1. Bunched-Beam Phase Rotation and FFAG -Factory Injection David Neuffer Fermilab

2. 2 Outline  Introduction  Study 2 scenario  Induction linac phase rotation + 200 MHz buncher  “High-frequency” Buncher and  Rotation  Concept  1-D, 3-D simulations  Cost guesstimates …  Continuing Studies …  Variations  Matching, Optimization  Study 3  For FFAG -Factory injection ??  Lower frequencies, larger energy spreads ??

3. 3 Neutrino Factory Baseline Design  Feasible, but expensive  Find ways to reduce costs …

4. 4 Study 2 system  Drift to develop Energy- phase correlation  Accelerate tail; decelerate head of beam (280m induction linacs (!))  Bunch at 200 MHz  Inject into 200 MHz cooling system

5. 5 Adiabatic buncher + Vernier  Rotation  Drift (90m)   decay; beam develops  correlation  Buncher (60m) (~333  200MHz)  Forms beam into string of bunches  Rotation (~10m) (~200MHz)  Lines bunches into equal energies  Cooler (~100m long) (~200 MHz)  fixed frequency transverse cooling system Replaces Induction Linacs with medium- frequency rf (~200MHz) !

6. 6 Longitudinal Motion (1-D simulations) DriftBunch  E rotate Cool System would capture both signs (  +,  - ) !!

7. 7 Buncher overview  Adiabatic buncher  Set T 0,  :  125 MeV/c, 0.01  In buncher:  Match to rf =1.5m at end:  zero-phase with 1/  at integer intervals of  :  Adiabatically increase rf gradient: rf : 0.90  1.5m

8. 8 “Vernier”  Rotation  At end of buncher, choose:  Fixed-energy particle T 0  Second reference bunch T N  Vernier offset   Example:  T 0 = 125 MeV  Choose N= 10,  =0.1 –T 10 starts at 77.28 MeV  Along rotator, keep reference particles at (N +  ) rf spacing  10 = 36° at  =0.1  Bunch centroids change:  Use E rf = 10MV/m; L Rt =8.74m  High gradient not needed …  Bunches rotate to ~equal energies. rf : 1.485  1.517m in rotation; rf =  ct/10 at end ( rf  1.532m) Nonlinearities cancel: T(1/  ) ; Sin(  )

9. 9 Bunching and  Rotation Beam after drift plus adiabatic buncher – Beam is formed into string of ~ 200MHz bunches Beam after ~200MHz rf rotation; Beam is formed into string of equal-energy bunches; matched to cooling rf acceptance System would capture both signs (  +,  - ) !!

10. 10 Next step: match into cooling channel !  Need to design a new cooling channel, matched to bunched/rotated beam  Do not (yet) have redesigned/matched cooling channel  Use (for initial tries):  ICOOL beam from end of AVG simulations  Study 2 cooling channel  Direct transfer of beam (no matching section)

11. 11 Results (~ICOOL)  In first ~10m, 40% of  ’s from buncher are lost,    0.020m     0.012m  Remaining  ’s continue down channel and are cooled and scraped,    ~0.0022m, similar to Study 2 simulation.  Best energy, phase gives ~0.22  ’s /24 GeV p  Study 2 baseline ICOOL results is ~0.23  ’s/p GeV m

12. 12 ICOOL simulation –Buncher, , Cool

13. 13 Caveats: Not properly matched  This is not the way to design a neutrino factory  Not properly matched in phase space  Cooling channel acceptance is too small (add precooler ?)  Correlation factors “wrong”  “Cooling” channel collimates as much as it cools …

14. 14 To do  Move to more realistic models  Continuous changes in rf frequencies to stepped changes …  3-D fields (not solenoid + sinusoidal rf)  Match into realistic cooling channels …  Estimate/Optimize Cost /performance

15. 15 Hardware/Cost For Buncher/Rotator  Rf requirements:  Buncher: ~300  ~210 MHz; 0.1  4.8MV/m (60m) (~10 frequencies; ~10MHz intervals)  Rotator: ~210  200 MHz; 10MV/m (~10m)  Transverse focussing  B=1.25T solenoidal focusing;R=0.30m transport  System Replaces Study 2: (Decay(20m, 5M$); Induction Linacs(350m, 320M$); Buncher(50m,70M$))  with:  Drift (100m); Buncher (60m);Rf Rotator (10m)  (Rf =30M$ (Moretti) ; magnets =40M$ (M. Green) ; conv. fac.,misc. 20M $) (400M$  ?? 100M$ )  needs more R&D …

16. 16 Costing Procedure

17. 17 Variations/ Optimizations …  Many possible variations and optimizations  But possible variations will be reduced after design/construction  Shorter bunch trains ??  For ring Coolers ?  Other frequencies ??  200 MHz(FNAL)  88 MHz ?? (CERN)  ??? ~44MHz  Cost/performance optima for neutrino factory (Study 3?)  Collider ?? both signs (  +,  - ) !  Graduate students (MSU) (Alexiy Poklonskiy, Pavel Snopok) will study these variations; optimizations; etc…

18. 18 Shorter bunch train (for Ring Cooler ?)  Ring Cooler requires shorter bunch train for single-turn injection – ~30m?  200MHz example  –reduce drift to 45m (from 90)  -reduce buncher to 30m  Rotator is ~10  ~85% within <~30m  Total rf voltage required is about the same (~200MV) “Long” Bunch “Short” Bunch  2 scale

19. 19 FFAG -Factory injection  Baseline scenario is single bunch injection without  -E rotation or bunch formation  Capture is not matched to beam phase-space  Capture is centered at higher energy than Study 2  Requires very low-frequency bucket (~25 MHz or less)  Rf Gradient is ~1 MV/m (or less)  Can injection use buncher-rotator methods to improve acceptance, increase rf gradient ? Capture is ± 150MeV, ± 12 ns

20. 20 FFAG-influenced variation – 100MHz  100 MHz example  90m drift; 60m buncher, 40m rf rotation  Capture centered at 250 MeV  Beam at 250MeV ± 200MeV accepted into 100 MHz bunche  Bunch widths < ±100 MeV  Uses ~ 400MV of rf

21. 21 ~50 MHz variations Example I (250 MeV) oUses ~90m drift + 100m 100  50 MHz rf (<4MV/m) ~300MV total  Captures 250  200 MeV  ’s into 250 MeV bunches with ±50 MeV widths Example II (125 MeV) oUses ~60m drift + 90m 100  50 MHz rf (<3MV/m) ~180MV total  Captures 125  100 MeV  ’s into 125 MeV bunches with ±20 MeV widths

22. 22 Summary  High-frequency Buncher and  E Rotator simpler and cheaper than induction linac system  Performance as good (or almost …) as study 2, But  System will capture both signs (  +,  - ) ! (Twice as good ??)  Method could (?) be baseline capture and phase- energy rotation for any neutrino factory … (FFAG) To do:  Complete simulations with matched cooling channel!  Optimizations, Best FFAG Scenario, …

23. 23 Compare with Study II (Capture + Cooling) x: –20 to 100m; y: 0 to 400 MeV