History and Challenges of Particle Accelerators · 2011-12-21 · FFAG Workshop Sept 2011 M W Poole...

M W Poole FFAG Workshop Sept 2011

History and Challenges of Particle Accelerators

Mike Poole

ASTeC


Birth of Particle Physics and Accelerators

1898 Discovery of radium (α, β, γ) 7.6 MeV

1909 Geiger/Marsden MeV α backscattering - Manchester 1927 Rutherford demands accelerator development Particle accelerator studies start - Cavendish

1929 Cockcroft and Walton start high voltage experiments

1932 The prize achieved: Cockcroft + Walton split Li !!!!

‘High’ voltage generation – brute force UK grid initiated (132 kV) and industrial base started


Walton, Rutherford, Cockcroft - 1932

Start of the modern era – particle accelerators

NOBEL PRIZE !


Cockcroft-Walton Generator

ISIS

665 kV

Removed 2005 Greinacher 1921

View remains in Cockcroft Institute atrium at Daresbury !

First example of commercial exploitation distraction !


Early Challenges

High voltage breakdown

Reliable vacuum systems

Low beam currents

Zero diagnostics

Small industrial base

Scale – big science emerges !


Electrostatic Accelerators

1927 Tuve builds multi-MV Tesla transformers

1931 van der Graaff pioneers effective electrostatic solution (1 MeV)

1961 6 MeV machine at Liverpool (Manchester collaboration)

1972 Design Study of 20-30 MV facility at Daresbury

1974 Civil construction starts

1983 NSF commissioned 1992 Closure


Daresbury Nuclear Structure Facility (NSF)

Last of the line !

Tandem World high energy: 20+ MV

Control of HV breakdown

Scale: weight/stresses cost ion sources controls environment


Resonant Accelerator Concept - LINAC

Wideroe – 1928

Alvarez - 1946

Original CERN linac - 1958

Drift tubes screen beam Synchronism and bunching


Linac Challenges

Development of RF power sources – energy limit

Beam dynamics - radial fields at gaps

First use of quadrupoles ?

Permanent magnet solutions

Scaling issues (only few MeV/m)

FQUADs (shown) focus the beam horizontally

DQUADs (as above, rotated 90º) focus vertically


Recirculation Concept – The Cyclotron

Radio frequency alternating voltage

Hollow metal drift tubes

time t =0

time t =½ RF period

Automatic Synchronisation

D-shaped RF cavities

Orbit radius increases with energy

Expensive/impractical for high energies (1 GeV)

Lawrence (1932): 4” – 80 keV 11” - 1.2 MeV

q v B = mv2 / r r = mv / qB T = 2πm / qB


Accelerator Developments

High energy Cyclotrons have huge magnets - spiral orbits

Also problem of relativistic mass increase: desynchronises (some help from FM synchrocyclotron)

Solution:

Raise magnetic field strength as particle energy increases

Produces annular orbit geometry

SYNCHROTRON


Synchrotron Ring Schematic

Focusing magnets

Vacuum tube

Accelerating cavity

Bending magnets

Bending and focussing often combined


Early (UK) History

(Synchro)Cyclotrons Berkeley (Lawrence) 60” 20 MeV (1939) Liverpool 37” 20 MeV (1939) Harwell 110” 175 MeV (1949) Liverpool 156” 380 MeV (1954) (extraction)

Linacs

Harwell 3.5 MeV (1947) 15 (Mullard), 55 (Met Vickers), 136 MeV

Synchrotrons Woolwich Arsenal - Goward & Barnes e 8 MeV (1946) (Betatron 1943) Malvern 30 MeV e (1950) Oxford 125 MeV e (1952) Birmingham 1 GeV p (1953) Glasgow 350 MeV e (1954) NIMROD RAL 7 GeV p (1960) NINA DL 5 GeV e (1966)

Clatterbridge Oncology Centre 65 MeV

NINA


Origins of Daresbury Laboratory

Particle physics facility

State of art electron synchrotron: 5.3 GeV

Designed 1962 and commissioned 1966 Closed 1977 (all domestic HEP ends)

But not the end of Daresbury !


