International Linear Collider Barry Barish P5 Meeting Washington DC 8-Sept-05 Thales CPI Toshiba
Jan 17, 2016
International Linear Collider
Barry BarishP5 MeetingWashington DC8-Sept-05
ThalesCPI
Toshiba
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 2
Outline
– Charge posed by Abe Seiden1. Your plans for how to make progress on the
LC design and R&D.2. Budget requirements tied to the above, any
milestones you feel comfortable presenting at this time.
3. Community response to the design challenge. Names of any individuals who plan to commit significant time to this effort.
4. Regional issues - division of effort.5. Any comments you wish to make regarding
outcome of Snowmass meeting.6. Anything you feel we should know about.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 3
Outline
– Charge posed by Abe Seiden1. Your plans for how to make progress on the
LC design and R&D.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 4
What’s our job?
– The Mission of the GDE • Produce a design for the ILC that includes a
detailed design concept, performance assessments, reliable international costing, an industrialization plan , siting analysis, as well as detector concepts and scope.
• Coordinate worldwide prioritized proposal driven R & D efforts (to demonstrate and improve the performance, reduce the costs, attain the required reliability, etc.)
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 5
The ITRP Recommendation
• We recommend that the linear collider be based on superconducting rf technology
– This recommendation is made with the understanding that we are recommending a technology, not a design. We expect the final design to be developed by a team drawn from the combined warm and cold linear collider communities, taking full advantage of the experience and expertise of both (from the Executive Summary).
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 6
main linacbunchcompressor
dampingring
source
pre-accelerator
collimation
final focus
IP
extraction& dump
KeV
few GeV
few GeVfew GeV
250-500 GeV
Starting Point for the GDE
Superconducting RF Main Linac
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 7
Parameters for the ILC
• Ecm adjustable from 200 – 500 GeV
• Luminosity ∫Ldt = 500 fb-1 in 4 years
• Ability to scan between 200 and 500 GeV
• Energy stability and precision below 0.1%
• Electron polarization of at least 80%
• The machine must be upgradeable to 1 TeV
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 8
Higgs Coupling and Extra Dimensions• ILC precisely measures Higgs interaction strength with standard model particles.
• Straight blue line gives the standard model predictions.
• Range of predictions in models with extra dimensions -- yellow band, (at most 30% below the Standard Model
• The models predict that the effect on each particle would be exactly the same size.
• The red error bars indicate the level of precision attainable at the ILC for each particle
• Sufficient to discover extra dimensional physics.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 9
GDE – Near Term Plan
• Schedule• Begin - define Configuration (Snowmass Aug 05) • Baseline Configuration Document (end of 2005)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------• Baseline under Configuration Control (Jan 06) • Develop Reference Design (end of 2006)• Coordinate the supporting R&D program
• Three volumes -- 1) Reference Design Report; 2) Shorter glossy version for non-experts and policy makers ; 3) Detector Concept Report
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 10
GDE – Staffing
• Staff the GDE– Administrative, Communications, Web staff– Regional Directors (one per region)– Accelerator Experts (covering all technical areas)– Senior Costing Engineer (one per region)– Civil/Facilities Engineer (one per region)– Detectors (WWS chairs)– Fill in missing skills (later)
• Total staff size about 25 FTE (2005-2006) about 50 heads.
• The internal GDE organization and tasks will be organized internationally, not regionally
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 11
GDE MembersChris Adolphsen, SLACJean-Luc Baldy, CERNPhilip Bambade, LAL, OrsayBarry Barish, CaltechWilhelm Bialowons, DESYGrahame Blair, Royal HollowayJim Brau, University of OregonKarsten Buesser, DESYElizabeth Clements, FermilabMichael Danilov, ITEPJean-Pierre Delahaye, CERN, Gerald Dugan, Cornell UniversityAtsushi Enomoto, KEKBrian Foster, Oxford UniversityWarren Funk, JLABJie Gao, IHEPTerry Garvey, LAL-IN2P3Hitoshi Hayano, KEKTom Himel, SLACBob Kephart, FermilabEun San Kim, Pohang Acc LabHyoung Suk Kim, Kyungpook Nat’l UnivShane Koscielniak, TRIUMFVic Kuchler, FermilabLutz Lilje, DESY
Tom Markiewicz, SLACDavid Miller, Univ College of LondonShekhar Mishra, FermilabYouhei Morita, KEKOlivier Napoly, CEA-SaclayHasan Padamsee, Cornell UniversityCarlo Pagani, DESYNan Phinney, SLACDieter Proch, DESYPantaleo Raimondi, INFNTor Raubenheimer, SLACFrancois Richard, LAL-IN2P3Perrine Royole-Degieux, GDE/LALKenji Saito, KEKDaniel Schulte, CERNTetsuo Shidara, KEKSasha Skrinsky, Budker InstituteFumihiko Takasaki, KEKLaurent Jean Tavian, CERNNobu Toge, KEKNick Walker, DESYAndy Wolski, LBLHitoshi Yamamoto, Tohoku UnivKaoru Yokoya, KEK
49 members
Americas 16 Europe 21 Asia 12
The GDE Plan and Schedule
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Global Design Effort Project
Baseline configuration
Reference Design
ILC R&D Program
Technical Design
Bids to Host; Site Selection;
International Mgmt
LHCPhysics
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 13
Design Approach• Create a baseline configuration for the machine
– Document a concept for ILC machine with a complete layout, parameters etc. defined by the end of 2005
– Make forward looking choices, consistent with attaining performance goals, and understood well enough to do a conceptual design and reliable costing by end of 2006.
