/
CLIC FFD Final Focusing Magnet Assessment CLIC FFD Final Focusing Magnet Assessment

CLIC FFD Final Focusing Magnet Assessment - PowerPoint Presentation

spottletoefacebook
spottletoefacebook . @spottletoefacebook
Follow
342 views
Uploaded On 2020-08-04

CLIC FFD Final Focusing Magnet Assessment - PPT Presentation

And Proposal for a short term RampD effort Recent Events Conventional Facility Design for NLC Stanford Linear Accelerator Center March 10 to 28 2003 CAREELAN meeting CERN November 23 25 2005 ID: 797781

magnet clic swoboda june clic magnet june swoboda magnets 2009 detlef permanent quadrupole final design 2009detlef amp beam strength

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download The PPT/PDF document "CLIC FFD Final Focusing Magnet Assessmen..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

CLIC FFD

Final Focusing Magnet Assessment

And

Proposal for a short term R&D effort

Slide2

Recent Events

Conventional Facility Design for NLC · Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, March 10 to 28, 2003

CARE/ELAN meeting @ CERN November 23 - 25 2005.

CLIC07 Workshop, 16-18 October 2007Stabilisation day at CERN, March 18 2008Nanobeam 2008 (Novosibirsk, 27 May 2008)EUROTeV Scientific Workshop at Uppsala,August 2008CLIC08 Workshop @ CERN, 14-17 Oct. 08CLIC BDS WS @ CERN, Dec. 08

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide3

References

Introduction to Transfer lines and Circular Machines P.J. Bryant/CERN84-04

Selection of Formulae and Data useful for the Design of AG Synchrotrons C. Bovet et al, CERN/MPS-SI/

Int DL/70/4SUPERFISH - A Computer Program, K. Halbach and R. F. Holsinger, Particle Accelerators 7 (1976) 213-222.Vibration stabilization for a cantilever magnet prototype at the sub-nanometer scale L. Brunetti et al. ,LAPP-TECH-2008-01IP solenoid and SR studies, DALENA, Barbara, CLIC08 Workshop, CERN, 14-17 October 2008Permanent Magnet Work at Fermilab 1995 to Present, James T Volk, FNALA Super-Strong Permanent Magnet Quadrupole with Variable Strength, Y. Iwashita, (ICR, Kyoto U.) et al, LINAC2004 Lübeck

MODIFICATION AND MEASUREMENT OF THE ADJUSTABLE

PERMANENT MAGNET QUADRUPOLE FOR THE FINAL FOCUS IN A LINEAR COLLIDER*, Y. Iwashita et al., PAC07

Permanent magnet Final Focus

Quadrupole for ATF2, Y. Iwashita et al, ATF2 19-21 Dec 2007CONTINUOUSLY ADJUSTABLE PERMANENT MAGNET QUADRUPOLE FOR A FINAL FOCUS, Takanori Sugimoto, EPAC08NLC Superconducting Final Focus Magnets, Brett Parker, BNL-SMD, Nov. 2002COMPACT SUPERCONDUCTING FINAL FOCUS MAGNET OPTIONS FOR THE ILC*, B. Parker et al, PAC 2005Nested SC quad proto FNAL. ILC-Americas Workshop: SLAC, October 14-16, 2004.Estimating Field quality in low-B Superconducting Quadrupoles and its impact on Beam Stability, E. Todesco et al, PAC 07 proceedings 353-355.ADJUSTABLE STRENGTH REC OUADRUPOLES, R.L. ,,Gluckstern, R.F, Holsinger, IEEE Vol. NS-30, NO. 4, Aug 1983Feasibility for Quadrupole for CLIC Final Focus, P. Sievers, 1988Conceptual design of a 5 T/mm Quadrupole for linear collider final focus, K.Egawa, T.Taylor, CERN LEP-MA 89-08Crab collisions for the CLIC final focus, J. Hagel, B. Zotter, CLIC Note 210, 14 Sep. 1993

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide4

Outline

Requirements and Technology Issues

FFD Magnet Technologies

Proposals and ProtosDesign IssuesConcluding Remarks5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide5

5 June. 2009

Final Focusing

Use telescope optics to

demagnify beam by factor M = f1

/f

2

typically f

2= L*f1f2 (=L*)The final doublet FD requires magnets with very high quadrupole gradient exceeding ~250 Tesla/m superconducting or permanent magnet technology?

