Candidate Lattice Design of the HEPS Booster Consisting of Combined-Function Dipoles
Yi Jiao,Yuemei Peng,Gang Xu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18429/jacow-ipac2017-wepab053
2017-01-01
Abstract:The High Energy Photon Source (HEPS) is a 6-GeV, ultralow-emittance, kilometer-scale storage ring light source to be built in China. It is planned to use a 300 MeV linac and a full energy booster as the injector. In this paper we present one of the candidate lattice designs for the HEPS booster, where most of the dipoles are combined with quadrupole and sextupole gradients. Global optimization of the lattice has been done, where the dependencies of the lattice performance on various parameters, including the minimum pole face field, damping partition number, number of dipoles, etc. are discussed. INTRODUCTION The High Energy Photon Source (HEPS) is a 6-GeV, ultralow-emittance storage ring light source to be built in the suburb of Beijing, China. The R&D project, HEPS test facility (HEPS-TF) started in 2016. A 7BA ring lattice was developed [1] based on the ‘hybrid MBA’ concept [2] and used as the baseline lattice of the HEPS-TF, with a circumference of about 1296 m and a natural emittance of about 60 pm at 6 GeV. Since the lattice for the HEPS is under design and optimization and not finally determined yet, other related physics studies for the HEPS, including the booster design, are based on this 60-pm design. For the booster, there are two options. One is to locate the booster in the same tunnel with the storage ring, while the other is to design a booster with circumference of 1/3 of the storage ring and place it in a separate tunnel. For the latter option, we have designed a 15BA lattice, with a natural emittance of ~4.5 nm at 6 GeV [3]. In this lattice, we combine only the horizontally defocusing gradients into the dipoles, while using separate-function horizontally focusing quadrpoles and sextupoles. A question related to the budget arises then whether we can combine more gradients into the dipoles, similar to the NSLS-II booster [4], so as to greatly reduce the number of the magnets and hence the cost. To this end, we did detailed design and optimization studies on this type of lattice. Although at the end of 2016, it was decided to not use this type of lattice, it is meaningful to show the underlying considerations for designing such a lattice, which may provide useful reference for other similar lattice designs. LINEAR OPTICS RELATED ISSUES Similar to the 15BA lattice designed for the HEPS booster, this lattice is assumed to have 4 super-periods, providing 4 long straight sections to accommodate injection, extraction, and RF systems. The main property of this type of lattice is that most of the quadrupole and sextupole gradients are combined into the dipoles. This, however, will introduce several constraints on the available minimum emittance. First, in this case each unit cell is consisted of two dipoles combined with focusing and defocusing gradients, respectively. This leads to a backward that one cannot simultaneously reduce the optical functions in the two dipoles to be close to the so-called ‘theoretical minimum emittance’ conditions [5]. Secondly, to reach a low emittance it calls for a large number of dipoles (and hence small bending angles) and strong focusing, which however, for a fixed circumference, implies short dipoles combined with strong focusing gradients and also strong sextupole gradients (to correct the natural chromaticity). This will make the pole face filed of the dipole quickly approaching its upper or lower limit. Preliminary studies show that it is easier to reach the lower limit (than to reach the upper limit) of the pole face filed, when reducing the emittance. So, we investigate the relationship between the available minimum emittance and the lower limit of the dipole pole face field, for a specific number of dipoles. For the unit cell, we derive the expressions of the emittance and the pole face field in terms of dipole parameters (not taking into account the sextupole gradients of dipoles). In this way, for an arbitrary set of dipole parameters, we can quickly calculate the corresponding emittance and pole face filed, and do not need to put these parameters in a real lattice model. This is verified with a comparison study, where two PSO (particle swarm optimization) evolutions are performed over 1000 generations based on the analytical expressions and real lattice models respectively, for the case with 41 dipoles in each super-period. The final solutions of two PSO evolutions are shown in Fig. 1. It appears that these two approaches generate basically the same results. Furthermore, it is much faster for the PSO based on the analytical expressions to reach the so-called Pareto front. From the PSO optimizations based on analytical expressions, we obtain the dependence curves of minimum emittance versus the minimum pole face field of the dipole, as shown in Fig. 2. For different dipole numbers (namely, different number of unit cells in one superperiod), the available maximum cell length is considered to be 84 m/No. of unit cells. And, constraints on tunes, beta functions, etc., were imposed in the optimization, to ensure that the found solutions have satisfying optical parameters. One can see clearly from Fig. 2 that it does not definitely result in lower emittance with larger number of dipoles. ___________________________________________ * Work supported by NSFC (11475202, 11405187) † jiaoyi@ihep.ac.cn WEPAB053 Proceedings of IPAC2017, Copenhagen, Denmark ISBN 978-3-95450-182-3 2700 Co py rig ht © 20 17 CC -B Y3. 0 an d by th er es pe ct iv ea ut ho rs 02 Photon Sources and Electron Accelerators A05 Synchrotron Radiation Facilities Finally, we choose the number of dipoles in one superperiod to be 45. In the case with larger number of dipoles, there is just a limited room for further-reduction of the emittance, but with a price of higher cost (more dipoles). In addition, we somewhat arbitrarily set the lower limit of the dipole pole face field to 0.2 T at 6 GeV (corresponding to 100 Gauss at the injection energy 300 MeV). From Fig. 2, such a minimum pole face field corresponds to a minimum emittance of ~5 nm. Figure 1: Solutions of PSO evolutions based on anlyatical expression and actual lattice model. Figure 2: Variation of the available emittance with respect to the minimum dipole pole face filed, for different numbers of dipoles in one super-period, obtained from PSO optimizations based on analytical expressions. NONLINEAR OPTIMIZATION RELATED ISSUES From the above estimations, we fix the dipole numbers of each super-period to 45. Then, we perform nonlinear optimizations with the actual lattice model, where the sextupole gradients of dipoles are calculated for corrected chromaticities of (+1, +1), and the dynamic aperture (DA) at the center of the long straight section is also calculated. The lattice is optimized by iteratively and successively implementing the MOPSO and multi-objective genetic algorithm (MOGA) [6], with two objectives, i.e., the emittance and DA, until the population reaches a good convergence. The results (not shown here) suggest that it is possible to reach a natural emittance of 4~5 nm at 6 GeV, and simultaneously achieve a DA comparative to the physical aperture (assumed to be 18 mm in both x and y planes). Nevertheless, we noticed that although the minimum pole face fields of all the solutions are above 0.2 T (assuming the pole width is 18 mm), the quadrupole and sextupoles gradients used in the lattice are quite large. Table 1 lists the dipole parameters of one typical solution, where the dipole parameters of the NSLS-II booster [4] are also presented. Table 1: Dipole Parameters UUUused in HEPS and NSLS-II