S2 Progress Report for EC H. Padamsee and Tom Himel For the S2 Task Force.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
9Apr07 Fermilab Steering Group 1 S2 Task Force Status (String test definition) and High Priority R&D Items Tom Himel.
Advertisements

Operations and Availability GG3. Key decisions Summary of Key Decisions for the Baseline Design The linac will have two parallel tunnels so that the support.
SLAC ILC Accelerator: Luminosity Production Peter Tenenbaum HEP Program Review June 15, 2005.
RF Unit Test Facility at NML & CM1 Test Plan Bob Kephart Fermilab IWLC-10 October 20, 2010.
An SRF Single Cavity Horizontal Test Facility Tom Peterson, Fermilab May 10, 2005.
ILCTA_NML Progress at Fermilab Jerry Leibfritz September 10, 2007.
5Feb07 Beijing GDE meeting 1 S2 Task Force Status (String test definition) Tom Himel.
ATLAS Intensity and Efficiency Upgrade ATLAS USERS MEETING Speaker: Mike Kelly Physics Division May 15, 2014.
Test Stands Roger Ruber Uppsala University ESS TAC4 16 Feb
Gek 16/6/041 ITRP Comments on Question 19 GEK 9/06/04 19) For the X-band (warm) technology, detail the status of the tests of the full rf delivery system.
Accelerators for ADS March 2014 CERN Approach for a reliable cryogenic system T. Junquera (ACS) *Work supported by the EU, FP7 MAX contract number.
TTF-II Status & Prospectives Nick Walker DESY 5 th ITRP Meeting – CALTECH.
STF plan overview H. Hayano, KEK LCPAC 02/25/2005.
Type IV Cryomodule Proposal (T4CM) Don Mitchell, 16 JAN 2006.
Cryomodule Design and R&D during the EDR phase Robert Kephart With input from the T4 CM Collaboration.
CLIC Implementation Studies Ph. Lebrun & J. Osborne CERN CLIC Collaboration Meeting addressing the Work Packages CERN, 3-4 November 2011.
1Matthias LiepeAugust 2, 2007 LLRF for the ERL Matthias Liepe.
6-7 April 06 MAC Review Global Design Effort 1 The Global R&D Board Bill Willis GDE Columbia University.
D.Proch, DESY; GDE meeting Vancouver 06 Technical systems: Cavity Report Overview on costing activities for ILC –European costing method Overview industrial.
Beijing ILC Workshop Global Design Effort 1 High-Gradient Module Test Lutz Lilje.
S1G Experiment Schedule Plan; H. Hayano ILC10 GDE meeting.
Harry Carter – LCFOA Meeting 5/1/06 1 LCFOA Technical Briefings: Cryomodules H. Carter Fermilab Technical Division.
Aug 23, 2006 Half Current Option: Impact on Linac Cost Chris Adolphsen With input from Mike Neubauer, Chris Nantista and Tom Peterson.
Experience with LEP (and LHC) cryo-modules Workshop on cryogenic and vacuum sectorisations of the SPL O.Brunner – November ’09.
Test plan for SPL short cryomodule O. Brunner, W. Weingarten WW 1SPL cryo-module meeting 19 October 2010.
1 Update on Q2 Main linac starting gradient, upgrade gradient, and upgrade path Results of WG5 discussions after feedback from plenary on Tuesday New Option.
LHC-CC Validity Requirements & Tests LHC Crab Cavity Mini Workshop at CERN; 21. August Remarks on using the LHC as a test bed for R&D equipment.
30 May 2007 DESY Cryomodule Discussion 1 Type 4 Cryomodule Technical Discussion Tom Peterson Compiled from various previous meeting notes and many sources.
Proton Driver Resources & Schedule (R&D Plan) Rich Stanek May 10, 2005.
John Carwardine 20 April 09 Preliminary planning for Aug/Sept studies.
Progress and Plans for R&D and the Conceptual Design of the ILC Main Linacs H. Hayano, KEK PAC2005 5/18/2005.
Carlo Pagani University of Milano INFN Milano-LASA & GDE ILC and XFEL Cryomodules Preliminary thoughts for convergence ILC EDR Kick-off Meeting DESY,
General remarks: I am impressed with the quantity and quality of the work presented here and the functioning of the organization. I thank ILC and FNAL.
CERN, 27-Mar EuCARD NCLinac Task /3/2009.
Summary of SCRF Meeting Fermilab, April 21-25, 2008 April 25, 2008 General Summary and Further Plan: 4/21: Cavity: Gradient R&D, performance, diagnostics.
CW Cryomodules for Project X Yuriy Orlov, Tom Nicol, and Tom Peterson Cryomodules for Project X, 14 June 2013Page 1.
1 Comments concerning DESY and TESLA Albrecht Wagner Comments for the 5th meeting of the ITRP at Caltech 28 June 2004 DESY and the LC What could DESY contribute.
HISTORY OF SNS DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY CHOICES PROJECT X WORKSHOP NOVEMBER 12-13, 2007 R. KUSTOM.
Wish list from ESS Christine Darve H-ECCTD Kick-off meeting 16 March
ILCTA_NML Progress at Fermilab Jerry Leibfritz August 16, 2007.
Start of S2 Milestone Work H. Padamsee. Intro At KEK S2 meeting we decided to make a list of milestones and eventually cost S2 activities I tried to start.
ILC : Type IV Cryomodule Design Meeting Main cryogenic issues, L. Tavian, AT-ACR C ryostat issues, V.Parma, AT-CRI CERN, January 2006.
Tests on production cryomodules Bob Kephart Sept 30, 2006.
19Jul06 Vancouver GDE meeting 1 S2 Task Force Status (String test definition) Tom Himel.
LCLS-II Prototype Cryomodule Darryl Orris 21 January 2015 Final Design Review: Instrumentation.
Recent Result for the STF-2 Cryomodule Operation
Cost Optimization Models for SRF Linacs
The Evolving ILC Project
S1G Experiment Schedule Plan
Cryomodule test stand at ESS site
WP5 Elliptical cavities
Requirements for Efficient CW SRF Cryomodules
Uppsala Commitment to ESS and FREIA Planning
TTC Topical Workshop - CW SRF, Cornell 12th – 14th June 2013
Evolving an ILC focused SCRF Facility from the XFEL Infrastructure
Chris Adolphsen Sergei Nagaitsev
Availsim runs and questions
Overview MESA SRF system and machine design
Main Linac EDR: Cavity & Cryomodule Discussion
Notes on Ramp-Up and Production
CLIC: from 380 GeV up to 3 TeV Will also study klystron based machine for initial stage.
High Gradient Cavities: Cost and Operational Considerations
ESS RF Development at Uppsala University
ILC Cryogenic Systems Draft EDR Plan
Accelerator Layout and Parameters
CW Operation of XFEL Modules
Nick Walker (DESY) EU GDE Meeting Oxford
ILC Cryogenics -- Technical Design Report Planning
ERL Director’s Review Main Linac
Summary of the maximum SCRF voltage in XFEL
Presentation transcript:

S2 Progress Report for EC H. Padamsee and Tom Himel For the S2 Task Force

Review S2 Goals (1) Review TRC R2 recommended tests and revise list Determine generic lessons learned from the operation of TTF and other SRF based accelerators –How are these lessons applicable for S2 tests and ILC Assess number of RF units needed for planned activities Assess if beam is needed See what assemblies and tests are presently done or planned at – FLASH (TTF-II), SMTF STF Assess their timelines –compare with S0, S1, TDR Evaluate impact of XFEL plans on S2 needs

Review S2 Goals (2) (Relationship to Industrialization/Production Scenarios) The Plan should show how the transitions from proof-of-principle to the S2 Milestone and to the start of main linac production should be accomplished. –Look at how previous high tech projects have been industrialized –Make model (s) for the cavity/cryomodule industrialization plan(s) to prepare for ILC construction –Work backward to determine where R&D needs to be over intervening years between now and construction –Do we need a phase 2 (longer string test of many RF Units)

Discuss Tests Needed Examples Under Discussion Tests with < 1 RF Unit –(e.g. at cryomodule test stand) Tests with 1 RF Unit Tests with a few RF Units Tests with N >> 1 RF Units

Example Tests With < 1 RF Unit e.g. at cryomodule test stand Test reliability of components. –Of particular concern are components with long MTTR such as tuners, piezos, and couplers. Use ILC design piezos, tuners, HOM, and cryomodule Measure dark current in cryomodules –cryo load –radiation Important for electronics and personnel in tunnel with RF on. Check for cavity and quad vibration due to use of piezo tuners

Test transportability of cryomodules Test compatibility of cryomodules from mixing those of different regions Try a dirty vent on some cryomodules and evaluate extent of damage and recovery Do above with a fast acting valve to see effects both of valve and of the dirty vent Provide a test bed for evolving industrially produced cryomodules. –desire to test preproduction cryomodules before full production released Tests Which Can Be Done With <1 RF Unit (con’t) e.g. at cryomodule test stand(s)

One RF Unit Tests (y = with beam) Demonstrate that we can make an RF unit to ILC spec for gradient, Q, dark current –Evaluate cavity quench, coupler breakdown rates and recovery times at 31.5 MV/m for long-term operation –Check static and dynamic cryo heat loads at spec (y) –Are these commensurate with the operational expectations Test RF fault recognition and recovery software (y) –Insure that adequate instrumentation is available to sense likely faults. (coupler breakdowns, cavity quench, broken tuner motor, broken coupler motor, defective sensor… Check for trapped HOMs including between the cavities using final cavity spacing Check beam phase and energy stability (y) Provide an RF unit for LLRF tests for several years (y) Determine capability of LLRF, tuners, and couplers to deal with gradient spread in cryomodules..how much spread can be dealt with?

