1. Nine months at the European Spallation Source, Lund, Sweden
Rüdiger Schmidt
With material from Mats Lindroos

2. Why ESS? Why neutron scattering ?
Neutron scattering can be applied to a range of scientific questions, in physics, chemistry, geology, biology, engineering and medicine.
With a neutron tool kit, we can probe the structure and dynamics of materials over a wide range of length- and time-scales
life science, 
soft condensed matter research, 
chemistry of materials, 
energy research, 
magnetic and electronic phenomena, 
engineering materials and geosciences, 
archaeology and heritage conservation,
fundamental and particle physics. 

3. Example of using neutrons for archaeology
2012-amphore-photo
Proto-Corinthian ceramic vase
dated to about 700–600 B.C.
2012-amphore X-rays
Radiography: FRM II
Neutron Tomography: FRM II

4. Neutrons are good for ……

5. ESS has a long history……

6. ….and requires very slow neutrons

7. 5 MW seems to be a natural constant

8. ESS - Bridging the neutron gap
Berkeley 37-inch cyclotron
350 mCi Ra-Be source
Chadwick
1930
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
105
1010
1015
1020 1
ISIS
Pulsed Sources
ZINP-P
ZINP-P/
KENS
WNR
IPNS
ILL
X-10
CP-2
Steady State Sources
HFBR
HFIR
NRU
MTR
NRX
CP-1
1940
1950
1960
Effective thermal neutron flux n/cm2-s
(Updated from Neutron Scattering, K. Skold and D. L. Price, eds., Academic Press, 1986)
FRM-II
SINQ
SNS
J-PARC
ESS
Many of the reactor based neutron sources are being phased out = decline in the availability of neutrons = decline in competence and competitiveness
The vast majority of users will profit from a pulsed structure
A large fraction of users are fully satisfied by a long pulse source
Existing short pulse sources (ISIS, JPARC and SNS) can supply the present and imminent future need of short pulse users
Long pulse for physics flexibility (cold and thermal neutrons available)
++. Keep competency in communities – countries balance in science knowledge

9. ESS at Lund

10. ESS at Lund
35 min from Kastrup
2 h from Geneva

11. If you do not like rain, go to Lund….

12. Moving around in Lund

13. Moving around in Lund

14. Recipe for a Spallation Source
Accelerate many many many protons to 1 – 2 GeV
Proton beam power of several MW, 1.5 * 1016 protons / second
Send the protons to a metal (tungsten) target
1 GeV proton => about 20 Neutrons
Slow the neutrons down to thermal energies
Watch out – do not mix meV and MeV
Send them through (curved) guides to the experiments
Have an experiment (instrument) to use the neutrons
Single-Crystal Diffractometer (TOPAZ)

15. ESS Linac
Spokes
Medium β
High β
DTL
MEBT
RFQ
LEBT
Source
HEBT & Contingency
Target
2.4 m
4.5 m
3.6 m
40 m
54 m
75 m
174 m
75 keV
3.6 MeV
90 MeV
220 MeV
570 MeV
2000 MeV
MHz
MHz
Energy (MeV)
No. of Modules
No. of Cavities βg
Temp (K)
Cryo Length (m)
Source
0.075 1 –
~300
LEBT
RFQ
3.6
MEBT 3
DTL 90 5
Spoke
220 13
2 (2S) × 13
0.5 βopt ~2
4.14
Medium β
570 9
4 (6C) × 9
0.67
8.28
High β
2000 21
4 (5C) × 21
0.86
HEBT

16. Site Plan
~600 m

18. A research center for Europe
Science village Scandinavia

19. ESS office buildings

20. ESS site ….today

21. Artist view of ESS and MAX IV ….tomorrow
Science village
ESS Instruments
ESS Target building
ESS linac

22. Example of a (small) target: ISIS target hall

23. ESSS: some numbers
Staff number at ESS: today about 200, expected to increase to when operating
Start of operation (first protons on target) planned for 2019
Projected lifetime: 40 years
Operation budget per year: 140 M€
The construction budget for ESS is 1843 M€
Accelerator: 510 M€
Target station: 150 M€
Infrastructure: 520 M€
Controls etc.: 70 M€
N Instruments: 350 M€
Others: administration, licencing, energy, …
Not a typo

