Transcript Document 7344255

US LHC Accelerator Research Program
BNL - FNAL- LBNL - SLAC
LARP Accelerator Systems
Status & Plans
13 July 2009
DOE Review, FNAL
Tom Markiewicz/SLAC
The FY10 LARP Accelerator Systems Program
Instrumentation
– Beam Commissioning of Tune & Coupling feedback systems, Schottky
Monitor, AC Dipole and Synchrotron Light Monitor
– Luminosity Monitor
– LLRF modeling and commissioning
Collimation
– Rotatable Collimator as a Phase II Secondary Collimator candidate
– T980 Crystal Collimation Study at the Tevatron
– UA9 Crystal Collimation Study at CERN’s SPS
– Hollow electron lens as a scraper for LHC
Accelerator Physics
– Electron lens as a Beam-Beam interaction compensator
– Control of E-cloud induced beam instability in SPS through RF feedback
– Crab Cavity R&D program
– PS2 Design Study
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 2 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
BNL
Accelerator Systems
575
50
50
(15)
Instrumentation
Phase I
Chromaticity Feedback
Luminosity Monitor
Schottky
AC Dipole
LLRF
Task
List &
FY09
Budget
as of
May’09 rev.
65
Collimation
Phase I
Cleaning Efficiency Study
Phase II
Rotatable Collimators
Tertiary Collimation Study
Crystal Collimation
T980 at Tevatron
CRYSTAL at SPS
Irradiation Studies
Accelerator Physics
Studies
Electron cloud
Simulations
Ecloud FB at SPS
Grooved Chambers
Beam-beam
Simulation
Wire Beam-Beam compensation
Electrons lens
Discretionary
Crab cavities
PS2 Studies
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
FNAL
LBNL
SLAC
521 1,005 1,350
35
800
40
35
800
40
15
800
20
0
40
180
0
0
180
211
0
0
0
1015
0
211
0
1015
950
180
0
180
211
166
45
0
65
0
65
345
345
-
275
275
-
205
205
90
50
40
120
50
70
25.0
200
230
210
20
25.0
20
-
Slide n° 3 / 35
25.0
40
50
295
295
65
40
25
40
40
25.0
40
125
Total
3,451
925
925
0
800
20
65
40
1406
0
0
1406
950
0
456
166
290
0
1,120
1,120
155
50
80
25
390
250
50
90
100
300
175
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Themes for this Presentation
2008 Review Recommendations
– Develop a more strongly coupled and transparent relationship with
CERN management
• Drop activities not deemed high priority by CERN
– Ensure that any “item to be delivered to CERN” is delivered
• Manage such items as a separate project
– Develop a clear and open system to prioritize LARP projects
2009 Review Charge
– Determine the priorities and levels of R&D effort LARP should
apply to position the U.S. for participation in the upcoming LHC
upgrades
• Multi-year plan
• Timeline & resource requirements
• Scientific and Technical risks
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 4 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Program Oversight through
Increased Communication
Accelerator Systems Advisory Committee created to parallel Magnet SC
– Bruning (CERN), Fischer, Markiewicz, Prebys, Ratti, Peggs
ASAC meets (Webex) ~bi- weekly on general matters or as crisis
management team
– Task prioritization & Budget allocation
– LARP Collaboration Meeting (CM) Planning
– Luminosity Monitor Project Management
LARP Tasks have been coalesced into units large enough to warrant
regular Webex meetings and see to it that these are held with
additional participation of Program Leader, Deputy, L1, relevant L2
AND CERN Points of Contact
– As opposed to reports of isolated work to general LARP
membership at semi-annual CMs
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 5 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
CERN and LARP Communication
Occurs at various CERN levels
– CERN Point(s) of Contact:
• eg. Assmann (Collimation); Bravin (Lumi); Benedikt(PS2), …
– CERN LARP contact: Oliver Bruning
• tasked with assimilating POC reports and upper management priorities
– CERN middle managers: Ostijic (IR Upgrade Czar)
– CERN key managers: Evans/Myers
– CERN Director
Roughly mapping onto LARP
– LARP Task Leader