Properties of Charged Particle Beams

Unstable behaviour first encountered by Lawrence

Restoring forces provided by radial magnetic field variation (shims)

Uncoupled transverse motion with periodic driving terms

Hamiltonian solutions - now rare (simulations) canonical x,p

Betatron oscillations occur (tunes Qx/Qy) – and dispersion function

Weak focussing replaced by strong focussing (Q >> 1) => resonances

Phase space area = emittance Lattice functions

Ensemble of particles


Simple Accelerator Lattice

Dipole

F Quadrupole D Quadrupole

FODO Cell

Challenge: finite dispersion


Modern Double Bend Achromat Cell

Dipole

Quadrupoles

Sextupoles

Dipole Quadrupole

Dispersive Path

Dipole

Non - Dispersive

Model by matrix element procedure (can add perturbations)


Storage Rings

Synchrotrons can store beams at required (final) energy

Very high beam currents can be accumulated

Beam lifetime set by: Instabilities gas scattering IBS beam-beam etc Typically 10-50 hours (1012 turns !!!)

Radiation damping benefits electron rings

Exotic cooling schemes needed for protons (and ions)


Errors and Nonlinearities

Real accelerators are non-ideal

Misalignments and field errors must be corrected

Nonlinear behaviour must be controlled (fields and motion)

Implies diagnostics and magnetic correctors

Simulated behaviour is crucial – complex analysis


Example - Chromatic Correction

Sextupoles – compensate off-energy particle tune shift

Located in finite dispersion region: focussing varies with energy offset


Collapse of Dynamic Stability

No sextupoles Corrected to zero chromaticity by single magnet family

Four families Eight families


Engineering Challenges

Definition of beam stay clear aperture around a ring

Allocations for oscillations, closed orbit errors, injection, ....

Vacuum chamber walls and alignment (maybe bake out)

Mass component production issues

Radiation hardness

Controls engineering: multi-parameter optimisation

Reliability

M W Poole FFAG Workshop Sept 2011 Cockcroft Education Lectures

Accelerator Technologies

Sources - electron guns photoinjectors, ion sources, ……..

Magnets - EM / SCM / PM DC / AC / Pulsed Harmonic / Periodic Power supplies

RF System - structures power sources Vacuum - UHV modelling diagnostics pumping

Diagnostics - fast high precision non-interactive

Geodesics - alignment feedback

Radiation - losses shielding personnel safety

Dumps - spallation targets collimators

Engineering - mechanical electrical civil

Controls - advanced process control NB Multi-disciplinary teams Resources: construction/operation


Accelerator Physics Topics

• Classical electrodynamics - Maxwell (mainly !) • Lorentz forces: Deflection and acceleration

• Single particle dynamics • transport, stability, nonlinear dynamics - tracking & differential algebra

• Multi-particle dynamics • collective effects, wake fields, space charge, coherent instabilities

Production Transport Injection Acceleration Extraction Manipulation Delivery

Analytic modelling + Computer simulation (Start-to-End) (Major code development)

Experimental verification (Commissioning !)

fs nm


Summary - Types of Accelerator

Linear Accelerators (Linacs) Multi-cell concepts TW and SW

Cyclotrons Low energy limit

Synchrocyclotrons RF variation compensates mass change – extends energy reach

Betatrons Beam is ‘secondary’ of a transformer - magnetic field limit

Synchrotrons and Storage Rings Ramped magnetic field matches energy – annular design

Other variants Particle sources Microtron RFQ FFAG Plasma wake etc


Energy Frontier - Protons

Energy limited by dipole magnetic field strength – ring size

Challenge of superconducting technology

NbTi cable – invented in UK

Critical field limits (short sample sets)

NbSn alternative too difficult (so far)

Tevatron pioneer (1987): 770 dipoles at 4.2T for 1 TeV beams

LHC now operating at 4.2 T (3.5 TeV) but 8.4 T design

Huge cryogenic systems (10’s kW at 4 K, kl/h)


Energy Frontier - Electrons Limited by radiation emission (accelerated charge)

Technology and electricity costs

Properties calculated since 1897 (Larmor)

Lienard and Schott studied relativistic particles on circular trajectories:

P α E4/R2 So this applies to accelerated beams of charged particles in

a ring (synchrotron)

SYNCHROTRON RADIATION

=> Severe losses and energy restrictions GE synchotron 1947

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ge-synchrotron-acclerator.jpg�


LEP Technical Challenges

3280 revolutionary low field concrete magnets (0.1 T) !

