1 / 50

Project X (Accelerator) Update: Goals, Status, and Strategy

Project X (Accelerator) Update: Goals, Status, and Strategy. Steve Holmes Fermilab Physics Advisory Committee June 5, 2013. Outline. Project X Goals Design Development Technology Development Moving Project X Forward Our website : projectx.fnal.gov/. Project X Goals.

henry
Download Presentation

Project X (Accelerator) Update: Goals, Status, and Strategy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Project X (Accelerator) Update:Goals, Status, and Strategy Steve Holmes Fermilab Physics Advisory Committee June 5, 2013

  2. Outline • Project X Goals • Design Development • Technology Development • Moving Project X Forward Our website: projectx.fnal.gov/ PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  3. Project X Goals Our goal is to construct and operate the foremost Intensity Frontier facility in the world. • Broadband attack on central questions of particle physics utilizing neutrino, kaon, muon, nucleon, and atomic probes • 6 MW of site-wide beam power to multiple experiments, with flexible beam formats, at energies ranging from 233 MeV to 120 GeV • Platform for future development of a Neutrino Factory or Muon Collider • Possible missions beyond particle physics • Energy and materials applications PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  4. Reference Design A complete design concept exists (Reference Design Report) • 3 GeV CW superconducting H- linac with 1 mA average beam current. • Spallation-based program (nucleon/energy applications) at 1 GeV (1 MW) • Rare processes programs at 1 and 3 GeV (up to 3 MW) • Flexible provision for variable beam structures to multiple users • 3-8 GeV pulsed linac capable of delivering 340 kW at 8 GeV • Enhanced performance for short and long-baseline neutrino programs • Establishes a path toward a muon-based facility • Upgrades to the Recycler and Main Injector to provide ≥ 2 MW to the neutrino production target at 60-120 GeV. • Utilization of a CW linac creates a facility that is unique in the world, with performance that cannot be matched in a circular accelerator based facility. PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  5. Reference Design Performance Goals CW Linac Particle Type H- Beam Kinetic Energy 3.0 GeV Average Beam Current (@ 1 GeV) 2 mA Average Beam Current (@ 3 GeV 1 mA Beam Power to 1 GeV program 1000kW Beam Power to 3 GeV program 2870 kW Pulsed Linac Particle Type H- Beam Kinetic Energy 8.0 GeV Pulse rate10Hz Pulse Width 4.3 msec Cycles to Recycler/MI 6 Particles per cycle to Recycler/MI2.71013 Beam Power 340 kW Beam Power to 8 GeV program170 kW Main Injector/Recycler Beam Kinetic Energy (maximum) 120 GeV Cycle time 1.2 sec Particles per cycle 1.51014 Beam Power at 120 GeV 2400 kW simultaneous PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  6. Flexible Beam Structures(Example/Stage 1) Bunch pattern created in the MEBT 1 mA f0/2 1 GeV Transverse RF splitter at 1 GeV 0.91 mA 0.09 mA 1 msec RFQ beam current: 3.64 mA PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  7. Staging • Fiscal considerations/constraints have motivated development of a staging plan • Staging principles: • Compelling physics opportunities at each stage • Cost of each stage substantially <$1B • Utilize existing infrastructure to the extent possible at each stage • Minimize interruptions to the ongoing program at each stage • Achieve full Reference Design capabilities at end of final stage • Three stage plan developed in January 2012 – fleshed out over last year • Reference Design siting plan developed consistent with staging PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  8. StagingSite Plan PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  9. Staged Physics Program Project X Campaign * Operating point in range depends on MI energy for neutrinos. ** Operating point in range is depends on MI injector slow-spill duty factor (df) for kaon program. PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  10. R&D Program • The goal is to mitigate risk: technical/cost/schedule • Technical Risks • Front End (PXIE – Project X Injector Experiment) • H- injection system • Booster in Stage 1, 2; Recycler in Stage 3 • High Intensity Recycler/Main Injector