Classified Layoff Information Session Overview
This session held on May 27, 2021, via Zoom covered important topics related to classified layoffs, including definitions of layoff, rights of employees, seniority, and reasons for layoffs. Learn about displacement, seniority order, and employee entitlements during a layoff process. Explore key terms such as classification, length of service, and higher and lower classifications to gain insights into the layoff procedures discussed in the meeting.
Uploaded on Feb 15, 2025 | 0 Views
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
Kicker Optics or Selected ATF-II EXT Line Performance Issues ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 1/40
EXT Final Focus Damping Ring Linac emittance measurement coupling correction inflector extraction septa (BS1X,BS2X,BS3X) kicker (KEX1) kicker (KEX2) 6 m e- ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 2/40
Outline EXT optics vertical dispersion correction emittance measurement in EXT stability emittance growth (DR to EXT) bunch charge dependence coupling correction beta matching extraction kicker multipole components (simulation and beam-based measurements) QM7R replacement BS3X rotation extraction kicker (2) strength calibration rotation BS3X skew field Summary ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 3/40
Optics most inflector magnets at the same phase corrections within the inflector correct errors that originate in the inflector (single- phase corrections) two skew quadrupoles are included in the inflector for vertical dispersion correction sum mode ( -knob) generates vertical dispersion (no coupling) difference mode ( -knob) generates coupling (no vertical dispersion) coupling correction section is standard ILC orthonormal system (four skew quadrupoles) emittance diagnostic section is a compromise due to space limitations 2D reconstruction with beam tilts from 4 OTRs ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 4/40
QM6R QM7R Extraction + Inflector QD2X QD5X QD8X QF1X QF3X QF4X QF6X QF7X KEX1 KEX2 BH1X BH2X BH3X BS1X BS2X BS3X QS1X QS2X 200 X Y 20 Beta (m) X Y 100 1/2 10 0 0 360 180 (deg) 0.75 0 0.5 0.25 -180 0 -0.25 -360 -0.5 -0.75 0.5 Eta (m) 1 0 0 -0.5 0 5 10 15 20 S (m) -1 0 5 10 15 20 S (m) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 5/40
EXT Coupling Correction / Emittance Diagnostic Section SQ SQ WS WS WS WS WS SQ SQ Final Focus Inflector OTR OTR OTR OTR 20 90 90 180 90 90 90 8 20 39 28 32 46 x y 18 112.5 8.5 146.0 7.2 90.8 11.4 141.1 19.4 ( m) 16 14 12 ILC orthonormal coupling correction system Beta (m) 10 8 x y x y x y x y 6 4 2 0 25 30 35 40 45 50 S (m) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 6/40
Vertical Dispersion Correction best emittance measurements when y at OTRs is small (millimeter-ish) can t correct y at EXT OTRs (IP-phase) and in FF (FD-phase) simultaneously using the QS -knob presence of KEX2 prevented use of vertical dipole correctors for y correction emittance growth due to sextupole component when off axis vertically KEX2 is now gone (using BKX dipole instead) more later now use both QS -knob and vertical dipole correctors for vertical dispersion correction see Okugi-san s talk this afternoon for updates IP-phase FD-phase ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 7/40
Simulation 4000 250 ZV3X: I = +0.096 A ZV3X: I = +0.096 A 200 3000 150 2000 100 1000 50 Orbit (um) DY (mm) 0 0 -1000 -50 -2000 -100 -3000 -150 -4000 -200 -5000 -250 140 150 160 170 180 S (m) 190 200 210 220 140 150 160 170 180 S (m) 190 200 210 220 4000 250 ZV11X: I = +0.049 A ZV11X: I = +0.049 A 200 3000 150 2000 100 1000 50 Orbit (um) DY (mm) 0 0 -1000 -50 -2000 -100 -3000 -150 -4000 -200 -5000 -250 140 150 160 170 180 S (m) 190 200 210 220 140 150 160 170 180 S (m) 190 200 210 220 ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 8/40
