PRE-CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF A CW POSITRON SOURCE FOR JLAB (2013-LDRD-02) JOE GRAMES LDRD PROPOSAL REVIEW - JULY 17, 2013 PROJECT OVERVIEW THE TEAM LDRD EVALUATION.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SINBAD Ralph W. Aßmann Leading Scientist, DESY LAOLA Collaboration Meeting, Wismar
Advertisements

Simulation Study For MEIC Electron Cooling He Zhang, Yuhong Zhang Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Abstract Electron cooling of the ion beams.
Discussion on EUROTeV and ILC Nick Walker (DESY) EUROTeV Kick-off Meeting DESY 1 November 2004.
Structural Genomics – an example of transdisciplinary research at Stanford Goal of structural and functional genomics is to determine and analyze all possible.
SLAC Accelerator Research and Introduction to SAREC Tor Raubenheimer FACET Users Meeting August 29 th - 30 th, 2011.
JCS e + /e - Source Development and E166 J. C. Sheppard, SLAC June 15, 2005.
Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science Dr. Raymond L. Orbach Under Secretary for Science U.S. Department.
View from the NSF: Later Years J. Whitmore (EPP-PNA) M. Pripstein (LHC) M. Goldberg, J. Reidy (EPP) LEPP – CLEO CESR Symposium at Cornell, May 31, 2008.
Jefferson Lab Status Hall A collaboration Dec. 16, 2013 R. D. McKeown Deputy Director For Science.
HEPAP and P5 Report DIET Federation Roundtable JSPS, Washington, DC; April 29, 2015 Andrew J. Lankford HEPAP Chair University of California, Irvine.
Introduction and Charge to the Review of ESS Target building and Instrument Hall design requirements Roland Garoby November 2014, Lund
Jefferson Lab Strategic Planning Divisional Town Meeting Mission Statement of your Division – What is or should be the mission statement of your division?
Generation and Characterization of Magnetized Bunched Electron Beam from DC Photogun for MEIC Cooler Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD)
Performance Assessment Assessment of Organizational Excellence NSF Advisory Committee for Business and Operations May 5-6, 2005.
Identification of national S&T priority areas with respect to the promotion of innovation and economic growth: the case of Russia Alexander Sokolov State.
Global Design Effort Beam Delivery System => EDR LCWS07 June 2, 2007 at DESY Andrei Seryi for BDS Area leaders Deepa Angal-Kalinin, A.S., Hitoshi Yamamoto.
R&D, Collaborations and Closeout Fulvia Pilat MEIC Collaboration Meeting March
CLIC Implementation Studies Ph. Lebrun & J. Osborne CERN CLIC Collaboration Meeting addressing the Work Packages CERN, 3-4 November 2011.
Project Management Mark Palmer Cornell Laboratory for Accelerator-Based Sciences and Education.
A.Variola Motivations…from D.Hitlin Talk The polarized positron source.
Fermilab Presentation Greg Bock, Pepin Carolan, Mike Lindgren, Elaine McCluskey 2014 SC PM Workshop July 2014.
ERHIC design status V.Ptitsyn for the eRHIC design team.
ILC/CLIC e + generation working group Jim Clarke, STFC Daresbury Laboratory and Louis Rinolfi, CERN.
Polarized Positrons at the Jefferson Laboratory Idaho State University, Idaho Accelerator Center, Jefferson Lab, LPC Clermont-Ferrand, LPSC Grenoble, Old.
Copyright © 2015 SCKCEN ADS accelerator developments presently on-going for MYRRHA and possibly for the Chinese-ADS Dirk Vandeplassche 1 Eucard-2 — APAE.
Polarized Positrons at the Jefferson Laboratory Idaho State University, Idaho Accelerator Center, Jefferson Lab, LPC Clermont-Ferrand, LPSC Grenoble, Old.
Neutron Chopper Technologies Work Package
Department of Energy Office of Science  FY 2007 Request for Office of Science is 14% above FY 2006 Appropriation  FY 2007 Request for HEP is 8% above.
International Linear Collider at Stanford Linear Accelerator Center 9/13/2006 Americas Regional Team FY08-09 Planning Meeting 1 1/11 ILC-Americas FY08-09.
Jefferson Lab’s Enabling Technologies: A Call for Strategic Planning W. OREN JLAB Engineering Division 9 February 2012.
1 Future Circular Collider Study Preparatory Collaboration Board Meeting September 2014 R-D Heuer Global Future Circular Collider (FCC) Study Goals and.
Management February 20, Annual Review of the Muon Accelerator Program (MAP) Subcommittee members: Ron Prwivo, Ron Lutha, and Jim Kerby.
Argonne Accelerator Institute Activites Rod Gerig Argonne May 18, 2007 Presentation to the Fermilab-Argonne Directors’ Collaboration Meeting.
SLAC and ILC Jonathan Dorfan, Director LCFOA, SLAC May 1, 2006 Particle & Particle Astrophysics.
ILC 2007 Global Design Effort 1 Planning Damping Rings Activities in the Engineering Design Phase Andy Wolski Cockcroft Institute/University of Liverpool.
Use of CLIC zero for Accelerator R&D 10 May 2012 R. Assmann1 CLIC Collaboration Meeting, CERN
The ILC Outlook Barry Barish HEP 2005 Joint ECFA-EPS Lisbon, Portugal 23-July-05.
J. Corlett. June 16, 2006 A Future Light Source for LBNL Facility Vision and R&D plan John Corlett ALS Scientific Advisory Committee Meeting June 16, 2006.
UK X-FEL National Laboratory Perspective Susan Smith STFC ASTeC IoP PAB/STFC Workshop Towards a UK XFEL 16 th February 2016.
Nigel Lockyer Fermilab Operations Review 16 th -18 th May 2016 Fermilab in the Context of the DOE Mission.
1 Comments concerning DESY and TESLA Albrecht Wagner Comments for the 5th meeting of the ITRP at Caltech 28 June 2004 DESY and the LC What could DESY contribute.
DETECTOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Fred Borcherding 1.
Nigel Lockyer Fermilab Operations Review 16 th -18 th May 2016 Fermilab in the Context of the DOE Mission.
Fermilab-India Agreements and Collaboration Shekhar Mishra Project-X, International Collaboration Coodinator Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Batavia,
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Department of Energy Jefferson.
J.P.DelahayeTILC08: 06/ 03/ 081 CLIC-ILC Collaboration? Following visit of CERN (Nov 07)
LDRD Brainstorming Session
Jefferson Lab Overview
WP9-SuperB in TIARA M. Biagini, INFN-LNF.
LCC L. Evans, Santander, 2nd June 2016
Polarized Electrons for Polarized Positrons
Jefferson Lab Reliability Task Force and Initiatives
JLEIC Collaboration Meeting Closeout considerations
JLEIC R&D Review: Other R&D
ILC/CLIC e+ generation working group
Scientific Computing At Jefferson Lab
CEBAF Injector Overview
Introduction to Jefferson Lab
Polarized Positrons at Jefferson Lab
Requests of Future HEP e+/e-Facilities
MEIC Cost Estimate Overview
Upgrade of the GlueX Spectrometer for Physics with Strange Final States Nuclear Physics Yi Qiang Nov. 13, 2011.
Explanation of the Basic Principles and Goals
PEPPo : Polarized Positron Production
Update on the JLEIC pCDR
Feedback from the Temple Town Meeting MEIC Accelerator R&D Meeting
FY18-19 EIC R&D FOA FY 2018 Research and Development for Next Generation Nuclear Physics Accelerator Facilities Web site:
Comments to the Report of the Community Review of EIC Accelerator R&D for the Office of Nuclear Physics, February 13, 2017 (60 pages) By Haipeng Wang,
Optimization of JLEIC Integrated Luminosity Without On-Energy Cooling*
Presentation transcript:

PRE-CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF A CW POSITRON SOURCE FOR JLAB (2013-LDRD-02) JOE GRAMES LDRD PROPOSAL REVIEW - JULY 17, 2013 PROJECT OVERVIEW THE TEAM LDRD EVALUATION CRITERIA REVIEWER QUESTION BUDGET

PHYSICS MOTIVATION (bullets refer to letters of endorsement)  12 GEV CEBAF - The merits of positrons, polarized and/or unpolarized, for the Nuclear Physics program at JLab is comparable to the benefits of polarized with respect to unpolarized electrons.  Dr. Volker Burkert, Principal Staff Scientist and Head of Hall B, JLAB  NEXT GEN FACILITIES - Unpolarized and polarized positrons in the next generation of accelerators (MEIC, ILC, LHeC) have been identified as either necessary or complementary tools for the completion of their Physics program.  Dr. Yuhong Zhang, Senior Staff Scientist, MEIC Accelerator Design Study, JLAB  Dr. Alessandro Variola, Accelerator Department Director, LAL Orsay  NEW DIRECTIONS - There exists a long standing and never satisfied interest of the Material Science Community in an intense low energy ( MeV/c) positron beam, as a characterization tool of material structure.  Dr. Kelvin Lynn, Director for the Center for Materials Research, Washington State University, Boeing Chair for Advanced Materials

