Christopher Nantista SLAC Project X Workshop November 12, 2007 Fermilab.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
11/27/2007ILC Power and Cooling VM Workshop Mike Neubauer 1 RF Power and Cooling Requirements Overview from “Main Linac Power and Cooling Information”
Advertisements

PETS components and waveguide connections CLIC Workshop 2007 David Carrillo.
5th Collaboration Meeting on X-band Accelerator Structure Design and Test Program. May 2011 Review of waveguide components development for CLIC I. Syratchev,
Stephen Molloy RF Group ESS Accelerator Division
April SCRF Meeting FNAL08 S.Fukuda 1 HLRF Summary and Work Assignment S. FUKUDA KEK.
Design of Standing-Wave Accelerator Structure
Beam loading compensation 300Hz positron generation (Hardware Upgrade ??? Due to present Budget problem) LCWS2013 at Tokyo Uni., Nov KEK, Junji.
Conventional Source for ILC (300Hz Linac scheme and the cost) Junji Urakawa, KEK LCWS2012 Contents : 0. Short review of 300Hz conventional positron source.
Christopher Nantista SLAC TILC09 Tsukuba, Japan April 20, 2009.
Different mechanisms and scenarios for the local RF
SRF Results and Requirements Internal MLC Review Matthias Liepe1.
Christopher Nantista Chris Adolphsen SLAC TILC09 Tsukuba, Japan April 20, 2009.
Christopher Nantista ILC 2 nd Baseline Assessment Workshop (BAW-2) SLAC January 18, …… …… …… … ….
201 MHz NC RF Cavity R&D for Muon Cooling Channels
RF Distribution Alternatives R.A.Yogi & FREIA group Uppsala University.
November LCWS08 S. Fukuda 1 KEK HLRF Status and S1- global S. FUKUDA KEK.
1 C-Band Linac Development Satoshi Ohsawa 2004.Feb.19LCPAC.
1 Status of EMMA Shinji Machida CCLRC/RAL/ASTeC 23 April, ffag/machida_ ppt & pdf.
Christopher Nantista ARD R&D Status Meeting SLAC February 3, …… …… …… … ….
Proposed TDR baseline LLRF design J. Carwardine, 22 May 2012.
Clustered Surface RF Production Scheme Chris Adolphsen Chris Nantista SLAC.
X-Band RF Structure and Beam Dynamics Workshop, December 2008 CERN experience with 12 GHz high power waveguide components Igor Syratchev (CERN)
704MHz Warm RF Cavity for LEReC Binping Xiao Collider-Accelerator Department, BNL July 8, 2015 LEReC Warm Cavity Review Meeting  July 8, 2015.
Anders Sunesson RF Group ESS Accelerator Division
Klystron Cluster RF Distribution Scheme Chris Adolphsen Chris Nantista SLAC.
13 th April 2007FFAG 07 Carl Beard EMMA RF System Carl Beard, Emma Wooldridge, Peter McIntosh, Peter Corlett, Andy Moss, James Rogers, Joe Orrett ASTeC,
Power Distribution System R&D at SLAC Christopher Nantista ILC08 Chicago, Illinois November 18,
CLARA Gun Cavity Optimisation NVEC 05/06/2014 P. Goudket G. Burt, L. Cowie, J. McKenzie, B. Militsyn.
Ding Sun and David Wildman Fermilab Accelerator Advisory Committee
Aug 23, 2006 Half Current Option: Impact on Linac Cost Chris Adolphsen With input from Mike Neubauer, Chris Nantista and Tom Peterson.
Power Distribution System (PDS) Design and R&D Status Christopher Nantista SLAC SCRF Fermilab April 24, 2008.
John Carwardine 21 st October 2010 TTF/FLASH 9mA studies: Main studies objectives for January 2011.
1Matthias LiepeAugust 2, 2007 Future Options Matthias Liepe.
