From the SPL to the 4-target-horn system: Preliminary design of a beam switching yard WP2: Super Beam 4 th EUROν Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 E.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EuroNu CERN February 5, 2008 Marco Zito Super-Beam work package Marco Zito Dapnia-Saclay On behalf of the SB w2 team EuroNu 5/2/2008 Thanks to M. Dracos.
Advertisements

ISS meeting, (1) R. Garoby (for the SPL study group) SPL-based Proton Driver for Facilities SPL-based Proton Driver for Facilities at CERN:
Page 1 Collider Review Retreat February 24, 2010 Mike Spata February 24, 2010 Collider Review Retreat International Linear Collider.
Proton / Muon Bunch Numbers, Repetition Rate, RF and Kicker Systems and Inductive Wall Fields for the Rings of a Neutrino Factory G H Rees, RAL.
Participants WP3total Imperial College CERN STFC University Warwick CRNS University Oxford6 6 Total Euro  - WP3.
25/10/2007M. Dracos1 EURO The European Design Study for a high intensity neutrino oscillation facility (Rob Edgecock, Mats Lindroos, Marcos Dracos)
30 June 2008M. Dracos, NuFact081 Challenges and Progress on the SuperBeam Horn Design Marcos DRACOS IN2P3/CNRS Strasbourg NuFact 08 Valencia-Spain, June.
Thomas Roser Snowmass 2001 June 30 - July 21, MW AGS proton driver (M.J. Brennan, I. Marneris, T. Roser, A.G. Ruggiero, D. Trbojevic, N. Tsoupas,
1 Optics and IR design for SuperKEKB Y.Ohnishi 1/19-22, 2004 Super B Factory Workshop in Hawaii.
Sergey Antipov, University of Chicago Fermilab Mentor: Sergei Nagaitsev Injection to IOTA ring.
March A. Chancé, J. Payet DAPNIA/SACM / Beta-beam ECFA/BENE Workshop The Decay Ring -First Design- A. Chancé, J.Payet CEA/DSM/DAPNIA/SACM.
The LHC: an Accelerated Overview Jonathan Walsh May 2, 2006.
A new design for the CERN to Fréjus neutrino beam Marco Zito (IRFU/CEA-Saclay) For the EUROnu WP2 team NUFACT11 Geneva August 2nd 2011.
Storage Ring : Status, Issues and Plans C Johnstone, FNAL and G H Rees, RAL.
3 GeV,1.2 MW, Booster for Proton Driver G H Rees, RAL.
Low energy ν-beam for EUROSB Marcos Dracos, Nikos Vassilopoulos IPHC Strasbourg, IN2P3/CNRS.
A 3 Pass, Dog-bone Cooling Channel G H Rees, ASTeC, RAL.
ESS based neutrino Super Beam for CP Violation discovery Marcos DRACOS IPHC-IN2P3/CNRS Strasbourg 1 20 August 2013M. Dracos.
Proton Driver: Status and Plans C.R. Prior ASTeC Intense Beams Group, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory.
EDM2001 Workshop May 14-15, 2001 AGS Intensity Upgrade (J.M. Brennan, I. Marneris, T. Roser, A.G. Ruggiero, D. Trbojevic, N. Tsoupas, S.Y. Zhang) Proton.
J. Pozimski UKNF WP1 meeting 10 March 2010 UKNF WP1 milestone table status.
1 Design of Proton Driver for a Neutrino Factory W. T. Weng Brookhaven National Laboratory NuFact Workshop 2006 Irvine, CA, Aug/25, 2006.
Simulation of direct space charge in Booster by using MAD program Y.Alexahin, A.Drozhdin, N.Kazarinov.
R.G. 7/09/20101 Options for neutrinos. R.G. 7/09/20102 Conventional beam from the SPS (1/3) Neutrinos using the SPS Nominal CNGS 732 km baseline from.
J. Pasternak First Ideas on the Design of the Beam Transport and the Final Focus for the NF Target J. Pasternak, Imperial College London / RAL STFC ,
CERN/BENE meeting, July Marcos Dracos Collection system for future neutrino beams horn and target integration 2 LoI's sent –CERN –Strasbourg Who.
Optimization of Field Error Tolerances for Triplet Quadrupoles of the HL-LHC Lattice V3.01 Option 4444 Yuri Nosochkov Y. Cai, M-H. Wang (SLAC) S. Fartoukh,
Proton Delivery to Target Keith Gollwitzer Accelerator Division Fermilab MAP 2012 Winter Meeting March 7, 2012.
