1 / 32

Muon Accelerator R&D 5-year Plan (as background information for the MANX review)

Muon Accelerator R&D 5-year Plan (as background information for the MANX review). Andreas Jansson. Outline. Overview of the Muon Accelerator R&D 5-year plan 6D cooling channel component R&D and experiments in the 5-year plan Summary & Conclusions. Overview of the.

makoto
Download Presentation

Muon Accelerator R&D 5-year Plan (as background information for the MANX review)

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. Muon Accelerator R&D 5-year Plan(as background information for the MANX review) Andreas Jansson Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  2. Outline • Overview of the Muon Accelerator R&D 5-year plan • 6D cooling channel component R&D and experiments in the 5-year plan • Summary & Conclusions Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  3. Overview of the Muon Accelerator R&D5-year plan Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  4. U.S. Muon Accelerator R&D Community  In the U.S. Muon Collider & Neutrino Factory R&D is pursued by a collab-oration of accelerator scientists, particle physicists & engineers from laboratories, universities, and SBIR companies: • Sponsoring U.S. Labs (~30 FTE) • BNL, FNAL, LBNL • Other U.S. Labs (~2 FTE) • ANL, TJNAF, ORNL • U.S. Universities (~5 FTE) • IIT, Mississippi, Princeton, UC-Berkeley, UCLA, UC-Riverside • SBIR Companies (~10 FTE) • Muons Inc., Tech X, PBL TOTAL EFFORT ~ 4 7 FTE • Other institutions have made past contributions but are not presently supported: U-Chicago, Cornell, NIU, Northwestern, UIUC • In addition, Neutrino Factory R&D has been “internationalized” (see later) Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  5. Organization • NFMCC (Neutrino Factory & Muon Collider Collab.) • National collaboration funded since 1998. • Pursues Neutrino Factory & Muon Collider R&D. • NF R&D pursued with international partners • MCTF (Muon Collider Task Force) • Task Force established at Fermilab in 2006 • Pursues Muon Collider R&D, utilizing FNAL assets and extends & complements the NFMCC program • MCCC (Muon Collider Co-ordinating Committee) • Leadership of NFMCC (Bross, Kirk, Zisman) and MCTF (Geer, Shiltsev) • Co-ordinates NFMCC & MCTF plans to optimize the overall program … has worked well and resulted in a joint 5 year plan for future activities. • MUTAC (Muon Technical Advisory Committee) • Appointed by the multi-Lab oversight group (MCOG) • Reviews NFMCC & MCTF activities jointly Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  6. Motivation: Lepton Colliders • The capabilities of high energy lepton colliders have captured the imagination of the HEP community: • elucidate EWK symmetery breaking mechanism • search for (discover) supersymmetry • search for (discover) extra space-time dimensions & quantum gravity • Studies have motivated lepton colliders with multi-TeV energies and luminosities of order 1034 cm-2 s-1. • LHC results on a timescale of ~2013 are expected to establish desired lepton collider energy. • P5 recommended “ … R&D for alternative accelerator technologies, to permit an informed choice when the lepton collider energy is established.” • Alternatives for a multi-TeV lepton collider are: • Muon Colliders • Normal-Conducting RF e+e- linacs (NLC-like, CLIC, … ) • Plasma wakefield linacs driven by lasers or short e- bunches. Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  7. Muon Collider Advantages • Muon Collider concept is attractive because muons are point-like particles that do not radiate as readily as electrons (mm / me ~ 207): • Circular (compact) multi-TeV lepton collider that would fit on an existing laboratory site. • Very small beam energyspread enabling precise scans and width measurements • (mm/me)2 = ~40000  s-channel Higgs Factory (requires lower luminosity) EXAMPLE4 TeV Collider on the FNAL site Beamstrahlung in anye+e- collider E/E  2 Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  8. Muon Collider Schematic Muon Collider parameterranges (depend on LHC results) • Proton Driver • primary beam on target • Target, Capture, and Decay • create ; decay into  • Bunching & Phase Rotation • reduce E of bunch • Cooling • reduce 6D emittance • Acceleration • 130 MeV  O (1) TeV • Storage Ring • store for ~1000 turns 4 MWProtonSource s: 1-5 TeV L: 1034–1035 cm-2 s-1 eT: 10-25 mm eL: ~10 cm Dp/p: 0.001-0.002 b*: 3-10 mm Hg-Jet Target Decay Channel Buncher Acceler- ation Initial Cooling 6D Cooler 4 TeV Collider ~ 4 km Pre Accel -erator Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  9. Neutrino Factory • A muon source providing O(1021) muons/yr would also facilitate a new sort of neutrino source in which muons decaying in a storage ring with long straight sections produce a beam of 50% ne (anti- ne) & 50% nm (anti- nm) 4 MWProtonSource Hg-Jet Target SAME AS MUON COLLIDER Decay Channel n Buncher Initial Cooler StorageRing 10-20GeV ~ 1 km Pre Accel -erator 5-10 GeV Acceleration 1.5-5 GeV Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  10. Front-End Progress – last 5 years Rapid development of plans for multi-MW proton sources: FNAL: Project-X CERN: Linac 4, SPL … RAL: ISIS upgrade EU: ESS Project-X at FNAL with suitable modificationswould be a viable Source. 