Booster High-level RF Frequency Tracking Improvement Via the Bias-Curve Optimization

Similar documents
A Synchrotron Phase Detector for the Fermilab Booster

Tutorial on Design of RF system for Indus Accelerator. Maherdra Lad Head, Radio Frequency Systems Division RRCAT, Indore

arxiv: v1 [physics.acc-ph] 23 Mar 2018

LRC Circuit PHYS 296 Your name Lab section

Acceleration of High-Intensity Protons in the J-PARC Synchrotrons. KEK/J-PARC M. Yoshii

Slide Title. Bulleted Text

AC Circuits INTRODUCTION DISCUSSION OF PRINCIPLES. Resistance in an AC Circuit

ACCELERATION TECHNIQUES

Low-Level RF. S. Simrock, DESY. MAC mtg, May 05 Stefan Simrock DESY

Design and performance of LLRF system for CSNS/RCS *

STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS

Re-commissioning the Recycler Storage Ring at Fermilab

Beam Diagnostics, Low Level RF and Feedback for Room Temperature FELs. Josef Frisch Pohang, March 14, 2011

Cavity Field Control - RF Field Controller. LLRF Lecture Part3.3 S. Simrock, Z. Geng DESY, Hamburg, Germany

Main Injector Cavity Simulation and Optimization for Project X

The impedance budget of the CERN Proton Synchrotron (PS)

Linear Particle Accelerator Control Performance

National Accelerator Laboratory

Calibrating the Cavity Voltage. Presentation of an idea

Lab 9 - AC Filters and Resonance

Understanding VCO Concepts

Chapter 31 Alternating Current

RF Systems I. Erk Jensen, CERN BE-RF

Experiment VI: The LRC Circuit and Resonance

LEP RLC Circuit

MAHALAKSHMI ENGINEERING COLLEGE TIRUCHIRAPALLI UNIT III TUNED AMPLIFIERS PART A (2 Marks)

EXPERIMENT 8: LRC CIRCUITS

Ferrite Loaded Cavities for RF Accelerating Systems

Digital Signal Processing in RF Applications

Accelerator Complex U70 of IHEP-Protvino: Status and Upgrade Plans

Energy Recovering Linac Issues

Study of Inductive and Capacitive Reactance and RLC Resonance

EE301 ELECTRONIC CIRCUITS CHAPTER 2 : OSCILLATORS. Lecturer : Engr. Muhammad Muizz Bin Mohd Nawawi

Lecture Outline Chapter 24. Physics, 4 th Edition James S. Walker. Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc.

AC CURRENTS, VOLTAGES, FILTERS, and RESONANCE

Project of RF System for 2.2 GeV Electron Storage Ring Zelenograd SR Source.

Dr.-Ing. Ulrich L. Rohde

RF System Models and Longitudinal Beam Dynamics

1997 Particle Accelerator Conference, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, May 12-16, 1997 BNL

GATE: Electronics MCQs (Practice Test 1 of 13)

Experiment 2: Transients and Oscillations in RLC Circuits

Electronics and Instrumentation Name ENGR-4220 Fall 1998 Section Quiz 2

O. Napoly LC02, SLAC, Feb. 5, Higher Order Modes Measurements

TUNED AMPLIFIERS 5.1 Introduction: Coil Losses:

Chapter 33. Alternating Current Circuits

The Series RLC Circuit and Resonance

PERFORMANCE OF THE TUNER MECHANISM FOR SSR1 RESONATORS DURING FULLY INTEGRETED TESTS AT FERMILAB

Filters And Waveform Shaping

Low-beta Structures. Maurizio Vretenar CERN BE/RF CAS RF Ebeltoft 2010

Illinois. Speculations About a Fourier Series Kicker for the TESLA Damping Rings. Physics

New apparatus for precise synchronous phase shift measurements in storage rings 1

3 rd Harmonic Cavity at ELETTRA

DEVELOPMENT OF CAPACITIVE LINEAR-CUT BEAM POSITION MONITOR FOR HEAVY-ION SYNCHROTRON OF KHIMA PROJECT

AN INTEGRATED ULTRASOUND TRANSDUCER DRIVER FOR HIFU APPLICATIONS. Wai Wong, Carlos Christoffersen, Samuel Pichardo, Laura Curiel

MEASURES TO REDUCE THE IMPEDANCE OF PARASITIC RESONANT MODES IN THE DAΦNE VACUUM CHAMBER

INTRODUCTION TO RADIOFREQUENCY SYSTEMS FOR PARTICLE ACCELERATORS

The Design of 2.4GHz Bipolar Oscillator by Using the Method of Negative Resistance Cheng Sin Hang Tony Sept. 14, 2001

