Linear Collider Forum



Today's Messages (off)  | Unanswered Messages (on)

Forum: Beam Optics Design, Beam Collimation, Final Doublet.
 Topic: Considerations for Energy, Polarization Diagnostics
Considerations for Energy, Polarization Diagnostics [message #168] Thu, 02 December 2004 16:05
mwoods
Messages: 12
Registered: November 2004
Location: SLAC
(This message was initially posted to the MDI Workshop forum/topic on Nov. 24)

  1. At the KEK Workshop, WG4 decided to develop a complete Beam Delivery System including 2 IRs, one with a 20-mrad crossing angle (to be evaluated in range 12-25 mrad) and one with a 2-mrad crossing angle (to be evaluated in region 2-7 mrad).
  2. At SLAC Yuri Nosochkov is working on the 20-mrad extraction line design, which includes separate energy and polarimetry chicanes (see http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/lcd/ipbi/monthlymeetings/0 8dec2004/20mrad_extline_diagnostics.jpg).
  3. Next, Yuri will work on 2-mrad extraction line, initially with no beam diagnostics. (If this is successful with acceptable beam losses, will later look into adding E,P diagnostics).
  4. Upstream BDS for 2-mrad needs to include E,P measurements. For a strawman design, I propose we use the 4-magnet chicane described by Ray Arnold on slide 6 of his Nov. IPBI presentation (see http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/lcd/ipbi/monthlymeetings/0 3nov2004/Chicane_Issues.pdf This energy chicane needs to go downstream of the energy collimation. For polarimetry Ken Moffeit and I propose as a strawman to duplicate roughly (larger separation between middle 2 magnets) the energy chicane design for a polarimeter chicane, but locate upstream of the energy collimation (see http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/lcd/ipbi/monthlymeetings/0 8dec2004/Pol_Chicane_Upstream.jpg). Also, want beam trajectory at middle of polarimeter chicane parallel to IP (though chicane also allows possibility for using the chicane to match the trajectory).
  5. Upstream BDS for 20-mrad. Would prefer this to include similar energy and polarimeter chicanes as the 2-mrad BDS. But this is lower priority in SLAC studies and will be investigated later.


Forum: Fast Simulations
 Topic: LiC Detector Toy
idea.gif  LiC Detector Toy [message #557] Mon, 24 July 2006 07:08
mitaroff
Messages: 10
Registered: March 2004
Location: HEPHY Vienna, Austria, EU
A simple but powerful software tool for detector design studies, aimed at investigating the resolution of fitted track parameters in the vertex region for the purpose of comparing and optimizing the track sensitive devices and the material budgets of various detector set-ups. This is achieved by a mini simulation of the set-up (rotational symmetric w.r.t. the beam axis, homogeneous magnetic field), followed by a full track reconstruction.

A first presentation has been made by Meinhard Regler (regler@hephy.oeaw.ac.at) at the 3rd SiLC Collaboration Meeting last June in Liverpool; his slides can be downloaded from
here .

The package is written in MatLab. A pre-release, covering only "barrel region" tracks, is available from Meinhard. Preliminary documentation can be downloaded from http://wwwhephy.oeaw.ac.at/p3w/ilc/reports/LiC_Det_Toy/UserG uide.pdf.

Recent addition is a simple interface to the VERTIGO DataSeeder for vertex reconstruction by the RAVE toolkit. An official release, including also the "forward/backward region", is due by autumn this year.

Cheers, Winfried

[Updated on: Mon, 24 July 2006 08:34]

 Topic: Lelaps V03-20-25 available from CVS
Lelaps V03-20-25 available from CVS [message #134] Wed, 25 August 2004 17:19
langeveld
Messages: 12
Registered: March 2004
Location: SLAC
The latest version of Lelaps, V03-20-25, is now available from CVS.

The only difference from previous versions is that it now implements the SimulatorStatus bits for LCIO, hopefully correctly.

To get this version, type:

cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs.freehep.org:/cvs/lelaps checkout -r V03-20-25 lelaps

To compile on Solaris, Linux or Cygwin, cd to the lelaps directory and type "make".

Willy.


