A Mini-Primer for Parity Quality Beam (as seen from the Accelerator)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Journées Instrumentation du GDR Nucléon 8-9 Avril 2008, CEA Saclay Polarized Positrons at the Jefferson Laboratory (i) Physics motivations (ii) Principe.
Advertisements

Optics, Eugene Hecht, Chpt. 8
Source Outlook High polarization strained-layer photocathodes were activated in both electron guns during the summer shutdown, with usual QE (0.2% at 850.
5 MeV Mott Measurement for CEBAF Operations group Joe Grames, Marcy Stutzman February 14 th, 2007 Sir Nevill F. Mott at the ceremony with his Nobel Prize.
CEBAF Photoinjector: What’s new, what’s the same since HAPPEx 2004? What needs to be done? M. Poelker, HAPPEx collaboration meeting, Feb. 18, 2005.
Parity Quality Beam (PQB) April 07, Notes: 1.For each BPM, the wires are: +X+, +X-, +Y+, +Y- 2.There are only two injector BPMs we are not reading:
R. Michaels PVDIS at Nov 2009 Beam Requirements for PVDIS Property ValueRun-Avg Hel. Correl. 1-Day Hel. Correl. Energy 6 and 4.8 GeVdE/E < 1 ppm < 5 ppm.
1 Electron Beam Polarimetry for EIC/eRHIC W. Lorenzon (Michigan) Introduction Polarimetry at HERA Lessons learned from HERA Polarimetry at EIC.
1. Describe helicity magnet (HM) system 2. Con’s of PZT’s & Pro’s of HM–type system for BT measurements 3. Other Possibilities, Comments from BT & Planning.
PN12 Workshop JLab, Nov 2004 R. Michaels Jefferson Lab Parity Violating Neutron Densities Z of Weak Interaction : Clean Probe Couples Mainly to Neutrons.
Electronic Cross-talk & Ground Loop Elimination in Injector Riad Suleiman Center for Injectors and Sources.
PQB Photocathode Analyzing Power Study May 19, 2009.
JLab Polarized Source Happex Collaboration Meeting May 18, 2007 P. Adderley, J. Brittian, J. Clark, J. Grames, J. Hansknecht, M. Poelker, M. Stutzman,
PAVI ’06 Milos May 20, 2006 Kent Paschke – University of Massachusetts Controlling Helicity-Correlated Asymmetries in a Polarized Electron Beam Kent Paschke.
Polarized Source Development Run Results Riad Suleiman Injector Group November 18, 2008.
Real-time Parity Feedback John Hansknecht & Riad Suleiman April 28, 2009.
Hall A Parity Workshop (May 10, 2002), 1 Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Depart. Of Energy Thomas Jefferson.
/SC-PAC Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Depart. Of Energy Joe Grames CEBAF Operations
Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Depart. Of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Strained Superlattice.
Short Tutorial on Causes of Position Differences… …and what we can do about them (most slides stolen from Cates PAVI ’04 talk)
G 0 Coordinator Update & “To-Do List” Joe Grames William & Mary, June 5-6, 2006  Hall C Beam Line Tasks  Accelerator Preparation Tasks  Beam Halo 
1 Options for low energy spin manipulation Ken Moffeit, SLAC 2009 Linear Collider Workshop of the Americas 29 September to 3 October 2009 K. Moffeit, D.
Beam Polarimetry Matthew Musgrave NPDGamma Collaboration Meeting Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oct. 15, 2010.
Operated by Jefferson Science Associates, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Polarized Electron Beam.
ExperimentEnergy (GeV) Pol (%) I (µA) TargetA pv (ppb) Maximum Charge Asym (ppb) Maximum Position Diff (nm) Maximum Angle Diff (nrad) Maximum Size Diff.
