1 / 11

Elegant vs MAD

Elegant vs MAD.

reed
Télécharger la présentation

Elegant vs MAD

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. Elegant vs MAD • ‘Elegant’ code was used for my previous ATF2-EXT-line simulations. It has a ‘drawback’, which can’t calculate multipoles matrix (e.g., in the coupling correction); it has equivalent solution but is only limited to n3, thus higher order multipoles have to be off, e.g., for the coupling correction. • ‘Elegant’ tracking is ok for only QM7 multipoles with either vertical or horizontal shift because multipoles effects dominates by the sextupoles n=3 in this case. Results show that no obvious vertical emittance growth observed after perfect corrections. • But for both QM7 and SepA with, both vertical and horizontal offsets, n>3 multipoles also have significant contribution, and thus ‘elegant’ has no solution. • But MAD does calculate multipoles matrix n 9, and can process corrections for orbit, dispersion, coupling and Twiss. F. Zhou Slide 1 07/10/07

  2. MAD tracking procedures • Orbit corrections • Dispersion corrections • Coupling corrections • Twiss matching • Observe beam at the end of EXT line F. Zhou Slide 2 07/10/07

  3. Ideal position Interesting area Ideal position Ideal position x (x - 0.0855) (m) x (x - 0.0855) (m) Nonlinear field QM7 SepA SepA F. Zhou Slide 3 07/10/07

  4. MAD tracking • QM7 multipoles only, either horizontal shift of 4mm or vertical shift of 0.6mm: no obvious vertical emittance growth observed after all corrections. • QM7+SepA, either horizontal shift of 4mm or vertical shift of 0.6mm: no obvious vertical emittance growth observed after all corrections. Green: perfect beam Blue: test beam Green: perfect beam Blue: test beam y’ y’ y y QM7 only QM7+SepA F. Zhou Slide 4 07/10/07

  5. Green: perfect beam Blue: test beam y’ y MAD tracking (con’t) • Only QM7 multipoles with both horizontal shift of 4mm and vertical shift of 0.6mm: no vertical emittance growth observed after all corrections. • QM7+SepA with both horizontal shift of 4mm and vertical shift of 0.6mm: significant vertical and horizontal emittance growths observed after all corrections. Green: perfect beam Blue: test beam y’ y QM7 only QM7+SepA F. Zhou Slide 5 07/10/07

  6. y’ y x’ x y x X=2.6mm and y =0.6mm x’ y y’ x y x X=4mm and y =0.6mm Position-dependency F. Zhou Slide 6 07/10/07

  7. Energy spread-dependency Green: perfect beam Blue: test beam y’ y’ y y E=0.08% E=0.13% QM7+SepA QM7+SepA F. Zhou Slide 7 07/10/07

  8. Orbit corrections using existing correctors F. Zhou Slide 8 07/10/07

  9. Dispersion correction F. Zhou Slide 9 07/10/07

  10. Coupling correction, and Twiss matching • Off-diagonal R-matrix <10^-5 • Twiss matched using EXT last 4 quads y x F. Zhou Slide 10 07/10/07

  11. Summary • MAD can include multipoles n 9, and proceed all corrections – orbit, dispersion, coupling and Twiss match. • When beam is trapped in either horizontal or vertical off-center position at QM7 and SepA, no obvious vertical emittance growth observed after all corrections; same results as in elegant code. • When beam is trapped in both horizontal and vertical off-center position (e.g., x=4mm and y=0.6mm) at QM7 and of course transversely offset at SepA, both horizontal and vertical emittance growths are obviously observed even after all corrections. • Emittance growth slightly depends on the initial energy spread. • All simulations are done on ATF2 EXT line; next is to simulate the existing ATF EXT line since both the EXTs are not fully identical. F. Zhou Slide 11 07/10/07

More Related