Upload
jelani-freeman
View
40
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Target/Beam Interaction MICE Target Workshop – RAL 8/1/2009. M. Apollonio, A. Dobbs - IC. Motivations:. optimise secondary production minimising dangerous losses in ISIS assess better orientation/shape of the shaft for secondary production a work at “four hands”: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
1
Target/Beam InteractionMICE Target Workshop – RAL
8/1/2009
M. Apollonio, A. Dobbs - IC
2
Motivations:• optimise secondary production minimising
dangerous losses in ISIS
• assess better orientation/shape of the shaft for secondary production
• a work at “four hands”:• A. Dobbs, ORBIT simulation of ISIS ring /
interaction with target / comparison with data taken from MICE shifts,
• MA, G4Beamline simulation of secondary production with a set of shafts
3
ORBIT Results A. Dobbs
4
- overview of results obtained from simulating beam loss in ISIS synchrotron- using code ORBIT - emphasis to loss caused by MICE target - results for 3 target orientations: • long-thin • short-fat • tilted or parallel to the MICE beamline- 2 target sizes are used: • 10mm x 1mm and • 1mm x 1mm- dip depths ranging from 27mm to 24mm above beam axis are shown.
5
Target Orientations (variable depths)
•“Short-Fat” – 1mm along z – axis, 10mm along x - axis
• “Long-Thin” – 10mm along z – axis, 1mm along x – axis (true orientation)
•“Reduced” – 1mm along z – axis, 1mm along x - axis
x
y
s
6
Model
The MICE target is modelled as a block of iron inserted into the ISIS beam 2ms before extraction, sitting at a position of ~115m around the synchrotron ring. The target is also currently modelled as being static.
Work is being done about the possibility of improving the model to make the target titanium and dynamic.
NB: ORBIT phys.models elastic/inelastic/nuclear
7
TGT
8
Results• 2D histograms showing number of particles lost from the beam as a function of time in an ISIS spill and the position in the synchrotron in which they were lost. • Further a table is also presented for each target configuration, showing the number of “hits” (intersections of the volume) in the MICE target, for the last 2ms of the ISIS spill• The tables also give the number of particles “absorbed” by the target i.e. turned into lost particles by their interaction with the target.
9
Injection losses MICE target
losses MICE target
losses
Short-Fat: 27mm above axis, -1 to 10ms
zoom last 2 ms
10
Short-Fat: 27mm above axis, 8 to 10ms
11
Name Index Position [m] # Hits # Absorbed Efficiency
Mice1 11100 115.225 1986 14 0.00704935
Mice2 11110 115.226 0 0 0
Mice3 11120 115.227 0 0 0
Mice4 11130 115.228 0 0 0
Mice5 11140 115.229 0 0 0
Mice6 11150 115.23 0 0 0
Mice7 11160 115.231 0 0 0
Mice8 11170 115.232 0 0 0
Mice9 11180 115.233 0 0 0
Mice10 11190 115.234 0 0 0
12
Long-Thin: 27mm above axis, -1 to 10ms(NB: present config)
13
Long-Thin: 27mm above axis, 8 to 10ms
14
Name Index Position [m] # Hits # Absorbed Efficiency
Mice1 11100 115.225 613 3 0.00489396
Mice2 11110 115.226 615 0 0
Mice3 11120 115.227 617 0 0
Mice4 11130 115.228 617 0 0
Mice5 11140 115.229 614 1 0.00162866
Mice6 11150 115.23 609 0 0
Mice7 11160 115.231 601 0 0
Mice8 11170 115.232 592 1 0.00168919
Mice9 11180 115.233 581 0 0
Mice10 11190 115.234 568 0 0
15
Long-Thin: 26mm above axis, -1 to 10ms
16
Long-Thin: 26mm above axis, 8 to 10ms
17
Name Index Position [m] # Hits # Absorbed Efficiency
Mice1 11100 115.225 1045 6 0.00574163
Mice2 11110 115.226 1043 2 0.00191755
Mice3 11120 115.227 1051 0 0
Mice4 11130 115.228 1042 0 0
Mice5 11140 115.229 1038 0 0
Mice6 11150 115.23 1020 0 0
Mice7 11160 115.231 1003 0 0
Mice8 11170 115.232 995 0 0
Mice9 11180 115.233 990 0 0
Mice10 11190 115.234 966 1 0.0010352
18
Long-Thin: 27mm above axis, 250 rotation, -1 to 10ms
19
Long-Thin: 27mm above axis, 250 rotation, 8 to 10ms
NB At present there remains an ambiguity in the direction of the rotation, clockwise or anti-clockwise. If / when this is resolved it will be published in an updated version of this document.