– Technical and cost considerations will be an integral part in making these choices.
– Baseline will be put under “configuration control,” with a defined process for changes to the baseline.
– A reference design will be carried out in 2006. I am proposing we use a “parametric” design and costing approach.
– Technical performance and physics performance will be evaluated for the reference design
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 14
Parametric Approach
• Parametric approach to design– machine parameters : a space to optimize the machine
– Trial parameter space, being evaluated by subsystems
– machine design : incorporate change without redesign; incorporates value engineering, trade studies at each step to minimize costs
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 15
Approach to ILC R&D Program
• Proposal-driven R&D in support of the baseline design. – Technical developments, demonstration experiments,
industrialization, etc.
• Proposal-driven R&D in support of alternatives to the baseline– Proposals for potential improvements to the baseline,
resources required, time scale, etc.
• Develop a prioritized DETECTOR R&D program aimed at technical developments needed to reach combined design performance goals
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 16
Outline
– Charge posed by Abe Seiden1. Your plans for how to make progress on the
LC design and R&D.
2. Budget requirements tied to the above, any milestones you feel comfortable presenting at this time.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 17
US ILC Budgets – FY05
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 18
US ILC Budgets – FY05
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 19
US ILC Budgets – FY05
• SLAC, LBNL & Cornell – Design & Simulation of Bunch Compressor
• All – Main Linac Lattice Design & Beam based alignment
• Berkeley developed RF BPMs to measure local tilt of the bunch
• Ohio State developing radiation hard digitizers
• Coherent Synchrotron Radiation in Bunch Compressors studied at UNM
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 20
US ILC Budgets – FY05
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 21
European ILC Budgets – FY05
Japan / Asia budgets are pending, but the efforts are comparable.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 22
Present ILC R&D Budget Levels
• Comparable in the three regions– About $30M / region
• Estimate that the global level must triple to produce technical design and readiness for construction (e.g. by construction start ~ 2010)
• Main items –– Design Effort (engineering, cost estimates, etc)– R&D in support of baseline and alternatives– Industrialization– System Tests
• Detailed outyear budget plan will be developed after baseline configuration is completed
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 23
Outline
– Charge posed by Abe Seiden1. Your plans for how to make progress on the
LC design and R&D.
2. Budget requirements tied to the above, any milestones you feel comfortable presenting at this time.
3. Community response to the design challenge. Names of any individuals who plan to commit significant time to this effort.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 24
Participation in Snowmass
670 Scientists attended two week
workshopat
Snowmass
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 25
GDE MembersChris Adolphsen, SLACJean-Luc Baldy, CERNPhilip Bambade, LAL, OrsayBarry Barish, CaltechWilhelm Bialowons, DESYGrahame Blair, Royal HollowayJim Brau, University of OregonKarsten Buesser, DESYElizabeth Clements, FermilabMichael Danilov, ITEPJean-Pierre Delahaye, CERN, Gerald Dugan, Cornell UniversityAtsushi Enomoto, KEKBrian Foster, Oxford UniversityWarren Funk, JLABJie Gao, IHEPTerry Garvey, LAL-IN2P3Hitoshi Hayano, KEKTom Himel, SLACBob Kephart, FermilabEun San Kim, Pohang Acc LabHyoung Suk Kim, Kyungpook Nat’l UnivShane Koscielniak, TRIUMFVic Kuchler, FermilabLutz Lilje, DESY
Tom Markiewicz, SLACDavid Miller, Univ College of LondonShekhar Mishra, FermilabYouhei Morita, KEKOlivier Napoly, CEA-SaclayHasan Padamsee, Cornell UniversityCarlo Pagani, DESYNan Phinney, SLACDieter Proch, DESYPantaleo Raimondi, INFNTor Raubenheimer, SLACFrancois Richard, LAL-IN2P3Perrine Royole-Degieux, GDE/LALKenji Saito, KEKDaniel Schulte, CERNTetsuo Shidara, KEKSasha Skrinsky, Budker InstituteFumihiko Takasaki, KEKLaurent Jean Tavian, CERNNobu Toge, KEKNick Walker, DESYAndy Wolski, LBLHitoshi Yamamoto, Tohoku UnivKaoru Yokoya, KEK
49 members
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 26
Outline
– Charge posed by Abe Seiden1. Your plans for how to make progress on the
LC design and R&D.
2. Budget requirements tied to the above, any milestones you feel comfortable presenting at this time.
3. Community response to the design challenge. Names of any individuals who plan to commit significant time to this effort.
4. Regional issues - division of effort.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 27
Regional Efforts
• Asia – – Broaden participation (e.g. India, Taiwan)
• Europe – – CERN role (Delahaye, Baldy) EDMS?