• Markiewicz (Collimation); Ratti (Lumi); Wienands(PS2), …
– LARP L1 (Markiewicz)
– LARP APUL czar (Wanderer)
– LARP Program Leader (Prebys)
– OHEP (Strauss, Kovar)
• Oral “story” sometimes inconsistent and full set of players never in same room
• Inadequate written correspondence
• Improvement in both these areas required
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 6 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
CERN Input to FY10 LARP Program
Bruning Report to ASAC
Context:
1) Lumi Mon assumed to be done by FY10 and not part of list; otherwise 1st priority
2) Other "Done" projects, plus Lumi, will require some amount of funding for commissioning
activities: these include Schottky, AC Dipole, Chromaticity Feedback and any continued
work on the Synchrotron Light Monitor
3) Bruning will go back again to CERN LLRF group & Myers to clarify CERN position on
LLRF task
Ordered List:
1) Rotatable Collimator
2) PS2
3) SPS Ecloud control through RF feedback or other means
4) Elens as collimation scraper
5) R&D that will happen even if not supported by LARP:
- Elens Beam-Beam compensation (BNL & RHIC)
- T980 (FNAL)
- UA9 (existing CERN-Russian-Italian-US collaboration)
6) Crab: in this position because it requires a non-LARP framework to fund it
7) H- emittance monitor for Linac 4
8) LLRF studies (despite "last place" rank LARP contribution appreciated as valuable &
support for commissioning should be provided; CERN management perspective is that
CERN, not LARP, must "own" this role)
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 7 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Extra-ordinary Meetings
US-CERN Meeting (2009 Jan 14)
– Heuer, Myers, Evans, Bruning, Ostijic, Assmann, ..
– Relevant AS take away point for LARP
• Crab activity perceived as LARP-driven. For CERN to proceed questions to be
answered must include
– What is impact to LHC?
– What can be measured?
– What will be learned?
– What is risk to LHC?
Phase II Collimation Conceptual Review (2009 April 2-3)
– Full participation of Rotatable collimator team plus LARP management
• LHC will require
– “Cryo-collimators” (collimators embedded in cold regions of LHC)
– A new “High Radiation Materials Test Beam” (TT60 line) as part of MTP
– Phase II secondaries of a type to be determined only after experience with
LHC and prototype testing in TT60
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 8 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
CERN Mid-Term-Planning Timeline
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
Q4
LHC Operation assumed
O
SPS operation and exploitation
O
PS Operation and Exploitation
O
Booster Exploitation and Operation O
Source/LINAC2 op and exploitation O
Linac3/LEIR/Ions Operation
Sh
LHC 3-4 magnet repair for spares
Consolidation all accelerators
C
LINAC4 assumed
C
Inner Triplets assumed
C
AD assumed
Sh
AEGIS
ELENA
CNGS
Sh
East Hall (PS)
Sh
ISOLDE (REX)
Sh
nToF
Sh
North Area (Compass etc)
Sh
CAST/OSQAR
??
CTF3 Operation
O
CLIC/ILC
St
Collimation Phase 2
St
PS2 Study
St
PS2 Construction
SPL (LP)
St
SPL Construction
HIE ISOLDE
High Field Quadrupoles R&D
St
Medical Applications
Radiation Facilities (HiRadMat)
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
scarcity of protons
Priorities
2010
Q2 Q3
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
C C
C C
C C
C C
O O
C? C?
Q4
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
C
C
C
O
C?
St
St
St
O
O
O
O
O
??
O
St
St
St
O
O
O
O
O
??
O
St
St
St
O
O
O
O
O
??
O
St
St
St
St
St
St
St
Q1
O
O
O
O
O
Sh
C
C
C
C
Sh
C?
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
??
Q1
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
2011
Q2 Q3
Sh O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
Q4
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q1
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
C C
C C
C C
O O
O? O?
?? ??
