CEPC partial double ring scheme and crabwaist parameters
CEPC partial double ring scheme and crab-waist parameters Dou Wang, Jie Gao, Feng Su, Ming Xiao, Yuan Zhang, Jiyuan Zhai, Yiwei Wang, Bai Sha, Huiping Geng, Tianjian Bian, Xiaohao Cui, Yuanyuan Guo CEPC AP meeting, 2016. 04. 01
Primary parameter for CEPC double ring (wangdou 20160325) Number of IPs Energy (Ge. V) Circumference (km) SR loss/turn (Ge. V) Half crossing angle (mrad) Piwinski angle Ne/bunch (1011) Bunch number Beam current (m. A) SR power /beam (MW) Bending radius (km) Momentum compaction (10 -5) IP x/y (m) Emittance x/y (nm) Transverse IP (um) x/IP y/IP VRF (GV) f RF (MHz) Nature z (mm) Total z (mm) HOM power/cavity (kw) Energy spread (%) Energy acceptance by RF (%) n Life time due to beamstrahlung_cal (minute) F (hour glass) Lmax/IP (1034 cm-2 s-1) Pre-CDR H-high lumi. H-low power W Z 2 120 54 3. 1 0 0 3. 79 50 16. 6 51. 7 6. 1 3. 4 0. 8/0. 0012 6. 12/0. 018 69. 97/0. 15 0. 118 0. 083 6. 87 650 2. 14 2. 65 3. 6 0. 13 2 6 0. 23 47 2 120 54 2. 96 15 2. 85 67 16. 9 50 6. 2 2. 5 0. 25/0. 00136 2. 45/0. 0074 24. 8/0. 1 0. 03 0. 11 3. 62 650 3. 1 4. 1 2. 2 0. 13 2 2. 2 0. 47 36 2 120 54 2. 96 15 2. 67 44 10. 5 31. 2 6. 2 2. 2 0. 268 /0. 00124 2. 06 /0. 0062 23. 5/0. 088 0. 032 0. 11 3. 53 650 3. 0 4. 0 1. 3 0. 13 2 2. 1 0. 47 32 2 80 54 0. 59 15 5 0. 74 400 26. 2 15. 6 6. 1 2. 4 0. 1/0. 001 1. 02/0. 003 10. 1/0. 056 0. 008 0. 074 0. 81 650 3. 25 3. 35 0. 99 0. 09 2 45. 5 54 0. 062 15 7. 6 0. 46 1100 45. 4 2. 8 6. 1 3. 5 0. 1/0. 001 0. 62/0. 0028 7. 9/0. 053 0. 006 0. 073 0. 12 650 3. 9 4. 0 0. 99 0. 05 1. 7 0. 3 1. 1 0. 24 0. 68 2. 04 0. 82 2. 96 0. 81 2. 01 0. 92 3. 09 0. 95 3. 09
parameter for CEPC double ring-88 km (wangdou 20160329) Number of IPs Energy (Ge. V) Circumference (km) SR loss/turn (Ge. V) Half crossing angle (mrad) Piwinski angle Ne/bunch (1011) Bunch number Beam current (m. A) SR power /beam (MW) Bending radius (km) Momentum compaction (10 -5) IP x/y (m) Emittance x/y (nm) Transverse IP (um) x/IP y/IP VRF (GV) f RF (MHz) Nature z (mm) Total z (mm) HOM power/cavity (kw) Energy spread (%) Energy acceptance by RF (%) n Life time due to beamstrahlung_cal (minute) F (hour glass) Lmax/IP (1034 cm-2 s-1) H-high lumi. H-low power W Z 2 120 88 2. 0 15 2. 0 1. 75 257 24. 5 50 9. 0 1. 9 0. 36/0. 0011 1. 63/0. 005 24. 4/0. 074 0. 091 3. 1 650 2. 7 3. 25 2. 2 0. 1 1. 5 3 0. 29 32 2 120 88 2. 0 15 2. 6 1. 53 176 14. 7 30 9. 0 1. 5 0. 36/0. 0011 1. 15 /0. 0035 20. 5/0. 062 0. 033 0. 091 2. 57 650 2. 94 3. 53 1. 1 0. 1 1. 4 2. 1 0. 31 40 2 80 88 0. 4 15 6. 3 0. 565 1150 35. 5 14. 3 9. 0 1. 9 0. 1/0. 001 0. 76/0. 0023 8. 7/0. 048 0. 0053 0. 061 0. 57 650 3. 55 3. 65 0. 99 0. 07 2 45. 5 88 0. 04 15 12. 1 0. 24 6600 86. 5 3. 6 9. 0 1. 9 0. 1/0. 001 0. 24/0. 0011 4. 9/0. 033 0. 06 0. 074 650 3. 93 4. 0 0. 97 0. 04 1. 4 0. 27 0. 9 0. 2 0. 78 4. 18 0. 82 2. 63 0. 94 3. 52 0. 97 5. 02
