R D at international test facilities TTF ATF 2

R&D at international test facilities TTF, ATF 2 (5. 5, 5. 10. 1 & others) 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 1

Background • In early 1990’s, linear collider scientists developed a global RD facility plan. • 15 yrs later, ILC has 2 dedicated (to some degree) mature test beam facilities – Tesla Test Facility at DESY (SCRF) – Accelerator Test Facility at KEK (Damping ring) • multi 10’s M$ investment • Goals: – Aggressive study of ILC accelerator science and technology – Development of inter-laboratory technical partnerships these to enable good working relationships – Train students; keep more senior staff focused on ‘real’ issues 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 2

SLAC involvement at TTF & ATF • SLAC invested 1 FTE on ATF projects 1997 (first extracted beam) ~ 2004. ~ 2 FTE since 2004 – Focus on beam dynamics and instrumentation – Beam – based alignment, system commissioning and emittance tuning – Strong partner with a broad range of contributions – Significant benefit for both labs – Mo. U 1996, renewed 2004. • SLAC investment in TTF starting in 2001 – 1/3 FTE average – Instrumentation, RF control studies, SCRF operations – Mo. U 2002, addendum 2005 • In both cases, the partner lab has helped with funding 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 3

SLAC Leadership at TTF & ATF • Logistics – Up to 30 visitors at ATF in a given 2 week ‘operations cycle’ – Project management on schedule is vital • Coordination – Machine capabilities, assignment of responsibilities – Infrastructure preparation – Communication • Analysis – Performance evaluation, improvements list… • An effective way to build lasting relationships based on mutual trust and respect • Both ATF/TTF ILC efforts are resource-limited – ATF operation ~20 11 -shift weeks/year – TTF operation overwhelmingly dominated by VUV-FEL & operational concerns 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 4

TTF, ATF 2 Collaborations • (n, m numbers indicate staffing ‘names’; read: n total of whom m are either grad/post-grad students) • TTF: – Bunch length monitoring • DESY, German U, SLAC (6, 1) – SCRF Higher-Order-Mode instrumentation • DESY, Saclay, Fermilab, SLAC, (KEK) (8, 2) • ATF – Cavity BPM • KEK, LLNL, LBNL/UCB, Cambridge, Cornell, UCL, RHUL, SLAC, Japanese U (14, 5) – Ring BPM • UCB, SSRL/SLAC (6) 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 5

Collaborations – continued • ATF – Feedback (FONT) (UK Leadership) • Oxford, Daresbury, SLAC (6, 2) – Laserwire (UK Leadship) • RHUL, Oxford, SLAC, KEK (10, 3) – Kicker system development • DESY, KEK, LLNL, LBNL, Cornell, UBC, INFN, SLAC (? ) – Multibunch feedback • SLAC, KEK, INFN (6) – Coherent Synchrotron Radiation • LBNL (3, 1) • ATF 2 – ATF 2 BPM’s • SLAC, KEK, PAL (7, 2) • For the most part not individually formally arranged – Falls under ATF Int’l Coll. Mo. U (2006), ~ 20 institutions ILC-Americas Regional Team Review • Roughly 70 names (16 students) from all 3 regions Marc Ross - SLAC 4/5/2006 6

ILC Americas related work packages: 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 7

TTF 2 HOM – based Beam Instrumentation (3. 9. 1) • There are 18 low-lying dipole modes in the TESLA 9 cell cavity – 4 couple strongly to the beam (~1750 MHz) • SLAC/DESY/Saclay installed and commissioned a single channel (one mode) receiver system on each of the TTF HOM couplers (80 each) in late 2005. • GOAL: – Find relative centers of cavities in cryomodule – Integrate with the TTF BPM system – roughly tripling the number of BPMs 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 8

Installation at TTF 2 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 9

9 cell cavity, coupler and mode diagram 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 10

TTF 2 HOM monitor (3. 9. 1): Status • 06 Budget: 1. 4 • 06 costed: 0. 8 168 50 – (much work completed in late 05) – Spending expected for remainder of 06: 0. 2 25 K • Two commissioning runs done: 11/05 and 3/06 – Schedule determined by VUV-FEL master • • Next run(s): 5/05 and 8/05 Preliminary alignment results distributed(? ) BPM integration in May and August 07 HOM studies on cavity fab, mode differences, beam phase (LLRF) – post doctoral study 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 11

TTF 2 ‘ACC 5’ centers 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 12

Cavity BPM Studies (3. 7. 1, 3. 10. 2, 3. 10. 3 part of 5. 5. 1) • Classification indicates broad range of application – Includes MDI (Machine Detector Interface) and ATF 2 (Beam Delivery) • Through use of dipole modes of monolithic (Cu) resonators, cavity BPM’s have far better resolution than striplines or buttons – Effective monopole suppression – Many practical questions 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 13

