Carlo Pagani University of Milano INFN Milano-LASA & GDE ILC and XFEL Cryomodules Preliminary thoughts for convergence ILC EDR Kick-off Meeting DESY, 19-21.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Interface of Plug-Compatible Cryomodule Components KEK Norihito Ohuchi 2008/3/41GDE-Sendai Meeting.
Advertisements

Indian Plan for Contribution in Superconducting Cavity & Cryomodule Technology Prashant Khare Avinash Puntambekar RRCAT,India.
FNAL-SCRF 会議報告 1. Cryomodule, Plug-compatible Interface ( 大 内) 2. High Pressure Code, 5K Shield (Tom Peterson)
Alignment and assembling of the cryomodule Yun He, James Sears, Matthias Liepe MLC external review October 03, 2012.
Shuichi Noguchi, KEK6-th ILC School, November Auxiliary Components  Input Power Coupler  HOM Dumping Coupler  Frequency Tuner  He Jacket  Magnetic.
Cavity Integration summary H. Hayano April 25, 2008 ILC-SCRF
ILC-BCD: Cavity Package International Linear Collider - Baseline Configuration Document: Cavity Package DESY -MPY-
1.3 GHz FNAL Dressed Cavity S-1 Global Deliverable to KEK 7 July 2009.
R&D Status and Plan on The Cryostat N. Ohuchi, K. Tsuchiya, A. Terashima, H. Hisamatsu, M. Masuzawa, T. Okamura, H. Hayano 1.STF-Cryostat Design 2.Construction.
ESS cavities interfaces
FNAL Meeting, July 2006 Basti, Bedeschi, Raffaelli, INFN-Pisa 1 ILC cryomodule mechanical work at INFN-Pisa  Ongoing work  Near term future  Manpower.
TESLA MEETING May 2003 Frascati LINAC TECHNOLOGY WORKING GROUP Working Group Linac techology introduction Cryomodule design and Assy. Tuner issue.
Present status of TTF-cryomodules short overview Bernd Petersen DESY MKS March, 7, 2005 Main design features of TESLA-cryomodules Design changes for XFEL-cryomodule.
LCLS-II cryomodule alignment. 2 Wednesday meeting, 6/17/2015 Topics Alignment of Components inside the CM Tunnel Network Tolerances LCLS-II cryomodule.
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.
D.Proch, DESY; GDE meeting Vancouver 06 Technical systems: Cavity Report Overview on costing activities for ILC –European costing method Overview industrial.
Plug compatibility Document ILC10 cavity integration session H. Hayano.
ML Planning for ILC08 First Pass + SCRF agenda Chris Adolphsen Hitoshi Hayano.
Americas Region: T4CM Status and Plans H. Carter TD SRF Dev. Dept. July 14, 2006.
Blade Tuner L. Lilje for the INFN colleagues. Disclaimer The slides were prepared by R. Paparella and N. Panzeri for Carlo Pagani who could not attend.
Mechanical issues SPL cavities/cryomodules: Objectives V.Parma Mini-workshop on Mechanical issues SPL cavities/cryo-modules, CERN 30th September 2009.
Harry Carter – LCFOA Meeting 5/1/06 1 LCFOA Technical Briefings: Cryomodules H. Carter Fermilab Technical Division.
ALCPG/GDE Meeting FNAL Global Design Effort 1 Cavity Work Packages Lutz Lilje GDE.
5 K Shield Study of STF Cryomodule Norihito Ohuchi, Norio Higashi KEK Xu QingJin IHEP 2008/3/3-61Sendai-GDE-Meeting.
October 23, 2007 GDE EDR Meeting 1 EDR Strategy and Timeline Cavities and Cryomodules Rich Stanek October 23, 2007.
Meeting of the European Global Design Effort Report from INFN non EU-funded R&D Carlo Pagani University of Milano and INFN DESY, 10 May 2006.
Date 2007/Oct./25 FNAL-GDE-Meeting Global Design Effort 1 Cryomodule Report N. Ohuchi KEK 1.Cryomodule & Cryogenics KOM 2.GDE-meeting discussion I.Interface.
