1 / 16

BPM status

BPM status. Pengjia Zhu 2013.8.28. survey uncertainty caused bpm uncertainty. 1. position survey ~ 0.15 mm. 2. angle survey ~ 0.0001 deg. 3. harp wire survey ~ 0.15 mm. 4. harp scan minumum step ~ 0.07 mm. position uncertainty at bpm -> 0.25 mm. 3.13 bpm calibration setting: autogain

hope
Télécharger la présentation

BPM status

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. BPM status Pengjia Zhu 2013.8.28

  2. survey uncertainty caused bpm uncertainty 1. position survey ~ 0.15 mm 2. angle survey ~ 0.0001 deg 3. harp wire survey ~ 0.15 mm 4. harp scan minumum step ~ 0.07 mm position uncertainty at bpm -> 0.25 mm

  3. 3.13 bpm calibration setting: autogain didn't subtract pedestal

  4. 3.13 calibration constant covered 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg timeline 2.257GeV auto gain fixed gain 3.12 5T harp scan 3.14 straight through harp scan 3.16 2.5T harp scan

  5. 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg timeline 2.257GeV 3.14 straight through harp scan(100nA) BPM A BPM B

  6. 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg 2.257GeV 3.16 run 3217 C12 hole check using 3.14 constant Let's focus on BPM A first 10 mm carbon hole -> 16.1 mm raster size -> ~15.3 mm at BPM A

  7. 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg 2.257GeV 3.16 run 3217 C12 hole check using 3.14 constant raster shape at BPM A ~15.5mm

  8. 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg 3.13 run 3146 raster size calibration 3.17 run 3273 raster size calibration using 3.14 constant

  9. 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg Then focus on BPM B 3.13 run 3146 raster size calibration using 3.14 constant BPM A BPM B

  10. 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg 2.257GeV 3.17 run 3273 raster size calibration using 3.14 constant BPM A BPM B BPM B constant destroyed

  11. 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg timeline 3.16 2.5T harp scan use BPM A and harp 05 to check BPM B harp 05 BPMA BPMB -940.5mm -814.3mm -676.5mm if +-0.1mm in BPMA +-0.1mm in harp --> +-0.24mm in BPMB 2.5T will bend beam 0.1mm

  12. incorrect BPM B constant

  13. 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg timeline 3.12 5T harp scan will update soon

  14. 3.13 3.14 3.6 3.9 3.17 3.27 3.29 2.5T 90 deg 5T 6 deg straight through 2.5T 90 deg septum fired 2.5T 90 deg timeline div=4 for A and B div=2 for A and B different div setting caused BPM B constant changed but not affect BPM A don't have enough harp data for div=2 will try to find a way to fix it also need to find a way to get bpm resolution

  15. bpm rotation --- correct

More Related