# Presentation: 526686

## The Proton DriverA New High Intensity Proton Source at Fermilab

**Bob Kephart**
**University of Illinois**
**  **
**Dec 6, 2004**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Outline

**Fermilab Long Range Plan **
- Linear Collider and Proton Driver recommendations
**Physics case for an intense proton source**
- Focus: Long baseline neutrino experiments
- Mention: Other physics possibilities
**Existing Fermilab proton source and its limitations**
**Proton Driver design**
- 8 GeV SCRF LINAC (bulk of the talk)
**Synergy with other SCRF projects **
- ILC, RIA, etc
**Conclusions**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## The Fermilab Long Range Plan

**In May of 2004 Fermilab completed a Long Range Planning exercise**
**The report is available at:**
- http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/Longrange/Long_range_planning.html
**The vision expressed in that report is that Fermilab will remain the primary site for accelerator-based particle physics in the U.S. regardless of the siting or schedule for the International Linear Collider**
- If successful as host to a linear collider Fermilab would be established as a world center for physics at the energy frontier for many decades.
- If a linear collider were constructed elsewhere, or _delayed_, Fermilab would strive to become a world center in neutrino physics, based on new multi-MW Proton Source (AKA Proton Driver)
- One possible scenario is that an SCRF Linac based Proton Driver is built at Fermilab as a first step towards a U.S. hosted International Linear Collider

- Fermilab is pursuing Linear Collider and Proton Driver R&D in parallel.
- The recent ITRP decision to use cold technology for the International Linear Collider allows close alignment of these paths.

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## The Physics Case for an Intense Proton Source 

**A number of recent workshops have focused on the physics possibilities with intense (MW class) Proton Sources**
**BNL/UCLA –APS workshop**
- BNL, March 3-5, 2004
- http://www.bnl.gov/physics/superbeam/presentations.asp
**Physics with Multi-MW Proton Source (SPL)**
- CERN, May 25-27, 2004
- http://physicsatmwatt.web.cern.ch/physicsatmwatt/
**HIF04**
- Elba Italy, June 2004
- http://www.pi.infn.it/pm/2004/
**APS Neutrino Study**** **(year long effort)
- www.interactions.org/neutrinostudy
**Fermilab Proton Driver Physics Workshop**** **
- Fermilab Oct 6-9, 2004
- http://www-td.fl.gov/projects/PD/PhysicsIncludes/Workshop/index.html

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Neutrino Physics  

**At all of these workshops, the leading Physics case for an intense Proton source is provided by the study of neutrino oscillations. Why ?**
**Recent ****experimental results provide stunning and compelling evidence that neutrinos have nonzero masses and mixings ****(K2K, SNO, LSND, KAMLAND, etc)**
**“****The Standard Model can’t accommodate neutrino mass terms, which require either the existence of right-handed neutrinos ******** Dirac mass terms, or a violation of lepton number conservation ******** Majorana mass terms **
_**Hence this sector of the  Standard Model is broken**_**” ***
*** Steve Geer at recent DOE briefing to Robin Staffin on the Physics case for the PD**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Neutrino Oscillations 

**Neutrino masses are small, difficult to measure, but ....**
**One way to probe small neutrino mass **_**differences**_** is to study neutrino oscillations. Namely where a neutrino of one type (e.g. ************ ) spontaneously transforms into another type (e.g. ********e**** )**
**For this phenomenon to occur the neutrinos must have mass and the apparent conservation of lepton number must be violated**
**The probability for 2-flavor neutrino oscillations is given by:**
**P = sin****2****(2 ****) sin****2****(1.27 ********m****2**** L/E)**
**Where :**
- m  is the mass difference between the parent  and its daughter
- L     is the distance the neutrino travels in meters from “birth” to detection
- E     is the neutrino parent energy, and
****      is the mixing angle

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Neutrino Experiments

**Many of the neutrino oscillation experiments have used neutrinos from the sun or those produced in the upper atmosphere by cosmics**
**New generation experiments: Use accelerator produced neutrino beams. One example is NUMI/MINOS which will start taking data in 2005 with goal of measuring    ************ ******** ********e**** oscillations**
**The MINOS “near” detector is located at Fermilab, and a “far” Detector in the Soudan mine in Minnesota  ( 730 km away)**

- $130M investment, performance limited by intensity of Proton Source

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Why are such neutrino experiments interesting  ?

