Status of Reference Network Simulations John Dale TILC09 20 April 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Update on ILC ML Lattice Design Alexander Valishev, for the FNAL LET group FNAL AP Dept. Meeting March 7, 2007.
Advertisements

General Linear Model With correlated error terms  =  2 V ≠  2 I.
On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison. Department of Geodesy and Surveying Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Athanasios.
CESR as Light Source David L. Rubin for the CESR Operations Group Cornell University Laboratory for Elementary-Particle Physics.
The LiCAS FSI Subsystem Current Status and Initial Measurements John Dale for the LiCAS Collaboration IOP HEP April 2008.
280 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION The System Identification Problem is to estimate a model of a system based on input-output data. Basic Configuration continuous.
Factor Analysis Purpose of Factor Analysis Maximum likelihood Factor Analysis Least-squares Factor rotation techniques R commands for factor analysis References.
Factor Analysis Purpose of Factor Analysis
1 PID Detectors & Emittance Resolution Chris Rogers Rutherford Appleton Laboratory MICE CM17.
© John M. Abowd 2005, all rights reserved Statistical Tools for Data Integration John M. Abowd April 2005.
Linear and generalised linear models
Advanced Topics in Optimization
Linear and generalised linear models
Basics of regression analysis
Linear and generalised linear models Purpose of linear models Least-squares solution for linear models Analysis of diagnostics Exponential family and generalised.
Analysis of MICE Chris Rogers 1 Imperial College/RAL Thursday 28 October, With thanks to John Cobb.
1 ILC Main Linac Alignment Simulations using Conventional Techniques and Development of Alignment Model John Dale LCWS08 & ILC08.
Modern Navigation Thomas Herring
Update on ILC ML Lattice Design Alexander Valishev, for the FNAL LET group FNAL AP Dept. Meeting March 7, 2007.
1 SVY207: Lecture 18 Network Solutions Given many GPS solutions for vectors between pairs of observed stations Compute a unique network solution (for many.
Trajectory Correction and Tuning James Jones Anthony Scarfe.
Track Reconstruction: the trf & ftf toolkits Norman Graf (SLAC) ILD Software Meeting, DESY July 6, 2010.
Modern Navigation Thomas Herring
CHAPTER 4 Adaptive Tapped-delay-line Filters Using the Least Squares Adaptive Filtering.
SUPA Advanced Data Analysis Course, Jan 6th – 7th 2009 Advanced Data Analysis for the Physical Sciences Dr Martin Hendry Dept of Physics and Astronomy.
Progress in identification of damping: Energy-based method with incomplete and noisy data Marco Prandina University of Liverpool.
CERN, BE-ABP-CC3 Jürgen Pfingstner Verification of the Design of the Beam-based Controller Jürgen Pfingstner 2. June 2009.
CHAPTER 17 O PTIMAL D ESIGN FOR E XPERIMENTAL I NPUTS Organization of chapter in ISSO –Background Motivation Finite sample and asymptotic (continuous)
Chapter 28 Cononical Correction Regression Analysis used for Temperature Retrieval.
Optics considerations for ERL test facilities Bruno Muratori ASTeC Daresbury Laboratory (M. Bowler, C. Gerth, F. Hannon, H. Owen, B. Shepherd, S. Smith,
July 19-22, 2006, Vancouver KIRTI RANJAN1 ILC Curved Linac Simulation Kirti Ranjan, Francois Ostiguy, Nikolay Solyak Fermilab + Peter Tenenbaum (PT) SLAC.
Vertical Emittance Tuning at the Australian Synchrotron Light Source Rohan Dowd Presented by Eugene Tan.
ILC Main Linac Alignment Simulations John Dale 2009 Linear Collider Workshop of the Americas.
Survey, Alignment and Metrology Fiducials Requirements Fabien Rey ESS Survey, Alignment and Metrology Group ACCELERATOR TECHNICAL BOARD 23/09/2015.
WP3 The LiCAS Laser Straightness Monitor (LSM) Greg Moss.
Status of Reference Network Simulations John Dale ILC-CLIC LET Beam Dynamics Workshop 23 June 2009.
Emittance Tuning Simulations in the ILC Damping Rings James Jones ASTeC, Daresbury Laboratory.
CERN, BE-ABP (Accelerators and Beam Physics group) Jürgen Pfingstner Adaptive control scheme for the main linac of CLIC Jürgen Pfingstner 21 th of October.
GDE Main Linac and RTML Beam Dynamics Conveners: Nikolay Solyak, Cris Adolphsen, Kyioshi Kubo April 20, Room 303, 14:30 – 18:00.
DMS steering with BPM scale error - Trial of a New Optics - Kiyoshi Kubo
Main Linac Tolerances What do they mean? ILC-GDE meeting Beijing Kiyoshi Kubo 1.Introduction, review of old studies 2.Assumed “static” errors.
… Work in progress at CTF3 … Davide Gamba 01 July 2013 Study and Implementation of L INEAR F EEDBACK T OOLS for machine study and operation.
Simulations - Beam dynamics in low emittance transport (LET: From the exit of Damping Ring) K. Kubo
State-Space Recursive Least Squares with Adaptive Memory College of Electrical & Mechanical Engineering National University of Sciences & Technology (NUST)
CESR as Light Source David Rubin for the CESR Operations Group Cornell University Laboratory for Elementary-Particle Physics.
Computacion Inteligente Least-Square Methods for System Identification.
ATF2 Software tasks: - EXT Bunch-Bunch FB - IP Bunch-Bunch FB - FB Integration Status and plans Javier Resta-Lopez JAI, Oxford University ATF2 commissioning.
Dark Current in ILC Main Linac N.Solyak, A.Sukhanov, I.Tropin ALCW2015, Apr.23, 2015, KEK LCWS'15, Tsukuba, 04/2015Nikolay Solyak1.
Freddy Poirier - DESY Preliminary Merlin DFS studies following discussion (Very preliminary) Freddy Poirier DESY.
April 17, Dejan TrbojevicFFAG07 -Non-Scaling FFAG gantries1 Non-Scaling FFAG Gantries Introduction: Motives: The most challenging problem in the carbon/proton.
8 th February 2006 Freddy Poirier ILC-LET workshop 1 Freddy Poirier DESY ILC-LET Workshop Dispersion Free Steering in the ILC using MERLIN.
Progress in CLIC DFS studies Juergen Pfingstner University of Oslo CLIC Workshop January.
Ultra-low Emittance Coupling, method and results from the Australian Synchrotron Light Source Rohan Dowd Accelerator Physicist Australian Synchrotron.
Review of Alignment Tolerances for LCLS-II SC Linac Arun Saini, N. Solyak Fermilab 27 th April 2016, LCLS-II Accelerator Physics Meeting.
CSE 554 Lecture 8: Alignment
College Algebra Chapter 6 Matrices and Determinants and Applications
Arun Saini, N. Solyak Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
Computation of Eigen-Emittances (and Optics Functions!)
Dispersion Matched Steering and Alignment Model in Main Linac
The Primary Control network of HLSⅡ
Steering algorithm experience at CTF3
Beam Dynamics in Curved ILC Main Linac (following earth curvature)
ILC Z-pole Calibration Runs Main Linac performance
Update on ILC ML Lattice Design
A simple model of the ILC alignment process for use in LET simulations
New algorithms for tuning the CLIC beam delivery system
Summary of Beam Dynamics Working Group
Status of Reference Network Simulations
ILC Main Linac Alignment Simulations
Yu.N. Filatov, A.M. Kondratenko, M.A. Kondratenko
Presentation transcript:

Status of Reference Network Simulations John Dale TILC09 20 April 2009

Introduction Accelerator Alignment Concept Reference Network Simulations Model –Concept –Linearised model –Free network constraint Reference Network Simulation Results –Error Curves –Dispersion Matched Steering (DMS) results

Accelerator Alignment Concept Many possible ways to Align an Accelerator, the concept used here is: –Over lapping measurements of a network of reference markers using a device such as a laser tracker, stretched wires or LiCAS RTRS –Measurements of a small number of Primary Reference Markers (PRM) using, for example GPS transferred from the surface. –Combining all measurements in a linearised mathematical model to determine network marker positions –Using adjusted network to align Main Linac –Using Dispersion Matched Steering (DMS) to adjust correctors to minimise emittance Reference Marker Stake out device PRM Accelerator Machine Marker Z X

Reference Network Simulation Aims Generate ILC reference network solutions which can be used for LET simulations Easy to use Quickly (minutes not days) Correct statistical properties Capable of simulating existing as well as novel network measurement techniques

Possible Approaches Commercial survey adjustment software –Expensive –Need to be survey expert to use –Usually only use laser tracker/tachometers Full simulation of a specific device –Slow to generate networks –Restricted to one measurement technique Simplified Model –If designed correctly can be quick –Can be used to model novel devices

