Cavity Work-Package in EDR phase
H. Hayano 01282008 for Lutz Lilje
Cavity Work-Package Definition
•
•
•
•
WP-C1: Gradient performance
WP-C2: Fabrication
WP-C3: Preparation
WP-C4: Cavity Design
WP-C1: Gradient performance
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Tight-loop effort
Production-like effort
Preparation for ultimate cavity batch
Single cell program
Common performance evaluation
Gradient proposal for EDR
WP-C1-1: Tight-loop effort
Finalize the tight-loop process
• Package should demonstrate repeatability with in each
participating lab. Then an inter-laboratory comparison should follow
facilitated by cavity exchange. Re-evaluation whether second loop
is needed.
• Cavity treatment and testing. Measurement data. Data comparison.
• 2-3 SCRF labs(FNAL, JLab, KEK, DESY), 3 cavities per lab, 3
tests each cavity.
• milestones
All cavities tested by mid of 2008.
Data comparison by fall 2008.
Re-evaluation by fall 2008.
WP-C1-2: Production-like effort
1. Treat 30 cavities with EP + ethanol process
•
•
•
•
Repeat process (If needed in case of underperformance) at least once.
Apply T-map on as many cavities as possible, at least all cavities below
30 MV/m.
Deliverables: Cavity treatment and testing. Measurement data.
SCRF labs(FNAL, DESY), 30 cavities.
Milestones: All cavities tested by end of 2008.
2. Treat 20-30 cavities with EP + Degrease
•
Repeat process….(same above)
•
•
•
Deliverables: (same above)
SCRF labs(FNAL, Jlab, KEK, DESY), 20-30 cavities.
Milestones: All cavities tested by end of 2008.
3. Treat 10-20 cavities with EP + fresh EP
•
Repeat process …(same above)
•
Deliverables: (same above)
•
•
SCRF labs(Jlab, KEK), 10 cavities.
Milestones: All cavities tested by end of 2009.
WP-C1-3: Preparation for ultimate cavity batch
1. Evaluate data from tight-loop and production data
•
•
•
•
Overall evaluation of data available by end of 2009.
Deliverables: Report on data comparison. Recommendation for ILC
cavity process.
Candidate labs(FNAL), by Database and Scientist.
Milestones: Report and recommendation by end of 2009.
2. Treat 30 cavities with ILC process
•
Repeat process (If needed in case of underperformance) at least once.
Apply T-map on as many cavities as possible, at least all cavities below
30 MV/m.
•
•
•
Deliverables: Cavity treatment and testing. Measurement data.
Candidate labs(FNAL, KEK), 30 cavities.
Milestones: All cavities tested by end of 2010.
WP-C1-4: Single cell Program
1. To be discussed.
WP-C1-5: Common performance evaluation
1. Database setup
•
•
•
•
Develop basis for an ILC database. Review existing database. Choose
common database system.
Deliverables: Database for cavity process and testing data.
Candidate labs(FNAL, Jlab, KEK, DESY), by Scientist and IT engineer.
Milestones: Evaluation by end of 2007. Choice of database by spring
2008, Database in place by mid 2008.
2. Data evaluation between laboratory
•
Develop schemes for inter-laboratory data evaluation. Evaluation of
data sets available. Define data sets requested from labs. Compare data
analysis done by participating labs. Evaluate data relevant for ILC
project.
•
Deliverables: Report on evaluation of existing data sets. Proposal for
data sets.
Candidate labs(FNAL, Jlab, KEK, DESY), by Scientist.
Milestones: Report on evaluation by end of 2007. Proposal for database
by mid 2008.
•
•
WP-C1-6: Gradient proposal for the EDR
1. Definition of vertical test gradient specification for ILC
•
Re-visit Snowmass and S0 specification. Take into account more flexible
power distribution. Develop a final specification for vertical test assuming
an operational gradient of 31.5MV/m in the machine.
•
Deliverables: Report on tolerable gradient spread in ILC (together with
Main Linac and LLRF). Final specification.
by Scientists.
Milestones: Report on tolerable gradient spread by end of 2007. Final
ILC specification for gradient spread in vertical tests by mid 2008.
•
•
2. Final proposal for ILC gradient
•
Data evaluation of all existing data by end of 2009. Report with proposal
for ILC gradient by end of 2009.
•
•
•
Deliverables: Report.
by S0 task force.
Milestones: Report by end of 2009.
WP-C2: Fabrication
1.
2.
3.
4.
