1 / 5

Maximizing Efficiency in LHC Machine Studies and MD Scheduling

This document outlines key recommendations for managing LHC machine studies and MD (Machine Development) scheduling, emphasizing the importance of action over discussion. It highlights the need for clear prioritization of MDs based on analyses from Chamonix and suggests developing structured proposals for scheduling. Key MD areas for 2011/12 and HL-LHC efforts are identified, with particular focus on beam-beam studies, luminosity leveling, and intensity limits from impedance. Enhanced collaboration with operations teams is emphasized for improved efficiency and timely reporting.

arva
Télécharger la présentation

Maximizing Efficiency in LHC Machine Studies and MD Scheduling

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Input from LMC & Chamonix Frank Zimmermann LSWG, 21 March 2011

  2. LMC 23 February & 16 March: • LHC machine studies should be handled lightly • do not spend more time talking about the studies than doing them • MDs should be based on an analysis of list coming out of Chamonix • clear need to prioritize – and introduce categories, e.g. short term and long term • develop a proposal for an MD schedule, e.g. which MDs should be done when and in which order • for the sake of MD efficiency, operations people should be strongly involved; they are familiar with procedure and software • MD reports within a week of experiment being done • after filtering of the MD requests an MD schedule proposal should be presented to LMC by Ralph Assmann and Frank Zimmermann • early on experiments to quantify parameter limits from beam-beam point of view, especially long-range beam-beam and a few other MDs related to machine protection • tracking of changes and recovery procedures for transitions back to physics after MDs

  3. LMC 23 February & 16 March cont’d: • define what can be the EOF studies • 1) what will be allowed as EOF study? • 2) what will be the envelope? • 3) what can/should (not) be done in stable beams?

  4. MD Studies relevant for 2011/12(S. Myers, G. Papotti): • abort gap cleaning at 3.5 TeV • injection slot cleaning • beam-beam studies • tune diagram exploration • optimization of ramp (DONE) • optimization of turnaround time (DONE) • no pre-cycle after short access (DONE) • test the continuous functions for ramp, squeeze, collide • test combined ramp and squeeze • end-of-fill luminosity scans for emittance measurement • hands-off squeezed (but not colliding) single bunches for single beam parameter evolution measurement • beam tests (quench test location + injection region) to improve radiation field calibration • test for p-Pb operation J. Jowett • 90-m optics H. Burkhardt

  5. MD Studies relevant for HL-LHC(L. Rossi, O. Brüning): • beam-beam limit as a function of long range collisions, separation and crossing angle. W. Herr. Detailed MD proposal in preparation. • luminosity leveling using angle, separation and beta*. R. De Maria. Team and proposal in preparation. • test ATS optics in the present LHC to understand feasibility, limitations and merits; test as well collision with bx≠by. S. Fartoukh. • intensity limits from impedance by measuring coupled-bunch instability rise time and coupled-bunch tune shifts w..r.t. transverse damper, collimators, chromaticity, bunch spacing and intensities. E. Metral. Some results may be produced parasitically • intensity limits from e-cloud, in particular during scrubbing run (but also at 25 ns). G. Arduini, G. Rumolo, F. Zimmermann, E. Metral. Some results may be produced parasitically • effect of a large Piwinski angle, in practice with longer than nominal bunch length, nominal or close to nominal synchrotron tunes and beam parameters corresponding to a total head-on beam-beam tune shift of ~0.02 at zero crossing angle. S. Fartoukh, F. Zimmermann • compare crossing schemes: H-V, V-V, H-H planes, F. Zimmermann • LHC beam qualification for injector MDs ?, e.g. double batch injection

More Related