1 / 32

“Dark-Horse Neutron Source Heads Belatedly Towards Starting Line” [Science, 27 October 2006]

“Dark-Horse Neutron Source Heads Belatedly Towards Starting Line” [Science, 27 October 2006]. A new perspective for ESS Dr Peter Tindemans chair ESS Initiative RID, 12 February 2007. Overview.

shada
Download Presentation

“Dark-Horse Neutron Source Heads Belatedly Towards Starting Line” [Science, 27 October 2006]

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “Dark-Horse Neutron Source Heads Belatedly Towards Starting Line” [Science, 27 October 2006] A new perspective for ESS Dr Peter Tindemans chair ESS Initiative RID, 12 February 2007 Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  2. Overview • Where are we almost 10 years after OECD ministers endorsed Megascience Forum Global Neutron Strategy • The current choice for Europe’s future top tier facility and its expected performance • Which changes in Europe since 2004 have allowed “the dark horse” ESS to re-enter the race • Timeline and: will the Netherlands participate, and how Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  3. Dreams of intensity • SNQ Forschungszentrum Jülich early 80-ties • ESS Starting seriously early 90-ties: FZ Jülich, RAL • USA: ANS (Advanced Neutron Source) high power, high density reactor, abandoned ’96/’97 for Spallation Source SNS, based on ESS design • J-PARC: proton accelerator research complex, incorporating JSNS with similar target design as ESS: liquid Hg Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  4. 1) refurbish some national ones; 2) maximise potential of ILL and ISIS; 3) three MW class in E, US, J (Asia-Pacific) OECD: A three-pronged global strategy Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  5. SNS first neutrons in August 2006 SNS Target, January 2006 SNS aerial, September 2005 Courtesy SNS Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  6. J-PARC JSNS: first neutrons in 2007/2008 MLFacility: experimental hall #1, December 2006 Overview J-PARC, December 2006 Courtesy J-PARC Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  7. Neutron facilities in Europe ~300 Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  8. Which neutron sources are left in Europe in 2017? ? ? ? ? Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  9. ESS Initiative • Purpose: keep ESS alive • Members: • Scientific community: ENSA • Consortia for site candidatures: Yorkshire, Scandinavia, Hungary, Spain/Basque Country, Sachsen/Sachsen-Anhalt • Some labs: ILL, FZJülich (on behalf of German labs) • Independent chair • ILL is host • Looks like we are succeeding! Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  10. Which ESS? Pulse length requirements Pulse length requirements by scientific needs:  Irradiation work:  Single (Q,) experiments (D3, TAS?):   SANS, NSE: 2 – 4 ms Reflectometry: 0.5 – 2 ms  Single Xtal diffraction: 100 – 500 s Powder diffraction: 5 – 500 s Cold neutron spectroscopy: 50 – 2000 s Thermal neutron spectroscopy: 20 – 600 s  Hot neutron spectroscopy: 10 – 300 s  Electronvolt spectroscopy: 1 – 10 s Backscattering spectroscopy: 10 – 100 s, … Peak flux characterizes source performance for sufficiently long pulses to avoid intensity loss by excessive resolution Shaping of ms long pulses feasible for > 95 % of cases Courtesy Feri Mezei Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  11. Progress in source performance Lines: peak fluxes Shaded area: scientific capabilities (except irradiation & single Q) Courtesy Feri Mezei Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  12. Progress in source performance Courtesy Feri Mezei ESS LPTS advantages: Higher cold peak flux More often „sufficient“ pulse length Adjustable resolution Cleaner line shape Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  13. ESS study on pulse shaping Pulse shaping technique for diffraction and inverted geometry spectroscopy at long pulse sources Multiplexing chopper system (with phase slewing to source) Wavelength Frame Multiplication A fancy multidisc velocity selector (RISP) Courtesy Feri Mezei Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  14. Next generation Current projects (SNS, J-PARC) Today (ILL, ISIS) Optimized LPTS up-grade: next generation Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  15. Comparing 3 European scenarios to SNS Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  16. Authors: Expert Group for ESFRI Neutron WG • A. Furrer, C. Vettier, R. Cywinski, F. Mulder, H. Zabel, W.I.F. David, H. Jobic, M. Latroche, J. Comenero, D. Richter, A. Arbe, F. Barocchi, R. McGreevy, F. Mezei, G. Fragneto, D. Myles, P. Timmins, R.Rinaldi, B. Winkler, S. Redfern, H. Rauch. Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  17. Source strength against SNS (1.4 MW) high priority instruments The black line indicates the SNS reference Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  18. ….and present/coming European sources Magnification in order to display better the present European capabilities Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  19. The ESS to be built Arguments • SNS + 10 (+) years ESS “5x SNS” in many areas • Maintain network of sources • Cost-effectiveness dictates: eventually as many instruments as possible • Start in as complementary a mode as possible Choice • start with 5 MW LP upgradeable to/with: • 10 -15 MW • 40 instruments (1 TS or 2 TSs, to be decided later) • Low power dedicated TSs (to be decided later) • As many ancillary and science facilities as affordable • Ready to operate in ‘industry-mode’ too: access mode (financial, time), IP arrangements, demonstration experiments, standardised procedures, etc.) Costs • ~1.2 B€2006 investment; 100 M€2006 /y operating. Needs of course updating in first coming phase: current prices, energy