operations • High Power targets • Cost Risks • Superconducting rf • Cavities, cryomodules, rf sources – CW to long-pulse • Nearly all elements are in play at Stage 1 • Goal is to be prepared for a construction start in 2018 – most likely Stage 1 (and perhaps Stage 2) PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  11. Linac Technology Map PXIE RFQ LEBT b=0.11 MEBT b=0.22 b=0.51 b=0.61 b=0.9 b=1.0 RT CW Pulsed 325 MHz 10-177 MeV 1.3 GHz 3-8 GeV 650 MHz 0.18-3 GeV 162.5 MHz 0.03-11 MeV PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  12. Project X Injector ExperimentPXIE • PXIE is the centerpiece of the PX R&D program • Integrated systems test for Project X front end components • Validate concept for Project X front end, thereby minimizing primary technical risk element within the Reference Design • Operate at full Project X design parameters • Systems test goals • 1 mA average current with 80% chopping of beam delivered from RFQ • Efficient acceleration with minimal emittance dilution through ~30 MeV • PXIE will utilize components constructed to Project X specifications wherever possible • Opportunity to re-utilize selected pieces of PXIE in PX/Stage 1 • Collaboration between Fermilab, ANL, LBNL, SNS, India PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  13. PXIE Layout MEBT SSR1 HWR HEBT RFQ LEBT 40 m, ~25 MeV PXIE will address the address/measure the following: • LEBT pre-chopping • Vacuum management in the LEBT/RFQ region • Validation of chopper performance • Bunch extinction • MEBT beam absorber • MEBT vacuum management • Operation of HWR in close proximity to 10 kW absorber • Operation of SSR with beam • Emittance preservation and beam halo formation through the front end PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  14. PXIE StatusTechnical • Technical Components • Ion source operational and characterized (LBNL→FNAL) • LEBT emittance scanner procurement initiated (SNS) • LEBT solenoids ordered (FNAL) • RFQ design complete and procurements initiated (LBNL) • HWR cavity design complete and procurements initiated; CM design in process (ANL) • SSR1 cavity prototypes characterized; CM design in process (FNAL) • Chopper proof-of-principle prototypes and driver development (FNAL, SLAC) • Infrastructure • Siting established at CMTF • Shielded enclosure under construction PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  15. PXIE Enclosure at CMTF PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  16. PXIE time line • Stage 1 complete – early FY17 (~Nov 2016) • Beam delivered to the end of MEBT with nearly final parameters (2.1 MeV, 1 mA CW, 80% arbitrary chopping) • SSR1 tested at full rf power • Stage 2 complete – Aug 2017 • HWR tested at full rf power • Stage 3 complete – Aug 2018 • All elements in place including final kicker and HEBT instrumentation • Beam through HWR and SSR1 PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  17. SRF Acceleration Energy gain/cavity for the CW Linac (0-3 GeV) PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  18. SRF DevelopmentStatus and Plans PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  19. SRF DevelopmentSSR1 (325 MHz) Bare and dressed prototype SSR1 cavity • Two prototypes fabricated by industry, processed in collaboration with ANL, and tested at Fermilab as part of HINS program • One cavity dressed with He vessel, coupler tuner • Two cavities in fabrication at IUAC-Delhi (Q3 FY13 ) • Ten cavities fabricated by US industry (all have arrived, 6 tested) • Tests in progress PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  20. SRF DevelopmentSSR1 (325 MHz) Bare cavity at 2 K Microphonics Active Damping: SSR1 dressed cavity Gradient/Q0 performance: SSR1 bare cavity at 2 K PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  21. SRF Development650 MHz PAC June 2013, S. Holmes • Prototypes: • Two single-cell b=0.6 cavities received (JLab) • Six single-cell b = 0.9 cavities received; four five-cell on order (AES) • Five single-cell b = 0.9 cavities ordered(PAVAC, ARRA funds) • Prototypes at both b under fabrication in India • Infrastructure modifications completed for 650 MHz • Vertical Test Stand • Cavity handling & HPR tooling • Optical inspection system • New electro-polishing tool (ANL)

