<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body>
<title>BTeam-2012-01-10</title>
BTeamers,<br>
<br>
Here are the meeting notes from yesterday's Bteam meeting.
Yesterday's<br>
beam studies were very successful, with first beam on ITV5D00 for
PEPPo<br>
after opening vacuum valves, 1% Mott development, and beam restored
to<br>
experiments right on schedule at 20:00. Thanks to all who made this
session<br>
a success. I'll send out the agenda for next Tuesday's 11:00 meeting
after the<br>
studies scheduling meeting this Friday morning. Cheers!<br>
<br>
-Todd<br>
<h1 class="title">BTeam-2012-01-10</h1>
<div class="outline-2">
<h2 id="sec-1">2012-01-10 Tue 11:00 BTeam Meeting Agenda</h2>
</div>
<div class="outline-2">
<h2 id="sec-2">1 Mike Spata (for Curt Hovater): C100 Studies
Status</h2>
<ul>
<li>
Beam-based C100-1 (SL24), C100-2 (SL25) have been ongoing
through this run
</li>
<li>
Recent investigation of microphonics has used 960 Hz DAQ for
Hall C BPM signals
</li>
<li>
Dominant peaks are 11, 22 Hz, something at 79 Hz (test plan by
Riad to investigate)
<ul>
<li>
Kirk seems to remember that 79 Hz signal came up in
sandbagging
</li>
<li>
But 79 Hz also appears in upstream BPMs and does not
appear correlated with gradient
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>
Arne: Spec should be factor of 3-5 less than energy spread
spec (single-screen histogram)
</li>
<li>
Microphonics beam motion correlated with gradient, not with
beam intensity
<ul>
<li>
Seems to be linear with number of cavities, number of
cryomodules
</li>
<li>
Geoff/Jay: Total system like this would be very bad, far
beyond spec
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>
Another test, 2 cavities or 7 with same net gradient, results
were the same
<ul>
<li>
Unusual result if there is higher susceptibility to center
cavities in cryomodule
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>
Recently discovered south linac local oscillator (LO) noise
affecting C100 performance
<ul>
<li>
Whole drive line shaking, but new modules apparently more
sensitive than old
</li>
<li>
SL LO noise had been there since at least October (Clyde
has been complaining)
</li>
<li>
Noise on LO disappeared after recent tripler repair
(logged data from Trent)
</li>
<li>
NL LO shows no noise or other problems
</li>
<li>
Hope to perform studies with beam Wed 18 Jan
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>
Spectra shown in talk show notches that are frequencies that
FFB operates on (60, 120 Hz etc)
<ul>
<li>
Mike: based on FFB suppression at line harmonics
</li>
<li>
Geoff: Could microphonics frequencies be suppressed with
modification to FFB?
</li>
<li>
Jay: Software designed to have four poles for FFB; might
still be considered
</li>
<li>
HallD FFB in works, not Fast SEE, could be broader band
correction system
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>
AF: No plan to turn cavities on during operations yet
<ul>
<li>
Will probably have these off until we develop some
confidence in QWeak/C100 ops
</li>
<li>
One benefit for running with them: could reduce our trip
rate by spreading out gradient
</li>
<li>
56 MeV setting but open question about radiation (AF/JB)
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>
Spata: RF is lobbying for cryomodule testing in FEL with beam
</li>
<li>
QWeak cares about diff X/Y in tables most, since that's parity
quality/helicity correlations
</li>
<li>
Another test plan being developed to evaluate C100 radiation,
activation
<ul>
<li>
Could have field emitted electrons cascade along
cryomodules above single-neutron threshold
</li>
<li>
Spata: FEL folks say mostly transverse field emission at
low gradient, longitudinal at higher gradient
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="outline-2">
<h2 id="sec-3">2 Campaigns and Owners (from Arne)</h2>
<ul>
<li>Regularly scheduled beam studies on Wednesdays, 08:00-20:00<br>
<ul>
<li>Except this week, where Hall C problems have
necessitated a bump to Tue<br>
</li>
<li>In place for remainder of this run; 12 GeV era will be
scheduled then<br>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>1h at start, 3h at end devoted to machine baseline/restore
(optics on call)<br>
</li>
<li>Beam studies scheduling meetings Fridays 09:00 for following
Wednesday<br>
<ul>
<li>Includes present and future optics on call personnel for
planning<br>
</li>
<li>ATLis required for beam studies time<br>
</li>
<li><span class="todo">TODO</span> Update ATLis items for
studies promptly after study time<br>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Campaigns and Owners<br>
<ul>
<li>C100 (Hovater)<br>
</li>
<li>PePPo (Grames)<br>
</li>
<li>CEBAF Modeling (Satogata)<br>
<ul>
<li>
LOCO measurements (Roblin)
</li>
<li>
RayTrace (Bodenstein/Tiefenback)
</li>
<li>
Zigzag harp optics (Turner/Tiefenback)
</li>
<li>
Online modeling/decks (AHLA/Satogata/Roblin)
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>1% Mott Upgrade (Suleiman)<br>
</li>
<li>Others (coordinated by Optics)<br>
<ul>
<li>
Path length / MOMOD (Tiefenback/Krafft)
</li>
<li>
Injector coupling / parity quality (Roblin/Morozov)
</li>
<li>
Software development
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="outline-2">
<h2 id="sec-4">3 Optics on call schedule</h2>
<ul>
<li>Rotates at BTeam (10:00 Tuesdays)<br>
</li>
<li>03 Jan-10 Jan: Todd/Jay (Outgoing)<br>
<ul>
<li>No calls through week, 2-pass spin-up, low current ops<br>
</li>
<li>Participating in studies start Tue 10 Jan<br>
</li>
<li>Beam studies Tue 10 Jan<br>
</li>
<li><span class="todo">TODO</span> Add 5-pass spin-up ATLis
(as opportunistic in case of, e.g. ESR failure, Jay)<br>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>10 Jan-17 Jan: Rui/Tief (Oncoming)<br>
<ul>
<li>Hall C high-current setup (180 uA) Wed 11 Jan<br>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>17 Jan-24 Jan: Vasily/Yves<br>
</li>
<li>24 Jan-31 Jan: Balsa/Alex<br>
<ul>
<li>Balsa scheduled to be PD Jan 25-Feb 8<br>
</li>
<li><span class="todo">TODO</span> Readjust schedule to
accommodate Balsa's PD-ship<br>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>31 Jan-07 Feb: Yuhong/Geoff<br>
</li>
<li>07 Feb-14 Feb: Ed/Todd<br>
</li>
<li>14 Feb-21 Feb: Fanglei/Mike<br>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<meta name="generator" content="Org-mode">
<meta name="generated" content="2012/01/11 12:21:05">
<meta name="author" content="Todd Satogata">
<style type="text/css">
html {
font-family: Times, serif;
font-size: 12pt;
}
.title { text-align: center; }
.todo { color: red; }
.done { color: green; }
.timestamp { color: grey }
.timestamp-kwd { color: CadetBlue }
.tag { background-color:lightblue; font-weight:normal }
.target { background-color: lavender; }
pre {
border: 1pt solid #AEBDCC;
background-color: #F3F5F7;
padding: 5pt;
font-family: courier, monospace;
}
table { border-collapse: collapse; }
td, th {
vertical-align: top;
<!--border: 1pt solid #ADB9CC;-->
}
</style>
</body>
</html>