1 / 61

Status of the ILC Accelerator Design

Comprehensive insights from 2nd ILC Workshop in Snowmass, Colorado, examining Unification aftermath and development of Baseline Configuration Document.

mclane
Download Presentation

Status of the ILC Accelerator Design

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. Status of the ILC Accelerator Design Barry Barish, Nick Walker for the entire ILC machine community 2nd ILC Workshop – Snowmass, Colorado 26.08.2005

  2. The Year After ‘Unification’ • 1st ILC workshop at KEK November 2005 • ILCSC forms 5 technical WG + 1 communications and outreach WG • WG1 Parameters & General Layout • WG2 Main Linac • WG3 Injectors • WG4 Beam Delivery & MDI • WG5 High gradient SCRF • WG6 Communications Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  3. The Year After ‘Unification’ Goals of the1st Workshop Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  4. WG1 Parms & layout WG2 Linac WG3 Injectors WG4 Beam Delivery WG5 High Grad. SCRF WG6 Communications WG1 LET beam dynamics WG2 Main Linac WG3a Sources WG3b Damping Rings WG4 Beam Delivery WG5 SCRF Cavity Package WG6 Communications The Year After ‘Unification’ Birth of the GDE and Preparation for Snowmass Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  5. WG1 Parms & layout WG2 Linac WG3 Injectors WG4 Beam Delivery WG5 High Grad. SCRF WG6 Communications WG1 LET beam dynamics WG2 Main Linac WG3a Sources WG3b Damping Rings WG4 Beam Delivery WG5 SCRF Cavity Package WG6 Communications GG1 Parameters & Layout GG2 Instrumentation GG3 Operations & Reliability GG4 Cost Engineering GG5 Conventional Facilities GG6 Physics Options The Year After ‘Unification’ Birth of the GDE and Preparation for Snowmass Introduction of Global Groups transition workshop → project Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  6. WG1 LET bdyn. WG2 Main Linac WG3a Sources WG3b DR WG4 BDS WG5 Cavity GG1 Parameters GG2 Instrumentation GG3 Operations & Reliability GG4 Cost & Engineering GG5 Conventional Facilities GG6 Physics Options 2nd ILC Workshop (Snowmass) Technical sub-system WG Provide input Global Group Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  7. Goals of the 2nd Workshop • Continue process of making a recommendation on aBaseline Configuration • Identify longer-termAlternative Configurations • Identify necessary R&D • For baseline • For alternatives • Priorities for detector R&D This workshop has been a major step towards these milestones  Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  8. Baseline / Alternative:some definitions • Primary GDE Goal: • Reference Design Report including costs end 2006 • Intermediate goal (follows from primary) • Definition of a Baseline Configurationby end of 2005 • Will be designed to during 2006 • Will be basis used for cost estimate • Will NOT be the machine we will build Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  9. Baseline / Alternative:some definitions Baseline: a forward looking configuration which we are reasonably confident can achieve the required performanceand can be used to give a reasonably accurate cost estimate by mid-end 2006 (→ RDR) Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  10. Baseline / Alternative:some definitions Alternate: A technology or concept which may provide a significant cost reduction, increase in performance (or both), but which will not be mature enough to be considered baseline by mid-end 2006Note:Alternatives will be part of the RDRAlternatives are equally important Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  11. Baseline Configuration Document • Our ‘Deliverable’ by the end of 2005 • A structured electronic document • Documentation (reports, drawings etc) • Technical specs. • Parameter tables • … • A ‘printable / readable’ summary document (~100 pages) Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  12. Structure of the BCD Summary-like overview for those who want to understand the choice and the why Technical documentation of the baseline, for engineers and acc. phys. making studies towards RDR Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  13. Alternatives Section(s) Note ACD is part of the BCD Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  14. Towards the BCD

