ECFA/BENE Future Neutrino Beam studies

1. ECFA/BENE Future Neutrino Beam studies Towards a comparison of options on equal footing Defining the next steps Aim of this presentation is to trigger discussion The ECFA/BENE Working groups (several 100 authors since 1998) recently published ‘ECFA/CERN studies of a European Neutrino Factory Complex' CERN 2004-002 ECFA/04/230 and Physics with a MMW proton driver (MMW workshop) +The beta beam working group beta-beam and high power target studies within EURISOL DESIGN STUDY (Lindroos + Lettry) http://muonstoragerings.cern.ch or bene.cern.ch

2. ENG/BENE Agenda 16th March 2005 • Meeting of the Target and Collector Section,  JRJ. Bennett • 09.30  [talk] Non Cylindrical Symmetric Shocks in LiquidJets J. Lettry & E. Robert • 09.45  [talk] Proton Induced Thermal Stress Wave Measurements in Solid targets   R. Wilfinger • 10.00   [talk] Status of the TT2A experiment   A. Fabich • 10.30   ---Coffee--- • 11.00   [talk]  Pion Yields from Mars Calculations                           S. Brooks • 11.30   [talk] The New UK Programme of Shock Measurements in Solids R. Bennett  • 12.00   [talk] LS-DYNA and ANSYS Calculations of Shock in Solids      G. Skoro • 12.30   Close • Afternoon session 1:30 PM 4:30 PM (PS auditorium) H. Haseroth, R. Edgecock • [talk]  Parameters of 2nd SPL feasibility study     A. Lombardi • [talk]  MMW target development for EURISOL and EUROTRANS     Y. Kadi • [talk]  Lifetime test of a MMW solid target                        R. Bennett---Coffee---  • [talk]  Frontend optimisation                                        S. Brooks • [talk]  Simulations of FFAG rings                               F. Meot/F. Lemuet • 4:45 PM  BetaBeam (PS auditorium) • [talk]  EURISOL and the Beta-Beam Tasks: Status and Planning  M. Lindroos • [talk]  The decay ring                                                 A. Chance

3. MUFRONT MUEND session 9:00-11:00,  F. Méot • [talk]  Insertions for muon FFAG rings                                     G. Rees • [talk]  FFAG e-model, lattice studies, beam dynamics                 E. Keil • [talk]  Beam transmission in isochronous FFAG lattices         F. Lemuet/F. Méot •           Plans for future studies                                  All participants • MICE session 11:30-14:30 / K. Long • [talk]  MICE beam line and experiment status                       P. Drumm[talk]  Simulations of MICE                                           R. Sandstroem[talk]  Particle by particle emittance measurement to high precision     C. Rogers[talk]  MICE cooling channel: can we predict cooling to 10-3?   E. Gschwendtner • Proton Driver session 14:30-18:00, C. Cavata • [talk]  P driver activities at CERN                                         R. Garoby • [talk]  P driver activities at Saclay                                         C. Cavata • [talk]  P driver activities at RAL                                             C.  Prior • [talk]  P driver activities in Italy                                         A. Pisent • [talk]  Proton driver for ADS applications                             J. L. Biarrotte •            identify answers (and dates) to be given  during 2005 

4. SPSC Recommendations (p.63) ●Future neutrino facilities offer great promise for fundamental discoveries (such as CP violation) in neutrino physics, and a post-LHC construction window may exist for a facility to be sited at CERN. ●CERN should arrange a budget and personnel to enhance its participation in further developing the physics case and the technologies necessary for the realization of such facilities. This would allow CERN to play a significant role in such projects wherever they are sited. ●A high-power proton driver is a main building block of future projects, and is therefore required. ●A direct superbeam from a 2.2 GeV SPL alone does not appear to be the most attractive option for a future CERN neutrino experiment as it does not produce a significant advance on T2K. ●We welcome the effort, partly funded by the EU, concerned with the conceptual design of a β-beam. At the same time CERN should support the European neutrino factory initiative in its conceptual design.

