Higher Order Modes in the Project-X Linac V. Yakovlev, Fermilab.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tom Powers Practical Aspects of SRF Cavity Testing and Operations SRF Workshop 2011 Tutorial Session.
Advertisements

ESS End-to-End Optics and Layout Integration Håkan Danared European Spallation Source Catania, 6 July 2011.
S. N. “ Cavities for Super B-Factory” 1 of 38 Sasha Novokhatski SLAC, Stanford University Accelerator Session April 20, 2005 Low R/Q Cavities for Super.
ERHIC Main Linac Design E. Pozdeyev + eRHIC team BNL.
DESIGN OF A 7-CELLS, HOM DAMPED, SUPERCONDUCTING CAVITY FOR THE STRONG RF FOCUSING EXPERIMENT AT DANE David Alesini, Caterina Biscari, Roberto Boni, Alessandro.
Sergey Antipov, University of Chicago Fermilab Mentor: Sergei Nagaitsev Injection to IOTA ring.
SRF Results and Requirements Internal MLC Review Matthias Liepe1.
Beam tolerance to RF faults & consequences on RF specifications Frédéric Bouly MAX 1 st Design Review WP1 - Task 1.2 Bruxelles, Belgium Monday, 12 th November.
Simulation of direct space charge in Booster by using MAD program Y.Alexahin, N.Kazarinov.
3 GeV,1.2 MW, Booster for Proton Driver G H Rees, RAL.
Drive Beam Linac Stability Issues Avni AKSOY Ankara University.
Preliminary design of SPPC RF system Jianping DAI 2015/09/11 The CEPC-SppC Study Group Meeting, Sept. 11~12, IHEP.
Simulation of direct space charge in Booster by using MAD program Y.Alexahin, A.Drozhdin, N.Kazarinov.
RF system issues due to pulsed beam in ILC DR October 20, Belomestnykh, RF for pulsed beam ILC DR, IWLC2010 S. Belomestnykh Cornell University.
SRF Requirements and Challenges for ERL-Based Light Sources Ali Nassiri Advanced Photon Source Argonne National Laboratory 2 nd Argonne – Fermilab Collaboration.
1 Simulation for power overhead and cavity field estimation Shin Michizono (KEK) Performance (rf power and max. cavity MV/m 24 cav. operation.
PROTON LINAC FOR INDIAN SNS Vinod Bharadwaj, SLAC (reporting for the Indian SNS Design Team)
SINGLE-STAGE BUNCH COMPRESSOR FOR ILC-SB2009 Nikolay Solyak Fermilab GDE Baseline Assessment Workshop (BAW-2) SLAC, Jan , 2011 N.Solyak, Single-stage.
Project X Injector Experiment (PXIE) Sergei Nagaitsev Dec 19, 2011.
Beam Dynamics and Linac Simulation Petr Ostroumov Fermilab Accelerator Advisory Committee May 10 th – 12 th, 2006.
Beam breakup and emittance growth in CLIC drive beam TW buncher Hamed Shaker School of Particles and Accelerators, IPM.
Beam Dynamics in the ESS Linac Under the Influence of Monopole and Dipole HOMs A.Farricker 1, R.M.Jones 1, R.Ainsworth 2 and S.Molloy 3 1 The University.
Design Optimization of MEIC Ion Linac & Pre-Booster B. Mustapha, Z. Conway, B. Erdelyi and P. Ostroumov ANL & NIU MEIC Collaboration Meeting JLab, October.
Jean-Luc Biarrotte, SPL HOM Workshop, CERN, June 25-26, A few longitudinal BBU simulations (in the SPL case) J-Luc Biarrotte CNRS, IPN Orsay.
Aaron Farricker 107/07/2014Aaron Farricker Beam Dynamics in the ESS Linac Under the Influence of Monopole and Dipole HOMs.
704 MHz warm cavity November 4, 2015 A.Zaltsman: SRF & warm RF components for LEReC1  A single cell 704 MHz warm cavity is used to correct the beam energy.
Comparison of Fermilab Proton Driver to Suggested Energy Amplifier Linac Bob Webber April 13, 2007.