Monday Day Shift, December 17, 2012 after QS -knob only FD-phase correction after QS -knob + ZV correction QS*X : -1.050 A -0.113 A ( I = +0.937 A) correct IP-phase y ZV3X : +0.172 A +0.047 A ( I = -0.125 A) correct FD-phase y ZV11X : +0.201 A +0.229 A ( I = +0.028 A) correct FF orbit ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 9/40
EXT Emittance Measurements do we believe the OTR measurements? how stable/reproducible are the measurements? observations (DR XSR and EXT multi-OTR) charge dependence ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 10/40
Wire Scanner / OTR Comparison EXT Diagnostics Section QD10X QD12X QD14X QD16X QD18X QD20X QF11X QF13X QF15X QF17X QF19X QF21X QK1X QK2X QK3X QK4X QF9X 40 35 black circles = WS (4): y = 43 3 pm blue circles = OTR (4): y = 50 4 pm OTR Vertical Emittance Measurement December 14, 2011 07:44 30 Vertical Beam Size (um) 25 20 Wire Scanner Measured Vertical Beam Sizes December 14, 2011 09:30 (MW1X y value ignored) 15 10 5 0 165 170 175 180 185 190 S (m) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 11/40
OTR2X beam tilt is the beam rotated? Check measured response to ZH9X OTR2X X VS ZH9X Expected Pos 750 p0= 8.922+- 8.079 p1= 0.9918+-0.01692 700 650 600 550 OTR2X X /um X 500 450 400 350 Y 300 250 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 rho = 1.010 ZH9X Expected Pos /um NDF= 9 chisq/N = 1.081 RMS= 7.75 um OTR0X after dispersion correction OTR0X after coupling correction OTR0X before corrections ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 12/40
Stability: 10 Consecutive EXT Emittance Measurements (November 29, 2012 ~30 minutes) EmitY = 25.4122 +- 0.2439 pm ICT = 0.4967 +- 0.0082 29 0.65 0.6 28 27 0.55 26 0.5 EmitY (pm) 25 0.45 ICT 24 0.4 23 0.35 22 0.3 21 0.25 20 0.2 0 1 2 3 4 5 Meas # 6 7 8 9 10 11 0 1 2 3 4 5 Meas # 6 7 8 9 10 11 EmitY vs ICT EmitY = 25.2738 +- 0.1437 pm @ ICT = 0.45 (chisq=1) 30 27 EmitY = 16.4 1.3 pm @ ICT = 0 EmitY/ ICT 2 pm/109 29 26.5 28 26 27 ICT Corrected EmitY (pm) 25.5 26 EmitY (pm) 25 25 p0= 16.4+- 1.261 p1= 19.73+- 2.707 NDF= 8 chisq/N = 0.391 24 24.5 23 24 RMS= 0.42 pm rho = 1.001 22 23.5 21 20 23 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0 1 2 3 4 5 Meas # 6 7 8 9 10 11 ICT (e10) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 13/40
Emittance: 2011 2012 (S. Kuroda) Emittance: March 2013 (K. Kubo, T. Okugi) ~2.5 pm / 109 ATF-II: y = 30 nm ILC IP: y = 35 nm ATF-II: y = 30 nm EATF-II = 1.28 GeV ILC DR: y = 20 nm K. Kubo March 12, 2013 (XSR) March 12, 2013 (OTR; QS -knob; QKs off) March 15, 2013 (OTR; QS -knob; QKs off) earthquake 3.11.2011 ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 14/40
November 6, 2012 Owl Shift DR XSR y vs ICT XSR source-point y measurement y = 2.56 m DR XSR y ( m) ICT (1010) y/ ICT 0.6 pm / 1e9 ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 15/40
Coupling Correction given installed emittance diagnostic section, is measurement and correction of arbitrary phases of input coupling possible? recently (February 2013) Okugi-san had success correcting coupling at OTRs using QS1X/QS2X difference knob see his talk this afternoon ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 16/40
assume matched DR beam with y = 12 pm add coupling at many random phases projected y = 100 pm correct projected y two ways use 4 skew quadrupoles (QKs) to correct measured beam tilt at each OTR using a modeled response matrix (effectively) scan 4 QKs to minimize projected y (proposed ILC method) E. Marin ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 17/40
Beta Matching 6 dedicated -matching quadrupoles are provided at the start of the Final Focus, but they are downstream of the EXT OTRs used for changing * -matching now being done with EXT quadrupoles, upstream of the OTRs beta match can easily be verified ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 18/40
