| Paper |
Title |
Page |
| THPLT156 |
Simulations of IP Feedback and Stabilization in the NLC
|
2822 |
| |
- L. Hendrickson, J.C. Frisch, T.M. Himel, T.O. Raubenheimer, A. Seryi, M. Woodley
SLAC, Menlo Park, California
- G.R. White
Queen Mary University of London, London
|
|
| |
Keeping nanometer-sized beams in collision is an essential component in achieving design luminosity in a linear collider. The NLC stabilization strategy is conservative by including enough redundancy so that if some piece doesn't work to specification or the incoming beam motion is worse than expected, the beams will still be kept in collision. We show simulation results with both realistic and pessimistic assumptions about the response of the ground motion, inertial stabilization, interbunch and intertrain feedback systems. By providing backup systems, and by assuming that some systems may perform more poorly than expected, we can achieve a high level of confidence in our ability to successfully stabilize the beams.
|
|
| THPLT162 |
Diagnosis of Coupling and Beta Function Errors in the PEP-II B-Factory
|
2837 |
| |
- M.H. Donald, T.M. Himel, S. Zelazny
SLAC, Menlo Park, California
|
|
| |
The SLAC Control program has an automatic phase measuring system whereby the beta functions of the two storage rings are measured. This facility has recently been extended to measure coupling between the horizontal and vertical motion and to fit the measured values to their modes of propagation. This facility aids the diagnosis and correction of coupling and focusing errors.
|
|
| MOPLT136 |
Reliability Simulations for a Linear Collider
|
857 |
| |
- N. Phinney, T.M. Himel, M.C. Ross
SLAC/NLC, Menlo Park, California
- P. Czarapata, H. Edwards, M. Huening
Fermilab, Batavia, Illinois
|
|
| |
A new flexible tool for evaluating accelerator reliability was developed as part of the US Linear Collider Technology Comparison Study. The linear collider designs considered were based on the GLC/NLC X-band and TESLA Superconducting proposals, but modified to meet the US physics requirements. To better model some of the complexities of actual operation, a simulation program was written, which included details such as partial fixes or workarounds, hot-swappable repairs, multiple simultaneous repairs, cooldown periods before access, staged recovery from an outage, and both opportunistic and scheduled machine development. The main linacs and damping rings were modeled in detail with component counts taken from the designs, and using MTBFs and MTTRs from existing accelerator experience. Other regions were assigned a nominal overall failure rate. Variants such as a single tunnel or conventional positron source were also evaluated, and estimates made of the sensitivity to recovery or repair times. While neither design was predicted to be sufficiently reliable given present experience, the required improvements were estimated to increase the overall project cost by only a few percent.
|
|