2017-01-25-run-settings¶

Previous meeting ... Next meeting

We will meet at 4 pm UK time. For those at RAL we will be in the MICE meeting room in R1.

Phone:

http://mice.iit.edu/phonebridge.html

Actions¶

• Jaroslaw: look at improved optics for 140 MeV/c
  • Currents distributed; to be tracked
• Ao: look at required running time to get 100k good muons
  • Done; see slides
• Ao: can we get emittance change across TKU to TKD using unmatched beam
  • Stands
• Rogers: tidy up plots and run any new optics solutions
  • http://micewww.pp.rl.ac.uk/issues/1902#note-4
  • Done
• Rogers: do the trims in SSU
  • Stands

Discussion¶

1. Do we basically agree on the plan, i.e.:

At p = 140 MeV/c

• beta = 200 mm
• beta = 400 mm
• beta = 800 mm

At p = 200 MeV/c

• beta = 800 mm (approx smallest available)

At p = 240 MeV/c

• beta ~ 1100 mm (approx smallest available)

2. Should we choose Ao's setting optimised for "unmatched beam" or "matched beam" for the beta = 200 mm setting at 140 MeV/c

Let's try not to regurgitate the point from last time...

• Ao - we should take unmatched beam data with unmatched lattice; this gives us a measure of emittance reduction across the absorber with the best performing lattice
• Jaroslaw - we should take unmatched beam data with matched lattice; this gives us an easier analysis for the higher beta function data; we can sample the lower beta function data; we can compare more easily to the solenoid data

3. Is there a better 200 MeV/c setting?

Notes¶

• Jaroslaw posted some new currents - to be tracked

• Ao estimated about 60 hours per cooling channel setting, assuming we take 200k good muons to allow 50 % efficiency for sampling; 80 hours per cooling setting with contingency; not including magnet alignment data.
  • This is assuming we take three emittance settings per cooling channel setting
  • At the moment looking at 24*5 + 16*15 i.e. about 360 hours of data taking; assuming we get some infill.

• Discussion of diffuser; start with tight focussing option in 140 MeV/c to deal with diffuser issue?
• Long discussion about how well matched we are. No agreement between Ao and Rogers; some plots uploaded
• Discussion of whether we can do the analysis purely by beam sampling (and not changing magnet settings)
  • Chris R and Jaroslaw: we need to optimise the magnet currents for best transmission and cooling for a given focus at absorber
  • Ao: we set up one magnet current and then sit there; sample to get different focus at the absorber

• Discussion of the proposed run plan; Jaroslaw agreed broadly with scheme, with 240 MeV/c setting as lowest priority and maybe 140 MeV/c 450 mm setting as highest priority; Ao had to leave so did not comment