Project Review 2010 Status of PDPWA, Muon Cooling, and ILC Guoxing Xia Max Planck Institute für Physik.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The scaling of LWFA in the ultra-relativistic blowout regime: Generation of Gev to TeV monoenergetic electron beams W.Lu, M.Tzoufras, F.S.Tsung, C. Joshi,
Advertisements

KEK : Novel Accelerator TYL Workshop M. Yoshida, M. Nozaki, K. Koyama, High energy research organization (KEK) -Collaboration -IZEST (CEA) :
Plasma wakefields in the quasi- nonlinear regime J.B. Rosenzweig a, G. Andonian a, S. Barber a, M. Ferrario b, P. Muggli c, B. O’Shea a, Y. Sakai a, A.
Page 1 Collider Review Retreat February 24, 2010 Mike Spata February 24, 2010 Collider Review Retreat International Linear Collider.
Particle-Driven Plasma Wakefield Acceleration James Holloway University College London, London, UK PhD Supervisors: Professor Matthew wing University College.
Chengkun Huang | Compass meeting 2008 Chengkun Huang, I. Blumenfeld, C. E. Clayton, F.-J. Decker, M. J. Hogan, R. Ischebeck, R. Iverson, C. Joshi, T. Katsouleas,
Erik Adli CLIC Workshop 2015, CERN, CH 1 Erik Adli Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Norway Input from: Steffen Doebert, Wilfried Farabolini,
Industry and the ILC B Barish 16-Aug May-05ILC Consultations - Washington DC2 Why e + e - Collisions? elementary particles well-defined –energy,
Baseline Configuration - Highlights Barry Barish ILCSC 9-Feb-06.
Lecture 3: Laser Wake Field Acceleration (LWFA)
2 Lasers: Centimeters instead of Kilometers ? If we take a Petawatt laser pulse, I=10 21 W/cm 2 then the electric field is as high as E=10 14 eV/m=100.
20-Jan-09 Madrid, Spain Global Design Effort 1 Barry Barish Madrid, Spain 20-Jan-09 Designing the ILC ATF-2 Final Doublet System.
Internal target option for RHIC Drell-Yan experiment Wolfram Fischer and Dejan Trbojevic 31 October 2010 Santa Fe Polarized Drell-Yan Physics Workshop.
The AWAKE Project at CERN and its Connections to CTF3 Edda Gschwendtner, CERN.
Parameter sensitivity tests for the baseline variant Konstantin Lotov, Vladimir Minakov, Alexander Sosedkin Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS,
FACET and beam-driven e-/e+ collider concepts Chengkun Huang (UCLA/LANL) and members of FACET collaboration SciDAC COMPASS all hands meeting 2009 LA-UR.
Low Emittance RF Gun Developments for PAL-XFEL
The International Linear Collider and the Future of Accelerator-based Particle Physics Barry Barish Caltech Lomonosov Conference 20-Aug-2015 ILC.
Recent Results on the Plasma Wakefield Acceleration at FACET E 200 Collaboration 1)Beam loading due to distributed injection of charge in the wake reduces.
June 23, 2005R. Garoby Introduction SPL+PDAC example Elements of comparison Linacs / Synchrotrons LINAC-BASED PROTON DRIVER.
ILC – Recent progress & Path to Technical Design Report Brian Foster (Hamburg/DESY/Oxford & GDE) Plenary ECFA CERN 25/11/11.
Nonlinear Optics in Plasmas. What is relativistic self-guiding? Ponderomotive self-channeling resulting from expulsion of electrons on axis Relativistic.
High gradient acceleration Kyrre N. Sjøbæk * FYS 4550 / FYS 9550 – Experimental high energy physics University of Oslo, 26/9/2013 *k.n.sjobak(at)fys.uio.no.
Electron Source Configuration Axel Brachmann - SLAC - Jan , KEK GDE meeting International Linear Collider at Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.
ERHIC design status V.Ptitsyn for the eRHIC design team.
Consideration for a plasma stage in a PWFA linear collider Erik Adli University of Oslo, Norway FACET-II Science Workshop, SLAC Oct 14,
Damping Ring Parameters and Interface to Sources S. Guiducci BTR, LNF 7 July 2011.