Willy Langeveld (wglp09@slac.stanford.edu)
(650) 926-2280
 Topic: Lelaps available from CVS
Lelaps available from CVS [message #119] Fri, 30 July 2004 12:18
langeveld
Messages: 12
Registered: March 2004
Location: SLAC
To get Lelaps from CVS, type the following:

cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs.freehep.org:/cvs/lelaps co lelaps

To compile it, do the following:

cd lelaps
make

To run it, do this:

cd lelaps # change to the lelaps directory inside lelaps!
lelaps -h

The above will show you a number of options. Most likely you will want to use:

lelaps -o foo.sio -E bar.stdhep

or

lelaps -o foo.slcio -E bar.stdhep

You can create one output file for multiple stdhep input file by just specifying more than one .stdhep file:

lelaps -o foo.slcio -E bar1.stdhep bar2.stdhep ...

or even:

lelaps -o foo.slcio -E *.stdhep

By default it simulates SDJan03, but you can change the detector using:

lelaps -L LDMar01 -o foo.slcio -E *.stdhep

Willy.

[Updated on: Thu, 05 August 2004 13:55]


Willy Langeveld (wglp09@slac.stanford.edu)
(650) 926-2280
 Topic: Lelaps
more.gif  Lelaps [message #25] Fri, 12 March 2004 10:44
langeveld
Messages: 12
Registered: March 2004
Location: SLAC
So here's a topic to discuss Lelaps. For documentation on Lelaps, see (for the moment):

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~wglp09/Lelaps

Willy.


Willy Langeveld (wglp09@slac.stanford.edu)
(650) 926-2280
Forum: Reference Design Report (RDR)
 Topic: Beam parameters test
Beam parameters test [message #202] Mon, 28 March 2005 05:32
torr
Messages: 2
Registered: March 2005
Location: SLAC
Test of topics
Forum: LCDG4
 Topic: LCDG4 v04-00 is released
LCDG4 v04-00 is released [message #240] Tue, 26 April 2005 12:51
lima
Messages: 47
Registered: May 2004
Location: DeKalb, IL, USA
Dear LCDG4 users,

A new version of LCDG4, v04-00, has been released.

Please visit http://nicadd.niu.edu/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/lcdg4/VERSION for release notes and corresponding versions.

Documentation is available at http://nicadd.niu.edu/lcdg4 .

Enjoy, and please let us know if you find any problems, or have any questions.

Guilherme
 Topic: LCDG4 samples available at nicadd
yes.gif  LCDG4 samples available at nicadd [message #100] Thu, 27 May 2004 10:06
lima
Messages: 47
Registered: May 2004
Location: DeKalb, IL, USA
Several single-particle and physics samples have been processed
through LCDG4 v02-24 using SDJan03 geometry, and are available for
general use. The data is available via secure ftp (sftp) to the
nicadd server (access instructions below).

The samples available are:

* single particles:
- 2K each of e,mu,pi,gamma,neutron at theta=90deg
with energies of 2, 3, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 50 GeV
- 10K K0s -> pi+pi- @ 10GeV, theta=90deg
- 5K K0s -> pi0pi0 @ 10GeV, theta=90deg
- 5K sigma @ 10 GeV, theta=90deg
- 5K lambda @ 1-10GeV, theta=90deg

* physics:
- 10K ee -> Z -> hadrons @ 91GeV
- 5K ee -> ttbar (incl) @ 350GeV
- 5K ee -> WW -> (qqbar)(any) @ 500GeV
- 2K ee -> ZH -> (bbbar)(any) @ 500GeV, MH=120 GeV
- 2K ee -> ZH -> (bbbar)(any) @ 500GeV, MH=160 GeV

Please use these samples and let us know of any problems,
at lima at fnal dot gov.

==== ACCESS INSTRUCTIONS ====

% sftp scpuser@k2.nicadd.niu.edu
[password: lcd_2004]
sftp> cd pub/lima/lcdg4/v02-23
sftp> ls # to see all the files available
sftp> get *ttbar* # for instance
sftp> quit

Windows users can use Winscp utility, please visit
http://nicadd.niu.edu/~jeremy/admin/scp/ for more details.


Enjoy,
Guilherme
 Topic: LCDG4 homepage
icon2.gif  LCDG4 homepage [message #23] Fri, 05 March 2004 15:49
jeremy
Messages: 46
Registered: March 2004
Location: SLAC
Hello.