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
?? ??
O? O?
*St? St?
St St
St St
C
C
C
Sh
??
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
??
O
St
St
St
C
C
C
O
O?
??
O
O
O
O
O
??
O
St
St
St
St
St
St
C
C
C
Sh
2012
Q2 Q3
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
??
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
??
Sh
Td?
C?
St
C
C
C
O
O?
??
O
O
O
O
O
??
O?
Td?
C?
St
C
C
C
O
O?
??
O
O
O
O
O
??
O?
Td?
C?
*
St
St
*
Q4
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q1
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
C
C
C
O
O?
??
O
O
O
O
O
??
O?
Td?
C?
C
C
C
Sh
??
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
??
Sh
Td?
C?
2013
Q2 Q3
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
C
C
C
O
O?
??
O
O
O
O
O
??
O?
Td?
C?
C
C
C
O
O?
??
O
O
O
O
O
??
O?
Td?
C?
Q4
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Q1
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
2014
Q2 Q3
Sh O
Sh O
Sh O
Sh O
Sh Sh
Sh O
C
Sh
Sh
Sh
C
Sh
Sh
Sh
C
Sh
Sh
Sh
??
O
O
O
O
O
??
O?
Td?
C?
??
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
??
Sh
Td?
??
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
Sh
??
O?
Td?
C
O
O
O
?
??
O
O?
O?
O?
O?
??
O?
Td?
Q4
O
O
O
O
Sh
O
C
O
O
O
?
??
O
0?
0?
0?
0?
??
O?
Td?
C? C? C? C? C? C? C? C?
St
St
St
St
St
St
St
St
St
C?
C? C? C? C? C?
St St St St St St St St St
St St St St St St St St St
C? C? C? C? C? C? C? C? C?
O Operation
C Construction
O?
* Council decision
Slide n° 9 / 35
Sh Shutdown
C?
C?
St
St
O?
C?
C?
St
St
O?
C?
C?
St
St
O?
C?
C?
St
St
Sh
St
Studies
C?
C?
St
St
Sh
C?
C?
St
St
O?
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
C?
C?
St
St
O?
LARP Management Oversight
Instrumentation Task Meetings
Chromaticity FB, Schottky, AC Dipole, Synchrotron Light Monitor
– No regularly scheduled “public” meetings
– Contact between LARP & CERN POCs, esp. during commissioning trips
– Reports at parallel sessions of CMs
– No direct management oversight
Luminosity Monitor
– Regular LBL staff mtgs and Ratti/Bravin mtgs during CERN trips
– Biweekly status meetings since June 2008 with
• Prebys, Markiewicz, Bruning, Peggs, Ratti, Bravin, Corlett (LBL mgmt), 2 LBL EEs
• Written status report distributed after each meeting
– Full grilling by AS at CM#11,CM#12 followed by plenary report to LARP
LLRF
– SLAC 5 person group plus 2 CERN POCs call/exchange email
– Many working trips to CERN
– Work status presented at LARP CMs and at SLAC ARD seminars
– No direct management oversight
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 10 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
LARP Management Oversight
Collimation Task Meetings
Rotatable Collimator
– Weekly staff (5) mtg at SLAC with web-posted progress report
– Biweekly webex/video with CERN collimation group (5-10 people)
• Notes & slides posted
– Reports at parallel session of CM mtgs & included in plenary summary
– CERN-organized meetings (P-II Conceptual Review, Beams’07,..)