James Holloway University College London, London, UK PhD Supervisors: Professor Matthew Wing University College London, London, UK Professor Peter Norreys.
GWENAEL FUBIANI L’OASIS GROUP, LBNL 6D Space charge estimates for dense electron bunches in vacuum W.P. LEEMANS, E. ESAREY, B.A. SHADWICK, J. QIANG, G.
23-April-13 ECFA LC2013 Global Design Effort 1 Barry Barish ECFA LC2013 DESY Hamburg, Germany 27-May-13 GDE The path to a TDR.
Frictional Cooling A.Caldwell MPI f. Physik, Munich FNAL
Beam-Plasma Working Group Summary Barnes, Bruhwiler, DavidTech-X Clayton,
24-July-10 ICHEP-10 Paris Global Design Effort 1 Barry Barish Paris ICHEP 24-July-10 ILC Global Design Effort.
Erik Adli CLIC Project Meeting, CERN, CH 1 Erik Adli Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Norway Input from: Steffen Doebert, Wilfried Farabolini,
WebEx meeting November 17, 2009 ILC Damping Ring Working Group on Electron Cloud LC e- cloud Working Group November 17, 2009.
LNF Frascati, July 8, 2011 DR Technical Baseline Rev. Global Design Effort 1 DR Technical Baseline Review INFN LNF · Frascati, Italy July 7 and 8, 2011.
Future Circular Collider Study Kickoff Meeting CERN ERL TEST FACILITY STAGES AND OPTICS 12–15 February 2014, University of Geneva Alessandra Valloni.
ICFA Workshop on Future Light Source, FLS2012 M. Shimada A), T. Miyajima A), N. Nakamura A), Y. Kobayashi A), K. Harada A), S. Sakanaka A), R. Hajima B)
Global Design Effort ILC Damping Rings: R&D Plan and Organisation in the Technical Design Phase Andy Wolski University of Liverpool and the Cockcroft Institute,
Prospects for generating high brightness and low energy spread electron beams through self-injection schemes Xinlu Xu*, Fei Li, Peicheng Yu, Wei Lu, Warren.
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,
Ultra-short electron bunches by Velocity Bunching as required for Plasma Wave Acceleration Alberto Bacci (Sparc Group, infn Milano) EAAC2013, 3-7 June,
Beam quality preservation and power considerations Sergei Nagaitsev Fermilab/UChicago 14 October 2015.
Ionization Injection E. Öz Max Planck Institute Für Physik.
V.Shiltsev 1 Comments on What Kind of Test Facility(ies) the ILC Needs Vladimir Shiltsev/ Fermilab.
Jayakar Thangaraj Fermilab Accelerator Advisory Committee November 7-9, 2011 PROTOPLASMA: Proton-driven wakefield experiment at Fermilab.
Introduction to Plasma Physics and Plasma-based Acceleration Wakefield acceleration Various images provided by R. Bingham.
Proton-driven plasma wakefield acceleration in hollow plasma
Electron acceleration behind self-modulating proton beam in plasma with a density gradient Alexey Petrenko.
ILC - Upgrades Nick Walker – 100th meeting
Barry Barish LCWS10 - Beijing 26-March-10
Beam-beam effects in eRHIC and MeRHIC
Tunable Electron Bunch Train Generation at Tsinghua University
Why Study Electron Clouds? Methods and Tools to Study Electron Clouds
Proton driven plasma accelertion
Wakefield Accelerator
Measurements, ideas, curiosities
E-164 E-162 Collaboration: and E-164+X:
Review of Application to SASE-FELs
Outlook for PWA Experiments
Proton Driven Plasma Wakefield Acceleration
Barry Barish LCWS10 - Beijing 26-March-10
Requests of Future HEP e+/e-Facilities
Barry Barish JSPS - Sendai 12-Sept-11
Advanced Research Electron Accelerator Laboratory
Explanation of the Basic Principles and Goals
Barry Barish Paris ICHEP 24-July-10
2. Crosschecking computer codes for AWAKE
Proton-driven plasma wakefield Acceleration (PDPWA)
Outlook for PWA Experiments
Presentation transcript:

Project Review 2010 Status of PDPWA, Muon Cooling, and ILC Guoxing Xia Max Planck Institute für Physik

