1 / 13

G. Balik , B. Caron, L. Brunetti (LAViSta Team)

Optimization of the final focus stabilization for CLIC. G. Balik , B. Caron, L. Brunetti (LAViSta Team) LAPP-IN2P3-CNRS, Université de Savoie, Annecy, France & SYMME-POLYTECH Annecy-Chambéry, Université de Savoie, Annecy, France. The 21 st October 2010. Final focus stabilization.

oliver-torres
Télécharger la présentation

G. Balik , B. Caron, L. Brunetti (LAViSta Team)

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. Optimization of the final focus stabilization for CLIC G. Balik , B. Caron, L. Brunetti (LAViSta Team) LAPP-IN2P3-CNRS, Université de Savoie,Annecy, France& SYMME-POLYTECH Annecy-Chambéry, Université de Savoie, Annecy, France The 21st October 2010

  2. Final focus stabilization Direct disturbances : Acoustic noise, cooling... Final focus Final focus Detector Position at the interaction point Magnetic axis of the focalisation magnet FOCUSING MAGNET Desiredbeam Beam (e+) Beam (e-) ΔY≠0 (if no trajectory control) position KICKER ACTIVE/PASSIVE ISOLATION RIGID GIRDER Indirect disturbances : Seismic motion Repetition rate of the beam: 50 Hz Specification: Displacement of the beam at the IP < 0.1nm integrated RMS @ 0Hz IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  3. Typical ground motion measured at CMS CERN (K.Artoos, M.Guinchard…) PSD [m²/Hz] Frequency [Hz] Beam trajectory control • Active/passive isolation Beam trajectory control limited by the repetition rate of the beam Ground motion integrated RMS already between a few nm to dozens of nm at 5 Hz IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  4. Mechanicalschemeandcontrol pointofview + + Seismic motion Active/passive isolation Direct disturbances + + Desired beam position: Y=0 Actuator (Kicker) Position at the IP: ∆Y IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  5. Feedbackscheme Active/passive isolation Seismic motion + + + - Desired beam position: Y=0 Actuator (Kicker) Controller Position at the IP: ∆Y BPM noise Sensor (BPM) + Controlleroptimized to minimize the PSD of displacement of the beam(∆Y) in function of the disturbance seismic motion + The results of the optimization depend on the considered seismic motion and on the active passive isolation. Direct disturbances + + Efficiency of the feedback scheme: 0 Hz to [4 – 5]Hz (limited by the repetition rate of the beam: 50Hz) It is needed to improve the efficiency of the control IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  6. Feedback + Adaptive scheme Seismic motion Active/passive isolation - + + + + - Adaptive filter BPMnoise Y=0 Actuator (Kicker) Controller Position at the IP: ∆Y Sensor (BPM) + + Adaptive filter reconstruct and cancel the disturbance Direct disturbances Efficiency of the control greatly increased (in the same range: 0 Hz to [4 – 5]Hz) + + Beam motion still at a detrimental level at 5Hz Specification of the future active/passive isolation IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  7. Pattern of a global active/passive isolation Determination of the pattern of the global Active/passive isolation (Kg) Active/passive isolation (Kg) Seismic motion + - + + + - Adaptive filter BPMnoise Y=0 Actuator (Kicker) Controller ∆Y(q) Sensor (BPM) Example if we consider Kg as a second order low pass filter: + + Static gain Go Independent from ξ in the range [0.01 – 0.7] Resonant frequency f0 [Hz] Direct disturbances + + IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  8. Feasibility demonstration with industrial products - + + + + - = + f0 = 2Hz ξ = 0.01 TMC table (K1) Mechanical support (K2) BPMnoise Seismic motion (CMS data) Active/passive isolation + Adaptive filter + Y=0 Actuator (Kicker) Controller Direct disturbances Position at the IP: ∆Y + + MAGNET Sensor (BPM) ACTIVE/PASSIVE TMC Table (K1) Mechanical support (K2) ISOLATION IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  9. Results PSD [m²/Hz] Frequency [Hz] Integrated RMS displacement [m] Frequency [Hz] IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  10. Robustness (Mechanical support) Integrated RMS displacement = f(ξ, f0) • Controller optimized for the PSD of the ground motion filtered by the TMC table + Mechanical support K2 ξ= 0.01 f0 = 2 Hz Integrated RMS [m] f0 = f0 ± 10% ξ = ξ ± 50% • The worst case: f0 = 2.2 Hz ξ = 0.005 Integrated RMS displacement of the beam 0.1nm @ 0.1Hz Damping ratio: ξ [ ] Resonant frequency: f0 [Hz] IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  11. Robustness (BPM noise) Integrated RMS displacement = f(W) Active/Passive isolation Seismic motion - + + + + - Adaptive filter • W: white noise added to the measured displacement BPM noise W(q) Y=0 Actuator (Kicker) Controller ∆Y(q) Sensor (BPM) + BPM’s noise has to be < 13 pm integrated RMS @ 0.1 Hz + Integrated RMS at 0.1 Hz [m] Direct disturbances + + The BPM is a post collision BPM: Amplification of 105 BPM noise W [m] IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  12. Example with the solution being developed at LAPP Mid-lower magnet Lower electrode of the capacitive sensor V-support for the magnet 1355mm Elastomeric strips for guidance Fine adjustments for capacitive sensor (tilt and distance) Piezoelectricactuator below its micrometric screw Mechanical support for magnet (A. Badel, J-P. Baud, R. Le Breton, G. Deleglise, A. Jérémie, J. Lottin, L. Pacquet) IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

  13. Conclusions • Feedback + Adaptive control: • Feasibility demonstration of the beam stabilization proposed • New specification of the active/passive isolation • Future prospects : • Implementation of the controller under placet IWLC 2010 - CERN - 2010-10-21

More Related