Crystal Collimation
– Bi-Weekly Webex meeting to which all members of both T980 (Fermilab
expt.) and CERN SPS UA9 are invited
• Typically SLAC(5), BNL(1), Markiewicz, Prebys, Peggs & Scandale (CERN) attend
• Approx. monthly reports from Mokhov on T980
– Unknown but large number of bi-lateral UA9 meetings in Europe
– Regular meetings of FNAL T-980 staff & FNAL resident visitors
– Semi annual mini crystal workshops & LARP CM presentations
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 11 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
LARP Accelerator Physics Task Meetings
Electron Lens for Beam-Beam Compensation
– No regular working meetings (to my knowledge)
– Annual mini-wkshps (eg. 12/3/08 at BNL) & reports at parallel session of
CMs
Ecloud
– Monthly Webex attended by CERN (3-4), SLAC (3) and LBL(3) and
typically Fischer, Prebys & Markiewicz
– Semi-annual meetings in context of global Ecloud effort (eg. EC Mitigation08 CERN, 12/08) and CARE series of workshops
– Reports in parallel session of CMs
Crab Cavity
– Monthly international webex with large participation
• UK, KEK, CERN (incl. LARP-residents), BNL, SLAC, FNAL, LBL, AES
• Prebys, Markiewicz, Peggs, Strait
– Annual mini-workshop, ~quarterly mtgs at CERN, LARP CMs & CARE
PS2
– Weekly/biweekly webex with BNL, FNAL, LBL & SLAC w/ Prebys &
Markiewicz
– CM and CERN organized workshops
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 12 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
LARP Accelerator Systems Highlights
Luminosity Monitor:
– All hardware is at CERN and all hardware that can be installed is installed
Rotatable Collimator:
– First prototype jaw passes thermal mechanical tests
– Majority of hardware for 3 more jaws (2 full collimators) in hand; fabrication in progress
PS2
– 5 year plan focused on intensity-related effects involving the 4 LARP labs coordinated
with CERN; early results
SPS Ecloud
– SPS measurements during 3 MD periods show effects that can be simulated;
RF modeling to control instabilities has begun
Crab Cavity
– Baseline design of cavity/coupler exists and SBIR to fabricate a cavity approved
– Multinational, multilab effort working/meeting regularly to develop plan
Other
– Crystal experiments UA9 and T980 installed full-time & taking data regularly
– E-lenses for RHIC approved & feedback for LHC expected
– LLRF model used to commission LHC system without beam;
beam commissioning planned
– HW commissioning for Schottky, AC Dipole & Tune/Chromaticity FB complete
– New Synchrotron Light Monitor designed, assembled & installed with LARP effort
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 13 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Project Management
LARP Acc. Systems is producing hardware for CERN in 3 areas
– Lumi Monitor
– Rotatable Collimator
– Roman Pot for SPS Crystal Collimation Expt #UA9
And is (was) considering delivering a crab cavity prototype
My thoughts:
– Each of these would ideally be managed outside of LARP
– Mission creep and external schedule slippage compound internal problems
– Annual reviews necessary but not sufficient
• Aug. 2007 Lumi review & April ’08 CM10 did not foresee June’08 ‘crisis’
– Monthly budget reporting with “earned value” necessary but not sufficient
– Lumi has convinced me that some external manager(s) must follow
progress ~biweekly to fully understand the project in real time so that
surprises do not happen
– TWM is trying to do this for the UA9 RP (reporting to Eric)
– No one forces TWM to do this for RC
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 14 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Luminosity Monitors
2 per IP + One Spare
Preamp/HV Assembly
Shaper (& Chassis)
Detector Interface Chassis
GAS Distribution/Monitoring Panel
PC for Local Monitoring
1 per IP
DAQ Firmware
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 15 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Luminosity Monitor “Crisis” & Response
As Lumi is/will be the first LARP produced hardware installed in LHC it is
essential that we deliver
June 2008 letter from CERN luminosity monitoring group leader Enrico Bravin
raised concern that
– Lumi might be be late for 2008 run
– PMT system would be deployed for 2008