5. Garoby, 17 March 2005 Implications of SPSC Villars’s recommendations for the AB department are being sent to the Research Board Special INTC meeting (Villars – Oct. 2005) Þ new set of recommendations (nuclear physics community) Creation of an accelerator team to elaborate scenarios Accelerator studies in the frame of: CARE [EU supported Integrated Activity: “Coordinated Accelerator Research in Europe” including networks (BENE: “Beams for European Neutrino Experiments”, H3: “High energy, High intensity, High brightness” accelerators) and the Joint Research Activity HIPPI: “High Intensity Pulsed Proton Injectors”] LHC upgrade studies EURISOL Design Study [EU supported] Future of proton accelerators at CERN LHC will operate until ~ 2020 Þ Consolidation + LHC upgrade LHC will always be a part-time user of the injector complex ÞOther physics programmes can be covered if they are compatible with LHC needs. On top of value for science, synergy will be an important parameter.

6. This table will be reviewed by PAF group (Garoby et al) (Proton Accelerator for the Future) and physics by PoFPA (J. Ellis et al) (Physics of PAF) group HIP WG: long term alternatives * with brightness x2 ** need new injector(s)

7. Cut Yield of p+ and p− S. Brooks • Normalised to unit beam power (p.GeV) High energy yield now appears a factor of 2 over low energy, but how much of that kink is real?

8. 3-stage approach Stage 1: 3 MeV test place Þ development and test of linac equipment, beam characterization happening now • Stage 2: Linac4 • New linac replacing the present injector of the PS Booster (Linac2) • Front-end of the future SPL Þ improvement of the beams for physics (higher performance and easier operation for LHC, ISOLDE etc.) • Stage 3: SPL • New injector for the PS, replacing the PS Booster • New physics experiments using a high proton flux Þ improvement of the beams for physics and possibility of new experiments

9. CDR2 • expected by the end of 2005 • cointaining a feasibility study for a 3.5 GeV Superconducting H- LINAC based on 700 MHz cavities • results of the evolution of CDR1 with • contribution from CEA-Saclay, INFN Milano, HIPPI, ISTC ....

10. Stage 1: 3 MeV test place In construction. To be operational in 2007. (RFQ from France,3 MeV chopping line from CERN). The 3 MeV test stand will become the front-end of Linac4 and SPL

11. gradients at 700 MHz Last test performed in CryHoLab (July 04): 5-cells 700 MHz ß=0.65 Nb cavity A5-01 from CEA/Saclay and IPN-Orsay from Stephane Chel, HIPPI04, Frankfurt, sep04

12. Global planning RF tests in SM 18 of prototype structures* for Linac4 3 MeV test place ready Linac4 approval SPL approval CDR 2

13. Thermal Management: Liquid Target with window • MEGAPIE Project at PSI • 0.59 GeV proton beam • 1 MW beam power • Goals: • Demonstrate feasablility • One year service life • Irradiation in 2005 F. Groeschel et al. (PSI) Proton Beam KADI

14. Radiation Management this has been in operation for several years.

15. EURISOL – Multi-MW Target Participants Contributor P4 – CERN P18 – PSI Switzerland P19 – IPUL Latvia C5 – ORNL USA

16. EURISOL – Multi-MW Target

19. The CERN Neutrino Factory and Superbeam baseline scenario in general was very similar to PJK scenario • proton source= either (some version of) SPL (baseline) or RCS • advantages of SPL = better potential to increase power • disadvantage = need additional accumulator (SB) and compressor (NF) • to keep short (3 ms or 3 ns ) bunches • time structure = 144 bunches at 50Hz • operation cost? • 2. collector = horn (baseline) or 20T solenoid • horn is cheap and disposable. • Efficient for single sign, but one sign only. • synergy with Superbeam. 50Hz operation is hard • 3. RF phase rotation at 88 MHz. • Allowed one bunch of muons per bunch of protons. • Muon-collider compatible! can this do both signs? • 4. there never was an end-to-end simulation, • performance was evaluated with interfaces.