Proton-driven plasma Wakefield Acceleration (PDPWA)  Motivation  Demonstration experiment at CERN  Simulation of SPS beam-driven PWA  Status and outlook

List of people discussing project Max Planck Institute for Physics, Germany A. Caldwell, O. Reimann, H.V.D. Schmitt, F. Simon, G. Xia Budker Institute for Nuclear Physics, Russia K. Lotov Duesseldorf University, Duesseldorf, Germany A. Pukhov, N. Kumar University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA W. An, C. Joshi, W. Lu, W.B. Mori Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM, USA C. Huang University of Southern California, CA, USA P. Muggli SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory M. Hogan CERN, Geneva, Switzerland R. Assmann, F. Zimmermann, I. Efthymiopoulos, J.P. Koutchouk Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics, Germany O. Gruelke, T. Klinger DESY E. Elsen, B. Schmidt, H. Schlarb, J. Osterhoff University of College London, London, UK A. Lyapin, M. Wing Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, UK R. Bingham GoLP/Instituto de Plasmas e Fusao Nuclear, IST, Lisboa, Portugal J. Vieira, R. A. Fonseca, L.O. Silva Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany A. Schoening Karlsruher Institute for Technology, Germany A. Mueller, S. Hillenbrand Ludwig-Maximilians Universität LMU, Germany T. Tajima

Motivation With an increase of beam energy, the size and cost of modern high energy particle accelerators reach the limit (break down+power) Plasma can sustain very large electric fields, a few orders of magnitude higher than the fields in metallic structures The plasma accelerators (laser driven-LWFA or beam driven-PWFA) developed rapidly in last 20 years, GV/m accelerating gradients have been demonstrated in labs The novel plasma accelerators can potentially minimize the size and cost of future machines Very high energy proton beams are available nowadays, why not use these proton beam to excite wakefield for electron acceleration? It will be the PWFA experiment in Europe and first PDPWA experiment around the world.

PWFA Electron beam (beam energy 42GeV, bunch length 50 fs, bunch charge 2.9 nC) Plasma (length 85 cm, density 2.7e17 cm-3) Max. energy gain 43 GeV (85 cm column) = 52 GeV/m ! 29 GeV (113 cm column) Energy spectrum of the electrons in the GeV range as observed in plane 2 Blumenfeld et al., Nature 445 (2007) 741

PWFA and PDPWA Pros. of PWFA Plasma electrons are expelled by space charge of beam, a nice bubble will be formed for beam acceleration and focusing. The short electron beam is relatively easy to have (bunch compression). Wakefield phase slippage is not a problem. Cons. of PWFA One stage energy gain is limited by transformer ratio, therefore maximum electron energy is about 100 GeV using SLC beam. Easy to be subject to the head erosion due to small mass of electrons Pros. of PDPWA Very high energy proton beam are available today, the energy stored at SPS, LHC, Tevatron, HERA SPS (450 GeV, 1.3e11 p/bunch) ~ 10 kJ LHC (1 TeV, 1.15e11 p/bunch) ~ 20 kJ LHC (7 TeV, 1.15e11 p/bunch) ~ 140 kJ SLAC (50 GeV, 2e10 e-/bunch) ~ 0.1 kJ Cons. of PDPWA Flow-in regime responds a relatively low field vs. blow-out regime. Long proton bunches (tens centimeters), bunch compression is difficult. Wave phase slippage for heavy mass proton beam (small γ factor), especially for a very long plasma channel blow-out flow-in linear response nonlinear response (p+)

PDPWA A. Caldwell, K. Lotov, A. Pukhov, F. Simon, Nature Physics 5, 363 (2009). p+p+ e-e- 600 GeV e - beam ≤1% ΔE/E in ~500 plasma Drive beam: p + E=1 TeV, N p =10 11 σ z =100 μm,σ r =0.43 mm σ θ =0.03 mrad, ΔE/E=10% Witness beam: e - E 0 =10 GeV, N e =1.5x10 10 Plasma: Li + n p =6x10 14 cm -3 External magnetic field: Field gradient: 1000 T/m Magnet length: 0.7 m