**Because there is a LOT that we don’t know:**
**We don’t know the masses of the neutrinos**
**We do know that neutrino masses and mass splittings are tiny compared to the masses of any of the other fundamental fermions, **
- but we don’t know why this is the case.
- perhaps this points to new physics, which originates at the GUT or Planck Scale, perhaps it indicates the existence of new spatial dimensions.** **
**We don’t know ****how many**** neutrino mass eigenstates there are.**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Why are such neutrino experiments interesting  ?

**If the LSND (Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Detector) experiment is confirmed, ****(ie where a very large value  of ********m****2**** is observed)**** then there are more than 3 ******** mass eigenstates. **
**However, only 3 contribute to the Z width ******** existence of new “sterile” neutrinos that don’t couple to the known leptons**
- Currently the mini-BooNe experiment is running at Fermilab using neutrinos made with protons from the 8 GeV FNAL booster with the goal of confirming or refuting the LSND findings
- This is exciting stuff...
- But... the experiment is limited by the available proton flux at 8 GeV
**If LSND is **_**not**_** confirmed, then nature may contain only 3 neutrinos and, from the existing data, the neutrino spectrum looks something like —**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## or

- (Mass)2

- 1

- 2

- 1

- 2

- m2atm

-         m2sol = 8 x 10–5 eV2,     m2atm  = 2.5 x 10–3 eV2
- Note: in comparison m2LSND = **0.2 <  ****m****2**** < 2.0 **eV2 is _huge_

- ~

- ~

**Normal**

**Inverted**

**We don’t know which of these spectra is correct**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Neutrino Mixing 

- Within the framework of 3-flavor mixing, the 3 known flavor eigenstates **(********e****, ************, ************)** are related to 3 neutrino mass eigenstates **(********1****, ********2****, ********3****)** :

- = (33)

- (

- )

- (

- )

- We know that UMNS  is very different from the CKM Matrix

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Neutrino Mixing 

- In analogy with the CKM matrix, UMNS can be  parameterized using 3 mixing angles(12 , 23 , 13 ) and one complex phase () :

-      C12C23                          S12C13                           S13 e-i
-     -S12C23		      C12C23		       S23C13
- -C12S23 S13 ei 		-S12C23 S13 ei
-       S12S23		     -C12S23		       C23C13
- -C12C23 S13 ei 		-S12C23 S13 ei

- (

- )

- 12 ≈ sol ≈ 32°,  23 ≈ atm ≈ 35-55°,  13 < 15°
- non-zero_ _ would lead to P() ≠ P()  CP violation
- Note the crucial role of s13  sin 13, if too small =>can’t observe CP

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## How can you determine if the spectrum is Normal Or Inverted ?

- Exploit the fact that, in matter,

- W

- e

- e

- e

- (  )

- e

- (  )

- raises the effective mass of e, and lowers that of  e.
- This is usually referred to as the “matter effect”

- To resolve the mass hierarchy use the fact that e part of the 3 mass eigenstate is very small

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## }

- m2atm

******e ****[|U****ei****|****2****]**

- [|Ui|2]

- [|Ui|2]

- 

- 

- 

- (Mass)2

- m2sol

- 

- m2atm

- 

- 

- m2sol

- or

- _The spectrum with its approximate flavor content_

- In matter, effective mass of 3 doesn’t change much but that of 1, 2 does. Again, note the crucial role of a small 13

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## {

- the effective mixing angle with matter effects is ~
- sin2 2M = sin2 213 [ 1  +  S           ] .
- 	Sign[m2(     ) - m2(     )]
- At oscillation maximum,
- 		P(e)	>1  ;                Normal
- 		P(e)	<1  ;                Inverted
- 		 30%  ;  E = 2    GeV (NOA)		 10%  ;  E = 0.7 GeV (T2K)

- ~

- (**—**)

- (**—**)

- The effect is

- How can you determine if the spectrum is Normal Or Inverted ?

