Chicane Simulation Update Highlights
Explore the latest updates on the chicane simulation by Pavel Snopok, discussing discrepancies between ICOOL and G4beamline, mitigation strategies, and the impact of moving the absorber. Discover insights into the new chicane design and front end in G4beamline.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Chicane simulation update Pavel Snopok Front end phone meeting January 14, 2014 1
Last time: ICOOL vs G4beamline Number of muons Number of useful muons within canonical cuts Relatively large statistics: 300k incident particles, correct distribution (wrong distribution sent earlier by email, no 2 ns correction to time) 2
Source of discrepancy, mitigation Be proton absorber is causing a difference in transmission. ICOOL does not simulate pion propagation through material properly. Use G4beamline for the part of the channel where pions are of concern (capture + drift). Move the proton absorber downstream (following Dave s ICOOL decks). There is no G4beamline deck for the 325 MHz, 2 T frontend => working on it right now. 3
Pions through absorber: ICOOL vs G4beamline G4beamline ICOOL 4
New Front End in G4beamline You won t see it in the picture, but the arc length of each cell in the chicane is slightly different from that in the drift part. The reason is the BSOL approach: I take the SREGION length + curvature to define the chicane angle => chicane arc length while Chris was using a predefined number of cells of a certain arc length (250 mm) + angle per cell, and the Z length was derived from those. What I do is choose the cell length as close to 250 mm as possible based on the chicane arc length derived from BSOL parameters. This way the chicane length is the same in ICOOL and G4bl. 7
Current status I have: the short taper (14.75 m), some initial drift (6 m), chicane at 2 T (12 m), second part of the drift (43 m). I don t have: Buncher/phase rotator/matcher/cooler, but presumably those could be simulated in ICOOL, since pions are not an issue anymore. 8
