1. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 1 MICE Beamline Analysis Using g4beamline Including Jan 25 Updates for Kevin’s JAN04 Beamline Design Tom Roberts Illinois Institute of Technology

2. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 2 JAN04 MICE Beamline (3-D view approximately a plan view) Final red solenoid is for Tracker1.

3. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 3 JAN04 MICE Beamline + Cooling Channel Kevin’s beamline design of JAN04 is a candidate for the new baseline. I have stitched that beamline with the cooling channel of the MICE proposal, using Diffuser2 as common. Of necessity I deleted Diffuser1, and propose placing TOF0 and TOF1 between quads (see below). The MICE proposal has some minor self-inconsistencies; when in doubt I used data from Table 3.1. –No upstream Cherenkov –TOF2 is downstream of the downstream Cherenkov (TOF2 is too small for that, and should be upstream) I added a Proton absorber just upstream of B2, 5 cm of polyethylene –Upstream of B1 just selects which protons get through, downstream of B1 kills them all –Upstream of Decay Solenoid means some pions interact –Downstream of B2 means any generated junk gets into the TOFs, etc.

4. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 4 JAN04 MICE Beamline + Cooling Channel Pion Channel Muon Channel Cooling Channel and Detectors Note this is a 3-d view, not quite a plan view.

5. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 5 Pion Channel Note this is a 3-d view, not quite a plan view. MICE Proton Target (enlarged) Q1 Q2 Q3 B1 Decay Solenoid ISIS Proton Beam

6. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 6 Muon Channel Note this is a 3-d view, not quite a plan view. Decay Solenoid Proton Absorber B2 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 TOF0 TOF1 Diffuser2

7. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 7 Cooling Channel and Detectors Note this is a 3-d view, not quite a plan view. Diffuser2 Tracker1 Matching Coils Absorber (incl. Safety Windows) and Focus Coils 4 RF Cavities Coupling Coil Tracker2 Cherenkov TOF2 (behind) Calorimeter

8. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 8 Q4 – Q5 Detail (Same as Q8 – Q9) 60 mm 1450 mm 110 mm 343 mm Q5 Mirror Plate Circular Beam Aperture Q4 Mirror Plate Side View Beam View (Mirror Plate Removed) 60 mm

9. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 9 Singles per Millisecond of Good Beam LocationLAHETgeant4 After Q421141345 After Q51467933 After Q61264804 After Q7444282 After Q8348222 After Q9336214 After Tracker1321204 Good μ + (40°) 157100 Good μ + (90°) 170108 Good μ + (no LH2, no RF) 178113 LAHET and geant4 differ by 57% in overall normalization, for this beam tune.

10. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 10 Time of Flight TOF0 – TOF1 Proposal: Omit Diffuser1 Proposal: place TOF0 between Q4 and Q5; place TOF1 between Q8 and Q9. –Q4 shields TOF0 from most of the π + –Q9 shields TOF1 from Tracker1 Solenoid fringe field –Need to assess fringe fields from the Quads This beamline tune yields too few π + to make meaningful plots Generate equal numbers of π + and μ + after B2: –Gaussian momentum with (μ,σ) as for μ + at DetQ4 –Gaussian position and angles, to fill the aperture of Q4

11. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 11 Time Of Flight DetQ4 – DetQ8

12. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 12 P vs TOF Scattered red dots are π+ decays between TOF0 and TOF1. Those that lie in or close to the blue region are valid μ + for the cooling channel.

13. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 13 Backup Slides

14. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 14 MICE Tune, 40°

15. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 15 MICE Tune, 90°

16. January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 16 MICE Tune, No LH2, No RF