- }

- Higher Energy is Better

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Larger E is better but...
We want L/E to ~ at the peak of the oscillation
Therefore Larger E must be matched by larger L
Using larger L ( ie long baselines) to determine if the neutrino spectrum is “normal” or “inverted” could be a unique contribution of a new intense proton source at Fermilab
If 13 is large enough then observation of CP violation in the lepton sector may be possible
If CP violation is observed one possible explanation of why we exist ! (Leptogenesis) 

**We want L/E to ~ at the peak of the oscillation**
**Therefore Larger E must be matched by larger L**
**Using larger L ( ie long baselines) to determine if the neutrino spectrum is “normal” or “inverted” could be a unique contribution of a new intense proton source at Fermilab**
**If ********13**** is large enough then observation of CP violation in the lepton sector may be possible**
**If CP violation is observed ********one possible explanation of why we exist ! (Leptogenesis) **

- How can you determine if the spectrum is Normal Or Inverted ?

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Summary:The Neutrino Physics Case for the PD 

**Intense proton sources combined with large long baseline neutrino experiments allow one to perform precise and very interesting measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters**
**An ultimate goal is the discovery of and measurement of leptonic CP violation**
**Intermediate goals include:**
- Resolving the neutrino mass hierarchy problem
- Precision measurement of neutrino interaction cross sections

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Rare decays
(window for new physics)
Intense Kaon beams!

Muon physics (with intense muon beams)
Rare muon decays, Search for lepton flavor violation :  →  eor→ 3e
Muon EDM, CP violation
Precision measurements: g-2 (statistics limits understanding systematics)
Neutrino Factories
Anti-Proton Physics
When BTEV ends ~ 2015 Fermilab will have by far the worlds most intense source of antiproton. What should we do with it ?
Long pulse spallation neutron source, etc... more in minute

**(window for new physics)**
**Intense Kaon beams!**
**Muon physics (with intense muon beams)**
- Rare muon decays, Search for lepton flavor violation :  ******→  e******or******→ 3e**
- Muon EDM, CP violation
*Precision measurements: g*-2 (statistics limits understanding systematics)
**Neutrino Factories**
**Anti-Proton Physics**
- When BTEV ends ~ 2015 Fermilab will have by far the worlds most intense source of antiproton. What should we do with it ?
**Long pulse spallation neutron source****, etc... more in minute**

- Other Possible Physics with Intense Proton Sources

- e.g. BR (KL → o  )  ~3 x 10-11

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Fermilab’s Existing Proton Source

** ****Cockroft-Walton **
**H****-**** ions ********(750 KeV)**

**35 yrs old**

**Drift Tube LINAC**
**750 KeV ******** 116 MeV**

**35 yrs old**

**“****New” LINAC**
**116 MeV ******** 400 MeV**

**1994**

**FNAL Accelerator Complex**
**7 major accelerators !)**

**Proton Source = Linac, Booster, Main Injector**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Booster & Main Injector

**Booster Synchrotron **
**15 Hz resonant magnet cycle**
**400 MeV H****-**** stripped******** 8 GeV Protons**
**Protons ********MI or Mini-BooNE**

**35 yrs old**

**1999**

**Main Injector Synchrotron **
**8 GeV ******** 150 GeV**
**Protons or Pbars for TeV Collider**
**            ******** ****120 GeV for PBAR production or to the NUMI  target**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Limitations of Existing P Source

**Preac/Linac**
- Linac can 40 uA of H- @ 15 Hz, Not a performance limitation
- but the equipment is old (experts too!)  ==> reliability is an issue
**Booster **
- Limits the performance of the proton source
- Apertures, space charge effects, and losses limit the number protons in a booster batch to ~6E12 protons (limit set by activation of equipment)
- Uses a 15 Hz resonant magnet cycle but heating in ramped elements limit cycles with beam to ~ 10 Hz ~ 25 KW of beam power at 8 GeV
**Main Injector**
- Designed to Accelerate 6 booster batches/cycle   3E13 P/cycle
- 120 GeV cycle rate = 5/15(injection) + 1.5(ramp) =1.83 sec/cycle
**MI Beam Power**
- The Main Injector ~ 0.3 MW at 120 GeV  (~1.5 E 20 P/Snowmass yr)

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Fancy MI loading schemes could increase the maximum number of booster batches from 6 to ll in the future (slip stacking) 
Doubles the protons/cycle but this slows the cycle time
Already with 6 booster batches 15% of the cycle time is used to “fill” the Main injector 