Beta Matching (December 12 2012 owl) X Y name match0 match1 match2 match3 design file 054152 061717 080625 084346 EmitX 1.7894 1.8228 1.7587 1.5860 0 BmagX 1.1946 1.0013 1.0026 1.0076 1.0000 EmBmX 2.1376 1.8251 1.7633 1.5981 BetaX 4.7239 6.0386 6.4327 6.2257 6.3052 AlphaX -2.8890 -4.2795 -4.6550 -4.5596 -4.4943 EmitY 28.4846 25.7572 30.8175 28.2300 BmagY 1.2000 1.3489 1.0554 1.0034 1.0000 1 EmBmY 34.1808 34.7439 32.5253 28.3262 BetaY 9.1308 9.4923 7.1151 6.0766 6.1903 AlphaY 4.4037 4.8369 3.2854 2.6087 2.5763 QF1X 50.682 50.947 50.812 50.812 49.024 QD2X 42.865 43.035 43.312 43.312 42.865 2 QF3X 30.497 30.724 30.800 30.800 30.498 QF4X 30.863 30.710 30.636 30.636 30.864 QD5X 41.940 42.083 41.995 41.995 41.940 QF6X 52.983 52.753 52.692 52.692 51.556 QF7X 54.600 54.524 57.931 57.931 54.601 QD8X 26.862 26.850 27.005 27.005 26.863 3 QF9X 34.701 36.133 36.027 36.027 34.702 QD10X 52.965 51.764 56.860 56.860 52.964 ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 19/40
Extraction Kicker multipole fields (quadrupole/sextupole): are they real? 2nd kicker (KEX2) removed from beamline and replaced with a strong dipole corrector in January 2012 ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 20/40
POISSON Field Simulation (C. Pappas, SLAC) 1 2 3 4 0.0625" ceramic chamber 25 x 0.827" 0.75" 0.591" DIMAD SBEND parameters: ceramic chamber L = 0.4 m ANGLE = 5.0e-3 rad K1 = -1.846929e-1 m-2 K2 = -3.824591e+1 m-3 electrode 0.5"0.75" 1.0" 1.3" scale: 1.14" (figure) 0.75" (actual) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 21/40
Orbit Bump Study (February 2010): bump vertically through KEX2 what we expected to see (no kicker multipoles) QD10BFF QD10AFF QD10BFF QD10AFF QM16FF QM15FF QM14FF QM13FF QM12FF QM11FF QM16FF QM15FF QM14FF QM13FF QM12FF QM11FF QF9BFF QF9AFF QF9BFF QF9AFF QD8FF QD8FF QD10X QD12X QD14X QD16X QD18X QD20X QD10X QD12X QD14X QD16X QD18X QD20X QF7FF QF7FF QF11X QF13X QF15X QF17X QF19X QF21X SF6FF QF11X QF13X QF15X QF17X QF19X QF21X SF6FF QD2X QD5X QD8X QD2X QD5X QD8X QS1X QS2X QK1X QK2X QK3X QK4X QF1X QF3X QF4X QF6X QF7X QF9X QS1X QF1X QF3X QF4X QF6X QS2X QF7X QF9X QK1X QK2X QK3X QK4X QM6R QM7R QM6R QM7R BH1X BH2X BH3X BH1X BH2X BH3X KEX1 KEX2 KEX1 KEX2 BS1X BS2X BS3X BS1X BS2X BS3X 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 X (mm) Y (mm) 0 0 -1 -1 -2 -2 -3 -3 -4 -4 -5 -5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 S (m) S (m) what we observed bad BPMs bad BPMs ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 22/40
Orbit Bump Study (February 2010): bump vertically through KEX2 what we expected to see (with predicted kicker multipoles) QD10BFF QD10AFF QD10BFF QD10AFF QM16FF QM15FF QM14FF QM13FF QM12FF QM11FF QM16FF QM15FF QM14FF QM13FF QM12FF QM11FF QF9BFF QF9AFF QF9BFF QF9AFF QD8FF QD8FF QD10X QD12X QD14X QD16X QD18X QD20X QF7FF QD10X QD12X QD14X QD16X QD18X QD20X QF7FF QF11X QF13X QF15X QF17X QF19X QF21X QF11X QF13X QF15X QF17X QF19X QF21X SF6FF SF6FF QD2X QD5X QD8X QD2X QD5X QD8X QS1X QS2X QK1X QK2X QK3X QK4X QS1X QS2X QK1X QK2X QK3X QK4X QF1X QF3X QF4X QF6X QF7X QF9X QF1X QF3X QF4X QF6X QF7X QF9X QM6R QM7R QM6R QM7R BH1X BH2X BH3X BH1X BH2X BH3X KEX1 KEX2 KEX1 KEX2 BS1X BS2X BS3X BS1X BS2X BS3X 4 5 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 X (mm) Y (mm) 0 0 -1 -1 -2 -2 -3 -3 -4 -4 -5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 S (m) S (m) what we observed bad BPMs ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 23/40
X Y X = +3 mm set ZH3X/ZH4X/ZH5X X-bump; scan ZV5X/ZV6X/ZV7X Y-bump; find X- bump setting where Y-bump closes X = +1 mm at this point the quadrupole field seen by the beam in KEX2 has the value predicted by POISSON for the vacuum chamber center X = 0 X = -1.5 mm ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 24/40
Horizontal Jitter Predicted Vertical Emittance Growth ( y corrected) y/ y0(%) 60.4 [ Ykicker1 (mm)]2 Vertical Jitter 15 pm -> 24 pm @ +- 1 mm KEX2 removed January 2012 ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 25/40
