a first look at the tlep accelerator n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
A First Look at the TLEP Accelerator PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
A First Look at the TLEP Accelerator

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 32

A First Look at the TLEP Accelerator - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 97 Views
  • Uploaded on

A First Look at the TLEP Accelerator. Frank Zimmermann, CERN-BE o n behalf of the TLEP SG TH Seminar, 16 October 2013. thanks to R. Aleksan, R. Assmann , M. Benedikt, A . Blondel, Y . Cai, O . Dominguez, J . Ellis, B. Holzer, P . Janot, M . Koratzinos,

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'A First Look at the TLEP Accelerator' - joshua


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
a first look at the tlep accelerator

A First Look at the TLEP Accelerator

Frank Zimmermann, CERN-BE

on behalf of the TLEP SG

TH Seminar, 16 October 2013

  • thanks to R. Aleksan, R. Assmann, M. Benedikt, A. Blondel,
  • Y. Cai, O. Dominguez, J. Ellis, B. Holzer, P. Janot, M. Koratzinos,
  • H. Maury Cuna, S. Myers, K. Ohmi, K. Oide, J. Osborne,
  • L. Rossi, J. Seeman, V. Telnov, R. Tomas, J. Wenninger,
  • S. White, U. Wienands, K. Yokoya, M. Zanetti, …

Work supported by the European Commission under Capacities 7th Framework Programme, Grant Agreement 312453

slide2

circular colliders & storage rings

CESR

BEPC

LEP

Tevatron

LEP2

HERA

DAFNE

PEP-II

KEKB

BEPC-II

LHC

SuperKEKB (soon)

3rd generation light sources

  • since 1960 ~30 ring colliders successfully built & operated

1992ESRF, France (EU) 6 GeV

ALS, US 1.5-1.9 GeV

1993 TLS, Taiwan 1.5 GeV

1994ELETTRA, Italy 2.4 GeV

PLS, Korea 2 GeV

MAX II, Sweden 1.5 GeV

1996APS, US 7 GeV

LNLS, Brazil 1.35 GeV

1997 Spring-8, Japan 8 GeV

1998BESSY II, Germany 1.9 GeV

2000ANKA, Germany 2.5 GeV

SLS, Switzerland 2.4 GeV

2004SPEAR3, US 3 GeV

CLS, Canada 2.9 GeV

2006: SOLEIL, France 2.8 GeV

DIAMOND,UK 3 GeV

ASP, Australia 3 GeV

MAX III, Sweden 700 MeV

Indus-II, India 2.5 GeV

2008SSRF, China3.4 GeV

2009PETRA-III, Germany 6 GeV

2011ALBA, Spain 3 GeV

  • + many more e±storage-ring light sources (with ever smaller transverse emittance)

well understood technology &

typically exceeding design performance

within a few years

slide3

LEP achievements

integrated luminosity

peak

luminosity

evenbetter at higher energy

emittance ratio ex/ey

R. Assmann

Chamonix XI & APAC’01

slide4

TLEP design targets

  • c.m. energies: 240 GeV (ZH)

+ 91(Z), 160(WW), 350(), [+ 500 GeV (ZHH,H)?]

  • luminosities: L: several 1034 cm-2s-1/IP at ZH,

>> 1035cm-2s-1/IP at the Z

  • polarization up to WW for ~100 keV energy calibration
  • extendibility – reusing tunnel + infrastructure for 100-TeVppcollider, 1st step in HEP long-term vision

P. Janot et al,

arxiv1308.6176

k ey constraints in words
key constraints: in words …
  • SR power 100 MW ↔ wall plug power → beam current
  • limit on beam-beam tune shift:
    • extrapolated from LEP2 & KEKB & other colliders
  • #bunches ↔ luminosity, e-cloud, parasitic collisions
  • hor. emittanceex: bending radius r, optics (#magnets)
  • emittance ratio ey/ex: alignment, tuning, beam-beam
  • vertical b*y,: bunch length & optics
  • beam lifetime:
    • radiativeBhabha scattering (unavoidable)
    • beamstrahlung(design optimization)
and in formulae

… and in formulae

… and in formulae

SR radiation

power limit

beam-beam limit

constrained by beamstrahlung

to be reduced as much as possible!

slide7

lifetime limit: rad. Bhabha scattering

beam lifetime

at beam-beam limit:

s for rad. Bhabha:

help from theorists?

