APS Short Pulse X-ray (SPX) Design Study July 27-29, 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LLRF workshop 2013 Towards the next generation LLRF LBNL Gang Huang On behalf of LLRF Team LLRF workshop Oct. 1, 2013.
Advertisements

Ion Accelerator Complex for MEIC January 28, 2010.
An Advanced Linear Accelerator Facility for Microelectronic Dose Rate Studies P.E. Sokol and S.Y.Lee Indiana University.
Short Pulse X-ray Dampers U / U (U ) Geoff Waldschmidt RF Engineer ASD / RF DOE Lehman CD-2 Review of APS-Upgrade 4-6.
TUPD02 BEAM DIAGNOSTICS FOR THE ESS BLM BPM Trans Profile Bunch Shape BCM Preliminary System Count A. Jansson, L. Tchelidze, ESS AB, Lund, Sweden Hybrid.
6-Nov-06 FALC Resource Board Global Design Effort 1 Report from the GDE Barry Barish Caltech / GDE 6-Nov-06.
1 Low-energy RHIC electron Cooler (LEReC) Update November 17, 2014.
Linac Front-End R&D --- Systems Integration and Meson Lab Setup
Discussion on Studies at Test Stands Roger Ruber Uppsala University.
SPX High Level RF and RF Interlock Systems WBS U Doug Horan RF Systems Engineer Accelerator Systems Division/RF Group DOE Lehman CD-2 Review.
A U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science Laboratory Operated by The University of Chicago Argonne National Laboratory Office of Science U.S. Department.
The LHC: an Accelerated Overview Jonathan Walsh May 2, 2006.
SPX - Technical Integration WBS Ali Nassiri RF Group Leader SPX Technical Lead Accelerator Systems Division DOE CD-2 Review of APS-U 4-6 December.
SPX – Timing and Synchronization WBS U WBS U Frank Lenkszus Senior Electronics Engineer AES/Controls DOE Lehman CD-2 Review of APS-Upgrade.
ILC DR RF Cavity – D. Li DR Workshop, KEK, Japan 1 Design for the DR RF cavities and impedance issues Derun Li Center for Beam Physics Lawrence Berkeley.
Test Stands Roger Ruber Uppsala University ESS TAC4 16 Feb
Preliminary design of SPPC RF system Jianping DAI 2015/09/11 The CEPC-SppC Study Group Meeting, Sept. 11~12, IHEP.
Workshop on cryogenic and vacuum sectorisations of the SPL CERN, 9 th -10 th November 2009 Workshop Organisation and Goals Vittorio Parma TE-MSC.
Proposed machine parameters Andrei Seryi July 23, 2010.
HLRF DRAFT Global Design Effort 1 Defining EDR* Work Packages [Engineering Design Report] Ray Larsen SLAC ILC Division for HLRF Team DRAFT April.
M. Ross, N. Walker, A. Yamamoto ILC Cost Review, (updated for TB) and Cost Drivers  Future R & D ILC Cost Review (M. Ross,
R&D, Collaborations and Closeout Fulvia Pilat MEIC Collaboration Meeting March
Project Management Mark Palmer Cornell Laboratory for Accelerator-Based Sciences and Education.
July LEReC Review July 2014 Low Energy RHIC electron Cooling Sergey Belomestnykh SRF and RF systems.
RF system issues due to pulsed beam in ILC DR October 20, Belomestnykh, RF for pulsed beam ILC DR, IWLC2010 S. Belomestnykh Cornell University.
W.S. Graves ASAC Review Sept 18-19, 2003 R&D at Bates William S. Graves MIT-Bates Laboratory Presentation to MIT X-ray laser Accelerator Science Advisory.
1 Tim Michalski October 6, 2015 Engineering Issues in MEIC.
Alexander Aleksandrov Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Project X Injector Experiment (PXIE) Sergei Nagaitsev Dec 19, 2011.
Accelerator Science and Technology Centre POST-LINAC BEAM TRANSPORT AND COLLIMATION FOR THE UK’S NEW LIGHT SOURCE PROJECT D. Angal-Kalinin,
Automatic Machine Review Dec 2015 MAX IV Storage Rings Automation Pedro F. Tavares.
R.SREEDHARAN  SOLEIL main parameters  Booster and storage ring low level RF system  New digital Booster LLRF system under development  Digital LLRF.
John Carwardine 29 October, mA meeting 1. Agenda 9mA workshop Data analysis DAQ refresher / online database 2.
Argonne National Laboratory is managed by The University of Chicago for the U.S. Department of Energy Effects of Impedance in Short Pulse Generation Using.
RHIC 56 MHz Cryomodule Informational Review RHIC Integration Cross-sectional view of 56 MHz Cavity in Vacuum Vessel.
Progress and Plans for R&D and the Conceptual Design of the ILC Main Linacs H. Hayano, KEK PAC2005 5/18/2005.
24-July-10 ICHEP-10 Paris Global Design Effort 1 Barry Barish Paris ICHEP 24-July-10 ILC Global Design Effort.
Parametrisation of PRISM Ring and Design Options J. Pasternak Imperial College London/RAL STFC PRISM-FFAG Task Force phone meeting,
ESS Linac WP8 Radio Frequency Systems and Test Facilities ESS/SPL Collaboration Meeting Lund, 29 June 2010 Roger Ruber (Uppsala University) for the ESS.
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,
TLCC Themes BAW-2, SLAC, 19 January 2011 Ross Walker Yamamoto 1.
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.
THE ANDRZEJ SOŁTAN INSTITUTE FOR NUCLEAR STUDIES INSTYTUT PROBLEMÓW JADROWYCH im. Andrzeja Sołtana
Introduction to the effort on C-ADS accelerator physics and review charges Jingyu Tang For the Joint IHEP-IMP group on the C-ADS Accelerator Physics International.
High-efficiency L-band klystron development for the CLIC Drive Beam High-efficiency L-band klystron development for the CLIC Drive Beam CLIC workshop,
Progress Report on the Ultra-fast Harmonic Kicker Cavity Design and Beam Dynamic Simulation Yulu Huang 1,2 H. Wang 1, R. A. Rimmer 1, S. Wang 1 1.Thomas.
A CW Linac scheme for CLIC drive beam acceleration. Hao Zha, Alexej Grudiev 07/06/2016.
ESLS Workshop Nov 2015 MAX IV 3 GeV Ring Commissioning Pedro F. Tavares & Åke Andersson, on behalf of the whole MAX IV team.
1 DR 10 Hz Repetition Rate S. Guiducci (LNF) AD&I webex, 23 June 2010.
Uppsala Commitment to ESS and FREIA Planning
Plans for a Superconducting Proton Linac at CERN
R&D Topics for FOA Funding Proposals
WP10.3 LHC Crab Cavities Overview EUCARD SRF Annual Review
ESS RF Development at Uppsala University
JLEIC R&D Review: Other R&D
ERL Main-Linac Cryomodule
R. Bartolini Diamond Light Source Ltd
Other issues and concepts under study Conclusions References
FEL-Beam-Dynamics Group
Explanation of the Basic Principles and Goals
Barry Barish Paris ICHEP 24-July-10
ThomX – Commissioning Meeting – 25/01/2018
Yuhong Zhang MEIC Collaboration Meeting March 30 & 31, 2015
CEPC SRF Parameters (100 km Main Ring)
Robinson Instability Criteria for MEIC e Ring
12 Steps to a Cooler Design
SNS-PPU upgrades the existing accelerator structure
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,
Crab Crossing Named #1 common technical risk (p. 6 of the report)
Cooling of C6+ ion beam with pulsed electron beam
Presentation transcript:

APS Short Pulse X-ray (SPX) Design Study July 27-29, 2010

SPX Scientific Goal Conduct R&D to demonstrate proof of concept which will lead to design and implement of a fully integrated SRF deflecting cavities system for the APS storage ring. SPX Technical Goal Generate short x-ray pulses using crab-cavity-based method. 2 Beam current 202 mA ( 24singlets) Beam energy 7 GeV Revolution frequency kHz RF deflecting voltage 2 MV ( Initial implementation) Two cryomodules 4 cavities/cryomodule RF deflecting voltage 4 MV ( Final implementation) Two cryomodules 8 cavities/cryomodule RF frequency MHz ( 8 th harm of SR frequency ( MHz) SPX Fundamental Parameters

Technical Systems  Cavities  Cryomodule  Cryogenics  Low-level RF  High-power RF and waveguide distribution  Beam diagnostics  Timing and synchronization  Controls/Interlocks/ Machine Protection System 3

APS-U Timeline 4

SPX Timeline with Milestones 5

6 SPX Timeline with Milestones -2

R&D. What do we have to learn? 7

Agenda 8

Agenda - 2 9

Agenda - 3 Working Groups 10 WG2: LLRF/Timing-Synchronization/Diagnostics & Controls - B3100A&B Coordinators: Doolittle, Berenc,Byrd WG1: Cavity/Cryomodule/Cryogenics/HLRF - A1100 Coordinators: Rimmer, Waldschmidt, Mammosser

11  Focus entirely on the SPX technical goals.  Study and evaluate feasibility of proposed solutions based on beam physics requirements imposed by the APS storage ring operation.  Identify high-risk technical activities and suggest means of mitigating those risks. –Design modifications and/or alternative solutions  Identify and discuss key R&D elements in each technical system that are necessary for proof-of-the-concept demonstration.  Study and evaluate design and performance of each system. Highlight engineering design weaknesses that need improvements/modifications to be realizable and cost effective.  To what degree, if any, can the physics specifications be somewhat relaxed to ease the tolerances on the technical systems? Can design deliver technical performance?  Are there any potential show stoppers? Study Group Goals