BEAMLINE HOM ABSORBER O. Nezhevenko, S. Nagaitsev, N. Solyak, V. Yakovlev Fermi National Laboratory December 11, 2007 Wake Fest 07 - ILC wakefield workshop.
Concept Preliminary Estimations A. Kolomiets Charge to mass ratio1/61/8 Input energy (MeV/u) Output energy (MeV/u)2.5(3.5) Beam.
Marcel Schuh CERN-BE-RF-LR CH-1211 Genève 23, Switzerland 3rd SPL Collaboration Meeting at CERN on November 11-13, 2009 Higher.
Pushing the space charge limit in the CERN LHC injectors H. Bartosik for the CERN space charge team with contributions from S. Gilardoni, A. Huschauer,
HOMSC Fermilab HOM Couplers for CERN SPL Cavities K. Papke, F. Gerick, U. van Rienen 1 Work supported by the Wolfgang-Gentner-Programme.
Project X Collaboration Meeting, April 12-14, 2011 Spallation Neutron Source facility at Oak Ridge National Laboratory HOM Couplers for Project X: Are.
Project X: Accelerators Sergei Nagaitsev September 2, 2011.
Overview of long pulse experiments at NML Nikolay Solyak PXIE Program Review January 16-17, PXIE Review, N.Solyak E.Harms, S. Nagaitsev, B. Chase,
CW Linac (ICD-2+): Lattice Design in Project-X, Nikolay Solyak (on behalf of team: F.Ostiguy, J-P.Carneiro, N.Perunov, A.Vostrikov, A.Saini, V.Yakovlev,
N.Solyak (on behalf of PrX team) Fermilab Project X Collaboration Meeting, FNAL, Oct.25-27, 2011 N.Solyak, Pulsed Linac1 PrX Collab. Meeting, FNAL, Oct.25-27,
F Sergei Nagaitsev (FNAL) Aug Project X ICD2 Briefing.
Linac Design: Single-Spoke Cavities.
Aaron Farricker 107/07/2014Aaron Farricker Beam Dynamics in the ESS Linac Under the Influence of Monopole and Dipole HOMs.
LFD and Microphonics Suppression for PIP-II Warren Schappert April 15, 2014.
Dark Current in ILC Main Linac N.Solyak, A.Sukhanov, I.Tropin ALCW2015, Apr.23, 2015, KEK LCWS'15, Tsukuba, 04/2015Nikolay Solyak1.
HOMs in the TESLA 9-cell cavity HOMs in the XFEL and ILC Rainer Wanzenberg SPL HOM workshop CERN, June 25 – 26, 2009.
F Sergei Nagaitsev (FNAL) Webex meeting Oct ICD-2 chopper requirements and proposal #1.
Cavities, Cryomodules, and Cryogenics Working Group 2 Summary Report Mark Champion, Sang-ho Kim Project X Collaboration Meeting April 12-14, 2011.
Review of Alignment Tolerances for LCLS-II SC Linac Arun Saini, N. Solyak Fermilab 27 th April 2016, LCLS-II Accelerator Physics Meeting.
HOMs in high-energy part of the Project-X linac. V. Yakovlev, N. Solyak, J.-F. Ostiguy Friday 26 June 2009.
XFEL beamline loads and HOM coupler for CW
General Design of C-ADS Accelerator Physics
Coupler RF kick simulations.
Physics design on the main linac
A beam splitter for the Project X LHC Crab Cavity Meeting 11/15/2011
Longitudinal beam parameters and stability
Physics design on Injector-1 RFQ
FPC Coupler RF Dipole Kick
Coupler kick and wake simulations upgrade
Update of CLIC accelerating structure design
CEPC RF Power Sources System
Overview Multi Bunch Beam Dynamics at XFEL
Implications of HOMs on Beam Dynamics at ESS
Analysis of Multi-Turn ERLs for X-ray Sources
LHC (SSC) Byung Yunn CASA.
CEPC Main Ring Cavity Design with HOM Couplers
Status of HOMS Spectra Measurements in 1.3 GHz Cavities for LCLS-II
Physics Design on Injector I
CEPC Ring RF System Jiyuan Zhai (IHEP) Workshop on the Circular Electron Positron Collider Rome, May 25, 2018.
Evgenij Kot XFEL beam dynamics meeting,
Multi-Ion Injector Linac Design – Progress Summary
Update on Crab Cavity Simulations for JLEIC
Fermilab elliptical cavities
Presentation transcript:

Higher Order Modes in the Project-X Linac V. Yakovlev, Fermilab

The talk is on behalf of the FNAL team: M. Champion, C. Ginsburg, I. Gonin, Ch. Grimm, T. Khabiboulline, A. Lunin, Th. Nicol, Yu. Orlov, A. Saini, D. Sergatskov, N. Solyak, A. Sukhanov, and A. Vostrikov

PROJECT X

3-GeV, 1-mA CW linac provides beam for rare processes program ~3 MW; flexible provision for beam requirements supporting multiple users; <5% of beam is sent to the Main Injector. Project X multi-experiment facility: 3 3 GeV GeV GeV

RF Cavities of the Project-X linac: HWR, MHz SSR1, 325 MHz SSR2, 325 MHz (ANL) (FNAL) (FNAL) HWR and spoke cavities of the Project X front end

Elliptical cavities of the high-energy part of CW linac Single-cell models: 5-cell model, HE650 LE 650 MHz (JLAB) HE 650 MHz (FNAL)

CM designs for Project X CW linac: HWR SSR1 HE650

Motivation for HOM investigation in PX : HOM damper is a vulnerable, expensive and complicated part of SC acceleration structure (problems – multipactoring, damage of feed-through, etc; additional hardware – cables, feed-through, connectors, loads); SNS SC linac experience shows that HOM dampers may limit a cavity performance and reduce operation reliability; SNS linac experience doesn’t show necessity of the HOM couplers. The PX cavities are under development and it is necessary to understand necessity of HOM dampers for these cavities.

Effects of HOMs (collective instabilities, cavity heating) depend on the bunch population, beam current, beam spectrum (chopping!) and cavity HOM spectrum. “Average” HOM power per cavity (incoherent losses): P av = k loss Q b I av Project X beta=0.9 SNS beta=0.81 ILC beta=1 I av, mA114.8e-2 Q b, pC25.6* k loss, V/pC P av,mW/cavity The ILC-type 1.3 GHz cavities contain HOM couplers that reduce the loaded Q-factors for transverse and longitudinal HOMs down to For SNS cavities no measureable HOM signals from beam observed. *162.5 MHz beam sequence frequency.

In ILC linac HOM dampers are necessary. All the 1.3 GHz ILC cavities are equipped by HOM couplers, which work successfully at DESY. Some problem with long-pulse operation: J. Sekutowicz, HOM Workshop, Cornell, Analysis of the HOM resonance excitation and collective effects (BBU and klystron-type) in SNS linac does not show critical influence of the HOMs on the beam dynamics; Our goal is to understand the HOM influence on the beam dynamics in Project X in order to decide whether we need the HPM dampers in high energy part of the linac and in the low energy part as well.

Scope of investigations: Loss factor calculations for non-relativistic beam; Beam spectrum investigation for different Project X operation options; Cavity spectrum investigations (simulations and measurements) for all the Project X sections - HWR, SSR1, SSR2, LE650 and HE650 – impedance and spectrum density versus frequency; Resonant frequency spread for HOMs estimations and if possible measurements for all the cavities of the Project X; Q estimations for different modes; HOM impedance spread (estimations and measurements) for all the cavities of the Project X; HOM impedance dependence on the particle velocity over the linac; Microphonics for different HOMs; Stability of HOMs versus operation mode tuning/detuning;

Cryogenic loss estimations for different option of the Project X operation (taking into account propagating and non-propagating modes); Estimation of the beam emittance (longitudinal and transverse) dilution caused by HOMs; Longitudinal “klystron type” instabilities caused by HOMs; Transverse instability – BBU; Comparison to operating accelerators (SNS)

Specifics of Higher Order Mode effects in the Project-X CW Linac: Non-relativistic beam; Small bunch population (26 pC/bunch) Small current (1 mA); No feedback (linac); CW operation; Complicated beam timing structure (dense frequency spectrum). Possible issues: Resonance excitation of HOMs; Collective effects; Cryo-losses; Emittance dilution (longitudinal and transverse).

