AN AUTOMATED INJECTION SYSTEM FOR ‘FILL ON FILL’OPERATION
J. Trewhella, M. ten Have, D. McGilvery, Australian Synchrotron, Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia
Abstract
The injection system for the Australian Synchrotron
consists of a 100MeV linac and full energy (3GeV)
booster, and requires the control of several hundredparameters to obtain good injection efficiency andminimise radiation. Previous machine procedures
required operators to manually tune systems, and follow
rigorous start up and shut down procedures. As a result,
there were a number of beam loss events through failure
to follow procedures and the efficiencies obtained varied
significantly between operators.
An almost fully automated software layer, integrated
with the EPICS control system, has been developed which
optimises the sequence and timing of each individual subsystem; virtually eliminating operator error, maintaining
consistently high efficiency, minimising the run time ofcritical systems, reducing radiation levels and savingenergy. It has also significantly reduced total injection
time and stress levels for the operators. This system will
be discussed, and will also include reviews of further
benefits of semi-automated recovery after unscheduled
beam loss events and progression to „top-up‟ mode ofoperation.

BACKGROUND
In only the fourth year of operations, standard machine
operating procedures have always been changing andupdating. One such area that required attention was theinjection procedures. Numerous rigorous manual
procedures needed to be sequentially performed in order
to inject. These procedures amounted to lengthy delays ininjections, and varying Operator training levels also
added inefficiencies between injections and in some cases
caused beam loss events. Since operations began in April
2007, there have been 7 unscheduled beam losses caused
by Operator error [1]. These could have been avoided bysimply following the correct procedures.
In order to eliminate the human factor in performing astandard „fill on fill‟ injection, an almost fully automatedsoftware layer needed to be developed. By utilising thealready implemented EPICS control system framework,
each manual procedure could be programmed to run in asequencer programme. This would simply replicate theOperators procedures for an injection into a script.

AUTOINJECT FRAMEWORKIn order to have an almost fully integrated automation
software system for injections, a standalone software
layer was created called „Autoinject‟. This was structured

on the accelerator network and utilising EPICS, was able
to control all systems required for injections. Autoinject
was designed and programmed in-house by the Operators.
This was important as it enabled precise programming of
the software to meet the stringent requirements. It would
also benefit in the ease for any future updating purposes.

Figure 1: EDM Autoinject GUI interface
The code is programmed in C++ and consists ofnumerous sub routines that are utilised by an EDM GUIinterface (Figure 1). These are both channel access (CA)clients and use CA protocols across the Accelerator LAN.
Illustrated in Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of thecontrol systems framework for Autoinject. EPICS PV‟slocated on CA host IOC-21, are accessed over CA
protocols from the C++ code and EDM GUI. This thencommunicates to other required PV's, IOC's and theircorresponding systems.

C++
EDM GUIAutoinject
OPIAccelerator LANIOCS
SystemsIOC-21
Autoinject PV’sFigure 2: Schematic of control system for AutoinjectAUTOINJECT FUNCTIONALITY
There are numerous functions of Autoinject, but theinitial design element was to automate „fill on fill‟injections during User beam. This was then incorporated
with monitoring for unscheduled beam dumps, and an
SMS notification system.

Injection duration comparison
Figure 4 displays the impact that Autoinject has had on
the injection duration. By automating this procedure wehave reduced the average injection duration by ~61%
(Table 1). This is important because it has:
Reduced Operator input, which has virtuallyeliminated errors occurring during injections.
Minimised the run time of critical systems, whichincreases their shelf life and saves on energy.
Reduced the injection time during unscheduled beam
dumps, which increases availability and reduces themean down time of faults.

Automated ‘fill on fill’ injections
Currently we have to perform daily injections into thestorage ring to 200mA every 12 hours. By utilising thethe programme, we have reduced the length of injections
from ~10mins to ~4 minutes (Figure 4). This
improvement has also had an impact on the injection timeafter beam losses, which reduces the overall down time of
the fault.

Injection Duration comparisons

To reduce the amount of recovery time in warming up
the injection system elements after an unscheduled beamloss, we have designed and implemented an automatedmonitoring and start-up programme in Autoinject. Byutilising the existing EPICS framework, the programme
will constantly monitor the stored beam status and startwarm-up procedures in the event of a beam loss. This has
reduced the recovery time significantly and enabledstandardised /repeatable recovery procedures.