SPEAR BTS Toroid Calibration

Design of ESS-Bilbao RFQ Linear Accelerator

Field Stability Issue for Normal Conducting Cavity under Beam Loading

ENEE 307 Electronic Circuit Design Laboratory Spring A. Iliadis Electrical Engineering Department University of Maryland College Park MD 20742

Dark current Monitor for the European XFEL D. Lipka, W. Kleen, J. Lund-Nielsen, D. Nölle, S. Vilcins, V. Vogel; DESY Hamburg

Equivalent Circuit Model Overview of Chip Spiral Inductors

Exercise 9: inductor-resistor-capacitor (LRC) circuits

FAST RF KICKER DESIGN

Review on Progress in RF Control Systems. Cornell University. Matthias Liepe. M. Liepe, Cornell U. SRF 2005, July 14

JUAS 2018 LINACS. Jean-Baptiste Lallement, Veliko Dimov BE/ABP CERN.

Worksheet for Exploration 31.1: Amplitude, Frequency and Phase Shift

Experiment-4 Study of the characteristics of the Klystron tube

Design and construction of an experimental setup to study ferromagnetic resonance

Electromagnetic Oscillations and Currents. March 23, 2014 Chapter 30 1

INTRODUCTION TO AC FILTERS AND RESONANCE

High Frequency VCO Design and Schematics

ELC224 Final Review (12/10/2009) Name:

CHAPTER 6: ALTERNATING CURRENT

FREQUENCY RESPONSE OF R, L AND C ELEMENTS

Converters for Cycling Machines

UNIT _ III MCQ. Ans : C. Ans : C. Ans : C

Design of a Regenerative Receiver for the Short-Wave Bands A Tutorial and Design Guide for Experimental Work. Part I

RLC-circuits with Cobra4 Xpert-Link TEP. 1 2 π L C. f res=

LLRF Plans for SMTF. Ruben Carcagno (Fermilab) Nigel Lockyer (University of Pennsylvania) Thanks to DESY, PISA, KEK, Fermilab, SLAC Colleagues

Laboratory Exercise 6 THE OSCILLOSCOPE

CHAPTER 6 BOOSTER RF SYSTEMS

SNS LLRF Design Experience and its Possible Adoption for the ILC

Laboratory Investigation of Variable Speed Control of Synchronous Generator With a Boost Converter for Wind Turbine Applications

Diagnostics I M. Minty DESY

Cavity Field Control - Feedback Performance and Stability Analysis. LLRF Lecture Part3.2 S. Simrock, Z. Geng DESY, Hamburg, Germany

CONICAL HALF-WAVE RESONATOR INVESTIGATIONS

RF Power Consumption in the ESS Spoke LINAC

Core Technology Group Application Note 1 AN-1

Progress Report on SIMULINK Modelling of RF Cavity Control for SPL Extension to LINAC4

To produce more powerful and high-efficiency particle accelerator, efforts have

Detailed Design Report

Analogue electronics for BPMs at GSI - Performance and limitations

Maurizio Vretenar Linac4 Project Leader EuCARD-2 Coordinator

Bunch-by-Bunch Broadband Feedback for the ESRF

Automatic phase calibration for RF cavities using beam-loading signals. Jonathan Edelen LLRF 2017 Workshop (Barcelona) 18 Oct 2017

Triple-spoke compared with Elliptical-cell Cavities

OVERVIEW OF RECENT TRENDS AND DEVELOPMENTS FOR BPM SYSTEMS

Measurement of the Permeability in a Ferrite Core by Superimposing Bias Current

Transcription:

FERMILAB-TM-227-AD Booster High-level RF Frequency Tracking Improvement Via the Bias-Curve Optimization Xi Yang Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Box 5, Batavia IL 651 Abstract It is important to improve the frequency tracking between the RF drive and the cavity field for the purpose of reducing longitudinal phase oscillations and increasing the effective accelerating voltage. And this is especially beneficial for Booster running at higher intensity with smaller beam emittance. Optimizing the bias supply current curve for the ferrite tuners can reduce the phase error between the RF drive and the cavity field, and also improve the HLRF-to-LLRF frequency tracking efficiency. Introduction The Booster accelerates protons (H + ) from 4 MeV to 8 GeV after the H beam injected from the Linac is stripped to protons. The RF frequency changes from 37.9 MHz to 52.9 MHz to accelerate the beam in a Booster cycle. Each Booster RF cavity contains three ferrite tuners (FT), which are connected to the accelerating cavity and are part of the resonating structure.[1] The cavity resonant frequency is adjusted by changing the bias supply current for the purpose of varying the inductance of FT. The relationship between the bias current and the cavity resonant frequency has been measured and applied as the bias curve (BC) for a Booster cycle. However, there are some factors, such as the hysteresis of the ferrite, Booster rep rate, temperature, and beam loading, etc., which could change the relationship between the bias current and the cavity resonance frequency and make the required bias current for a cavity resonance 1

