1 / 25

Summary of Working Group 1 Linear Colliders and Light Sources

C. Christou, M. Dehler. Summary of Working Group 1 Linear Colliders and Light Sources. Goals: Review state of the art in linear colliders and light sources Applicability of X band structures as basic building blocks Demands for X band power sources and accelerating structures.

fletcher-carroll
Download Presentation

Summary of Working Group 1 Linear Colliders and Light Sources

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. C. Christou, M. Dehler Summary of Working Group 1Linear Colliders and Light Sources

  2. Goals: • Review state of the art in linear colliders and light sources • Applicability of X band structures as basic building blocks • Demands for X band power sources and accelerating structures

  3. One dedicated session heavily concentrated on light sources (3 presentations), one lost sheep from WG2 • Global joint session, our special focus X band sources, availability and cost • Joint with WG4: Standard components

  4. RF Systems Booster: 500MHz 1 x 5 cell Cu PETRA cavity1 x 60kW IOT Storage ring: 500MHz 3 x 1 cell Nb Cornell cavities3 x 300kW IOT complex Linac: 3GHz 2 x 5.2m Cu DESY structures 2 x 35MW klystronsbunchers Cavities from Accel. Amplifiers from Thales

  5. Beamtime Statistics (to end Sep.) 2008: 3177h delivered with 95.0% uptime, MTBF = 14.6 h 2007: 3120h delivered with 92.4% uptime, MTBF = 10.0 h

  6. The UK’s New Light Source Project Project to consider the scientific case and develop a conceptual design for a possible next generation light source based on a combination of advanced conventional laser and free-electron laser sources. • STFC Daresbury and Rutherford Laboratories • Accelerator Science and Technology Centre (ASTeC) • Central Laser Facility (CLF) • Diamond Light Source • John Adams and Cockcroft accelerator institutes • Various Universities • NLS Progress • Official Launch, April 11th 2008 • Science Workshops, May 13th – June 19th • Draft Science Case published, Sep. 11th • Science Case approved by the Physical And Life Science committee of the STFC, Oct. 17th  approval to proceed to the design stage www.newlightsource.org

  7. NLS: normal conducting option S-band for acceleration X-band for phase space linearisation at input to BC1

  8. NLS: superconducting option Possible SRF Linac Parameters for NLS

  9. Upgrade Paths • Higher photon energies, ≥ 1.5 keV – additional linac • Increased rep. rate, ≥ 10 kHz – VHF/SC gun • Longitudinal coherence to ≥ 1 keV – improved seeding sources • Shorter pulses, ≤ 1 fs – slicing/single-spike • Additional FELs/experimental stations • Latest News • NLS Project Governing Body agreed on Nov. 19th to proceed with the cw superconducting option. • Studies will now concentrate on both the straight and recirculating SC linac options, with 1 keV baseline photon energy.

  10. 4th Generation Machines Worldwide Blue – single-stage Red – multi-stage (inc. harmonic correction) Yellow – ERL (various methods) Bold – they have measured that bunch length NLS SC Design NLS NC Design • Users want 1kHz rep. rate, 20fs pulses, 3 GeV ideally • Our initial interpretation, a ~1 GeV SC linac, upgradable to 3 GeV • Other approach, a 3 GeV NC linac (R. Bartolini) • Recirculating option being developed

  11. Similar Schemes to a SC NLS WiFEL Both about 2 GeV Both about 600 m (facility) LBNL

  12. An NLS SC Design (Hywel Owen and Peter Williams) • 735 MeV chosen as it corresponds to 1 nm, the limit for HHG seeding i.e. this is a possible extraction energy where we want short bunches • Compression scheme must be carefully designed – linearisation, cavity wakefield compensation, CSR, LSC • 200 pC bunch charge chosen, based injector on XFEL • EPAC08: MOPC034, MOPC035 available at www.jacow.org • PR-STAB in preparation

  13. Why superconducting in the UK? ‘Mega-facilities’ already under construction – LCLS, XFEL, SCSS, with different pulse patterns, but all ‘low rep. rate’. Provide short wavelength output c. 1 A. Lower-energy ‘low rep. rate’ facilities already operating, under construction or proposed – FLASH, FERMI, MAXLAB etc. Low rep. rate machine (e.g. up to 400 Hz) can use NC cavities, e.g. S-band, C-band, using established technology – therefore cheap, but not competitive • User advantages of SC all from higher rep. rate • Bunch properties about the same • Synchronisation might be easier • Experiments faster, or different ones possible • Disadvantages: • Greater Capital cost (about 1.7 times cf. NC on NLS) • Cryoplant • Lower gradient than C-band (about the same as S-band) – up to 20 MV/m • An X-band solution should compete on: • Higher gradient • Lower cost cf. SC • Rep. rate higher than 1 kHz to compete against S-band • At lower energies, want all X-band to minimise facility length • Wakefields an issues for short bunch production (important)

  14. FERMI@Elettra Linac Experimental Hall Spreader & FEL Hall • Financed by • MIUR • FVG Region • EIB

  15. FERMI objectives Construction of a single-pass FEL User Facility, in the soft X-ray region, based on the existing Normal Conducting S-band Linac. • Beam energy 1.2 GeV (Phase I), 1.5 GeV (Phase II) • 10-50 Hz pulse repetition rate, 1 e-bunch/pulse • Seeded operation with Harmonic Generation • Spectral range: • Phase I 100 (80) – 40 (20) nm, single stage • Phase II 40 (20) – 10 (5) nm, two stages • Short sub-ps pulses  200 fs • Flexible polarization, gap tuning, apple type undulators

  16. LCLS TUE APS 1.6 cell 2.6 cell 1.0 HOM FERMI machine layout X-Band structure Laser heater E~100 MeV E3=1200/1500 MeV 7 nose cone BW_TW 3/4 p (6.1 m) with Sled 9 Slac type FW_TW 2/3 p (3.0 - 4.5 m) without Sled

  17. Firstphotoelectrons Courtesy of M. Trovo’

  18. Cost discussion • Main cost driver is klystron • Usual economies of scale apply • Price starts coming down over 10 units • CLIC will require larger number of X-band klystrons for testing, commissioning… • Specification still not standardised

More Related