Minutes of 80th FFIR/BDSIM and 3rd ILC-Asia WG4 meeting on 10/13/2004

The 3rd meeting was held on Oct.13 10:00 am at rm.425 bldg no.3. As was announced in the last memo, The ACFA-FFIR group join WG4 at least until the workshop.

The meeting memo was wriiten by Kaoru Yokoya (KEK).

(1)  Crossing angle issues (continued from last meeting)  T.Tauchi
(transparencies, pdf, 11pages, 1.5MB)
   * Addition and correction to the last presentation on Sep.30.
      * `R22=3' in the 2mrad case is the matrix element defined
        on the in-coming beam line. This means the out-going beam,
        having an angle 2mrad, goes out of QD with an angle
        2mrad*3 = 6mrad.
      * In the 2mrad layout, QD is SC (supercond.) and QF is NC.
        The spent beam goes inside QD and outside QF.
      * On the plot of beam loss. The plot on the left shows the
        fraction of the beam that hit the coil of QD.
   * Presented a comparison table of the 5 cases of the crossing
     angle. (head-on, vertical 0.3mrad, horizontal 2mrad,
     7mrad, 20mrad)
   * Suggested a possible application of QD in the olc JLC Design
     Study to the present large L*. L*=2m with phi=8mrad
     corresponds geometrically to L*=5m with phi=3.2mrad.
     It is necessary to compute the synchrotron radiation profile
     using the new lattice. (to be done by Kuroda. Tauchi is
     checking TESLA group calculation.)
     It is also necessary to design the magnet QD to see its
(2)  Review of BDS optics for SC.
(3)  Status of simulation codes
   *  SAD and SLEPT have already been linked by SAD script, though
      never been used seriously.
   *  To futher link CAIN should be straightforward.
      (It is necessary to compile CAIN on unix envioronment
        --Fortran90 needed)
   *  Is this link needed at all?
   *  The effects like the banana can be studied only by connecting
      all the programs.
(4)  Discussion
   *  Joint session with WG1
      * Tor (SLAC) suggests the crossing angle issue need not be
        discussed in WG1.
      * The problem of the linac orientation is an issue of WG1.
      * Demands from physicists should be reported in plenary or
        WG1 session? Energy range, necessity of 2nd IP, its energy,
        necessity of positron polarization, etc.
   *  BDS in GDI
      * SLAC leading, or EuroTeV is also powerful enough?
        Isn't is desirable to asign roles for test facility,
        e.g., collimator at SLAC, beamline manipulation at ATF2 ?
   *  ATF2
       A strong argument is needed as to what sort of merit is
       expected in ATF2 under the circumstance 100 times lower
       energy and 100 times larger emittance.

The next meeting will be on 20 October, 2004,10:00 - at 3 gokan, 425 .