MEASUREMENT OF EMITTANCE AND OTHER OPTICS QUANTITIES V. Blackmore MICE Optics Review 14 th January, 2016 01/22.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 MICE Beamline: Plans for initial commissioning. Kevin Tilley, 16 th November. - 75days until commissioning Target, detectors, particle production Upstream.
Advertisements

Progress in the construction of the MICE cooling channel and first measurements Adam Dobbs, EPS-HEP, 23 rd July 2011.
1 Acceptance & Scraping Chris Rogers Analysis PC
PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
1 Progress report on Calorimeter design comparison simulations MICE detector phone conference Rikard Sandström.
FIGURE OF MERIT FOR MUON IONIZATION COOLING Ulisse Bravar University of Oxford 28 July 2004.
1 Angular Momentum from diffuser Beam picks up kinetic angular momentum (L kin ) when it sits in a field –Canonical angular momentum (L can ) is conserved.
Particle by Particle Emittance Measurement to High Precision Chris Rogers Imperial College/RAL 17th March 2005.
1 PID, emittance and cooling measurement Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE Analysis phone conference.
TJR Sept 22, 2004MICE Beamline Analysis -- SEPT041 MICE Beamline Analysis – SEPT04 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. September 22, 2004.
Analysis Meeting – – Slide 1 Beam momentum measurement using TOFs: progress report Analysis Meeting, February 2008 Mark Rayner.
Mar 31, 2005Steve Kahn -- Ckov and Tof Detector Simulation 1 Ckov1, Ckov2, Tof2 MICE Pid Tele-Meeting Steve Kahn 31 March 2005.
1 PID Detectors & Emittance Resolution Chris Rogers Rutherford Appleton Laboratory MICE CM17.
KEK Beam Test Koji YOSHIMURA KEK MICE Collaboration Meeting Koji YOSHIMURA KEK MICE Collaboration Meeting
1 G4MICE studies of PID transverse acceptance MICE video conference Rikard Sandström.
PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
1 Statistics Toy Monte Carlo David Forrest University of Glasgow.
March 31, Status of the TOF, Ckov and Virtual Detector Packages in G4Mice Steve Kahn Brookhaven National Laboratory Mice Collaboration Meeting March.
Beam line characterization with the TOFs1 Demonstrating the emittance-momentum matrix Mark Rayner, CM26 California, 24 March Initial.
Software parallel session summary MICE collaboration meeting INFN, Frascati 27/6-05.
Diffuser in G4MICE Victoria Blackmore 09/03/10 Analysis Meeting 1/8.
1 Losses in the Cooling Channel Malcolm Ellis PID Meeting 1 st March 2005.
Simulated real beam into simulated MICE1 Mark Rayner CM26.
1 Progress report on Calorimeter design comparison simulations MICE detector phone conference Rikard Sandström.
Oct 15, 2003 Video Conference Energy Deposition Steve Kahn Page 1 Energy Deposition in MICE Absorbers and Coils Steve Kahn October 15, 2003.
Jun 27, 2005S. Kahn -- Ckov1 Simulation 1 Ckov1 Simulation and Performance Steve Kahn June 27, 2005 MICE Collaboration PID Meeting.
MICE Collaboration Meeting 8th Octorber KEK Beam Test Analysis Hideyuki Sakamoto 16 th MICE Collaboration Meeting 8 th October 2006.
Mark Rayner, Analysis workshop 4 September ‘08: Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing, slide 1 Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing Analysis.
1 Chris Rogers MICE Collaboration Meeting 11th Feb 2005 Tracking and Cooling performance of G4MICE.
1 EMCal design MICE collaboration meeting Fermilab Rikard Sandström.
Analysis of MICE Chris Rogers 1 Imperial College/RAL Thursday 28 October, With thanks to John Cobb.
Oct 15, 2003 Video Conference Energy Deposition Steve Kahn Page 1 Energy Deposition in MICE Absorbers and Coils Steve Kahn November 2, 2003.
Tracker Software Update Adam Dobbs, MICE CM37 7 th Nov 2013.
Report on the Analysis Group & Plans V. Blackmore MICE VC 163 Thursday, 12 th December /11.
