WG3 – Part 3 - Design Studies Introduction Introduction View from Europe - RE View from Europe - RE “ “ Japan- Yoshi Kuno “ “ Japan- Yoshi Kuno “ “ US- Mike Zisman “ “ US- Mike Zisman Conclusions from the discussion Conclusions from the discussion

Introduction Two years since Study II Two years since Study II A lot has been done since then A lot has been done since then Time to start thinking about a third study Time to start thinking about a third study Much better: world study Much better: world study Europe, Japan and US Europe, Japan and US Parallel session of WG3 devoted to this Parallel session of WG3 devoted to this Views of each region Views of each region Discussion on how to form world-wide study Discussion on how to form world-wide study

View from…….Europe No design study so far No design study so far Work started late 1990s Work started late 1990s Much achieved Much achieved Two layouts: CERN (complete) RAL (under development) Two layouts: CERN (complete) RAL (under development) Effort dramatically reduced by CERN budget cuts Effort dramatically reduced by CERN budget cuts ECFA task forces re-organised  European Neutrino Group ECFA task forces re-organised  European Neutrino Group Very important: rejuvenate EU activities Very important: rejuvenate EU activities

Design Study – European View Fixed by EU Framework 6 programme Fixed by EU Framework 6 programme FP5: 2 Neutrino Factory related bids, both failed FP5: 2 Neutrino Factory related bids, both failed FP6: ESGARD formed - coordinated bid for accelerator R&D FP6: ESGARD formed - coordinated bid for accelerator R&D Two areas of interest: Integrating Activities Design Studies Two areas of interest: Integrating Activities Design Studies IA proposal already submitted: LHC upgrade, LC, NF IA proposal already submitted: LHC upgrade, LC, NF Basically for improving existing infrastructure Basically for improving existing infrastructure IA  Neutrino Factory, superbeam, beta beam network HIPPI JRA

FP6 Design Studies EC will contribute to: Feasibility studies – paper studies Feasibility studies – paper studies Technical Preparatory Work – hardware Technical Preparatory Work – hardware On new research infrastructures with a clear European dimension and interest. Includes: future facilities of world-wide relevance not existing in Europe infrastructures constructed outside EU!

FP6 Design Studies Feasibility studies Aim: Lay conceptual foundations for new infrastructure Methods: Basic feasibility study Basic feasibility study Explore new fundamental technology Explore new fundamental technology Detailed engineering design, particularly most advanced Detailed engineering design, particularly most advanced TPW Includes: Development and testing of critical components, sub- systems, materials or techniques, including software Development and testing of critical components, sub- systems, materials or techniques, including software Does not include: preparatory work based on existing or proven techniques preparatory work based on existing or proven techniques reproduction of available components or materials reproduction of available components or materials

FP6 Design Studies Funding: Total budget: 200M€; 70M€ in first call Total budget: 200M€; 70M€ in first call EC contribution per project  10M€ EC contribution per project  10M€ 50% matching required(?) 50% matching required(?) Timing: Call for proposals:October 2003 Call for proposals:October 2003 Deadline:Spring 2004 Deadline:Spring 2004 Evaluation results:Summer 2004 Evaluation results:Summer 2004 Contract signatures:Start 2005 Contract signatures:Start 2005

Design Study Bid EU will make FP6 Design Study bid EU will make FP6 Design Study bid Essential to re-build activities in Europe Essential to re-build activities in Europe Host laboratory: RAL (possibly!) Host laboratory: RAL (possibly!) Much better if part of world-wide design study Much better if part of world-wide design study FP6 allows for/encourages this FP6 allows for/encourages this May also provide some funding May also provide some funding Aim: ?DR for a Neutrino Factory ~2009 Aim: ?DR for a Neutrino Factory ~2009

View from……Japan Design study published July 2002 Design study published July 2002 Little support from KEK management Little support from KEK management Based on FFAGs Based on FFAGs

View from……Japan

Staging High Power Proton Driver – –Muon g-2 Muon Factory (PRISM) – –Muon LFV Muon Factory-II (PRISM-II) – –Muon EDM Neutrino Factory – –Based on 1 MW proton beam Neutrino Factory-II – –Based on 4.4 MW proton beam Muon Collider Physics outcomes at each stage

View from……Japan Would support a world-wide design study Would support a world-wide design study Concern expressed about overlap due to FFAGs Concern expressed about overlap due to FFAGs Would prefer some level of overlap for active participation Would prefer some level of overlap for active participation Timescale depends on J-PARCnu, LC, etc Timescale depends on J-PARCnu, LC, etc My interpretation of conclusions

View from……..US Two feasibility studies so far in US FS1: Instigated by FNAL director Instigated by FNAL director MC invited to participate MC invited to participate Focus was on feasibility Focus was on feasibility First attempt to specify NF from end-to-end First attempt to specify NF from end-to-end Design based on (reasonably) well understood technology Design based on (reasonably) well understood technology No attempt to optimise cost No attempt to optimise cost Cost was a deliverable Cost was a deliverable Feasibility was established Feasibility was established Performance poor, costs high Performance poor, costs high

View from……..US FS2: Collaboration between MC and BNL director Collaboration between MC and BNL director BNL managers able to draw on resources BNL managers able to draw on resources Goal: maintain feasibility, but improve performance Goal: maintain feasibility, but improve performance Cost optimisation again given lower priority Cost optimisation again given lower priority Performance: 6x Study I Performance: 6x Study I Cost: 75% (but only one RLA) Cost: 75% (but only one RLA) Still too high Still too high

View from……..US FS3: Need to reduce cost Need to reduce cost Much progress already: Neuffer RF phase rotation FFAG ring or VRCS Ring coolers Much progress already: Neuffer RF phase rotation FFAG ring or VRCS Ring coolers Need to look for optimum between Proton driver Cooling Acceleration Detector Need to look for optimum between Proton driver Cooling Acceleration Detector But much better if world-wide study But much better if world-wide study Possible host site (MICE): RAL Possible host site (MICE): RAL

Discussion Should there be a world-wide design study? Yes How should we proceed? Create a steering group US:Steve Geer Bob Palmer Mike Zisman Japan:Yoshi Kuno Yoshi Mori Kenso Nakamura Europe:Alain Blondel(?) Rob Edgecock Helmut Haseroth What should be included? Accelerator and detector Name?WDS1(?)

Discussion Timescale? Format? Host laboratory? Aim? Etc…..