QM7R Replacement original quadrupole (Tokin 3393) had 16 mm pole-tip radius extracting beam passed through at 22.5 mm in the coil pocket PRIAM simulations (P. Bambade) predicted large sextupole component at extracting trajectory QM7R replaced (January 2009) new quadrupole (Tokin 3581) has 21 mm pole-tip radius sextupole strength (K2L) reduced from 47 m-2 to 1 m-2 ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 26/40
QM7R: pole-tip radius = 16 mm extracted beam offset = 22.5 mm Tokin 3393 ( = 32 mm) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 27/40
QM7R replaced with larger bore ( = 42 mm) quadrupole in January 2009 K1L = 0.3 m-1 = 0.76 nominal optics mismatch K2L = 46.6 m-2 x-y coupling for vertically off-axis beam: factor ~ 2-3 y for y = 1 mm ( x: y = 100:1) K1L = 0.392 m-1 = 0.99 nominal K2L = 1 m-2 Measured PRIAM simulation K0L K1L K2L Tokin 3393 ( = 32 mm) Tokin 3581 ( = 42 mm) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 28/40
BS3X Rotation origin of strong vertical corrector ZV1X at beginning of EXT line and observed anomalous vertical dispersion in EXT/FF? measured vertical dispersion in DR at extraction point is normally small 3rd septum magnet BS3X thougth to be kicking vertically BS3X was physically rolled ~ -4 mrad on March 17, 2010 vertical orbit and measured y improved ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 29/40
Observed that first 2 EXT vertical correctors (ZV1X and ZV2X) needed to be strong to properly launch into EXT (since before EXT rebuild for ATF2 ) hypothesize that correctors are compensating for a kick error in extraction channel simulate error kick by rolling individual elements; use ZV1X and ZV2X to correct orbit find error that gives best fit to actual ZV1X/ZV2X values BS3X septum magnet roll BS3X was physically rolled ~ -4 mrad (March 17, 2010) to relieve ZV1X and ZV2X projected vertical emittance in EXT before coupling correction was improved (~20-40 pm before ~10-20 pm after) BS3X roll = 4.66 mrad ZV100RX QD2X QS1X QF1X QF3X ZV1X ZV2X ZV3X SET-file values (April 2009 - May 2010) QM6R QM7R BH1X KEX1 BS1X BS2X BS3X 1.4 1.2 0.2 1 0 0.8 -0.2 0.6 ZV2X Current (A) -0.4 Y (mm) 0.4 -0.6 0.2 -0.8 0 -1 -0.2 -1.2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 S (m) -0.4 BS3X roll = 4.66 mrad Izv1 = -6.918 (-6.976) amp Izv2 = 1.270 ( 0.965) amp chi2 = 0.3102 before March 17, 2010 after March 17, 2010 -0.6 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 ZV1X Current (A) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 30/40
Extraction Kicker (2) kicker strength setpoint (voltage) has been creeping up beam-based calibration measurement vertical steering rotation DR Extraction Kicker Historic Setpoint Data (from SET-files) 50 EXT-DKICKER (kV) 45 40 35 2010 2011 2012 2013 Time ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 31/40
X VKEX X @ BS3X (from orbit fit) measurement: 2012/12/07 Owl Shift 415 m -800 V Horizontal orbit position at BS3X center estimated by back-propagation from EXT BPM measurements (QF1X-QF4X) courtesy of Yves Renier 315 m -600 V 215 m -400 V 112 m -200 V 0 V 8 m ATF2 feedback dX/dV = -0.5085 um/V 450 1 x 400 = , = = , x R c V c 12 R V 350 12 300 XBS3X (um) R12 = 4.7329 mm/mrad dX/dV = -0.5085 mm/kV d /dV = -0.1074 mrad/kV 0 = -5 mrad V0 = 46.5 kV (SLAC NDR KEX: 0.1158 mrad/kV) 250 200 150 100 50 0 -800 -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 KEX (V) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 32/40
EXT Orbit (Corrected) vs KEX Voltage December 13, 2012 Day Shift (Okugi) 1600 2600 1580 2580 BS1X (A) BS3X (A) 1560 2560 1540 1520 2540 40 45 50 40 45 50 KEX (kV) KEX (kV) 0.5 0.4 0 0.2 ZV1X (A) ZV2X (A) -0.5 0 -1 -0.2 -1.5 -0.4 40 45 50 40 45 50 KEX (kV) KEX (kV) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 33/40
