON task. measurement of coherent oscillations vs chromaticity. Results will be shown in a week from now. may be sharing a presentation. The measurements is confirming the expected simulations. may be not exactly quantitatively.
zero chromaticity could be operated without MBFB with up to 10mA stored (else instability).
S.P. : can we run the code from N.C.?
N.C. : the code can be shared. Not difficult to integrate. AT based. AT "fastring" is used. Will clean the code and write a few comments before sharing.
M4.1.5 not possible to complete in time due to lack of simulations. in September it will be fine likely. (M45) 3 month delay.
Next meeting around 25th September
S.P. asks size of deliverable due in Jan 2024.
S.L. small summary document with some figures. 5-10 pages at most.
S.P. will send slides