Flat-beam IR optics José L. Abelleira, PhD candidate EPFL, CERN BE-ABP Supervised by F. Zimmermann, CERN Beams dep. Thanks to: O.Domínguez. S Russenchuck,
BEAM TRANSFER CHANNELS, BEAM TRANSFER CHANNELS, INJECTION AND EXTRACTION SYSTEMS OF NICA ACCELERATOR COMPLEX Tuzikov A., JINR, Dubna, Russia.
Proton Driver Keith Gollwitzer May 31, Initial Design Overview For design purposes, the following is assumed –H - beam comes from PIP II and follow-on.
1 Target Station Design for Neutrino Superbeams Dan Wilcox High Power Targets Group, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory NBI 2012, CERN.
Beam Dynamics in the ESS Linac Under the Influence of Monopole and Dipole HOMs A.Farricker 1, R.M.Jones 1, R.Ainsworth 2 and S.Molloy 3 1 The University.
ESS based neutrino Super Beam for CP Violation discovery Marcos DRACOS IPHC-IN2P3/CNRS Strasbourg 1 10 September 2013M. Dracos.
IDS-NF Accelerator Baseline The Neutrino Factory [1, 2] based on the muon storage ring will be a precision tool to study the neutrino oscillations.It may.
CLIC Stabilisation Day’08 18 th March 2008 Thomas Zickler AT/MCS/MNC/tz 1 CLIC Quadrupoles Th. Zickler CERN.
Proton Driver / Project X Keith Gollwitzer Fermilab August 30, 2012.
The Introduction to CSNS Accelerators Oct. 5, 2010 Sheng Wang AP group, Accelerator Centre,IHEP, CAS.
Proton Driver Design Keith Gollwitzer Fermilab February 19, 2014.
FFAG’ J. Pasternak, IC London/RAL Proton acceleration using FFAGs J. Pasternak, Imperial College, London / RAL.
Beam collimation in the transfer line from 8 GeV linac to the Main Injector A. Drozhdin The beam transfer line from 8 GeV Linac to the Main Injector is.
Pushing the space charge limit in the CERN LHC injectors H. Bartosik for the CERN space charge team with contributions from S. Gilardoni, A. Huschauer,
Proton Driver Keith Gollwitzer Accelerator Division Fermilab MAP Collaboration Meeting June 20, 2013.
WP2 13/07/2011M. Dracos1 Marcos Dracos IPHC-IN2P3/CNRS, Strasbourg.
ESSnuSB Open Meeting May 2014 CERN E. Wildner J. Jonnerby, M. Martini, H. Schönauer 13/03/14EUROnuSB Lund, E. Wildner 2 W. Bartmann, E. Bouquerel,
X-band Based FEL proposal
Research progress and plan CERN-KEK Committee, 2nd meeting 07/Dec/07 Masamitsu AIBA CERN-Japan fellow, AB/BI.
FFAG Studies at BNL Alessandro G. Ruggiero Brookhaven National Laboratory FFAG’06 - KURRI, Osaka, Japan - November 6-10, 2006.
Status of the magnet studies in the ARCS (FLUKA)
Primary Beam Lines for the Project at CERN
BEAM TRANSFER CHANNELS, INJECTION AND EXTRACTION SYSTEMS
Challenges and Progress on the SB Horn Design
A.Lachaize CNRS/IN2P3 IPN Orsay
Beam switching yard interfaces
Beam-beam effects in eRHIC and MeRHIC
Large Booster and Collider Ring
AD & I : BDS Lattice Design Changes
Yuhui Li How to edit the title slide
FFAG Accelerator Proton Driver for Neutrino Factory
ERL accelerator review. Parameters for a Compton source
Multi-Turn Extraction for PS2 Preliminary considerations
MEBT1&2 design study for C-ADS
Negative Momentum Compaction lattice options for PS2
Negative Momentum Compaction lattice options for PS2
Elena Benedetto, CERN 16/12/08
Fanglei Lin, Yuhong Zhang JLEIC R&D Meeting, March 10, 2016
Status and plans for crab crossing studies at JLEIC
Crab Crossing Named #1 common technical risk (p. 6 of the report)
Fanglei Lin JLEIC R&D Meeting, August 4, 2016
CLIC luminosity monitoring/re-tuning using beamstrahlung ?
Presentation transcript:

From the SPL to the 4-target-horn system: Preliminary design of a beam switching yard WP2: Super Beam 4 th EUROν Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 E. Bouquerel, F. Osswald, M. Dracos on behalf of the IPHC group, CNRS, Strasbourg

