1. 24 Nov 2009PC 396 1 Analysis PC Schedule 2009 Tuesdays fortnightly Proposed dates: 13 October  27 October  CM25 4 – 6 November  24 November 8 December 22 December (unlikely....) Then January 2010 Let me know of any items you wish to present

2. 24 Nov 2009PC 396 2 Agenda ------ Schedule & tasks from CM25 - John C. Beamline - Marco A. On-line analysis - Linda C. TOF calibration - Yordan K. Beam characterisation - Mark R. Beam Weighting - David A. Statistics - David F. AOB 1 AOB 2 AOB 3 Apologies from Ulisse B.

3. 24 Nov 2009PC 396 3 1) STEP III – IV COMPARISON Do we need STEP III / Could we go straight to STEP IV? See JC talk (provocation) at end of CM25; summary on next slide ? How well can Tracker 1 – Tracker 2 comparisons be made in STEP III v STEP IV? ? Implications for field mapping of FC modules Field may have to be known better than ‘good enough for cooling’ (is there any difference in practice?) Needs some thought & simulations & volunteer(s) 2) DEMONSTRATE THAT STEP VI IS ESSENTIAL Necessary for UK funding (i.e. to obtain the £££ for STEP VI) Better phrased as ‘DEMONSTRATE STEP V IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH’ A few thoughts on slide 5 Needs more thought & simulations & volunteer(s) Is anyone able to take on either of these tasks?? Analysis Tasks from CM25

4. 24 Nov 2009PC 396 4 FROM CM 25 TALK STEP III / III.1STEP IV Tracker/Spectrometer systematics Longer extrapolation to central plane. What do errors do? Question for Tracker group? Optics & Cooling Modest at best Both steps require large subtraction (Amplitude should help) Higher beta function at absorber  Equilibrium Emittance higher by ~1.66 d  = – 3.8% maximum ~4.1% maximum even with LH 2 Longitudinal coolingNot consideredSolid wedge abs. studied MagneticsNon-standard currents in Match Coils; PSU limit ? Operates at design currents InstallationExtra Step to mount & demount before STEP IV LH 2 system may not be available immediately; Extra work to mount solid absorbers

5. 24 Nov 2009PC 396 5 STEP V 2 AFC modules + 1 RFCC module DE ~ 20 MeV ~ 10% cooling 4 combinations of field Flip & Non-Flips: FF / FN / NF / NN STEP VI 3 AFC modules + 2 RFCC modules DE ~ 30 MeV ~ 15% cooling 8 combinations of field Flip & Non-Flips: FFF.... NNN - not all have been studied & shown to work Potentially larger error field due to iron walls - not obviously enormous problem STEP VI obviously (somewhat) bigger & better Can that be quantified? What other differences / advantages are there? What can’t STEP V do?