Slides - Agenda

N. Monseu
F. Méot
Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Joseph Fourier Grenoble 1, CNRS/IN2P3 , Institut Polytechnique de
Grenoble, 53 avenue des martyrs, 38026 Grenoble France
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
STUDIES REGARDING SUPER-B LATTICE
1 Introduction
2 LER
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3
.
.
.
.
.
4
4
6
8
10
11
3 HER
3.1 lattice parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2 HER Maximum stable amplitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3 HER Dynamic aperture and momentum de-tuning . . . . . . .
14
14
15
17
Lattice parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Typical H and V phase spaces at IP . . . . . . . .
LER Maximum stable amplitudes . . . . . . . . .
LER Dynamic aperture and momentum de-tuning
Checking spin behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
Contents
Introduction
• This presentation will review the work done last two month, by F. Méot and me,
from the beginning of my PhD thesis.
• Our long term goal is to contribute on spin dynamics, and specially on the rotator.
• We first try to understand the main parameters of the lattice, tune, dynamic
aperture (on & off momentum), and check results obtained with MAD8 with raytracing methods yielding more accurate high order dynamics.
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
1
2.1 Lattice parameters
• The purpose here is to show that ray-tracing starts from paraxial conditions identical to MAD
hypothesis.
• Ray-tracing includes fringe fields in all bends and in solenoids, hard edge otherwise.
LER parameters.
Circumference(4)
Qx, Qy
Q’x, Q’y
Max β x, y
MAD8
(m)
obs. at IP
obs. at MDL
obs. at IP
obs. at MDL
obs. at IP
obs. at MDL
(m)
Ray-tracing
1323.018
1323.031(5)
45.53951, 20.56969 [45].5365, [20].5539(2)
45.54141, 20.56655
[45].5390, [20].5616
-6.492674, -7.666569
-6.4672, -15.963
-6.49278, -7.667717
-5.4900, -9.6662
366.06, 1570.56
366.22, 1563.01
0.4853, 0
0.00042308, 48.6174 0.00042365, 48.5844
Max
pD x, y
α, 1/α
Periodic functions at IP :
βx , βy
(m)
0.02, 0.002
αx , αy
∼0, 0
Dx , Dx′
(m,-)
0, 0
′
horiz. closed orbit, xco , xco
(m, rad)
0, 0
rms and max. quantities, over circumference :
rms, max (m, rad)
0, 0
horiz. closed orbit(6) , xco , x′co
′
vertic. closed orbit(6) , yco , yco
rms, max (m, rad)
0, 0
(2)
Obtained from multiturn Fourier analysis.
(3)
Quasi-zero c.o., induced by dipoles’ fringe fields.
(4)
The origin of the difference between circumference values remains to be determined.
(5)
The circumference in the ray-tracing case is the length of the on-momentum closed orbit.
(6)
Arising from residual coupling in the solenoids.
0.020, 0.0020
∼0, 0
∼0, 0
∼0, 0
2 10−6, 2 10−5
6 10−6, 7 10−5
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
2 LER
Zgoubi|Zpop
01-Nov-09
Y
(m)
vs.
lmnt#
0.2
E-4
Zgoubi|Zpop
01-Nov-09
Z
(m)
vs.
lmnt#
0.6
E-4
0.15
E-4
0.4
E-4
0.1
E-4
0.5
E-5
0.2
E-4
0.0
0.0
-0.5
E-5
-0.2
E-4
-0.1
E-4
-0.4
E-4
-0.15
E-4
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
Residual closed orbits, H and V
-0.6
E-4
200
400
600
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
* Data generated by searchCO
Residual H closed orbit, induced by
dipoles’ fringe fields.
200
*
400
600
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
* Data generated by searchCO
Residual V closed orbit, induced by
solenoids.
Residual H and V closed orbits are negligible at IP (<< beam size).
*
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
2.2 Typical H and V phase spaces at IP
Zgoubi|Zpop
22-Oct-09
X’
(rad) vs.
