LCLS-II Magnetic Structure Design Review Steve Marks 7/6/11 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SCU Development at LBNL Soren Prestemon Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Superconducting Undulator R&D Review Jan. 31, 2014.
Advertisements

Simona Bettoni and Remo Maccaferri, CERN Wiggler modeling Double-helix like option.
MICE RF and Coupling Coil Module Outstanding Issues Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory MICE Collaboration Meeting October 26, 2004.
Magnets for the ESRF upgrade phase II
SCUs for the LCLS-II HXR FEL SCUs for the LCLS-II HXR FEL P. Emma, et. al. July 9, 2014 Hard X-Ray (HXR) FEL for LCLS-II must cover 1-5 keV (4-GeV) SASE.
SCU Measurements at LBNL
SCU Magnet Modelling: Tolerances and Beam Trajectories Ben Shepherd Superconducting Undulator Workshop RAL, April 2014.
October 12, 2006 Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS Undulator Good Field Region and Tuning Strategy 1 Undulator Good Field Region and.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project Keith Jobe May 1999 Damping Ring Kicker Development.
LCLS Undulators October 14, 2004 Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / SSRL MMF Review Introduction to the LCLS Undulators Heinz-Dieter Nuhn,
Progress on the MICE 201 MHz Cavity Design Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab RF Working Group Fermilab August 22, 2007  automatic.
Isaac Vasserman Magnetic Measurements and Tuning 10/14/ I. Vasserman LCLS Magnetic Measurements and Tuning.
X-Ray Diagnostics for the LCLS Jan , 2004 UCLA.
M. White – June 28, 2004 LCLS Requirements Meeting In a project, we live or die by the schedule. After we’re “baselined” it is our plan for what we will.
1 Zachary Wolf 1 Undulator Tuning Status June 9, 2009 Undulator Tuning Status Z. Wolf, S. Anderson, R. Colon, S. Jansson, D. Jensen,
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.
Stephen Milton Undulator System 20 April, 2006 LCLS Undulator System Update S. Milton, ANL FAC, April 20 th, 2006.
Magnet designs for the ESRF-SR2
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.
Zack Wolf Undulator Bench October 14, Undulator Bench Requirements Zack Wolf SLAC.
XFD – XF Engineering Group November 15-th, 2004LCLS Undulator Final Design Review1 Undulator for the LCLS project – from the prototype to the full scale.
Zack Wolf Undulator Magnetic April 11, 2006 LCLS Undulator Magnetic Measurements Zack Wolf, Scott Anderson, Ralph Colon,
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.
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.
LCLS-II Magnetic Structure Design Review - Conceptual Mechanical Design: Module Assembly Method Alan Black Steve Marks 7/6/11 1.
Zachary Wolf Undulator Oct 12, LCLS Undulator Tuning Zack Wolf, Yurii Levashov, Achim Weidemann, Seva Kaplounenko,
DELTA Quadrant Tuning Y. Levashov, E. Reese. 2 Tolerances for prototype quadrant tuning Magnet center deviations from a nominal center line < ± 50  m.
CHAPTER 4 Negotiation : Strategy and Planning
MCTF Michael Lamm MUTAC 5-Year Plan Review 22 August Magnet R&D for Muon Accelerator R&D Program Goals Proposed Studies Preliminary Effort and Cost.
Magnetic Material Specification and Procurement Strategy Dawn Munson 1.
Number of Blocks per Pole Diego Arbelaez. Option – Number of Blocks per Pole Required magnetic field tolerance of ~10 -4 For a single gap this can be.
