1. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 1 MONALISA update Could the messenger of bad vibration news be the cause of it? beam pipe Shintake interference patter Seismic Sensors

2. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 2 Overview Goal of ATF2 installation: Test if MONALISA vacuum system introduces vibrations onto Shintake monitor Installation of MONALISA vacuum system at ATF2 Minimal Force system Motion Stability during pump down measured by KEK survey team Vibration Measurements of LAPP group Fringe stability test done by Shintake group (Tokyo University)

3. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 3 Good progress We kept within our proposed schedule –As set out in ATF2 meeting 17 Jun 09 All items arrived at KEK 1 st July 2009 –Brought to ATF2 roof within 15 mins of arrival On ATF2 roof –System assembled and retested Brought to ATF2 Final focus tunnel –Reassembled at IP Thursday 9 th July and tested

4. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 4 On the roof of the ATF2

5. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 5 Schematic Layout of Pneumatics Vacuum in end boxes connected through inner bellows High pressure only connected to outer bellows chamber

6. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 6 Sensor readout during pumping

7. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 7 Into the ATF2 tunnel

8. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 8 The DBS was hoisted into place Full assembly completed well within one day

9. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 9 DBS pumped out: with rods in Reached 28 Pa with a different pump –vacuum integrity was unaltered

10. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 10 Tilt sensor Tilt change on Shintake ~5+5  rad –After MONALISA DBS installed at IP

11. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 11 Forces measured pumping down when mounted at ATF2 IP Regulator cycle ~225 s

12. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 12 (x,y,z) Physicists coordinates In the following we’re using the physicists coordinate frame Y X Z

13. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 13 Tracking QD0 motion in Z Set MONALISA at operational pressure –Pumped out vacuum vessel –Over-pressure in outer bellowed chamber Set up independent tracking of QD0 –Used FARO to survey QD0 position changes –Keyence laser meter tracked QD0 mounted on SD0 base plate

14. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 14 KEYENCE tracking QD0 Z Readout sensor in mV 10 V = 5 mm 1 mV = 0.5  m Readout with our ADC/LabVIEW DAQ QD0 Supported from SD0 KEYENCE

15. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 15 FARO survey instrument FARO Retro

16. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 16 Comparison of FARO & KEYENCE

17. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 17 Tracking QD0 motion in Z

18. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 18 Tracking QD0 motion in X

19. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 19 Left-right QD0 mover tests

20. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 20 Left-right QD0 mover tests

21. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 21 Left-right QD0 mover tests DBS spring constant is small enough to let QD0 move freely

22. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 22 What to learn from this measurements? We are told that static tolerances for QD0: –100 μ m in x,y,z Our measurements show that even with the current pressure control system we meet this tolerance. The low spring constant of the DBS allows the QD0 mover to move the magnet unhindered. Dynamic tolerances: vertical:10 nm, (between Shintake andQD0) horizontal: 500 nm along beam: 10 μ m

23. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 23 Vibration Measurements performed by Benoît BOLZON (LAPP) taken from talk presented at ATF2 meeting July 15. 1. Relative motion calculation using representative absolute motion 2. Impact of Monalisa on vibrations (3 directions) between: - Shintake and QD0 with and without pressure - QD0 and QF1 with pressure  Comparison of measurements with/without Monalisa  Measurements without MONALISA have been repeated two weeks ago with cooling water flowing inside FD 3. Conclusion

24. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 24 Choice of a representative ground motion measured at ATF2 Choice of a high ground motion during shift period Friday 12/12/08 at 3pm  Above 0.2Hz: 218nm  Above 1Hz: 128nm Amplitude almost the same during 4 hours of shift  Choice of ground motion at 3pm representative 24 Relative motion calculation by taking this ground motion PSD gm

25. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 25 Impact of Monalisa on vibrations between: - Shintake and QD0 with and without pressure - QD0 and QF1 with pressure  Comparison of measurements with/without Monalisa Vibration measurements between Shintake and QD0 Vibration measurements between QD0 and QF1

26. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 26 Vibration transmission between Shintake and QD0 Vertical direction  Almost same coherence: - With/without Monalisa - With/without pressure  Only difference: QD0 resonance slightly lower due to Monalisa weight - No Monalisa: 65.3Hz - With Monalisa: 60.3Hz  With Monalisa: Same transfer function with/without pressure

27. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 27 Vibration transmission between Shintake and QD0 Vertical direction  Below 4Hz: increase of relative motion due to not enough high SNR (coherence very close to 1: relative motion should not increase) Relative motion above 4Hz (should be the same than above 0.1Hz) :  Relative motion above 4Hz: - No Monalisa: 5.0nm - Monalisa with pressure: 5.7nm - Monalisa without pressure: 5.8nm Almost no change compared to tolerances

28. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 28 Vibration transmission between Shintake and QD0 Direction parallel to the beam  Almost same coherence: - With/without Monalisa - With/without pressure  Only difference: QD0 resonance slightly lower due to Monalisa weight - No Monalisa: 18.0Hz - With Monalisa: 16.6Hz  With Monalisa: Same transfer function with/without pressure

29. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 29 Vibration transmission between Shintake and QD0 Direction parallel to the beam  Same relative motion with/without Monalisa (even better with Monalisa above 7Hz)  Same relative motion with/without pressure in Monalisa

30. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 30 Vibration transmission between Shintake and QD0 Direction perpendicular to the beam  Almost same coherence: - With/without Monalisa - With/without pressure  QD0 resonance almost the same: - No Monalisa: 20.4Hz - With Monalisa: 19.2Hz  With Monalisa: Same transfer function with/without pressure  SM resonance higher with Monalisa (59.6Hz  55.0Hz): good!

31. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 31 Vibration transmission between Shintake and QD0 Direction perpendicular to the beam  Same relative motion with/without pressure in Monalisa  Same relative motion with/without Monalisa (even better with Monalisa above 10Hz)

32. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 32 Vibration transmission between QD0 and QF1 Vertical direction With Monalisa: QD0 and QF1 resonances slightly appear (factor 5) since QD0 resonant frequency is slightly lower (due to Monalisa weight) Without Monalisa: QD0/QF1 resonances almost do not appear (very thin peak) since:  their frequencies are almost the same  QD0/QF1 move in phase (very close to each other)

33. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 33 Vibration transmission between QD0 and QF1 Relative motion increase of 2nm with Monalisa due to QD0/QF1 resonances (decrease of QD0 resonant frequency) : very low!  Solution: put a mass on QF1 to decrease its resonant frequency down to QD0 resonant frequency Vertical direction

34. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 34 With GM/flowing cooling water, relative motion of SM to QD0: ToleranceWithout Monalisa With Monalisa (with/no Press) Vertical7 nm5.0nm5.7nm/5.8nm Perpendicular to beam~ 500 nm16.7nm Parallel to the beam~ 10,000 nm17.2nm  Tolerances still achieved with Monalisa (almost no influence)  N.B: No influence of the regulation system With GM/flowing cooling water, relative motion of QF1 to QD0: Without Monalisa With Monalisa and pressure Vertical 5.0nm7.0nm Perpendicular to the beam 8.9nm34.2nm Parallel to beam 10.9nm26.2nm In vertical direction: almost no influence of Monalisa In horizontal directions: still acceptable because of the large tolerances A solution: put a mass on QF1 to get same resonances than QD0 ones This is not an issue!!

35. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 35 Phase Stability Taken from the talk presented by T. Yamanaka at ATF2 meeting 15 July 09 Motivation –Shintake monitor uses laser interference fringe pattern to measure beam size. –It is important to know the stability of the fringe position ( = fringe phase). –However, it is impossible to measure it at the IP Measure fringe phase stability indirectly off the IP and get the information about the IP fringe

36. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 36 Phase Stability Measurement Microscope Lens Linear Image Sensor Measure fringe profile Fourier transform and get the peak frequency Calculate the phase at the peak frequency Make interference fringe again on the lens and Magnify IP Schematic of Phase Monitor

37. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 37 Measurement for MONALISA Phase stability is the key of the Shintake monitor Checked the effect of the MONALISA system 1.without MONALISA 2.MONALISA is mounted on the Shintake monitor table and QD0, double bellows system is activated 3.MONALISA is mounted, the MONALISA chamber is opened to atmosphere All the measurements were performed in the midnight.

38. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 38 Without MONALISA 1 min phase stability (RMS) Long term time variation of the phase Histogram of 1 min phase stability Mean: 135 mrad RMS: 52 mrad

39. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 39 MONALISA Mounted, Double Bellows System Activated 1 min phase stability (RMS) Long term time variation of the phase Histogram of 1 min phase stability Mean: 163 mrad RMS: 49 mrad

40. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 40 MONALISA Mounted, Atmospheric Pressure 1 min phase stability (RMS) Long term time variation of the phase Histogram of 1 min phase stability Mean: 153mrad RMS: 39 mrad

41. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 41 Summary 1 min phase stability ConditionMean [mrad]RMS [mrad] without MONALISA13552 MONALISA, Activated16349 MONALISA, Atmospheric Presssure 15339 It seems to be a little bit worse when MONALISA is mounted. It seems to be a little bit worse when the double bellows system is activated. However, there exists not a little time variation of the phase stability so it can be say MONALISA system doesn’t influence the fringe phase stability so much. Ref. ) 135 mrad and 163 mrad phase stability corresponds to 5.7 nm and 6.9 nm fringe position stability in 174 degree crossing angle mode.

42. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 42 So what do we learn from this The messenger of the news is not affecting its message: –We do not cause undue vibrations. The double bellow system produces very small forces Care is required when using a vacuum system

43. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 43 Vacuum System 8 way fibre ribbon Tapered hole Vacuum vessel wall

44. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 44

45. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 45 Summary & Outlook MONALISA vacuum system worked well –Many thanks for the wonderful support we got! The next step is to do optics tests with the vacuum system in place to gain calibration constants. Our goal is to get first position measurements to the Shintake group next spring/summer.

46. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 46 Implications for MONALISA at CLIC Important to be prepared if vacuum system should be needed –Idea mount a flange on the bottom of the magnet –This flange will hold retros –This flange can be used to attach a future vacuum system We probably need a force neutralizing double bellows system as well, since the magnet is on movers. –Nee big enough a hole through the support structure to allow a double bellow system –Integration

47. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 47 Non-vacuum system The following systems are (almost) ready –Lasers that can be brought to CERN –Readout including Crate, amplifiers, ADCs We are currently designing the interferometer heads that we wish to bring to KEK. We can easily build a few additional heads for CERN, although the idea is of course to further develop and adapt the heads to the CLIC specific needs We need to tackle things like placement of laser/readout with respect to the magnet to address laser safety, purchase fibres....

48. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 48 Forces on frame during pumping Cycled bellow chamber pressures –Inner chamber 100 kPa to 25 Pa to 100 kPa –Outer chamber 100 kPa to 140 kPa to 100kPa Measured forces –Using recalibrated force sensor Independently calculated forces –Based on SMC pressure sensors One for each chamber

49. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 49 Tunnel preparation Terunua-san installed pipe across the inside of the ATF2 final focus tunnel roof Equipped with 2 hoists

50. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 50 Mounting Shintake components Plate mounted using M30 hooks End box mounted using hoist Cables

51. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 51 Mounting QD0 end box Beeswax was placed on QD0 surface –To ensure good vibration coupling to magnet

52. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 52 End boxes mutually aligned Laser light projected along accelerator axis Shintake end box –(left-right adjustable) –Moved to match QD0 end box

53. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 53 FARO compared with KEYENCE

54. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 54 FARO tracking X and Z

55. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 55 Over-pressure regulation Over-pressure regulator does not behave as we would like Control Signal /V Overpressure / kPa 0 40 Vmax 0 No response for over-pressure requests less than (50 mbar)

56. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 56 Required over-pressure regulation Would want a straight line relationship even for very low over-pressure Control Signal /V Overpressure / kPa 0 40 Vmax 0

57. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 57 Vibration transmission between Shintake and QD0 Vertical direction No pressure Transfer function measurements done during 4 hours the night (quiet)  Frequency resolution: 0.016Hz  Time resolution: 19 minutes Pressure Time Frequency Amplitude Frequency Amplitude Time Vibration measurements (with pressure in Monalisa) done simultaneously with frange measurements of SM  Same transfer function (with and without pressure) over time

58. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 58 Vibration transmission between QD0 and QF1 Direction parallel to the beam With Monalisa: QD0/QF1 resonances slightly appear (factors 5) since QD0 resonant frequency is slightly lower (due to Monalisa weight) Without Monalisa: QD0/QF1 resonances almost do not appear (factors 2/3) since:  their frequencies are almost the same  QD0/QF1 move in phase (very close to each other)

59. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 59 Vibration transmission between QD0 and QF1 Direction parallel to the beam Relative motion increase of 15nm with Monalisa due to QD0/QF1 resonant frequencies  Very low increase compared to tolerances (500nm)

60. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 60 Vibration transmission between QD0 and QF1 Direction perpendicular to the beam With Monalisa: QD0/QF1 resonances slightly appear (factors 5 and 3) since QD0 resonant frequency is slightly lower (due to Monalisa weight) Without Monalisa: QD0/QF1 resonances almost do not appear (factor 2) since:  their frequencies are almost the same  QD0/QF1 move in phase (very close to each other)

61. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 61 Vibration transmission between QD0 and QF1 Direction perpendicular to the beam Relative motion increase of 25nm with Monalisa due to QD0/QF1 resonant frequencies  Very low increase compared to tolerances (500nm)

62. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 62 Backup

63. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 63 Remark 1 minute is an assumed one beam size measurement time with the Shintake monitor. 2π [rad] phase corresponds to one period of the interference fringe pitch crossing angle [deg]fringe pictch [μm]100 mrad phase stability [μm] 2150.24 83.80.061 301.00.016 1740.270.0042

64. Tue 22 Sept 2009 Stabilization Day 7 Oxford MONALISA 64 Measurement in Last Year Measurement in summer of last year Mean: 384 mrad RMS: 50 mrad Last yearThis year Laser repetition frequency 10 Hz6.25 Hz Measurement frequency 10 Hz1.5625 Hz Laser output powerLowMaximum Laser and chiller location side of the optical table Laser room outside of the shield Difference between last year and this year measurement