Short proton driver A magnetic chicane for bunch compression 4 km bunch compressor is required for 1 TeV p+ beam! G. Xia, A. Caldwell et al., Proceedings of PAC09

Short bunch driver Self-modulation via plasma wakefield (the transverse two- stream instability modulates the long bunch into many ultra short beamlets at plasma wakelength*. SPS beam at 5m 1e14 cm -3

Demonstration experiment at CERN PS (East Hall Area) and SPS (West Area) could be used for our demonstration experiment

Demonstration experiment at CERN PDPWA has the potential to accelerate electron beam to the TeV scale in a single stage. As a first step, we would like to demonstrate the scaling laws of PDPWA in an experiment with an existing beam. kick-off meeting-PPA09 held at CERN last December A spare SPS tunnel is available for demonstration experiment With no bunch compression in the beginning Beam Lines

PS vs. SPS Simulation shows that SPS beam can drive a higher plasma wakefield compared to the PS beam. This is largely due to the smaller emittance of the SPS beam. The lower emittance of SPS beam allows the instability to develop before the beam diverges due to the angular spread. PSSPS Energy [GeV]24450 Protons/bunch [10 11 ] rms bunch length [cm]2012 Norm.transverse emittance [μm]3.5 rms energy spread [10 -4 ]53 Bunch spacing [ns]25 PS, SPS energy: low, high bunch length: long, short beam intensity: low, high emittance: big, small plasma focusing: weak, strong tunnel length: 60 m, 600m SPS-LHC p =1e14cm -3 smooth and cut beams PS p =1e14cm -3 smooth and cut beams K. Lotov SPS-LHC beam high plasma density

Codes benchmarking Various particle-in-cell (PIC) codes are used to benchmark the results based on same parameter set. Presently they show very good agreement

Seeding the instability Seed the instability via laser or electron beam prior to the proton beam (the instability will not start from random noise, rather from a well-defined seeded field The instability is seeded via half-cut beam (beam density abruptly increases) E ac c E focu s npnp nbnb For SPS half-cut beam, at plasma density n p =10 14 cm -3 (λ p  3.33 mm) A strong beam density modulation is observed, A nice wakefield structure is excited and the wakefield amplitude is around 100 MV/m at 5 m plasma. VLPL results from A. Pukhov

Simulations of SPS beam-driven PWFA Maximum longitudinal e field is ~120 MV/mBeam density modulation Half-cut SPS plasma (n p =10 14 cm -3 ) Full SPS 10m plasma (n p =10 14 cm -3 ) QuickPIC results from C. Huang

Simulations of SPS beam-driven PWFA Bunch population, N p 3x10 11 Bunch length, σ z 8.5 cm Beam radius,σ x,y 200 μm Beam energy, E450 GeV Energy spread, dE/E0.04% Normalized emittance, ε x,y 2 μm Angular spread, σ θ 0.02 mrad Simulation from 2D OSIRIS nominal SPS beam Bunch population, N p 1.15x10 11 Bunch length, σ z 12 cm Beam radius,σ x,y 200 μm Beam energy, E450 GeV Energy spread, dE/E0.03% Normalized emittance, ε x,y 3 μm Angular spread, σ θ 0.02 mrad

Plasma density variation Increasing the plasma density properly at the moment of developed instability, the wave shift with respect to the main body of the beam will be stopped and one can obtain a stable bunch train that propagates in plasma for a long distance ~ 900 MV/m field propagates stably for 200 m! LHC beam w. plasma density ramp

Electron acceleration VLPL3D hydro-dynamic code 10 MeV continuous e- beam injection A. Pukhov

Demonstration experiment at CERN Scientific Goal of Experiments: Initial goal is to observe the energy gain of 1 GeV in 5 m plasma. A plan for reaching 100 GeV within 100 m plasma will be developed based on the initial round of experiments Experimental Setup: Expected Results: A long SPS drive beam (without compression) will be used in the first experiment. a self-modulation of the beam due to two-stream instability which produces many ultrashort beam slices at plasam. The modulation resonantly drives wakefield in the MV/m with CERN SPS beam. Simulation shows with the optimum beam and plasma parameters, ≥ 1 GV/m field can be achieved in the experiment.