parameter for CEPC double ring-100 km (wangdou 20160329) Number of IPs Energy (Ge. V) Circumference (km) SR loss/turn (Ge. V) Half crossing angle (mrad) Piwinski angle Ne/bunch (1011) Bunch number Beam current (m. A) SR power /beam (MW) Bending radius (km) Momentum compaction (10 -5) IP x/y (m) Emittance x/y (nm) Transverse IP (um) x/IP y/IP VRF (GV) f RF (MHz) Nature z (mm) Total z (mm) HOM power/cavity (kw) Energy spread (%) Energy acceptance by RF (%) n Life time due to beamstrahlung_cal (minute) F (hour glass) Lmax/IP (1034 cm-2 s-1) H-high lumi. H-low power W Z 2 120 100 1. 7 15 2. 0 1. 43 436 30 50 11 1. 8 0. 297/0. 0011 1. 63/0. 0049 22/0. 074 0. 033 0. 083 3. 1 650 2. 45 2. 94 2. 3 0. 1 1. 46 3. 5 0. 27 40 2 120 100 1. 7 15 2. 83 1. 22 307 18 30 11 1. 4 0. 3/0. 0011 1. 03/0. 003 17. 6/0. 59 0. 025 0. 083 2. 25 650 2. 77 3. 33 1. 1 0. 1 1. 4 2. 2 0. 28 49 2 80 100 0. 33 15 8. 65 0. 42 2400 48. 7 16. 0 11 1. 4 0. 1/0. 001 0. 46/0. 0014 6. 8/0. 037 0. 003 0. 055 0. 41 650 3. 8 3. 9 0. 98 0. 065 2 45. 5 100 0. 034 15 15. 8 0. 165 0. 9 0. 26 0. 7 0. 18 0. 8 4. 75 0. 85 3. 01 0. 96 4. 46 0. 985 15800 125. 3 4. 3 182260 1449. 7 50 11 1. 3 0. 1/0. 001 0. 14/0. 00065 3. 8/0. 026 0. 002 0. 054 0. 053 650 3. 94 4. 0 0. 97 11. 3 0. 037 6. 59 76. 4
CEPC Luminosity vs circumference
100 km CEPC vs Fcc-ee PHOM=11. 3 kw PHOM=29. 1 kw • Fcc-ee did not include the constraint for HOM power.
y vs circumference (Higgs)
Bunch number vs circumference Higgs
Bunch charge vs circumference
Energy acceptance vs circumference (Higgs)
SR loss vs circumference
Double ring FFS design with crab sextupoles Betax=0. 25 m Betay=0. 00136 m K 2 hs=26. 8 m-3 K 2 vs=32. 2 m-3 IP Crab sextupole Critical energy: Ec=190 ke. V Dipole strength: B=0. 019 T Ø As Oide said, the second FFS sextupoles of the CCS-Y section can work as the crab sextupoles, if their strengths and phases to the IP are properly chosen.
Final doublet IP L*=1. 5 m L(QD 0)=1. 46 m, G(QD 0)=-200 T/m L(QF 1)=1. 29 m, G(QF 1)=97 T/m L 0=1. 5 m
Crab sextupole strength x=2 , y=2. 5 Ø The crab sextupole should be placed on both sides of the IP in phase with the IP in the horizontal plane and at π/2 in the vertical one. 13% strength of main sextupoles
Insert FFS in PDR
DA of the whole ring Su Feng 2016. 03. 31 Sextupole: 2组
Chromaticity correction in FFS • Fine tuning the phase of main sextupoles. • Weak sextupoles are -10% of main sextupoles to correct the sextupoles’ length effect K 2 hs=-6. 99 m-3 K 2 vs=32. 16 m-3
DA after chromaticity correction Sextupole: 2组
THANKS!
- Slides: 19