1 / 12

ILC Cavity Gradients and Status of US 9-cell Cavity Manufacturing

ILC Cavity Gradients and Status of US 9-cell Cavity Manufacturing. C.M. Ginsburg (Fermilab) Fermilab All Experimenters’ Meeting November 2, 2009. ILC Cavity Gradients: Database. Motivation Everyone uses the same data to make plots – a common denominator in yield calculations

mika
Download Presentation

ILC Cavity Gradients and Status of US 9-cell Cavity Manufacturing

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. ILC Cavity Gradients and Status of US 9-cell Cavity Manufacturing C.M. Ginsburg (Fermilab) Fermilab All Experimenters’ Meeting November 2, 2009

  2. ILC Cavity Gradients: Database • Motivation • Everyone uses the same data to make plots – a common denominator in yield calculations • If you show a plot, you specify “I made xxx cuts on the data” and anyone could reproduce it (they might also argue with your cuts) • Rules (a subset) • All RF tests from the last couple of years are included; may be flagged for exclusion • Use uniform criteria for data entry: only allowed values for as many as possible items • Define everything which might vary or have underlying subtleties, e.g., “LABX#1" might be a final surface treatment referenced as a well-defined recipe anyone can look up. • If something changes significantly, treatment specification becomes LABX#2, also referenced, etc. • No private/sensitive vendor data • Minimize effort required for compliance • Provide regular updates reliability transparency reproducibility CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  3. ILC Cavity Gradients: Database Tool • Database is currently an Excel file, not yet a real database • http://tdserver1.fnal.gov/project/ILC/S0/ILC-Cavity-Database/DB_coord.html • DESY agreed to provide limited support for inclusion of global data into their database – this is not implemented yet – in progress • All the participating labs (Fermilab, JLab, Cornell, DESY, KEK) agreed to put their data into the DESY database • 7/7/2009 Excel spreadsheet contains data from all three regions, from the last few years • KEK [5 cavities]: [MHI005:MHI009] • JLab, Cornell, Fermilab [18 cavities]: [A5: A9], [TB9ACC010:TB9ACC015], [AES001:AES004], [TB9AES005:TB9AES006], JLAB-2 • DESY [39 cavities]: [AC112:AC129], [Z130:Z145], [AC146:150] • (Production batches 5, 6, &7 are represented) • Current effort: adding new data, DESY production 4, and database tool CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  4. “Experienced-Vendor” Production Yield Plot - Method • Database version 7/7/2009 • Cuts • Cavity from experienced vendor: ACCEL or ZANON • Fine-grain cavity • Use the first successful (= no system problem) test • Standard EP processing: no BCP, no experimental processes • Defined as JLab#1, DESY#2 (weld tank before test), DESY #4 (weld tank after test) • (Ignore test limitation) • Also known as “first-pass” • Include binomial errors CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  5. “Qualified-Vendor” Production Yield (First Pass) Plot Database version 7/7/2009 Since DESY and JLab yields are statistically consistent, can combine them to get a smaller error bar At 35 MV/m (ILC req’t), 1st pass yield is 22% At 20 MV/m (~PrX req’t), 1st pass yield is 68% (improvement seen on 2nd pass) CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  6. Compare first-pass of new/established vendors Database version 7/7/2009 MHI005,MHI006,MHI007 AES001,AES002,AES003,AES004, TB9AES005,TB9AES006 CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  7. Americas Cavities Summary US manufacturer 35 MV/m 20 MV/m time CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  8. Typical gradient limitations Field emission: limitation typically higher than 20 MV/m, but below 35 MV/m Can be due to system problem, such as contamination of the ultra-pure water system in high-pressure water rinse Surface defects: limitation 15-20 MV/m Some recent success with targeted polishing at KEK MHI08 improved from 16 MV/m to 27 MV/m CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  9. Best US-built ILC-style Cavity So Far: TB9AES008 TB9AES008 exceeded ILC spec with a maximum gradient of 41 MV/m at Q0 of 9E9 in 1st process/test at JLab CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  10. US-built cavity performance: TB9AES009 TB9AES009 achieved 36 MV/m at Q0=9E9 without measured field emission during the 2nd vertical test at JLab CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  11. US Manufacturers Currently have 10 AES cavities Two have not been tested yet Two latest ones reached ILC gradient requirement 35 MV/m 6 more AES cavities are due by March 2010 6 cavities from Niowave/Roark arriving Jan.31-Jun.30 2010 Total of 24 new cavities expected for process/test at FNAL and JLab during FY10 In addition, up to 40 cavities will be ordered using ARRA funds for process/test in >12 months CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

  12. Schedule/Plan • ILC Cavity Gradients • Currently using preliminary database tool containing 62 cavities from the last few years • Preliminary yield plots created (only a subset were shown) • To be updated with significantly more data and the better tool of the DESY database • Many good ideas under discussion for expressing the global cavity yield reliably and fairly • US Cavity Manufacturing • Eight cavities from AES show learning curve • The two most recent satisfied ILC cavity gradient requirement • Two more from this batch are being processed now • 12 additional US-built cavities are due in FY10 • One new 9-cell vendor (Niowave-Roark) • Both AES and NR have produced excellent 1-cell cavities… CMGinsburg Fermilab AEM

More Related