2. WG3 Summary (Achievements in 2005)

5. 28 Talks & 5 focus sessions 17 talks &2 focus sessions in this talk 12 taks & 3 focus sessions by H. Kirk

6. FFAG (Fixed Field Alternating Gradient) Fixed Field (No magnet ramping) Very wide momentum aperture Large transverse acceptance ===> Fast muon acceleration, US-Study 2,EMMA,Japan- ===> Bunch rotation for Front End, PRISM ===> Proton Driver, AGS-upgrade

7. Classification of FFAG Scaling FFAG –MURA –PoP, 150 MeV, Kyoto Non-Scaling FFAG (Not yet build) –Many variations: how you break scaling law –Linear, non-isochronous: EMMA –Non-linear, non-isochronous:Rees(P.D),Ruggiero –N.L., Isochronous:Rees(  ), Lemuet –N.L., Isochronous+constant tune:Schonauer Semi-Scaling FFAG

8. Cooling –A. Klier –S. Kahn –WJ Murray –D. Li Target –N. Simos Front End –K. Paul –Y. Iwashita –J. Pozimski Proton Driver –F. Terranova –G.Rees Proton Driver Focus Session FFAG and acceleration –M. Aiba –G. Rees –Franck Lemuet –H. Schonauer –S. Machida –A. Bogacz –M. Popovic FFAG and Acceleration focus session

9. Cooling

10. Amit Klier Cooling of a muon beam

11. The small dipole ring “Weak” (edge) focusing (ideally) scaling Filled with ~10 Atm. hydrogen gas @ 77K For P  ~200 MeV/c, the radius should be ~60 cm Dipole field ~ 2 T

12. “Cooling” with no scattering X initial =6 cmY initial =8 cm P Xinitial =30 MeV/cP Yinitial =17.5 MeV/cE initial =213 MeV t initial = –1.5 ns X central =0.04 cm P Xcentral =0.12 MeV/cP Ycentral =0 MeV/c Y central =0 cm E central =201.8 MeV t central =0 ns

13. S. Kahn Demonstration Ring Design Parameters Pressurized H 2 gas filled ring. –The gas is the absorber. 40 Atm @ 300  K 10 Atm @ 77  K Four Weak focusing dipoles –Dipoles use edge focusing. –Iron yokes for flux return. Nominal dipole field of 1.8 T 2.3 T would be possible with Vanadium Permendur. RF cavities in the drift region between magnets to replace energy loss in gas. –Using 201.25 MHz cavities. –10 MV/m gradient.

14. 1.6 m

21. 201 MHz NCRF Cavity R&D for muon cooling channel D. Li (LBL)

22. Target

23. N. Simos SOLID TARGET MATERIAL STUDIES PHASE I: Study of Carbon Carbon vs. Graphite under 24 GeV, intense AGS Beam – Shock Response Irradiation Damage Assessment of Super Invar and Inconel 718 PHASE II: Irradiation Damage Assessment of a host of attractive candidates. Re-assessment of Super Invar Carbon-Carbon Composite in Target Assembly Nickel-plated aluminum in target assembly (goal is to find out how irradiation affects bonding) Carbon-Carbon Composite (BNL) Toyota “Gum Metal” (KEK) Graphite (IG-43) (KEK) AlBeMet (BNL) Beryllium (BNL) Ti Alloy (6Al-4V) (SLAC) Vascomax (BNL) Nickel-Plated Alum. (BNL-FNAL-KEK) Material Matrix of PHASE II Study at BNL Complex assembly of target materials BEAM PARAMETERS 200 MeV protons; ~ 70 μA Spot size FWHM ~ 14 mm BEAM

24. What Are We Learning About CC Composite? Temp.% elongation 23 o C0% 200 o C-0.023% 400 o C-0.028% 600 o C-0.020% 800 o C0% 1000 o C0.040% 1200 o C0.084% 1600 o C0.190% 2000 o C0.310% 2300 o C0.405% Experiment Manufacturer’s DATA

25. Super Invar re-assessment

26. Front End

27. K. Paul

31. Review from last talk (NuFact04) + 3D sim.(proc.) — Neat Bunching Scheme with Amplitude Modulation S-shaped Curved Solenoid Yoshihisa Iwashita Advanced Research Center for Beam Science, Institute for Chemical Research, Kyoto University, Gokanosho, Uji, Kyoto 611-0011, JAPAN iwashita@kyticr.kuicr.kyoto-u.ac.jp http://wwwal.kuicr.kyoto-u.ac.jp Beam Simulations in S-shaped Curved Solenoids

32. J. Pozimski

34. Proton Driver

35. F. Terranova The radiation-pressure dominated regime * (*) S.V. Bulanov et al., Plas. Phys. Rep. 30 (2004) 196 |v e  B|  cE  E  =2  en e l l x ions electrons EE E  > E || > m p  /2  e Independent of x if pulse weist sufficiently large Avoid ion recombination Ions become relativistic in less than one laser cycle

36. G. Rees Non-scaling, Non-linear FFAGs Categories for FFAG Lattice Cells of Five Magnets: 1. IFFAG: isochronous, no Q v =n and 2Q v =n crossing 2. IFFAGI: IFFAG with combined function insertions 3. NFFAG: non-isochronous, high/imag  -t, no Q var’n 4. NFFAGI: NFFAG with insertions, some Q h variation 1 and 2: rapid acceleration of muons or electrons 3 and 4: high power proton drivers or medical rings

37. 4 MW, Proton Driver Layout 0.18 GeV H ‾ Achromat 0.18 GeV H ‾ Linac 10 GeV, 50 Hz, N = 5, NFFAGI with 10 13 protons per bunch 3 GeV, 50 Hz, h =5, RCS (1 at 50 Hz, or 2 at 25 Hz)

38. Proton Driver Focus Session Moderator : C. Prior

39. Different Approaches Full energy linac, accumulator and compressor rings (R. Garoby) ~200 MeV linac, RCS for accumulation, acceleration and compression (volunteer?) FFAG acceleration (A. Ruggiero)

45. FFAG & acceleration

48. M. Aiba Introduction FFAG accelerator: –For proton driver –For muon acceleration, phase rotation Resonance crossing –In scaling FFAG: tune variation due to imperfection of scaling –In non-scaling FFAG: tune variation in wide range Dynamics of resonance crossing is important. Experimental study at PoP FFAG and HIMAC

49. Crossing experiment at PoP FFAG Parameter list PoP FFAG: radial sector type scaling FFAG Experiment of resonance crossing with various driving term and crossing speed

50. Criterion to avoid trapping Adiabatic parameter more than 7 will be harmless.

51. S. Machida

54. Isochronous, FFAG Rings with Insertions for Rapid Muon or Electron Acceleration G H Rees, RAL

55. 20 MeV, Electron Model, Cell Layouts bd(-) BF(±) BD(+) BF(±) bd(-) O. 04.04. 04. 04 O.045.062.126.062.045 0.05 Normal cell (9.231º, 0.6 m) 0.05 0.20 Insertion cell (9.231º, 0.9 m) 0.20 Three superperiods, each of 9 normal and 4 insertion cells New (previous) ring circumferences: 27.0 (29.2) m

56. F. Lemuet Tunes : acceleration cycle NuFact05, Frascati June 2005 A particle is launched at the injection energy (11 MeV) on its closed orbits. Tunes are computed during the acceleration cycle, approximate to paraxial tunes due to the low energy detuning. Extraction 20 MeV Injection 11 MeV

58. FFAG and Acceleration Focus session

64. --To be confirmed--