24. ESS specific
ESS is an emerging research laboratory with (still) very limited capacity in-house
Collaborative projects: Work in a collaboration where the scope of the project can be set by the total capacity (distributed) of the partners
The accelerator part of the project well suited for this as this community has a strong tradition of open collaboration (XFEL, FAIR, CERN, e.g.LINAC4, European commission framework programs such as EUCARD and TIARA, EURISOL,...)
To keep cost down and to optimize schedule this requires that investments in required infrastructure is done at the partner with best capacity to deliver

25. Prototyping the ESS accelerator
Søren Pape Møller
Sebastien Bousson
Roger Ruber
Pierre Bosland
Anders J Johansson
CERN
The National Center for Nuclear Research, Swierk
Roger Barlow
Ibon Bustinduy
Santo Gammino

26. Transition from construction to operation
ESS Operations can be divided into three distinct phases:
Initial Operations Phase (2019 – 2022, 4 years) – Includes one year of activities to produce first neutrons (2019) and three years of activities to improve accelerator performance and to commission instruments (experiments by friendly users);
Initial User Program Operations (2023 – 2025, 3 years) – Includes support necessary for reliable operations with public users and provides the basis for future cost sharing; and,
User Program Operations (Beginning in 2026 – ) – Routine operations including the completion and commissioning of the final 22 public instruments.

27. Scope contingency for 5 MW accelerator
We plan for delivering a 5 MW accelerator
The scope contingency for the accelerator is beam power. The purchasing of power supplies and RF sources necessary to go from 2.5 to 5 MW will be scheduled discretely. These purchases will be authorized after the financial requirements for delivering 2.5 MW of beam power are secure.
Each 7 M€ reduction decrease energy by 70 MeV (=175 kW at 62.5 mA)
Scope contingency
100 M€
CM and RF sources
Spokes
Medium β
High β
DTL
MEBT
RFQ
LEBT
Source
HEBT & Contingency
Target
2.4 m
4.5 m
3.6 m
40 m
54 m
75 m
174 m
75 keV
3.6 MeV
90 MeV
220 MeV
570 MeV
2000 MeV
MHz
MHz

29. My involvement Learning about sc high intensity proton linacs
Machine Protection (..organised a PLC workshop)
Planning
Controls systems
… and many activities not related to ESS

30. Some of my impressions Exciting new project in the accelerator world
Together, ESS and MAXlab will become one of the major accelerator research centres in Europe
Working methods very different from CERN
Very formal definition of requirements…..
Structure of technical discussions not obvious…
Very little collaboration between the two labs
Surprisingly little activities related to protection of personnel yet….
Many challenges
Building up a lab from scratch on a green field
Working with outside partners to deliver most systems
Building up a base with qualified personnel
Collaboration in some areas can be of interest for both labs, ESS and CERN
Interlock and protection systems
Superconducting RF
Others (beam losses, BLMs, diamond detectors, ….)

31. Slide from Mats Lindroos

32. Project Review November 2013
The first ESS annual review took place at LUND the 12th-14th November 2013
Present : ESS project team, 33 members of the review team organized in 7 subcommittees and 7 observers (see next slide for details)
First impressions:
The review committee congratulates the ESS team and its management for the quality of the material and presentations submitted to the reviewers
The ESS is now a real project from all points of view, well shaped and well organized. ESS is now managing to the established baseline.
A big effort was made in the last 10 months to build up an organization structure with names and clear responsibilities attached to it
The management of the project is strong, well determined, motivated and success oriented. The ESS overall schedule foresees first protons on target in December The cost cap has been fixed to B€ (year 2013).
ESS will start real construction work in June 2014 (ground break)

33. Plan A and other plans…
Schedule Priority – Facility construction complete at the end of with 5 MW capability installed;
Operations Linked to Construction Progress – Initial operations in (production of 1st neutrons) and facility operations in (instruments available for the user program);
Scope Contingency - Explicit scope contingency integrated into the accelerator plans (scope that can be delayed if necessary);
Instrument Program – Technically limited schedule, leverage construction investment, plan for additional investment;
Conventional facilities costs above the cost report value covered outside the cap by the host countries or new partners;