Tests Needing More than One RF Unit Measure dark current –effects cryo load –how much dark current is accelerated/captured from module to module –How much radiation Important for electronics and personnel in tunnel with RF on. Check cryo control (maintain liquid levels, feedback time response etc.) and vibrations due to cryogen flows Mock up actual tunnel layout to explore installation, maintenance, and repair issues prior to large scale construction of ILC –could influence civil designs

Tests needing N >> 1 RF Units (probably not practical) Check for emittance growth due to cavity misalignments Check for emittance growth before and after DFS steering

Next Steps Which system tests are done at TTF, SNS… –(e.g next slide) –What have we learned? What tests from previous lists can be done at TTF-II/FLASH? –Start a dialog between S2 and TTF-II to make a list –List tests that must be done elsewhere Compare time lines

Down time weeks Total downtime: h (13%) h (71%) 24.2 h (7%) 20.5 h (6%) 9 h (2%) 17 h (5%) 10 h (3%) 4.2 h (1%) 1.5 h (<1%) 1 h (<1%) 0.8 h (<1%) 10.3 h (3%) 7.6 h (2%) Klystrons / modulators: 71% LLRF: 7% Photonline: 5% Laser: 6% Magnets: 2% Controls: 3% Protection: 2% Other: 3% Water: 1% Klystrons / modulators is the sum of both plus waveguides, pre-amplifier, interlocks…. We urgently have to detail this; about 50% was one single event (bouncer circ. capacitor)

Do we need a longer string test (phase 2)? (Relationship to Industrialization/Production Scenarios) The Plan should show how the transitions from proof-of-principle to the S2 Milestone and to the start of main linac production should be accomplished. –Look at how previous high tech projects have been industrialized –Make model (s) for the cavity/cryomodule industrialization plan(s) to prepare for ILC construction –Work backward to determine where R&D needs to be over intervening years between now and construction

Examples Studied LEP-II SC system evolution –350 MHz, Nb-Cu Technology –288 cavities, 500 meters –Total 72 modules over 6 years –3 years 4 modules per year –Start-up 12 modules/year –Final rate 25 modules/year LHC evolution –1250 magnet modules, 15 m long Need to compare with XFEL scenario as it develops >120 modules 6 modules tested in TTF-II (string test)

12/ year 4/year 29/year 24/year 6 years total

Brief Remarks for LEP Lessons –4 modules installed in LEP for initial system tests with beam –Many lessons learned Couplers need to be improved pondermotive oscillations, controls Optimize RF distribution

LHC: R&D, Pre-Series and Production Phases, Total CM LHC Project Approval 1 m 10m 15 m LHC String Test 1 Pre- Series Series

R&D With Industry Phase Before LHC Approval Initial R&D with industry, 1991 – x 1.3m magnets/modules ordered from 5 firms 7 x 10 m long magnets/modules ordered from 4 firms LHC string test first reached design field in Dec 1994 –2 dipoles (10m) and 1 quadrupole LHC approved in Dec 1994 LHC String test 1 complete Jan 1999 (4 year test) String test 2/1, 3 D (15m), 1Q, 98 – 01 String test 2/2, 6 D (15 m), 1 Q,

LHC String Test The String has been an invaluable test-bed for LHC systems such as cooling, vacuum and magnet protection and has also served as a training ground for the String team and operators The String began operation in December 1994, just before the … LHC project was approved. Since then five experimental runs have been carried-out. The first runs were aimed at validating the design choices for the individual systems. The emphasis then shifted towards optimisation of the design, while later experiments were designed to highlight any weak points through artificially induced fatigue on components and the interconnections between them.

Many Scenarios Still Under Discussion in S2 One Possible Example An Evolutionary Picture Learning : Stage 0 –1 RF unit Stage 1: 1 – 2 RF Units –Reach spec –Make modules regionally compatible Stage 2 : Many RF units together in one location Need to examine each relative to ILC timeline, XFEL plans & timeline,

N= 1 - 2

Conclusions We are defining goals for S2 –Phase 1, carry out needed RF unit tests, keep it small to have minimal impact on funding decision –Phase 2 longer string of RF units to get good statistics on cavities, cryomodules, RF, LLRF…(industrial?) After approval ? We try to make S2.1 consistent with S0, S1 –Number of cavities, timeline… We need to adapt the plan to available funding –phase 1 and 2 What is clear so far: –It is a large effort –Parts of Phase 1 can be done in TTF-II (define how much) Push for Plan formulation by Valencia We need your advice on our phased approach !