Non-relativistic beam in Project X linac: HE electron linac Proton linac (Project X) (ILC, XFEL or NGLS) f max ~ c/σ bunch f max ~ c/a for σ bunch = 50µ, f max < 6 THz for a = 50mm, f max < 6 GHz Loss factor depends strongly on the σ field !

Incoherent loses per CM in HE 650 MHz section of the Project X linac. Longitudinal impedance versus frequency: R/Q =R0exp(-f/f0)

The beam splitter The beam spectrum in Project X is determined by the beam distribution scheme:

RF separator directs Muon pulses (16e7) MHz, 100 nsec at 1 MHz 700 kW; Kaon pulses (16e7) 20.3 MHz 1540 kW Nuclear pulses (16e7) MHz 770 kW Deflecting structure should operating at the frequency f 0 (m±1/4),where f 0 is the bunch sequence frequency (f 0 =162.5 MHz). 1  sec period at 3 GeV Operating scenario at the bunch sequence frequency of MHz: t, mksec

Beam after splitter 10 MHz bunches 20 MHz bunches 1 MHz pulses Muon pulses Nuclear pulses Kaon pulses

Injection to the pulse linac for neutrino experiments: Pulse width – 4.3 msec; Repetition rate – 10 Hz.

The beam current spectrum contains ● harmonics of the bunch sequence frequency of MHz and ● sidebands of the harmonics of MHz separated by 1 MHz. Idealized beam spectrum

DimensionBeta=0.61Beta=0.9 Regular cell End cell Regular cell End cell r, mm R, mm L, mm A, mm B, mm a, mm b, mm α,° Dimensions of the 650 MHz cavities beta=0.61 beta=0.9 (bottom).

Monopole mode spectrum β = 0.61 β = 0.9

Dipole mode spectrum β = 0.61 β = 0.9

Impedances of monopole modes For β = 0.61: all the modes have (r/Q) below 10 Ohms; For β = 0.90: -two modes have (r/Q) =12 Ohm: F=1988 (df=2.2 MHz) and 2159 MHz (df=3.9 MHz), -one mode has (r/Q) = 22 Ohm: F= MHz (df=0.44 MHz), and -one mode has (r/Q) = 130 Ohm: F= MHz (df=2.0 MHz) df is the difference between the HOM frequency and nearest main beam spectrum line.

Impedances of dipole modes β = 0.61 β = 0.9 For β = 0.61 three modes have (r/Q) above 10 4 Ohm/m 2 (F=974, and 1293 MHz); For β = 0.90 four modes have (r/Q) above 10 4 Ohm/m 2 (F=946.6, 950.3, 1376 and 1383 MHz).

(r/Q) for HOM modes depends on the particle velocity β: 650 MHz, β=0.9 cavity a) b) Monopole (a) and dipole (b) impedances of “the most dangerous” modes for beta=0.9 cavity versus accelerated particle velocity.

HOM have frequency spread caused by manufacturing errors.  For ILC cavity r.m.s. spread σ f of the resonance frequencies is 6-9 MHz depending on the pass band, according to DESY measurement statistics: J. Sekutowicz, HOM damping,” ILC Workshop, KEK, November 13-15, However, in a process of “technology improvement” σ f reduced to ~1 MHz;  Cornell: σ f ≈ 10.9·10 -4 ×(f HOM -f 0 ), for PX σ f = 1-2 MHz;  SNS: σ f ≈ (9.6· ·10 -4 )×(f HOM -f 0 ); Δf max =|f HOM,calculated -f HOM,measured | ~ σ f

Effect of the HOMs:  Resonance excitation;  Collective effects.  Resonance excitation, monopole modes. Monopole modes should not increase the beam longitudinal emittance ( = 1.6 keV*nsec): is average energy gain caused by HOM, is a bunch length. For high-Q resonances and thus, is the deference between the HOM frequency and the beam spectrum line frequency ( ). Is a beam spectrum line amplitude.

