Difference between revisions of "PPB - April 12, 2023"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
*** emittance cuts do not change this very much despite increase in beam size | *** emittance cuts do not change this very much despite increase in beam size | ||
*** deposited power favors thinner targets (but thermal conductivity may not?) | *** deposited power favors thinner targets (but thermal conductivity may not?) | ||
| − | ** Chicane layout and integration into existing space | + | ** Chicane layout and integration into existing space: mostly determined by space constraints |
| + | *** [[File:20230412_092102.jpg|500px]] | ||
*** after 0L02, make use of existing DP can, fast valve, at least 2 quads | *** after 0L02, make use of existing DP can, fast valve, at least 2 quads | ||
*** could start at 5D line, gives us BCM and third quad for free, but perhaps not enough space | *** could start at 5D line, gives us BCM and third quad for free, but perhaps not enough space | ||
*** to use existing viewer, harp, quads, and FC2: reinject before ITV0L03? | *** to use existing viewer, harp, quads, and FC2: reinject before ITV0L03? | ||
| − | *** | + | ** whole chicane should work with 7 MeV electrons, but east leg must be achromatic on its own |
| + | ** RF positron capture does not seem viable (cost, power, time, space, everything) | ||
| + | ** Rough grocery list | ||
| + | *** west leg: 2 DL dipoles (scavenged), 1 valve, 4 correctors, 1+ BPM, 3 QD quads (2 can be easily scavenged). This is assuming achromatic design like UITF, but length is a problem (~ 2.5 m). Can choose to ignore dispersion... There are various design choices but no risks. | ||
| + | *** [[File:20230412_092115.jpg|500px]] | ||
| + | *** target line: 2 quads, 2 BPMs, 2+ correctors, 1 DP can, 1 valve, target, 2 solenoids, 2 apertures. No risks up to target, then dependent on capture simulation | ||
| + | *** east leg: needs lots of simulation to determine what we need; at least 2 special dipoles (maybe CFM), 1 aperture, 1 lens, 1 valve | ||
| + | *** [[File:20230412_092124.jpg|500px]] | ||
| + | *** 20+ magnet channels necessitates extra trim rack in ISB? | ||
| + | *** vacuum pumps TBD but likely not negligible | ||
* Status from target working group | * Status from target working group | ||
* Bob - status of SRF toy model | * Bob - status of SRF toy model | ||
Revision as of 08:40, 12 April 2023
Meeting Coordinates
- On-site => Wednesdays @ 11am EDT in TL-2236
- Zoom => https://jlab-org.zoomgov.com/j/1616149761?pwd=SDJKY3NhWEtBOUR5MVR5RlY1R1pHdz09&from=addon
Agenda
- IPAC'23 - Joe, Amy, Reza, Eric - Which day is your poster? Plan to circulate poster and proceedings?
- Max - Status of PEPPo-II LDRD proposal
- Andriy's simulations
- max e+ yield 6e-4 at 1 mm thickness
- emittance cuts do not change this very much despite increase in beam size
- deposited power favors thinner targets (but thermal conductivity may not?)
- Chicane layout and integration into existing space: mostly determined by space constraints
- after 0L02, make use of existing DP can, fast valve, at least 2 quads
- could start at 5D line, gives us BCM and third quad for free, but perhaps not enough space
- to use existing viewer, harp, quads, and FC2: reinject before ITV0L03?
- whole chicane should work with 7 MeV electrons, but east leg must be achromatic on its own
- RF positron capture does not seem viable (cost, power, time, space, everything)
- Rough grocery list
- west leg: 2 DL dipoles (scavenged), 1 valve, 4 correctors, 1+ BPM, 3 QD quads (2 can be easily scavenged). This is assuming achromatic design like UITF, but length is a problem (~ 2.5 m). Can choose to ignore dispersion... There are various design choices but no risks.
- target line: 2 quads, 2 BPMs, 2+ correctors, 1 DP can, 1 valve, target, 2 solenoids, 2 apertures. No risks up to target, then dependent on capture simulation
- east leg: needs lots of simulation to determine what we need; at least 2 special dipoles (maybe CFM), 1 aperture, 1 lens, 1 valve
- 20+ magnet channels necessitates extra trim rack in ISB?
- vacuum pumps TBD but likely not negligible
- Andriy's simulations
- Status from target working group
- Bob - status of SRF toy model
- Any other business...
Upcoming
- April 19 - Joint meeting with PWG
- May 7-13 - IPAC'23 (Joe, Amy, Reza, Eric)
- May 15-19 - LCWS (Andriy, Carlos)