Material
Alternative materials
Fabrication method
HPV regulation
WP-C2-1: Material
1. Material specification
•
Develop full specification for ILC baseline fine-grain niobium material.
Review XFEL specification.
•
•
•
Deliverables: specification for cavity material.
by Scientists, engineer of FNAL, Jlab, KEK, DESY.
Milestones: Specification ready by 2011.
WP-C2-2: Alternative Materials
1. Large grain cost evaluation
•
Review available material on large grain niobium material cost.
Investigate cost effective cutting methods.
•
•
•
Deliverables: Report on cost difference for large-grain material.
by Scientists, engineer of FNAL, Jlab, KEK, DESY.
Milestones: Report ready by 2008.
2. Large grain multi-cell cavity development and testing
•
Built and test several multi-cell cavities. Repeat process (If needed in
case of underperformance) at least once. Apply T-map on as many
cavities as possible, at least all cavities below 30 MV/m. Comparison of
different surface treatments on multi-cell cavities.
•
Deliverables: Cavity treatment and testing. Measurement data. Report of
data comparison with baseline material. Material specification.
Candidate labs(Jlab, DESY), 10-20 cavities. ~2 tests each cavity.
Milestones: All cavities tested by mid of 2010. Data comparison by fall
2010. Final report by end 2010.
•
•
WP-C2-3: Fabrication method
1. Analysis of EBW performance
•
Evaluate available data on performance of EB welds by both established
and new cavity vendors. Include laboratory in-house fabrications where
appropriate. Implementation of sufficient diagnostic capability in
participating labs (e.g. temperature mapping). Development of cavity
autopsy for the weld region on defective cavities (destructive or nondestructive).
•
Deliverables: Report on performance of EB welds. T-mapping for
diagnostics. Method of defect detection in weld region.
by Scientists, engineer, and SCRF labs.
Milestones: Report until mid 2008. T-mapping diagnostics by mid 2008.
Method by 2009.
•
•
2. EBW specification
•
Review XFEL specification for EBW. Develop additional qulity control for
EBW at companies. Write specification.
•
•
•
Deliverables: Specification.
by scientists.
Milestones: specification by end of 2008.
WP-C2-4: HPV regulation
1. HPV regulation
•
Develop common understanding of requirements to fulfil high-pressure
vessel code regulations especially for how to deal with niobium material.
•
•
•
Deliverables:
by .
Milestones:
WP-C3: Preparation
1. Baseline process
2. Alternatives
WP-C3-1: Baseline process
1. Process specification
•
Develop full specification for ILC surface process. Review XFEL cavity
surface process.
•
Deliverables: specification for cavity process. EP, HPR, assembly and
QA thereof.
by Scientists engineer at FNAL, Jlab, KEK, DESY.
Milestones: Specification ready by 2011.
•
•
2. Surface Analysis in support of baseline process
•
Review ongoing R&D activities on niobium RF surfaces. Develop
program to improve QC for ILC surface process.
•
Deliverables: Development of an R&D program. Managing program with
supporting institutes.
by Scientists engineer at Jlab, Cornell.
Milestones: Program ready by mid 2008.
•
•
WP-C3-2: Alternatives
1. Tumbling
•
Evaluate whether tumbling as an additional intermediate process step
for a cavity is necessary to achieve more homogeneous performance.
•
Deliverables: Comparative study on cavities with and without tumbling
(possibly on single cells).
by Scientists of KEK, by single cell program.
Milestones: Report by end of 2008.
•
•
2. Dry-Ice
•
Evaluate whether dry-ice cleaning as an additional intermediate process
step for a cavity with main coupler is feasible. Demonstrate proof-ofprinciple.
•
•
•
Deliverables: Report on feasibility. Proof-of-principle.
by Scientists.
Milestones: Report by end of 2008.
WP-C4: Cavity Design
1.
2.
3.
4.
Specification of outer envelope
Preparation for the cavity shape decision
Lorentz detuning concept
Beam dynamics
WP-C4-1: Specification of outer envelope
1. Outer diameter, length
•
Evaluation of existing designs. Technical comparisons of the designs. Define the
outer boundary of the cavity.
•
Deliverables: specification.
•
•
by Engineer.
Milestones: Complete specification by Sendai meeting.
2. Sealing technology
•
Review existing seal designs. Make technical comparison. Make recommendation
for common interface. Finalise specification.
•
Deliverables: Review report. Recommendation. Specification.
•
•
by Engineer.
Milestones: Complete review report by Sendai meeting.