The worst case: beginning of the high-beta 650 MHz section. = 7.7e-3 nsec (or 1.8 deg). For = 0.5 mA and (R/Q)= 130 Ohm (HOM with the frequency of 1241 MHz) one has >> 70 Hz  When the distance between the beam spectrum lines is 5 MHz, and the frequency spread is 1 MHz, the probability that the cavity has the resonant frequency close enough to the beam spectrum line is <1e-4.  The gain caused by the HOM is <300 keV, that is small compared to the operating mode gain, ~20 MeV, and does not contribute to the cryogenic losses because 1241 MHz mode is TM 011 mode in a cell, and, thus, it’s surface distribution is “orthogonal” to one of the operating mode. Q 0 ~ 5e9.  If the HOM mode is in resonance, it’s Q loaded << 2e7. One should take care on the 2d band monopole HOMs in order to avoid resonance accidental excitation!

 Resonance excitation, dipole modes.  Dipole modes should not increase the beam transverse emittance  Transverse kick caused by the HOM is: (k=2π/λ)  Emittance increase may be estimated the following way: is beta-function near the cavity.  Thus, is proton rest mass in eV.  For f =1376 MHz, (R/Q) 1 =60 kOhm/m 2 (worst case), proton energy of 500 MeV, β f =15 m and x 0 =1 mm one has δf >> 2.5 Hz.  If the HOM is in resonance, Q << 1.4e9..5 Does not look to be a problem. ( ε = 2.5e-7/ βγ m).

Approach:  Cavity HOM simulations taking into account manufacturing misalignments;  Compare the frequency and R/Q spread with the measured data if available;  Calculation and measurements of R/Q and Q of the HOMs;  For propagating HOMs: variation of the reflection from the ports and determining maximal R/Q, which is used in RF loss and emittance dilution estimations. Calculate surface field as a sum of contributions from exited modes; Calculate losses by integrating squared surface field; Calculate total losses by the sum of losses from individual beam harmonics; Calculate energy change caused by HOMs for every bunch and emittance dilution caused by HOM Statistics accumulation and analysis.

a) b) 1/5π 2/5π 3/5π 4/5π π HOMs in an ideal cavity HOMs in a “realistic” cavity, i.e., in presence of misalignments. In both cases the operating mode is tuned to correct frequency and field flatness.

Calculations of the power losses in the HE 650 MHz cavities: Q=1.e7 Q=1.e10

red – maximum R/Q vs beta for all HOMs, blue –R/Q for an ideal cavity, green – “realistic” R/Q for a cavity with mechanical errors. Probability of monopole HOMs RF losses per cryomodule. (HE 650 MHz cavities)

I = 1ma I = 5ma

Longitudinal emittance dilution: Because HOM and beam components frequencies are not multiple, the resonance HOM excitation by one of the beam component will cause that other parts will see its voltage at a “random” phase. Thus, in a case of a high-Q resonance, such a HOM mode may introduce a significant energy variation along the beam train. This variation is proportional to the amplitude of the beam current spectrum line closest to the HOM frequency. HOM Phase, [deg] Bunch number Resonance monopole HOM excitation in HE 650 by various beam components, a) – “muon”, b) – “nuclear” and c) “kaon” There is no this effect if the beam structure is regular – for example, for NGLS

The probability of longitudinal emittance growth for I = 1mA average current Based on the predicted deviations of monopole HOMs frequency and Q ext we generated ~10 5 random linacs in order to estimate the probability of the beam longitudinal emittance growth.

For 5 mA there is no problems with the emittance; For 10 mA thee may be some problems.

HOM damping through the main coupler. Main coupler should provide Q ext ~ 2-3e7 for the operating mode. D=17mm D t =100mm D c =40mm DaDa DaDa Qext

HOM damping through the main coupler (perfect window transmission). The coupler window is optimized to provide a good transmission for the 2d pass band

Monopole Band #2 Ez* on axis Mode # Freq [GHz] Q_extR/Q max [Ω] β max 1/5π E /5π E /5π E /5π E π E R/Q vs β

650 MHz coupler, coupler window and WG-coax transition: 1 st PB 2d PB 3d PB 4 th BP 5 th PB 1 st and 2d BPs have high (r/Q), 3d and 4 th BPs have modest (r/Q) and damping; 5 th BP has modest (r/Q) and good damping.