The LCDG4 homepage at NICADD:

http://nicadd.niu.edu/~jeremy/lcd/lcdg4/index.html

Comments and suggestions are welcome.


Jeremy McCormick, SLAC <jeremym@slac.stanford.edu>
Forum: Beam RF effects.
 Topic: Additional references from MDI Workshop and IPBI meeting
Additional references from MDI Workshop and IPBI meeting [message #270] Tue, 24 May 2005 17:10
mwoods
Messages: 12
Registered: November 2004
Location: SLAC
1. There was a session on Beam RF effects and EMI at the MDI Workshop in January. See
http://www-conf.slac.stanford.edu/mdi/sessions/beamrf.htm
2. Some references from the MDI Workshop are available at
http://www-conf.slac.stanford.edu/mdi/sessions/references/be amrf_refs.htm
3. Some talks at LCWS 2005 in April:
i) Test beams talk on tracking and vertexing by D. Bailey,
http://heppc12.uta.edu/~yu/research/linear-collider/lcws2005 -tb/bailey.pdf
ii) DAQ talk by M. Woods,
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/lcd/ipbi/lcws05/Woods_MDI_ and_DAQ.pdf
iii) MDI talk by M. Woods,
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/lcd/ipbi/lcws05/Woods_Beam RF.ppt
iv) Plenary talk on vertex detectors by C. Damerell,
http://hepwww.rl.ac.uk/damerell/Vertex_Detectors_and_LC.ppt
4. At the May IPBI meeting there was a presentation by Steve Smith on EMI and a compilation of reference studies at SPEAR and PEP by Sherwood Parker -- see
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/lcd/ipbi/monthlymeetings/0 4may2005/agenda.html
 Topic: Discussion on EMI for Vertex Detector
Discussion on EMI for Vertex Detector [message #171] Tue, 07 December 2004 17:34
mwoods
Messages: 12
Registered: November 2004
Location: SLAC
Here are notes from a meeting at SLAC, held Dec. 7, 2004 prompted by some discussions with Chris Damerell:
Attending: Nick Sinev, John Jaros, Ray Arnold, Tim Nelson, Marty Breidenbach, Jim Brau, Mike Woods

  1. related presentations planned for MDI Workshop:
    • Marty: SLD experience with VXD2, VXD3
    • Marty: Signal Processing / DAQ planned for most of SiD (excluding very forward region and VXD); having 4 sample/hold per train (occupancy will be ok) for each detector pixel and then reading out between trains
    • Mike (or other victim to be found): review LCWS 2004 talks for DAQ session and summarize signal processing / DAQ plans presented there
    • Nick: describe current status of VXD3, including readout system, and describe a beam test that can be carried out in ESA where we can provide 10Hz beam with single bunches, 2e10 charge, with bunch lengths in range 100 microns to 1mm (SLD bunch length was 1mm)
  2. other talks planned in beam rf session:
    • PEP-II higher-order mode beampipe heating; Mike Sullivan (to be confirmed)
  3. other talk possibilities for beam rf session:
    • BaBar electronics: EMI mitigation in vertex or wire chamber? I'll contact Natalie Roe (also maybe Dave Nelson) for the vertex chamber and Mike Kelsey for the wire chamber and see if there might be something of interest to present
    • UA1 VXD experience: I talked to Tom Markiewicz who recalls that the initial beam pipe was too thin to have enough skin depths for the higher beam rf harmonics; some possible contacts on this: Kate Morgan (friend of Nan and I'll ask Nan how to contact), Guryn at Brookhaven, Ann Kiernan (retired?). Also may be documented in a NIM paper?
    • theory talk on calculating HOMs: Perry Wilson?
    • rf shield included in NLC ZDR in "pant-leg" region of the crossing angle geometry?
  4. other notes:
    • The EMI observed with SLD VXD3 was not in shifting/clocking of CCDs (this clocking was always blanked out around beamtime and could be a separate problem if there were no blanking); problem was with the fiber optic link losing its phase lock (there was no fiber optic link for VXD2)
    • need to check for additional notes/documentation on VXD3 EMI problem: Vavra? Mentioned in any of the UK theses on VXD?