EUROν WP2: Super Beams E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 2 The Work Package 2 addresses the issues concerning the proton energy and the beam profile specific to neutrino beams Use of a proton driver (4MW mandatory), an accumulator, a target and the hadron collector: Design study based on the Superconducting Proton Linac (SPL) at CERN Use of four targets (instead of one): To decrease the power dissipated and then minimize the radiation issues To reduce stress on target via lower frequency (12.5 Hz) Main task of this present work: Define an optical system to ensure the beam distribution onto the 4 targets of the horn system

SPL/accumulator: what we know SPL Use of the High Power Super Conducting Proton Linac (HP-SPL) under study at CERN Essential element of the staged approach towards renewing the CERN proton injector complex The current design studies foresee a beam power of 4 MW at 50 Hz repetition frequency with protons of about 4.5 GeV kinetic energy and a pulse duration of about 400 μs for neutrino physics applications Pulse duration of the proton beam delivered on the SPL-Super Beam target- horn station ≤ 5 μs to limit the energy stored in the magnetic field generated by the pulsed current of the horn For this reason an additional accumulator ring is required interfacing the SPL and the target-horn station Accumulator* Dedicated design studies exist only for the Neutrino Factory Requires a combination of accumulator and compressor ring (to achieve a bunch length of 2 ns rms after compression) For the SB the accumulator ring is sufficient A 6-bunch per pulse option is most suited: allows the lowest values of the local power distribution inside the target Optimal case: a single continuous bunch per pulse with ≤5 μs duration Circumference of the ring m *Feasibility Study of Accumulator and Compressor for the 6-bunches SPL based Proton Driver, M. Aiba, CERN-AB B1 Parameters of the HP-SPL* E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 3

SPL-accumulator/SY interface Meeting with CERN (R. Garoby et al.) in March 2012: Strong interested from the SPL people shown to the EUROnu SB project (see R. Garoby’s talk at the European Strategy for Neutrino Oscillation Physics – II, CERN May 2012) Creation of an interface note to ease the sharing of information from both side Baseline parameters at the SPL- accumulator/switching yard interface Chromatic tolerance Trapezoidal shape, 1 % flat-top duration and variation, overshoot, oscillations, rise and fall times Truncated parabolic queues RMS value relative to specific distribution >LINK< Still to be confirmed (CERN) E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 4

Beam switching yard (SY) *The target and horn for the SPL-based Super-Beam: preliminary design report, C. Bobeth, M. Dracos, F. Osswald, EUROnu WP2 Note **Feasibility Study of Accumulator and Compressor for the 6-bunches SPL based Proton Driver, M. Aiba, CERN-AB B1 Beam switching yard Beam rigidity: T.m (4 GeV) T.m (4.5 GeV) kinetic energyrest energy p Proton beam from accumulator 1-4 beam separator 4 proton beam lines Target station Beam dump Decay volume p Energy4.5 GeV Beam power4 MW Proton per pulse1.1 x Rep. rate50 Hz Pulse duration1 μs Beam shapeGaussian Emittances rms3 π mm mrad** Target length4.5 GeV Target radius4 MW Beam shapeGaussian Rep. rate / line12.5 Hz Pulse duration1 μs Sigma*4 mm E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 5

SY: Principle Use of 2 bipolar kickers* (or bipolar pulsed magnets): ± 45˚ rotation wrt the z axis K1 (K2) deflects to D1 and D3 (D2 and D4) Need of 1 compensating dipole per beam line (1 angle for each target): Apply a symmetry in the system Angle of deflection (rad) Kinetic energy (GeV) Magnetic length (m) Magnetic field (T) 2000mm T1 T2 T4 T3 z oblique view side view >>KEY PARAMETER<< E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 6 *Technology already used at KEK, Japan (M. Barnes, CERN, private communication)

SY: Operation mode Repetition rate: 50/4 = 12.5 Hz E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 7 1

SY: Beam optics investigations Transverse beam envelop (1 beam line) **PSI Graphic Transport Framework by U. Rohrer based on a CERN-SLAC-FERMILAB version by K.L. Brown et al *83mrad deflection angle Kicker Dipole Target - Radius of the beam at target location 7 times greater than the original size (target radius: 1.5cm) - High dispersion term value (1.38 cm/%) Need to design a beam focusing system !! Configuration Kicker – Dipole - Target = Addition of quadrupoles Simulations done with TRANSPORT code** E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 8

