1. Goal of MICE:   out /  in of  10 -3  Assuming a standard (or agreed to) definition of 6-D cooling.  We can also assume that the tracker can give us particle position and momemtum that this won’t contribute significantly to the error.  Particle ID < 1% error  The sources of systematic errors in the COOLING CHANNEL need to be under control to a level that 10 independent sources will be < 10 -3 the same level  A. Blondel: keep each source of error <3*10 -4 level if we can. Systematics

2. Instrumentation and controls  Monitoring/safety  Data acquisition: Information on system state:  dE/dx density  Magnetic field  RF field  Calibration: Magnetic fields:  Offline field maps  Fringe fields  Survey  Online monitoring  Subsystems Absorbers RF Magnets

3. MICE Cooling channel Readout  What is necessary/ desirable? (physics calibration) Temperature inside the the absorber/vacuum Pressure on the LH2 outlet Optical occlusion methods (laser or non-laser) Temp/flow on Helium  Controls (questions of data acquisition ) LH2 Safety systems (subset of monitoring describing the “state” of the system) Magnetic field measurements: currents (probes) power supply location monitors RF: power, tuning, phase  Design considerations (depends on the final dimensions, routs, ports) LH2/flammable gas safety Clearance and strain relief Feedthroughs to outside electronics Noise cancellation/shielding Robustness

4. Example of such: Coil tilt tolerance. Take U. Bravar's MICE note 62: this looks like a quadratic dependence. it takes 4 0 =0.068 rad to get a change by 0.065 ==> it will take  (tilt) = 0.068rad x sqrt(0.001/0.065) to get a change by 0.001 this is 8mrad or 0.5 degrees. this sensitivity is (3x) smaller than the tolerance calculated by U. Bravar, because MICE will be sensitive to effects that are somewhat smaller than what is assumed to be needed for the cooling channel. similarly for the transverse position I find ~6mm tolerance instead of 20mm From A. Blondel TB talk:

5. The magnetic measurement devices as from the proposal see pages 52, 53. NB, we need to know *where* the probes are for this to work : The magnet system will be operated in a variety of currents and even polarities and it is difficult to assume that the field maps will simply be the linear superposition of those measured on each single magnet independently: forces are likely to squeeze the supports and move the coils in the cryostats. we will measure the magnetic field with probes (NIKHEF) (contacts Frank Linde and Frank Filthaut F.Linde@nikhef.nlF.Linde@nikhef.nl and filthaut@hef.kun.nl ) A. Blondel, TB talk

6. quantitydesign tol.monitoringwith beam beam optics transfer matrix: par ex. (p t, p L, phi, x 0, y 0 ) in (p t, p L, phi, x 0, y 0 ) out measure with no RF and empty absorbers each time one changes the mag set-up. positions of coils internal survey some mmalignment position monitor currentssome 10 -4 amp-meter PS monitoring mag fieldsome 10 -4 mag probes amount of absorber (in g/cm 2) 310 -3 = 1mm/35 cm density through T & P thickness how??? measure energy loss of muons for 0 absorber, 1 absorber, two absorbers with RF off. RF field3 10 -3 measure E to DE/E= 3.10 -3 measure energy of muons vs RF phase before and after cooling channel  What physics information needs to be extracted?  How can we control it by design tolerances / by monitoring / with the beam itself

7. FIRST PASS: at first look the required monitoring consists of -- Ampermeter for each coil -- Magnetic field measurement -- monitor position of probes and coil assemblies -- E RF (t) (gradient and phase of each cavity) -- absorber density (i.e. T & P) and thickness.  Look toward how we do this in a neutrino factory  Want to get information unique to this cooling experiment e.g. the muons themselves will provide very powerful cross- check (energy loss and energy gain, transfer matrix)