  22. SRF Development650 MHz • Jan 29: EP only; • Feb 15: EP+120C bake; • Feb 19: BCP only. Gradient/Q0 performance: 650 MHz, b=0.9., single cell at at 2 K PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  23. SRF DevelopmentImproving Q0 • NbN: superconductor with higher Tc (~16K, compared to 9.2K for Nb); • Nitridization: simple and inexpensive modification to standard Nb treatments. • First result at FNAL: world record Q ~ 7.5e10 at 2K and 10MV/m for a 1.3GHz single cell cavity; residual resistance <0.5 nOhm! • HF rinse: • Single HF rinse (5 min) followed by water rinse is beneficial for the medium field Q value – gains of up to 35% measured at 70 mT, • f=1.3 GHz (Bpeak/Eacc=4.26 mT/MeV/m). PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  24. Moving Project X ForwardStrategy • Maintain strong engagement with U.S. strategic planning processes • DOE/SC Ten-Year Facilities Strategy • APS/DPF Community Summer Study (Snowmass on the Mississippi) • Maintain CD-0 documentation in a continuing state of readiness • Up-to-date Reference Design Report • Up-to-date Construction Cost Estimate (by stage) • Up-to-date resource requirements for the pre-CD3 phase • Align R&D program with risk reduction associated with the Reference Design • Priority on Stages 1 and 2 • Prepare for FY18 construction start • Support DOE in negotiating contributions from India PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  25. Moving Project X ForwardDOE • DOE Intensity Frontier Workshop • Direct input into all WGs – good coverage in final report in all topical areas www.intensityfrontier.org • Office of Science Facilities Plan • Presentations and Whitepapers to HEPAP Facilities Subpanel indico.fnal.gov/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=6381 The importance and breadth of the research program that the Project X accelerator facility enables and enhances leads the accelerator facility to be classified as absolutely central. Although R&D is still required for the spallation target needed by some experiments, all stages of the Project X accelerator facility are ready to initiate construction. Project X experiments that compose the research program range from important to absolutely central, but scientifically the Project X research program as a whole is classified as absolutely central. Being in the planning phase, the construction readiness of the Project X research program is classified as mission and technical requirements not yet fully defined, although some experiments are beyond this phase. • Office of High Energy Physics • ~Monthly teleconference with Director to lay out development strategy PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  26. Moving Project X ForwardHEP Community Engagement • Many colloquia, seminars, conference talks… • 2012 Project X Physics Study • June 14-23, 2012 • 217 registrants (153 non-Fermilab) indico.fnal.gov/event/projectxps12 • Snowmass 2013 • Conveners assigned in relevant groups • S. Nagaitsev: Frontier Capabilities/High Intensity Secondary Beams Driven by Protons • R. Tschirhart: Intensity Frontier – Frontier Capabilities liaison • Intensity Frontier/HISBDP/BNL indico.bnl.gov/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=617 • Intensity Frontier Workshop/ANL indico.fnal.gov/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=6248 • Volume in preparation: RDR, Research Program, Broader Impacts • Online roll-out online at the Users Meeting (June 13); to printer June 20 PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  27. Moving Project X ForwardCommunity Engagement beyond HEP • Many colloquia, seminars, conference talks… • Project X Energy Station Workshop • Jointly organized by Fermilab and PNNL • Participation from DOE/NE and DOE/SC (including FES) • Discussion/development of “Energy Station” concept https://indico.fnal.gov/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=5836 • FESAC Report to SC Facilities Plan identified Fusion Material Irradiation Facility as: Science Assessment; “absolutely central” Readiness Assessment: “ready to initiate construction” “Viable facility options that meet the mission needs described above include US participation in IFMIF, MTS and Project X.” • Project X Muon Spin Rotation (MuSR) Forum • TRIUMF is only Western Hemisphere facility • Natural domain is BES https://indico.fnal.gov/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=6025 PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  28. PNNL Energy Station Concept evolving into Project X Integrated Target Station 1 GeV protons Cold Neutrons Physics Isotopes Fusion Materials Spallation Target Goal • Develop integrated spallation target station concept to serve DOE-NE, DOE-SC-FES/HEP/NP experimental needs Fission Materials Rational • CW spallation neutron source could augment limited US irradiation testing capability • Synergy between Physics experimental needs and materials testing for fusion and fission communities Project X – Stage 1 • Could provide ~1 MW of beam dedicated to a spallation neutron source for nuclear materials and fuels research (Energy Station) or shared with a physics mission facility with similar neutron source requirements (Integrated Target Station)