AARD Sub-panel at Fermilab Feb , 2006 LARP Magnet R&D Program - S. Gourlay1 BNL -FNAL - LBNL - SLAC LARP Magnet R&D Program Steve Gourlay AARD Sub-Panel.
SuperConducting Undulator (SCU) R&D Motivation and Status P. Emma For the SCU R&D collaboration: ANL, LBNL, SLAC June 27, 2014.
End Design Discussion D. Arbelaez (LBNL) Oct. 7,
Permanent Magnet Quadrupoles for the CLIC Drive Beam Jim Clarke, Norbert Collomb, Neil Marks, James Richmond, and Ben Shepherd STFC Daresbury Laboratory,
Project Management Mark Palmer Cornell Laboratory for Accelerator-Based Sciences and Education.
Option – 5m Undulators What is the optimum length for an LCLS undulator?  XFEL is using 5m undulator segments.  Is this optimum?  What are the advantages.
Magnetic Design S. Prestemon, D. Arbelaez, S. Myers, R. Oort, M. Morsch, E. Rochepault, H. Pan, T. Ki, R. Schlueter (LBNL) Superconducting Undulator Integrated.
Pioneering Business Models through Business Architecture Transformation BMT 3.0 Overview.
rd ATF2 project meeting Permanent Magnet Updates Y. Iwashita, M. Ichikawa, Y. Tajima, M.Kumada, C.M. Spencer Kyoto University, NIRS, SLAC Contents:
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.
Procurement and Manufacture of LCLS Undulators FY 04 Activity: Complete design of Second Prototype Undulator This will include field control comb Procure.
SCU 3-Lab Review Meeting, Dec. 16, 2014 SCU Presentations Today Intro. & Performance Motivations (P. Emma, SLAC, 20+5) Conceptual Cryostat Design: Option-A.
HL-LHC QXF Conductor/Cable Internal Review. Thank You First of all, let me thank everybody for accepting an extended work time and have this meeting over.
Design and Measurement Results for the Permanent Magnet Undulators for the Linac Coherent Light Source Facility II D. Arbelaez BeMa2014, 01/02/2014.
Practical aspects of small aperture quadrupoles Dr Ben Leigh Tesla Engineering Ltd.
EIAScreening6(Gajaseni, 2007)1 II. Scoping. EIAScreening6(Gajaseni, 2007)2 Scoping Definition: is a process of interaction between the interested public,
Update on electron spectrometer measurements Introduction Setup, measurements carried out Some raw images Results and conclusions L. Deacon, M. Wing (UCL)
Review of Alignment Tolerances for LCLS-II SC Linac Arun Saini, N. Solyak Fermilab 27 th April 2016, LCLS-II Accelerator Physics Meeting.
Magnetic Field optimization of EPU at TPS
Tutorial On Fiducialization Of Accelerator Magnets And Undulators
Status of SPARC Undulator
Optimization of Triplet Field Quality in Collision
Magnets for the ESRF upgrade phase II
10th Feb 2017, CLIC Implementation Meeting
FIVE PROJECT PHASES 5C-3 Sun. 8:00-10:00am 21/ 2/2016.
Dimensioning Hand Drawings
Relaxing Quads Roll Alignment tolerance
Undulator Assembly Procedure
Magnetic Analysis Jin-Young Jung.
A Cold SCU Phase-Shifter
PERMANENT MAGNET QUADRUPOLE FOR THE LINAC 4 CCDTL
Dimensioning Hand Drawings
Undulator Line Design Liz Moog, Advanced Photon Source April 24, 2002
Undulator Cost & Schedule Patric Den Hartog, ANL April 24, 2002
Undulator Tuning Status Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS for Zack Wolf, Yurii Levashov, Achim Weidemann, Seva Kaplounenko, Scott Jansson, Ralph Colon, Dave.
Undulator Tuning Status
Electron Beam Systems ETC and Methodology
Undulator and Magnet Production Status 25 October 2006
LCLS Undulator Magnetic Measurements
Presentation transcript:

LCLS-II Magnetic Structure Design Review Steve Marks 7/6/11 1

Agenda IntroductionS. Marks Summary of relevant physics requirements, design elements affecting magnet blocks S. Marks Conceptual mechanical designA. Black Magnetic structure assembly conceptA. Black Analysis of one vs. two blocks per poleD. Arbelaez End Design – TheoryR. Schlueter Baseline magnetic designS. Marks Magnetic analysis, results Quarter period model, results End design J.-Y. Jung Procurement strategy, magnet specificationD. Munson Conclusions, recommendationsS. Marks Slide 2Undulator Alternatives- 5m

Review Context and Objective Prepare for procurement of first prototype  A total of four HXU* Magnet Modules, two each from two vendors Two operational magnet test units (top and bottom module pairs) End modules included  Objective: Qualify two magnet material vendors, and establish firm cost Qualify the periodic magnet design Test and qualify the end design Test tuning + other tests Slide 3Magnetic Structure Conceptual Design Review 7/6/11 *We want to compare blocks of the same variety from two different vendors. HXU is chosen because of the more demanding requirements.

Review Context and Objective Magnetic material procurement drives the schedule, so want to accelerate this procurement The overall magnetic design will be presented at a conceptual design level, but want to concentrate on those aspects that directly affect magnet blocks Desired outcome from review: approval to proceed with block procurement, or identification of modifications necessary before procurement Procurement of remaining magnet module components and assembly will follow by approximately two months Conceptual design review for overall system early August Slide 4Magnetic Structure Conceptual Design Review 7/6/11

Relevant Physics Requirements Related Design Elements Peak B eff : 1.93 T (SXU), 1.26 T (HXU)  Choice of magnet material ( B r, H cj )  Height of pole, overhang of magnet material Horizontal field roll off: |  K/K| = 1.5×10 -4 (SXU), 5.4×10 -5 (HXU) at ±0.4mm  Pole and block width |  B y dz| < 40  Tm, |  B y dz 2 | < 50  Tm 2  With even number of poles, systematic  B y dz = 0  Systematic  B y dz 2 related to end design (size of last three blocks), gap variation Offset Entrance (and exit) kick have to be less than 14.7  Tm Tolerance on trajectory (non-systematic part of  B y dz 2 ), phase errors/shake  Result of block non-uniformity, pole placement errors  Number of blocks per pole, sorting  Tuning mechanism(s), variation over gap range Slide 5Magnetic Structure Conceptual Design Review 7/6/11

Conceptual Mechanical Design Alan Black Slide 6Magnetic Structure Conceptual Design Review 7/6/11

One vs. Two Blocks Diego Arbalaez Slide 7Magnetic Structure Conceptual Design Review 7/6/11

Magnetic End Design – Theory R. Schlueter Slide 8Undulator Alternatives- 5m

Baseline Magnetic Design Magnetic material:  B r = 1.32 T, H cj = 21 kOe  Examples: VACODYM 854TP, NEOMAX 44AH, Shin Etsu N42SH SXU  Peak B eff = 1.91 T (1.93 T)   B/B| 0.4mm = 2.3×10 -5 (1.5×10 -4 ) HXU  Peak B eff = 1.28 T (1.26 T)   B/B| 0.4mm = 2.4×10 -5 (5.4×10 -5 ) Slide 9 HXU Pole/Block SXU Pole/Block Magnetic Structure Conceptual Design Review 7/6/11

Magnetic Analysis J.-Y. Jung Slide 10Undulator Alternatives- 5m

Magnetic Material Procurement Dawn Munson Slide 11Magnetic Structure Conceptual Design Review 7/6/11

Conclusions and Recommendations The baseline design meets requirements A modest savings (probably less than $1M) could be realized if peak field requirement is relaxed for SXU by ~3% – Not recommended The use of two blocks per pole offers a significant advantage if coupled with appropriate sorting algorithm, will reduce the effort and risk during tuning – Recommended Solicit bids for both HXU and SXU blocks – Initial procurement of HXU blocks HXU end design meets requirements over most of gap range, will verify with prototype, initial SXU design scaled from HXU, but need to tweak – Better control will require active control (coil around end pole); will test with prototypes Slide 12Undulator Alternatives- 5m