The Zipper Structure: A Novel Accelerator Structure Configuration Christopher Nantista SLAC AAC Workshop ’08 Santa Cruz, CA July 31, 2008.
The NLC RF Pulse Compression and High Power RF Transport Systems Sami G. Tantawi, G.Bowden, K.Fant, Z.D.Farkas, W.R.Fowkes J.Irwin, N.M.Kroll, Z.H.Li,
I. Syratchev, CLIC Breakdown Workshop, CERN, 20 May 2008 Power Circulation in a CLIC Accelerating Structure I. Syratchev.
Summery of the power coupler session at the LCWS13 workshop E. Kako W.-D. Möller H. Hayano A. Yamamoto All members of SCRF WG November 14, 2013.
BEAMLINE HOM ABSORBER O. Nezhevenko, S. Nagaitsev, N. Solyak, V. Yakovlev Fermi National Laboratory December 11, 2007 Wake Fest 07 - ILC wakefield workshop.
Jan Low Energy 10 Hz Operation in DRFS (Fukuda) (Fukuda) 1 Low Energy 10Hz Operation in DRFS S. Fukuda KEK.
Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Vector Control Algorithm for Efficient Fan-out RF Power Distribution Yoon W. Kang SNS/ORNL Fifth CW.
HLRF R&D Towards the TDR Christopher Nantista ML-SCRF Webex meeting June 29, 2011.
Conventional source developments (300Hz Linac scheme and the cost, Part-II) Junji Urakawa, KEK PosiPol-2012 at DESY Zeuthen Contents : 0. Short review.
Summary of Relative RF Distribution Costs with Gradient Considerations (Work in Progress) Chris Adolphsen SLAC.
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,
C/S band RF deflector for post interaction longitudinal phase space optimization (D. Alesini)
Project X High Power 325 MHz RF Distribution and Control Alfred Moretti, Nov 12, 2007 Project X Workshop.
Feasibility and R&D Needed For A TeV Class HEP e+e- Collider Based on AWA Technology Chunguang Jing for Accelerator R&D Group, HEP Division, ANL Aug
Linac RF System Design Options Y. Kang RAD/SNS/NScD/ORNL Project – X Collaboration Meeting April , 2011.
Waveguide Heat Loads Christopher Nantista SLAC Main Linac – KOM Fermilab September 28, 2007 W.K.H. Panofsky
Longitudinal dynamic analysis for the 3-8 GeV pulsed LINAC G. Cancelo, B. Chase, Nikolay Solyak, Yury Eidelman, Sergei Nagaitsev, Julien Branlard.
Advancements on RF systems D. Alesini (LNF-INFN) Quinto Meeting Generale Collaborazione LI2FE, Frascati 15-16/03/2011.
A CW Linac scheme for CLIC drive beam acceleration. Hao Zha, Alexej Grudiev 07/06/2016.
Bunch Shape Monitor for HINS Wai-Ming Tam Project X Collaboration Meeting September 11, 2009.
Areal RF Station A. Vardanyan
ILC Power and Cooling VM Workshop
Multi-stage pulse compressor
Abstract EuSPARC and EuPRAXIA projects
Manipulating RF phase and amplitude at high power level.
A frequency choice for the SPL machine: Impact on hardware
NC Accelerator Structures
Chris Adolphsen Sergei Nagaitsev
Application of the moderate peak power (6 MW) X-band klystron’s cluster for the CLIC accelerating structures testing program. I. Syratchev.
Brief Review of Microwave Dielectric Accelerators
Update of CLIC accelerating structure design
Electric Field Amplitude (MV/m)
CEPC RF Power Sources System
Overview Multi Bunch Beam Dynamics at XFEL
ATF project meeting, Feb KEK, Junji Urakawa Contents :
ERL Director’s Review Main Linac
CEPC SRF Parameters (100 km Main Ring)
Presentation transcript:

Christopher Nantista SLAC Project X Workshop November 12, 2007 Fermilab

BCD: linear ACD: semi-branched w/ VTO’s & no circulators? Fewer types of splitters (3 vs. 9) Power division adjustable by pairs Elimination of circulators possible Basic ILC RF Distribution Scheme (Baseline) (Alternate) 3 cryomodules per klystron 26 cavities (9-8-9)

Baseline RF Distribution System Alternative RF Distribution System Fixed Hybrid Tap-offs w/ various couplings Circulators Variable Tap-Offs (VTOs) 3 dB Hybrids 3-stub tuners phase shifters

SLAC Variable Tap-Off (VTO) Mode Rotator (Center): Polarization Selecting 3-Port Junction (Ends): oblong cross-section circular Full 4-Port Assembly: length = ” machined aluminum; dip-brazed rotatable flanges Mechanical Design: Coupling is a function of center rotation angle: C = sin 2 (2 

angle (degrees)~0angle 1angle 2~45 coupling (dB / %)-51.4 / / / / 99.9 coupled phase (degrees)(57.496) through phase (degrees) (32.256) reflection (dB / %) / / / / 0.02 loss (dB / %) / / / / 0.57 VTO Cold Test Results Average attenuation: dB / 0.65% Coupled phase variation: 0.15° Through phase variation: 0.66°

L-Band “Magic-H” 3-dB Hybrid ” HFSS DesignMechanical Design Ports oriented for branching distribution (eliminate 2 bends) Design for high accuracy/isolation at 1.3 GHz. This is crucial for elimination of circulators. Don’t need broad bandwidth Fabricated by aluminum dip-brazing milled halves. Loss: 0.31% Match & Isolation: ~-43 dB Coupling: dB (49.76%) Coupling Error: dB or Frequency Error: 4.4 MHz Cold Test Results:

SLAC is building VTOs and hybrids, using aluminum dip- brazing, and acquiring parts to assemble RF distribution systems for FNAL’s NML cryomodules. A VTO and hybrid have operated stably at 3 MW, 1.2 ms, 5 Hz at atmospheric pressure.

Other Components 1 MW load Circulator (also AFT) bidirectional coupler E-plane bendH-plane bend semi-flex waveguide = 6” S.P.A. Ferrite, Ltd. (St. Petersburg) DESY phase shifter

Input Power Baseline TTF-3 Coupler Design tunablity (Q L ) HV hold-off dual vacuum windows bellows for thermal expansion motorizable knob movable antenna (Q L adjustment) Design complicated by need for:

Cold WindowBias-ableVariable QextCold Coax Dia.# Fabricated TTF-3Cylindricalyes 40 mm62 KEK2Capacitive Diskno 40 mm3 KEK1Tristan Diskno 60 mm4 LAL TW60Diskpossible 62 mm2 LAL TTF5Cylindricalpossible 62 mm2 Baseline and Alternative Coupler Designs

beam RF Alternative ILC RF Distribution Layout with circulators: without circulators: VTO’s allow pair-wise adjustment of power distribution and thus more efficient use of power. Hybrid feeding of equal-Q cavity pairs directs reflected power into hybrid loads. RF beam loads hybrid VTO circulators flex guide load directional couplers H-plane bends

Case Not Sorted [%] Sorted [%] Individual P’s and Q’s (Indiv. P control and Circ) P’s in pairs, individual Q’s 2.5   0.2 (VTO and Circ) 1 P, individual Q’s 2.7   0.4 (Circ but no VTO) P’s in pairs, Q’s in pairs 7.2   0.2 (VTO but no Circ) 1 P, Q’s in pairs 8.8   0.5 (no VTO, no Circ) G i set to lowest G lim 19.8   2.0 (no VTO, no Circ) Optimized 1  G  /  G lim  ; results for 100 seeds Consider uniform distribution of gradient limits (G lim ) i from 22 to 34 MV/m in a 26 cavity RF unit - adjust cavity Q’s and/not cavity power (P) to maximize overall gradient while keeping gradient uniform (< 1e-3 rms) during bunch train Gradient Optimization with VTOs and Circulators also more efficient power usage

0 -  /2 P For cavity phasing: n=6 :  P=1.3260m = ” Cavity Spacing and Phasing beam Reflections from identical cavities combine into hybrid load port. Type 3+ cryomodule has m (= 6 0 ) spacing to allow energy recovery in X-FEL. Type 4+ cryomodule will have 1.326m (= ) spacing to allow elimination of (most) ILC circulators. This won’t work in Project X with ILC cryomodules due to low  (wrong spacing) and varying cavity parameters (mismatched reflections). Even in the ILC-like last section of the high-energy linac, with an average  of 0.99, the cavity spacing is off by ~21° (reflections by 42°).  Circulators required in Project X linac. load from hybrid from beam transit RF

XFEL RF Distribution 2-level splitting, like SLAC ILC ACD: First splitting done with customizable asymmetric shunt T’s of various coupling (eliminating hybrid loads). Second splitting also done with matched T’s, rather than hybrids, eliminating loads. This is a good idea if circulators are used. In-line Phase shifters incorporated into T’s, eliminating two flange joints. V. Katalev