– As long as robust system ready for 2009, no harm
Response:
1. Major LARP support in FY09, before CY2009 run, to fully complete the
system (electronics fabrication, firmware, software & integration)
2. Biweekly meetings of LARP ASAC w/Ratti-Bravin since June 29, 2008
– 20 meetings held with written reports (TWM)
3. Greatly increased involvement of LBL management (Corlett + EE Head)
– MS Project maintained by LBL EE & kept up to date
4. Ongoing discussions on how to minimize commissioning cost & handoff
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 16 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Lumi Status:
All Hardware Installed
Hardware Commissioning in Progress
All required Hardware Installed in LHC points 1 and 5:
– Detectors (4) (plus spare at LBNL)
– Preamps (4)
– Shapers (4)
– Detector Interface Units (2)
– Gas Panels
Detailed list of noise issues, damaged RTDs, faulty power supplies, gas
system leaks, unequal cable lengths, temperamental gas controllers
all being worked on
Firmware
– Phase I (Low Luminosity “Counting”) complete & being tested
– Phase II (High Lum pulse height with centroid deconvolution) a
future project
System Modeling: New Toohig Fellow Ryoichi Miyamoto
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 17 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
US LHC Accelerator Research Program
BNL - FNAL- LBNL - SLAC
LARP Rotatable Collimators
for LHC Phase II Collimation
1) Adapt rotatable NLC design concept to LHC: “RC”
2) Build and test one collimator jaw with 10kW resistive heaters to
verify thermo-mechanical performance
•
Minimize deflection when absorbs with 60kW for 10 sec
3) Build a collimator that can be destructively beam tested at new
TT60 facility yet which still rotates, provides clean collimation
surfaces, whose cooling system survives and which is UHV
4) Build a fully functional collimator & test it at LHC
Gene Anzalone (CAD), Eric Doyle (ME-FEA, ret.), Lew Keller (FLUKA, ret.),
Steve Lundgren (ME), Tom Markiewicz (Phys), Reggie Rogers (Mech Tech)
& Jeff Smith (PD)
LARP Rotatable Collimator
In TT60 vacuum tank:
•ports for camera to observe
surface damage
•ports for laser micrometers
to measure permanent
distortion due to thermal
shock
beam
•DN250 end flanges for easy
access to jaws after tests and
cool-down
•CERN/LHC rack & pinion
drives with water & cable
quick-connects
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 19 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
LHC Phase II Base Concept
Glidcop Jaw - Cu Mandrel wrapped with CuNi coil – Hollow
Glidcop Hub / Molybdenum Shaft with 2mm gap from Mandrel
20 facets
• Beam spacing: 136mm OD
• Length 1.47 m flange–flange:
Glidcop
Cu
Mo
•930mm overall
Cu coolant supply
tubes twist to
allow jaw rotation
•2 x 38mm 15° tapers
• 854mm long facets
Helical cooling channels 23mm below surface
with 16m long 10mm square CuNi tube
Hub area
Cantilever Mo shaft
@ both ends
Molybdenum
Shaft
Copper Mandrel
Copper tubing wound in groove
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
2mm gap between shaft OD and mandrel ID
Slide n° 20 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Glidcop Jaw – CuNi Coil- Cu Mandrel –
Glidcop Hub - Molybdenum Shaft Design
2mm gap
365mm
ANSYS of Final Design
7s
880mm: Leff: 95cm→33cm
Proposal is to set 1st copper jaw at 8.5 s (or to use C-C in this location)
Simulations show that remainder of system maintains efficiency
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 21 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
RC0 10kW Distortion Test
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 22 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Second Generation Version of Collimator
Assembly Support, Rotation Mechanism, and
RF transition to Vacuum Tank
RF Transition
Possible BPM location
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 23 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Plan to Make 3 More Cylinder Jaws
for total of 4→Two Full Collimators
1st of 3 new mandrels finished March 28
Plan:
RC1-SPS/TT60 end of 2009
RC2-LHC in 201n
6 Moly Half-shafts at SLAC
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 24 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Status of RC Program
1.
2.
3.
4.
