Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “COMMISSION”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 829 records · Page 46
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2010

Test and Commissioning of the Third Harmonic RF System for FLASH

Ultra short bunches with high peak current are required for efficient creation of high brilliance coherent light at the free electron laser FLASH. They are obtained by a two stage transverse magnetic chicane bunch compression scheme based on acceleration of the beam off the rf field crest. The deviation of the rf field’s sine shape from a straight line leads to long bunch tails and reduces the peak current. This effect will be eliminated by adding the Fermilab-built third harmonic superconducting accelerating module1 operating at 3.9 GHz to linearize the rf field. The third harmonic module also allows for the creation of uniform intensity bunches of adjustable length that is needed for seeded operation. This paper summarizes the results from the first complete rf system test at the crymodule test bench at DESY and the first experience gained operating the system with beam in FLASH.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2015

Commissioning of an Improved Superconducting RF Photo Injector at ELBE

In order to produce high-brightness electron beams in a superconducting RF photo injector, the most important point is to reach a high acceleration field in the cavity. For this reason two new 3.5-cell niobium cavities were fabricated, chemically treated and cleaned in collaboration with Jlab. The first of these two cavities was shipped to HZDR and assembled in a new cryomodule. This new gun (SRF Gun II) was installed in the ELBE accelerator hall in May 2014 and replaces the previous SRF Gun I. Beside the new cavity the ELBE SRF gun II differs from the previous gun by the integration of a superconducting solenoid. The paper presents the results of the first test run with a Cu photocathode.

Teichert, J.↗
DOE OSTI2010

COMMISSIONING OF THE SRF SURFACE IMPEDANCE CHARACTERIZATION SYSTEM AT JEFFERSON LAB

Superconducting radio frequency (SRF) technology is widely adopted in particle accelerators. There remain many open questions, however, in developing a systematic understanding of the fundamental behavior of SRF materials, including niobium treated in different ways and various other bulk/thin film materials that are fabricated with different methods under assorted conditions. A facility that can measure the SRF properties of small samples in a range of 0~180 mT surface field and 2~20 K temperature is needed in order to fully answer these questions. The Jefferson Lab surface impedance characterization (SIC) system [1] has been designed to attempt to meet this requirement. It consists of a sapphire-loaded cylindrical Nb TE011 cavity at 7.5 GHz with a 50 mm diameter flat sample placed on a non-contacting end plate and uses a calorimetric technique [2-5] to measure the rf induced heat on the sample. Driving the resonance to a known field on this surface enables one to derive the surface resistance of the small localized area. TE011 mode identification has been done at room temperature and 4 K, and has been compared with Microwave Studio® simulation results. The variable input and transmitted rf couplers have been characterized. Rf loss mechanisms in the SIC system are under investigation. Thermal properties of the calorimeter have been well studied. A second generation calorimeter is being developed to optimize the dynamic range of the system. A prototype VCO phase lock loop system has been used in CW mode. Preliminary tests with bulk Nb samples have been done at <3 mT magnetic field. The presently available hardware is expected to enable up to 20 mT peak magnetic field on the sample, and paths to higher field tests have been identified.

Xiao, Binping↗
DOE OSTI2023

Construction and Commissioning of Gas Electron Multiplier (GEM) Detectors in Advanced Assembly Design for Low-Energy Applications at High Rates and Analysis of GEM Data From the Muse Experiment at PSI

The search beyond the Standard Model explores dark matter and a potential fifth force. DarkLight@ARIEL investigates the dark photon as a mediator between ordinary and dark matter. The experiment aims to measure the process e?Ta ? e?TaX ? e?Ta(e?e+), by detecting a charged lepton pair in the final state. The spectrometers will be instrumented with Gas Electron Multiplier (GEM) detectors with minimal material budget for tracking. A novel GEM construction technique is employed for fabricating 25 cm x 40 cm GEM detectors, where all layers are mechanically stretched and assembled within a double frame. The dissertation outlines physics motivation, methods, experimental setup, and the role of GEM detectors in DarkLight. A comprehensive discussion on GEM detectors, focusing on the "NS2" technique, including design, parts, assembly, testing, and performance evaluation will be discussed. The proton has garnered attention due to discrepancies in measuring its charge radius using muonic hydrogen and electron-based methods. The 2010 muonic hydrogen measurement of the proton charge radius Rp = 0.84184(67) fm, showed a significant 7? discrepancy compared to the previously known value of Rp = 0.8775(51) fm, giving rise to the proton radius puzzle. Through simultaneous measurements of e ? p and ? ? p elastic scattering, MUSE facilitates a precise and direct comparison of the proton radius. The physics background of the proton radius puzzle, measurement techniques, the approach adopted by the MUSE experiment, its significance and the experimental setup will be discussed. Furthermore, the role of GEM detectors, along with an in-depth analysis of their data and efficiency will be discussed and evaluated.

Mohammed Prem Nazeer, Sahara↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-04: The Recommendations of MPPG #5 and Practical Implementation Strategies

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG #5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