X
Zgoubi|Zpop
22-Oct-09
(m)
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
(m)
0.0002
0.0002
0.00015
0.0001
0.0001
0.5
E-4
0.0
0.0
-0.5
E-4
-.0001
-.0001
-.00015
-.0002
-.0002
-0.4
E-5
-0.2
E-5
0.0
0.2
E-5
0.4
E-5
* Data generated by searchCO
Left : 1000-turn (x, x′ ) phase-space
Zgoubi|Zpop
22-Oct-09
X’
(rad) vs.
X
at σx (ǫx /π =
(m)
0.008
-0.6
E-7
*
10−9
-0.4
E-7
-0.2
E-7
0.0
0.2
E-7
0.4
E-7
0.6
E-7
* Data generated by searchCO
m.rad) ; right : induced (y, y ′ ) motion
Zgoubi|Zpop
22-Oct-09
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
*
(m)
0.01
0.006
0.004
0.005
0.002
0.0
0.0
-.002
-.005
-.004
-.006
-.00015-.0001 -0.5
E-4
0.0
0.5
E-4
0.00010.00015
* Data generated by searchCO
Leftt : 1000-turn (x, x′ ) phase-space
-.01
-0.1
E-4
*
at 40σx (ǫx /π = 1600
-0.5
E-5
0.0
* Data generated by searchCO
× 10−9 m.rad) ; right : induced (y, y ′ )
0.5
E-5
motion.
0.1
E-4
*
X’
(rad) vs.
X
Zgoubi|Zpop
22-Oct-09
(m)
0.15
E-4
0.0015
0.1
E-4
0.001
0.5
E-5
0.0005
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
(m)
0.0
0.0
-.0005
-0.5
E-5
-.001
-0.1
E-4
-.0015
-0.2
E-6
-0.1
E-6
0.0
0.1
E-6
0.2
E-6
* Data generated by searchCO
Right : 1000-turn (y, y ′ ) phase-space
Zgoubi|Zpop
22-Oct-09
X’
(rad) vs.
X
-0.3
E-6
at σy (ǫy /π =
-0.2
E-6
0.0
0.1
E-6
* Data generated by searchCO
0.5 10−9 m.rad) ; left : induced (x, x′ )
Zgoubi|Zpop
22-Oct-09
(m)
-0.1
E-6
*
Y’
(rad) vs.
0.2
E-6
0.3
E-6
*
motion.
Y
(m)
0.5
E-5
0.1
E-4
0.04
0.8
E-4
0.6
E-4
0.4
E-4
0.2
E-4
0.0
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.0
-0.2
E-4
-0.4
E-4
-0.6
E-4
-0.8
E-4
-.01
-.02
-.03
-.04
-0.3
E-5
-0.2
E-5
-0.1
E-5
0.0
0.1
E-5
* Data generated by searchCO
Right : 1000-turn (y, y ′ ) phase-space
0.2
E-5
-0.15
E-4
*
at 50σy (ǫy /π = 1250
-0.1
E-4
-0.5
E-5
0.0
* Data generated by searchCO
× 10−9 m.rad) ; left : induced (x, x′ )
motion.
0.15
E-4
*
To summarize : residual coupling by solenoids contributes to less than < 0.1×beam size, H & V
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
Zgoubi|Zpop
22-Oct-09
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
2.3 LER Maximum stable amplitudes
• Goal : now we are satisfied with starting hypothesis, we produce DAs (and compare with MAD for reference).
LER Maximum stable H amplitudes at DL
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
Zgoubi|Zpop
23-Nov-09
(m)
Y
Zgoubi|Zpop
23-Nov-09
(m)
0.0004
0.0004
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0
0.0
-.0002
-.0002
-.0004
-.0004
-.0004
-.002
-.001
0.0
0.001
0.002
-.002
0.003
0.0
0.001
0.002
x’ (rad) vs x (m) with dp/p=+0.01 Starting at dogleg in LER
Linux version 8.23/08
24/11/09 09.31.01
0.8
0.6
1.0
-.003
x’ (rad) vs x (m) with dp/p=0 Starting at dogleg in LER
Linux version 8.23/08
24/11/09 09.31.01
0.8
0.6
1.0
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.2
-0.2
-0.2
-0.4
-0.4
-0.4
-0.6
-0.6
-0.6
-0.8
-0.8
-0.8
0.002
-1.0
0.004 -0.004
-0.002
0.0
Table name = TRAC
21σ
-.001
0.0
0.001
0.002
x’ (rad) vs x (m) with dp/p=-0.01 Starting at dogleg in LER
Linux version 8.23/08
24/11/09 09.31.01
-1.0
0.004 -0.004
-0.002
0.0
0.002
0.004
x (m)
Table name = TRAC
50σ
0.003
*
x (m)
x (m)
Table name = TRAC
0.002
-.002
0.6
0.4
0.0
(m)
0.8
0.2
-0.002
Y
8σx
0.4
-1.0
-0.004
(rad) vs.