27 km machine

3% energy loss per turn (at 100 GeV)

20MW synchrotron radiation

Superconducting RF systems

Nb coated Cu structures 288 cavities total


Superconducting RF Technology

Slower to be adopted than superconducting magnets

Serious technical challenges

Power saving is only one issue

Structure quality reduces (some) beam instabilities

Tuning challenges (Q ~ 106) – and microphonics

J-lab module

Power coupler

Avoid dust and other contaminants

New surface treatments – complex processing

Class 10 clean rooms


Unexpected Challenges - Tides and TGV !!!!

Influence on the beam energy moon, sun and tides level of lake Geneva rainfall

AND the fast train.........

5 A induced in the vacuum chamber


LHC Accelerator Complex

7 TeV x 2


LHC: Some Parameter Challenges

1612 different electrical circuits 8 Sector Powering Circuit

1220 Magnet Stored Energy (MJoules)

1MJ melts 2kg Cu 370 Beam Stored Energy ( MJoules)

2.2.10-6 loss causes quench 0.5 Beam Intensity (A)

1ppm resolution 13000 Current in dipole sc coils (A)

Super-fluid helium 1.9 Operating Temperature (K)

8.4 Dipole Field Strength (Tesla)

14.3 Length of Dipole (m)

Cable Nb-Ti, cold mass 37million kg 1232 Number of Dipoles

100-150m underground 26.7 Circumference (km)


LHC Construction and Repair

20 per week

Sept 2008

Beam Screen (BS) : The red color is characteristic of a clean copper

surface

BS with some contamination by super-isolation (MLI multi layer

insulation)

BS with soot contamination. The grey color varies depending on the thickness of the soot, from grey to

dark.

53 magnets removed

Major cleaning/inspection


LHC Update

Restarted November 2009 (450 GeV injection)

Collisions at 3.5 x 3.5 TeV in March 2010

Further shutdown at least one year (2013 +)

Major beam dynamics challenges – luminosity

Full energy (7 TeV) by 2014 but full specification

2016 ?

LHC upgrade programme under review (inc LHeC)


Next Generation HEP Facility

LEP

SLC

ILC

CLIC

1.E+30

1.E+31

1.E+32

1.E+33

1.E+34

1.E+35

0 1 2 3 4 5

Energy (TeV)

Lum

inos

ity (c

m-2

sec

-1)

main linacbunchcompressor

dampingring

source

pre-accelerator

collimation

final focus

IP

extraction& dump

KeV

few GeV

few GeVfew GeV

250-500 GeV

TeV Electron Linear Collider

SLC


Configuration for 500 GeV machine (C of M) Expandability to 1 TeV

Early ILC Baseline Concepts


ILC Beam Parameters

• Electrons/bunch 0.75 10**10

• Bunches/train 2820

• Train repetition rate 5 Hz

• Bunch separation 308 ns

• Train length 868 µs

• Horizontal IP beam size 655 nm

• Vertical IP beam size 6 nm

• Longitudinal IP beam size 300 µm

• Luminosity 2 10**34

Challenges on precision collisions !


ILC - Main Linac R&D

Total of 1680 cryomodules and 14 560 SC RF cavities

~1m 9 cell 1.3 GHz Nb cavity

Novel fabrication techniques Eg spinning, hydroforming

Chemical Polish

Electro Polish Mass production challenge


0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

MainLinac

DR RTML e+Source

BDS Common Exp Hall e-Source

VA

LUE

- $M

ILC Greatest Challenge ?

Conventional Facilities Components

2007 Cost Estimate: 6.7 B$ + labour = 8 B$

This means a major design push to reduce costs, or .............