Jaw support & rotation mechanism COMPLETE (June 2007)
First full single jaw-hub-shaft unit COMPLETE (May 2008)
Thermal distortion tests indicate performance in accord with FEA to ~10% (July
2008)
Vacuum & flatness measurements all good
Since June 2009 DOE Review
1. RF design finalized
2. New concepts for vacuum tank, jaw support, braze process developed
3. Copper mandrels for 3 new jaws bored and grooved
4. Molybdenum support half-shafts and central glidcop hubs for 3 new jaws made
5. Glidcop for 3 jaws obtained ($56k) and machined parts for 1 jaw ready
6. 2nd jaw-hub-shaft unit being assembled & brazed week of July 13-17, 2009
Work to complete RC1:
1. Finish 2nd jaw & modify 1st jaw so it is useable in collimator vessel
2. Build supports & rotator mechanism and assemble with RF features in new vacuum
tank
3. Metrology & vacuum tests at SLAC
4. Mechanical motion tests on existing CERN system
5. Ship to CERN
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 25 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
LARP RC Timeline for Discussion
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Build fully functional prototype
Vacuum & mechanical tests at SLAC
Ship to CERN
Vacuum & mechanical tests at CERN
SPS Tests of impedance and BPMs
Modest involvement in Phase I collimation commissioning
Develop diagnostics for damage assessment
Test prototype in TT60
Apply lessons learned to production design
Build 2nd prototype for testing in LHC
- recent planning has always assumed a 2nd test in LHC
Given uncertainties: Build for 2010 SPS test and wait and see
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 26 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Roman Pots & Flanges with Detector
Housings with thin widows produced
by LARP/SLAC for UA9
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 27 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Support Structure and Linear Screws
Still to be Delivered to UA9 by
LARP/SLAC
Stepper Motor
Resolver with reduction gear
400step/tour = 0.9o resolution
Slide Ball Screw
(2mm lead)
Coulisse
Sliding Guides
full metal
mswitches
LVDT position sensors
Movement resolution
2 mm/400 steps = 5 mm (s/16)
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 28 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
Long Term Planning
General Comments
• At CM12 a first cut of program and budget requests was submitted by
each task
• One round of discussions with lab POCs and task leaders has
occurred to better pin down
– Lab-to-lab split
– LARP-to-Off-project labor split
– Individuals by name & status (staff, PD, GS) and their FTEs
• identify unitarity problems
• At this point, usual spreadsheet approach in $ assuming
– One very coarse overhead loaded salary ($250k) used to convert
LARP funded FTEs to dollars
– M&S and travel requests assumed to include lab overhead
• FY09 numbers have been constructed to reflect the actual budget
(before contingency allocation)
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 29 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
FY09-FY14 Plan
LARP LABOR RATE
FY
Milestone
LUMI Monitor
Schottky
Tune & Chromaticity Feedback
AC Dipole
LLRF
SLM Development and Studies
H- Development for Linac4
Rotatable Collimator Task
T-980 Crystal Collimation at Tevatron
UA9 Crystal Collimation at SPS
Electron Lens as Collimation Scraper
E-lens for Beam-Beam Compensation
SPS E-Cloud Study
PS2
Crab Cavities
Discretionary
Total Accelerator Systems
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
LARP
Labor
(FTE)
2.5
0
0
0.2
3
1
2.25
7
2.7
0
0
8.3
10.2
10.7
5.8
0
53.65
Slide n° 30 / 35
$250k
non-LARP
LARP
LARP
LARP
Labor
M&S (k$) Travel (k$) Cost (k$)
(FTE)
0
0
0
0
5
0.5
0
0
5.5
1.5
0
0
10.625
13.3
0
0
36.425
$200k
$275k
$0k
$60k
$0k
$50k
$0k
$90k
$0k
$220k
$0k
$50k
$75k
$90k
$400k
$130k
$361k
$105k
$20k
$225k
$75k
$0k
$20k
$50k
$775k
$300k
$230k
$565k
$0k
$250k
$100k
$0k
$2,256k $2,460k
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
$1,100k
$60k
$50k
$140k
$970k
$300k
$728k
$2,280k
$1,141k
$245k
$75k
$2,145k
$3,625k
$3,470k
$1,700k
$100k
$18,129k
Accelerator Systems
5 Year Spending Profile
$5,000k
$4,500k
Electron Lens as Collimation Scraper
Discretionary
Crab Cavities
PS2
SPS E-Cloud Study
E-lens for Beam-Beam Compensation
UA9 Crystal Collimation at SPS
T-980 Crystal Collimation at Tevatron
Rotatable Collimator Task
H- Development for Linac4
SLM Development and Studies
LLRF
AC Dipole
Tune & Chromaticity Feedback
Schottky
LUMI Monitor
$4,000k
$3,500k
$3,000k
$2,500k
$2,000k
$1,500k
$1,000k
$500k
$0k
FY09
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
Slide n° 31 / 35
FY14
Not too bad for 1st try!
