310 likes | 491 Views
Sub-committee Report: Basic Energy Sciences Facilities Prioritization. William A. Barletta Director, United States Particle Accelerator School Department of Physics, MIT. Members of Subcommittee on BES Facilities Prioritization. Charge to the committee.
E N D
Sub-committee Report:Basic Energy Sciences Facilities Prioritization William A. Barletta Director, United States Particle Accelerator School Department of Physics, MIT
Charge to the committee • Provide input for a 10-year prioritization of scientific facilities in their respective programs from 2014 to 2024 • Basis for characterization • Ability of the facility to contribute to world-leading science • Readiness of the facility for construction • What to consider • Present & proposed facilities listed by BES • Potential facilities that require a minimum investment of $100 M • Provide a report that assigns each facility to a category & provides a short justification for that categorization Do not rank order the facilities
Ability of the facility to contribute to world-leading science (2014- 2024) • Would it answer the most important scientific questions • Could other facilities answer these questions; • Would it contribute to many areas of research • Would the facility address needs of the broad community of users including those supported by other agencies • What is the level of user demand • Place each facility or upgrade in one of 4 categories: • Absolutely central • Important • Lower priority • Don't know enough yet
Readiness for construction • Has the concept of the facility been formally studied • What is the level of confidence that the technical challenges involved in building the facility can be met • Is the R&D performed to date sufficient to assure technical feasibility • Is the cost to build & operate the facility understood • Place each facility in one of three categories: • ready to initiate construction; • significant scientific/engineering challenges to resolve before initiating construction • mission and technical requirements not yet fully defined
Briefings to the sub-committee • APS & APS-U Eric Isaacs (ANL) • NSLS & NSLS-II Steve Dierker (BNL) • SSRL, LCLS, & LCLS-II Chi-Chang Kao (SLAC) • ALS & NGLS Paul Alivisatos (LBNL) • HIFAR, SNS & Second Target Station Thom Mason (ORNL) • Lujan Neutron Scattering Center Mark Bourke (LANL) • Center for Functional Nanomaterials Emilio Mendez (BNL) • Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies David Morris (LANL) • Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences Sean Smith (ORNL) • Center for Nanoscale Materials Amanda Petford-Long (ANL) • Molecular Foundry Omar Yaghi (LBNL) Facilities also submitted written input to the sub-committee
Advance Light Source • ALS has a world-wide reputation for excellence in the use of soft X-ray synchrotron radiation science • Strong user demand & high productivity with strong impact • ALS is a leader in developing tools for soft X-ray science • Strong international competition The ALS is “important” to US “world-leading science”
Advanced Photon Source • Leading US source for hard X-rays • Optimized for very bright x‐rays in medium (2‐15 keV) & hard ( >15 keV) energy ranges • Large user demand (>5000 users) • Strong competition from European & Japanese light sources The APS is “absolutely central” to US “world-leading science”
National Synchrotron Light Source • Long history of high productivity and high impact • Large user demand • Diverse Capabilities over Broad Spectral Range • Will cease operations no later than Sep, 2014 • Operations at Brookhaven will transfer to NSLS-II NSLS operation is “lower priority” for US “world-leading science”
National Synchrotron Light Source-II • Large, ultra-low emittance ring • Capable of housing 50 beamlines • 30 are presently under development • Potential to be best in class from IR to hard X-rays • Short pulse operation (~15 ps rms) • On schedule for early completion in June, 2014 • Presently – 85% complete NSLS-II is “absolutely central” to US “world-leading science”
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource • Mid-energy x-ray synchrotron user facility • In 2004, successfully completed a major upgrade • Exciting potential for sub-ps X-rays • ~1600 users with high user satisfaction • Operational synergies with LCLS SSRL is “important” to US “world-leading science”
Linac Coherent Light Source • World’s first hard X-ray FEL • A stunning success for US science • Uses last third of SLAC linac • Highly over-subscribed • (~25% get beam time) • 60% of papers in high impact journals LCLS is “absolutely central” to US “world-leading science”
Spallation Neutron Source • World’s highest power spallation source • Highly competitive in machine capability • Neutron instruments in US are far fewer than in Europe • Steady growth in users • Significant headroom for power upgrade SNS is “absolutely central” to US “world-leading science”