 Topic: Background references for Beam rf effects
Background references for Beam rf effects [message #163] Wed, 01 December 2004 09:48
mwoods
Messages: 12
Registered: November 2004
Location: SLAC
1. EMI (electro-magnetic interference) effects for vertex detectors
I believe the only observed effects on vertex detector readout have been from the SLD
experiment. I'm not an expert on this, but I'll summarize my current understanding of the SLD experience.
This will be summarized better by Marty Breidenbach at the MDI Workshop.

At SLD, it took ~200 ms to read out the VXD, longer than the 8 ms between bunches (120 Hz operation).
In order to be able to read out the CCD VXD without noise problems we had to suppress
charge transfer shifting for ~10 microsec around beam time. This effect (and cure by suppressing shifting at beam time)
was observed only for VXD3 detector and not for VXD2. VXD2 was used thru 1995 and VXD3 was used in 1996-1998.

2. HOM (higher-order mode) heating for the B-factories and for HERA,
the observed effects have been beampipe heating which can lead to potential background problems
from increased vacuum pressure. Some references on this:
- http://www.slac.stanford.edu/pubs/slacpubs/9000/slac-pub-937 2.html
(High Order Mode Heating Observations in the PEP-II Interaction Region)
- http://www.interactions.org/cms/?pid=1014128 (DESY press release on HERA performance: an excerpt from
this reads "It has been a long and hard struggle to get HERA back into successful operation after a challenging upgrade
in the years 2000 and 2001. Unexpectedly severe backgrounds prevented the two collider experiments H1 and ZEUS from
taking data when HERA restarted in 2001. The main causes were found to be the strong heating of the beam pipe due to the
short positron bunches and the intense synchrotron radiation from the positrons close to the experiments. These resulted
in a degradation of the vacuum – the spray of particles from the interaction of the proton beam with the residual gas
produced the unacceptable backgrounds."

3. Bunch lengths at different colliders: SLC (1mm), LEP (10mm), PEP-II (12mm), KEK-B (7mm), HERA e+ (8mm), ILC (0.3mm).
A comparison of beam rf effects at SLC, PEP-II and ILC and possible scaling with charge and bunch length,
is considered on slide 48 of Woods' talk at Victoria,
http://www.linearcollider.ca:8080/lc/vic04/plenary/mike_wood s.pdf


4. Summary of references
SLD,LCD:
C. Damerell, http://hepwww.rl.ac.uk/damerell/Daresbury-LCFI-LCABD-Connect ions.ppt
SLD VXD3 NIM paper, http://www.slac.stanford.edu/pubs/slacpubs/7000/slac-pub-738 5.html
C. Damerell at LCWS2004, http://agenda.cern.ch/askArchive.php?base=agenda&categ=a 04172&id=a04172s60t2/transparencies

PEP-II HOM:
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/pubs/slacpubs/9000/slac-pub-937 2.html

HERA:
http://www.triumf.ca/people/miller/HERA/herabg_II_slides.pdf
http://www.interactions.org/cms/?pid=1014128

Forum: Higgs Physics
 Topic: Discussion + Questions about this forum
Discussion + Questions about this forum [message #84] Mon, 03 May 2004 04:48
desch
Messages: 6
Registered: April 2004
Location: University of Hamburg
Please reply to this topic if you have questions
suggestions etc about this forum

[Updated on: Mon, 03 May 2004 04:50]

 Topic: General Discussion
General Discussion [message #83] Mon, 03 May 2004 04:47
desch
Messages: 6
Registered: April 2004
Location: University of Hamburg

Please reply to this topic if you want to discuss
something within our community
 Topic: Meeting,Workshops,Conferences
Meeting,Workshops,Conferences [message #82] Mon, 03 May 2004 04:45
desch
Messages: 6
Registered: April 2004
Location: University of Hamburg

Please reply to this topic in order to
announce a workshop, meeting or conference
of relevance for LC Higgs physics
 Topic: New LC Higgs papers
New LC Higgs papers [message #80] Mon, 03 May 2004 04:42
desch
Messages: 6
Registered: April 2004
Location: University of Hamburg

Please reply to this topic if you have written a new
paper or note relevant for LC Higgs physics.
 Topic: Welcome
Welcome [message #79] Mon, 03 May 2004 04:40
desch
Messages: 6
Registered: April 2004
Location: University of Hamburg

Welcome the Forum for Higgs Physics at Linear Collider

The forum is meant as a place where information useful
for Higgs physics studies can be posted.