Simplified Model Have a device model –Measures small number of RMs e.g. 4 –Moves on one RM each stop and repeats measurement –Determines vector difference between RMs –Vector difference smeared by input error –Knowledge of measurement procedure not necessary –Rotates around the X and Y axis PRM measurements –Vector difference measurements between PRM’s –Measurements smeared by input error

The Linearised Model M device stops, N reference Markers Total, O PRMs Total, device measures 4 markers per stop Measurement Vector L –Contains device and PRM vector differences Measurement Covariance Matrix P –Simple diagonal matrix assuming no cross dependency on measurements Variables Vector X –Contains all the markers positions Prediction Vector F(X) –Predicts L Difference Vector W = F(X) – L Design Matrix A = δF(X)/δX

The Linearised Model Normal Non-linear least squares minimises W T W leading to an improvement of estimates given by ΔX = -(A T PA) -1 A T PW Problem A T PA is singular and not invertible Model Requires Constraints.

Free Network Constraints Five constraints required Could constrain first point to be at (0,0,0) and both the rotations of first stop to be 0. –Gives zero error at one end and large error at other. Not the desired form Use a free network constraint –Technique developed in Geodesy –The free network constraint is that X T X is minimised. –If X T X = min the trace of the output covariance matrix is also minimised –Equivalent to a generalised inverse –The least squares minimises W T W and X T X to give a unique solution

Free Network Constraint Break Up A T PA into sub-matrices –N11 Must be non-singular –N22 size 5*5 Leading to constraint Matrix A2 Improvement given by Output Covariance matrix given by –Contains the errors on the RM positions Note ΔX and Σ X are longer than X, but extra elements are zero.

Model Summary Input –Device Measurement Errors –Number RMs measured by device in one stop –PRM Measurement Errors –Network Parameters Number RMs, Number PRMS, RM spaceing, PRM spacing Output –Reference marker position difference from truth –Reference marker position statistical error

Laser Tracker Network Simulation Test model by comparing to laser tracker network Can simulate ILC laser tracker networks using PANDA Use PANDA output to determine model parameters –minimising the difference between the PANDA statistical errors and the model statistical errors –Minimiser can adjust the model input parameters –minisation using JMinuit minisation done for networks with and without PRMs

Error Curve Comparison Use Model to generate laser tracker measured network without PRM’s Model used to produce network with the following parameters –No markers = 500 –Space between markers = 25m –σx = E-5 –σy = E-5 –σz = E-5

Error Curve Comparison Use Model to generate laser tracker measured network with PRM’s Model used to produce network using the following parameters –No markers = 500 –Space between markers = 25m –No PRM’s = 6 –Space between PRM’s = 2500m –σx = E-05 –σy = E-05 –σz = E-05 –σGPS = E-03

Simulation of DMS using Merlin DMS simulations using Merlin (a C++ based library for particle tracking) The Merlin based ILCDFS package –Is performing the tracking through the curved main linac (positron side) –It has implementation of the Beam Based Alignment method based on Dispersion Matched Steering Dispersion Matched Steering (DMS) –Attempts to locally correct the dispersion caused by alignment errors in magnets and other accelerator components. –Adjusts correctors to bring dispersion to its nominal value and preserve the emittance along the Main Linac (ML) –Parameters used here Starting emittance 20nm A nominal beam starting energy 15GeV → 250Gev at exit Initial energy of test beam is 20% of nominal beam Constant gradient adjustment of -20%

DMS Simulations for Laser trackers 100 networks generated without PRMs using PANDA and the model 10 DMS simulations performed on each network using Merlin Note: PANDA results are revised compared to LCWS 2008 Model PANDA Mean : 3110nm 90% : 8390nm ≤ 30nm : 4.5% Mean : 3170nm 90% : 9210nm ≤ 30nm : 4%

DMS Simulations for Laser trackers 100 networks generated with PRMs using PANDA and the model 10 DMS simulations performed on each network using Merlin Note: PANDA results are revised compared to LCWS 2008 Model PANDA Mean : 110nm 90% : 270nm ≤ 30nm : 18% Mean : 46nm 90% : 104nm ≤ 30nm : 42%

Conclusion Model works without Primary Reference Markers Implementation of Primary Reference Markers needs improvement Laser tracker network not suitable for the ILC as only 42% of machines below 30 nm

Future Work Fix GPS problem in model Determine LiCAS Model Parameters Introduce systematics Verify DMS results using different code