Energy Deposition for Intense Muon Sources Study
Explore the energy deposition for intense muon sources study by Pavel Snopok at the MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting. The study discusses power deposition, challenges in handling secondary particles, and MARS simulations. Various images depict the history, references, and shielding details related to the research.
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
Energy deposition for intense muon sources (chicane + the rest of the front end) Pavel Snopok Illinois Institute of Technology and Fermilab December 4, 2014 Pavel Snopok | MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting (SLAC, December 3-7, 2014)
Outline Introduction History Current MARS simulations new data files for solid target Using other codes (ICOOL and G4beamline) Summary December 4, 2014 Pavel Snopok | MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting (SLAC, December 3-7, 2014) 2
Introduction Power deposited per unit length [kW/m] 0.01 0.1 10 1 0 50 100 z [m] 150 200 e+ and e- m+ and m- proton 250 In high-intensity sources muons are produced by firing high energy p onto a target to produce . decay to which are captured and accelerated. Significant background from p and , which may result in heat deposition on superconducting materials; activation of the machine preventing manual handling. December 4, 2014 Pavel Snopok | MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting (SLAC, December 3-7, 2014) 3
Introduction, contd. Need a secondary particle handling system for a megawatt class solid C target solenoidal chicane followed by a proton absorber. Challenges of optimization and integration of the system with the rest of the muon front end. Main study tool MARS, some analysis and validation by using ICOOL and G4beamline. Start with the chicane, use the same technique downstream to study the the buncher and phase-rotator sections. December 4, 2014 Pavel Snopok | MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting (SLAC, December 3-7, 2014) 4
History: MARS simulations ROOT-based geometry 12.5 single bend, Z=0 corresponds to 19 m downstream of the target consistent with RDR (IDS-NF). W density reduced to 60% to take into account packing fraction for beads. 5
Reference: no shielding DPD peaks at 15.8 mW/g, that translates into 42.6 kW/m for Cu coils or 33.3 kW/m for SC coils. December 4, 2014 Pavel Snopok | MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting (SLAC, December 3-7, 2014) 6
Uniform 35 cm shielding PD total, mW/g Empty channel 7
Non-uniform 30 and 40 cm shielding PD total, mW/g Empty channel 8
Overall DPD per coil/segment Average DPD per coil, mW/g Segmented coil analysis, total DPD, mW/g In both cases red line corresponds to 0.1 mW/g SC limit 9
Current MARS simulations New target parameters: 8 GeV => 6.75 GeV 4 MW => 1 MW 3.125e15 protons/sec => 0.925e15 protons/sec new particle distribution need to re-run MARS The hope is that the new parameters help reduce the amount of shielding required December 4, 2014 Pavel Snopok | MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting (SLAC, December 3-7, 2014) 10
New results Muon flux, side view Muon flux, top view 11
New results 2 Proton flux, side view Proton flux, top view 12
New results 3 Deposited power density, mW/g, top view Deposited power density, mW/g, side view 13
New results 4 Deposited power density, mW/g segmented coil analysis Deposited power density, mW/g averaged 14
Other codes Can G4beamline or ICOOL be used for energy loss/deposition calculations? Back in 2010 I did a comparison of the two codes for IDR: Integrated losses per 8 GeV proton 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 0 1 0 g4bl: e+ and e- ICOOL: e+ and e- g4bl: p+ and p- ICOOL: p+ and p- g4bl: m+ and m- ICOOL: m+ and m- g4bl: proton ICOOL: proton 50 100 z [m] 150 200 250 December 4, 2014 Pavel Snopok | MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting (SLAC, December 3-7, 2014) 15
Summary Simulations of the new 1 MW graphite target are underway, first results presented. power density > 0.1 mW/g only in a handful of cental coils, very low everywhere else; definitely do not need 35 cm of tungsten. Action item: implement a more sophisticated geometry (elliptical cross-section following the profile of the beam). this will allow to significantly reduce the amount of W used for shielding. MARS is the main tool, although G4beamline and ICOOL can also be used for some analyses. December 4, 2014 Pavel Snopok | MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting (SLAC, December 3-7, 2014) 16
Thank you! December 4, 2014 Pavel Snopok | MAP Winter Collaboration Meeting (SLAC, December 3-7, 2014) 17