frequency different from the measurement. Also, since for a required rate of acceleration, the low-level RF system (LLRF) is continuously adjusting the RF drive to the cavity field to maintain the correct phase relation between circulating beam bunches and the accelerating gap voltage, the cavity resonance frequency varies slightly from cycle to cycle.[2] Since the required cavity resonance frequency couldn t be controlled only by a predetermined BC, a feedback loop (bias running closed loop) had been installed for each Booster RF station to minimize the phase error between the RF drive and the cavity field.[3] With the continuously increased requirement for Booster to deliver protons with higher intensity and smaller emittance, it is important for us to improve the frequency tracking between the RF drive and the cavity field for the purpose of reducing phase oscillations longitudinally and increasing the effective accelerating voltage. Besides, the feedback loop only can correct the phase error between the RF drive and the cavity field after the error appears. Also, the correction time is limited by the time constant of the bias-tuning system and is about half a millisecond. A procedure, which can be used to generate the optimal BC based upon the phase error signal from the pre-booster cycle and the cavity Q factor, has been developed to improve the HLRF-to-LLRF frequency tracking. Method The bias supply current for each RF station is the sum of three inputs, the BC signal, the phase error signal and the DAC signal. The DAC signal provides an offset to the bias supply current in the beginning of a cycle and varies from station to station. Here, we set it to zero. The BC signal is obtained from Booster console program B3 with a calibration constant of 25 A/V, as shown in Fig. 1(a). The phase error signal is generated by the analog device AD532 whose transfer function is [4] (( X1( t) X 2( t ) ( Y1 ( t) Y ( t)). I ( 2 pes t) 1 1 Here, t is the time in a Booster cycle, I pes (t) is the phase error signal, and X 1 (t) is the phase error from the phase detector. The phase detector is continuously comparing the phase difference between the cavity field and the RF drive and outputting it as the phase error in 2

unit of volt with a calibration constant of 1 V/9. Y 1 (t) is the BC signal in unit of ampere, X 2 (t) and Y 2 (t) are zero due to the grounding. The phase error taken at a MiniBooNE event ($1D) from station #16 is shown in Fig. 1(b). The phase error signal (PES), which is the product of Fig. 1(a) and Fig. 1(b) and then divided by 1, is shown in Fig. 1(c). The total bias supply current, which is the sum of Fig. 1(a) and Fig. 1(c), is shown in Fig. 1(d). It is important for us to notice that when station #16 was running at the bias current curve shown in Fig. 1(d) the PES still appeared as the curve shown in Fig. 1(c). The frequency difference ( f) between the cavity field and the RF drive can be calculated using the parallel-rlc circuit model,[5] as shown in eq.2, once the phase error from the phase detector is known. 1 Z( Re Im ( Z( ) 2 2 2 2 2 Rs ( 1 ω LC) + ω L 2 2 jωlrs ( ) ( 1 ω LC) Z(, 2 2 2 2 2 Rs ( 1 ω LC) + ω L 2 Im( Z( ) jr ( 1 ω LC) tan( φ( ) Re ω ω + ω, f f φ( ω 2π f 1 1 + + jωc, R jωl s f ( V ) d 2 2 ω L R ( Z( ) ω 2π π 9, 18 1. LC pes s ( tan( φ( ) ) s, ωl, ω 4π Q Here, Z( is the impedance of the parallel-rlc circuit at the angular frequency ω2πf, R s is the shunt impedance, L is the inductance, C is the capacitance, f is the cavity resonance frequency, Q is the cavity quality factor at the resonance frequency, f d is the RF drive frequency, V pes is the phase error between the cavity field and the RF drive in unit of volt, and φ( is the phase angle of Z( in unit of radian. Small angle, 1 3 5 7 st 2 4 6 8 nd nd th th th th th 2 3