* * Data generated by searchCO
22.7σx, βx = 3.40, αx = 0.043
px/ p0 [*10**( - 3)]
1.0
-.001
* * Data generated by searchCO
4σx
Y’
0.0
-.0002
* Data generated by searchCO
px/ p0 [*10**( - 3)]
(rad) vs.
0.0004
-.003
MAD
Y’
px/ p0 [*10**( - 3)]
RAY-TRACING
Zgoubi|Zpop
23-Nov-09
4.5σ
√
Maximum horizontal stable amplitudes (xmax = n ∗ σx where σx = ǫx ∗ βx at DL, taking ǫx/π = 10−9)
1000-turn for ray tracing, 200-turn for mad ; dp/p = +1%, 0, −1%, from left to right.
Test particles are launched at DL and observed at DL.
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
(m)
Zgoubi|Zpop
19-Nov-09
Y
Zgoubi|Zpop
19-Nov-09
(m)
0.0004
0.0004
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0
-.0002
-.0002
-.0002
-.0004
-.0004
-.0004
-.001
0.0
0.001
0.002
-.002
0.0
0.001
-.002
0.002
y’ (rad) vs y (m) with dp/p=+0.01 Starting at dogleg in LER
Linux version 8.23/08
24/11/09 09.31.01
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.30
y’ (rad) vs y (m) with dp/p=0 Starting at dogleg in LER
Linux version 8.23/08
24/11/09 09.31.01
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.30
0.10
0.05
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.15
-0.15
-0.15
-0.20
-0.20
-0.20
-0.25
-0.25
-0.25
Table name = TRAC
-0.30
0.0020
-0.0020
y (m)
-0.0010
0.0
0.0010
Table name = TRAC
8σy
5σy , βy = 5.53, αy = +0.047
0.0
0.001
0.002
*
y’ (rad) vs y (m) with dp/p=-0.01 Starting at dogleg in LER
Linux version 8.23/08
24/11/09 09.31.01
0.15
0.05
0.0010
-.001
0.20
0.05
0.0
(m)
0.25
0.10
-0.0010
Y
8.4σy
0.10
-0.30
-0.0020
(rad) vs.
* * Data generated by searchCO
30σy , βy = 5.33, αy = −0.105
py/ p0 [*10**( - 3)]
0.30
-.001
* * Data generated by searchCO
4.7σy
Y’
0.0
0.0
* Data generated by searchCO
py/ p0 [*10**( - 3)]
(rad) vs.
0.0004
-.002
MAD
Y’
py/ p0 [*10**( - 3)]
RAY-TRACING
Zgoubi|Zpop
19-Nov-09
-0.30
0.0020 -0.0020
-0.0010
0.0
0.0010
0.0020
y (m)
y (m)
Table name = TRAC
1.5σy
Maximum vertical stable amplitudes
1000-turn for ray tracing, 200-turn for mad ; dp/p = +1%, 0, −1%, from left to right.
Test particles are launched at DL and observed at DL.
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
LER Maximum stable V amplitudes at DL (1σy taken for ǫy /π = 10−9)
Dynamic aperture
Dynamic aperture
0.0025
0.18
dp=+1%
dp=+0.5%
dp= 0
dp=-0.5%
dp=-1%
dp=+1%
dp=+0.5%
dp= 0
dp=-0.5%
dp=-1%
0.16
0.002
0.14
0.12
y (cm)
y (cm)
0.0015
0.1
0.08
0.001
0.06
0.04
0.0005
0.02
0
-0.03
-0.02
-0.01
0
0.01
0.02
0
-0.3
0.03
-0.2
-0.1
x (cm)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
x (cm)
Figure 1: Dynamic aperture observed at IP.
