results from beam-based collimator alignment

13
LHC Collimation Working Group – 02 April 2012 Results from Beam-Based Collimator Alignment G. Valentino, R. W. Assmann, R. Bruce, F. Burkart, M. Cauchi, D. Deboy, L. Lari, S. Redaelli, B. Salvachua

Upload: kaden-cole

Post on 01-Jan-2016

25 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

DESCRIPTION

Results from Beam-Based Collimator Alignment. G. Valentino, R. W. Assmann , R. Bruce, F. Burkart , M. Cauchi , D. Deboy , L. Lari , S. Redaelli , B. Salvachua. Outline. The collimator s etup a pplication Fast BLM data acquisition - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

LHC Collimation Working Group – 02 April 2012

Results from Beam-Based Collimator Alignment

G. Valentino, R. W. Assmann, R. Bruce, F. Burkart, M. Cauchi, D. Deboy, L. Lari,

S. Redaelli, B. Salvachua

Page 2: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Outline

Gianluca Valentino

2

• The collimator setup application

• Fast BLM data acquisition • Software issues encountered during the setups

• Results comparison: 2011 vs. 2012

• Qualification of the collimator settings

• Summary

Page 3: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Reminder: collimator setup application

Gianluca Valentino

3

Setup Task Sequencer

GUI

User

Parallel Setup Algorithm

Loss Threshold Selection

BLM Spike Recognition

Fast BLM Data Acquisition

BLM Feedback

Structure as proposed for March 2012 setups

Page 4: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

12.5 Hz BLM data acquisition

Gianluca Valentino

4

cs-ccr-logging2

cs-ccr-dev

Thanks to: R. Assmann, V. Baggiolini, A. Bland, B. Dehning, S. Jackson, S. Redaelli, C. Zamantzas

CCC Setup Application

Fast BLM Data Logging

~3900 BLMs in all crates

12.5 Hz and 1 Hz BLM signals

Left jaw aligned

Right jaw aligned

Page 5: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Issues encountered during setups

• Some software issues were encountered in the 450 GeV setup, which were fixed by the 4 TeV setup:

- Fast BLM data was transmitted from the low-level with channels & crates in reverse order for each IR.

- GUI: multi-threading issues prevented full functionality of GUI.

- Sequencer not jumping correctly through the setup stages (TCP, parallel, sequential).

- Setup Sheet: left and right jaw positions not saved correctly.

• Outstanding issues:

- Loss spike recognition: All clearly optimal spikes (e.g. TCP IR7) were classified correctly.

- Main issues were for “grey area” spikes: in the classifier design, it was preferred to err in classifying an optimal spike as non-optimal rather than classifying an non-optimal spike as optimal.

- When detecting a non-optimal spike, the jaw is moved in once again until an optimal spike is classified. This could cause dumps at 4 TeV if the jaw is at the beam and is moved in erroneously again.

- Algorithm assumes a simple loss spike model with a low noise level, no other spikes after main spike, etc.

- An improved spike recognition algorithm will be developed and tested in an MD.

• Beam instabilities: possible impedance effects with too many collimators close to the beam (N. Mounet)

Gianluca Valentino

5

Page 6: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Alignment results: setup time

• Setups in March 2012:

• Comparison in setup time 2010 – 2012 for the full system:

Gianluca Valentino

6

2010 (Manual) 2011 @ 1 Hz 2012 @ 8 Hz

450 GeV 3.5 TeV 450 GeV 3.5 TeV 450 GeV 4 TeV

# Fills 3 5 6 3 3 1

# Dumps 1 4 2 0 0 0

# Hours 11 28 18.5 17.7 10 7.5

Setup Type Injection Flat Top Colliding Squeezed

Date 21st March 29th March 30th March 31st March

Page 7: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Alignment results: beam-based centres

• Beam-based centre comparison to 2011 for injection orbit.

Gianluca Valentino

7

µ = 0.177 mm σ = 0.033 mm

µ = 0.229 mmσ = 0.076

mm

Delta: 450 GeV 2011 vs. 2012 B1 and B2 Delta: Flat Top 2011 vs. 2012 B1 and B2

∆ TCLIA.4R2 = -12.920mm∆ TDI.4L2 = +7.048mm

Page 8: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Alignment results: beam-based centres

Gianluca Valentino

8

µ = 0.238 mmσ = 0.111

mm

µ = 0.183 mmσ = 0.059 mm

• Beam-based centre comparison between 450 GeV and 4 TeV in 2012 (injection orbit).

Delta: 450 GeV vs. 4 TeV B1 Delta: 450 GeV vs. 4 TeV B2

Page 9: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Alignment Results: Beam Size Ratios

• Beam Size Ratio comparison: 2012 vs 2011, 450 GeV

Gianluca Valentino

9

IR2 IR3 IR7 IR8 IR3IR7

TDI TDI

Page 10: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Alignment Results: Beam Size Ratios

• Beam Size Ratio comparison: 2012 vs 2011, Flat Top

Gianluca Valentino

10

IR3 IR7 IR3IR7

Page 11: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Collimator Settings Qualification

Gianluca Valentino

11

B. Salvachua

LIC BLMs

LIC BLMs

Page 12: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Collimator Settings Qualification

Gianluca Valentino

12

B. Salvachua

Page 13: Results from Beam-Based  Collimator Alignment

Summary

• Collimator setup time reduced from 17 hours in 2011 to 7.5 hours in

2012 at flat top, 1 fill.

• Limit for setup time not yet reached: improvements can still be made.

• Further tests will be carried out in an 8 hour slot in April MD.

Future Work:

• Only GUI will run on CCC console: BLM feedback and jaw movement

requests to be moved to a server.

• Distributed application will be developed based on Java RMI and JMS,

running on the server and the CCC console.

• More complex beam loss recognition system to be designed.

Gianluca Valentino

13