POSITRON SOURCE CANDIDATES  WHAT CHARACTERIZES A POSITRON SOURCE CANDIDATE ? We believe a conventional design is best suited for Jefferson Lab  EXAMPLES OF A “SUITABLE ELECTRON DRIVE BEAM” CEBAF INJ (100 MeV) FEL (100MeV) CEBAF (12 GeV) High Power Beam Absorber Optimized Integrated Collection Facility Integrated Acceleration Suitable Electron Drive Beam Well Defined User Beam Specifications

HIGH POWER BEAM ABSORBERS  HIGH POWER ABSORBERS ARE CHALLENGING Highly localized beam power ( kW) to be dissipated Radiation management is a priority, specifically to cost and operability  ABSORBER TECHNOLOGY BALANCES MANY IMPORTANT PARAMETERS Heat - energy absorption and heat dissipation in target Radiation - prompt radiation and material activation around target Accelerator Integration - collection beam line after target  NEW DIRECTIONS A novel or original implementation of a positron source is likely  Study applicability of recently issued JLAB patents  Introduce “split two target” design  first (optimize bremsstrahlung) – high radiation  second (optimize positron production/collection) – low radiation footprint

MOGA SOURCE OPTIMIZATION  DIVERSE SET OF PARENT PARAMETERS Electron Drive Beam (energy, intensity, radiation, polarization) Single- & Double- Targets(bremsstrahlung and e+/e- converters) Electron Beam Power(radiation, activation, thermal management) Positron Collection(adiabatic matching, acceleration, optics) Positron Beam(emittance, damping, transport, acceleration) Positron Polarization(PEPPo concept, self-polarization) Value(cost, size, scale)  IMPLEMENT MULTI-OBJECT GENETIC ALGORITHM (MOGA) Principles of biological evolution to optimize multi-dimensioned non-linear problems Application to modern sophisticated problems Operating highest brightness high current photoinjector (Cornell) Design of optimized luminosity for ILC Optimized design and operating costs of an SRF linac JLAB expertise

 DOWN SELECTION (CLOSED LOOP PROCESS) Technical Review  Internal and External reviewers  Review materials provided well in advance  One day agenda split between presentations and reviewer assessment Committee Charge  Assess and recommend scenario(s) for detailed study  Reduce to 1 or at most 2 concepts  SHIFT EFFORT FROM CANDIDATES TO PRE-CONCEPUTAL DESIGN Limited to design and analysis of most critical components  Absorber  Collection  Optimization Explore prototype engineering plan  Critical path R&D  Positron source systems (targets, magnets, SRF, vacuum, shielding)  Facility integration  Risk assessment TECHNICAL REVIEW & PRE-CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REPORT

THE TEAM User Physics Eric Voutier Visiting Nuclear Physicist LPSC, Grenoble (5-10%) High Power Absorbers Pavel Degtiarenko Radiation Physicist (SS) ESH&Q (5-10%) Source Optimization Joe Grames Injector Physicist (SSIII) ACC/CIS (5-10%) Scientific Lead New Post-Doctoral Research Associate (100%) Engineering Analysis Mechanical Engineer (ME II) ENG (7-15%) “The ultimate deliverable of this proposal is a technically well-developed Pre-Conceptual Design Report based upon physics-motivated User input, with alignment and feasibility to the existing CEBAF and FEL facilities, and including an optimization and technical review of candidate design schemes.”

LDRD EVALUATION CRITERIA  POTENTIAL IMPACT ON JLAB High Grows and strengthens core expertise in (polarized) particle sources for CEBAF NP Potential for center of growth in low energy or material science and collaboration  LIKELIHOOD TO ACHIEVE GOALS Strong Builds upon JPOS’09, University Collaborators, 2 PhD’s, JLab patents, ILC support, PEPPo  PROSPECTS FOR ATTRACTING FUTURE FUNDING New funding for future NP program HEP funding to support high energy e+ colliders US interests in materials sciences to compete with European leadership  STRATEGIC VALUE OF YOUR PROJECT TO JLAB Entirely new aspect to CEBAF NP program Support MEIC at JLab with positrons  LEVEL OF INNOVATION IN SCIENCE AND/OR TECHNOLOGY First ever CW positron source New technology to produce polarized positrons at low energy Evolution of high power beam absorbers

Analyze the pro and cons of stretching the funding over 3 years.  PROS 3 year is preferable (submitted 2 year proposal to be most compact) Improved task flow (more serial, less parallel) Better synchronization with post-doctoral scientist search and funding term  CONS Deliverable delayed by one 1 year REVIEWER QUESTION

BUDGET 2 YEAR (SUBMITTED) 3 YEAR (QUESTION)