Figure 2: Dynamic aperture observed at DL.
Particles in the region 1.007 ≤ dp/p ≤ 1.004 are lost, whatever z0 .
0.62
0.64
Qx-45
Qx-45
Qy-20
Qy-20
0.6
Qx-45
Qy-20
0.62
0.6
0.58
0.58
0.56
0.56
0.54
0.54
Zgoubi|Zpop
17-Nov-09
0.52
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
(m)
0.4
E-4
0.5
0.52
0.3
E-4
0.5
0.2
E-4
0.48
0.1
E-4
0.48
0.0
0.46
0.44
0.46
-0.1
E-4
-0.2
E-4
0.44
-0.3
E-4
-.0001
0.42
0.99
-0.5
E-4
0.0
0.5
E-4
0.0001
* Data generated by searchCO
0.995
*
1
1.005
Figure 3: momentum detuning.
1.01
0.42
-0.01
-0.005
0
0.005
Figure 4: from MAD
0.01
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
2.4 LER Dynamic aperture and momentum de-tuning
Single turn, IP to IP
~X (longituSpin components of five particles at dp/p = 0, ±0.5%, ±1%, observed at IP, after a full turn, starting pure S
dinal).
p
o
o
m
m
1
1
1
1
1
SX
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
INITIAL
SY
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
SZ
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
S
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
SX
0.9999
0.9999
1.0000
0.9997
0.9983
SY
0.0022
0.0012
-0.0000
0.0039
0.0168
FINAL
SZ
-0.0152
-0.0130
-0.0006
0.0230
0.0561
S
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
GAMMA
8262.849
8221.944
8181.039
8140.133
8099.228
Matching spin orbit vector ~n at IP
~ at IP (the fit variables) are varied
We consider the on-momentum, zero-closed orbit particle. Initial components of S
so to get (constraints :) identical components after a turn, and |S| = 1.
Xi2 =
STATUS OF
LMNT VAR
3
Sx
3
Sy
3
Sz
STATUS OF
TYPE
Sx-Sx_0
Sy-Sy_0
Sz-Sz_0
|S|
8.69910E-18
VARIABLES (Iteration #
29)
PARAM MINIMUM
INITIAL
FINAL
MAXIMUM
STEP
10
0.891
1.00
0.9999999389
1.09
8.699E-16
11 -0.100
7.826E-08
7.8264406325E-08 0.300
1.311E-15
12 -0.100
-3.410E-04 -3.4099938123E-04 0.300
1.311E-15
CONSTRAINTS
I
J LMNT#
DESIRED
WEIGHT
REACHED
KI2
*
1
1 1909
0.0000000
1.0000
2.9494193E-09
1.0000E+00
*
1
2 1909
0.0000000
1.0000
1.1601682E-12
1.5473E-07
*
1
3 1909
0.0000000
1.0000
4.1513054E-12
1.9810E-06
*
1
4 1909
1.0000000
2.0000
1.0000000E+00
5.6768E-07
*
Parameter(s)
0 :
0 :
0 :
0 :
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
2.5 Checking spin behavior
Sx,y,z
vs.
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
1.
pick-up #
Sz
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
Sx
0.0
-.2
-.4
-.6
-.8
Sy
200
400
Zgoubi|Zpop
03-Nov-09
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Sx,y,z
1.
0.8
600
vs.
pick-up #
Sz
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
-.2
Sy
Sx
-.4
-.6
-.8
-1.
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Components of the ~n vector over a turn and in the rotator.
SX (longitudinal) is recorded at IP over a few hundred turns. Nine particles with dp/p = 0, ±0.01, step ± 0.02 (apart
from particles with p/p0 = 1.004, 1.006 which are not stable, see Sec. ??), and with ǫy > 10−9 nm (Fig. 5).rad are
launched. Results in Fig. 6, no intrinsic resonance effects are observed.
