Uknf 24 th june 2003
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 28

UKNF – 24 th June 2003 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 82 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

UKNF – 24 th June 2003. SR proposals: Introduction - Ken Long Proton Driver - Ian Gardner Targetry - Paul Drumm Design Study - Rob Edgecock World-wide Design Study - Rob Edgecock Status of MICE - Giles Barr

Download Presentation

UKNF – 24 th June 2003

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Uknf 24 th june 2003

UKNF – 24th June 2003

  • SR proposals:Introduction- Ken LongProton Driver - Ian GardnerTargetry- Paul DrummDesign Study- Rob Edgecock

  • World-wide Design Study- Rob Edgecock

  • Status of MICE- Giles Barr

  • Summary of NuFact’03- Peter Norton

  • MuScat 2003- Malcolm Ellis


Other stuff

Other stuff

  • UK Neutrino Factory design- Complete layout at RAL- Incorporates proton driver and target work

  • World-wide design study- Introduction- View from Europe- “ “ Japan- “ “ US- Conclusions of discussion at NuFact’03

  • Summary of bid


Uk neutrino factory design

Target

Cooling

Proton driver

UK Neutrino Factory Design

RAL Neutrino Factory layout


Nf layout

NF Layout

  • Need to complete current design work:- proton driver (HARP results)- targetry- muon frontend

  • Need to extend to remainder of machine- muon acceleration- storage ring

  • Need to optimise

  • Need to produce coherent design


Frontend without cooling

Frontend without Cooling

Grahame Rees et al

Pion-muon decay channel

88 MHz muon linac


Frontends with cooling

Frontends with Cooling


Frontends without cooling

Frontends without Cooling

Solenoid

channel

Es=190MeV

Solenoid

channel

Es=190MeV

RF phase

rotation

channel

Es=190MeV

Inverse

rotation

channel

Es=190MeV

Linac

Es=400MeV

(Transmission

=77%)

Linac

Es=400MeV

Transmission comparable to 44/88MHz scheme


Rings

Rings

Grahame Rees et al

S = solenoid, A = absorber, 36 cavities in blocks of 3

  • Hybrid ring, using solenoids and dipoles

  • 44m circumference: 18m straights, 4m bends

  • 4m sections for injection and extraction

  • Initial results looking promising


World wide design study

World-Wide Design Study

  • Introduction

  • View from Europe - RE

  • “ “ Japan- Yoshi Kuno

  • “ “ US- Mike Zisman

  • Conclusions from the discussion


Introduction

Introduction

  • Two years since Study II

  • A lot has been done since then

  • Time to start thinking about a third study

  • Much better:world study

  • Europe, Japan and US

  • Parallel session of WG3 devoted to this

  • Views of each region

  • Discussion on how to form world-wide study


View from europe

View from…….Europe

  • No design study so far

  • Work started late 1990s

  • Much achieved

  • Two layouts: CERN (complete) RAL (under development)

  • Effort dramatically reduced by CERN budget cuts

  • ECFA task forces re-organised  European Neutrino Group

  • Very important: rejuvenate EU activities


Design study european view

Design Study – European View

  • Fixed by EU Framework 6 programme

  • FP5: 2 Neutrino Factory related bids, both failed

  • FP6: ESGARD formed - coordinated bid for accelerator R&D

  • Two areas of interest: Integrating ActivitiesDesign Studies

  • IA proposal already submitted: LHC upgrade, LC, NF

  • Basically for improving existing infrastructure

IA  Neutrino Factory, superbeam, beta beam networkHIPPI JRA


Fp6 design studies

FP6 Design Studies

  • EC will contribute to:

  • Feasibility studies – paper studies

  • Technical Preparatory Work – hardware

  • On new research infrastructures with a clear European dimension and interest.

  • Includes: future facilities of world-wide relevance not existing in Europe infrastructures constructed outside EU!


Fp6 design studies1

FP6 Design Studies

Feasibility studies

  • Aim: Lay conceptual foundations for new infrastructure

  • Methods:

  • Basic feasibility study

  • Explore new fundamental technology

  • Detailed engineering design, particularly most advanced

TPW

  • Includes:

  • Development and testing of critical components, sub-systems, materials or techniques, including software

  • Does not include:

  • preparatory work based on existing or proven techniques

  • reproduction of available components or materials


Fp6 design studies2

FP6 Design Studies

Funding:

  • Total budget: 200M€; 70M€ in first call

  • EC contribution per project  10M€

  • 50% matching required(?)

