Minutes of ILC-Acc. Physics meeting, 2007 September 5.
Preambles: Webex was found to be slow at starting up. This was observed from the Desy site, and from Japan as well.
Brief overview of the agenda: Two talks one by Kiyoshi K. on a response to Chris Adolphsen talk on Main Linac work packages for our group, and one talk from Andrei Seryi on Beam Delivery System (BDS) work Packages. These talks have been posted at:
http://ilcagenda.linearcollider.org/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=2174
We started with the talk on Main Linac, presenter is Kiyoshi K. Discussion: Kiyoshi thinks we can contribute to the 2nd work-package ( Static Tuning) and the 3rd one (Dynamic Tuning). As numerous simulations have been already done on static tuning, the work here is to document rather starting to code or simulate "from scratch". On the 4rth package, on Wakefields, Kiyoshi thinks that computing wakefield potentials is not within our LET mandate, input will have to come from experts.
Kiyoshi also stated that Peter Tenenbaum (PT) has also written a set of Work Packages for the Main Linac.
Daniel S. expressed surprise at the emphasis place by Chris A. on analytical calculation for static tuning. Daniel thinks such analytical calculations are too usually simplistic to draw quantitative conclusions. Andrei Seryi, who talked to Chris about this, stated that Chris probably meant "parameterization of the code". If "analytical" is to be understood as "scaling properties of the code", than Daniel S. agrees.
Nick Walker thanked Kiyoshi for this presentation, and had the following comments:
a. There seems to consensus on the Main Linac 4 work packages. Nobody disagree.
b. On static tuning: We need to consolidate our documentation, and overcome a possible "communication problem". That is, the results exist and no need to do such calculation again, as the results exists. Daniel S. state that indeed the tools exist and can be ran again for specific details/problem if need be. Nick agrees.
c. Nick emphasized the importance of finding and naming one person as the task leader for each such work package. While this meeting was not the appropriate venue for discussing potential candidates, Daniel, Nick and Kiyoshi expressed hope to find such leaders, further offline, e-mail discussions will take place..
d. Nick is looking forward to a Main Linac talk and/or meeting that will take place at the Fermilab "EDR Kick-off" meeting, to be held at Fermilab, 22-26 October 2007, where better versions, close to final, will be presented.
Andrei Seryi presented an exhaustive list of work packages for the BDS. Questions/comments:
a. From Paul L. "What is a "flight simulator". Andrei : a software system running in the Main Control room, to allow operators to assess the effect of a change in procedure or different tuning procedure by running a simulation, which includes both beam tracking and simulation of the control loop. (This is for ATF2.)
b. From Nick Walker: ATF2 is mentioned. How much overlap between ILC and ATF2. Andrei: ~ 90%, or more of the work done at ATF2 has relevance to the ILC.
c. Nick asked clarification about GAMCAL, a gamma calorimeter located downstream of the IP to gauge the e.m. radiation out of the collision between the bunches.
c. Nick/Andrei: Nine work package were listed in the talk. A long list. Also, Nick stated that the first one is "very large". Andrei will provide a bit of hierarchy. Nick asked the question "Do we have all the people to do all this work" ... Are the extraction lines included? Andrei: yes, they are. .. Nick " Outside SLAC who in Europe or Asia might be interested at picking up some of this load. Daniel S expressed interest and mentioned links between the BDS for CLIC and the BDS for ILC. Kiyoshi stated that most of the work in Japan will be done at ATF2.
Nick thanked Andrei for such an exhaustive list, and gave us words of encouragement to pursue this simulation work.
Further discussions took place on EDR Kick-off meeting, where the overall organization of the EDR will become clearer. Meanwhile, Andrei S. and Chris A. will look for people. As we have limited resources, it is possible that a given work -package, or some part of it, will have to be put on the back-burner.
We all recognized the need for a face to face meeting. Nikolay S. and PT discussed the suggestion to have it at SLAC, the week of December 3 or December 10. Tor R. liked the idea, so it looks like we will meet at SLAC. Nick expressed preference for the week of December 3. A duration of three days seems optimum. So, Tuesday December 4 through Thursday December 6 is our tentative schedule.
We went back on discussing organizational matters: Kiyoshi discussed the need to find "contact persons" for Magnet specs and BPM specs. Nick wanted to know a bit more about the role of such contact persons. Aren't they work package leaders? No, says both Kiyoshi and Daniel, they only are responsible for collecting information for clearly stating the input data for our simulation. And it goes both ways, i.e., we (LET/Beam Physics Simulation people) can/should set these specs, and ask these contact persons if it is reasonable. Nick will think about it.
We adjourned around 10:30, CDT. Next Webex meeting is Tuesday, September 18, 14:00 GMT.
(Recorded by P.Lebrun)
There are minutes attached to this event.
Show them.