Individual Cavity Control VTO’s can be used to optimize division of RF power between pairs. For changing  (thus transit factor and shunt impedance) and cavity-to-cavity phasing, greater control over individual cavity feeding may be needed. rejected power reflected power rejected power reflected power Assuming Q L control by adjustable couplers, there are two hardware configurations by which local phase and amplitude control can be achieved A) B) A) Requires an E-H Tuner or Magic-T w/ two reflective phase shifters as well as an additional circulator w/ load B) Requires two additional hybrids w/ loads and two in-line phase shifters

A is probably more compact. B is probably less lossy. A uses one fewer load. B uses only components already developed for TESLA/ILC/XFEL. A uses simpler phase shifters in which it is easier to incorporate electronically controlled active elements (e.g. ferrites) if fast control is required. One could also gain contol over power to individual cavities by incorporating a VTO for each cavity, but: The current VTO design is longer than the cavity spacing Changing the setting of one affects the power to all downstream (RF wise) cavities in the line. The current design is not remotely controlable and it would be difficult and expensive (if possible) to make it so. Pros & Cons:

Average Effective Cavity Gradient (MV/m) The Project X L-Band Linac* 603 MeV – 8 GeV  =.7933 –.9945 *favored design ILC-8  /9 ILC-1 ILC-2 ILC

ILC 8  /9 Cavities 00   pp v p =c v p =9/10c  -8  /98  /9 10  /9 +2  The reference linac design incorporated low-  “squeezed ILC” cavities in the standard  -mode with adjusted cell length. To avoid a new cavity development and modifications to the cryomodule, the “favored” design instead uses standard ILC cavities deformed just enough to bring the 8  /9 mode up to 1.3 GHz and operated in this highly non-standard mode. Stretch to increase frequency by 0.8 MHz

For the  mode since the TW components are indistinguishable (from each other and from the SW), they both contribute equally to acceleration. For a non-  mode then, in a field-limited cavity, we automatically take a hit of about a half in voltage V seen by a synchronous particle. In a SW mode, the cells all oscillate in phase, but with an amplitude modulation determined by the “phase advance” of the TW components. The stored energy U is thus also cut in half, as is the R/Q (=V 2 /  U). Q L (~= V/((R/Q)I b )) and t i (~=2Q L /w ln2)), however, remain roughly unchanged. 8  /9 mode AnAn n  mode

One takes a further hit at low  due to the transit time factor for the individual cells. P. Ostroumov, et al. Fig. 2.1 Project X document 8p/9 mode in 9-cell ILC cavity peak cavity field equivalent  -mode gradient of ~23.25 MV/m (~ ° off crest) 5.9–11.9 MV/m 57% spread in V for first RF station

peak cavity field equivalent  -mode gradient of ~23.25 MV/m (~ ° off crest) 5.9–11.9 MV/m 57% spread in V for first RF station Parameters for Flat Acceleration Along Bunch Train: for constant, cavity field limited stored energy. Energy and Gradient Profiles Along Linac Section: Exact Solution for flat acceleration and zero reflection during beam. But 21 cavities with a large spread in V share a common klystron and thus a common t i.

PROBLEM: If we relax the efficiency condition and allow steady state reflected power during the beam, can we achieve constant gradient along the bunch train in each cavity with varying V but uniform stored energy and a common injection time? Assume we can adjust both Q L (~= Q e ) and P for each cavity. Solve optimal case (see above) for highest gradient cavity to set t i. Determine and fix stored energy in cavities, U 0. The RF power required to achieve this stored energy at time t i is now determined as a function of Q L.

Now, for the cavity field /gradient to equilibrate at injection time, the power flowing into the cavity at t i must equal the power taken out by the beam (neglecting wall losses). condition for flat acceleration. The steady-state reflected power during the beam is given for each cavity by:

Conclusions L-Band high-power RF distribution development for TESLA/XFEL/ILC can be applied to Project X. The configuration and components used will depend on the degree of control required in setting the power, phase, and coupling at each individual cavity which, if any, of these parameters need to be changeable remotely whether and what fast (not mechanical) control is needed These requirements will be set by considerations of beam dynamics, LLRF, operations, etc. The changing  causes changing shunt impedances and creates a different problem than in ILC, where the anticipated spread in cavity limits is the chief concern, but it would appear to be solvable.