costs, steel, upgradeability Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  20. Mature, cost-effective design Mature: a decision today is technically fully warranted! • Ion source for 5 MW LP: exists • Linac: SNS commissioned 08-05: beyond specs; others as well • No compression ring • Liquid Hg Target: risks at most at level SNS, most likely less; other target option at hand: solid rotating target. Experience with especially SNS, but also PSI important. • [Maybe other liquid metal target! Political tendency to ‘outlaw’ Hg] • Instruments: Spin-echo, SANS unproblematic; ToF instruments experience on reactors; successful experiment with running Lujan as LP source [Rencurel Workshop (September 2006): further optimisation possible (very long, 200-300 m, instruments, high m-values supermirrors, clever design guides, etc). SL in many case will be WL.] Cost-effective: • initial configuration is by far the best you can get for the price • Upgradeability warrants ESS will be with further relatively small investments best facility for next 40 years or so. Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  21. Changes in European political landscape • ESFRI Road Map • UK Neutron Review • Several very serious site candidates backed by national governments with money Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  22. ESFRI 2006 Road Map Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  23. ESFRI Road Map 2006 35 ‘infrastructures’: 6 in Social Sciences & Humanities; 7 Environmental Sciences; 3 Energy; 6 Biomedical & Life Sciences; and then: Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  24. Names explained Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  25. UK Neutron Review • Decision by minister for science to review UK’s need triggered by Yorkshire consortium (to host ESS) • In contrast to e.g. Germany (Deutsche Kommission für Neutronenforschung always put ESS first) UK ambiguous • 1 MW upgrade of ISIS or ESS? End 2005 possible outcome was still: 2-year feasibility study of 1 MW upgrade of ISIS, and delay ESS • Eventually (assisted by ESFRI’s clear statement that only ESS and ILL 20/20 are on the European Road Map??): • ‘next generation European Source’ is first priority. • No feasibility study into ISIS upgrade yet. • Science case for new neutron source unequivocal. • CCLRC puts forward RAL as site for ‘next generation European Source’ Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  26. Serious site candidates • Scandinavia/Sweden: Lund • Swedish government asked former finance minister Alan Larson to make the case • Colin Carlile appointed professor at Lund University • Spain/Basque Country: Bilbao • Backdrop partially ITER • Formal agreement National government and Basque government: 50-50; 300+ M€ available and 20 M€ for preparations • When presidents and prime ministers meet…..Chirac and Zapatero: “French support for Bilbao; joint WG to investigate things” • Hungary • Secretary of State for Economy and Transport in charge • Structural Funds EU, European Investment Bank • Strong regional support • Yorkshire, RAL? • Sachsen/Sachsen-Anhalt: no longer Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  27. Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  28. What is happening now? • European situation still very much: individual countries talking and striking (package) deals. Countries pay, not EU. • Will ESFRI Road Map result in transparent process? Unlikely. Bu tit may help • EU Commission: special component in first Infrastructures call for FP7 for Road Map projects only on non-competitive basis for ‘feasibility study’. Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  29. Proposal for the Preparatory Phase Call on Dec. 22, deadline May 2, 2007 130 M€ for the 35 ESFRI-projects; 1-7 M€ per project (ESS 10 M€?) Duration: 1-4 years Purpose: * Facilitate decision making for politicians * Investigate critical issues (financial, legal…) * Conclude an agreement Matching funds: 50% profit / 25% non-profit organizations (cash/in kind) Peer review (scientists/policy makers): no fixed rejection rate Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  30. Work focus legal work e.g. legal form of new infrastructure EC can help governance and logistics e.g. decision making, management structure, advisory bodies, IPR, access rules, staff recruitment, researcher support finances e.g. financial arrangements for construction, operation and decommissioning strategic work e.g. integration of new RI in EU fabric of related facilities, identification of best possible site, planning of research services provided at international level technical work Only limited acmount (but still maybe 50 % of money) Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  31. Work structure ESS-FP7 project Coordination Team to project proposal • Peter Allenspach (ENSA), chair • Colin Carlile • Feri Mezei • Juan Urrutia Board to supervise chair: Peter Tindemans) • ENSA president • ESS-Bilbao • ESS-Yorkshire • ESS-Scandinavia • ESS-Hungary • CCLRC • FZ-Jülich • Italy (INFN?) • Peter Tindemans chair (non-exclusive; expected additional members: ILL, CEA, PSI etc) Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

  32. What about the Netherlands? • Default option: Netherlands should participate in all major European facilities, unless….. • Working Group of Innovatieplatform recommended: • Road Map for research facilities for the Netherlands (Committee established) • Set aside 100 M€ annually for facilities in the Netherlands and participation in foreign facilities (NWO BIG was first result) • How? • Bear in mind: ‘SNS’ or ‘ITER’ construction model likely: large components built in different places, to be assembled on site. Hence partially ‘in kind’ contributions. • Is that an option? • Who takes the lead? Delft, 12 February 2007 - Peter Tindemans

More Related