4 MWProtonSource Successful completion of MERIT proof-of-principleHg-jet target experiment Hg-Jet Target MUCOOL Test area built. Limitations of High-gradient RF in magnetc fields identified. Candidate RF options for RF in ionization cooling channels identified – development in progress. Decay Channel Buncher MICE experiment has begun – to be completed 2011-2012 Cooler 1021 muons/yr Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  11. Component Development & Experiments MICE Experiment under way at RAL: Ionization Cooling Channel proof-of-principle MUCOOL Test Area builtat FNAL for ionization cooling component testing MERIT at CERN: Hg-jet in 15T solenoid, hit by 31013 24 GeV protons New beamline built at FNAL to test high-pressure RF concept for muon cooling channels NFMCC 805 MHz and 201 MHz RF studies in magnetic fields to develop needed capability for muon cooling channels High-field Magnet Studies for muon cooling channels Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  12. Muon Collider Design Progress • Muon Collider designs start with a NF front-end, but require a much more ambitious cooling channel (6D cooling ~ O(106) c.f. 4D cooling ~ O(10). • In the last 5 years concepts for a complete end-to-end self con-sistent cooling scheme have been developed • Requires beyond state-of-art components: need to be developed • Hardware development and further simulations need to proceed together to inform choices between alternative technologies • Also progress on acceleration scheme & Collider ring design, but the cooling channel presently provides the main Muon Collider challenge NF FRONT END Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  13. Next Steps: Strategy • MC strategy presented to P5 to bring the high energy frontier back to the U.S. • study to demonstrate MC feasibility by 2013 • post-study experiments and component test for 7-10 years • Start MC construction early to mid 2020’s • In parallel with MC R&D, the medium term NF development plan presented to P5: • Complete MICE experiment & participate in International Design Study (IDS) to deliver a NF-RDR by 2012 • If community wishes to proceed, preconstruction R&D for a few years beyond 2012, with an option to start construction in the late 2010’s • MCOG and MUTAC encouraged the NFMCC & MCTF leadership to develop a joint 5 year plan that proposes the way forward for the period FY09-13 • This plan was submitted to DOE in December ’08. Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  14. The 5 Year Plan • A joint NFMCC-MCTF Plan • A measured program based on the solid muon accelerator R&D achievements of the last decade • Sufficiently ambitious to make substantial progress before the next round of long-term decisions by the particle physics community • Includes accelerator, physics & detector studies (funding for physics & detector part sought separately) • Meets our existing commitments (NF-RDR, MICE) and in addition will deliver: • MC performance requirements based on physics • A first end-to-end MC simulation • Critical component development & testing • A first MC cost estimate Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  15. Elements of the MC R&D Plan BNL FNAL LBNL LBNL BNL LBNL FNAL LBNL FNAL BNL LBNL FNAL BNL LBNL FNAL FNAL BNL (Targetry) Reviewed separately sponsoring laboratory participation Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  16. Elements of the Plan - 2 • Design and Simulations • MC DFS (Design Feasibility Study) • Physics and Detector Study • Accelerator Design & Simulation • Cost Estimation Study • NF RDR (under IDS-NF auspices) • overall system design and staging scenarios • siting issues • participation in cost estimation activity Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  17. Elements of the Plan - 3 • Component Development and Experiments • carry out hardware development & perform tests to “inform” MC DFS & NF RDR • facilitate down-selection of MC cooling channel options • complete MICE • includes ongoing work • RF testing, magnet development, absorbers, target • understand performance limits, engineering issues, costs • hardware R&D has been carefully selected • plan only includes activities needed to assess feasibility & make 1st defensible cost estimate. • defines subsequent experimental program (extends beyond 5-yr plan) Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  18. Key component models Expected MC Status after Plan Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  19. Resources Resources needed to execute the 5 year plan NOW 1 2 3 4 5 YEAR NOW 1 2 3 4 5 YEAR NOTE: Roll-over in years 4-5 provides an opportunity to initiate post-DFS activities, should the community wish us to proceed to the next step Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  20. EFFORT (FTE) 1 2 3 4 5 YEAR Contributions (FTE) • Proposed effort profile (FTEs) for muon accelerator R&D: Based on input from the lab management • Universities ~ 5FTE, Other Labs ~ 2FTE. NOTE: In addition there are ~ 10FTE SBIR. • Includes SBIR, Universities, Other Labs, & additional engineering effort from BNL+FNAL+LBNL or external contracts (with M&S vs SWF adjustment) • Includes post-5-year plan activities • Utilization of Effort • 5-year plan activitiesdominate years 1-4 • Start post-plan R&D in years 4-5 if community wishes to proceed to next step Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  21. Cooling channel component R&D and Experiments In the 5-year plan Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  22. MICE • During the next 5 years, we expect MICE will demonstrate transverse (4D) cooling. • MICE is essentially a section of NF study II prototype cooling channel. Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  23. 6D Cooling Channel Status • Three main types (and many variants) of 6D cooling channel have been proposed, and shown to cool in simulation. • They all require RF cavities operating in strong magnetic fields. • This is currently our biggest challenge HCC (Derbenev/Johnson) Guggenheim (Palmer) FOFO snake (Alexahin) Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  24. The Emax(B) problem • Vacuum RF suffers significant reduction in stable gradient in magnetic fields • High Pressure RF is not sensitive to magnetic fields, but have not yet been tested with beam. (Muons Inc/Fermilab) Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  25. The path to a cooling channel demo • Highest priority is to demonstrate at least one RF cavity technology that can operate in strong magnetic fields • This will allow us to narrow down the cooling channel options and focus our efforts • Expect to select a baseline cooling channel about halfway through the plan (year 3). RF test Section test Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  26. Some possible 6D cooling experiments MICE rebuilt as FOFO snake (Alexahin) MANX w LHe, no RF (Muons Inc) Mag. ins. Guggenheim section (Palmer) HCC w. HP H2 RF (Palmer) LiH wedge as MICE phase III (Rogers) Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  27. Some different points of view “There might be bugs in the simulation code or subtle effects that may accumulate and affect a long cooling channel.” “Multiple scattering and Maxwell’s equations are well known since a long time. It will work if we can just build it.” “Demonstrating 6D cooling is important to generate optimism about the Muon Collider.” Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  28. R&D goals • Goals of experimental cooling channel R&D and experiments can in general be classified as • Demonstrate that we can create the simulated conditions in reality. • Experimentally validate simulation codes and models. • Demonstrate cooling. • Note that • If A and B are achieved, in principle this implies C. • Achieving C does not imply B (or A). • Main focus in 5-year plan is on Goal A. • This can be achieved with bench tests (no beam) • MICE will do Goal C for 4D cooling, and might be able to do some of Goal B (to be determined). Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  29. Goals of a 6D cooling experiment? • Demonstrate 6D cooling in a short cooling channel section (emittance out < emittance out) (c.f. Goal C) • Great PR and probably political pre-requisite for building a long cooling channel (and MC). • Experimental method straightforward (developed by MICE). • Convince ourselves that the results extrapolate to long cooling channels (c.f. Goal B) • Main uncertainties are energy straggling and scattering tails. • These effects may be very difficult to measure with sufficient accuracy in a cooling channel section (needs further study). • A lot of the early preparatory work is generic and can be done without locking in on a particular experiment. Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  30. Summary & Conclusions • A 5-year plan for Muon Accelerator R&D has been developed and submitted to DOE • Aims to deliver a MC Design Feasibility Study in ~2013, including an end-to-simulation of the baseline scenario • Requires x3 increase in Muon R&D budget, as well as all the manpower we expect to get from the labs (and then some). • Experimental program focused on enabling down-selection of cooling channel options, and provide other input needed to select a baseline collider scenario. • Highest priority is to solve the E(B) problem, then proceed to build a section of baseline cooling channel for bench tests. • A 6D cooling experiment would follow after the 5 years. • Generic studies on how to best measure 6D cooling encouraged now. • More detailed planning on cooling experiment after a baseline is selected (money may start to become available at that time as well). • If we are clever, the bench test model might become the test channel. Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  31. Timelines Aspirational NF timeline presented in ISS report Illustrative MC timelinepresented to P5 (Palmer) Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

  32. RLA Linac 2 detector NF  Muon Collider RLA Linac 1 Project X -factory beam To DUSEL MCTF Final Cooling A Muon-Based Vision Andreas Jansson - Fermilab AAC review

More Related