Map of the electric fields in the chain of cavities connected with bellows

Project X versus SNS (HE parts) Q=1.e8Q=1.e9 Power of losses (per cavity) distribution for high energy cavities for beta=0.9 (PX) and beta=0.81 (SNS). SNS: Lorentz detuning and pulse-to-pulse jitter may reduce the losses; Project X: microphonics may reduce the losses.

Microphonics for HOMs in HE 650 MHZ cavity of the PX linac. df/dP in Hz/mbar (blue) for different cavity modes; mode # is in black. The cavity + He vessel are optimized in order to minimize df/dP for the operating mode #5, but not HOMs.

HOM investigations for SSR1: Bead-pull measurement test setup for an SSR1 cavity prototype. Results of analysis show that HOM losses and corresponding cryogenic heat load are extremely small in the range of QL from 1e6 to 1e9 ‣ mean power loss is less than 1 nW ‣ 99% quantile loss is less than 1 uW

 Even in the case when it happens, it is possible to move the HOM frequency away from the spectrum line simply detuning the cavity by tens of kHz, and then tune the operating mode back to the resonance.  A special test was made with the 1.3 GHz, 9-cell ILC cavity. The cavity was tested at 2 K.  The operating mode was detuned by Δf =90 kHz, and then was tuned back.  The frequencies of HOMs moved after this procedure by δf = Hz because of small residual deformation of the cavity. What to do if the HOM has resonance frequency close to the beam spectrum line*? f, MHzΔf, kHzδf, HzPassband Monopole Dipole Dipole Dipole Dipole Dipole Dipole Dipople Dipople Quadrupole Quadrupole Monopole Monopole Monopole Monopole *Timergali Khabiboulline, this workshop

Collective effects:  Beam break –up (BBU), transverse.  “Klystron-type”, longitudinal. Why collective effects may not be an issue: 1.No feedback as in CEBAF; 2.Different cavity types with different frequencies and different HOM spectrum are used; 3.Frequency spread of HOMs in each cavity type, caused by manufacturing errors; 4.Velocity dependence of the (R/Q); 5.Small beam current.

BBU estimations for 650 MHz part of the Project – X linac: Simple model:  Short bunches;  Current lattice design - N. Solyak, et al;  Two types of the 650 MHz cavities, beta=0.61 and beta=0.9;  Five dipole pass bands are taking into account;  Random transverse misalignment of the cavities;  Beam time structure – S. Nagaitsev (see above)  Model: (P-W) Parameters:  Beam current: 1 mA;  RFQ frequency: 325 MHz;  r.m.s cavity off-set: 0.5 mm; Transverse dynamics.

Q = 10 7 Q = 10 8 Q = 10 9 Low beta section, Resonance case, One HOM only, ( MHz, 24 kOHm/m 2 ) No dependence of (R/Q) on beta. Δε~Δf -2 Transverse emittance dilution vs. HOM frequency spread Δf.

“Realistic” linac. Transverse emittance dilution vs. Δf. Q = 10 7 Q = 10 8 Q = 10 9 No noticeable effect.

Klystron-type longitudinal instability*, longitudinal emittance dilution caused by monopole HOMs J. Tuckmantel, “Do we need HOM dampers on superconducting cavities in proton linacs?”, HOM Workshop, CERN, July 2009 Q = 10 7 Q = 10 8 Q = 10 9

σ f = 10 kHz σ f = 100 kHz σ f = 1 MHz σ f = 10 MHz Cavity voltage distribution for different HOM frequency spread No noticeable effect.

σ f = 10 kHz σ f = 100 kHz σ f = 1 MHz σ f = 10 MHz HOM Voltage

Summary. To damp or not to damp?  BBU in 650 MHz section should not be a problem;  “Klystron-type” longitudinal instability does not look to be a problem as well.  Resonance excitation of the dipole modes does not look to be an issue;  Accidental resonance excitation of the 2d monopole band in beta=0.9 section may lead to longitudinal emittance dilution, but probability is small. No HOM dampers!

Flange for HOM damper “Safe” option: make flanges (~40 mm)for HOM dampers, seal them and install the dampers in future for possible upgrade if necessary (as they discuss at SPL).