H. Burkhardt, R. Kleiss,

EPAC1994

  • LEP2: tbeam,LEP2~ 6 h (~30% suppression: s~0.21 barn)
  • TLEP with L~5x1034 cm−2s−1 at 4 IPs:
  • tbeam,TLEP~21 minutes, unavoidable
slide8

lifetime limit: beamstrahlung (BS)

  • synchrotron radiation in the strong field of opposing beam
  • make some e± lose large part of their energy
  • h: momentum acceptance
  • sx: horizontal beam size at IP

Note: Many theoretical beamstrahlung studies in 1980’s. Example R. Blankenbecler, S.D. Drell , “A Quantum Treatment of Beamstrahlung,” Phys.Rev. D36 (1987) 277

& then be lost→ limited beam lifetime

with

V. Telnov, PRL 110 (2013) 114801

  • mitigations:
  • (1) large momentum acceptance h
  • (2) flat beams [i.e. small ey & large bx*]
  • (3) fast replenishing

→minimize ke=ey/ex, by~bx(ey/ex) & respect by≥sz

slide9

from LEP2 to TLEP-H

  • larger ring: higher energy or beam current
  • 4-5 x more SR power: 23 MW → 100 MW
  • a few times smaller emittanceat equal energy (r, cell length)
  • by* reduced by factor 50

- also requires smaller sz ~ by*

(natural for larger ring)

- steady-state BS energy spread ≤0.3%

  • top up injection to support short lifetime
slide10

TLEP: double ring with topping up

A. Blondel

short beam lifetime (~tLEP2/40) due to high luminosity supported by top-up injection (used at KEKB, PEP-II, SLS,…); top-up also avoids ramping & thermal transients, + eases tuning

slide11

top-up injection: schematic cycle

beam current in collider (15 min. beam lifetime)

100%

99%

almost constant current

energy of accelerator ring

120 GeV

injection into collider

injection into

accelerator

20 GeV

acceleration time = 1.6 s

(assuming SPS ramp rate)

10 s

top up performance at pep ii babar

top-up injection at PEP-II

top-up performance at PEP-II/BaBar

Before Top-Up

After Top-Up

J. Seeman

J. Seeman

average luminosity ≈ peak luminosity

similar results from KEKB

slide13

TLEP Main Parameters

energy = 91, 160, 240, 350 & 500 GeV c.m.

circumference ~100 km

total SR power ≤ 100 MW

#IPs = 2 or 4

beam-beam tune shift / IP scaled from LEP

luminosity / IP ~ 5x1034cm-2s-1 at the Higgs

~1000 x LEP2

top-up injection

by* = 1 mm ~ sz

slide15

com-parison

with LEP2

slide16

TLEP

energy

upgrade?

slide17

similar proposals around the world

SLAC/LBNL

design:

27 km

TLEP: 80 or 100 km

near Geneva

LEP3: 27 km

TLEP (LEP4): 80 km

near Geneva

SuperTRISTAN in Tsukuba: 40 (& 60 or 80 “TLEP”) km

or HF in 27-km

LHC tunnel

(“LEP3”)

Y. Cai,

U. Wienands,

A. Chao et al

Mike Koratzinos et al

K. Oide

FNAL site filler, 16 km

FNAL Snowmass proposal:

100 km “TLEP”

& FNAL VLLC 233 km ring

Chinese Higgs Factory CEPC

+ Chinese pp Collider

50 or 70 km

P. Bhat, T. Sen et al

Qing QIN et al

slide18

IR optics - momentum acceptance h

with synchrotron motion &

radiation

(sawtooth)

KEK design

before optics

correction

KEK design

after optics

correction

  • IR optics w. up to h~2% acceptance

±1.1%

±1.3%

K. Oide

±2.0%

±1.6%

FNAL site filler

SLAC/LBNL design

Y. Cai

T. Sen, E. Gianfelice-Wendt, Y. Alexahin

slide19

Emittances in Circular Colliders &

Modern Light Sources

Y. Funakoshi, KEK

no problem achieving target emittances with top up injection

TLEP (240)