**Fancy MI loading schemes could increase the maximum number of booster batches from 6 to ll in the future ****(slip stacking)**** **
**Doubles the protons/cycle but this slows the cycle time**
**Already with 6 booster batches 15% of the cycle time is used to “fill” the Main injector**** **

- Limitations of Existing P Source

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Existing Fermilab Proton Source and its Limitations

**Several studies have had the goal of understanding the limitations of the existing source and suggesting upgrades **
**Proton Driver Design Study I:   **
- 16 GeV Synchrotron (TM 2136)                 Dec 2000
**Proton Driver Design Study II (draft TM 2169) :**
- 8 GeV Synchrotron  		         May 2002
- 2 MW upgrade to Main Injector                  May 2002
- 8 GeV Superconducting  Linac:                  Feb   2004
**Proton Team Report ****(D Finley):****            **Oct   2003
**Report: **http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/program_planning/studies/ProtonReport.pdf
**Limitations of existing source, upgrades for a few 10’s of $ M.**
- “On the longer term the proton demands of the neutrino program will exceed what reasonable upgrades of the present Booster and Linac can accommodate FNAL needs a plan to  replace its aging LINAC & Booster with a new more intense proton source  (AKA a Proton Driver)

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Proton Driver Study in Progresshttp://www-bd.fnal.gov/pdriver/

**High Level Parameters**
- 0.5-2.0 MW beam power at 8 Gev
- 2.0 MW beam power at 120 GeV
- 6 x power of current Main Injector
**Two Possible implementations**
- 8 GeV Synchrotron
- 8 GeV SCRF Linac
**FLRPC: Linac is preferred**
- Better performance
- More Flexible
- Comparable in cost
- LC connection (TESLA technology)

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## PD: 8 GeV SC Linac

**Design concept originated with ****Bill Foster**** at FNAL**
- Observation: $/ GeV for SCRF has fallen dramatically Can consider a solution in which H- beam is accelerated to 8 GeV in a SC linac and injected directly into the Main Injector
**Why an SCRF Linac looks attractive:**
- Probably simpler to operate vs. two machines (i.e. linac + booster)
- Produces very small emittances vs. a synchrotron (small halo & losses in MI)
- Can delivers high beam power simultaneously at 8 & 120 GeV
- Many components exist (fewer parts to design vs new booster synchrotron)
- Use “TESLA” klystrons, modulators, and cavities/Cryo modules
- Exploit development/infrastructure from RIA, SNS, JLAB, JPARC etc
- Can be “staged” to limit initial costs & grow with neutrino program needs

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## PD: Status and Plans

**Following the FLRPC recommendations FNAL started an serious effort to develop the SCRF linac design and the Physics case**
- Bill Foster: Machine Design
- Steve Geer: Physics case
**The Aug 04 ITRP selection of “cold” technology for the International Linear Collider provides a HUGE boost for idea of an SCRF linac based PD at FNAL**
**Much of the development and infrastructure needed for a Proton Driver or a cold-technology International Linear collider are identical**
**A superconducting linac-based Proton Driver might have many possible future missions**

- }Goal DOE CD-0 approval in 05

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## 8 GeV Superconducting Linac

- 8 GeV Superconducting Linac

**Anti-**
**Proton**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Baseline 2 MW 8 GeV LINAC 

- Baseline 2 MW 8 GeV LINAC

- DTL 1

- DTL 2

- DTL 3

- DTL 4

- DTL5

- DTL6

- RFQ

- RFQ

- Modulator

- Modulator

- (7 total)

-   325 MHz

-   Klystrons

-   2.5 MW

- H -

- B=0.47

- B=0.47

- B=0.61

- B=0.61

- B=0.61

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Warm Copper

- Drift Tube Linac

- 325 MHz

- 0 - 87 MeV

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Modulator

- 12 cavites/ Klystron

- 1300 MHz Beta=1

-   36 Klystrons   (2 types)

-   31 Modulators  10 MW ea.