approximation and Taylor expansion of ωω + ω to the 1 st order of ω are used in the calculation of f from φ(, Q, and ω, as shown in the 6 th equation in eq.2. The cavity Q vs. time t in a Booster cycle is shown in Fig. 2(a).[2] The RF drive frequency (f d ) for each Booster cycle is calculated from the magnet ramp,[6] and is shown in Fig. 2(b). From the past experience, the difference between the HLRF frequency and the LLRF drive frequency couldn t be bigger than half percent; otherwise part of the beam will fall off. We can use 2πf d as ω in the 6 th equation of eq.2 and get the frequency error f for the $1D event, as shown in Fig. 2(c). The cavity resonance frequency is obtained using f d + f (the sum of Fig. 2(b) and Fig. 2(c)), and the total bias current vs. the cavity resonance frequency is shown in Fig. 2(d). The relationship between the bias current (I) and the cavity resonance frequency is obtained by the exponential fit of the curve in Fig. 2(d), as shown in eq.3(a). I bc ( f ) a exp( b f ).7768 exp(.155 f ). 3(a) Here, the unit of f is MHz. We obtain eq.3(b) by differentiating eq.3(a). ( f ) a b exp( b f ) f.1169 exp(.155 f ) f 3(b) I bc The amount of bias current, which should be adjusted in order to eliminate the phase error, should be I bc, and the result is shown in Fig. 2(e). The optimal bias current should be the sum between the total bias current and I bc, as shown in Fig. 2(f). However, I bc is less than.3% of the total bias current, and this can be understood by the calculation shown in eq.4, which is obtained through dividing eq.3(b) by eq.3(a). Ibc ( f ).23%. max ( ) b f b f I f 4 bc Comment The difference between the bias curve shown in Fig. 1(d) and the one shown in Fig. 2(f) is less than.3%, and more efforts are required for the optimal bias current curve in Fig. 2(f) than those for the total bias current curve in Fig. 1(d). Also some other fluctuations in Booster from cycle to cycle can be comparable or larger than.3%. So it is helpful for us to modify the control system of the bias supply current and use the total bias current curve, which is obtained from the pre-booster cycle, as the bias current curve for the 4

present cycle and keep on updating the bias current curve frequently, at least from day to day. Whenever it is possible, tuning the bias current curve to minimize the average phase error signal from all the stations will be helpful. And the reason why we use the average phase error signal for tuning is because all the stations are running the same BC. Using a separated bias current curve for each RF station can remove the phase error from the station-to-station difference and improve the HLRF-to-LLRF frequency tracking further. Acknowledgements The author gives thanks for the tremendous amount of help from the HLRF group in Fermilab, especially to Rene Padilla, John Reid, Tim Berenc and Bob Scala, who provided the author with the technical information and guidance for this work. References: [1] E. L. Hubbard, Editor, Booster Synchrotron, FERMILAB-TM-45. [2] K. C. Harkay, A Study of Longitudinal Instabilities and Emittance Growth in the Fermilab Booster Synchrotron, Ph.D thesis, Purdue University, 1993. [3] Low Level RF Talk, www-ad.fnal.gov/proton/newboosterwww/booster.htm. [4] www.analog.com. [5] D. M. Pozar, Microwave Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, 2 nd Edition, 1998. [6] X. Yang, Energy Loss Estimates at Several Beam Intensities in the Fermilab Booster, FERMILAB-TM-2244. 5

24 22 2 18 16 BC Signal (A) 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 2 4 6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 22 24 26 28 3 32 34 Fig. 1(a) 2. 1.5 1. Phase Error (V).5. -.5-1. -1.5 2 4 6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 22 24 26 28 3 32 34 Fig. 1(b) 6

15 1 Phase Error Signal (A) 5-5 -1-15 -2 2 4 6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 22 24 26 28 3 32 34 Fig. 1(c) 25 2 Total Bias Current (A) 15 1 5 2 4 6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 22 24 26 28 3 32 34 Fig. 1(d) Fig. 1(a) the bias curve obtained from Booster console program B3 with a calibration of 25 A/V. Fig. 1(b) the phase error taken at a MiniBooNE event ($1D) from station #16. Fig. 1(c) the phase error signal, which is the product of Fig. 1(a) and Fig. 1(b) and then divided by 1. Fig. 1(d) the total bias supply current, which is the sum of Fig. 1(a) and Fig. 1(c). 7

14 12 1 Cavity Q Factor 8 6 4 2 2 4 6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 22 24 26 28 3 32 34 Time in a Booster cycle (ms) Fig. 2(a) 54 52 5 Drive Frequency (MHz) 48 46 44 42 4 38 36 2 4 6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 22 24 26 28 3 32 34 Fig. 2(b) 8

.1.5. f (MHz) -.5 -.1 -.15 -.2 2 4 6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 22 24 26 28 3 32 34 Fig. 2(c) 25 2 Total Bias Current (A) 15 1 5 38 4 42 44 46 48 5 52 54 Cavity Resonance Frequency (MHz) Fig. 2(d) 9

.8.6.4.2 - I bc (A). -.2 -.4 -.6 -.8-1. 2 4 6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 22 24 26 28 3 32 34 Fig. 2(e) 25 2 Optimal Bias Current (A) 15 1 5 2 4 6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 22 24 26 28 3 32 34 Fig. 2(f) Fig. 2(a) the cavity Q vs. time t in a Booster cycle. Fig. 2(b) the RF drive frequency (f d ) for a Booster cycle. Fig. 2(c) the frequency error ( f) of station #16 for the $1D event shown in Fig. 1(b). Fig. 2(d) the total bias current vs. the cavity resonance frequency. Fig. 2(e) the amount of bias current, which should be adjusted in order to eliminate the phase error shown in Fig. 1(b). Fig. 2(f) the optimal bias current. 1