SY: Beam focusing Aim and wanted conditions at target: - Beam waist at the middle of each target (1sigma radius: 4mm) - Beam circular cross section, Gaussian distribution Several possible configurations studied with TRANSPORT: K stands for kicker Q stands for quadrupole D stands for dipole T stands for target E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 9

SY: Beam focusing Configuration 1: K-Q-Q-D-TConfiguration 2: K-Q-Q-Q-D-T Advantages: - Small angle of deflection (33mrad): small magnetic fields for the kicker and the dipole Disadvantages: - Non regular beam shape at target (rx: 0.45cm; ry: 0.09cm) - Total distance 46.5m - High Magnetic field for the quadrupoles (up to 1.93 T) Advantages: - Beam waist values close to the needs (rx 0.46cm; ry 0.43cm) Disadvantages: - First quadrupole too close to the kicker (7.25m) - High dispersion value (0.31 cm/%) at the middle of the target cm beam radius at the entrance of the target E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 10

SY: Beam focusing Configuration 3: K-D-Q-Q-Q-TConfiguration 4: K-Q-Q-Q-D-Q-Q-Q-T Advantages: - Beam waist values close to the needs (rx 0.38cm; ry 0.37cm) - No quadrupole between the kicker and the dipole - Total length 30.2m - Reasonable magnetic fields Disadvantages: - High dispersion value (0.42 cm/%) at the middle of the target Advantages: - Beam waist values equal to what is needed (0.4cm) - Total length of 30.9m - Small dispersion value (0.08cm/%) Disadvantages: - Use of 6 quadrupoles (cost, increase prob. of dysfunction) - Presence of quadrupoles between the kicker and the dipoles E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 11

SY: Beam focusing Configuration 4: K-Q-Q-Q-D-Q-Q-Q-T Advantages: - Beam waist values equal to what is needed (0.4cm) - Total length of m - Small dispersion value (0.08cm/%) Disadvantages: - Use of 6 quadrupoles (cost, increase prob. of dysfunction) - Presence of quadrupoles between the kicker and the dipoles Suitable solution up to now Configuration 3: K-D-Q-Q-Q-T Advantages: - Beam waist values close to the needs (rx 0.38cm; ry 0.37cm) - No quadrupole between the kicker and the dipole - Total length 30.2m - Reasonable magnetic fields Disadvantages: - High dispersion value (0.42 cm/%) at the middle of the target E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 12

SY: Preliminary layout E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 13 oblique view Distances: Kicker1 / target station: 30.2m; Kicker1 / dipole 1,3: 17m Kicker2 / dipole 2,4: 14.7m; Dipoles 1,2,3,4 / target station: 12.2m Total volume 960m 3 + The total surface needed for the PSU: 180m2 of surface; 4m of height Preliminary costing estimations: 1500 K€ (Materials only) 5.6 M€ (PSU – P. Poussot)

Additional instrumentations E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 14 Additional beam instrumentations if required: Beam collimation up stream the kicker 1 to cut off any eventual halo of the beam when leaving the accumulator At this stage of the feasibility study no precision exists on the position, the dimensions and the aperture of such collimator yet (Any alignment tuning or remote control to be defined if required A consequent variation of the energy of the proton beam coming from the SPL- accumulator may induce chromatic focusing errors within the system (addition of sextupoles may be required for correction) Addition of: - Beam monitors to measure the transverse position of the beam (avoid the beam from not hitting the centre of the targets) - Collimators to suppress any eventual halo from the beam

Thank you for your attention

SY/Target station interface Baseline parameters at the SY/target station interface Without beam losses 1.33 MW in case of 1 target/horn failure 16.6Hz in case of 1 target/horn failure Truncated parabolic queues? With/without hallo For 1 λ Failure of 1 target, rep. rate becomes 16.6 Hz for each target (same intensity): Power of the incoming beam becomes 1.33 MW instead of 1MW (still tolerable for targets) Tolerance on the field errors of the optical elements: 1%. Abnormal conditions The failure of a second target aborts the experiment: 2 working targets not sufficient for the physics 2MW not tolerable for each target (=radiation safety issues) Any dysfunction or failing magnet aborts the experiment Risk of having the beam hitting magnets or not centred/focussed onto the target (= safety issues) Addition of beam dumps and instrumentations after the pair of kickers and after each dipole to manage safety Failure modes E. Bouquerel – EUROν 4 th Annual Meeting, Paris, June 13, 2012 Slide 18