Zgoubi|Zpop
03-Nov-09
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
Zgoubi|Zpop
(m)
Sx
1. 03-Nov-09
vs.
Pass#
0.01
0.999
0.998
0.005
0.997
0.0
0.996
0.995
-.005
0.994
0.993
-.01
-0.1
E-5
-0.5
E-6
0.0
* Data generated by searchCO
0.5
E-6
50
0.1
E-5
*
Figure 5: Vertical invariant at IP of nine particles launched for search of possible intrinsic resonance effects.
100
* Data generated by searchCO
150
200
*
Figure 6: Longitudinal spin component at IP for the nine particles with dp/p =
0, ±0.002, −0.004, −0.006, ±0.008, ±0.01.
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
Static behavior
3.1 lattice parameter
Table 1:
HER parameters.
MAD8
Circumference(4)
Qx, Qy
Q’x, Q’y
Max β x, y
(m)
obs. at IP
obs. at MDL
obs. at IP
obs. at MDL
obs. at IP
obs. at MDL
(m)
Ray-tracing(1)
1322.949337
1323.03(5)
45.53912, 20.57044 [45].54350, [20].57357(2)
45.53996, 20.56999
[45]54350, [20].57342
-5.7722, -30.6157
-5.8311, -32.2510
-5.7671, -30.8482
-5.8311, -32.2579
364.1857, 1525.0676
Max
(m)
0.5983, 0
pD x, y
α, 1/α
0.00040590, 49.6355
0.00038548, 50.9330
Periodic functions at IP :
βx , βy
(m)
0.02, 0.002
0.020, 0.0020
αx , αy
∼0, 0
∼0, 0
′
Dx , Dx
(m,-)
0, 0
∼0, 0
horiz. closed orbit, xco , x′co
(m, rad)
0, 0
∼0, 0
(5)
The circumference in the ray-tracing case is the length of the on-momentum closed orbit.
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
3 HER
HER Maximum stable H amplitudes at DL
Zgoubi|Zpop
19-Nov-09
X’
(rad) vs.
X
Zgoubi|Zpop
19-Nov-09
(m)
0.2
E-4
RAY-TRACING
(rad) vs.
X
Zgoubi|Zpop
19-Nov-09
(m)
0.0004
-0.5
E-5
0.0002
-0.1
E-4
0.0
-0.2
E-4
-.0002
-0.2
E-4
-0.4
E-4
-.0004
-0.25
E-4
-.0006
-0.3
E-4
-.002 -.0015 -.001 -.0005 0.0
0.0005 0.001
* Dogleg section.
0.002 0.004 0.006
27/11/09 17.53.00
0.0015
-.0004
x’ (rad) vs x (m) with dp/p=0 Starting at dogleg in HER
Linux version 8.23/08
27/11/09 17.53.00
0.0015
0.0013
0.0013
0.0013
0.0010
0.0010
0.0010
0.0008
0.0008
0.0008
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0003
0.0003
0.0003
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.0002
-0.0002
-0.0002
-0.0005
-0.0005
-0.0005
-0.0008
-0.0008
-0.0008
-0.0010
-0.0010
-0.0010
-0.0012
-0.0012
-0.0012
-0.0015
-0.020
-0.010
0.0
0.010
-0.0015
0.020
-0.020
-0.010
0.0
0.010
x (m)
Table name = TRAC
-.0002
0.0
0.0002
0.0004
*
0.020
x’ (rad) vs x (m) with dp/p=-0.01 Starting at dogleg in HER
Linux version 8.23/08
-0.0015
-0.020
-0.010
0.0
27/11/09 17.53.00
0.010
x (m)
Table name = TRAC
28σx,
βx = 34.688, αx = −1.230
(m)
2σx
px/ p0
x’ (rad) vs x (m) with dp/p=+0.01 Starting at dogleg in HER
Linux version 8.23/08
X
* * Dogleg section.
25σx
px/ p0
px/ p0
0.0015
-.006 -.004 -.002 0.0
* * Dogleg section.
6.5σx
(rad) vs.
