+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas,...

Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas,...

Date post: 18-Jan-2016
Category:
Upload: myra-jordan
View: 213 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
33
Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics with a Year in Europe Msci at Imperial College London in relation with École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne as part of the Swiss European Mobility Program.
Transcript
Page 1: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity

decay rates at the LHC in 2012Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015

For completion of the 3rd year of the Physics with a Year in Europe Msci at Imperial College London in relation with École

Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne as part of the Swiss European Mobility Program.

Page 2: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Special thanks to Xavier Buffat for help with the analysis and Danilo Banfi for help with the initial Python codes

used

Main supervisor: Tatiana PieloniSupervisor from Imperial College London: Gavin Davies

Supervisor from EPFL: Leonid Rivkin

Page 3: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Aims

• Analyse different available models for luminosity decay

• Analyse the dependency of decay rates on BBIs

• Analyse the time dependency of decay rates

Page 4: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Different fitting methods

• Simple exponential model• C = 0, variable C

• Tevatron model (“Fitting the luminosity decay in the Tevatron, E. McCrory et al., 2005)

•Brightness model (Xavier Buffat)

Page 5: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Simple exponential model

• (C = 0)

• + C (C variable)

Constant decay rate

Page 6: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Tevatron model

Theory attempts to account for IBS, beam burn-up due to luminosity, and beam-beam interactions.

Time varying decay rate

Page 7: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Brightness model

Assumes 2 different processes of decay – slow process () (e.g. IBS)Fast process () that is present for brightness larger than (e.g. incoherent growth due to a resonance)

Two decay rates – C varying in initial hoursC = 0 in later hours

Page 8: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

C = 0 fit

Page 9: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

C varying fit

Page 10: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Brightness fit

Page 11: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Tevatron fit

Page 12: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Residual analysis – Whole FillC = 0 fit qualitatively worse.

3 other fits produce similar results.

Page 13: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Residual analysis – 1st Hour

Whole fill does not model 1st hour accurately – need to fit 1st hour separately

Little difference between Variable C fit and other models when fitting first hour.

Page 14: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Filling scheme 2710

- First half 2012

Page 15: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Decay rates pop out for bunches missing IP2s and IP8s

Luminosity and Specific luminosity decay rates follow the same pattern

Page 16: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Strong and varying correlations with the LRs

Page 17: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Bunches seem to also follow HOs – only noticeable when they are missing

Page 18: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Very different pattern over whole fill compared to 1st hour

Some shifts at bunches with different HOs/LRs

Related to drop in HOs?

Page 19: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Negative correlation with LRs?Or a different effect? IBS?

Page 20: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Specific luminosity decays show some relation to HOs

Whole fill decay shows stronger relation to HOsrather than LRs?Likely due to stronger effect of HOs persisting throughout fill

Page 21: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Filling scheme 2998

- Second half2012

Page 22: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Decay rates pop out for bunches missing IP8s

Luminosity and Specific luminosity decay rates follow the similar pattern

Very different patterncompared to fill 2710

Page 23: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Strong and varying correlations with the LRs

Also for spec. lumi.

Page 24: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Very different pattern over whole fill compared to 1st hour

Drops in decay rates for bunches with fewer total LRs

Page 25: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

But no bunch by bunch correlation with LRs

Page 26: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Large change in pattern after 1st hour

Expanding time window

Page 27: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Similar change in pattern

Page 28: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Equivalent analysis using 1hr sliding window – results are very different and not consistent enough to produce results for each hour

Modelling sections by single hours is not effective outside of the first hour

Page 29: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

However, the expanding window is not necessarily better, as it only shows a different pattern for the first hour, and misses it in the following hours – e.g. hours 1-2, as seen below…

Page 30: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Decay rate vs time analysisDecay rate is calculated by an expanding window as for the bunch-bunch analysis, though expanding in 5 minute steps.

Sharp drop after first hoursThough somewhat unreliable due to expanding window

Page 31: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

More examples…

Page 32: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

• Importance of model used to fit luminosity – simple exponential (C=0) is not suitable. Models based around varying decay regimes are much better• Importance of the time period that is looked at – currently no model can

fit to the whole fill and still accurately model behaviour contained within the first hour. Need to find a better model for consistent time analysis• Effects in the first hours are VERY different to effects over the whole fill –

Strong BBI dependencies – not yet obvious the nuances within this• Studies on a larger number of fills and relating to injection intensities of

fills would be useful

Closing ideas…

Page 33: Effects of beam-beam interactions on luminosity decay rates at the LHC in 2012 Anton Esmail-Yakas, 2015 For completion of the 3 rd year of the Physics.

Thank you!

Questions?


Recommended