R. Bartolini,

DIAMOND

slide20

b* history

b* [m]

year

SPEAR

PEP, BEPC, LEP

PETRA

TRISTAN

DORIS

CESR-c, PEP-II

BEPC-II

CESR

DAFNE

KEKB

TLEP

SuperKEKB

IP beam size

slide21

SuperKEKB – aTLEP demonstrator

beam commissioning will start in early 2015

  • by*=300 mm (TLEP: 1 mm)
  • lifetime 5 min (TLEP: ~15min)
  • ey/ex=0.25% ! (TLEP: 0.2%)
  • off momentum acceptance (±1.5%, TLEP: ±2%)
  • e+ production rate (2.5x1012/s, TLEP: <1x1011/s)
slide22

luminosity of e+e- colliders

TLEP-Z

S. Henderson

TLEP-W

TLEP-H

TLEP-t

slide23

e+e- Higgs factories: luminosity

ultimate precision

at Z, WW, ZH ;

sensitive to New

Physics in multi-TeVrange & to SM closure → case for VHE-LHC

ultimate energy reach

up to 1 or 3 TeV ;

direct searches

for New Physics

slide24

TLEP technical systems

BNL 5-cell 700 MHz cavity

  • SC RF at ~800 MHz

as developed for ESS, BNL, CERN SPL

    • need 12 GeV/turn at 350 GeV
      • ~600 m of SC RF cavities @ 20 MV/m
        • LEP2 had 600 m at 7 MV/m
    • high power : ~200 kW / cavity in collider
      • power couplers similar to ESS –

700-800 MHz preferred

  • cryogenics system for the RF
    • like LHC cryo system (~ ½ LHC’s)
  • arc magnets
    • ~500-700 G at top energy, ~50 G at injection
    • similar to LHeC prototype magnets

RF Coupler

(ESS/SPL)

  • we could build it tomorrow!

LHeC dipole w

0.35 mm

laminations

(BINP)

  • LHeC dipole withone-turn conductor& air cooled
  • interleaved laminations [1 mm iron, 2 mm plastic]
  • (CERN)
slide25

polarization

LEP

R. Assmann

loss of polarization due to growing energy spread

LEP

observations

+ model predictions

polarization scaling (energy spread!):

LEP at 61 GeV → TLEP at 81 GeV

TLEP

optimized scenario

TLEP

U Wienands, April 2013

 100 keVbeamenergy calibration byresonantdepolarization (using pilot bunches) aroundZpeak and W pair threshold:

mZ~0.1 MeV, Z ~0.1 MeV, mW ~ 0.5 MeV

r = 9000 m, C = 80 km

lower energy spread, high polarization up to W threshold

A. Blondel

slide26

80-100 km tunnel in Geneva region

J. Osborne, C. Waaijer, CERN, ARUP & GADZ,

submitted to European Strategy Symposium 2012

TLEP/VHE-LHC

slide27

is 80-100 km too big?

“Of course, it should not be the size of an accelerator, but its costs which must be minimized.”

  • Gustav-Adolf Voss,
  • builder of PETRA,
  • † 5. October 2013
slide28

FCC study - scope & structure

Future Circular Colliders (FCC) - Conceptual Design Study & Cost Review for next European Strategy Update

Infrastructure

tunnels, surface buildings, transport (access roads), civil engineering, cooling ventilation, electricity, cryogenics, communication & IT, fabrication and installation processes, maintenance, environmental impact and monitoring, safety

Hadron collider

Optics and beam dynamics

Functional specifications

Performance specs

Critical technical systems

Related R+D programs

HE-LHC comparison

Operation concept

Detector concept

Physics requirements

e+ e- collider

Optics and beam dynamics Functional specifications

Performance specs

Critical technical systems

Related R+D programs

Injector (Booster)

Operation concept

Detector concept

Physics requirements

Hadron injectors

Beam optics and dynamics

Functional specs

Performance specs

Critical technical systems

Operation concept

e- p option: Physics, Integration, additional requirements

two pillars: pp & e+e-; emphasis on ppmachine, driving infrastructure

slide29

possible long-term strategy

TLEP (80-100 km,

e+e-, up to

~350 GeV c.m.)

PSB

PS (0.6 km)

LHC (26.7 km)

SPS (6.9 km)

HL-LHC

VHE-LHC

(pp, up to

100 TeVc.m.)

& e± (120 GeV) – p (7, 16 & 50 TeV) collisions ([(V)HE-]TLHeC)

≥50 years of e+e-, pp, ep/A physics at highest energies

slide30

tentative long-term time line

1980

2000

2010

1990

2030

2020

2040

Design,

R&D

LHC

Constr.

Physics

Proto.

Design,

R&D

Constr.

Physics

HL-LHC

Design,

R&D

TLEP

Physics

Constr.

Design,

R&D

Constr.

Physics

VHE-LHC

slide32

synchroton-radiation: heat load

TLEP has >10 times less SR heat load per meter than PEP-II or SPEAR! (though higher photon energy)

N. Kurita, U. Wienands, SLAC

SR heat per meter lower than

for many operating rings