[BTeam] update on BTEAM activities

[Yves Roblin]

Colleagues,

   We will have a BTEAM today.

   Here is where we left it at two weeks ago:

https://accwiki.acc.jlab.org/do/view/BTeam/BTeam20201013

In the rest of this email, I will refer to the item #s as they are presented in the link above.

Since then, we had activity on:


item 7:
Review (ongoing) of Hall controls related to FSDs, target positions etc..
Brian, Yves, Hall C (David Flay )

Currently in meetings with David and Brad , we are particularly concerned about experiments with long glass targets (alignment issues, beam steering, rastering). We are concluding that one might have to upgrade Hall A to have a stronger raster placed after all (most) quadrupoles. Jay Benesch studied that for the Moller experiment and we are reviewing some of his options. One option looked at is moving quads 1H01/1H04 upstream of raster and Moller target.


The review for the SBS experiment E12-09-016 took place on the 22nd. It generated action items:
(We are still drafting the final report, it probably will be released this coming friday)

Accelerator related recommendations:


The choice of the raster pattern needs to be motivated. Whether one has to use a circular or square raster will affect the optics configuration of the beamline. Likewise, there is an upper limit on the raster size beyond which it may become difficult to deliver beam without scraping on the long 3He target.


· The target alignment procedure with beam needs to be detailed in an OPS procedure. This also should include a description on how operations will ensure the beam alignment stays within tolerances during beam delivery.


· The experimenters have a plan for commissioning the SBS correctors and studying the effect of the stray field on beam delivery. A formal procedure needs to be developed with operations to eliminate ambiguities and miscommunications between MCC and the Hall A control rooms.


· Develop a solution allowing for centering the beam on target with the required raster pattern along with any specialized targets on the target ladder.


We have a working group with physics to go through this (Brad, D. Flay, M. Jones, J. Benesch, B. Freeman, myself) . Next meeting is in a week.


item 13: Rehauling the optics troubleshooting guide.

We had a preliminary meeting and have another one coming up this friday (Brian F., Mike A. , myself)
to arrive at a timeline and define the scope.   We are shooting for a timeline and scope by early  december and a first draft by February.

We closed out:

item 2: RF landscape for restart, implication for optics (Jay B.)  (see link above for summary)
item 8:  Global synchronized locks spanning the whole machine
 was deferred (lack of resources )

item 12: Review of Inj Chicane aperture. Is it properly handled?
-> what is the clearance?
See the link of previous minutes for the summary of the findings.


we need help (from OPS ) on :
item 9: Review of state of ORFP, lesson learned from last runs (Ops, Yves)


items 3,4,5,6 in progress

item 10 Implication of new Injector setup to ORFP ? (Reza, Dennis)

Reza indicated that He and Alicia are hoping to give a presentation on prelimary findings for this sometimes in December. Note that most of the implications have to do with a 2022 setup.

Item 11 : Review of new diagnostics ? What do we need ? (Mike T.)

This is a broad topic that will be best addressed when we start cross-correlating our needs with those of future experiments. In that regard, a better integration with physics would be beneficial (similarly to the current working group dealing with SBS) .


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/bteam/attachments/20201027/0af5d9af/attachment.html>