-    7  Warm Linac Loads

-   48 Cryomodules

- 384 Superconducting Cavities

**8 GeV  2 MW  LINAC**

- Squeezed Tesla cavities

- 1300 MHz

- 0.087 - 1.2 GeV

- "TESLA" LINAC

*24 Klystrons*

*288 cavites in 36 Cryomodules*

*5 TESLA Klystrons, 10 MW each*

*96 cavites in 12 Cryomodules*

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

##  Cavities and Cryomodules 

- Tesla SCRF Cavity

- Cryomodule at Tesla Test Facility

- The Cavities and Cryo-modules for 85% of the Proton Driver  will be nearly identical to those developed by the TESLA collaboration for the International Linear Collider

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## What is a Tesla Cryo-Module?

- 12 Meter long Cryostat
- Eight 9-cell cavities of pure Nb
- Cavities are cooled with 1.8 K superfluid He
- Cavities are surrounded by thermal radiation shields (4 & 80 K)
- Couplers carry 1.3 GHz RF energy from room temp into the cavity
- Support, alignment structures tuners, magnetic shielding, etc/

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## SCRF Cavities

**Superconducting cavities are remarkable !**
**Single cavities have achieved accelerating gradients of >45 MV/M this is a **_**Huge**_** number... Think 45 KV/mm !**
**Superconducting cavities also exhibit some of the highest Q’s ****( = stored energy/energy loss per cycle) ****of any system observed in nature.           Q’s > few x 10****10**** are typical**
**Gradients in cavities are typically limited by field emission, breakdowns, or quenchs**
**Material control and cleanliness are crucial**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## How do you build a SCRF Cryomodule ?

**Cavities are fabricated from pure Nb Sheet**
**Nb is machined, deep drawn, electron Beam welded to form the basic cavity**
**Cavities then are chemically etched, baked, and cleaned with utra-pure high pressure water ****(goal = smooth surface, no micro size or larger contamination which can cause field emission)**
**Work is done in Class 10 clean rooms (similar to chip fabrication)**
**The highest gradients are achieved with a final electro-polish step                      25 ******** 35-40 MV/Meter. (Individual cavities are tested after this step.)                 **
**Cavities are then “dressed” with a helium vessel **
**Input couplers are added to pass room temp RF into 1.8 K  cavity environment**
**Cavity string assembly  ( 8 cavities) is last clean room step**
**Next is cold mass assembly, alignment, & insertion in outer vessel**
**Finally, the cryomodule is tested (requires cryogenics & high power RF )**
**          ****All of this requires a lot of infrastructure... (eg DESY spend ~ $ 140 M to build TTF I + II.       **
**Fortunately, a lot of SCRF infrastructure already exists at US universities & national labs (e.g. recent SNS construction)**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## TESLA Cryomodule Assembly 

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Slide 34

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Fermilab

- Copy of TTF

- For A0 and DESY XFEL

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## RF Power: Klystrons

**RF power for the Proton Driver would be provided by high power (10 MW)    1.3 GHz klystrons **
**Three companies have developed these for TESLA (**_**Thales**_**, CPI, Toshiba)**
**Modulators would be             ~ identical to those used by TESLA (built by Fermilab)**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## RF Power:  Modulators 

**Biggest single component in RF cost for a PD or a LC**
**Fermilab designed and built the modulator for the TESLA TTF, Its been in service and reliable at TTF since 1994**
**Modulators for the Proton Driver and ILC could be very similar**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## RF System for 1.2 8 GeV Linac

**The Proton Driver design assumes TESLA-style RF power distribution works**
- One TESLA multi-beam Klystron per ~12 Cavities
**A Proton Linac (******** < 1) requires a “fast ferrite”    E-H tuner to control the phase and amplitude to each cavity**
- Also needed if Linac is to alternate between e and P.
- The fundamental technology to do this was developed in the 1960’s for phased-array radar transmitters.
**This technology work is crucial to the financial feasibility of the Proton Driver ( klystron + modulator are ~ $ 2 M)**
- Fermilab began R&D last year to develop the required phase shifters (two in-house designs + ordered one commercially from AFT)

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## RF Fan-out for 8 GeV Linac

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## RF Fanout at Each Cavity

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## ELECTRONICALLY ADJUSTABLEE-H TUNER

- FERRITE LOADED SHORTED STUBS
- CHANGE ELECTRICAL LENGTH DEPENDING ON DC MAGNETIC BIAS.