Timing:

  • Call for proposals:October 2003

  • Deadline:Spring 2004

  • Evaluation results:Summer 2004

  • Contract signatures:Start 2005


Design study bid

Design Study Bid

  • EU will make FP6 Design Study bid

  • Essential to re-build activities in Europe

  • Host laboratory: RAL (possibly!)

  • Much better if part of world-wide design study

  • FP6 allows for/encourages this

  • May also provide some funding

  • Aim: ?DR for a Neutrino Factory ~2009


View from japan

View from……Japan

  • Design study published July 2002

  • Little support from KEK management

  • Based on FFAGs


View from japan1

View from……Japan


View from japan2

View from……Japan


View from japan3

View from……Japan

Staging

Physics outcomes

at each stage

  • High Power Proton Driver

    • Muon g-2

  • Muon Factory (PRISM)

    • Muon LFV

  • Muon Factory-II (PRISM-II)

    • Muon EDM

  • Neutrino Factory

    • Based on 1 MW proton beam

  • Neutrino Factory-II

    • Based on 4.4 MW proton beam

  • Muon Collider


View from japan4

View from……Japan

My interpretation of conclusions

  • Would support a world-wide design study

  • Concern expressed about overlap due to FFAGs

  • Would prefer some level of overlap for activeparticipation

  • Timescale depends on J-PARCnu, LC, etc


View from us

View from……..US

Two feasibility studies so far in US

FS1:

  • Instigated by FNAL director

  • MC invited to participate

  • Focus was on feasibility

  • First attempt to specify NF from end-to-end

  • Design based on (reasonably) well understood technology

  • No attempt to optimise cost

  • Cost was a deliverable

  • Feasibility was established

  • Performance poor, costs high


View from us1

View from……..US

FS2:

  • Collaboration between MC and BNL director

  • BNL managers able to draw on resources

  • Goal: maintain feasibility, but improve performance

  • Cost optimisation again given lower priority

  • Performance: 6x Study I

  • Cost: 75% (but only one RLA)

  • Still too high


View from us2

View from……..US

FS3:

  • Need to reduce cost

  • Much progress already:Neuffer RF phase rotationFFAG ring or VRCSRing coolers

  • Need to look for optimum betweenProton driverCoolingAccelerationDetector

  • But much better if world-wide study

  • Possible host site (MICE): RAL


Discussion

Discussion

Should there be a world-wide design study?

Yes

How should we proceed?

Create a steering group

US:Steve GeerBob PalmerMike Zisman

Japan:Yoshi KunoYoshi MoriKenso Nakamura

Europe:Alain Blondel(?)Rob EdgecockHelmut Haseroth

What should be included?

Accelerator and detector

Name?

WDS1(?)


Discussion1

Discussion

Timescale?

Format?

Host laboratory?

Aim?

Etc…..


Cost summary

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

Neutrino Factory Design

FTE

0.1

2.0

4.0

8.0

Staff cost

7.

146.

304.

640.

Capital and recurrent

0.

10.

50.

500.

VAT (17.5%)

0.

2.

9.

18.

Travel

1.

3.

10.

20.

Sub-total

8.

161.

373.

1178.

Proton Driver

FTE

1.9

5.0

9.0

16.0

Staff cost

133.

365.

684.

1280.

Capital and recurrent

0.

500.

500.

1000.

VAT (17.5%)

0.

88.

88.

175.

Travel

3.

7.

20.

40.

Sub-total

136.

960.

1292.

2395.

Cost Summary


Cost summary1

Target Studies

FTE

0.7

5.0

10.0

12.0

Staff cost

50.

365.

760.

960.

Capital and recurrent

0.

360.

900.

1000.

VAT (17.5%)

0.

63.

158.

175.

Travel

1.

10.

25.

30.

Sub-total

51.

798.

1843.

2165.

Design Study

FTE

0.5

0.5

3.5

5.0

Staff cost

35.

37.

266.

400.

Capital and recurrent

0.

0.

0.

50.

VAT (17.5%)

0.

0.

0.

9.

Travel

2.

2.

5.

10.

Sub-total

37.

39.

271.

469.

Total

232.

1958.

3779.

6207.

Working margin (10%)

23.

196.

378.

621.

TOTAL

255.

2154.

4157.

6828.

Cost Summary


  • Login