20
Name Index Position [m] # Hits # Absorbed Efficiency
Mice1 11100 115.225 205 0 0
Mice2 11110 115.226 202 0 0
Mice3 11120 115.227 181 1 0.00552486
Mice4 11130 115.228 191 0 0
Mice5 11140 115.229 197 1 0.00507614
Mice6 11150 115.23 215 2 0.00930233
Mice7 11160 115.231 227 1 0.00440529
Mice8 11170 115.232 214 0 0
Mice9 11180 115.233 203 0 0
Mice10 11190 115.234 0 0 0
21
Reduced: 27mm above axis, -1 to 10ms
22
Reduced (1mm^2): 27mm above axis, 8 to 10ms
23
Name Index Position [m] # Hits # Absorbed Efficiency
Mice1 11100 115.225 1044 6 0.00574713
Mice2 11110 115.226 0 0 0
Mice3 11120 115.227 0 0 0
Mice4 11130 115.228 0 0 0
Mice5 11140 115.229 0 0 0
Mice6 11150 115.23 0 0 0
Mice7 11160 115.231 0 0 0
Mice8 11170 115.232 0 0 0
Mice9 11180 115.233 0 0 0
Mice10 11190 115.234 0 0 0
24
Reduced: 26mm above axis, 8 to 10ms
25
Name Index Position [m] # Hits # Absorbed Efficiency
Mice1 11100 115.225 1620 9 0.00555556
Mice2 11110 115.226 0 0 0
Mice3 11120 115.227 0 0 0
Mice4 11130 115.228 0 0 0
Mice5 11140 115.229 0 0 0
Mice6 11150 115.23 0 0 0
Mice7 11160 115.231 0 0 0
Mice8 11170 115.232 0 0 0
Mice9 11180 115.233 0 0 0
Mice10 11190 115.234 0 0 0
26
Reduced: 25mm above axis, 8 to 10ms
27
Name Index Position [m] # Hits # Absorbed Efficiency
Mice1 11100 115.225 3286 22 0.00669507
Mice2 11110 115.226 0 0 0
Mice3 11120 115.227 0 0 0
Mice4 11130 115.228 0 0 0
Mice5 11140 115.229 0 0 0
Mice6 11150 115.23 0 0 0
Mice7 11160 115.231 0 0 0
Mice8 11170 115.232 0 0 0
Mice9 11180 115.233 0 0 0
Mice10 11190 115.234 0 0 0
28
Reduced: 24mm above axis, 8 to 10ms
29
Name Index Position [m] # Hits #Absorbed Efficiency
Mice1 11100 115.225 6039 38 0.00629243
Mice2 11110 115.226 0 0 0
Mice3 11120 115.227 0 0 0
Mice4 11130 115.228 0 0 0
Mice5 11140 115.229 0 0 0
Mice6 11150 115.23 0 0 0
Mice7 11160 115.231 0 0 0
Mice8 11170 115.232 0 0 0
Mice9 11180 115.233 0 0 0
Mice10 11190 115.234 0 0 0
30
Circular-solid 6mm radius: 27mm above axis, 8 to 10ms
31
Name Index Position [m] # Hits #
Absorbed
Efficien
cyMice1 11100 115.23 671 5 0.01Mice2 11110 115.23 820 0 0Mice3 11120 115.23 953 1 0Mice4 11130 115.23 1019 0 0Mice5 11140 115.23 1058 2 0Mice6 11150 115.23 1062 0 0Mice7 11160 115.23 1036 0 0Mice8 11170 115.23 982 0 0Mice9 11180 115.23 863 0 0
Mice10 11190 115.23 706 0 0
32
SUMMARY of the SUMMARIESORBIT Results
Summary
Target Run Depth above axis (mm) LP end of spill MICE Collimator Hits MICE Collimator Absorber % Efficiency
Short Fat 6.1 27 454 1986 14 0.70493454
Long Thin 6.2 27 636 6027 5 0.08296001
Reduced 6.5 27 211 1044 6 0.57471264
Rotated 25deg 7.1 27 483 1835 5 0.27247956
Circular 6mm rad 8.1 27 1047 9170 8 0.087241
Long Thin 6.4 26 1083 10193 9 0.08829589
Reduced 6.6 26 352 1620 9 0.55555556
Reduced 6.7 25 700 3286 22 0.669507
Reduced 6.8 24 1347 6039 38 0.62924325
- in a sh.fat config. losses happen far from the tgt point-the long-thin (or cylindrical) config. suggest most of losses happenin S7-8, closer to the TGT prod point- more controllable with collimators/scrapers?