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Requirements

magnets can be constructed, supported, and monitored

to

meet alignment tolerances

Slide6

Global requirements

5 June. 2009

CLIC main parameters

valueCenter-of-mass energy3 TeVPeak Luminosity2·10^34 cm-2 s-1Repetition rate

50 HzBeam pulse length

230 ns

Average current in pulse

1 AHor./vert. IP beam size bef. pinch53 / ~1 nmStability~ nmSpot sizeSome nm (40 x 1)Beam measurement accuracy~1 %Q-pole strength accuracy~ 10^-3  beam miss-match dominated by measurement errors, not by magnetsTuning accuracy QD0~ 10^-6 (0.02 G)Alignment tuning frequenciesVibration/ripple t< 1/5 sStability/drift t < 1 hrDetlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Requirements

Slide7

CLIC FF doublet parameters

5 June. 2009

QF1

QD0

L*

3.5

m

Gradient

200

575

T/m

Length

3.26

2.73

m

Aperture (radius)

4.69

3.83

mm

Outer radius

< 35 - < 43

mm

Octupolar error

106

T/m3

Dodec. error

1016

T/m5

Peak field

0.94

2.20

T

Field stability

10

^-

4

Energy spread± 1%

IP*z = G * R^2/(2 * µº) = (575*14.7*10^-6)/(2*4*π*10^-7)=105.4*10^2/ π=3355 [A] – Ampere-turns/pole [Br (@ pole tip) = 2.20 T]

G ~ 1/R²

Bpole

~ R

Doublet magnetic length:

α

=( h1*lFFD*dBZ/dx)/B0*ρ; l* ≈ h1/ αlFFD = (B0*ρ*dx/dBZ )/l* = (3.3356*1.5*10³/406.6)/3.5 = 3.51 [m]

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Requirements

Slide8

Max. Gradients

5 June. 2009

SC type

Temp [K ]Bcr [T]J [A/m2]

G [T/m]Nb-Ti

1.9

5

6*10^9300Nb3Sn1.951*10^10500Detlef Swoboda @ CLICRequirements

Slide9

RT

Quadrupole

5 June. 2009

2 mm

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Conventional Magnets

Slide10

RT LHC type

Quadrupole

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLICConventional Magnets

Slide11

Conventional

Quadrupole

5 June. 2009

RT or SCTechnologyDetlef Swoboda @ CLICConventional Magnets

Slide12

Conceptual proposal for permanent magnet

PM

quadrupoles

might appear as an attractive option for the FFD. A variety of materials are available (table PM mat) which can be selected for a specific application. A comprehensive overview of the state of the art can be found in [3]. Flux density gradients in the order of magnitude required for CLIC have been achieved with short samples [4]. Machining to the necessary dimensional tolerances is not a fundamental problem and the cross-sectional dimensions are basically rather modest. Intrinsic drawbacks are however given by the environment through the exposure to external magnetic field, temperature variation and ionizing radiation (PM prosCons). The design of the magnet must in addition take the magnetization spread of +- 10 % between individual PM material bricks into account. Longitudinal variation of # % have to be expected. For anisotropic materials the orientation direction can normally be held within 3° of the nominal with no special precautions.In practice this requires an iterative adjustment of geometrical dimensions, selection of components and shimming. For quadrupoles a precise balancing between opposite poles is one of the difficult requirements. Since this tuning is exposed to environmental and operational changes, a recalibration, if necessary, would imply a full reconstruction and recommissioning of the magnet.5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Permanent Magnets

Slide13

Design issues for permanent magnets

The magnetic properties of PM material are altered by various external factors. These range from temperature variations over mechanical effects to ionizing radiation.