• Americas – – Broaden participation (Canada); – Develop SCRF capability at Fermilab; – Industrialize; – Prepare to bid to host
• Division of effort will take place at time of technical design / site selection.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 28
Outline
– Charge posed by Abe Seiden1. Your plans for how to make progress on the
LC design and R&D.
2. Budget requirements tied to the above, any milestones you feel comfortable presenting at this time.
3. Community response to the design challenge. Names of any individuals who plan to commit significant time to this effort.
4. Regional issues - division of effort.
5. Any comments you wish to make regarding outcome of Snowmass meeting.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 29
Highlights from Snowmass
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 30
ILC Workshop Organization
2nd Week: BCD Recommendations - Focus Groups
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 31
Design Choices for Baseline
• Design Alternatives– Gradient / Length (30MV/m?, 35MV/m? Higher?)– Tunnel (single? or double?)– Positron Souce (undulator? conventional?)– Damping ring (dogbone? small ring?)– Crossing angle (head-on, small angle, large angle)
• Define detailed configuration– RF layout– Lattice layout– Beam delivery system layout– Klystron / modulators– Cryomodule design
• Evolve these choices through “change control” process
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 32
Cost Drivers
cf31%
structures18%rf
12%
systems_eng8%
installation&test7%
magnets6%
vacuum4%
controls4%
cryo4%
operations4%
instrumentation2%
Civil
SCRF Linac
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 33
How Costs Scale with Gradient?
Relative
Co
st
Gradient MV/m
2
0
$ lincryo
a Gb
G Q
35MV/m is close to optimum
Japanese are still pushing for 40-45MV/m
30 MV/m would give safety margin
C. Adolphsen (SLAC)
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 34
Cavity Fabrication
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 35
Gradient
Results from KEK-DESY collaboration
must reduce spread (need more statistics)
single
-cell
measu
rem
ents
(in
nin
e-c
ell
cavit
ies)
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 36
Improved Fabrication
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 37
Improved ProcessingElectropolishing
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 38
Improved Cavity Shapes
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 39
ILC Siting and Conventional Facilities
• The design is intimately tied to the features of the site– 1 tunnels or 2 tunnels?– Deep or shallow?– Laser straight linac or follow earth’s curvature in
segments?
• GDE ILC Design will be done to samples sites in the three regions – North American sample site will be near Fermilab– Japan and Europe are to determine sample sites by the
end of 2005
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 40
1 vs 2 Tunnels
• Tunnel must contain– Linac Cryomodule– RF system– Damping Ring Lines
• Save maybe $0.5B
• Issues– Maintenance– Safety– Duty Cycle
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 41
Possible Tunnel Configurations
• One tunnel of two, with variants ??
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 42
ILC Civil Program
Civil engineers from all three regions working to develop methods of analyzing the siting issues and comparing sites.
The current effort is not intended to select a potential site, but rather to understand from the beginning how the features of sites will effect the design, performance and cost
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 43
Baseline Klystrons
ThalesCPI
Toshiba
Available today: 10 MW Multi-Beam Klystrons (MBKs) that operate at up to 10 Hz
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 44
Improved Klystron ?
10 MW Sheet BeamKlystron (SBK)Parameters similar to
10 MW MBK
Low Voltage10 MW MBK
Voltage e.g. 65 kVCurrent 238AMore beams
Perhaps use a Direct Switch Modulator
5 MW Inductive Output Tube (IOT)
Drive
Out
put
IOT
Klystron
SLAC CPI
KEK
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 45
Beamsize Growth Study (cumulative after feedback)
30 min ground.
+ Undulator
+ Component
jitter
+ 5 Hz
ground.
+ Kicker, current,
energy jitter, BPM resol.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 46
Availability Studies1 vs 2 tunnels
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 47
Improving Mean Time Between Failures
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 48
Industrial Studies
• Industrial studies in three regions are essential.
– Important to understand industrial costs– Important to examine potential cost reductions– Need to think about what studies are needed and when– Focus on the cost drivers for ILC, important for cost estimate – Focus on places where there is technical risk to the project goals– ILC need a point-of-contact and a plan for industrial studies
2nd ILC Industrial Forum Meeting is scheduled to be held atFermilab Sept. 21st and 22nd, 2005.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 49
Outline
– Charge posed by Abe Seiden1. Your plans for how to make progress on the
LC design and R&D.2. Budget requirements tied to the above, any
milestones you feel comfortable presenting at this time.
3. Community response to the design challenge. Names of any individuals who plan to commit significant time to this effort.
4. Regional issues - division of effort.5. Any comments you wish to make regarding
outcome of Snowmass meeting.6. Anything you feel we should know about.
8-Sept-05 P5 Meeting - Washington DC 50
• Three concepts under study
• Typically requires factors of two or so improvements in granularity, resolution, etc. from present generation detectors
• Focused R&D program required to develop the detectors -- end of 2005
• Detector Concepts will be used to determine machine detector interface, simulate performance of reference design vs physics goals next year.
Detector Concepts and Challenges