Difference between revisions of "Beamline, Radiator and Dump"

From Ciswikidb
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(29 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
= '''Songsheet and Nomenclature''' =  
 
= '''Songsheet and Nomenclature''' =  
  
* Design, installation and released mechanical drawings (dipole + beam line) are here \group\bubble\grames
+
* Design, installation and released mechanical drawings (dipole + beam line) (change .txt to .tar): [[media:Bubble_Beamline_Drawings.txt]] (also here \group\bubble\grames)
 
* Songsheet and nomenclature [[media:ACC2008000-1100.pdf]]
 
* Songsheet and nomenclature [[media:ACC2008000-1100.pdf]]
  
Line 7: Line 7:
  
 
= '''6 mm Cu Radiator/Dump''' =
 
= '''6 mm Cu Radiator/Dump''' =
 +
* Realistic Thermal Analysis:
 +
# Updated spreadsheet with energy deposition at 9.5 and 5 MeV beam energies (first 2 sheets have data binned in 1mm intervals both in Z direction and radially, third sheet has 5 MeV data in 0.5mm bins). All deposited power adds up to about 85% of the beam power. These models assume Gaussian beam with sigma=0.2mm (G. Kharashvili): [[media:radiator_power.xlsx]]
 +
# Analysis results (F. Fors): [[media:Bubble_Chamber_Thermal_FF082015.pdf]] [[media:Bubble_Chamber_Thermal_FF082015.pptx]]
  
* Drawing: [[media:JL0015733_rad_dump.pdf]]
+
* Drawing: [[media:JL0015733 CU RADIATOR WINDOW ASSY.pdf]]
* Thermal Analysis: [[media:ThermalAna_IDL5D01.pdf]]  
+
* Thermal Analysis: [[media:ThermalAna_IDL5D01.pdf]]
 +
* Approved to run up to 10 µA or 100 W (September 2014)
 
* LCW flow to radiator/dump was measured with:
 
* LCW flow to radiator/dump was measured with:
 
# a flow-meter and was found to be 0.9 GPM
 
# a flow-meter and was found to be 0.9 GPM
Line 32: Line 36:
 
= '''Model''' =
 
= '''Model''' =
  
* Elegant (Tennet - September 2015): [[media:BubbleChamber.ele.Sept.txt]] [[media:BubbleChamber.lte.Sept.txt]] [[media:BubbleChamber_FIT.ele.txt]] [[media:Bubble_Chamber_Twiss_Trends.xlsx]]
+
* Elegant (Tennant - September 2015): [[media:BubbleChamber.ele.Sept.txt]] [[media:BubbleChamber.lte.Sept.txt]] [[media:BubbleChamber_FIT.ele.txt]] [[media:Bubble_Chamber_Twiss_Trends.xlsx]]
  
* Elegant (Tennet - December 2013): [[media:BubbleChamber.ele.txt]] [[media:BubbleChamber.lte.txt]]  
+
* Elegant (Tennant - December 2013): [[media:BubbleChamber.ele.txt]] [[media:BubbleChamber.lte.txt]]
 +
 
 +
* ''Summary of the Transverse Beam Characterization Measurements in the CEBAF 5 MeV Region: 2014-2015''
 +
C. Tennant et al. (18 December 2015): [[media:TN-15-052.pdf]] [[media:TN-15-052.docx]]
 +
 
 +
 
 +
= '''2K vesus 4K''' =
 +
* ''4 K SRF Operation of the 10 MeV CEBAF Photo-Injector''
 +
G. Eremeev, M. Drury, J. Grames, R. Kazimi, M. Poelker, J. Preble, R. Suleiman, Y. Wang, and M.Wright,
 +
Proceedings of 28th Linear Accelerator Conference, LINAC 2016, East Lansing, MI: [[media:Linac16_moplr010.pdf]]
  
  
Line 75: Line 88:
 
* Cu Collimator: [[media:Bubble_Cu_Collimator.pdf]]
 
