1 PIC versus Frozen? 5/27/2013 FSOutcome of SC-13 PIC codes are definitely needed when coherent...
-
Upload
daniella-heath -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 PIC versus Frozen? 5/27/2013 FSOutcome of SC-13 PIC codes are definitely needed when coherent...
1
PIC versus Frozen?
5/27/2013 FS Outcome of SC-13
• PIC codes are definitely needed when coherent effects are relevant.
• In our case in presence of strong space charge, time varying fields, double RF at the beginning of injection using PTC-ORBIT makes a lot of sense!
• However, one of the main SC-13 outcomes is the fact that probably the most relevant issues are of incoherent nature Frozen space ➔charge approach might be sufficient for many aspects of our studies.
• Frozen space charge codes are 10-100 faster Long time scales➔• Clearly for the simulations of 1.2s of the PS only frozen space
charge codes can do the job! • It has been argued that the half integer resonance in the PSB is a
good candidate for coherent phenomena. However, a half integer resonance compensation improves losses a lot needs studies.➔
• MAD-X in the newest version has the frozen space charge implemented and by the way with time varying fields.
• Example for the Fermilab Debuncher shows quite similar results.
Slow extraction in Debuncher using Orbit• 3-order resonance with variable tune Qx and sext. str. K2• First “strange” results for extraction: “intensity drop”
intensity vs turns
• “Intensity drop” was resolved simply at the beginning: Valery advised to make mesh refinements
PIC: “Total Beam size increases at slow extraction => mesh number should be increased to keep the cell size”
SC-13 3V. Kapin (F. Schmidt)
Simulations with ORBIT by V. Nagaslaev
Ramps are given in tables; Npart in bunch ~ 2.5e12
SC-13 4V. Kapin (F. Schmidt)
N_macro_surv vs Turn Number for the Debuncher
Timing on CERN computer
• Macro version ~20-24h
• MADX-SC
~2-4h
MAD-X V3 with Macros
MADX-SC V5