  29. Project X Integrated Target Station has the potential to benefit several areas (beyond HEP) • Highest priority opportunities within the US Nuclear and Fusion energy programs are irradiation of fusion and fast reactor structural materials. • Must provide a fusion and fast reactor relevant neutron flux at a minimum of 20 dpaper calendar year in a reasonable irradiation volume. • Enable the in-situ real-time measurements of various separate-effects phenomena in fuels or materials, which would be very valuable to the modeling and simulation technical community. Such capabilities are more feasible in an accelerator-based system than a reactor • integral effects testing of fast reactor fuels, including driver fuel, minor actinide burning fuel, and transmutation of spent fuel. • support DOE Office of Nuclear Energy plus Office of Science programs • Materials Program - Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) • Isotope Production Program – Nuclear Physics (NP) • ultra cold neutrons – Nuclear Physics (NP)

  30. Lead Matrix Test Region • Solid lead with gas or water cooling • ~ 2 m diameter, 3 m length • Low n absorb/ High n scatter • High n flux/ Fast n spectrum • Acts as gamma shield • Closed Loop Test Modules • Removable/replaceable/customizable • Independent cooling system • n spectrum/material/temp/pressure to match reactor conditions • ~30 cm dia • Spallation Target • Liquid Pb-Bi • >30 neutrons/proton • 1 GeV protons penetrate ~50 cm in lead • Neutrons Similar to fission spectrum • Samples can be irradiated in proton beam • Adding W or U can increase n flux density • Small volume ~ 10 cm dia, 60 cm length • Cleanup system for spallation products • Project X Proton Beam • 1mA @ 1 GeV (1 MW) • Reflector • Steel/iron/nickel • High n scatter • Flattens n flux distribution Fast Spectrum Test Module: SFR, LFR, GFR Project X Energy Station Concept Thermal Spectrum Test Module: LWR, HTGR, MSR

  31. Possible Muon Spin Resonance at Project X • mSR is a technique invented by Garwin and Lederman. • Polarized Muons from stopped pions embedded in material. Spin precession gives information on local fields. • No U.S. facility since LAMPF. • PSI, J-PARC, TRIUMF, ISIS (RAL) have active programs • Programs tend to only be able to handle 50% of current demand. • Likely construction of a beamline at RISP also. • Synergy with neutron scattering – real space vs. Fourier transform space. User communities overlap.

  32. Concept for Project X • Of greatest scientific interest right now are very low-energy muons (LEM), ~few keV for studies of 10-100 nm depths. • LEM requires high power beam. (~5 x 10-13mper proton). PX provides competitive intensities and can benefit from being a new facility to use optimized targetry and beamlines. • PX beam flexibility can also be exploited via multiple low-power beamlines of conventional (4 MeV) muons. • These beams can be used for fundamental physics. • Classic example is muonium-antimuonium oscillation search. Depth Profile of typical LEM experiment

  33. Status and Activities • At present, design is “discussional”. Concepts and layouts being explored. • Little experience => making contacts with experts. • Extremely successful MuSR Workshop held at FNAL, October 17-19 2012 • Attended by most major experts in the field. • Accelerators, materials science, chemistry. • University and laboratory scientists, international. • Together with ongoing interactions, it is forming the basis of a section for “Broader Impacts” document for Project X. • “Pre-conceptual” layout and capabilities generated for that purpose, and to encourage further work.