The forum is meant as a worldwide platform as discussed
at the International Linear Collider Workshop (LCWS04).

Since currently it is not possible to create sub-categories,
I will post a few messages which you may reply to
in order to get the information sorted a bit.

I encourage everybody to use this communication tool
in order to make the best out of our limited resources.

Klaus Desch
Forum: Polarimetry
 Topic: Upstream polarimeter discussions
Upstream polarimeter discussions [message #208] Fri, 01 April 2005 09:12
mwoods
Messages: 12
Registered: November 2004
Location: SLAC
Hi, I would guess that Peter is right that the 5mm dispersion could be increased at least to 10mm dispersion. We chose a 5mm dispersion chicane to match the upstream energy chicane; Woodley presented calculations on the emittance growth for the 5mm chicane in this talk from March 8,
And the emittance growth was negligible. Can do the appropriate scaling to check for 10mm dispersion chicane or even 20mm.
For a gas cherenkov counter I would agree with Peter that don't want to go narrower than 1cm-wide channels. If need to go narrower, can consider a quartz cherenkov counter though more susceptible to synchrotron radiation background. Should anyway consider a quartz counter for comparison.
One other item questioned at LCWS for the upstream polarimeter was how easy is it to get 35uJ/pulse in the ILC pulse format for the laser beam as designed; re. presentation regarding the Fabry-Perot cavity. Can you address this as well?
Also, this discussion would be very useful to have in the MDI forum on polarimetry at http://forum.linearcollider.org/.
I'll take some liberty and post this message with the thread below there. Cheers, mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Schuler [mailto:schuler@mail.desy.de]
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 7:06 AM
To: Moffeit, Kenneth C.
Cc: Peter Schuler; Woods, Michael B.; Walker, Nicholas John; Norbert.Meyners@desy.de
Subject: emittance growth in upstream chicane optics


Dear Ken,

hmm, only 5 mm chicane dispersion (at 250 GeV), instead of 20 mm.

That makes indeed a lot of difference, to the detector, vacuum chambers,
etc. I had assumed 20 detector channels with a hor. aperture of 10 mm ea.,
covering a range of x = 20 -> 220 mm from the beam axis.

Scaling simply all x-dimensions by a factor 1/4 would give us very narrow
detector channels of only 2.5 mm nominal, which is not comfortable. Maybe
5 mm would be possible. Also, I don't want to get closer to the beam than
x_min = 20 mm. So that would decrease the maximum covered energy.

You indicate considerations about emittance growth as the origin of this
much more docile chicane design. This surprises me, since we have actually
investigated this point, based on earlier work by Nick Walker on the
TESLA energy spectrometer. If you look at page 18 of the talk Norbert
presented, we estimate an acceptabe emittance growth of 2.5%, but only
at E_cm = 1 TeV, and totally negligible at lower energies. So, unless
our estimate is bogus, it does not seem to be justified to decrease the
dispersion of the upstream chicane so drastically. My gut's feeling is
that we could absorb a factor of 0.5. But 0.25 would really hurt.

Even worse, and I would go as far as saying "unacceptable", would be
only 1.7 meters between the inner dipoles. We assumed a center to center
distance of 10 meters, which gives us nominally 8 meters of space for
a typical magnet length of 2 meters. The reason for this space requirement
is simple geometry for the laser beam insertion/exit. We went through this
exercise already with our Tesla design, and the arguments have not changed
and are still valid. You want to accomodate a crossing angle of 10 mrad,
and you must keep the optics away from any synchrotron radiation. These
conditions are met with our design, which accomodates a vertical beam
crossing, but retains a minimal magnet gap height of only 20 mm for all
dipoles. With a space of only 1.7 m, you would either have to increase
the height of the gap by some unacceptable factor, or you would have to
resort to horizontal beam crossing, which will jeopardize the optics and
is therefore also not acceptable.

I have not had time to look at all the details of the current beam line
elements, but I will take a closer look. Obviously, there are already
enough issues of contention. Clearly the actual amount of emittance growth
in the chicane should be checked with high priority.