M W Poole FFAG Workshop Sept 2011 Global Design Effort 40

ILC Design Updates

RDR SB2009

Centralised region (e+ included) Single tunnel Smaller DR


CLIC MODULE

Drive beam - 150 A, 130 ns from 2 GeV to 200 MeV

Main beam - 1 A, 100 ns from 9 GeV to 1.5 TeV

QUAD

QUAD

POWER EXTRACTION STRUCTURE

30 GHz - 230 MW

BPM

ACCELERATING STRUCTURES

(6000 modules/linac at 3 TeV)

CLIC Alternative: ‘Two Beam’ Accelerator

30 GHz design now abandoned Moved to 11-12 GHz

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

x 106

0

50

100

150

200

No. of shots

Peak

Acc

eler

atin

g fie

ld (M

V/m

)

3.5 mm tungsten iris3.5 mm tungsten iris after ventilation3.5 mm copper structure3.5 mm molybdenum structureCLIC goal loadedCLIC goal unloaded

World record 150 MeV/m


Plasma Wake Accelerators ?

79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91

0.0

0.5

1.0

Num

ber o

f ele

ctro

ns /

MeV

[a.u

.]

Energy [MeV]

laser

self-injected electron bunch undergoing betatron oscillations

ion bubble 0.8%γσ

γ=

In principle 100 GeV/m

33 mm plasma channels

Berkeley: 1 GeV achieved

Radiation source demonstrations

Strathclyde

Big Lasers !!


PETRA-III

2-d scanning system

Vertical

my µσ 2.08.1 ±=mx µσ 2058 ±=

KEK ATF

Courtesy: G Blair and RHUL group

Micron Scale Beam Diagnostics 532 nm

“Laser Wire”


Advanced Radiation Sources

Electron

Cone angle = 1/γ

Acceleration

Parasitic use on HEP facilities - 1st Generation

Daresbury SRS - 2nd Generation (1981-2008)

1E+05

1E+06

1E+07

1E+08

1E+09

1E+10

1E+11

1E+12

1E+13

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100ω/ωc

Spec

tral

Pho

ton

Flux

(pho

tons

/s/m

rad/

0.1%

ban

dwid

th/G

eV/1

00m

A

33R4γ

≈λc

R

For 2 GeV, 1.2 T:

R ~ 5.5 m, γ ~ 4000

Wavelength ~ 0.1 nm


Compact Light Sources

Demand is high for access to Light Sources

National facility scale dominates landscape

Alternatives include example of HELIOS (700MeV)

Commissioned 1991 (OI/Daresbury)

IBM operated for lithography trials

Superconducting magnets (4.5 T)


High Field Insertion Devices

1.0E+10

1.0E+11

1.0E+12

1.0E+13

1.0E+14

1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 10000.0 100000.0

Photon Energy (eV)Sp

ectr

al P

hoto

n Fl

ux(p

hoto

ns/s

/mra

d/0.

1% b

andw

idth

)

1.2 T Magnet6.0 T Magnet

Normal Straight

With Insertion Device

SRS Superconducting Wavelength Shifter 6.0 Tesla

λc ∼ B-1

Challenging design - pole proximities


Multiple Pole Emission

λπ

−=u

0s2sinB)s(B

λπ

γ=

λπ

πλ

γ=

uu

u0 s2cosKs2cos2mc

eBdsdx

u0u0 B4.93

2mceBK λ=

πλ

=

λπ

πλ

γ=

u

u s2sin2

Kx

Maximum angle is equal to K/γ

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Longitudinal Position (m)

Hor

izon

tal P

ositi

on (m

m)

B Fi

eld

(T)

Position

Field

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1

Longitudinal Position (m)

Mag

netic

Fie

ld (T

)

2/γ 2/γ K/γ

K < 1 K >> 1


Interference

Electron

d

λu θ

Condition for interference: θλ−βλ

=λ= cosnd us

u


Undulator Equation

Substituting in for the average longitudinal velocity of the electron, βs :

++= 22

2

2 21

2γθ

γλλ Kn

u

eg 3 GeV electron and 50 mm period undulator with K = 3:

1st harmonic (n = 1) on axis (θ = 0) is ~ 4 nm

Width ~ 1/nNλ

(cf slit/grating results)

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60Frequency (Arb. Units)

Inte

nsity

(Arb

. Uni

ts)