Orientation direction (and tolerance of orientation direction is critical)

Anisotropic magnets must be magnetized parallel to the direction of orientation to achieve optimum magnetic properties.Supply of components (bricks) magnetized or magnetization of assembled magnetCoating requirementsAcceptance tests or performance requirementsNot advisable to use any permanent magnet material as a structural component of an assembly.Square holes (even with large radii), and very small holes are difficult to machine.Magnets are machined by grinding, which may considerably affect the magnet cost.Magnets may be ground to virtually any specified tolerance.5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Permanent Magnets

Slide14

PM materials …

Strontium Ferrite may be considered for the following features:

Cost, ease of fabrication, radiation hardness and stability over temperature and time. Drawback is certainly the reversible temperature coefficient of the residual field Br of -0.19%/°C. However, adding compensation shims allows to minimize the effect. This method requires a number of modify, measure, correct cycles.

Samarium cobalt is roughly 30 times more expensive and has suspect radiation resistance [4]. Alnico is approximately 10 times more expensive and due to lower coercivity, an Alnico design will result in a tall, bulky magnet. Barium Ferrite is a largely obsolete material with no advantages over Strontium Ferrite and should not be seriously considered.5 June. 2009ParameterSr FerriteNd-FeSm-CoBr [T]

0.3851.230

1.050

H

ci [Oe]30501200011000BHmax [MGO]3.535.026.0Temp var. [%]0.180.110.045Cost [$/cm³]0.042.753.66Detlef Swoboda @ CLICPermanent Magnets

Slide15

… PM materials

5 June. 2009

Material

State

Cost

Bhmax

Coercivity

TmaxMachinability

Index

MGOeHci

(KOe)

(

o

C)

Nd-Fe-B

(sintered)

65%

<45

<30

180

Fair

Nd-Fe-B

(bonded)

50%

<10

<11

150

Good

Sm-Co

(sintered)

100%

<30

<25

350

Difficult

Sm-Co

(bonded)85%<12<10150FairAlnicoHard30%<10<2550DifficultFlexible5%<4<3

300

Fair

Ferrite

2%

<2

<3

100

Excellent

Critical

Temperatures for Various Materials

Material

T

Curie

(degC)

T

max

(degC)

Neodymium Iron Boron

310

150

Samarium Cobalt

750

300

Alnico

860

540

Ceramic

460

300

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Permanent Magnets

Slide16

Studies on Radiation effects for PM

SmCo

and especially Sm

2Co17 withstand radiation 2 to 40 times better than NdFeB materials.SmCo exhibits significant demagnetization when irradiated with a proton beam of 10 MGy to 100 MGy. NdFeB test samples were shown to lose all of their magnetization at a dose of 7 x 100 kGy, and 50% at a dose of 4 x 10 kGy.In general, it is recommended that magnet materials with high Hci values be used in radiation environments, that they be operated at high permeance coefficients, Pc, and that they be shielded from direct heavy particle irradiation. Stabilization can be achieved by pre-exposure to expected radiation levels.5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Permanent Magnets

Slide17

Reluctance

Reluctance changes occur when a magnet is subjected to

permeance

changes such as changes in air gap dimensions during operation. These changes will change the reluctance of the circuit, and may cause the magnet's operating point to fall below the knee of the curve, causing partial and/or irreversible losses. The extents of these losses depend upon the material properties and the extent of the permeance change. Stabilization may be achieved by pre-exposure of the magnet to the expected reluctance changes.5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLICPermanent Magnets

Slide18

PM Materials & Features

5 June. 2009

Material

Characteristics

samarium cobalt (Sm2Co17)

Brittle

anisotropic

corrosion resistant, no coating requiredSmx

Er

l-x

Co

Stability ~ 10

-6

/hr

neodymium iron boron (

NdFeB

)

