Project

General

Profile

Actions
History

PC 2014-12-18

Analysis phone call, 15:00 GMT, 18th December 2014. We will be in meeting room CR09 (ATLAS building breakout room).

Actions

  • ACTION (Pasternak/Rogers): determine magnetic settings routine - do we imagine "equivalent coil"? Implement iron in MAUS? Run everything through OPERA?
  • ACTION (Pasternak/Rogers): determine standard magnetic settings for commissioning e.g. magnet currents for 420 mm beta in solenoid mode
  • ACTION (Pasternak/Rogers): determine standard beamline settings
  • ACTION (Dobbs/Rogers): specify MAUS implementation of "estimate of the error on the field as a function of position" in detail and implement
    • Is this really possible? John Cobb request, John Cobb to comment
  • ACTION (Rogers): would like to know how well the bobbin on which the coils are wound is aligned to the SS bores
    • Discussion with Preece, indicates that alignment is better than ~ 100 microns, must be pretty good as the MLI is tightly packed in. Closed
  • ACTION (Rogers): arrange a "magnet bolting down meeting" to determine how Physics group does the handover of the magnet axes and how the installation will work
  • ACTION (Rogers): Need to consider how we staff the "accelerator physics" during running
  • ACTION (Rogers): Xboa specification document
    • In preparation - not ready for public yet
  • ACTION (Rogers): Bring in Dobbs MAUS analysis framework to xboa?
  • ACTION (Rogers/delegate): need an accelerator physics helper for the analysis of existing batch simulations
  • ACTION (Rogers/Rajaram/Blackmore): Official plots and publications pages
  • ACTION (Uchida): Organise field mapping of the iron for tracker alignment check

RLSR/MPB Actions

  • ACTION (Preece/Rogers): The project must ensure that results from the Step IV data-taking are obtained as soon as possible in order to support the UK application to STFC for remaining funding for the completion of the project.
  • ACTION (Rajaram/Rogers): Investigate as a matter of urgency technical means to optimize the trigger efficiency for ‘good’ muons, and remove dataflow bottlenecks before the Step IV run.
  • ACTION (Rogers): Plan and execute a blind ‘physics analysis challenge’ in order to ensure the readiness of the whole collaboration for data analysis, early in 2015.
  • ACTION (Pasternak): Ensure optimization of the beamline settings in order to preserve matching at the entrance of the ionization channel and potentially increase the number of ‘good’ muons, during the Step IV run.
  • ACTION (Boyd): Include a set of measurements in a configuration with large beta functions in Step IV data taking, in order to validate the muon tracking tools for trajectories with large displacements passing through nonlinear magnetic fields, and to explore the size of the cooling system apertures.

Agenda

  • Actions
  • Issues Arising
  • Field Mapping (Victoria Blackmore)
  • Step IV Technical Paper
    • Beamline (Jaroslaw Pasternak)
    • Detectors (Melissa Uchida)
      • Alignment Measurement
      • Efficiency
      • Residuals
    • Particle ID (Celeste Pidcott)
    • Measurement of magnetic alignment (Chris Rogers)
    • Quality of transported beam (Chris Hunt)
  • Step IV First Demonstration of Cooling (Chris Rogers)
  • Step I Papers (Victoria Blackmore)
    • EMR paper
    • Pion contamination
  • Magnetics (Unfilled)
    • Non-linear beam optics/measurement (Rob Ryne)
  • Absorber and material physics (Unfilled)
    • Scattering measurement
    • Energy loss measurement
  • Support
    • Batch Production (Ryan Bayes)
    • X-BOA (Chris Rogers)
    • Online Analysis Tool (Chris Rogers)
  • Date of next meeting
    • January 15th
    • January 29th
    • February 9th (CM41)

Following item is likely to move to a MIPO/MEMO meeting at 16:00 (analysis group welcome):

  • MICE Demonstration of Ionisation Cooling (Victoria Blackmore)
    • Do we need movable secondary absorbers? (Jaroslaw Pasternak)

Notes

Present:
  • Alain Blondel
  • Rob Ryne
  • Chris Rogers
  • Melissa Uchida
  • Victoria Blackmore
  • Yagmur Torun
  • JB Lagrange
  • Chris Hunt
  • Sophie Middleton
  • John Nugent

ACTION (Uchida): Organise field mapping of the iron for tracker alignment check

  • Plan to use ad-hoc Hall probe jig looking around the iron, e.g. Hall probes used for focus coil
  • Melissa to formalise the plan
  • Aim to do tracker alignment in March, so that we can do things before the magnets turn on
  • Yagmur: has the back of the envelope calculation been done?
    • Rogers: yes, it has been done, guess 2 mm making some pessimistic assumptions
    • Melissa: it would be nice to have Hall Probes in the FC
    • Alain: support placement of Hall probes in vicinity of the FC
    • ACTION (Uchida): get Hall probes put on FC
ACTION (Rajaram/Rogers): Investigate as a matter of urgency... (trigger)
  • Alain: use a muon beam from pion beam, TOF trigger
  • Victoria: 70 % for a muon beam on time of flight were good muons
  • John: could we get a better specification from tracker/DAQ folks on what they need
  • Alain: not sure what we can do
  • John: another dead time associated with TOF ADCs/TDCs
  • Alain: request for "dead time" analysis session
  • Melissa: tracker group looking at removing analogue information from event
  • We will get am update when there is an update from tracker group
  • No specific action on analysis group as yet
ACTION (Pasternak): Ensure optimization of the beamline settings...
  • John Cobb: take the same large emittance beam and make sub selections
  • Alain: useful to populate the centre of the beam better
  • Alain: support data blinding wrt beam selection
ACTION (Boyd): Include a set of measurements...
  • John Cobb: this is a typical accelerator physicist question
  • Alain Blondel: we worry about the low amplitude particles more
Policy document
  • What is a measurement, how does it compare with the MPB data document?
    • Victoria: There is an updated list of measurements on the MPB meeting page
    • John Cobb: The online plots will look strange no matter what
    • Alain Blondel: We should consider having a team if required on the measurement champion
Magnet mapping:
  • Systematics happen in SS as well as FC
  • Possibly it is larger effect in SS
  • SS mapper wobbles by a couple of mm
  • Making a mock up
  • Some issues may be answered by the survey
Non-linear beam optics
  • Rogers: can you explain how eigen emittance is calculated
    • Rob: J Sigma (see backup slides)
  • Rogers: is canonical angular momentum conserved?
  • Rogers: what drives Step IV analysis? what magnet settings?
  • Rogers: what drives the emittance growth (e.g. which terms in the Hamiltonian)?

Phone Details

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

Updated by Rogers, Chris over 8 years ago · 27 revisions