SciPost Submission Page
The High Intensity Proton Accelerator Facility
by J. Grillenberger, C. Baumgarten, M. Seidel
This is not the latest submitted version.
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Christian Baumgarten |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | scipost_202107_00017v1 (pdf) |
| Date submitted: | 2021-07-12 11:49 |
| Submitted by: | Baumgarten, Christian |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics Proceedings |
| Proceedings issue: | Review of Particle Physics at PSI (PSI2020) |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approach: | Experimental |
Abstract
The High Intensity Proton Accelerator Facility at PSI routinely provides a proton beam with up to $1.4\,\rm{MW}$ power at a kinetic energy of $590\,\rm{MeV}$. The beam is used to generate neutrons in a spallation target and muons, pions and neutrinos in meson production targets. The applications are focused on condensed matter research and particle physics at the intensity frontier. This section presents the main physics and technology concepts utilized in the facility. It includes beam dynamics and in the cyclotrons, the control of beam losses and activation, power conversion, efficiency aspects, and performance figures, e.g., the availability of the facility.
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Report #2 by Anonymous (Referee 2) on 2021-7-27 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:scipost_202107_00017v1, delivered 2021-07-27, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.3302
Report
This paper is a gem and should be published after the respective corrections/imporivements
Requested changes
1) Line 10ff:
instead of neutron in a spallation target ... --> neutrons in spallation targets and pions
in meson production targets.
The pions decay into muons and neutrinos. Pions and muons are used in condensed ...
2) Line 19:
According to the Style Manual of the American Physical Society one should write:
... tens of microampere.
3) Line 27:
To my knowledge, the maximal extracted current of Injector I was 180 $\mu$A, see also Fig. 24 before 1985,
where the power is 89 kW corresponding to about 151 $\mu$A.
4) Footnote page 1:
Throughout the paper the name ,,Ring cyclotron" was used while in the footnote it says ,,ring Cyclotron"
5) Line 34:
The statement ,,Injector I was not able to deliver beam currents higher than originally specified" is wrong!
The specified maximal beam current was 100 $\mu$A, while the maximal delivered beam current for longer periods
(1984 and 1985) was 180 $\mu$A.
6) Line 52:
Leave away ("Dees"). The resonators in Injector two do not look at all like Dees.
7) Line 55:
Instead of ... particles' almost circular paths... --> ...particles on almost circular paths ...
In fact the particle move on almost spiral paths!
8) Line 58:
Give reference to a paper ,,The Meson Production Targets in the high energy beamline of HIPA at PSI",
D. Kisselev, P.A. Duperrex, S. Jollet, D. Laube, D. Reggiani, R. Sobbia, V. Talanov,
These Proceedings (2021).
9) Line 59:
... the beam loses only a small fraction of its energy.
10) Line 65:
The references [13-16] are not the main publications to describe the PSI UCN source. It is mandatory to add:
The PSI ultra-cold neutron source,
A. Anghel, F. Atchison, B. Blau, B. van den Brandt, M. Daum, R. Doelling, M. Dubs, P.-A. Duperrex, A. Fuchs,
D. George, L. Goeltl, P. Hautle, G. Heidenreich, R. Henneck, S. Heule, T. Hofmann, S. Joray, M. Kasprzak,
K. Kirch, A. Knecht, J.A. Konter, T. Korhonen, M. Kuzniak, B. Lauss, A. Mezger, A. Mtchedlishvili, G. Petzold,
A. Pichlmaier, D. Reggiani, R. Reiser, U. Rohrer, M. Seidel, H. Spitzer, K. Thomsen, W. Wagner, M. Wohlmuther,
G. Zsigmond, J. Zuellig, K. Bodek, S. Kistryn, J. Zejma, P. Geltenbort, C. Plonka, S. Grigoriev,
Nucl. Instrum. and Meth. in Phys. Res. A 611, 272 (2009)
and
Neutron Optics of the PSI ultracold-neutron source: characterization and simulation,
G. Bison, B. Blau, M. Daum, L. Goeltl, R. Henneck, K. Kirch, B. Lauss, D. Ries, P. Schmidt-Wellenburg
G. Zsigmond,
Europ. Phys. J. A 56, 33 (2020).
11) Line 65:
Give reference to a paper:
A fast kicker magnet for the PSI 600 MeV proton beam to the PSI ultra-cold neutron source,
D. Anicic, M. Daum, G. Dziglewski, D. George, M. Horvath, G. Janser, F. Jenni, I. Jirousek, K. Kirch,
T. Korhonen, R. K\"unzi, A. C. Mezger, U. Rohrer, L. Tanner,
Nucl. Instrum. and Meth. in Phys. Res. A 541, 598 (2005).
12) Line 122:
Please explain the difference between 1 mA from the Injector II and 310 $\mu$A in the Ring cyclotron!
as ist is written it suggests that 69 % of the beam gets lost!
13) Line 142:
The shut downs start actually in December, right before Christmas!
14) The maximal available pion momentum is about 450 MeV/c. Above that momentum, the pion production
cross section tends to zero.
15) Line 190:
The facility, originally designed for ...
16) Line 205: My suggestion:
Following the installation of the last (fourth) new copper cavity...
17) Line 218:
... few mSv/h --> ... a few millisievers per hour...
18) Line 219:
... increase the beam current --> ...increase of the beam current.
19) Line 227:
... the radial tune and U_t the enery gain ... --> ... the radial tune, U_t the energy gain...
20) Line 263 and throughout of the paper:
aluminum is American English, European English is aluminium
21) Figure caption 2.8:
1974 and 2020 --> 1974 to 2020
22) Line 304:
The 5.4 MW of the RF-to-beam... add "of"!
23) Line 305:
... roughly linear --> roughly linearly
24) Line 357:
... of eth zurich --> of ETH Zurich
Report #1 by Adrian Signer (Referee 1) on 2021-7-20 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Adrian Signer, Report on arXiv:scipost_202107_00017v1, delivered 2021-07-20, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.3269
Report
We (the editors Cy Hoffman, Klaus Kirch, Adrian Signer) had the opportunity to review an earlier draft of the
article and were in communication with the authors before the submission. All our comments and
suggestions have been taken into account. Hence, we think the paper can now be published in the
current form.