280 likes | 441 Views
UKNF – 24 th June 2003. SR proposals: Introduction - Ken Long Proton Driver - Ian Gardner Targetry - Paul Drumm Design Study - Rob Edgecock World-wide Design Study - Rob Edgecock Status of MICE - Giles Barr
E N D
UKNF – 24th June 2003 • SR proposals: Introduction - Ken Long Proton Driver - Ian Gardner Targetry - Paul Drumm Design Study - Rob Edgecock • World-wide Design Study - Rob Edgecock • Status of MICE - Giles Barr • Summary of NuFact’03 - Peter Norton • MuScat 2003 - Malcolm Ellis
Other stuff • UK Neutrino Factory design - Complete layout at RAL - Incorporates proton driver and target work • World-wide design study- Introduction - View from Europe - “ “ Japan - “ “ US - Conclusions of discussion at NuFact’03 • Summary of bid
Target Cooling Proton driver UK Neutrino Factory Design RAL Neutrino Factory layout
NF Layout • Need to complete current design work: - proton driver (HARP results) - targetry - muon frontend • Need to extend to remainder of machine- muon acceleration - storage ring • Need to optimise • Need to produce coherent design
Frontend without Cooling Grahame Rees et al Pion-muon decay channel 88 MHz muon linac
Frontends without Cooling Solenoid channel Es=190MeV Solenoid channel Es=190MeV RF phase rotation channel Es=190MeV Inverse rotation channel Es=190MeV Linac Es=400MeV (Transmission =77%) Linac Es=400MeV Transmission comparable to 44/88MHz scheme
Rings Grahame Rees et al S = solenoid, A = absorber, 36 cavities in blocks of 3 • Hybrid ring, using solenoids and dipoles • 44m circumference: 18m straights, 4m bends • 4m sections for injection and extraction • Initial results looking promising
World-Wide Design Study • Introduction • View from Europe - RE • “ “ Japan - Yoshi Kuno • “ “ US - Mike Zisman • Conclusions from the discussion
Introduction • Two years since Study II • A lot has been done since then • Time to start thinking about a third study • Much better:world study • Europe, Japan and US • Parallel session of WG3 devoted to this • Views of each region • Discussion on how to form world-wide study
View from…….Europe • No design study so far • Work started late 1990s • Much achieved • Two layouts: CERN (complete) RAL (under development) • Effort dramatically reduced by CERN budget cuts • ECFA task forces re-organised European Neutrino Group • Very important: rejuvenate EU activities
Design Study – European View • Fixed by EU Framework 6 programme • FP5: 2 Neutrino Factory related bids, both failed • FP6: ESGARD formed - coordinated bid for accelerator R&D • Two areas of interest: Integrating Activities Design Studies • IA proposal already submitted: LHC upgrade, LC, NF • 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 • 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 • Explore new fundamental technology • Detailed engineering design, particularly most advanced TPW • Includes: • Development and testing of critical components, sub-systems, materials or techniques, including software • Does not include: • preparatory work based on existing or proven techniques • reproduction of available components or materials
FP6 Design Studies Funding: • Total budget: 200M€; 70M€ in first call • EC contribution per project 10M€ • 50% matching required(?) Timing: • Call for proposals: October 2003 • Deadline: Spring 2004 • Evaluation results: Summer 2004 • Contract signatures: Start 2005
Design Study Bid • EU will make FP6 Design Study bid • Essential to re-build activities in Europe • Host laboratory: RAL (possibly!) • Much better if part of world-wide design study • FP6 allows for/encourages this • May also provide some funding • Aim: ?DR for a Neutrino Factory ~2009
View from……Japan • Design study published July 2002 • Little support from KEK management • Based on FFAGs
View from……Japan Staging Physics outcomes at each stage • 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
View from……Japan My interpretation of conclusions • Would support a world-wide design study • Concern expressed about overlap due to FFAGs • Would prefer some level of overlap for active participation • Timescale depends on J-PARCnu, LC, etc
View from……..US Two feasibility studies so far in US FS1: • Instigated by FNAL director • MC invited to participate • Focus was on feasibility • First attempt to specify NF from end-to-end • Design based on (reasonably) well understood technology • No attempt to optimise cost • Cost was a deliverable • Feasibility was established • Performance poor, costs high
View from……..US FS2: • Collaboration between MC and BNL director • BNL managers able to draw on resources • Goal: maintain feasibility, but improve performance • Cost optimisation again given lower priority • Performance: 6x Study I • Cost: 75% (but only one RLA) • Still too high
View from……..US FS3: • Need to reduce cost • Much progress already: Neuffer RF phase rotation FFAG ring or VRCS Ring coolers • Need to look for optimum between Proton driver Cooling Acceleration Detector • But much better if world-wide study • 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 PalmerMike 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…..
2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 Neutrino Factory Design FTE 0.1 2.0 4.0 8.0 Staff cost 7. 146. 304. 640. Capital and recurrent 0. 10. 50. 500. VAT (17.5%) 0. 2. 9. 18. Travel 1. 3. 10. 20. Sub-total 8. 161. 373. 1178. Proton Driver FTE 1.9 5.0 9.0 16.0 Staff cost 133. 365. 684. 1280. Capital and recurrent 0. 500. 500. 1000. VAT (17.5%) 0. 88. 88. 175. Travel 3. 7. 20. 40. Sub-total 136. 960. 1292. 2395. Cost Summary
Target Studies FTE 0.7 5.0 10.0 12.0 Staff cost 50. 365. 760. 960. Capital and recurrent 0. 360. 900. 1000. VAT (17.5%) 0. 63. 158. 175. Travel 1. 10. 25. 30. Sub-total 51. 798. 1843. 2165. Design Study FTE 0.5 0.5 3.5 5.0 Staff cost 35. 37. 266. 400. Capital and recurrent 0. 0. 0. 50. VAT (17.5%) 0. 0. 0. 9. Travel 2. 2. 5. 10. Sub-total 37. 39. 271. 469. Total 232. 1958. 3779. 6207. Working margin (10%) 23. 196. 378. 621. TOTAL 255. 2154. 4157. 6828. Cost Summary