Cavity BPM RD • Goal: Prove viability of cavity BPMs for ILC – Resolution, systematic errors, calibration process • 2 sets of triplets installed at ATF – ‘full blown’ mover calibration, including angles • Excellent ~20 nm resolution Dec 04/March 05 runs (world record) • Carbon fiber metrology tube (LLNL) mounted in Jan 06 – Monitor thermal space frame internal motion • ATF 2: ~35 cavities now in production in Korea – System testing in FY 07 – 100 nm resolution – 1 um systematics 4/5/2006 Excellent system test ILC-Americas Regional Team Review – Marc Ross - SLAC 14

Cavity BPM triplet space frame – KEK/ATF 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 15

Calibrate +/- 20 um range of motion • Move one BPM at a time with movers • Extract BPM phase, scale, offset as well as beam motion by linear regression of BPM reading against mover + all other BPM readings. 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 16 250 pulse sequence

Move BPM in 1 um Steps 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 17

Cavity BPM Studies (3. 7. 1, 3. 10. 3 part of 5. 5. 1): Status • 5. 5. 1 06 Budget: . 5 effort’) • 3. 10. 3 06 Budget: • 3. 7. 1 Budget (Kolomensky) • 06 costed: • 5. 5. 1 • 3. 10. 3 – remainder of 06 (5. 5. 1): . 3 – 3. 10. 3 – 3. 7. 1 4/5/2006 30 (SLAC – includes ‘household. 22 48 (Walston) 104 (04 -06) . 2 20 124 10 K done 12. 5 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 18

3. 10. 2 – ATF 2 Cavity BPM electronics: Status • 06 Budget: • 06 costed: 1. 4 0. 2 168 5 – Spending expected for remainder of 06: 0. 8 • • • 125 K First prototype bench tests good Second prototype in production Testing at ATF April 10 -24 Production run complete - full delivery June 5. Commissioning & system testing next year 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 19

ATF Ring BPM electronics (3. 5. 2) • Goal: Upgrade ATF ring BPM electronics for improved resolution (100 nm), stability (1 um), calibration (1 e-4) – Should allow beam tuning for 1 pm-rad vertical emittance – Multi-pass system this is basic advantage • Use existing storage ring technology – fast digital receivers (e. g. Echo. Teck) – SLS, Fermilab, APS, SPEAR • Total replacement cost dominated by receiver electronics cost ~400 K – Primary effort in designing and testing front end and 4/5/2006 infrastructure ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 20

7 ‘y’ BPMs: 3 upgraded & 4 original Stored Beam – 10 minute time scale; ATF lifetime ~ few minutes 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 21 time ~2 m. A

time Same lifetime data: 10 minute total interval (factor 3 in intensity) Residual after removing ~minute scale oscillations Two lines are +/- 500 nm apart 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Residual vertical (over total time) ~ 500 nm. Marc Ross - SLAC ~ factor 20 improvement long term stability checks to be done 22

Ring Electronics (3. 5. 2): Status • 06 Budget: 1. 7 • 06 costed: 0. 3 198 101 – Spending expected for remainder of 06: 0. 8 15 K • 06 borrowed 8 digitizers from SPEAR (16 BPMS / 96 total) • Receiver produced (20 BPM’s) – Cal system in design • Initial operation Feb 2006 • Second tests in June – Fermilab will join the group, and bring a full crate system for testing – This is Fermilab’s first direct contribution to ATF • Partial system remains in use at KEK 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 23

FY 07 ‘Initiatives’ • ATF Coupled bunch instability fast feedback (Fox/Teytelman) • ATF 2 IP and large bore cavity BPM testing and electronics • ATF 2 magnet movers (from FFTB) • SCRF HOM absolute beam phase monitor – To be integrated with TTF 2 LLRF system • Single pass bunch length monitor – LCLS / ESA 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 24

FY 07 ‘Initiatives’ (2) • ATF 2 testing, commissioning and pre-operations • FNAL Test facility Instrumentation and LLRF Controls Collaboration v ILC Beam Test Facility Coordination Group 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 25

ILC Beam Test Facility Coordination Group • Beam testing is critical for mitigating technical risk associated with ILC. – ATF and TTF also SNS, ‘A 0’, various storage rings and ESA. – technical and logistical issues makes it hard – lack of dedicated hosting staff that have the time and expertise to deal with potential users. – We propose a small group that will work to match RD efforts with appropriate opportunities so as to maximize successful testing at the test facilities. • An important task for the RD board is the assessment of beam testing time required for each RD task • Many of the ILC design staff developed operational skills at SLC or similar HEP accelerators. – The staff need continued connection with an operating machine in order to appreciate the practical aspects of SCRF and ultra-low emittance operation. – Newly recruited students have a similar need. 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review 26 Marc Ross - SLAC

ILC Beam Test Facility Coordination (2) • form a small group of ILC experts who would strive to match the capabilities of the test facility infrastructure with the needs of the RD program. • experience operating the systems at the facility and have developed working relationships with the appropriate experts. • no direct authority but would participate and facilitate participation in test facility use and operation, – as needed by the host organization and the ILC RD effort. 4/5/2006 ILC-Americas Regional Team Review Marc Ross - SLAC 27