Luminosity considerations: head-on collisions
Abstract
For true head-on collisions, measuring luminosity appears to be straightforward. Small crossing angles, even if they work, complicate the situation very much--especially if one wishes to know the luminosity better than 10 percent. However, except for the possible necessity of some extra trim magnets, it is hard to see how these considerations can affect the design of the energy doubler/saver (ED/S) collider in a significant way. If true head-on collisions are implemented, a monitor of luminosity and interaction region location can be placed away from the experiment. For small angle crossings, the experimenters have to include such facilities in their experimental design.
- Authors:
- Publication Date:
- Research Org.:
- Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, N.Y. (USA)
- OSTI Identifier:
- 7328222
- Report Number(s):
- BNL-21701
TRN: 77-003619
- DOE Contract Number:
- E(30-1)-16
- Resource Type:
- Technical Report
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
- Subject:
- 43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS; BEAM LUMINOSITY; BEAM MONITORS; ISABELLE STORAGE RINGS; ACCURACY; BEAM BUNCHING; BEAM DYNAMICS; COLLIDING BEAMS; COULOMB SCATTERING; ELECTROMAGNETS; FERMILAB ACCELERATOR; ACCELERATORS; BASIC INTERACTIONS; BEAMS; CYCLIC ACCELERATORS; ELASTIC SCATTERING; ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT; ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERACTIONS; EQUIPMENT; INTERACTIONS; MAGNETS; MEASURING INSTRUMENTS; SCATTERING; STORAGE RINGS; SYNCHROTRONS; 430400* - Particle Accelerators- Storage Rings
Citation Formats
Humphrey, J.W.. Luminosity considerations: head-on collisions. United States: N. p., 1976.
Web. doi:10.2172/7328222.
Humphrey, J.W.. Luminosity considerations: head-on collisions. United States. doi:10.2172/7328222.
Humphrey, J.W.. Thu .
"Luminosity considerations: head-on collisions". United States.
doi:10.2172/7328222. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/7328222.
@article{osti_7328222,
title = {Luminosity considerations: head-on collisions},
author = {Humphrey, J.W.},
abstractNote = {For true head-on collisions, measuring luminosity appears to be straightforward. Small crossing angles, even if they work, complicate the situation very much--especially if one wishes to know the luminosity better than 10 percent. However, except for the possible necessity of some extra trim magnets, it is hard to see how these considerations can affect the design of the energy doubler/saver (ED/S) collider in a significant way. If true head-on collisions are implemented, a monitor of luminosity and interaction region location can be placed away from the experiment. For small angle crossings, the experimenters have to include such facilities in their experimental design.},
doi = {10.2172/7328222},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 1976},
month = {Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 1976}
}
Save to My Library
You must Sign In or Create an Account in order to save documents to your library.
-
Round beams v flat beams integrated luminosity considerations
We show that, although a factor of 2 increase in maximum luminosity may be gained by using round beams rather than flat beams, the gain in integrated luminosity may be less than 2. 1 tab. -
Luminosity Estimates For The Lighter Ions: Equal Mass Collisions C+C, S+S, Cu+Cu, I+I
This report provides estimates for lighter ions in luminosity light beams. -
Luminosity Scaling of Electron Gold Collisions in the RHIC Rings
In principle it is possible to collide heavy ions with positrons in RHIC, with the positrons circulating in one of the two existing rings. In this scenario a fundamental constraint is placed on the luminosity performance by the synchrotron radiation heat load incurred at cryogenic temperatures. Alternatively, an additional purpose built ring in the RHIC tunnel could circulate positrons or (more likely) electrons. Such a room temperature ring would be much less constrained by cooling system requirements. This note calculates the approximate scaling of the achievable luminosity, either constraining the synchrotron radiation power to an upper bound of 1 Wattmore »