PPLP ramp MD First results Motivation PPLP ramp
![Motivation – PPLP ramp (vs PELP) [A] Ø The PPLP ramp is ~10% shorter](https://slidetodoc.com/presentation_image_h2/fb094fdee10055143550e608ac254a12/image-2.jpg "Motivation – PPLP ramp (vs PELP) [A] Ø The PPLP ramp is ~10% shorter")
- Slides: 8
PPLP ramp MD First results
Motivation – PPLP ramp (vs PELP) [A] Ø The PPLP ramp is ~10% shorter than the PELP ramp (1100 sec vs 1210 sec) Faster settling parabola Ø Potential gain = 10 hours/year (~350 ramps in 2016) Ø The PPLP ramp has to be tested with beam SNAPBACK sec From LSWG on May 23 rd LSWG – 17 August 2017 2
Strategy § Same optics distribution as 2017 ATS CRS § Q, Q’, coupling and orbit copied (shrunk) from nominal BP § Optics corrections copied from nominal inj BP § Same SPOOL BP as for nominal hypercycle § RF settings copied from nominal then modified (Voltage) to cope with the faster momentum change LSWG – 17 August 2017 3
What was done 1 st RAMP: • Pilot, coarse COLL, long blow-up ON lost ~40% during first 400 sec 2 nd RAMP • Pilot, coarse COLL, NO long blow-up, tune/orbit fed-forward GOOD! 3 rd RAMP • INDIVs, tighter coarse COLL, long blow-up ON, orbit/tune (re)fed-forward, Xing&sep IN GOOD! 4 th RAMP • Pilot, tune and energy feedbacks OFF, Xing&sep IN, RF modulation ON GOOD! LSWG – 17 August 2017 4
Ramp quality (INDIV) Peak of 5 E-5 Gy/s on TCP. IR 3 comparable with what we have in the present PELP ramp LSWG – 17 August 2017 5
Ramp quality For matching reasons the PPLP ramp is slower at the beginning. At 46 sec the second parabola starts, sensibly increasing the energy variation @55 sec the PPLP overtakes the PELP ramp No losses are observed after ~25 seconds (nor on the (faster) settling parabola)!! Worst case of 2016 snapback goes fully IN in ~42 sec (46 in the new PPLP) LSWG – 17 August 2017 6
Q’ meas – B 1 V example LSWG – 17 August 2017 7
PPLP ramp Ø 4 RAMPS have been performed with progressive corrections VERY SUCCESFUL MD!! Ø The PPLP CRS is now ready to be used Ø A commissioning phase is needed to clean all corrections, measure coupling etc… Ø An easy way would be to use it for the intermediate energy run (@END of the year? ), as it was done for CRS Ø The linear part being untouched (actually longer) does not prevent from possible increase of squeeze in the ramp LSWG – 17 August 2017 8