***TWO COILS***  PROVIDE INDEPENDENT
***PHASE AND AMPLITUDE *** CONTROL OF CAVITIES

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Linac Cost Optimizations & Options

**Staging: Extend Klystron Fanout 12:1 ******** 36:1**
- Drop beam current, extend pulse width
- Drop rep. rate  avg. 8-GeV power 2 MW 0.5 MW
- But... still delivers 2 MW from MI at 120 GeV with existing MI ramp rates
**SCRF Front End? (using RIA Spoke Resonators)**
**Assumed Gradients for TESLA cavities:**
- Baseline 5 GeV linac by assuming TESLA 500 gradients,
- Deliver    8 GeV linac by achieving TESLA 800 gradients.
**384 Cavities ******** 240 cavities ;      ****	****Linac Length: 650m ******** 400**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Staged:2 MW@120 GeV & .5 MW@8GeV,SCRF FE

- RFQ

- RFQ

- Modulator

- H -

- B=0.47

- B=0.47

- B=0.61

- B=0.61

- B=0.61

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- B=0.81

- Modulator

- "Pulsed RIA"

-  SCRF Linac

-  325 MHz

-  0 - 120 MeV

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Modulator

- Modulator

-   11 Klystrons   (2 types)

-   11 Modulators  20 MW ea.

-    1  Warm Linac Load

-   54 Cryomodules

- ~550 Superconducting Cavities

**8 GeV  0.5 MW  LINAC**

*  **8 Klystrons*

*  **288 cavites in 36 Cryomodules*

*2 Klystrons*

*96 cavites in 12 Cryomodules*

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Beta=1

- Modulator

- Modulator

- Multi-Cavity Fanout at 10-20kW/cavity

- Phase & Amplitude Adjust via Fast Ferrite Tuners

-   TESLA

-   Klystrons

- 1300 MHz

-    10 MW

- 325 MHz

- Klystron

- 3.0 MW

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Cost Driver: Klystrons per GeV

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## 325 MHz RF System

- M

- Pulse Transformer& Oil Tank

- IGBT Switch & Bouncer

- CAP
- BANK

- 10 kV

- 110 kV

- Charging
- Supply
- 300kW

**MODULATOR:**  FNAL/TTF Reconfigurable for 1,2 or 3 msec beam pulse

- Single
- JPARC
- Klystron
- 325MHz
- 3 MW

- WR2300 Distribution Waveguide

- TOSHIBA  E3740A

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- E

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- B

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- T

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- R F Q

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- Cables to
-  Tunnel

- Fast Ferrite
- Isolated I/Q Modulators

- RF Couplers

- S

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- S

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- R

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- S

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- S

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- R

**I**
**Q**
**M**

**400kW**

**20 kW**

- D

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- S

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- R

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- D

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- S

**I**
**Q**
**M**

- R

**I**
**Q**
**M**

**120 kW**

**10kV**

**H-**

- Medium Energy
- Beam Transport
- Copper Cavities

**Radio Frequency**
**Quadrupole**

**Cryomodule #1              Single-Spoke**
**Resonators**

**Cryomodule #2 Double-Spoke**
**Resonators**

**20 kW**

- JPARC

- ~RIA

- ~TESLA
-     TTF

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## JHF 325 MHz RFQ and Klystrons  

- JHF  325 MHz
- 3 MW Klystron

- JHF 325 MHz RF Quad

- JHF 325 MHz RFQ and Klystrons

- * TESLA frequency  =  1300  MHz
- = 4*325 MHz

- Facilitate a TESLA-Compatible* Front End

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## SCRF Front End (Pulsed RIA)?

**RIA group at Argonne has made great progress using spoke resonators to achieve high gradients for beta<1 cavities.**
**Using these in 1 msec pulsed mode looks considerably cheaper than a warm-copper front end *****(if one already has the cryoplant).***
**FNAL/ANL collaboration **
- Shared SCRF infrastructure (chemistry)
- Investigating common designs, shared production
- Plan to test RIA cavities in Pulsed mode (U of I grad student)

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

- _Topologically same as a shorted coax_

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Main Injector Upgrades

**With a Proton Driver beam in the Main injector will increase by a factor of ~ 5 from its design value of 3.0 E 13 protons per pulse to ~1.5 E 14 **
**The main injector beam power can also be increased by shortening the MI ramp time.**
- Requires additional magnet power supplies
- Becomes practical with a linac, injection time = 1 ms
**More protons/cycle and/or faster ramp times ******** more MI RF power required = $$$**
**But shorter ramp time ******** beam power goes up.**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## 120 GeV Main Injector Cycle with 8 GeV Linac & Standard Ramp