High Flux Isotope Reactor • Nation’s highest flux continuous neutron beams • 99% reliability operations • An exceptional resource for materials irradiation & neutron activation analysis • Significant national security usage • Continuing mission in isotope production HFIR is “important” to US “world-leading science”
Lujan Neutron Scattering Center • Strongly leverages NNSA investment in LANSCE • Extra capability & capacity is helpful • Neutron instruments in US are far fewer than in Europe • Accessories not at the other facilities • high field, high pressure, plutonium, irradiate materials • exploited the sample environments, in situ strain is unique • important but not essential LNSC is “lower priority” for US “world-leading science”
General comments • Nanoscience Research Centers add high value through twin missions of pursuing top-quality science and enabling the same for external users through access to NSRC facilities and/or collaboration with NSRC researchers. • They are commended for the quality of their research, strong connections to relevant research centers, & their successes in enabling successes of external users. • The committee identified particular value in synergies • between science programs of NSRC researchers, • special facilities they develop, • benefits available to users
Center for Nanoscale Materials (ANL) • CNM exploits the hard x-ray nanoprobe at APS • a unique facility - for a host of collaborations with key industry labs as well as universities • Excellent access to environmental nanoprobes CNM is “absolutely central” for US “world-leading science”
Center for Functional Nanomaterials (BNL) • World class TEM capabilities. • Plans in place for strong coupling with NSLS II CFN is “important” for US “world-leading science”
The Molecular Foundry(LBNL) • Strong cross-disciplinary portfolio to support users in one building • Enable staff & users to take their projects all the way to screening & prototyping. • Very strong chemical synthesis of nanoscale materials integrated with characterization/measurements • Well coupled to leadership scale computing platform at LBNL & to ALS The Molecular Foundry is “absolutely central” for US “world-leading science”
Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences(ORNL) • Excellent in theory & scanning probes • Well coupled to leadership scale computing platform at ORNL CNMS is “important” for US “world-leading science”
Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies (SNL/LANL) • Creates a growing number of Discovery Platforms • Uses SNL MESA facility & CINT labs, as new MEMS-based science platforms readily delivered to users or employed in collaborations with CINT scientists. • Unique capability for user platforms CINT is “absolutely central” for US “world-leading science”
Sub-committee characterization of Proposed Upgrades & Facilities
Advanced Photon Source Upgrade • Keeps US capabilities highly competitive with hard X-ray facilities in Europe & Asia • Offers exciting possibilities for short pulse X-rays (~2 ps) ∗ Hardware approach for 2 ps pulses requires vetting this spring The APS-U is “absolutely central” to US leadership in science APS-U is “ready to initiate construction” *
Linear Coherent Light Source - II • Maintains LCLS leadership in ultra-short pulse science • Broadens LCLS capabilities • Extends wavelength range • Substantial Increase in average brightness • Substantially increases LCLS capacity LCLS-II is “absolutely central” to US leadership in science LCLS-II is “ready to initiate construction”
Next Generation Light Source • High rep rate, soft X-ray source • Would be the world’s highest average power electron accelerator • Further discussion based on BESAC Light Source Charge • Would in principle allow unique, multiple pulse experiments, including the possibility of "multi-dimensional" experiments • Would in principle access science at the ~ 1fs time scale NGLS could be “absolutely central” * to US leadership in science NGLS has “significant scientific/engineering challenges to resolve before initiating construction”
SNS Second Target Station • Increases SNS power > 2 MW to improve neutron scattering performance • Will keep SNS competitive with ESS • Adds new instruments to US capabilities & capacity • Helps but does not close capacity gap with Western Europe • Which instruments to be decided with strong user input SNS-STS is “absolutely central” to US leadership in science SNS-STS has “scientific/engineering challenges to resolve before initiating construction”
Additional opportunities discussed by the sub-committee If you wish to add facilities or upgrades, please consider only those that require a minimum investment of $100 M
Future Light Sources • In addition to the completion of NSLS-II & upgrades of APS & LCLS A future light source is “absolutely central” to continued US leadership in science • All options (FEL, ERL, Ultimate Storage Ring) have “significant scientific/engineering challenges to resolve before initiating construction” • We look forward to the BESAC study this spring