Emittance measurement: ID muons with time-of-flight Measure x,y and t at TOF0, TOF1 Use momentum-dependent transfer matrices iteratively to determine trace.
Emittance measurement: ID muons with time-of-flight Measure x,y and t at TOF0, TOF1 Use momentum-dependent transfer matrices to map  path Assume straight.
Results from Step I of MICE D Adey 2013 International Workshop on Neutrino Factories, Super-beams and Beta- beams Working Group 3 – Accelerator Topics.
A NALYSIS OVERVIEW & “T HE M ISSING P HYSICS ” V. Blackmore CM38 23rd February /14.
Particle Production in the MICE Beamline IPAC10 Linda Coney, UC Riverside, Adam Dobbs, Imperial College London, Yordan Karadzhov, Sofia University The.
MICE at STFC-RAL The International Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment -- Design, engineer and build a section of cooling channel capable of giving the.
Marco apollonio/J.CobbMICE coll. meeting 16- RAL - (10/10/2006) 1 Transmittance, scraping and maximum radii for MICE STEPVI M. Apollonio – University of.
Oct 15, 2003 Video Conference Energy Deposition Steve Kahn Page 1 Energy Deposition in MICE Absorbers and Coils Steve Kahn November 2, 2003.
M. Ellis - MICE Collaboration Meeting - Thursday 28th October Sci-Fi Tracker Performance Software Status –RF background simulation –Beam simulation.
PID Detector Requirements for Emittance Measurement Chris Rogers, MICE PID Review, Thursday Oct 12.
Progress in the construction of the MICE cooling channel and first measurements Adam Dobbs, EPS-HEP, 23 rd July 2011.
26 Oct 2010PC Physics Requirements of Software from Chris R ~19 Oct. My.
Analysis meeting: Beam momentum measurements using TOFs Tuesday, 22 January 2008 Slide 1 of 10 Beam momentum measurement using.
18 th March 2008Measuring momentum using the TOFsSlide 1 Measuring momentum using TOF0 and TOF1 Progress report Mark Rayner (Oxford/RAL) Analysis Meeting,
M. Ellis - MICE Collaboration Meeting - Wednesday 27th October Sci-Fi Tracker Performance Software Status –RF background simulation –Beam simulation.
Monte Carlo simulation of the particle identification (PID) system of the Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment (MICE) Mice is mainly an accelerator physics.
MEASUREMENT OF EMITTANCE AND OTHER OPTICS QUANTITIES V. Blackmore 01/19.
Mark Rayner – Analysis SessionCM25, 4 November The TOF detectors: Beyond particle identification Mark Rayner The University of Oxford MICE CM25.
MICE S TEP IV P HYSICS ‘D ELIVERABLES ’ V. Blackmore MAP 2014 Spring Meeting 30 th May, /15 AKA “What will we learn from Step IV?”
S TATUS OF THE P HYSICS A NALYSIS V. Blackmore MICE Project Board 29 th April, /30.
MICE. Outline Experimental methods and goals Beam line Diagnostics – In HEP parlance – the detectors Magnet system 2MICE Optics Review January 14, 2016.
Marco apollonioAnalysis Meeting (9/12/2006)1 transmission vs amplitude with a finite size diffuser M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.
C. Rogers, ASTeC Intense Beams Group Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
MICE. Outline Experimental methods and goals Beam line Diagnostics – In HEP parlance – the detectors Magnet system 2MICE Optics Review January 14, 2016.
Step IV Physics Paper Readiness
Global Track Matching and Fitting
Beam Energy-Loss measurement
MICE Analysis Status and Plans
C. Rogers, ASTeC Intense Beams Group Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
MICE Beamline Status m. apollonio 17 December 2009 MICE VC
Tracker to Solenoid Alignment
Validating Magnets Using Beam
Global PID MICE CM43 29/10/15 Celeste Pidcott University of Warwick
C. Rogers, ASTeC Intense Beams Group Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
How to turn on MICE Step IV
The Detector System of the MICE Experiment
Presentation transcript:

MEASUREMENT OF EMITTANCE AND OTHER OPTICS QUANTITIES V. Blackmore MICE Optics Review 14 th January, /22

Depends on material Depends on magnetic lattice Depends on upstream beam line (mostly diffuser) Depends on particle species  backgrounds! Multiple scattering Ionisation Cooling Measure a change in emittance PHYSICS GOALS 02/22

THE MICE MUON BEAMLINE 03/22

The MICE Muon Beamline during Step I EMR 04/22

STEP I CHARACTERISATION 1 DOI: /epjc/s /epjc/s /22

MEASURING EMITTANCE IN MICE 06/19 06/22

MEASURING EMITTANCE Run 7469, selected (x, Px) distribution at TKU plane 1 07/22

RUN 7469 Conventional Magnet Current (A) D D DS Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Superconducting Coil Current (A) SSU-E2249 SSU-C278 SSU-E1234 SSU-M20.0 SSU-M10.0 FCU-upstream0.0 FCU-downstream0.0 SSD-M10.0 SSD-M20.0 SSD-E10.0 SSD-C0.0 SSD-E20.0 Taken on Oct 7 th 2015, from 15:39 to 16:48 (3, 200) mu+ optics Only 3 (of 5) coils powered in SSU Expect non-uniform field across tracker (will return to this!) ISIS at 700MeV (not 800MeV) 08/22

SELECTION CRITERIA Only use particles that satisfy all of the following: 1.Have a spacepoint (hit) in TOF0 2.Have a spacepoint (hit) in TOF1 3.Have a spacepoint (hit) in all 5 tracker planes 4.Have a time-of-flight from TOF0  TOF1 between 27 and 40ns 5.Have a good track fit The downstream tracker is ignored, as is TOF2/KL/EMR for the moment. PID selection can and will be improved. 14’392 particles to “have fun” with! 09/22

SANITY CHECKS ~1m PRY Upstream tracker (plane 5) 10/22

SANITY CHECKS Measurement at…Mean P (MeV) TOF0  TOF1 Pattern Recognition (TKU)194.2 Kalman fit (TKU) Expected P at TKU plane 5~189 Run 7469, |P| distribution at TKU plane 5 11/22

CONSISTENCY CHECKS Run 7469, Pt distribution at TKU plane 5 12/22

CONSISTENCY CHECKS Run 7469, Pz distribution at TKU plane 5 13/22

CALCULATING THE COVARIANCE MATRIX xyPxPy x y Px Py At tracker plane 1 (reference plane): From 14’392 particles: Comment: beam is not rotationally symmetric 14/22 Note difference from report. Data has since been reprocessed with improved track fit quality estimates

CALCULATING THE COVARIANCE MATRIX 15/22

CALCULATING THE COVARIANCE MATRIX Sample A Sample B o Measure covariance matrix of Sample A at plane 5 o Measure covariance matrix of Sample B at plane 1 (reference plane) o Compare… Beam direction Plane 1 (reference plane) Plane 5 16/22

CALCULATING THE COVARIANCE MATRIX Sample A Sample B Beam direction Plane 1 (reference plane) Plane 5 z (mm) A B o Reduces sample size to ~7’000 particles/sample o Large emittance change across tracker volume implies work still to be done… 17/22

SOURCES OF UNCERTAINTY o Kalman track fit (currently) assumes a 4T uniform field o With E1-C-E2 coils powered at full current, and others at 0, field is not flat across tracker o PRY enhances field strength o MC studies in progress to assess fully o Can estimate effect from pattern recognition o Not a perfect estimate, as field variation will also affect circle radii… Field calculated assuming warm coil dimensions and no PRY 18/22

SOURCES OF UNCERTAINTY Plane 5 (Sample A) Plane 5 (Sample A) 19/22

Plane 5 (Sample A) SOURCES OF UNCERTAINTY Plane 1Plane 5 Plane 1 (Sample B) NB: Emittance here is calculated using pattern recognition estimates, not Kalman track fit estimates as on previous slide Currently assume this Field calculated assuming warm coil dimensions and no PRY 20/22

SOURCES OF UNCERTAINTY o The degree to which the following affect the emittance measurement are under investigation: o Field non-uniformity – Kalman track fit can account for this o Field scale (i.e. PRY enhancement) o Improved coil geometry from field map data o Pions and electrons mis-identified as muons o Independent measurement of emittance using Step I method (TOF0  TOF1) can be used to cross-check measurement at tracker, by evolving ellipse back through SSU field to TOF1. 21/22

SUMMARY Run 7469, phase space distribution at TKU plane 1 22/22