* Cu Collimator: [[media:Bubble_Cu_Collimator.pdf]]
 
* Al Photon Dump: [[media:Al_Photon_Dump.pdf]]
 
* Al Photon Dump: [[media:Al_Photon_Dump.pdf]]
 +
 +
-----
 +
  
  
Line 82: Line 98:
 
# Is the 5mm diameter what we want to use?
 
# Is the 5mm diameter what we want to use?
 
# Is the size of the photon dump reasonable? Do we need the hole in the photon dump or we can be fine with just a block of Al. Does this whole service any purpose? I thought of it to try to contain any back scattered electrons. Can Argonne make the photon dump?
 
# Is the size of the photon dump reasonable? Do we need the hole in the photon dump or we can be fine with just a block of Al. Does this whole service any purpose? I thought of it to try to contain any back scattered electrons. Can Argonne make the photon dump?
 +
 +
 +
 +
= '''First Radiator: Copper Conflat Flange''' =
 +
* Drawing: [[media:ACC2008000-1000.pdf]]
 +
* Photos:
 +
 +
 +
:: [[file:170127_Rad1.jpeg|left|300px|]]
 +
:: [[file:170127_Rad2.jpeg|center|300px|]]

Latest revision as of 08:58, 31 October 2023

Songsheet and Nomenclature


6 mm Cu Radiator/Dump

  • Realistic Thermal Analysis:
  1. Updated spreadsheet with energy deposition at 9.5 and 5 MeV beam energies (first 2 sheets have data binned in 1mm intervals both in Z direction and radially, third sheet has 5 MeV data in 0.5mm bins). All deposited power adds up to about 85% of the beam power. These models assume Gaussian beam with sigma=0.2mm (G. Kharashvili): media:radiator_power.xlsx
  2. Analysis results (F. Fors): media:Bubble_Chamber_Thermal_FF082015.pdf media:Bubble_Chamber_Thermal_FF082015.pptx
  1. a flow-meter and was found to be 0.9 GPM
  2. a bucket and was found to be 2.0 GPM
  • LCW temperature is 40°C


Photon Cu Collimator


Photon Al Dump


Documentation


Model

  • Summary of the Transverse Beam Characterization Measurements in the CEBAF 5 MeV Region: 2014-2015

C. Tennant et al. (18 December 2015): media:TN-15-052.pdf media:TN-15-052.docx


2K vesus 4K

  • 4 K SRF Operation of the 10 MeV CEBAF Photo-Injector

G. Eremeev, M. Drury, J. Grames, R. Kazimi, M. Poelker, J. Preble, R. Suleiman, Y. Wang, and M.Wright, Proceedings of 28th Linear Accelerator Conference, LINAC 2016, East Lansing, MI: media:Linac16_moplr010.pdf


DL Magnet





Old Drawings

  • The electron beam hitting the radiator will be roughly 0.2 mm diameter. We will allow for 5 mm diameter sweet spot. Using beam position monitors we will know the beam position on the radiator to about 1 mm.
  • This 5 mm diameter and a 10 mm diameter in the center of the bubble chamber will define a cone. This way we can determine the size of the holes in the collimator. This cone extend all the way to the photon dump.
  • The table where the radiator and collimator sit will be made of Al and the frame that hold the collimator will be made of Al, too.



Bubble Beamline elev 1.jpg


Bubble Beamline elev 2.jpg


Bubble Cu radiator.jpg





  • Questions:
  1. Is the assumption about the cone fine. Do want the 10 mm diameter be at the center of the bubble chamber or at the end of the chamber entrance collimator.
  2. Is the 5mm diameter what we want to use?
  3. Is the size of the photon dump reasonable? Do we need the hole in the photon dump or we can be fine with just a block of Al. Does this whole service any purpose? I thought of it to try to contain any back scattered electrons. Can Argonne make the photon dump?


First Radiator: Copper Conflat Flange


170127 Rad1.jpeg
170127 Rad2.jpeg