33
G4Beamline StudiesM. Apollonio
34
- is there a better shape for the target or orientation?- how many secondaries (pi) do we get at the Q1 bore (per impinging proton?)- what about materials?
ISIS p trajectory
Q1-
2-3
25o
MICE TGT
35
10 mm
10 mm
XZ
25 deg
Q1-TGTaxis
25 deg
lostto Q1
secondariesproduction20<theta<30propagation toplane Aacos(Pz/Ptot)>20&& acos(Pz/Ptot)<30
rotation &propagation to plane B
A A
B
C
shift & align with Q1-TGT axis
LONG SLIM
36
25 deg
25 deg
FAT SHORT
TILTED TGT10o / 25o
37
25 deg
Cylinder: OD=6mm/ID=4.7 mm
Materials:Ti Be Al
38
Tgt_long_slim_rot0: y:x Nprimaries=100M
A
39
Tgt_long_slim: y:x rotation 25 deg + shift 4.226
B
40
at Q1 plane in Q1 bore
C
41
Tgt_tilt25_rot0: y:x Nprimaries=100M
A
42
At Q1 plane Q1 bore C
43
Tgt_short_fat_rot0: y:x
44
Tgt_cyl_rot0: y:x
45
46
47
config POT POT/mm2 Dx H BaseArea V Q1 Q1/(POT/mm2)rho(mm) (mm) (mm^2) (mm^3) g cm-3
cyl_Ti 2.50E+08 1.04E+07 6 4 10.92457 43.69827 7351 7.06E-04 4.54cyl_Be 1.00E+08 4.17E+06 6 4 10.92457 43.69827 1792 4.30E-04 1.85cyl_Al 1.00E+08 4.17E+06 6 4 10.92457 43.69827 2059 4.94E-04 2.70long_slim 5.00E+08 1.25E+08 1 4 10 40 79817 6.39E-04 4.54short_fat 5.00E+08 1.25E+07 10 4 10 40 8184 6.55E-04 4.54tilt_25 1.00E+08 4.81E+06 5.2 4 10 40 3092 6.43E-04 4.54tilt_10 1.00E+08 9.19E+06 2.72 4 10 40 6010 6.54E-04 4.54
expectedp n pi+ pi- mu+ mu- gam e+e- TOT A/rho pi+
cyl_Ti 3.68E-04 2.67E-04 2.04E-05 6.82E-06 6.24E-06 1.92E-06 3.43E-05 1.34E-06 7.06E-04 10.54 2.04E-05cyl_Be 2.38E-04 1.30E-04 1.15E-05 3.36E-06 7.44E-06 2.16E-06 3.82E-05 2.40E-07 4.30E-04 4.88 9.42E-06cyl_Al 2.74E-04 1.60E-04 1.51E-05 3.12E-06 8.16E-06 3.60E-06 2.93E-05 7.20E-07 4.94E-04 10.00 1.93E-05long_slim 3.34E-04 2.36E-04 2.05E-05 6.39E-06 5.57E-06 1.54E-06 3.25E-05 1.52E-06 6.39E-04short_fat 3.43E-04 2.44E-04 2.06E-05 5.36E-06 6.16E-06 1.60E-06 3.27E-05 1.36E-06 6.55E-04tilt_25 3.23E-04 2.49E-04 1.44E-05 5.62E-06 1.12E-05 1.66E-06 3.41E-05 3.95E-06 6.43E-04tilt_10 3.41E-04 2.46E-04 1.47E-05 4.90E-06 1.08E-05 1.96E-06 3.14E-05 3.37E-06 6.54E-04
Q1 breakdown (/POT/mm2)
cyl_Ti (6/4.6) 3.92E-04 2.85E-04 2.17E-05 7.27E-06 6.66E-06 2.05E-06 3.66E-05 1.43E-06 7.53E-04cyl_Ti (6/4.2) 4.85E-04 3.53E-04 2.69E-05 9.00E-06 8.24E-06 2.53E-06 4.52E-05 1.77E-06 9.31E-04cyl_Ti (6/4.0) 5.29E-04 3.84E-04 2.93E-05 9.80E-06 8.97E-06 2.76E-06 4.93E-05 1.93E-06 1.01E-03
48
CONCLUSIONS
- neither the shape nor the orientation of a target seem to alter significantly the production of secondaries to Q1- the overall material volume intercepted by the beam is the main parameter (reasonable) - material other than Ti (lower A/rho) generate less secondaries (in particular pions)-a good balance should be found between weight / mechanical stiffness / andpion production-a hollow cylinder is a good solution, certainly does not worsen the performances ofthe present configuration