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
PS2 Plan w/ time, manpower, subtasks
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 32 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
PS2 Outyears
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 33 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
PS2 Program Milestones by subtask & year
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 34 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
PS2
FY
LARP
Labor
(FTE)
Milestone
PS2
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
10.7
Prep for Design Report
Prep for Design Report
Design Report Delivered
Further Development Possible but not costed
Further Development Possible but not costed
Further Development Possible but not costed
non-LARP
LARP
LARP
LARP
Labor
M&S (k$) Travel (k$) Cost (k$)
(FTE)
13.3
2.6
2.9
2.8
1.75
1.75
1.5
2.9
2.8
1.75
1.75
1.5
$230k
$115k
$115k
$565k $3,470k
$100k
$110k
$135k
$80k
$80k
$60k
5 Year Spending Profile
$1,000k
$900k
$800k
$700k
$600k
$500k
PS2
$400k
$300k
$200k
$100k
$0k
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
1
2
Slide n°3 35 / 35
4
5
6
Acc.Systems
Status - T. Markiewicz
$100k
$950k
$950k
$518k
$518k
$435k
Rama’s Input to this Excercise
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 36 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
CRAB
FY
LARP
Labor
(FTE)
Milestone
Crab Cavities
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
non-LARP
LARP
LARP
LARP
Labor
M&S (k$) Travel (k$) Cost (k$)
(FTE)
5.8
Downselect of cavity design & CERN
commitment to provide test location and
infrastructure (Sept. 09)
TDR in Fall 2010
Support for Cavity & Cryostat Construction
Continued Support for Cavity & Cryostat
Construction
Continued Support for Cavity & Cryostat
Construction; Cavity Installation &
Commissioning
Participation in & analysis of beam test
0
$0k
$250k $1,700k
0.8
$100k
$300k
2.5
2.5
$75k
$75k
$700k
$700k
$0k
5 Year Spending Profile
$0k
$800k
$0k
$700k
$600k
$500k
$400k
Crab Cavities
$300k
$200k
$100k
$0k
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 37 / 351
2
3
4 Status - T.
5 Markiewicz
6
Acc.Systems
Rotatable Collimator
FY
LARP
Labor
(FTE)
Milestone
Rotatable Collimator Task
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
non-LARP
LARP
LARP
LARP
Labor
M&S (k$) Travel (k$) Cost (k$)
(FTE)
7
Deliver TT60 RC Prototype to CERN
Deliver LHC RC Prototype to CERN; SPS
beam test of LHC Prototype BPM system
Test TT60 RC in TT60
LHC Beam Test of LHC Prototype RC;
Technology Choice of Phase II Collimators
Build RCs as part of APUL
Build/Install RCs as part of APUL
0
$400k
$130k $2,280k
3
$200k
$0k
$950k
2
$100k
$30k
$630k
1
$50k
$50k
$350k
1
$50k
$50k
$350k
0
0
$0k
$0k
5 Year Spending Profile
Plan based on
schedule shown
by Assmann at
April 2009
Collimation
Review
$1,000k
$900k
$800k
$700k
$600k
$500k
Rotatable Collimator Task
$400k
$300k
$200k
$100k
$0k
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 38 / 35
1
2
Acc.Systems
Status
- T.
