Participants: S.Morales, A.Lechner, B.Salvachua, D.Mirarchi, A.Verweij, K.Taylor, S.Redaelli, F.Titz, H.Timko, E.Carosotti

Updated procedure of MD#15209 - D.Mirarchi

• Two main updates wrt MD1
  • Only partial scraping to avoid triggering BPM interlock on bunch intensity
    • Need to inject more bunches than initially planned
      • For 200kW -> 54 or 28 bunches of 1.6e11p depending if we scrape down to 1sigma or 0.5sigma
      • For 500kW -> 136 or 70 bunches of 1.6e11p depending if we scrape down to 1sigma or 0.5sigma
  • Need to inject trains to have an efficient filling-> request to have trains of 36b
• No changes on BPM.6 interlock window is necessary
• Interlock on max RF offset must be increased -> nominal + 400Hz (needed RF shift of +400Hz)
• Dedicated BLM thresholds deployed just before the MD
• Updated BLM decomposition matrix for 2025 to be loaded on LSA
• Typical BIS mask of loss maps 
• Main focus on B2 -> off-momentum losses in B1 are caught in IR7 at start of ramp
• Gradual approach with higher intensities injected until achieved target power loss
  • Will try to adjust loss rate speed and sustain target power loss for some seconds
• Belen comments that we should test at low intensity if there are any interlocks triggering
  • Daniele says that for the sake of efficiency, it is better to mask the first test with setup beam
• Belen comments that for unforeseen limitations, we will not change the thresholds
• Belen asks Stefano if someone from collimation could be present to check temperatures of collimators, magnets, etc
  • Anton says there might be a dump on the passive absorber as it gets much more loaded than the case in IR7 
• Q6 IR3 operating at low current -> Arjan confirms there is no problem with doing the test for this magnet
• Implementation of thresholds can be done as soon as the previous MD dumps

BLM thresholds changes for MD#15209 - B.Salvachua

• Implementation of offline changes after the meeting
• Q6 quench levels much lower than MQY/MQM
  • About a factor of 10 lower
  • Conclusion from Arjan was that if the magnet is running at low current it is ok to probe the quench limit
    • It is the case for injection energy
• IR3 TCLA at 450GeV expected power deposition below IR7 TCLA at 6.8TeV -> ok from thermomechanical simulation point of view -> Federico and Luisa
• Pierre said that there was significant margin at 500kW found on the studies of power dissipation
• OK to probe the limit for 500kW
• Analysis for rise of thresholds done for start of ramp fills from 18th to 20th of August
• Anton comments that we could think of a similar test with B1 next year without the phase knob
• TCTPV in IR2 needs a factor of 4 increase -> higher than what we had in the ion run
• In IR3 the BLM at the Q6 is the one requiring the highest factor -> around 10
• Some BLMs that appear requiring an increase are expected to be due to the scaling of B1 (which will not be used in the test)
• The TCP needs a correction in the short RS -> will require an increase of master thresholds and MF
• Scaling from pilot beam test with the RF trim will include a large error due to low BLM signals
  • BLMs in IR8 will be neglected -> due to injection protection in 
• A factor of 2 higher on the pilot beam scaling, it seems probable to a be a scaling error
  • Will not be included in the changes
• Applied threshold on TCTPV IR2 is still lower than what was in the ion run -> acceptable
• Scaling based on the largest factor needed for the RS 
• TCP threshold same order of magnitude as in IP7
• TCSG threshold slightly higher than IP7 at top energy
• TCLA not including the ones from B1 -> threshold comparable with the expected from simulations
• Rest of proposed thresholds as expected
• Q6 a factor of 10 higher -> what we want to probe
• Stefano comments that if there are unexpected interlocks from collimator temperature they should not be changed in the night