KEX1 Roll -85 mrad (-5 !) BS1X/BS2X BS3X 40 20 10 20 0 I (A) I (A) -10 0 -20 measured simulated -20 -30 40 45 50 40 45 50 ZV1X ZV2X 0.5 0.3 0.2 0 +6 A 0.1 I (A) I (A) 0 -1.7 A -0.5 -0.1 -1 -0.2 40 45 50 40 45 50 VKEX1 (kV) VKEX1 (kV) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 34/40
BS3X Skew Field observed anomalous vertical dispersion in EXT/FF measured vertical dispersion in DR at extraction point is small well modeled with a skew quadrupole field at BS3X septum we have had problems with BS3X in the past BS3X had to be physically rolled ~ -4 mrad (March 17, 2010) measured dependence of inferred skew quadrupole strength versus horizontal position in BS3X is consistent with a skew sextupole field with: K2L = 16 m-2 our strongest FF sextupole (SD4FF) has K2L = 14.91 m-2 ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 35/40
NOTE: x = 179 mm @ BS3X Modeled y0 = -13.2 mm y0 = -14.2 mr 600 400 200 DY (mm) 0 -200 -400 -600 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 Measured S (m) BS3X Modeled BS3X skew quad KL = -0.03 m-1 (IIDX = -5.8 A) 600 400 200 y(BS3X IP) = 101.8 DY (mm) 0 -200 -400 12 pm 39 pm -600 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 S (m) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 36/40
KLBS3Xskew = -0.02610 m-1 KEX = -800 V 600 Modeled Measured 400 200 0 DY (mm) -200 -400 -600 -800 140 150 160 170 180 S (m) 190 200 210 220 BS3Xskew = 0 @ KEX = 46.7 kV BS3Xskew = 0 @ BS3X X = +1.7 mm BS3X Skew KL vs Kicker Voltage BS3X Skew KL vs BS3X X Position -0.024 -0.024 skew sextupole K2L = 16 m-2 -0.026 -0.026 -0.028 -0.028 KL (1/m) KL (1/m) -0.03 -0.03 -0.032 -0.032 -0.034 -0.034 KEX lower voltage toward DR (to the left) -0.036 -0.036 -800 -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 KEX (V) X (um) ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 37/40
Set EXT Kicker Voltage to 46 kV Dec 7 (KEX @ 50 kV) Dec 12 (KEX @ 46 kV) V0 = 46.519 +- 0.046 (kV) V0 = 45.784 +- 0.360 600 600 QD10B QD4A 550 550 500 500 |DY| (um) |DY| (um) 450 450 400 400 QD10B QD4A 350 350 49.1 49.2 49.3 49.4 49.5 EXT_DKICKER (kV) 49.6 49.7 49.8 49.9 50 50.1 45.5 45.6 45.7 45.8 45.9 EXT_DKICKER (kV) 46 46.1 46.2 46.3 46.4 46.5 ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 38/42
Study by Edu Marin (March 2013) http://atf.kek.jp/twiki/pub/ATFlogbook/Meeting201307/EXT_misalignments_Study.pdf ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 39/40
Summary EXT optics is well understood and capable of delivering matched and dispersion-corrected beams to the Final Focus there are some remaining anomalies in the DR extraction channel still looking for sources of emittance growth (and its current dependence) multi-OTR EXT emittance measurements are reliable and stable measured beam tilt (coupling) values are believable and correspond to real X-Y coupling direct beam tilt correction using a modeled response matrix looks like a superior coupling correction technique extracted vertical emittance is strongly dependent on bunch charge 2-3 pm per 109 much larger than observed in DR weaker dependence observed recently? see Okugi-san s talk this afternoon extraction magnets (kicker, QM7R, septa) have been problematic, but improvements are being made observed KEX1 quadrupole/sextupole field components agree with POISSON field simulation tracking simulations indicate that vertical beam offset in KEX1 is not a source of significant emittance growth removing 2nd kicker gave us more tuning flexibility, without significantly increasing beam jitter roll alignment of bending magnets has been problematic, but improvements are being made some mysteries remain is KEX1 rolled? by how much? can it be fixed? are there anomalous magnetic fields in BS3X, or are other errors fooling us? if there are anomalous magnetic fields in BS3X, can the magnet be fixed? can Okugi-san s QS -knob coupling correction technique tell us more about any coupling sources? ATF-II Technical Review, April 3 2013 M. Woodley 40/40