**Fill time is negligible => could increase MI ramp rate**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Baseline Proton Driver & MI 0.8 sec cycle 

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Comparison of PD options

**With an 8 GeV SCRF Linac one can imagine upgrade paths to MI beam powers beyond 2 MW **

- RDK
- unofficial

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Synergies with other Projects

**Synergy with many other SCRF projects**
- CBEAF upgrades, SNS, RIA, light sources, e-cooling @RHIC, eRHIC, etc
**Strong connection with a Cold Technology LC **
- Both require extensive SCRF infrastructure development
- The last 85% of the Proton Driver linac (1 GeV to 8 GeV) is comprised of ****=1 TESLA modules and can serve as a large scale demonstration of the 4000 cryo-modules and RF equipment needed for the ILC
- Proton Driver  ~ 1% of a LC => improve the LC cost estimate ( will pay for itself )
- Can be used to study ILC reliability and alignment issues
-  The synergy between ILC R&D and Proton Driver is further reinforced by the almost complete overlap of a PD and ILC module R&D and test plans
- SCRF PD could be made to accelerate electrons
- With a low emittance source  LC beam studies
- Possibly serve as part or all of a LC ETF
**All of this can happen while the LC project is trying to organize complex international agreements and funding**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Timescale for a Proton Driver ?

**Always hard to guess **
**Technically limited schedule**
- CD0   in 05
- CD1  in  06 (preliminary: acquisition strategy, PEP, conceptual design report, project scope, baseline cost/schedule range, PMP, Hazard analysis, etc)
- CD 2/3a in 07-08 (project baseline approved, approval to start construction)
**Funds in FY09 ? Availability of funding from DOE may push this later**
**Once funding is approved, typical projects of this scale ( MI, SLAC B factory, KEK-B, SNS) have construction times of 4-5 years**
**The timescale will also depend on how the Linear Collider plays out, over the next few years  (e.g. PD = ETF ?) **
**Its up to us to make the physics case that a Proton Driver is required and that it should go as fast as possible**
**Making the PHYSICS CASE is crucial in all of this !**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## CONCLUSIONS

**It seems likely that a new intense proton source will be proposed for construction at FNAL**
**Similar in scope to the Main Injector Project (cost/schedule)**
**A 8 GeV Synchrotron or a Superconducting  Linac appear to be both technically possible. However the SCRF linac strongly preferred if it can be made affordable**
**The FNAL management has requested that the 8 GeV linac design be developed  including cost & schedule information**
**A Technical Design will be developed (charge to Bill Foster)**
**The Physics Case needs to be further developed (charge to Steve Geer)**
**These will make it possible to submit a Proton Driver project to the DOE for approval and funding in the near future **

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Proton Driver R&D

**Neutrino Detector Design**
- Nova ( NuMI off-axis detector) = proposal to PAC
- FLARE ( large LAr surface detector)
- Large water Cerenkov ? BNL proposal ... similar to K2K ( deep underground, also could do Proton Decay)
- Underground cavern construction issues
**Beam Optimization**
- Wide vs Narrow band neutrino beam
- Energy choice
- Optimal vs practical baselines ? (L/E ratio)
- Beam lines ? ( eg for places other than towards Soudan)

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## Proton Driver R&D

**High Power Target Design ( 2-4 MW)**
- Target Stations
- Particle collection elements (eg Horns)
**Beam Dynamics**
- H- stripping
- Multi-turn phase paint injection in the Main Injector
**Main injector**
- Beam activation of components
- Collimators
- RF upgrade
- Magnet ramp upgrades

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004

## PD/ILC R&D Plans

**SCRF Cavity Development**
- Beta = 1 SCRF cryo-modules in both US and with international partners ( e.g. DESY, KEK)
- Develop Beta < 1 elliptical cavities
- Develop Low Beta spoke resonator cavities in collaboration with RIA (ANL & MSU)
**Superconducting Module & Test Facility (SMTF)**
- RF Power
- Cryogenics
- Infrastructure (most of this common to ILC and PD)
**Many University scale R&D projects (for PD and ILC)**

- University of Illinois

- Dec 6, 2004