Status and outlook  We have very strong simulation teams around the world (UCLA, LANL, BINP, Düsseldorf Univ. IST)  Phone conferences biweekly to exchange the results  A face-to-face meeting next year in London to discuss what to put in the Letter of Intent  The PDPWA demonstration experiment will be proposed as a future project  Simulation shows that working in self-modulation regime, SPS beam can excite the field around 1 GV/m with a high density plasma.  Future experiment will be carried out based upon the first round experiments.

Status of the FCD Experiment The Frictional Cooling Demonstration Experiment is searching for a new method of efficiently reducing the beam emittance The proton spectra have been measured without the gas cell. The gas feedthroughs are proved to be too thin to efficiently pump down the gas cell. The water in the air remaining in the gas cell might freeze on the cold detector to form a dead layer. Next Step: New gas feedthroughs with 3 times larger diameters are being manufactured, after which the Frictional cooling data will be taken.

International Linear Collider-ILC Max. COM. energy500GeV Peak Luminosity~2x /cm 2 s Beam Current9.0mA Repetition rate5Hz Aver. accelerating gradient31.5MV/m Beam pulse length0.95ms Total Site Length31km Total AC Power Consumption~230MW The next big thing. After LHC, a lepton Collider of over 30 km length, will probably be needed, to complement the LHC.

Machine layout Features: Two linear accelerators, with tiny intense beams of electrons and positrons colliding head-on-head Total length ~ 30 km long (comparable scale to LHC) COM energy = 500 GeV, upgradeable to 1 TeV Subsystems: e+, e- sources, damping rings, main linacs, beam delivery systems, IPs, beam dumps

R&D Goals for Technical Design Accelerator Design and Integration (AD&I) Studies of possible cost reduction designs and strategies for consideration in a re-baseline in 2010 SCRF High Gradient R&D - globally coordinated program to demonstrate gradient by 2010 with 50% yield; ATF-2 at KEK Demonstrate Fast Kicker performance and Final Focus Design Electron Cloud Mitigation – (CesrTA) Electron Cloud tests at Cornell to establish mitigation and verify one damping ring is sufficient.

Why change from RDR design? Timescale of ILC demands we continually update the technologies and evolve the design to be prepared to build the most forward looking machine at the time of construction. Our next big milestone – the technical design (TDR) at end of 2012 should be as much as possible a “construction project ready” design with crucial R&D demonstrations complete and design optimised for performance to cost to risk. Cost containment vs RDR costs is a crucial element. (Must identify costs savings that will compensate cost growth)

Technical Design Phase and Beyond AD&I studies RDR Alternate concepts R&D Demonstrations TDP Baseline Technical Design RDR Baseline Beijing Workshop TDR TDP-1 TDP-2 Change Request SB2009 evolve change control process AAP PAC Physics CERN Workshop

Proposed Design changes for TDR RDRSB2009 Single Tunnel for main linac- approved! Move positron source to end of linac Reduce number of bunches factor of two (lower power) Reduce size of damping rings (3.2km) Integrate central region Single stage bunch compressor

28 Single tunnel configuration Egress passageway not needed; 7 m Ø ok

The ILC SCRF Cavity  Achieve high gradient (35MV/m); develop multiple vendors; make cost effective, etc  Focus is on high gradient; production yields; cryogenic losses; radiation; system performance

SCRF cavity production yield

Electron cloud studies at CESR-TA schematic of e- cloud build up in the arc beam pipe, due to photoemission and secondary emission Strategies to reduce EC: Coatings: TiN, TiZrV (NEG), Carbon, enamel... Grooved surface in vacuum Combined techniques Solenoid in the drift Clearing electrodes... Test now in CESR-TA !

Summary Proton driven plasma wakefield accelerator has potential to take electron beam to the energy frontier in a single stage of acceleration We will propose an experimental study of PDPWA and will use the existing proton beam from the CERN SPS Simulation shows that working in the self-modulation regime, we could achieve 1 GeV energy gain within 5 m plasma Muon cooling experiment is still ongoing in lab and we expect more result will come in this year. We will measure the equilibrium energy of protons will be measured in various conditions, e.g. gas pressure, electric fields ILC, enters the TDR phase, and currently more effort has been put on the design optimization and cost reduction.