3. Input port diameter
•
Review existing port design and high power couplers. Make technical comparison
(needs definition of criteria). Make recommendation for common coupler port.
Finalise specification.
•
Deliverables: Review report. Recommendation. Specification.
•
•
by Engineer.
Milestones: Complete review report by Sendai meeting.
WP-C4-2: Preparation of the cavity shape
decision
1. Definition of tests
•
Review existing cavity design. Define required testing based on Cavity
KOM discussion. Develop a detailed schedule to prove a cavity shape
can be used in ILC.
•
•
•
Deliverables: Review report, report on required testing, Schedule.
by Scientists, engineer.
Milestones: Review report by end of 2007. Report on required testing by
2007. Detailed schedule by mid 2008.
2. Testing of cavity shape alternatives
•
Design ILC-compatible alternative shape cavity. Build and test
compatible cavities with alternative shapes. Preparation and surface
preparation of a number of cavities required by WP above. Repeat
vertical tests (if needed in case of underperformance) at least once.
Apply T-map on as many cavities as possible, at least all cavities below
30 MV/m.
•
Deliverables: Design of an ILC compatible alternative shape cavity.
Cavity treatment and testing. Measurement data.
One SCRF lab (Jlab, KEK, Cornell) per cavity shape, .
Milestones: Alternative design by beginning of 2008. Additional
milestones according to what has been defined.
•
•
WP-C4-3: Lorentz detuning concept
1. Evaluation of tests
•
Review existing Lorentz-force compensation concepts. Comparison of
technical concepts including the relevant tuner design. Proposal for a
common concept.
•
•
•
Deliverables: Review report. Proposal for a common concept.
by Scientists, engineer.
Milestones: Review report by end of 2007. Proposal by mid 2008.
WP-C4-4: Beam dynamics
1. HOM concept
2. Wake fields
3. Alignment
4. Straightness
DESY activity status
1. S0 cavity treatment
5-th product batch : 15 ZANON, 15 ACCEL -> EP training of HENKEL and
ACCEL.
Helium tank welding before vertical test (XFEL scenario). Final process will be
compared for Short etch and EP+ethanol rinse.
3 batch; 10 cavities = Short etch, 10 cavities = EP + ethanol, 10 decide later.
30 cavities testing by mid 2008. Two cavity vendors comparison.
AC71,AC74,AC80 are put into tight-loop.
2. Cavity package alternatives
8 new large-grain cavities are available in late 2008, will be tested by end of
2008.
11 large-grain cavities( 8 new + 3 existing) will receive final process of
EP+ethanol rinse.
DESY activity status (cont.)
3. S1 module tests
A series of modules will be assembled and/or tested:
1.
M3* (TTF 2 type cryostat) in early 2008:
Test to conform with pressure vessel code (possibly destructive)
2.
M8 (TTF 3 +) in spring 2008: ( plan was changed to go Saclay first, back to DESY later)
Normal module test including piezo tuners, Transport,
Second test to check performance
3.
M3**
After repair with a gradient goal of at least 25 MV/m as spare for FLASH.
Piezo tuners added
4.
M10 (XFEL Prototype) assembly autumn 2008,
gradient goal >25 MV/m
At least the M8 string could deliver ILC-like performance. The test will be made by mid 2008, so
that additional input for S1 would be available.
Independent of the module performance tests, both the transport test for M8,
and the test for the pressure vessel code with M3* are of major importance for the ILC.
US activity status
1. S0 cavity treatment
Jlab: 30 cycle of EP/VT per year. AC6(38MV/m),AC7(32MV/m): 4 cycles as S0. AC8
started as S0.
KEK Ichiro#5(30-20MV/m) started as S0. AES001,002,003,004 evaluation(1632MV/m).
Cornell: 1 cycle per month. AC8(28MV/m),AC9(25MV/m) are under qualified. 9-cell reentrant work. AES new EBW qualification with five 1 cell (4:25MV/m, 1:17MV/m).
New cavity plan: AC10-17(8 cavities), AES005-010(6 cavities) delivery end of 2007.
AES011-016(6 cavities) are ordered.
2. S1 module tests
First cryomodule is ready for test. Next cryomodule …?…
3. Infra-structure
ANL-EP commissioned with 1 cell. FNAL HPR under construction.
CAF-ICB (cryomodule assembly facility at ICB) : two assembly fixtures.
FNAL VT commissioned with AES001 cavity.
AES new EBW is qualified.
New cavity vender : PAVAC (Canada) is under qualifying.