Beam dynamics and linac optics studies for medical proton accelerators

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EMMA Magnet Design Ben Shepherd Magnetics and Radiation Sources Group ASTeC STFC Daresbury Laboratory.
Advertisements

A Capture Section Design for the CLIC Positron Source A. VIVOLI* Thanks to: L. RINOLFI (CERN) R. CHEHAB (IPNL & LAL / IN2P3-CNRS) O. DADOUN, P. LEPERCQ,
Energy deposition and neutron background studies for a low energy proton therapy facility Roxana Rata*, Roger Barlow* * International Institute for Accelerator.
Design and Performance Expectation of ALPHA accelerator S.Y. Lee, IU 2/26/ Introduction 2. Possible CIS re-build and parameters 3. Issues in the.
FODO-based Quadrupole Cooling Channel M. Berz, D. Errede, C. Johnstone, K. Makino, Dave Neuffer, Andy Van Ginneken.
Simulated real beam into simulated MICE1 Mark Rayner CM26.
FFAG Workshopfermilab April 2005 f Summary: FFAG WORKSHOP nonscaling electron model muon FFAGs C. Johnstone Fermilab.
Accelerator Physics  Basic Formalism  Linear Accelerators  Circular Accelerators  Magnets  Beam Optics  Our Accelerator Greg LeBlanc Lead Accelerator.
ALPHA Storage Ring Indiana University Xiaoying Pang.
Yichao Jing 11/11/2010. Outline Introduction Linear lattice design and basic parameters Combined function magnets study and feasibility Nonlinear dynamics.
FFAG-ERIT Accelerator (NEDO project) 17/04/07 Kota Okabe (Fukui Univ.) for FFAG-DDS group.
S.J. Brooks RAL, Chilton, OX11 0QX, UK Options for a Multi-GeV Ring Ramping field synchrotron provides fixed tunes and small.
The EMMA Project Rob Edgecock STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory & Huddersfield University.
The EMMA Project Rob Edgecock STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory & Huddersfield University *BNL, CERN, CI, FNAL, JAI, LPSC Grenoble, STFC, TRIUMF.
Ajit Kurup, C. Bontoiu, M. Aslaninejad, J. Pozimski, Imperial College London. A.Bogacz, V. S. Morozov, Y.R. Roblin Jefferson Laboratory K. B. Beard, Muons,
Low Emittance RF Gun Developments for PAL-XFEL
~ gun3.9 GHz cavity Bunch compressor 3 ILC cryomodules 45 deg. spectro injector main linac user area disp. area transport line Overview of.
Compton/Linac based Polarized Positrons Source V. Yakimenko BNL IWLC2010, Geneva, October 18-22, 2010.
DTL: Basic Considerations M. Comunian & F. Grespan Thanks to J. Stovall, for the help!
Quantitative Optimisation Studies of the Muon Front-End for a Neutrino Factory S. J. Brooks, RAL, Chilton, Oxfordshire, U.K. Tracking Code Non-linearised.
CLIC RF manipulation for positron at CLIC Scenarios studies on hybrid source Freddy Poirier 12/08/2010.
SIMPLE CHARACTERIZATION METHOD OF SMALL HIGH GRADIENT PERMANENT MAGNET QUADRUPOLES Concetta Ronsivalle,Luigi Picardi, Monia Vadrucci (ENEA C.R. Frascati,
Design of an Isochronous FFAG Ring for Acceleration of Muons G.H. Rees RAL, UK.
Muon cooling with Li lenses and high field solenoids V. Balbekov, MAP Winter Meeting 02/28-03/04, 2011 OUTLINE  Introduction: why the combination of Li.
Magnet Design & Construction for EMMA
Non-scaling FFAGs in UK EMMA Requirement for (at least) one non-scaling FFAG clear: - multi-resonance crossings - huge/tiny momentum compaction - asynchronous.
PROTON LINAC FOR INDIAN SNS Vinod Bharadwaj, SLAC (reporting for the Indian SNS Design Team)
CLARA Gun Cavity Optimisation NVEC 05/06/2014 P. Goudket G. Burt, L. Cowie, J. McKenzie, B. Militsyn.
Optics considerations for ERL test facilities Bruno Muratori ASTeC Daresbury Laboratory (M. Bowler, C. Gerth, F. Hannon, H. Owen, B. Shepherd, S. Smith,
Accelerator Science and Technology Centre POST-LINAC BEAM TRANSPORT AND COLLIMATION FOR THE UK’S NEW LIGHT SOURCE PROJECT D. Angal-Kalinin,
Accelerator Science and Technology Centre Extended ALICE Injector J.W. McKenzie, B.D. Muratori, Y.M. Saveliev STFC Daresbury Laboratory,
Linacs for Cargo Screening Dr Graeme Burt Lancaster University, Cockcroft Institute CERN High gradient Day 2015.
Max Cornacchia, SLAC LCLS Project Overview BESAC, Feb , 2001 LCLS Project Overview What is the LCLS ? Transition from 3 rd generation light sources.
Design Optimization of MEIC Ion Linac & Pre-Booster B. Mustapha, Z. Conway, B. Erdelyi and P. Ostroumov ANL & NIU MEIC Collaboration Meeting JLab, October.
New Gantry Idea for H + /C 6+ Therapy G H Rees, ASTeC, RAL 4 th September, 2008.
R.Chehab/ R&D on positron sources for ILC/ Beijing, GENERATION AND TRANSPORT OF A POSITRON BEAM CREATED BY PHOTONS FROM COMPTON PROCESS R.CHEHAB.
BDS Lattice Design : EDR plans GWP03 Meeting 04/12/2007.
Capture and Transport Simulations of Positrons in a Compton Scheme Positron Source A. VIVOLI*, A. VARIOLA (LAL / IN2P3-CNRS), R. CHEHAB (IPNL & LAL / IN2P3-CNRS)
Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Depart. Of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Alex Bogacz,
Operated by JSA for the U.S. Department of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Alex Bogacz Status and Plans for Linac and RLAs.
ELI PHOTOINJECTOR PARAMETERS: PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS AND SIMULATIONS C. RONSIVALLE.
Operated by JSA for the U.S. Department of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Alex Bogacz IDS- NF Acceleration Meeting, Jefferson Lab,
Operated by JSA for the U.S. Department of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Alex Bogacz NuFact’08, Valencia, Spain, July 4, 2008 Acceleration.
Particle Physics Group Meeting January 4 th – 5 th 2010 Commissioning EMMA, the Worlds First Non Scaling Fixed Field – Alternating Gradient Accelerator.
WG3 closing summary Rob Apsimon (Tom Kroc, George Coutrakon)
Plans and Activities at CERN
CALIFES A proposed electron beam test facility at CERN
Probe: Proton Boosting Extension for Imaging and Therapy
Present and possible future schemes for hadron therapy linacs Alberto Degiovanni for the ADAM team HG2017 Workshop , Valencia.
J-PARC main ring lattice An overview
Positron capture section studies for CLIC Hybrid source - baseline
M. Migliorati, C. Vaccarezza INFN - LNF
Injector Cyclotron for a Medical FFAG
Beam-beam effects in eRHIC and MeRHIC
Have a chance to operate your own beam at CERN
Physics design on Injector-1 RFQ
Developments on Proposed
A Comparative Study of Biological Effects of VHEE, Protons and other Radiotherapy Modalities Kristina Small University of Manchester, Christie NHS Foundation.
Longitudinal Diagnostics for start-up
R. Bartolini Diamond Light Source Ltd
Capture and Transmission of polarized positrons from a Compton Scheme
SuperB e+/e- main linac and diagnostics studies
CEPC-SPPC Beihang Symposium
Explanation of the Basic Principles and Goals
MEBT1&2 design study for C-ADS
Physics Design on Injector I
Injector Experimental Results John Schmerge, SSRL/SLAC April 24, 2002
DTL M. Comunian M. Eshraqi.
Bunch Compressor Beam Line Optics
Presentation transcript:

Beam dynamics and linac optics studies for medical proton accelerators R. Apsimon, G. Burt, S. Pitman Lancaster University / Cockcroft Institute H. Owen Manchester University / Cockcroft Institute

Overview Brief introduction to cyclinacs Beam dynamics Linac optics Transmission through a cavity Optimisation of beam parameters Linac optics Spatial considerations Quadrupole considerations

Brief introduction to cyclinacs I Cyclotron protons accelerated through linac Allows final beam energy to be varied Allows treatment and imaging in single machine ~250 MeV protons for treatment ~350 MeV protons for imaging Due to Bragg peak, protons deposit most of their energy in a very small range Minimises dose to healthy tissue Ideal for cancer treatment

Energy deposition through tissue

Brief introduction to cyclinacs II 𝑓 𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑛 = 𝑒𝐵 2𝜋𝑚 =15.25𝐵 MHz cyclotron RF linac ProBE cyclinac: - 230 MeV protons @ cyclotron extraction 330 MeV protons @ exit of RF linac (50 MV/m @ 12 GHz)

Brief introduction to cyclinacs III Typical frequencies 𝑓 𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑛 ~ 30 −100 𝑀𝐻𝑧 𝑓 𝑅𝐹 ~ 3 −12 𝐺𝐻𝑧 𝜎 𝑧,𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑜 ≈ 2 3 𝜆 𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑛 ≫ 𝜆 𝑅𝐹 Need to optimise linac and beam parameters for all RF phases (before RF capture)

Christie Hospital proton therapy centre 230 MeV cyclotron provides protons for cancer treatment in treatment rooms. 3m of space for linac in R&D room to allow protons for imaging 3 treatment rooms 1 R&D room 1 2 3 R

R&D 4th room

Christie Hospital: R&D room 3m of beam line to allow for tests of linac for future upgrade of R&D room into an integrated imaging and treatment cyclinac. ~1.8 – 2 m for RF cavities ~1 – 1.2 m for matching sections between cavities Matching sections must be at least 20 cm to allow for quadrupoles, bellows, flanges and diagnostics; limiting the total number of cavities to 6. Need to determine transmission through cavity to determine maximum cavity length and therefore minimum number of cavities in linac. Need ~10% transverse transmission through a cavity for scheme to be feasible.

