Difference between revisions of "CPS meeting - March 11, 2022"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
* The main discussion today was around the large vertical beam deflection is the vertical direction which amounted to 2.5mm at the location of the beryllium target. | * The main discussion today was around the large vertical beam deflection is the vertical direction which amounted to 2.5mm at the location of the beryllium target. | ||
* Vitaly identify that this deflection was due to the magnet field through which the electrons go before hitting the radiator. He fired the electrons just before the radiator to avoid the magnetic field before the radiator, and the vertical deflection was gone. | * Vitaly identify that this deflection was due to the magnet field through which the electrons go before hitting the radiator. He fired the electrons just before the radiator to avoid the magnetic field before the radiator, and the vertical deflection was gone. | ||
| − | * It was suggested to pull the radiator back | + | * It was suggested to pull the radiator back juts before the yoke (z=-41cm) for the next simulation and see if there is still any significant deflection. If there is still a deflection it might be dealt with a magnet, a new one or the existing 5C11B correcting magnets. |
* Hovanes asked if the multiple scattering was enabled in the FLUKA simulations since it should define the photon beam size at the beryllium target. Vitaly thinks that it is enabled. | * Hovanes asked if the multiple scattering was enabled in the FLUKA simulations since it should define the photon beam size at the beryllium target. Vitaly thinks that it is enabled. | ||
* Moskov argued that the fact that there is an non-zero angle between the photon beam and the z-axis can be beneficial for the K_long flux going from the beryllium target to the hydrogen target. But he would need to do some calculations or simulations to quantify that. Potentially this angle could be accommodated if it is not too large. | * Moskov argued that the fact that there is an non-zero angle between the photon beam and the z-axis can be beneficial for the K_long flux going from the beryllium target to the hydrogen target. But he would need to do some calculations or simulations to quantify that. Potentially this angle could be accommodated if it is not too large. | ||
| + | |||
=Action items = | =Action items = | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Check for a new model from Gaby (Hovanes). | ||
| + | * Check the sign of the magnetic field. | ||
| + | * FLUKA simulation with radiator at z=-41cm. (Vitaly) | ||
| + | * FLUKA simulations with FWHM=0.52mm t determine energy deposition profile in the center of CPS. (Vitaly) | ||
| + | * Check the value of the photon beam angle needed with respect to z-axis to improve the Kaon flux at the LH2 target. (Moskov) | ||
| + | |||
= Instructions for joining = | = Instructions for joining = | ||
Revision as of 16:11, 11 March 2022
Agenda
- Announcements
- Introduction (Hovanes)
- Simulation updates (Vitaly)
- Discussions and other business
Minutes
- Hovanes announced that these meetings will occur every two weeks to deal with CPS technical design for Hall D. These are not replacements for CPS general monthly collaboration meeting organized by Tanya, but an addition to them. Significant results from these Hall D meetings will be presented at the general monthly meeting.
- Introduction (Hovanes)
- Hovanes presented the near term plan for CPS adaption.
- The highest priority was to confirm that the Hall C design could be adopted without changing the design of the magnet.
- The possible changes are increase of the beam-hole in x and y.
- Eugene emphasized that all this assumptions about doubling the RMSs to compensate for the doubling of the power need to be proven with simulations.
- See Hovanes' presentation
- FLUKA simulations (Vitaly)
- Vitaly ran FLUKA to determine the energy deposition in the CPS copper core with 12GeV and narrow beam size (FWHM=0.45mm for x and y and FWHM=0.05mm for x and y).
- The electron beam must have been deflected upward in the simulations, so the sign of the field may need to checked. It is easy to do, according to Vitaly.
- The peak of the energy deposition is at around z=+5cm. This is close what Hall C simulation were producing with 60cm magnet.
- The main discussion today was around the large vertical beam deflection is the vertical direction which amounted to 2.5mm at the location of the beryllium target.
- Vitaly identify that this deflection was due to the magnet field through which the electrons go before hitting the radiator. He fired the electrons just before the radiator to avoid the magnetic field before the radiator, and the vertical deflection was gone.
- It was suggested to pull the radiator back juts before the yoke (z=-41cm) for the next simulation and see if there is still any significant deflection. If there is still a deflection it might be dealt with a magnet, a new one or the existing 5C11B correcting magnets.
- Hovanes asked if the multiple scattering was enabled in the FLUKA simulations since it should define the photon beam size at the beryllium target. Vitaly thinks that it is enabled.
- Moskov argued that the fact that there is an non-zero angle between the photon beam and the z-axis can be beneficial for the K_long flux going from the beryllium target to the hydrogen target. But he would need to do some calculations or simulations to quantify that. Potentially this angle could be accommodated if it is not too large.
Action items
- Check for a new model from Gaby (Hovanes).
- Check the sign of the magnetic field.
- FLUKA simulation with radiator at z=-41cm. (Vitaly)
- FLUKA simulations with FWHM=0.52mm t determine energy deposition profile in the center of CPS. (Vitaly)
- Check the value of the photon beam angle needed with respect to z-axis to improve the Kaon flux at the LH2 target. (Moskov)
Instructions for joining
Join ZoomGov Meeting https://jlab-org.zoomgov.com/j/1608547409?pwd=bWhpZG1yWVk1TWlEb3BjUW9DdmVLZz09 Meeting ID: 160 854 7409 Passcode: 454278 One tap mobile +16692545252,,1608547409# US (San Jose) +16468287666,,1608547409# US (New York)