Search NASA⌕ Search

DOE OSTI · 1661696

Chapter Six - Derivation, cross-validation, and comparison of analytic formulas for electrostatic deflector aberrations

Abstract

Here, we derived first and second order analytic aberration formulas in the horizontal transverse plane for an electrostatic deflector specified by the reference orbit radius, the central angle spanning the deflector, and its inhomogeneity coefficients. The derivation was performed using an iterative order-by-order perturbation method in a Frenet–Serret beamline coordinate system. We produced a C program edabrt for calculation of the first and second order aberrations using the formulas that we derived. The electrostatic deflector aberration formulas from Wollnik (1965) disagree with COSY INFINITY and the aberration formulas that we derived here, and they also deviate from the first and second order symplecticity conditions. The reason for this discrepancy is that the aberration formulas from Wollnik (1965) consider only motion in the main field of the deflector and do not properly account for fringe field effects, in particular the necessarily occurring change of kinetic energy due to the change in potential. The code GIOS uses electrostatic aberration formulas from Wollnik (1965) and exhibits the same discrepancy. We performed a comparison of first and second order electrostatic deflector aberrations for (1) the analytic formulas derived in this work, (2) differential-algebraic (DA) numerical integration of the equations of motion using the code COSY INFINITY, (3) the aberration formulas from Wollnik (1965), (4) aberrations computed using the code GIOS, and (5) the aberration formulas from Wollnik (1965) adjusted to account for the occurring change in potential. An electrostatic spherical deflector and an electrostatic cylindrical deflector were used as test cases for this comparison. There is excellent agreement between methods (1), (2), and (5), and these three methods satisfy the first and second order symplecticity conditions.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Valetov, Eremey, Berz, Martin. 2019-12-30. Chapter Six - Derivation, cross-validation, and comparison of analytic formulas for electrostatic deflector aberrations. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aiep.2019.11.007

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

Design and Integration of High Precision Superconducting Magnet Power Supply Systems

This paper reviews the design and integration approach being taken to power more than 400 superconducting magnets in Electron Ion Collider (EIC) by power supplies ranging from 20V to 400V and 100A to 18kA. A major challenge is to integrate existing legacy power supplies with new high current systems and maximize performance and reduce costs. Successful implementation requires coordinated integration of power convertors, current regulation, quench protection, energy extraction, machine protection, controls and existing accelerator infrastructure.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

Searching for the Most Harmful Field Errors in the HSR IR Superconducting Magnets

In this project, we improve beam stability for the Electron-Ion Collider. Magnetic field errors can reduce beam stability, making it essential to identify the field errors that have the greatest impact on accelerator performance. However, this is particularly challenging because beam stability depends on the complex interactions of many magnetic field errors, resulting in a high-dimensional and nonlinear optimization problem. We determine which field errors are the most influential for the large physical aperture superconducting magnet B2PF, a critical magnet in the Interaction Region (IR) in the Hadron Storage Ring (HSR). We complete and analyze nearly 30,000 simulations on the Brookhaven National Laboratory Linux Cluster by varying 18 nonlinear magnetic field errors. We evaluate beam stability using the dynamic aperture and the tune diffusion. We identify the field errors that most strongly influence beam stability and establish quantitative field error tolerances that improve accelerator performance.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