LN ur

λλ

λσλ

=≈'

eg λ ~ 1nm and L ~ 5m,

σr’ ~ 14 µrad

3GLS Bright Beams


Third Generation Light Sources

EmittanceFluxBRIGHTNESS =

3

2

cellNEk=ε

Comparison of 3rd Generation Synchrotrons

Diamond

Swiss Light Source

APS (USA)

PETRA III (Germany)

ESRF

Canadian Light Source

SPring-8 (Japan)

ELETTRA (Italy)

Australian SynchrotronALS (USA)

SOLEIL (France)

SPEAR3 (USA)

BESSY II (Germany)

MAX-II (Sweden)

ALBA/CELLS (Spain)

PLS (Korea)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Energy / GeV

Emitt

ance

/ nm

rad

Diamond Light Source

Incorporate all modern features – and challenges

ESRF Grenoble


Challenging Undulator Specifications

Not free choice of periodicity

Period/gap ratio is critical parameter (Maxwell !)

Ratio > 2

Gap set by aperture needs of beam, including tolerances

Periodicity must incorporate coil space (if present)

Permanent magnet systems optimise period and performance

SmCo or NdFeB Remanence ~ 1-1.5 T


Solution to the Challenge

λπ−

≈u

0gexp2.2B

g = gap between the two arrays

With only 4 blocks per period the field is very sinusoidal


Periodic Magnet Examples

Basis of all modern Light Sources - 3GLS

Very considerable quality challenges: high precision essential - block sorting, construction techniques, measurement, shimming


Free Electron Laser (FEL) Principles

cm)in is λ and Teslain is (B periodundulator theis λ

λ0.934BK ,cm

E γ

... 1,2,3n :where

θγ2

K12nγλ λ

u0

u

u020

222

2u

n

==

=

++=

mp

Intensity ~ Ne

Intensity ~ Ne2

4th Generation Light Source Gain α electron beam brightness


World Record Oscillator

400

300

200

100

Inte

nsity

(a.u

.)

190.8190.6190.4190.2190.0189.8189.6Wavelength (nm)

λ = 189.9 nmFWHM = 0.06 nm∆λ/λ = 3.1 10-4

Lased at 190 nm in 2001 World record !

300

200

100

0

Pow

er (m

W)

270265260255250245240235Wavelength (nm)

medium T @ 34 mA high T @ 32 mA

350300250200Wavelength (nm)

Wavelength Multilayer mirror type Lasing 350 - 356 nm Ta2O5/SiO2 yes

235 - 265 nm HfO2/ SiO2 yes

218 - 224 nm Al2O3/ SiO2 yes 189.7 - 200.3 nm Al2O3/ SiO2 yes

186 nm LaF3/MgF2 no

Very limited tuning

Sincrotrone Trieste


FEL Oscillators - Summary

Infra-red FEL operated 1977 – few sources before 1990

Tunable and high power (octave and kW)

User facilities highly successful (eg FELIX in Nieuwegein)

Short wavelength limited by mirrors

Mainly electron linacs but storage ring versions tried

Next Generation Sources to employ alternative FELs ?


Advanced FELs for XUV and X-rays

Major electron accelerators (GeV +)

Remove mirrors - new amplifier regime (demo 1985) Enormous challenges - high brightness beams and kA currents

Particle Physics technologies - Linear Collider synergy

Self Amplified Spontaneous Emission (SASE)

No Mirrors ! Configuration before upgrades

June 2010 achieved 4.5 nm at 1.2 GeV

FLASH Facility


γεx,y = 0.4 µm (slice) Ipk = 3.0 kA σE/E = 0.01% (slice)

(25 of 33 undulators installed)

courtesy of P. Emma, SLAC

1.5 Å

New World Record - LCLS 2009

Use of 1/3 SLAC Linac 14 GeV

Linac Coherent Light Source

Electron bunch length < 100 fs !

http://www-group.slac.stanford.edu/com/images/gallery/lcls/lcls_firstlight-10.jpg�


Chirped Bunch Compression

z

sz

δ

z

δ

sz0

δ

z

sE/E

RF Acceleration Bunch Compression

z

sz

δ

z

sz

δ

z

δ

z

δ

sz0

δ

z

sE/E

sz0

δ

z

sE/E

RF Acceleration Bunch Compression

Compress (shorten) bunch to increase peak current (kA => 100 fs) (but at cost of energy spread from chirp)

Time-Energy correlation


Ultra-short Pulse Diagnostics

.

