11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 1 ILC Baseline Schedule, Milestones, and Decision points Tom Himel

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 2 Preface There is a large amount of ongoing R&D. I will concentrate on those aspects which have major effects on the ILC design. Note that ILC R&D, engineering, and industrialization are all going on in parallel. I’ll describe each R&D project with its goals, explain why it is useful, give its schedule, and some results. We know many pieces of the schedule, but the fully integrated schedule will be developed during the EDR.

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 3 Contents Preview of Overall Schedule Major risk mitigation R&D efforts: –Cavity gradient –Cryomodule at full gradient –Linac string test –E cloud, DR kicker –BDS system test –Design for High Availability Cost reduction R&D –High power RF Construction Schedule and overview

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 4 Technically Driven Timeline August BCD All regions ~ 5 yrs Construction  Startup Siting Plan being Developed RDREDR Begin Const End Const Engineer Design Site Prep Site Select R & D -- Industrialization Gradient e-Cloud Cryomodule Full Production System Tests & XFEL Detector Install Detector Construct Pre-Operations

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 5 Cavity Gradient – Goal Current status: Nine 9 cell cavities have been produced with gradients > 35 MeV/m. Not reproducible and needs several attempts at final processing. Goal: After a viable cavity process has been determined through a series of preparations and vertical tests on a significant number of cavities, achieve 35 MV/m at Q 0 = in a sufficiently large final sample (greater than 30) of nine- cell cavities in the low power vertical dewar testing in a production-like operation e.g. all cavities get the same treatment. –The yield for the number of successful cavities of the final production batch should be larger than 80% in the first test. After re-processing the 20 % underperforming cavities the yield should go up to 95%. This is consistent with the assumption in the RDR costing exercise.

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 6 Cavity Gradient – Plan There are three main activities which are closely coupled and partially progressing in parallel –This is needed to separate cavity preparation and production issues 1. Single-cell R&D –Establishing more reliable final preparation parameters. –Focus on the final rinse after EP before HPR. –E.g. Ultrasound, Short EP (or HF rinse), H 2 O 2 2. Tight-loop (Finish in 2008) –International multi-cell cavity exchange –1st round Comparison of regional differences in preparation and testing –2nd round Use single-cell results and implement on 9-cell cavities. 3. Production-like effort (Continues into 2010) –Monitor ongoing productions Esp. XFEL preparation Use qualified and new vendors –Use improved preparation process for an ultimate batch of cavities A lot of data will be (is already) available by the time of the EDR writing

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 7 Cavity Gradient – Cost/Benefit Optimistic scenario with final batch + tight- loop –Costs 36 MILCU for the R&D –Gives highest confidence about the gradient distribution This needs to be compared to: –A reduction of the average gradient for the ILC from design of 31.5 to 28 –~ 600 MILCU

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 8 Cavity Gradient – Results KEK single cell results: 2005 – just learning 2006 – standard recipe 2007 – add final 3 μm fresh acid EP Note: multi-cells are harder than singles

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 9 Module Test – Goal Intermediate goal –Achieve 31.5 MV/m average operational accelerating gradient in a single cryomodule as a proof-of-principle. In case of cavities performing below the average, this could be achieved by tweaking the RF distribution accordingly. –Auxiliary systems like fast tuners should all work. Final goal –Achieve > 31.5 MeV/m operational gradient in 3 cryomodules. –The cavities accepted in the low power test should achieve 35 MV/m at Q 0 = with a yield as described above (80% after first test, 95% after re-preparation). –It does not need to be the final cryomodule design

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 10 Module Test – Plan Enough good cavities for the cryomodules are expected from the cavity gradient program. Module assembly plans: DESY –2007: M7: Being tested now. See next slide –2007: M8: Probably no slow-down to select best cavities –2008: M10 – could select best cavities from several regions US – funding problems have us behind schedule below –2007 – Assemble a kit of parts from DESY to get first assembly experience at FNAL –2008 – assemble 2 cryomodules from US produced parts. Second may be made by selecting the best available cavities. –2009 – build 2 more cryomodules Japan – : Build, test, 3 cryomodules

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 11 Module Test – Results DESY

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 12 String Test – Goal Build 1 RF unit (3 cryomodules + 1 Klystron) to fully check: –What gradient spread can be handled by LLRF system. This test should be done with and without beam loading. –For heating due to high frequency HOMs. –Amplitude and phase stability. –Static and dynamic heat loads. To partially check: –Reliability –Dark current –for degradation or other weaknesses The ILC cryomodule is enough different than that of the TTF that a new system test is warranted.