SMS and PA automated notification system
Another software automation implemented is an SMS
notification system (Figure 3). This is linked into themonitoring programme. When an unscheduled beam loss
is detected by Autoinject, an immediate beam loss SMS
message is sent to appropriate parties and a PA
announcement is sent over the facility speaker system.
This has allowed immediate recovery response to these
events for Operators and technical staff. This has added tothe reduction in down time for each associated fault
occurrence.

Figure 3: SMS notification system

AUTOINJECT IMPLEMENTATIONRESULTSAs a result of the success of Autoinject, we can nowdiscuss some of the results seen in comparison to before
the system was implemented (Autoinject wasimplemented in June 2008).

Injection Duration (mm:ss)

Automated monitoring and start-up

14:00
InjectionTimes
beforeAutoInject

12:00
10:00
08:00

Injection
Times
with
AutoInject

06:00
04:00
02:00
Apr07

Jun08
Date

Dec09

Figure 4: Injection Duration comparisons Plot [2]Injection efficiency comparison
Another area that has impacted from theimplementation of Autoinject, is the injection efficiency
rate (Figure 5). The efficiency rate is a measure of theeffective capture of injected electrons from the booster
synchrotron to the storage ring, expressed as a percentage.
Autoinject has increased the average efficiency rate by~28% (Table 1). This was made achievable by turning on
critical elements at specific times and ensuring thoseelements were stable before the injection commenced.
Maximising our injection efficiency is important because:
The higher our injection efficiency, the quicker weare injecting hence reducing our injection duration.
Also, the higher the efficiency, the lower the losses
in captured electrons, which decreases the radiation
produced.

COMPARISONS FOR AUTOINJECT
Injection Efficiency (%)

Injection Efficiency comparisons100%

Table 1: Statistics before and after Autoinject [2]Injection
Efficiency
beforeAutoInject

80%
60%

Injection
Efficiency
withAutoInject

40%
20%
0%

Apr07

Jun08
Date

Dec09

Figure 5: Injection Efficiency comparisons Plot [2]Injection radiation dose comparison
By increasing the injection efficiency, Autoinject has
effectively reduced the radiation losses during injection
times (Figure 6). This has had the most dramatic impact,
reducing the average radiation dose by ~ 93% (Table 1).
One of the key responsibilities of an Accelerator Operator
is radiation safety. It is pertinent that we minimise theamount of radiation produced as much as reasonablypossible. So utilising a tool such as Autoinject isinvaluable to the roles and responsibilities of an Operator.

Radiaition Dose (uSV)

Injection
Radiation
Dose before
AutoInject

10.1

Injection
Radiation
Dose withAutoInject

0.01
0.001

Apr07

Jun08
Date

Average
Injection
Duration(mm:ss)Average
Injection
Efficiency
Average
Injection
Radiation
Dose (µSv)

AfterPercentage
Autoinject difference

10:32

04:05

-61.18%61.21%

78.36%+28.03%

1.78

0.12-93.38%

FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
It is clear that a tool like Autoinject has dramatically
improved numerous areas. Future development in otherareas will also add to the improvements. The next stage ofOperations at the Australian Synchrotron is theprogression to Top-up mode. This will require extensive,
systematic procedures to ensure successful operation. Byutilising the already successful implementation ofAutoinject, we will be able to adapt its functionality to therequirements of reaching Top-up mode.

CONCLUSIONSInjection Radiation Dosecomparisons
10Before
AutoinjectDec09

By automating rigorous Operator procedures, wehave increased Operator and Machine efficiency
across numerous areas.
By successfully improving and implementing
automated preventative measures and recovery
procedures after an unscheduled beam loss, theAustralian Synchrotron has improved in reliability.
In only our fourth year of operations, the Australian
Synchrotron has been achieving beam availability>98% [1]. This can be attributed to some of thesuccessful implementations of Autoinject.
As we grow into the future, hopefully the processes
we have developed to resolving issues will help us
maintain this successfully high availability.

Figure 6: Injection Radiation Dose comparisons Plot [2]REFERENCES[1] J. Trewhella, “Australian Synchrotron Operating
Statistics Apr 2007 – Apr 2010”.
[2] J. Trewhella, “Reliability issues at the Australian
Synchrotron: Preventative measures and recovery
procedures”, ARW‟09, Vancouver, January 2009.