Rather brittle, mostly anisotropic

susceptible

to corrosion, requires coating

can lose strength under irradiation

ultrahigh

coercivity

grades show very small

remanence

losses, <0.4%±0.1%, for absorbed doses up to 3

Mgy

from 17

MeV

electrons

irradiation by 200

MeV

protons does reduce the

remanence

considerably

Curie T ~ 300

degCStrontium Ferrite (SrFe )dT = -0.19%/°CBarium Ferrite (BaFe )obsoleteFeCrCoDuctile, low coercive force, isotropicAlnicoDuctile, low coercive force, isotropicProsConsNo pwr cablesAdjust. Range limitationNo cryoDemagnetization, requires shieldingNo vibrationTemperature gradient, requires temperature stabilizationHigh coercivityRadiation tolerance

Net force in Solenoid (μ > 1)

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Permanent Magnets

Slide19

Permanent Quad Concepts

A new style of permanent magnet multipole has been described.

achieve linear strength and centerline tuning at the micron level by radially retracting the appropriate magnet(s).

Magnet position accuracies are modest and should be easily achievable with standard linear encoders

Steel Pole Pieces (Flux Return Steel Not Shown)

Rotatable PM (

Nd

-Fe-B) Blockto Adjust Field (+/- 10%)PM (Strontium Ferrite) Section5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLICPermanent Magnets

Slide20

Double Ring Structure

–Adjustable PMQ-

The double ring structure

PMQ is split into inner ring and outer ring. Only the outer ring is rotated 90 around the beam axis to vary the focal strength.5 June. 2009

High gradient

 heat load

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Permanent Magnets

Slide21

PM strength adjustment

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Permanent Magnets

Slide22

The first prototype of

superstrong

” Permanent Magnet Quad.Integrated strength GL=28.5T (29.7T by calc.)             magnet size. f10cm Bore f1.4cm Field gradient is about

300T/m

PHOTO

Cut plane view

Axial viewPMSoft iron

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Permanent Magnets

Slide23

Adjustable REC

Quadrupole

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLICPermanent Magnets

Slide24

Adjustable REC

Quadrupole

(ATF2 QD0)

5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLICPermanent Magnets

Slide25

Magnetic Center Shift

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Permanent MagnetsDouble ring

Slide26

Conceptual proposal for SC magnet

Design and construction of SC low-B

quadrupoles

for particle accelerators can rely on widespread and large experience. The demanding tolerances for CLIC however are several magnitudes above already achieved performances. Whereas the field quality (multipole, homogeneity) might be manageable [9], stability issues (electrical, vibrations, temperature) are major issues.Contrary to PM magnets tuning for different beam energies and compensation of external magnetic fields is possible but might require correction coils and consequently increase the complexity and cross-section. The required high field strength would however be rather demanding for the mechanical design and will also have an impact on the cross-section of the magnet. In addition the magnet aperture is determined by the space requirements for the inner bore of the cryostat and therefore obviously larger than in the case of a PM design.In the framework of the GDE (global design effort) SC magnet concepts have been proposed and prototype work is in progress [7].By applying a serpentine winding technique the diameter for the cryostat of a prototype quadrupole could be reduced to the order of magnitude necessary for an equivalent PM [8].5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Superconducting Magnets

Slide27

SC Magnet Features

5 June. 2009

Pros

Cons

Ramping, adjust setting

Services; i.e. cables, cryo lines)

Low sensitivity to external fields

Quench, Training, thermal movements, deformationsTemperature stability Vibrations Knowledge base, state of the art

Cryostat Cross-section, inner bore radius

Iron free magnet, no external force

High gradient

multipole

, geometrical tolerances

SC back leg coil

Coil dominated

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Superconducting Magnets

Slide28

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Superconducting Magnets

Slide29

Serpentine winding

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Superconducting Magnets

Slide30

IP Magnet Development

5 June. 2009

ILC – Americas WS

(14- 16 Oct. 2004 @ SLAC) For Energy and Optics Tuning  adjustable magnet is desirable. SC Quadrupole concept similar to HERA II meets basic requirements. Not enough knowledge about stabilization on nm level. Realistic Prototype required BUT cooling concept needs to be defined; i.e. (4.2 degK sub-cooled, 2

degK

superfluid

, conduction cooled, …)