Cheers,
Peter


************************************************************ *********
* *
* K. Peter Schüler Tel.: ++49-40-8998-2015 *
* DESY-HERMES Fax ++49-40-8998-4034 *
* Notke Strasse 85 *
* D-22603 Hamburg e-mail Peter.Schuler@desy.de *
* Germany *
* *
************************************************************ *********

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Moffeit, Kenneth C. wrote:

> Dear Peter, Mike and Norbert,
>
> Peter, please forward this email on to Norbert Meyners.
>
> I noticed in Norbert talk that he had assumed the dispersion at the upstream Compton Chicane IP was the same as for the extraction line dispersion (2 cm). Actually it is only 5mm. It was shown correctly in my drawing of 24 Nov 04. This changes quite a bit the geometry for the detector with the backscattered e- offset from the beam line only ~4.5cm instead of the 17.8cm for the extraction line polarimeter. Assuming a beam pipe radius of ~1cm we only have 3.5 cm for the cerenkov cells. Can the upstream detector be made to work in the smaller horizontal dimension? The reason for the low dispersion number is to avoid emittance growth in the final focus.
>
> Note, there is only 1.7 meters between BPC2 and BPC3 at the Compton IP. Is that adequate for the laser light to collide? We can bring the laser light in/out on the outside of magnets BPC3 and BPC2. Norbert, can you redo the geometry drawings of your talk with the 5mm dispersion?
>
> I updated my 24 Nov 04 drawing to refect the upstream beam optics values from Mark Woodley. The new version of the drawing with the correct S location and nomenclature is attached. Below I give the web address for the Woodley optics deck, and have extracted the section around the compton chicane for display below. Note the chicane starts with bend labelled BPC1A. The 3rd column gives the s location in meters at the end of magnet and the number 0.121359E-03 is the bend angle the magnet. Note, he breaks each magnet, eg BPC1 into 2 parts BPC1A and BPC1B for optics reasons.
>
> Regards,
> Ken
>
>
>
> >From Mark Woodley,
>
> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~mdw/ILC/Beam_Delivery/20050316 /ebds1.optics
>
> $ %16s %16s %e %e %e %e %e %e %e %e %16s
> @ XIY %e 0.00000
> @ XIX %e 0.00000
> @ QY %e 8.84391
> @ QX %e 8.06409
> @ CIRCUM %le 2550.52946695
> @ DELTA %e 0.00000
> @ TYPE %08s "OPTICS"
> @ COMMENT %44s "e- Beam Delivery System 1 [20 mr] (ILC2005)"
> @ ORIGIN %20s "MAD 8.51/15 Windows"
> @ DATE %08s "16/03/05"
> @ TIME %08s "13.03.11"
>
>
> * NAME KEYWORD S L K0L K1L K2L K3L K4L TILT TYPE
>
> "MMOVER" "MARKER" 708.695 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "QPFF3" "QUADRUPOLE" 709.695 1.00000 0.00000 -0.309720E-01 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "DPFFB" "DRIFT" 710.195 0.500000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "POLCHIC" "LINE" 710.195 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "PCBPM1" "MONITOR" 710.195 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "DPCBPM" "DRIFT" 711.595 1.40000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "BPC1A" "SBEND" 713.095 1.50000 0.121359E-03 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "BPC1B" "SBEND" 714.595 1.50000 0.121359E-03 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "DPCBBO" "DRIFT" 730.695 16.1000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "BPC2A" "SBEND" 733.695 3.00000 -0.121359E-03 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "BPC2B" "SBEND" 736.695 3.00000 -0.121359E-03 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "DPCBBI" "DRIFT" 737.395 0.700000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "PCBPM2" "MONITOR" 737.395 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "POL" "MARKER" 737.395 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "DPCBBI" "DRIFT" 738.095 0.700000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "BPC3A" "SBEND" 741.095 3.00000 -0.121359E-03 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "BPC3B" "SBEND" 744.095 3.00000 -0.121359E-03 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "DPCBBO" "DRIFT" 760.195 16.1000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "BPC4A" "SBEND" 761.695 1.50000 0.121359E-03 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "BPC4B" "SBEND" 763.195 1.50000 0.121359E-03 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "DPCBPM" "DRIFT" 764.595 1.40000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "PCBPM3" "MONITOR" 764.595 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "POLCHIC" "LINE" 764.595 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "DPFFB" "DRIFT" 765.095 0.500000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "QPFF4" "QUADRUPOLE" 766.095 1.00000 0.00000 -0.426096E-01 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 "~"
> "BPMQ079" "MONITOR" 766.095 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
>
Forum: Crossing Angles for 2 IRs
 Topic: disrupted beam files
disrupted beam files [message #183] Thu, 20 January 2005 08:06
robappleby
Messages: 2
Registered: November 2004
The large statistics disrupted beam files used for the
2mrad crossing angle study are now available at:

http://flc.web.lal.in2p3.fr/mdi/extraction/disruptedbeam.htm

This page includes the particle files for a 500 GeV and
a TeV machine, along with the files for a TeV machine
with 10^10 bunch population and also some photon
distributions.

Rob Appleby
 Topic: Photon Beam Dump considerations for Headon or 2-mrad IR
Photon Beam Dump considerations for Headon or 2-mrad IR [message #174] Sat, 11 December 2004 12:42
mwoods
Messages: 12
Registered: November 2004
Location: SLAC
Will there be discussion of photon beam dump considerations for the 2-mrad IR at the MDI Workshop?
This looks like a particularly thorny problem, since the incoming beam has to come thru the high power
(say 1-MegaWatt) beamsstrahlung photon dump. How is the engineering done for that? How are the stringent
vacuum requirements met? The TESLA design seems to have the incoming beam come thru a 1-cm radius beampipe thru a
10-meter long photon beam dump. Can SLAC's Conventional Facilities and Beam Dump Engineering experts consider this to provide comments at the MDI Workshop?
Some References:
  1. TESLA studies:
  2. NLC Studies:

Forum: MDI Workshop January 2005
 Topic: Phone call-in available
Phone call-in available [message #177] Wed, 05 January 2005 14:59
mwoods
Messages: 12
Registered: November 2004
Location: SLAC
We have had a few requests for audio hookup for the MDI Workshop, being held at SLAC January 6-8. Hence, we have set up a phone conference call for this and will make this work on a "best effort" basis. The call-in info is given below. We have requested speakers to make their talks available prior to giving the talks so that we may post them to the MDI web page location, accessible from http://www-conf.slac.stanford.edu/mdi/sessions.htm (a few talks are already posted).

The call-in number is 510-665-5437 (20 lines available).
Passcode number 4338 for the morning sessions.
Passcode number 1907 for the afternoon sessions.

Mike Woods (on behalf of the MDI Workshop Local Organizing Committee)

 Topic: Beam optics for energy, pol measurements
Beam optics for energy, pol measurements [message #160] Wed, 24 November 2004 23:03
mwoods
Messages: 12
Registered: November 2004
Location: SLAC
Comments on some SLAC work towards developing beam optics for energy and polarization measurements:
  1. At the KEK Workshop, WG4 decided to develop a complete Beam Delivery System including 2 IRs, one with a 20-mrad crossing angle (to be evaluated in range 12-25 mrad) and one with a 2-mrad crossing angle (to be evaluated in region 2-7 mrad).
  2. At SLAC Yuri Nosochkov is working on the 20-mrad extraction line design, which includes separate energy and polarimetry chicanes (see sketch).
  3. Next, Yuri will work on 2-mrad extraction line, initially with no beam diagnostics. (Later we can worry about adding diagnostics).
  4. Upstream BDS for 2-mrad needs to include E,P measurements. For a strawman design, I propose we use the 4-magnet chicane described by Ray Arnold on slide 6 of his Nov. IPBI presentation, This energy chicane needs to go downstream of the energy collimation. For polarimetry Ken Moffeit and I propose as a strawman to duplicate roughly (larger separation between middle 2 magnets) the energy chicane design for a polarimeter chicane, but locate upstream of the energy collimation (see sketch). Also, want beam trajectory at middle of polarimeter chicane parallel to IP (though chicane also allows possibility for using the chicane to match the trajectory).
  5. Upstream BDS for 20-mrad. Would prefer this to include similar energy and polarimeter chicanes as the 2-mrad BDS. But this is lower priority and can come later.