May 17, 2006Sebastian Baunack, PAVI06 The Parity Violation A4 Experiment at forward and backward angles Strange Form Factors The Mainz A4 Experiment Result.
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility G0 Collaboration Meeting, June 18-19, 2003 Updates G0 Tiger Laser High Polarization Photocathodes Mott polarimeter.
Polarized Positrons at the Jefferson Laboratory Idaho State University, Idaho Accelerator Center, Jefferson Lab, LPC Clermont-Ferrand, LPSC Grenoble, Old.
Helicity Magnets Commissioning February 7, 2007 Hari Areti, Chao, Brad Cumbia, Jeff Dale, Richard Dickson, Joe Grames, Roger Flood, Scott Higgins, Matt.
G 0 PC Installation and Beam Studies Stephanie Bailey Riad Suleiman.
Source Systematics PITA - type effects The importance of controlling the analyzer-axis –Two Pockels cells –Half-wave plate Position asymmetries –Lensing.
Beam Optics for Parity Experiments Mark Pitt Virginia Tech (DHB) Electron beam optics in the injector, accelerator, and transport lines to the experimental.
Injector Status & Commissioning QWeak Collaboration Meeting May 24, 2010 P. Adderley, J. Clark, S. Covert, J. Grames, J. Hansknecht, M. Poelker, M. Stutzman,
Parity Experiments and JLab Injector Riad Suleiman February 5, 2016.
CEBAF Source and Injector Status PREx-II Collaboration Mtg Feb. 26, 2016 Matt Poelker and Joe Grames Center for Injectors and Sources.
G 0 Project Coordinator Report Joe Grames “Big Picture” Schedule Preparations Polarized Source Injector Accelerator Hall C Accelerator Plans for 687 MeV.
Operated by Jefferson Science Associates, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Polarized Electron Beams.
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Depart. Of Energy The Department.
November 17, 2008 A. Brachmann Slide 1 ILC polarized Electron Source R&D Update LCWS 2008 A. Brachmann, J. Sheppard, F. Zhou - SLAC National Accelerator.
Parity Quality Beam (PQB) B-Team Meeting September 10, 2008.
Polarized Injector & Upgrade Schedule QWeak Collaboration Meeting November 06, 2009 P. Adderley, J. Clark, J. Grames, J. Hansknecht, M. Poelker, M. Stutzman,
Polarized Injector Update
Parity Violation Experiments & Beam Requirements
E-beam scanner experience at FNAL
with help from Riad Sulieman, Arne Freyberger, and Joe Grames
Coupling Correction at the Australian Synchrotron
G0 Backward Angle Accelerator Preparations
G0 Accelerator Planning Meeting (11/1/05)
Parity Violation Experiments at JLEIC
Parity Quality Beam (PQB)
5 MeV Mott Measurement for CEBAF Operations group
Accelerator Issues Raised in Hall A Parity Collaboration Meeting, April B-Team Meeting April 29, 2009.
Thoughts on why G0 needed position feedback and HAPPEX didn't
Thoughts on why G0 needed position feedback and HAPPEX didn't
QWeak Collaboration Meeting
G0 PC Installation and Beam Studies
G0 PC Installation and Beam Studies
Qweak Coordination Meeting
Polarized Source Development Run Results
Adiabatic Damping and Parity Quality of Low Energy
Feedback Systems Joe Grames Hall A Parity Meeting Jefferson Lab
Helicity Magnets for PQB Feedback Helicity Magnets for PZT Booster
Polarized Source: Recent Activities
PQB Meeting March 05, 2009.
Injector Setup for G0 and HAPPEX & Lessons Learned
G0 PC Installation and Beam Studies
LCLS Injector/Diagnostics David H. Dowell, SLAC April 24, 2002
Elliptical polarization
MEIC Polarized Electron Source
Injector Commissioning & Optimization
Presentation transcript:

A Mini-Primer for Parity Quality Beam (as seen from the Accelerator) Outline: Polarized Beam Experiments Parity Experiments (the bar lowers) The Imperfect World Sources of Problems Measurement, Controls & Feedback Summary PQB Meeting April 08, 2004 J. Grames

Why Polarized Beams and Targets? To learn the significance of particle spin in the nuclear interactions studied at JLab we take advantage of preparing the beam and/or target electrons to be polarized. Either (beam or target) is polarized if there is a net difference in the number of spin states along some physical direction, e.g., (N+ - N-) Polarization = (N+ + N-) (9 - 1) = 80% (9 + 1)

Polarization Experiments The common technique you’ll find for learning the spin physics interaction is to reverse the sign of the beam (or target) polarization and measure the relative difference in detected signal: (R+ - R-) Aexp = = Aphysics • Pbeam • Ptarget (R+ + R-) Flip one or other… For most experiments the z-component is important. This explains why: Experiments need longitudinal beam polarization. The word helicity is used (spin parallel/anti-parallel momentum).

Parity Experiments (R+ - R-) Aexp = (R+ + R-) Here’s the catch. For parity experiments the experimental asymmetry is very small. Experiments like G0 and HAPPEX-2 are interested in measuring asymmetries of order 1-10 ppm. One of the presently approved experiments in Hall A would seek something less than 1 ppm. Further down the road, it becomes even smaller. The challenge for these experiments is generally controlling the systematics, as opposed to making the measurement (spectrometer/detectors/electronics). Aexp = (R+ - R-) (R+ + R-)

The Imperfect World So, if R+ or R- changes because of anything other than the spin physics of the interaction, it is a false asymmetry. This results in the seemingly unattainable, golden rule for parity experiments: No beam property other than the beam polarization should change when the beam polarization reverses sign. But, beam properties do change: Intensity (first order) Position (second order) Energy (second order) These come in different ways: Laser light Photocathode Accelerator These happen before the electrons are even a beam…

Total Experiment Intensity Asymmetry Parity Violation Experiments at CEBAF Parity violation experiments continue to set the standard for Polarized Source performance. Experiment Physics Asymmetry Total Experiment Position Difference Total Experiment Intensity Asymmetry HAPPEX-I 13 ppm 10 nm 1.0 ppm G0 2 to 50 ppm 20 nm HAPPEX-He 8 ppm 3 nm 0.6 ppm HAPPEX-H 1.3 ppm 2 nm Qweak 0.3 ppm 0.1 ppm Lead <1 ppm 1 nm

The Polarized Electron Source Electrons are produced via photoemission, using a laser beam. The sign and degree of the electron beam polarization is determined by the sign and degree of circular polarization of the laser beam. The lasers produce linearly polarized light. With the application of high voltage (few kiloVolts) Pockels cells (electro-optic devices) convert the linearly polarized laser beam into a circularly polarized laser beam. By reversing the Pockels cell voltage the helicity of the laser beam, and thus the electron beam, is reversed. This is the “Helicity” reversal. Anything that changes with this reversal is said to be “Helicity Correlated”.

What can defy the golden rule? Pockels Cell Intervening Optics HV Steering (Position) PITA (Intensity) Lensing Cathode

More QE Quality of Laser Polarization & the Photocathode Photocathode Purity: Even 99.99% circular light is 1.4% linear. When circular light reverses sign linear light rotates by 90 degrees. High-P photocathodes have a QE anisotropy, meaning they emit a different number of electrons in orthogonal directions defined by the material, so voila, the intensity can vary by the percent of linear light. More QE Less QE Uniformity: The profile uniformity of the laser polarization depends on the Pockels cell crystal material and cell design. Poor uniformity can result in the centroid of the transverse charge distribution moving, producing a measured position difference. 99.92% 99.93% 99.95% 99.90% Laser profile

Accelerator A HC position difference on ANY aperture results in a HC intensity asymmetry. (Note we use absolute difference for position and relative asymmetry for intensity). Apertures (Profile & Position): Emittance/Spatial Filters (A1-A4) Temporal Filter (RF chopping apertures) Beam scraping monitors. Any piece of beampipe! The small apertures and tight spots (separation?) Adiabatic damping of the beam emittance may gain factors of 10-20 because of the reduction in amplitude of the beam envelope. Poor optics can reduce this gain by 10x. Poor optics stability can vary response between source and user.

Diagnostics for Measuring HC Beam Properties BCM’s (intensity) and BPM’s (position) are the main diagnostics used. Dedicated parity DAQ’s for both G0 and HAPPEX-2 exist in the injector and in the experimental halls. The beam properties each period of the helicity reversal (~33 ms). We integrate 10,000 samples to get a statistically meaningful result. Although it is intellectually satisfying to measure the parity beam quality at the injector the diagnostics measure all beams simultaneously.

The 3-User Laser Table All beams have common path

Laser Beam Controls (common to all lasers) 30 Hz PZT (optics) Pockels cell (makes circular light) Steering Lens (positions laser on photocathode) Insertable halfwaveplate (flips sign of polarization) Rotatable half waveplate (nulls analyzing power)

Laser Beam Controls (independent feedback knobs) PZT Mirror for Position IA cell for Intensity Laser output linearly polarized Add non-HC elliptical polarization Analyze light Add HC elliptical polarization Commissioning: Helicity Correction Magnets for Position

Injector Helicity Magnets Installation (0L01-0L03) January 5-6, 2004 MHE0L03V, MHE0L03H MHE0L02H MHE0L01V 110 VAC Isolation Transformer Grounded cage containing electrically isolated helicity magnet controls (VME) Tube protecting Litz magnet wire

HC Software Controls The parity experiments want to null the HC effects at the hall (or further upstream). The parity users implement their own feedback algorithm using the HC knobs of the injector.

Summary & Outlook Parity experiments are different than most experiments done at Jlab because the experiment includes the accelerator performance. From the first Jlab parity experiment (HAPPEX-I) the EGG and users have worked together on parity issues concerning the polarized source. Recently, with G0 and looking forward to more difficult parity experiments broader involvement of the accelerator division (CASA) has become critical. Other electron accelerators have a longer history of parity violation experiments, e.g. SLAC or MIT-Bates, however Jlab is poised to confront some of the most difficult proposed. We need to continue being more comprehensive for the present and future parity experiments to be successful.