Summary ( Cryomodule, Plug-compatible Interface) Norihito Ohuchi.
Date 2007/Oct./23 FNAL-GDE-Meeting Global Design Effort 1 Cryomodule Interface Definition (FNAL-GDE-Meeting) N. Ohuchi.
1 K.Jensch, D.Kostin, DESY - Cryomodule components List S1 – DESY parts DESY parts for the S1 Cavity-String.
LASA Medium-β Cavity Progress Update Paolo Michelato 2 nd ESS Collaboration Meeting - SRF Elliptical Cavities 15 th December 2015.
TILC09 SCRF Session Global Design Effort 1 EU Status TILC09 SCRF Session Lutz Lilje DESY.
Definition of Work Area H. Hayano, KEK EDR-KOM-cavity at DESY Issues of Cavity and Cavity Package, Work Package discussion.
Medium Beta Cavities Paolo Michelato, Paolo Pierini, and Carlo Pagani INFN Milano - LASA.
Medium beta cavities Paolo Michelato, Paolo Pierini, Carlo Pagani INFN Milano - LASA.
Industrial Participation & SRF Infrastructure at Fermilab Phil Pfund with input from Harry Carter, Rich Stanek, Mike Foley, Dan Olis, and others.
30 May 2007 DESY Cryomodule Discussion 1 Type 4 Cryomodule Technical Discussion Tom Peterson Compiled from various previous meeting notes and many sources.
What’s Inside a TESLA Cryomodule Tom Peterson Proton Driver Meeting February 9, 2005.
Global Design Effort Main Linac Technology System Kick-off Meeting Cavity Summary 20 Sept 2007 DESY Marc Ross.
S1 global: thermal analysis TILC09, April 19th, 2009 Serena Barbanotti Paolo Pierini.
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.
Date 2007/Sept./12-14 EDR kick-off-meeting Global Design Effort 1 Cryomodule Interface definition N. Ohuchi.
Beijing ILC Workshop Global Design Effort 1 Main Linac EDR: Cavity & Cryomodule Discussion Lutz Lilje DESY.
ALCPG/GDE Meeting FNAL Global Design Effort 1 Cavity Specification Table 23 Oct 2007 FNAL Lutz Lilje DESY.
S1-Global status report KEK Norihito Ohuchi 2008/11/171ILC08-GDE-Meeting-Chicago.
Tuner, Coupler WP & specification table H. Hayano, KEK GDE Sendai.
Plug compatibility discussion TILC09 cavity integration session H. Hayano.
CM2 Helium Circuit Vacuum Leak & Repair Tug Arkan, 6/18/
CW Cryomodules for Project X Yuriy Orlov, Tom Nicol, and Tom Peterson Cryomodules for Project X, 14 June 2013Page 1.
A Proposal for FJPPL (TYL) Development of Frequency Tuners Optimization and Cryomodule Integration for 1.3 GHz SRF Cavities G. Devanz, F. Nunio, O. Napoly.
Global Design Effort Close-Out Points EDR time-scale (2010) –No demonstrations to ILC-like RF unit –3(?) CMs constructed at FNAL – not RDR baseline –2(?)
ILC : Type IV Cryomodule Design Meeting Main cryogenic issues, L. Tavian, AT-ACR C ryostat issues, V.Parma, AT-CRI CERN, January 2006.
LCLS-II 3 rd Harmonic Dressed Cavity Design Review Chuck Grimm November 20, 2015.
The Evolving ILC Project
TDR guideline discussion on Cavity Integration
CERN – Zanon discussions
Status and plans for the 3.9 GHz section of XFEL
WP5 Elliptical cavities
Meeting for S1-Global module design Cryomodule and Cryogenics
S1-G Webex meeting Global Design Effort
Main Linac EDR: Cavity & Cryomodule Discussion
Jiyuan Zhai ( IHEP ) TTC Meeting, JLAB, 6 Nov 2012
Yamamoto WG3: ML-SCRF Parallel Session,
TESLA Cryomodule Design Ratinales
Module Evolution from TTF to XFEL/ILC
IHEP Cryomodule Status
Nick Walker (DESY) EU GDE Meeting Oxford
CEPC-650MHz Cavity Cryomodule
ERL Director’s Review Main Linac
Presentation transcript:

Carlo Pagani University of Milano INFN Milano-LASA & GDE ILC and XFEL Cryomodules Preliminary thoughts for convergence ILC EDR Kick-off Meeting DESY, September 2007

ILC EDR Cavity Kick-off Meet, DESY, 20 Sep 2007 Carlo Pagani 2 Present XFEL/ILC Differences Cryomodules: the Linac Building Blocks Cavity distance and Quadrupole length: –Just “2 parameters” in the 3 D model Quadrupole position: –In the XFEL is maintained because of the required effort. Number of cavities per module: –XFEL maintains 8, ILC has in one cryounit –ILC numbers could be reviewed if beneficial ? Cavity ancillaries: –Couplers: same baseline –Tuner: 2 alternatives on baseline. It could easily converge –Magnetic shield: tuner dependent Module ancillaries: –vacuum, beam pipe HOM, BPM, diagnostics: they could converge easily at least in term of interfaces.

ILC EDR Cavity Kick-off Meet, DESY, 20 Sep 2007 Carlo Pagani 3 General Remarks The present XFEL cryomodule is very close to the present ILC baseline design. Both are derived by the TTF Type III. A part from few parametric details (cavity distance and quadrupole length), the 2 modules could be set almost identical, or at lest compatible (consistent interfaces) A possible joint effort to reinforce convergence, if agreed upon by the two Project Managements, would have a number of unequivocal benefits, mainly for the ILC, but for the XFEL too: –Maintain a strong links between the two projects –Have XFEL as a large size ILC prototype –ILC cost saving by sharing the XFEL invaluable experience on industrialization and consequent cost saving managing QA and QC with industry effective cavity gradient and yield reliability issues of major components ……………………………

ILC EDR Cavity Kick-off Meet, DESY, 20 Sep 2007 Carlo Pagani 4 Convergence Effort: Cryomodule -1 Use a unique 3D reference design, as the parametric one being developed at Fermilab for Type IV, in a collaborative effort that include: DESY, INFN and KEK: 1.Cavity spacing can be a parameter  TTF type cavity on both baselines from iris to iris  End group lengths according to the project, with coupler port fixed  Same cavity bellow interface 2.Quadrupole package length can be a parameter  Quadrupole-BPM packages will be different in term of length and weight, but can be identical in term of major interfaces 3.Interfaces between components can to be the same:  the same interfaces between cavity and cold mass  the same interfaces between quadrupole package and cold mass  equal coupler ports and cavity flanges (bolts and seal position)  The same relative position of pipe axis and pipe diameters  Post position moves, according to parameters in points 1 & 2  Vacuum Vessel flange position from the parameters in points 1 & 2

ILC EDR Cavity Kick-off Meet, DESY, 20 Sep 2007 Carlo Pagani 5 Convergence Effort: Cryomodule Minor modified details can be re-equalized on the baselines  TTF experience is excellent in term of cost and performances  Each detail modification should be documented and proved  If its effect turns out being justified in term of performances and cost, the detail modification should be included in the baseline.  Unjustified, unproved or just marginal detail modification should be avoided to maintain the value of a common design and experience 5.Most of the linked documentation can be almost identical  Material properties, production critical steps, etc.  QC and QA specification and required production documentation  Pressure vessel qualification (ASME should be good for all)  Vibration analysis (scaled as point 1)) and transportation issues Major consequences for the two projects XFEL should move the quadrupole in the center ILC should renounce to the scheme

ILC EDR Cavity Kick-off Meet, DESY, 20 Sep 2007 Carlo Pagani 6 Convergence on Cavity Ancillaries Power coupler: Baseline designs are convergent Tuner and Tuner dependent ancillaries: Helium Vessel and Magnetic Shield: Two are the possible scenarios: –Standard Saclay-Tuner selected for XFEL System compatibility at the cavity interconnection and cold mass interface: cavity flanges, sliding pads, invar rod connection, etc. –Blade Tuner is chosen for the XFEL Identical baseline cavity packages (apart beam tube length) XFEL Tuner decision is expected in the next few months –Standard tuner with piezo installed in module # 6 Successfully operated up to 35 with 2 subsequent pulses Still some problem on assembly reproducibility (pizo pre-load) –Blade tuner with piezo (with SS) tested last week on Chechia Impressively good preliminary results at 23 MV/m with an adapted helium tank: 1 pulse, 1 piezo (40mm), 65 V (200 V available) Some details to be set on the final version Both close to final, Cost considerations will be dominant

ILC EDR Cavity Kick-off Meet, DESY, 20 Sep 2007 Carlo Pagani 7 Benefits for the ILC and the XFEL Supposing for a moment that we were living in a ideal world and that the same convergent design were adopted both for the XFEL construction, and for the ILC baseline. I could expect: A few positive consequences for the ILC: –All the huge XFEL experience would be quotable for ILC –Results from the ongoing R&D dedicated to performance improvement and cost cutting would have a well defined reference for comparison. –Motivations for changes would be forced to be more justified. –The best ideas and results would easily win A few positive consequence for the XFEL –Maintain the global SRF expert community behind the project –Sustain a global interest behind the XFEL Technology success to consistently increase the success probability.