1. Neutrinos from Stored Muons STORM physics with a μ storage ring

2. Primary Motivation  Flavor content fully known  “Near Absolute” Flux Determination is possible in a storage ring  Beam current, polarization, beam divergence monitor,  p spectrometer  Overall, there is tremendous control of systematic uncertainties with a well designed system  Initially the motivation was high-energy interaction physics.  BUT, so far no experiment has ever been done! 2 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

3. 30 Years in the Making  First proposed in detail by David Neuffer in 1980 at the Telemark Wisconsin workshop on neutrino mass 3 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013 The technology existed then & It certainly exists now

4. The Birth of the Neutrino Factory - 1998 TopCite 500+ “Renowned Paper” Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013 4

5. 5 So, here is where we are with the NF This is the simplest implementation of the NF This is what we want to do near-term: Neutrinos from STORed Muons, STORM 3.8 GeV/c

6. The Facility

7. Baseline  100 kW Target Station  Assume 60-120 GeV protons (Fermilab PIP)  Graphite target  Optimization on-going  Horn collection after target   collection/transport channel  injected into decay ring  Decay ring  Large aperture FODO (RFFAG)  Instrumentation: BCTs, mag-Spec in arc, polarimeter 7 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

8.  -base beam: Oscillation channels 8 8 out of 12 channels potentially accessible Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

9. Project Considerations

10. Three Pillars of nuSTORM 10 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013  Delivers on the physics for the study of sterile  Offering a new approach to the production of beams setting a 10  benchmark to confirm/exclude LSND/MiniBooNE  Can add significantly to our knowledge of interactions, particularly for e  “Light Source”  Provides an accelerator & detector technology test bed

11. Siting Plan 11 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

12. Looking to the Energy Frontier 12 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013 Only 40% of  s decay in straight Need  absorber

13. Low Energy  beam 13 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013 After 3.48m Fe, we have  10 10  /pulse in 100 < P(MeV/c) < 300 At end of straight we have a lot of  s, but also a lot of  s with 4.5 < P(GeV/c) < 5.5

14. Input beam for some future 6D  cooling experiment(s) 14 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

15. Near Hall Concept 15 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

16. nuSTORM Far Detector Hall 16 Alan Bross Higgs Factory WS - UCLA March 21, 2013

17. Costing

18. Costing model Basis of Estimation  Utilized data from the LBNE CD1 (95% CL estimate on TPC  $0.9B ) and extrapolated to nuSTORM components  Primary beam line  Target Station  Beam absorber  Conventional Facilities  Civil construction  Used FESS estimates from  2e CD1 review where appropriate  The above are, of course, fully loaded and escalated  Magnet Costs based on Strauss & Green model  Stored Energy  Added loading factor & escalation 18 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

19. Cost based on LBNE costs Fully loaded and escalated 19 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013 Sub SystemCost M$ 1 Primary Beam Line24 Target Station56 Transport Line14 Decay Ring82 Near Hall29 2 Far Detector24 3 Sub Total229 Project Office34 4 Total263 1 No allowances made for reuse of existing equipment 2 Near Hall sized for multiple experiments & ND for SBL oscillation physics 3 FD cost based on MINOS as-built & EUROnu costing for MIND + full burdening + escalation & no allowance for existing FD Hall 4 Assumes LBNE estimate of  15% (including contingency)

20. Moving Forward

21. Update for the Proposal  Facility  Targeting, capture/transport  In going to a C target we have lost about 2X in flux  Can we regain this?  Decay Ring optimization  Present both FOFO and RFFAG?  DA of FOFO problematic  RFFAG – need credible injection scheme and reliable cost estimate  Decay Ring Instrumentation  Much detail presented at CERN 21 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

22. Update for the proposal II  SBL oscillation study  Final MVA analysis  For cross-section (& general interaction physics) measurements, we need detector baseline design  LAr and calculate e CCQE  Note: The interaction physics detector is not part of the nuSTORM project 22 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

23. nuSTORM: Conclusions We have made the Physics case:  Initial simulation work indicates we can confirm/exclude at 10  (CPT invariant channel) the LSND/MiniBooNE result   and ( e ) disappearance experiments delivering at the <1% level look to be doable  Systematics need careful analysis  Detailed simulation work on these channels has not yet started  interaction physics studies with near detector(s) offer a unique opportunity & can be extended to cover 0.2<GeV< E < 4 GeV  Could be “transformational” w/r to interaction physics  For this physics, nuSTORM should really be thought of as a facility: A “light-source” is a good analogy  nuSTORM provides the beam & users will bring their detector to the near hall 23 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013

24. nuSTORM: Conclusions II  We now need to assembly the full proposal  Most detail in place  Some areas of concern   yield off C  FODO ring Dynamic Aperture  Complete understanding of systematics  SBL oscillations  flux and E shape @ ND hall 24 Alan Bross nuSTORM WS - Virginia Tech April 14th, 2013