Transmission through a cavity 2 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝐿 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑆 0 𝑆 1

Transmission through a cavity 𝑥 0 = −𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑥 0 = 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑥 1 = 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 Maximum area phase space ellipse inside parallelogram touches the midpoint of each line of the parallelogram. This allows us to determine the beam parameters 𝑥 1 =− 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣

Transmission through a cavity Taking into account the energy gain through the cavity the equations for the lines of the parallelogram can be expressed in terms of the transfer matrix through the cavity: 𝑥 0 =± 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑥 1 =± 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 = 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝑅 11 𝑥 0 + 𝑅 12 𝑥′ 0 And the maximal phase space ellipse touches the parallelogram at: 𝑥 0 =± 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑥′ 0 =∓ 𝑅 11 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑅 12 And 𝑥 0 =0 𝑥′ 0 =± 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑅 12 The normalised emittance for the maximal phase space ellipse is: 𝜀 𝑛,𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 = 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 2 𝑅 12

Transmission through a cavity The normalised 1σ emittance of the beam from the cyclotron is: 𝜀 𝑛,𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑛 ~5 mm mrad If we assume that the beam is Gaussian, then we can estimate the transverse transmission, 𝑇 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠 , of the cavity: 𝑇 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠 =erf 𝜀 𝑛,𝑥 𝜀 𝑛,𝑦 𝜀 𝑛,𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 2 𝜋 𝜀 𝑛,𝑥 3 2

Transmission through a cavity

Transmission through a cavity Recall that the lines defining the acceptance region of phase are: 𝑥 0 =± 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑥 1 =± 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 = 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝑅 11 𝑥 0 + 𝑅 12 𝑥′ 0 And the maximal phase space ellipse touches the parallelogram at: 𝑥 0 =± 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑥′ 0 =∓ 𝑅 11 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑅 12 And 𝑥 0 =0 𝑥′ 0 =± 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑅 12

Optimisation of beam parameters Since we know the locations where the phase space ellipse touches the parallelogram, we can relate those positions to Twiss parameters: 𝜀 𝛽 = 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑅 12 𝛽𝜀 = 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝛼 𝜀 𝛽 = 𝑅 11 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝑅 12 And we obtain the optimal beam parameters at the entrance of the cavity as: 𝛽 0 = 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝑅 12 𝛼 0 = 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝑅 11 𝜀 𝑛 = 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 2 𝑅 12 And at the end of the cavity as: 𝛽 1 = 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝑅 12 𝛼 0 =− 𝛽 𝑟1 𝛾 𝑟1 𝛽 𝑟0 𝛾 𝑟0 𝑅 11

Optimisation of beam parameters As the bunch length is much greater than the RF wavelength, we need to optimise the cavity for all phases. If we average the transfer matrix of an RF cavity for all phases, we get a drift length and the optimal Twiss parameters become: 𝛽 0 = 𝛽 1 = 𝐿 𝑐𝑎𝑣 𝛼 0 =− 𝛼 1 =1 𝜀 𝑛 = 𝛽 𝑟 𝛾 𝑟 𝑟 𝑐𝑎𝑣 2 𝐿 𝑐𝑎𝑣

Linac optics Maximise transmission: Need to match beam parameters through each cavity Need quadrupole matching section Medical proton accelerators must be as compact as possible Need to minimise length of matching sections Maximise accelerating gradient of cavities

Quadrupole considerations Each matching section ~24 cm Need strong quadrupole fields (250 – 400 m-2) to match optics in such small space: Permanent magnet quadrupole Small aperture electromagnetic quadrupoles Quadrupole length: 3 – 3.5 cm Bore radius: 1.5 – 2.5 mm Drifts between quads: ~2 – 6 cm Need minimum of ~ 2 cm for bellows, flanges etc.

How many quadrupoles per matching section? Need to match 4 constraints ( 𝛽 𝑥 , 𝛽 𝑦 , 𝛼 𝑥 and 𝛼 𝑦 ) so need 4 degrees of freedom. So the options are: 2 quads + 2 drift Relatively long drifts Large beam size through quadrupole aperture Large losses 3 quads + 1 drift Drift length > 2 cm (due to bellows, flanges, diagnostics…) Drift length < 4 cm (to prevent large beam losses through quads) Range of drift length too small to find perfect solution 4 quads (all drift lengths fixed) Perfect solution exists Can tweak quad lengths and bore radii to give more favourable parameters if needed

3 m X-band cavity Permanent magnet quadrupole (PMQ) 30 cm 24 cm 3 cm 2.4 cm

Conclusions Studies of transverse beam dynamics through cavities have been undertaken: Maximum transverse transmission through a cavity determined Verified against tracking simulations Determined optimal beam parameters through cavity to give maximum transverse transmission Matching sections designed to match beam parameters between cavities within the spatial limits. Still to do: Study beam dynamics through full linac structure Only single cavities investigated so far Verify transmission studies for short bunches Design matching sections for entire linac structure