Eurzion Task 4.1 Status:
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
M4.1.6 (M42 July 2023, ESRF) Assess feasibility of experimental validation on EBS or PETRA III.
M4.1.4 (M36 Jan 2023, DESY) Beam Diagnostics: Definition of the work organization for beam diagnostics studies
M4.1.5 (M42 Jul 2023, ESRF) Beam Diagnostics: Selection of the shaker device
D4.1.1 (M38 March 2023, ESRF) Preliminary technical report with proof of principle validation on simplified test cases
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.
SL Simone Liuzzo YES
LH Lina Hoummi YES
KS Kees Scheidt YES
BR Benoit Roche YES
EB Elena Buratin YES
FE Friederike Ewald YES
SW Simon White YES
IA Ilya Agapov YES
HS Holger Schlarb NO
GK Gero Kube YES
SJ Szymon Jablonski NO
SP Sven Pfeiffer YES
SM Sajjad Mirza YES
introduction of people
intro to Eurizon
initially we gave info for USSR storage ring and got financements for Post-Doc in change.
Now we continue among european institutes to keep the financing of the Post-Docs already working.
Harald Reichert proposed to work on a shaker device with DESY for PETRAIV .
Then in contact with Sven Pfeiffer to specify what is needed for PETRAIV.
One year only is left for this activity.
In order to continue to get the founding we need to continue with EURIZON.
We are always very happy to collaborate with other colleagues. In this case we have in addition to fit the milestones and deliverables.
Even if the Milestones and deliverables state ESRF/DESY we are both involved in the tasks.
Sven Pfeiffer added a few tasks: simulation tasks and emittance monitor selection.
Presentation by KS
ESRF thinks we are not involved with task 2 and 3
we are involved and have experience with task 4 and 5
IA asks: vertical emittance for ID gap variation
SL and BR: no, mainly for lifetime.
FE: for horizontal emittance, movements of ID have little impact. but radiation does change the emittance (reduce it) a feed back may be used to keep it a fixed value.
Sven Pfiffer: simulations to have basic understanding of what to do.
IA: according to the foreseen vertical emittance, may need large coupling ratios (due to the small horizontal emittance)
SP: one additional task for simulations. To get the idea of the amplitude of the exitaction needed. Are these simulations needed?
BR: without running simulations the needed exictation amplitude is rather small. The amplitude is of the same order of that used by the bunch by bunch feedback.
Frequency range, is the same range of the tune frequencies.
Shaker is more powerfull and acts only on the lower few modes.
Interaction with other system: strong with bunch by bunch feedback (opposite action).
In the case of ESRF, we most of the time do not use bunch by bunch feedback. Just need more power on the withe noise excitation to overcome the dumping done by the BbB feedback.
KS: chromaticity also gets in the game.
BR: chromaticity plays a crucial role. Simulations may be needed to understand.
SP + IA: PETRAIV plans possible operation at chroma (0,0).
IA: who will do the simulations? we have a simulation of multibunch feedback.
KS: may be it does not enter in the work package?
Also for Task 3, ESRF does not need to give support.
GK: shows slides for Emittance monitor studies.
Try to get to 0.1microm resolution.
For Energy spread, need at least 2 beamlines.
Visible not ok. Use 2x 3PW in ID straight section.
Use pinhole system + fresnel difractometry.
Presently data rate limited by network. Hope to get update rate at 50Hz at least (target). May be intensity will be too low, so lower frequency of data.
FE: sometimes when current is low several tens of milliseconds are needed. However data treatement is the limiting factor. The fastest possible is a cycle at 15Hz. If you have better solutions, we are interested.
At higher intensity we could be faster, but still limited by data analysis.
GK: could test in lab 50Hz signal processing. Soon will test with beam.
BR: using regular CPUS?
GK: yes. However we are discussing the use of GPUs and FPGA options.
FE: which FPGA?
GK: not on the camera. For the pinhole 2D gaussian fit.
FE: interesting, for ESRF 2D fitting has been tested few years ago and it is even slower.
KS: why using 2x 3PW ?
GK: each one is dedicated to 1 of the 2 diagnostics beamlines on the same canted ID.
KS: DESY-ESRF also in transfer of knowledge concerning magnets. You count on the 3PW as provided by J.Chavanne (not in EURIZON)?
GK: magnet people are in contact with J.Chavanne.
IA: J.Chavanne is collaborating, but no more news.
KS: we know that ESRF is waiting for a signature of memorandum of understanding concerning magnets. Only for curiosity.
About HArald reichert. What is his position at DESY? any interaction with him.
IA: Harald Reichert is project leader. mostly photon science. Bartolini for accelerators.
Not involved anymore in eurizon.
KS: only one mittance monitor?
GK: no, two beamlines in parallel all the time.
SP: task 3 will be done by DESY, in contact with GK.
KS: tasks 4 and 5, it could be very interesting if you could come to visit.
SP: yes it would be interesting. also GK would like to join.
KS: when could it be? January?
SP: deadlines till end of January.
GK: first half of January 2 days visit.
SP: first half of January also ok.
KS: till 16th January no beam. You can chose. GK and SP will join.
KS: should we remove tasks 2,3?
IA: let's keep them as they are related. but move them in time by about 4 month.
KS: task 3 is needed.
SP: we keep the task but is only DESY.
GK: will get in contact with FE about how to manifacture target.
IA: DESY beam dynamics group will do the simulations but it will take time and there are other deadlines already set. So the task should be shifted in time. Simulations may also need to include bunch by bunch feedback if there is interaction as mentioned by BR.
BR: BbB feedback simulations may be very heavy.
IA: Task 2 will be done by DESY.
KS: will finalize the Work organization within the next few weeks with email exchanges.
Next meeting could be in January. Potentially in Hybrid mode, so every one can join.
KS: please do not esitate to ask about specific aspect (shaker). Already several informations available in the presentation to start discussion.
SP: latest mid January we plan next meeting.
work organization almost completed.
Tasks 2 SP+IA displaced in time due to other deadlines.
Task 3 (SP + GK)
ESRF and DESY will work on Task 4 and 5 (BR + SP + GK)
Discussion will start with a visit at the latests mid Januray