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 13 String Test – Plan Use cryomodules built for module tests and for industrialization. Do more tests at TTF/FLASH XFEL will both be a string test and provide costing, contracting and construction information. Build 1 RF unit at KEK and 1 at Fermilab. –Do this in a phased manner, starting with smaller tests with modules that don’t meet specs. –Full – to spec – RF unit should work before 1% of the final industrial production of ILC cryomodules is complete. (2014) There will be a larger second phase string test to verify quality of the modules going into the ILC.

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 14 String test – Cost/Benefit The risk if we don’t do the string test is that we will build ~1.5 BILCU of cryomodules and then discover a design flaw. Fixing them all could take years and easily cost more than 20% of the original cost. If there is a medium risk (25%) of this type of error then the risk*cost ~75 MILCU plus the loss of a few years in schedule. –Note the risk would be high % if not for the TTF. The planned string tests will cost over 50 MILCU.

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 15 Schedule in Graphical Form Construction Schedule Cryomodule Production RF System Tests

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 16 E cloud – Goal Ensure the e- cloud won’t blow up the e+ beam emittance. –Do simulations (cheap) –Test vacuum pipe coatings, grooved chambers, and clearing electrodes effect on e- cloud buildup –Do above in ILC style wigglers with low emittance beam to minimize the extrapolation to the ILC.

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 17 E cloud – Plan Grooved chambers and special coatings are being tested in PEP-II and KEK-B straight sections. Lots of simulations have been done and bench-marked against existing accelerators. –Still, the long extrapolation leaves us nervous. Plans are being developed to test special chambers in wigglers in CESR and KEK-B. –The funding is not yet assured for these more definitive tests. –Schedule is for results in 2009

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 18 E Cloud – Cost/Benefit If we don’t do the R&D, there is a high (50%) risk that we have to build a second e+ DR at a cost of 200 MILCU. Cost*risk = 100 MILCU The first 2 types of R&D cost only a few million. The costs of the KEK-B and CESR tests are difficult to evaluate as they involve the dedicated use of the whole ring and it is unclear which costs should be accounted to the ILC. The scale is 10 MILCU.

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 19 E Cloud – Results SLAC

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 20 BDS System Test – Goal Build ATF2, a scaled BDS prototype at KEK to test: –Optics design including never before done local chromatic correction –Keeping a beam small (35 nm) and stable to a few nm for days at a time –Laser wires –Intra-train feedback –BPM’s –High availability power supplies –Tuning algorithms

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 21 BDS System Test – Plan ATF2 is already under construction by a multi-regional collaboration. Will be commissioned in 2009 with optics tests done in 2010

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 22 BDS System Test – Cost/Benefit Cost is ~5 MILCU Ameliorates a medium (25%) risk of having to do a major BDS redesign that could lengthen the BDS and cost 200 MILCU extra Would be a bargain at twice the price

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 23 High Power RF – Goals The baseline HPRF design is mature and has very little risk. The R&D concentrates on cost reduction –A Marx modulator to replace the bouncer modulator –Modified RF distribution system –Sheet-beam klystron to replace multi-beam klystron If all are used, the HPRF cost is cut in half.

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 24 Marx Modulator – Results SLAC

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 25 Marx Modulator – Results 100kV Output –1400 μsec, Leveled Long term test planned in coming year. SLAC

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 26 Modified RF Distribution System – Plans SLAC

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 27 Sheet Beam Klystron – Plan Build beam tester and klystron by Summer 2008 The beam tester will validate 3-D beam transport simulations and allow a more rapid turnaround for electron gun changes The klystron will be developed in parallel with little feedback from the beam tester. A rebuild of the klystron can incorporate design changes motivated by the beam tester

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 28 Sheet Beam Klystron – Plan

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 29 Americas Site Plan

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 30 ~ 5.5 km Central Area fits inside the Fermilab boundary Site Characterization of the Central Area can be done ~ Boundary of Fermilab Preconstruction Plan for Fermilab

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 31 Preparing for 2012 Construction Start Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 32 Civil Construction Timeline

11 June 07 Fermilab Steering Group 33 Technically Driven Timeline (reprise) August BCD All regions ~ 5 yrs Construction  Startup Siting Plan being Developed RDREDR Begin Const End Const Engineer Design Site Prep Site Select R & D -- Industrialization Gradient e-Cloud Cryomodule Full Production System Tests & XFEL Detector Install Detector Construct Pre-Operations