ILC Status - Baseline Design

1. ILC Status - Baseline Design 250 250 Gev 250 Gev • e+ e- Linear Collider • Energy 250 Gev x 250 Gev • Length 11 + 11 km • # of RF units 560 • # of cryomodules 1680 • # of 9-cell cavities 14560 • 2 Detectors push-pull • 2e34 peak luminosity • 5 Hz rep rate, 1000 -> 6000 bunches per cycle • IP spots sizes: sx 350 – 620 nm; sy 3.5 – 9.0 nm

2. ILC Status– Alternate designs The concept is to investigate the removal of conservative features of the design to save money and/or simplify the design: Single tunnel Low loss waveguide power distribution potentially allows the rf sources to be placed on the surface and spaced ~ 1km apart. Reliability concerns which largely determined the second tunnel concept thus negated. Also reduces tunnel cooling requirements. Personnel safety remains an issue Shallow site central campus Bring the collision points, beam delivery system, and damping rings close to the surface Reduced beam power Compensate with brighter beams and/or collisions point optics. Simplifies rf sources, beam dumps, collimation systems etc…. + ……………. ?

3. ILC Status - Global R&D Program What are the drivers for the global program ? Cost Risk • Main Linac RF systems (cavity gradient & yield, cryomodules, HLRF etc.. • Conventional construction/facilities Technical Risk • Electron cloud effects in the damping rings • Beam delivery system (small beams) Production Risk (industrial involvement) • Technology transfer • Volume production Cost cavity gradient MV/m

4. ILC status - R&D planning We are currently planning a ~4 year R&D phase which results in a Project Proposal by 2012 • RF unit system test –3 CM + beam • KEK and Fermilab • Complete the technical design and R&D needed for project proposal ( some exceptions) • Documented design • Complete and reliable cost roll up • Project plan developed by consensus • Cryomodule Global Manufacturing Scenario • Siting Plan or Process • Project Implementation Plan What won’t be done:- • Detailed Engineering Design • (final engineering, drawings, industry, etc) will follow before construction. • Global CM industrial plant construction

5. Americas Region - FY08 Status • The FY08 omnibus spending bill capped US DOE FY08 ART funding at $15M (SRF $5M). Since we were 3 months into the fiscal year with a $60M CR guidance this was tantamount to a ‘cease work’ for the balance of FY08. NSF Cornell support was minimally impacted. • All spending was halted ~ 1 Jan and a count of funds remaining at the labs indicated an unobligated balance of ~ $2.5M under the cap. A skeleton program continues in FY08. • GDE Common Fund ($400K) • GDE Collaboration management (4 FTE’s: Barish, Ross, Harrison, Carwardine) + some travel for meetings • CESR TA support ($1m) • ‘Keep alive’ SRF program (~$1.5M) • There is some level of ‘generic’ support through the FY08 base program

6. US ILC Program – P5 advisory committee (selected quotes) • If the optimum initial energy proves to be at or below approximately 500 GeV, then the International Linear Collider is the most mature option with a construction start possible in the next decade. • The cost and scale of a lepton collider mean that it would be an international project, with the cost shared by many nations. – • International negotiations will determine the siting; the host will be assured of scientific leadership at the energy frontier. • A requirement for initial energy much higher than the ILC’s 500 GeV will mean considering other collider technologies • Whatever the technology of a future lepton collider, and wherever it is located, the US should plan to play a major role. • The panel recommends for the near future a broad accelerator and detector R&D program for lepton colliders that includes continued R&D on ILC at roughly the proposed FY2009 level in support of the international effort. This will ensure a significant role for the US even if the ILC is built overseas.

7. Americas Region - FY09 Program • The FY09 presidents budget shows US ILC at $35.3M (The House & Senate consistent with this) • The out year assumption is constant level of effort for the next several years • No detailed US ILC multi-year program yet but it is conceptually compatible with the new GDE R&D plan. Strategic goals for ART -> • Preserve collaborative commitment to the GDE • Provide contributions to the ILC R&D program which are unique to the US • Support a value engineering effort in the medium term • Maintain US program in ILC SRF R&D • Project X synergy (SRF, HLRF, LLRF, accelerator physics)

8. ART DOE FY09 Funding by System

9. Americas Region ILC Program - major elements (2009 – 2012) • Cavities & Cryomodules – Fermilab (ANL, JLAB, Cornell) • RF Systems – SLAC • Damping rings electron cloud – Cornell (DOE & NSF) • Beam delivery systems/Detector Interface – SLAC (BNL)

10. ILC Key Technologies – cavities & cryomodules • Status • Maintain US presence in the GDE SRF program but no out year ramp up. • No industrialization (tech transfer only). • Consistent with 2012 systems tests (joint goal between ART & Fermilab). • Gradient program at JLAB & Cornell (+ANL/Fermilab) • Cryomodule prototyping at Fermilab (cryomodule engineering, cryomodule parts, testing etc….. $25M over 4 yrs) • Note: cryomodule development assumes some Fermilab infrastructure • Global Plug compatibility

11. ILC Key Technologies – RF systems • Next generation hardware under development (SLAC) • Solid state modulator, sheet beam permanent magnet klystron, tunable distribution system

12. ILC Key Technologies – Cryogenics & Conventional Facilities • Key Technologies but less R&D-like: • ILC cryogenic system similar in scale to the LHC currently ‘cold’ at CERN (27km at 1.8K). We will obviously learn a great deal in the next several years from full operations. • LHC Sector1/2 status as of yesterday:- The arc has been electrically qualified during the week and the DC cables are now being connected to the current leads of both DFBAs. The QPS tests and the power converters unlocking will follow next week from Tuesday with the aim of starting the powering tests on Friday. The problem with the level gauges of the stand alone magnets in the long straight sections are being solved and once the last boil-off tests are analyzed they will go through ELQA next week. Finally, the DFBX of point 2L, after the installation of the heaters and temperature sensors, will be delivered for the ELQA next Tuesday. The one in point 1R will be ready in about two weeks. • CFS issues involve design choices more than anything

13. ILC Key Technologies – High Accuracy Instrumentation • Mostly this work is based on the GDE beam test facilities. • The ATF2 (Accelerator Test Facility at KEK in Japan) facility is concerned with demonstrating very precise beam position measurements in a facsimile of the collision region. Beam stabilizing feedback systems, beam spot instrumentation measurements systems, precise collimation and eventually vibration and mechanical controls. This work involves a global collaboration not just the US. • CESR TA (Cornell) is utilizing specialized vacuum components and instrumentation in an R&D program of beam dynamics associated with unwanted electrons and very bright beams

14. ILC Key Technologies – High Availability systems • High Availability power supplies: • M+1 redundant power modules • Redundant regulators • 38 power supply units delivered to KEK for ATF2 ART Controls was all but brought to a stand-still by the FY08 budget Key expertise has been lost to other programs

15. ILC Status - Summary • The FY08 omnibus spending bill resulted in an immediate cessation of most of the Americas region efforts. • The ART planning assumptions have changed significantly in the past 12 months. The recent US & UK funding decisions result in a more R&D like (less –engineering like) phase for the next few years. • The ILC budget is $35.3M in FY09 appropriations • The proposed US Program is well aligned with the GDE R&D program as well as the national and lab based programs. • We (GDE) are aiming to have a project proposal ready on the ~2012 timescale • A continuing resolution in FY09 is (of course) based on the FY08 funding and will prove difficult