Paper | Title | Other Keywords | Page |
---|---|---|---|
OPL04 | High Intensity Challenges of the FAIR Project | synchrotron, heavy-ion, space-charge, ion | 22 |
|
|||
The FAIR accelerator project at GSI should increase the intensity of primary proton and heavy ion beams by up to two orders of magnitude, relative to the existing GSI facility. In addition to the design of the new synchrotrons and storage rings, the intensity upgrade of the existing UNILAC linac and SIS-18 synchrotron plays a key role for the FAIR project. In order to reach the FAIR design beam parameters several challenges related to operation with high brightness, high current beams in SIS-18 and in the new SIS-100 have to mastered. Important issues are
|
|||
|
|||
WGA04 | Crossing Transition at RHIC | feedback, quadrupole, ion, lattice | 53 |
|
|||
Operational experience on crossing RHIC transition as well as observed beam dynamics effects are described. The techniques to provide the successful transition crossing without beam losses and deterioration of the beam quality in both transverse and longitudinal plane are reviewed. Presently the ion beam intensity is limited by the transverse instability happenning at the transition region. It was observed that the threshold of the instability was significantly affected by the presence of the electron cloud. The results of recent studies of the intensity limiting instability are presented. |
|||
|
|||
WGB06 | Using the Online Single Particle Model for SNS Accelerator Tuning | linac, cavity, simulation, neutron | 203 |
|
|||
The paper describes a usage of the XAL online model for transverse and longitudinal tuning of the SNS linac. Most of the SNS control room physics applications based on the XAL online model which allows synchronizing the model with an accelerator live state and using this model for tuning the machine. Peculiarities of applying of the simplest single particle mode of the model for orbit correction and longitudinal dynamics control of the SNS linac are discussed. The procedure of parameters finding, algorithms, and results are presented. |
|||
|
|||
WGD12 | The NumI Proton Beam at Fermilab: Successes and Challenges | proton, target, extraction, beam-losses | 379 |
|
|||
The NuMI beam at Fermilab has delivered almost 5x10 20 120 GeV protons to the neutrino production target, since the start for MINOS physics operation in 2005. We will report on beam operation status, including successes and challenges to date with the beam and NuMI system technical components. Also covered will be the ongoing program of increasing NuMI beam power using slip stacking of beam in the Main Injector accelerator. |
|||
|
|||
WGD13 | SNS Beam Commissioning Tools and Experience | lattice, diagnostics, EPICS, neutron | 382 |
|
|||
The paper describes a parallel flow of the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) linac and ring commissioning and development of commissioning tools. An evolution of the physics control system, its features, problems and solutions are presented. The peculiarities of the SNS project such as a collaboration between six Department of Energy laboratories, an absence of previous experience in large accelerator construction and operation in Oak Ridge National Laboratory, an original upper level of a control system (physics applications) and their effect on SNS commissioning are discussed. SNS is managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725 for the U.S. Department of Energy. |
|||
|
|||
WGF05 | Fermilab Booster Diagnostics, Monitors, and Software for Operational Control of Residual Radiation | booster, diagnostics, radiation, proton | 454 |
|
|||
The FNAL Booster Accelerator delivers about 1017 8 GeV protons/hour. The Booster present cycling rate is 8 Hz but can go as high as 10 Hz with plans to run at 15 Hz. Booster's current operations and future plans required upgrades to most of Booster 30 year old diagnostic hardware and software. Beam quality as well as beam intensity and cycle repetition rate first became an issue when the neutrino experiment BooNE started in 2002. Since then MI slip stacking and continuation of running to MiniBooNE continues to push Booster diagnostics and software upgrades. Control of residual radiation while increasing the Booster throughput over 10 fold has been successful but the work is not done. |
|||
|
|||
WGF08 | HEBT Diagnostics for Commissioning, Control, and Characterization of the IFMIF-EVEDA Accelerator | diagnostics, beam-losses, emittance, beam-transport | 459 |
|
|||
The IFMIF-EVEDA accelerator will be a 9 MeV, 125 mA CW deuteron accelerator which aims to validate the technology that will be used in the future IFMIF accelerator. It is essential then to implement the necessary instrumentation for the commissioning and operation of the accelerator prototype, as well as for a correct characterization of the beam properties. A set of instrumentation will be installed in the last part of the accelerator, at the first section of the High Energy Beam Transport Line (HEBT), between the superconducting HWR and the Beam Dump (BD), in the so-called Diagnostics Plate (DP) to fully characterize the beam properties both from the RFQ and the HWR. In addition, there will be dedicated diagnostics all along the HEBT to transport and control the beam safely down to the BD. Moreover, the closest area to the BD –with high radiation levels and big pipe aperture- can be used for the tests of IFMIF profilers. In this contribution the requirements imposed by the high-intensity deuteron accelerator to the instrumentation along the HEBT, the type of techniques that will be used and a preliminary layout and specifications of the diagnostics in the line will be presented. |
|||
|
|||
WGF11 | Beam Diagnostic System of the Main Ring Synchrotron of J-PARC | beam-losses, synchrotron, proton, ion | 472 |
|
|||
The beam commissioning of the J-PARC Main Ring synchrotron (MR) has been started from May of this year. A single bunch beam from 3 GeV Rapid Cycling Synchrotron (RCS) was injected to the ring through 3-50 beam transporting (3-50BT) and then was extracted to the beam dump after 1000 turns (typically) without acceleration. The beam intensity was 4·1011 ppb that is 2 orders of magnitude smaller than that of the design intensity. The beam diagnostic system was used to establish the beam operational parameters. The system includes the instrumentations as follows; 3 types of Current Transformers (CTs), DCCT, fast CT (FCT), and Wall Current Monitor (WCM); Beam Position Monitors (BPMs); proportional counter type Beam Loss Monitors (BLMs) at each quadropole magnet; horizontal and vertical tune monitors with exciter systems; and 3 types of beam profile monitors, Multi Wire Profile Monitors (MWPMs) at 3-50BT and downstream of injection septa, a horizontal Flying Wire Profile Monitor (FWPM) and a vertical residual gas Ionization Profile Monitor (IPM) in the ring. At the workshop, the present status of the system will be presented. |
|||
|
|||
WGF12 | NuMI Proton Beam Diagnostics and Control: Achieving 2 Megawatt Capability | beam-losses, proton, target, extraction | 475 |
|
|||
The NuMI proton beam at Fermilab currently delivers 120 GeV protons to the neutrino production target at beam powers up to 320 kW, with design capability to 400 kW. We are preparing for upgrade to 700 kW, and are in planning stage for delivering 2.3 MW beam provided by the Project X accelerator upgrade. We will report on the system of beam diagnostics and control used in operation of the NuMI beam, and the experience to date. Also covered will be the steps to provide a robust system for transport and targeting beam of 2 MW and beyond. |
|||
|
|||
CPL06 | Closing Plenary Summary of Working Group F: Diagnostics and Instrumentation for High-Intensity Beams | beam-losses, monitoring, instrumentation, diagnostics | 496 |
|
|||
Working group F was charged with presentations and discussions on diagnostics and instrumentation of highintensity beams. We had 3 sessions spanning a total time of 330 minutes, in which 13 talks were presented. The presentation time for each talk had to be limited to 15-20 min., in order to allow sufficient time (5-10 min.) for some discussion. This turned out quite well, even though some presentations went longer, not every topic required the anticipated discussion time. |
|||
|