 Topic: Workshop Info
Workshop Info [message #158] Tue, 23 November 2004 17:10
mwoods
Messages: 12
Registered: November 2004
Location: SLAC
This Workshop will be held Jan. 6-8, 2005 at SLAC.
Scope and Goals
  • Evaluate "experiment impact" of the ILC design. The ILC Design impacts the ILC Detector and Physics, beyond just the delivered luminosity and energy reach. The Machine-Detector Interface (MDI) group needs to evaluate how the ILC design impacts the Experiment (Detector design and physics capabilities) and how the Experimental requirements impact the ILC design.

  • Give input to both the ILC Beam Delivery Group and the World-wide Study for ILC Physics and Detectors regarding critical choices, beam tests, the CDR and the TDR.

  • Address viability and issues for crossing angle choices: head-on, 300-mrad vertical, 2-mrad horizontal, 7-mrad horizontal, 12-25 mrad horizontal

  • Form international sub-groups working on individual topics, and identify available and needed resources. This Workshop is an important milestone: preparing for the CDR and for subsequent meetings at LCWS (March 2005) and Snowmass (August 2005).
Forum: Common Simulation Framework
 Topic: A starting point on the requests to be answered by a common geometry API
icon3.gif  A starting point on the requests to be answered by a common geometry API [message #104] Sat, 05 June 2004 10:12
lima
Messages: 47
Registered: May 2004
Location: DeKalb, IL, USA
This list is the result of a discussion carried out during the
LC simulations workshop at Argonne. Please add to this topic your comments and suggestions to this list. Comments from reconstruction algorithm developers are specially encouraged.

Guilherme, for the
Worldwide LC Simulations working group

---------------------------------------------------
Requests to be answered by a common geometry API
a starting point


* reqs on the geom system:

. full detector
- name/tag
- version
- others?

. given (x,y,z):
- material properties
density, radlen, intlen, others?
- E-field
- B-field
- distance to closest detector element (is this needed)?
- cell/channel
. id
. shape
. dimensions
. distance to closest edge
. volume, area, etc (needed?)

. given volume (cell/channel) id
- center position
- local <--> global coords transformations
- neighborhoods?
- geant4 attributes

. given A(xa,ya,za) and B(xb,yb,zb) (straight line only!)
- distance
- # radlens
- # intlens
- integral E.dl or B.dl
- collection of traversed volumes

. hierarchical view: given a volume
- collection of mutually exclusive, non-overlapping
subvolumes
- parent volume
- list of all parents
- sensitivity
- type (calorimeter or tracker)

. given vecP(px,py,pz)...
- nothing from a geometry system, but
from a client of the geometry system

 Topic: LLR Simulation Meeting notes
icon1.gif  LLR Simulation Meeting notes [message #101] Thu, 03 June 2004 01:11
mora
Messages: 48
Registered: February 2004
Location: L.L.R. - Ecole polytechni...
Dear all,

Attached here you have some notes concerning the Simulation Meeting held on 26 April 2004 at the L.L.R.

Cheers, Paulo.

 Topic: Simulation Requirements Document
Simulation Requirements Document [message #98] Thu, 27 May 2004 08:18
dhiman
Messages: 2
Registered: May 2004
Location: Norhtern Illinois Univers...
Friends,
The Worldwide LC Simulation Working Group is preparing a document that lists the requirements for a common detector simulation program. A preliminary draft of this document is attached. We'll post updates on this forum, but you can find the latest version also at http://nicadd.niu.edu/~dhiman/lcd/software/simulation/simreq doc.pdf. We intend to finalize the document over this summer. Your comments, suggestions, and questions, as a potential developer or user, are most welcome.
This is only the first step, to be followed by analysis, design, and implementation of many components that must be realized concurrently. As you can see, tasks are many, developers few, and time rather limited. Please let us know if you'd like to join the development team.

On behalf of the Worldwide LC Simulation Working Group,
Dhiman Chakraborty
NIU/NICADD

  • Attachment: simreqdoc.pdf
    (Size: 267.37KB, Downloaded 1681 times)

[Updated on: Thu, 27 May 2004 08:54]

Pages (7): [ «    1  2  3  4  5  6  7]


Current Time: Fri Oct 18 00:35:03 Pacific Daylight Time 2019
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.1.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software