3
4
5 Markiewicz
6
Luminosity Monitor
FY
LARP
Labor
(FTE)
Milestone
LUMI Monitor
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
non-LARP
LARP
LARP
LARP
Labor
M&S (k$) Travel (k$) Cost (k$)
(FTE)
2.5
Finish electronics & Installation, finish DAQ
(Phase 2) software
Significant Commissioning
Commissioning
Commissioning
Commissioning
Commissioning
0
2
$200k
$200k
0.5
$275k $1,100k
$100k
$800k
$75k
$25k
$25k
$25k
$25k
$200k
$25k
$25k
$25k
$25k
5 Year Spending Profile
$900k
$800k
$700k
$600k
$500k
LUMI Monitor
$400k
$300k
$200k
$100k
$0k
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
FY09
FY10
FY11
Slide
n° 39 / 35FY12
FY13
FY14
Acc.Systems
Status - T. Markiewicz
SPS Ecloud Feedback
FY
Milestone
SPS E-Cloud Study
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
Beam tests June 2009 and model analysis
leading to design study;
Continue SPS measurements; develop
MATLAB model of Feedback; build back-end
drive system to facilitate SPS measurements;
decision on whether to proceed with a FB HW
project
Prototype technology development of FB HW
system: measurement equipment; power
amps, HF signal processing HW
Prototype technology development of FB HW
system
Prototype technology development of FB HW
system
Prototype evaluated on SPS, detailed system
design proposal (TDR) for installed
LARP
Labor
(FTE)
non-LARP
LARP
LARP
LARP
Labor
M&S (k$) Travel (k$) Cost (k$)
(FTE)
10.2
10.625
$775k
$300k $3,625k
0.2
1.125
$25k
$80k
$155k
2
1.5
$75k
$50k
$625k
2
2
$125k
$50k
$675k
2
2
$175k
$40k
$715k
2
2
$175k
$40k
$715k
2
2
$200k
$40k
$740k
Scrubbing exercise reveals 2 FTE/year are presumed to be students (Good!),
unitarity mildly violated (especially when discussed with lab POC & other work
planned) and 25% “padded”. Good discussion of how much off project help each
lab
a wish-list
(notStatus
necessarily
bad).
LARP DOE Review
- 13could
July 2009contribute by name. Out
Slideyear
n° 40 /program
35
Acc.Systems
- T. Markiewicz
FY10 Challenges in Accelerator Systems
• Commission Luminosity Monitor and scale back task
• Deliver RC Prototype to SPS and scale back task
• Launch Crab Cavity with correct level of effort ($),
matching CERN interests & schedule
• Launch PS2 program
• Measure & understand SPS Ecloud & to begin to model a
RF correction
• Keep T980 and UA9 crystal efforts LHC application
focused.
• Use LARP provided LLRF models to beam commission
LHC
• Successfully beam commission all HW to which LARP
contributed
• Decide if & how to begin E-Lens scraper task
• Keep LHC beam-beam study personnel intellectually
involved while RHIC constructs E-lenses
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 41 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
$5,000k
$4,500k
$4,000k
$3,500k
$3,000k
Longer Term Plans
$2,500k
$2,000k
$1,500k
$1,000k
$500k
$0k
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
While Nb3Sn magnet program is goal oriented toward a possible Phase
II (2020?) upgrade construction project (APUL-II?) opportunities for
US collaboration in Accelerator Physics challenges should only
increase as LHC turns on and attempts to increase luminosity.
The apparent falloff in the 5 year budget is more a reflection of our lack
of detailed knowledge of what the future will bring than any lack of
ideas of how to contribute to that future. For example,
crab construction, collimation construction, RF feedback system
construction, ps2 hardware construction, electron lens scraper
construction, crystal collimation primary collimators, electron lens
beam-beam compensator construction, increased effort in running
& understanding
would all tend to invert the out year slope of the budget curve, and one
could argue, should.
LARP DOE Review - 13 July 2009
Slide n° 42 / 35
Acc.Systems Status - T. Markiewicz
FY13
FY14