  34. Moving Project X ForwardCollaboration • Organized as a “national project with international participation” • Fermilab as lead laboratory • Collaboration MOUs for the RD&D phase : NationalIIFC ANL ORNL/SNS BARC/Mumbai BNL PNNL IUAC/Delhi Cornell UTenn* RRCAT/Indore Fermilab TJNAF VECC/Kolkata LBNL SLAC MSU ILC/ART NCSU* • Recent additions are bringing capabilities we need for experimental programs, in particular neutron targets • Ongoing collaboration/contacts with NGLS (LBNL), RISP (Korea), RAL/FETS (UK), ESS (Sweden), SPL (CERN), China/ADS PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  35. CollaborationIndian Institutions • U.S. DOE – Indian DAE Implementing Agreement on “Accelerator and Particle Detector Research & Development for Discovery Science” – signed in July 2011 • Specific MOUs to be written underneath this agreement • Annex I covers Project X (currently under negotiation) • Significant Indian in-kind contribution possible (3 GeVlinac) • Major areas of collaborative development • Superconducting rf (cavities and cryomodules) • RF sources • LLRF • Instrumentation • Cryogenics • Goal of the R&D program is to create capabilities in India to allow contribution to the construction phase (of PX…or their own facility) PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  36. Summary • Project X represents a unique opportunity for the U.S. to establish a world leading Intensity Frontier program that will persist for decades. • Broadband attack on central questions of particle physics utilizing neutrino, kaon, muon, nucleon, and atomic probes • 6 MW beam power available at energies ranging from 1 to 120 GeV • Platform for future development of a Neutrino Factory or MuonCollider • Reference Design represents a complete, integrated, concept meeting the primary mission goals established for Project X • Unmatched by any other facility, either in existence or in the planning stages, within the world today. • Staging strategy with compelling physics opportunities at each stage • R&D program underway • Directly tied to mitigating risks associated with the Reference Design, and preparing for construction • Project X could start construction in the second half of this decade PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  37. Backup Slides PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  38. Beam Structure (Stage 2,3; example) RFQ beam current: 5.0 mA PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  39. PXIE StatusOrganizational • PXIE is not a Project; it is a (major) sub-set of the Project X R&D Program • Organization Chart • Resource Loaded Schedule • Complete design concept • Technical Design Handbook • Complete set of Functional Requirements Specifications • Major (Internal) Technical Reviews PXIE Program March 2012 HWR Design March 2012 RFQ Design April 2012 RFQ Design Update November 2012 • DOE Technical, Cost, Schedule Review: January 2013 • Funding Plan • Devoting ~70% of Project X and 25% of SRF funds to PXIE PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  40. PXIE MEBT #1-Emitttance, laser, Wire scanner, scrapper #0- Scrapper, RF #7-Scrapper, RF, Slow valve, Extinction monitor #8 – Fast valve, DCCT, Toroid, Laser wire, wire scrapper, Scrapper ? Slow valve, Toroid #5-Absorber, OTR #2-Kicker #4-Kicker #6–Diff. pumping, scrapper, wire scanner, #3-Wire scanner, fast Faraday cup, RF Passing beam Chopped beam PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  41. Project X Goals The goal is to construct and operate the foremost Intensity Frontier facility in the world. • A neutrino beam for long baseline neutrino oscillation experiments • 2 MW proton source at 60-120 GeV • MW-class proton beams at 1 & 3 GeV for kaon, muon, neutrino, and nuclei/ nuetron based precision experiments • Operations simultaneous with the neutrino program • A path toward a muon source for possible future Neutrino Factory and/or a Muon Collider • Upgradable to ~4 MW at ~5-15 GeV • Possible missions beyond particle physics • Energy and materials applications PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  42. SRF DevelopmentProject X Cavity Requirements *Leff=Gn/2, n is number of cells, ** Duty factor is 8% PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  43. SRF Plan PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  44. Chopper Driver PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  45. SRF Development650 MHz Gradient/Q0 performance: Single cell b=0.6 cavities from JLab PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  46. PNNL Energy Station Concept A new approach utilizing the flexibility of an accelerator neutron source with spectral tailoring coupled with a careful design of a set of independent test loops can provide a flexible neutron test station for DOE NE applications

  47. Spectrum Tailoring Can Simulate A Different Reactor in Each Module Sodium/steel Module Lead/steel Module Water/Zr Light Water Module Graphite/He Module

  48. Moving Project X ForwardCommunity Engagement PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

  49. mSR 2 mSR 1 mSR 3 Spallation mSRMuons Muon Area/Booster f0/2 filter mSR 4 Project X Protons mSR Target mSR target Protons to Spallation f0/4 filter LEM target LEM 1 LEM 2 Protons to Muon/Booster Low Energy Muons for mSR

  50. Cost Estimate • Bottoms up estimate based on the Reference Design • Estimate is for the construction period, CD-3 through CD-4 • Based on construction duration of 5 years/stage • Scope is from ion source through kickers and/or separators • DOE style estimate, includes • Purchases from vendors • All labor (FNAL rates) • All overheads (FNAL rates) • Contingency (40%) • Does not account for possible Indian in-kind contribution • Estimate in FY2013 dollars: Stage 1 $670M Stage 2 $500M Stage 3 $660M PAC June 2013, S. Holmes

More Related