-0.15
E-4
0.0
-0.6
E-4
X’
0.0
0.0006
0.4
E-4
MAD
X’
112σx,
βx = 11.013, αx = 0
0.020
x (m)
Table name = TRAC
0σx,
βx = 32.351, αx = −1.054
Maximum horizontal stable amplitudes
1000-turn for ray tracing, 200-turn for mad ; dp/p = +1%, 0, −1%, from left to right.
Test particles are launched at DL and observed at DL.
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
3.2 HER Maximum stable amplitudes
Zgoubi|Zpop
19-Nov-09
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
Zgoubi|Zpop
19-Nov-09
(m)
Zgoubi|Zpop
19-Nov-09
0.0008
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
(m)
Y’
(rad) vs.
Y
(m)
0.0008
0.0008
0.0006
0.0006
0.0004
0.0004
0.0002
0.0006
0.0004
RAY-TRACING
0.0002
0.0
0.0002
0.0
-.0002
0.0
-.0002
-.0002
-.0004
-.0004
-.0006
-.0006
-.0008
-.0004
-.0006
-.0008
-.0008
-.001
-.0005
0.0
0.0005
-.001
0.001
-.001
*
* Dogleg section.
-.0005
0.0
0.0005
0.001
* Dogleg section.
0.0
0.0005
0.001
*
6σy dp/p=-0.5%
( dp/p=-1% has 0 DA)
y’ (rad) vs y (m) with dp/p=+0.01 Starting at dogleg in HER
Linux version 8.23/08
py/ p0
0.0020
y’ (rad) vs y (m) withdp/p=0 Starting at dogleg in HER
Linux version 8.23/08
27/11/09 17.53.00
27/11/09 17.53.00
0.0015
py/ p0
py/ p0
20σy
0.0020
*
30σy
-.0005
* Dogleg section.
0.0015
0.0020
0.0010
0.0015
0.0005
0.0010
0.0
0.0005
-0.0005
0.0
-0.0010
-0.0005
-0.0015
-0.0010
y’ (rad) vs y (m) withdp/p=-0.005 Starting at dogleg in HER
Linux version 8.23/08
27/11/09 17.53.00
0.0010
MAD
0.0005
0.0
-0.0005
-0.0010
-0.0015
-0.0020
-0.004
-0.0020
-0.004
-0.002
0.0
0.002
-0.0015
-0.002
0.002
0.004
y (m)
0.004
y (m)
0.0
Table name = TRAC
-0.0020
-0.004
-0.002
0.0
0.002
0.004
y (m)
Table name = TRAC
9.5σy
5.5σy
Table name = TRAC
14.5σy
Maximum vertical stable amplitudes
1000-turn for ray tracing, 200-turn for mad ; dp/p = +1%, 0, −1%, from left to right.
Test particles are launched at DL and observed at DL.
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
HER Maximum stable V amplitudes at DL
Dynamic aperture
Dynamic aperture
0.0016
0.08
dp=+1%
dp=+0.5%
dp= 0
dp=-0.5%
dp=-1%
0.07
0.0012
0.06
0.001
0.05
y (cm)
y (cm)
0.0014
0.0008
0.04
0.0006
0.03
0.0004
0.02
0.0002
0.01
0
-0.04
-0.03
-0.02
-0.01
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
dp=+1%
dp=+0.5%
dp= 0
dp=-0.5%
dp=-1%
0
-0.6
0.04
-0.4
-0.2
x (cm)
Figure 7: Dynamic aperture observed at IP.
0.85
0.2
0.4
0.6
Figure 8: Dynamic aperture observed at DL.
0.85
Qx-45
Qx-45
Qy-20
Qy-20
0.8
Qx-45
Qy-20
0.8
0.75
0.75
0.7
0.7
0.65
0.65
0.6
0.6
0.55
0.55
0.5
0.5
0.45
0.45
0.4
0.4
0.35
0.35
0.3
0.99
0
x (cm)
0.995
1
1.005
1.01
Figure 9: Tunes vs. momentum obtained with Zgoubi.
0.3
-0.01
-0.005
0
0.005
0.01
Figure 10: Tunes vs. momentum obtained with MAD.
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009
3.3 HER Dynamic aperture and momentum de-tuning
Thank you for your attention
Super-B Workshop, Frascati, 1-4/12/2009