  15. The Hard Questions Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  16. The Hard Questions Critical choices: luminosity parameters & gradient Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  17. The Hard Questions Many questions are interrelated and require input from several WG/GG groups Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  18. Luminosity Parameters • nominal 500 GeV luminosity: 2×1034 cm-2s-1 • We want to design to a parameter ‘space’ • Keep a range of options open • Flexibility • Risk mitigation • Current sets represent trade-offs between sub-systems • Particularly Damping Ring  Beam Delivery Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  19. 50% IP vertical emittance 20nm (100%) emittance dilution budget from damping ring [TDR allowed 50%] Nominal Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  20. Low Bunch Charge Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  21. sy= 8nm large IP vertical emittance Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  22. Low Average Power reduced bunch number compensation Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  23. Low Average Power reduced bunch number compensation Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  24. Pushing the Envelopes Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  25. Example of Discussions Workshop allowed open discussion of new ideas and proposals Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  26. Gradient • Baseline recommendation for cavity is standard TESLA 9-cell • Alternatives (energy upgrade): • Low-loss, • Re-entrant • superstructure Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  27. Gradient Gradient recommendation (WG5) • 8km @ 31.5 MV/m → 250 GeV • +7km @ 36 MV/m → 500 GeV Tunnel length for one 500 GeV linac  (8+7)/0.7  21km Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  28. Gradient (WG5 Justification) Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  29. Gradient (WG5 Justification) Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  30. TESLA EP status Results from KEK-DESY collaboration must reduce spread (need more statistics) single-cell measurements (in nine-cell cavities) Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  31. Cavity Fabrication Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  32. Alternative Fabrication techniques Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  33. Improved Processing(Electropolishing) Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  34. Improved Cavity Shapes Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  35. Cavity R&D Fabrication from large grain Nb discs May remove the need for electropolishing ( cost!) Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  36. Conventional Facilities and Siting Milestone One: Snowmass 2005 Conference Successfully Initiate the Global Civil and Siting Effort Complete Comparative Site Assessment Matrix Format Milestone Two: December, 2005 Identify Regional Sample Sites for Inclusion into the Baseline Configuration Document Milestone Three: December, 2006 Complete Conventional Facilities and Siting Portion of the Reference Design Document Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado 8.19.05 V. Kuchler 2 of 8

  37. Sample Site Study Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  38. Conventional Facilities and Siting Outstanding Issues with Direct Impact on CFS Progress that will Require Further Discussion and Resolution with Other Working Groups 1 Tunnel vs 2 Tunnel Laser Straight vs Curved or Segmented Shape and Length of Damping Rings Shape and Configuration of Sources 1 vs 2 Interaction Regions Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado 8.19.05 V. Kuchler 6 of 8

  39. The design is intimately tied to the features of the site 1 tunnels or 2 tunnels? Deep or shallow? Laser straight linac or follow earth’s curvature in segments? GDE ILC Design will be done to samples sites in the three regions North American sample site will be near Fermilab Japan and Europe are to determine sample sites by the end of 2005 Conventional Facilities and Siting Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  40. Tunnel must contain Linac Cryomodule RF system Damping Ring Lines Save maybe $0.5B Issues Maintenance Safety Duty Cycle Availability/Commissioning(studies currently favour 2) 1 or 2 Linac Tunnels example Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  41. Possible Tunnel Configurations • One tunnel or two, with variants? Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  42. ILC Civil Program Civil engineers from all three regions working to develop methods of analyzing the siting issues and comparing sites. The current effort is not intended to select a potential site, but rather to understand from the beginning how the features of sites will effect the design, performance and cost Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  43. Baseline Klystrons 10MW MBK 1.5ms pulse 65% efficiency Thales CPI Toshiba Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  44. Improved Klystrons (?) 5 MW InductiveOutput Tube (IOT) 10 MW Sheet Beam Klystron (SBK) Low Voltage 10 MW MBK Voltage e.g. 65 kV Current 238A More beams Perhaps use a Direct Switch Modulator Parameters similar to 10 MW MBK Klystron Output IOT SLAC Drive CPI KEK Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  45. RF Distribution Klystron power Cavities (12) TESLA TDR and XFEL solution (TTF) Uses many circulators to protect klystron from reflected power (and isolate couplers) Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  46. RF Distribution Klystron power Possible improvement • Expensive circulators eliminated • Fewer types of hybrid couplers • Proper phasing causes reflections from pairs of cavities to be directed to loads • Small increase risk to klystron Two leveldivision Cavities (12) Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  47. Modulators (115 kV, 135 A, 1.5 ms, 5 Hz) (~ 2m Long) Operation: an array of capacitors is charged in parallel, discharged in series.Will test full prototype in 2006 Pulse Transformer Style Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  48. Damping Rings: Three variants 6km 3km 17 km ‘dogbone’ Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  49. Damping Rings   higher Iav smaller circumference (faster kicker) bunch train compression 300km  20km Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

  50. Damping Rings: Recommendation • Not Yet! • Systematic analysis of all rings being made • Dynamic aperture • Emittance performance (tolerances) • Electron cloud • Fast ion instability • … • Positive R&D on fast kickers will allow smaller circumference than TESLA dogbone • Recommendation to be made before the BCD Nick Walker - 2nd ILC Workshop - Snowmass - Colorado

More Related