Detlef Swoboda @ CLICSuperconducting Magnets

Slide31

Related Issues

Vibration & stabilization

Several studies and R&D

Passive damping & active compensation (table)Modeling & active compensation (cantilever support)Commercial equipment for controlled environment like IC production in accelerator noise > 10 x.Suspension vs. support?FF Quad magnet technologyHigh gradient ( N x 100 T/m) requires permanent/SC technologyCombination of both types?5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide32

Next Steps

Need to define strategy, resources, timescale.

Summary of proposals and R&D done on different technologies.

Comparative Synthesis of summaries and Recommendation.Design and R&D (Prototypes, test, measurement)5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide33

Resources & Timescale

5 June. 2009

Phase

ResourcesTime12 – 3 magnet experts1 -2 months2Idem1 month3Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide34

Concluding Remarks

The present FFD parameters are not very suitable for a conventional electro magnet.

SC and PM magnets can reach the magnetic requirements for the FFD.

It is obvious, that substantial studies and prototyping will be necessary for both technologies in order to be able to make a firm statement about feasibility and cost. Considerable work on SC magnets can be done on existing magnets for evaluating vibration, repeatability and related issues.PM magnets of large size which could be used for similar studies are not known.A possible strategy could therefore consist in continuing work on existing SC magnets for early detection of major problems.In parallel it would be interesting of joining ongoing or starting development projects for SC and PM magnets in the field of FELs etc.A proposal for a study and R&D has been presented. What is the effort needed from current state of the art to final design; i.e. when do we find out if and how it can be done?5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Concluding Remarks

Slide35

FFD Support & Tuning

The FFD is subject to several severe constraints. One being the high beta function values required to satisfy the beam height of 1 nm specified at the CLIC interaction point. The resulting high gradient of the beta function makes it extremely difficult to obtain mechanical and magnetic tolerances over the length of more than 3 m for the

quadrupole

magnet. If permanent magnets are used a possible concept is the subdivision into a number of short sections which can independently be aligned and tuned (Figure). A stabilization study [5] used piezo electric elements to achieve an active alignment control in the nanometer range. This technology can be applied to an arrangement as shown in figure. It is suggested to insert piezo elements in the upper and lower support. This will allow to obtain vertical alignment as well as rotation around the magnet axis for each magnet element separately.The decreasing values of the beta function close to the IP lead also to a relaxation of the alignment tolerances for the magnet sections close to the IP.Another possibility would be a tuning by moving sections axially with respect to the IP.5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide36

FF doublet (NLC ZDR)

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide37

Measurements

Center Stability

Strength

Multipolar contentsRepeatability in TuningRadiation HardnessVibrationGeometry5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide38

CLIC Linear Collider (

~2019)

:

Final doublets in cantilever

2m50

Detector

Vertical beam size at the interaction point: 1nm

Tolerance of vertical relative positioning between the two beams to ensure the collision with only 2% of luminosity loss:

1/10nm

Interaction point

Scope of FFS

Below 5Hz:

Beam position control with deflector magnets efficient

Above 5Hz:

Need to control relative motion between final doublets

5 June. 2009

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide39

5 June. 2009

FD stability

Things we don’t know:

What is the FD configuration? Saclay?Is it normal or superconducting? (M.Aleksa’s work: Sm2Co17)How close to detector? MDI issues=> free-fixed or fixed-fixed configuration?

Simulations for different configurations:

Free, free-fixed…

1 support, multi-support…

Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC

Slide40

STUDY OF SOME OPTIONS FOR THE CLIC FINAL FOCUSING

QUADRUPOLE

CLIC Note 506

M. Aleksa, S. Russenschuck5 June. 2009Detlef Swoboda @ CLIC