| | 2 | |
| | 3 | == Notes: == |
| | 4 | |
| | 5 | **Present:** TK, AK, KL, OE |
| | 6 | **Phone:** JPa, JPo |
| | 7 | **Apologies:** WS, JP |
| | 8 | |
| | 9 | 1. Introduction: KL |
| | 10 | * Goals for today: review layout for infrastructure assessment and take stock of the status of preparation of the simulation. |
| | 11 | |
| | 12 | 2. Notes and actions from [wiki:Research/DesignStudy/Meetings/2019/07-25 last meeting] |
| | 13 | * Notes accepted. No actions recorded. |
| | 14 | |
| | 15 | 3. Layout, footprint, and infrastructure: JPo |
| | 16 | * Will see L.Clarke later today. Plan to introduce quad focusing in the two transfer lines. Plan also to make a legend for the drawings to help with the costings. |
| | 17 | * Dimensions of wet-rooms are included in the drawing. |
| | 18 | * JPa: |
| | 19 | * 7 cells is not appropriate for the ring. Also, the injection line looks suitable for a vertical FFA of the type being considered for the ISIS demonstrator. However, if a horizontal FFA would be used then one would prefer a separation dipole before the vertical arc. The injection system needs a careful design. So, costing will be a poor estimate. |
| | 20 | * JPo: clearly there is no intention that this is an accurate estimate of cost. (KL) Rather it will be an indicative costing and the write-up that accompanies it will have to make this clear. |
| | 21 | * We agreed to emphasise the importance of making a ball-park estimate for the infrastructure cost and the importance of clarfying both the basis of estimate and the degree of uncertainty in the design. Further, we agreed to change the ring such that it shows a 10-cell doublet lattice of the type presently considered for ISIS demonstrator. |
| | 22 | * JPo: will discuss the 10-cell ring and the arrangement of the beam switch and the injection, extraction and transfer lines with LC. These issues may cause the width of the hall to be larger. |
| | 23 | * **//Agreed//**: need to make a start on the write-up. |
| | 24 | |
| | 25 | 4. Progress on simulation: AK |
| | 26 | * GPT simulation investigated (JPa, JPo, AK): simulation in GPT now believed to be physical (emittance grows slightly as expected). |
| | 27 | * Simulation of space charge was attempted by AK; technically GPT ran. Next steps are to to get TK into the GPT analysis loop. |
| | 28 | * Discussion of details of electron density accompanying the protons. This could be included in the GPT simulation so that its effect can be described. |
| | 29 | |
| | 30 | 5. Outline plan for preparation of initial CDR: KL/All |
| | 31 | * [raw-attachment:2019-08-13-Long.pptx LhARA simulation modules and provocation] |
| | 32 | * **AK/OE/(KL):** will prepare a note summarising the o/p format from "Smiley" and specifying the geometry. |
| | 33 | |
| | 34 | 6. Date of next meeting \\ |
| | 35 | * 27Aug19 |
| | 36 | |
| | 37 | 7. AoB |
| | 38 | * None. |
| | 39 | |
| | 40 | === Summary of actions === |
| | 41 | * **AK/OE/(KL):** will prepare a note summarising the o/p format from "Smiley" and specifying the geometry. |
| | 42 | |
| | 43 | ---- |