Probe laser Optical replica

Non-linear mixing

Coulomb pulse replicated in optical pulse

electron beam

65µm thick GaP

Record results at FLASH (DESY) 100 fs resolution


Intensity Frontier

Low energy colliders (eg B-factory)

Proton drivers – spallation sources

Proton driver – Neutrino Factory

Space charge challenge

High power limitations

ISIS - 800 MeV

300 µA


High Power Proton Accelerators

590 MeV 2 mA

1.2 MW

PSI Zurich

SNS at Oak Ridge also reaches ~ 1 MW ISIS operates up to 240 kW ESS plans 5 MW

Trip rates / High power proton accelerators

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000Trip length (seconds)

Trip

s pe

r day

long

er th

an tr

ip le

ngth

ISISLANSCEPSISNS

THOREA Collaboration investigations

232Th233Th233Pa233Ufission Actinides absent Proliferation resistant

Extreme reliability challenge

Challenge: losses < 10-6/m

Spallation sources:


Muon

Storage

Ring

High current H– source Proton

Driver Target Capture

Cooling

Muon Acceleration

‘near’ detector (1000–3000km)

‘far’ detector (5000–8000km)

‘local’ detector

Neutrino Factory Concept


Neutrino Factory UK Design Studies

Collaboration of 6 HEIs with ASTeC Glasgow IC Liverpool Oxford Sheffield Warwick

Funding also boosted in 2004 – and sustained

Sponsored International Scoping Study and now IDS

Proton drivers and muon accelerators (eg FFAG)

Technology programme

Front End Test Stand Targets RF breakdown studies

MICE FP7 EuroNu Design Studies


Baseline Design

10 GeV


NF Design Challenges

5-10 MW proton beam generation

Pion target survival

Muon capture and cooling

Muon acceleration and storage

Other applications !

FFAG solution attractive muon accelerator


Layout of MICE Experiment

Muon Ionisation Cooling Experiment

ISIS source

Muon beam from ISIS


High speed beam chopper & MEBT 324 MHz, 3 MeV RFQ

3 solenoid magnetic LEBT H- ion source 60 mA, 65 keV 2 ms pulse length 50 pps

Front End Test Stand at RAL (FETS)

Demonstration of injector for multi-MW source

RFQ Model - IC


Novel Challenge - FFAG Development

Fixed Field Alternating Gradient accelerator

Originally considered 1950’s but ‘rediscovered’

Cyclotron with compressed orbits => a ring

Proposed as muon accelerator – no field ramp necessary

Basic Technology grant for medical development (mainly) - hadron therapy solution ?

Possible HPPA contender too ?

1.3672

1.3671

1.3670

1.3669

1.3668

1.3667

1.3666

201816141210kinetic energy [GeV]

Challenges: Resonances Asynchronous acceleration


Chirped beam compression ~100 fs FEL included

‘Green’ machine

ALICE = Accelerators and Lasers in Combined Experiments

ALICE Test Facility at Daresbury

Energy Recovery Linac Prototype


EMMA Non-scaling FFAG at Daresbury

Proof of principle demonstrator – world first

Inject beam of electrons from ALICE

Commissioning from 2010

10-20 MeV Low Energy Beam High Energy Beam

No bending magnets ! 42 cells 19 cavities

Circumference 16.7 m

Coasting beam survives 1000 turns

Ring operated 10-20 MeV injection


Challenges Successfully Addressed

Natural sources replaced

Ingenuity

Complex beam dynamics analysis

Frontier technologies

Advanced diagnostics and control

Project management and delivery

All will need to be repeated for next generation solutions !

FFAG ???

History and Challenges of Particle Accelerators · 2011-12-21 · FFAG Workshop Sept 2011 M W Poole...

Documents

Transcript of History and Challenges of Particle Accelerators · 2011-12-21 · FFAG Workshop Sept 2011 M W Poole...