Machine Design & Cost Reduction Activities

Machine Design & Cost Reduction Activities Marc Ross Nick Walker Akira Yamamoto 1st PAC Meeting19th October, 2008

Content • Brief (and superficial) introduction to RDR baseline. • The RDR cost estimate • Technical Design Phase cost-reduction strategy – the Minimum Machine

ILC Requirements ILCSC Parameters group • Ecm adjustable from 200 – 500 GeV • Luminosity: ∫Ldt = 500 fb-1 in 4 years • Peak at max. energy of 2×1034cm-2s-1 • Assume 1/g L scaling for <500 GeV • Energy stability and precision below 0.1% • Electron polarization of at least 80% • The machine must be upgradeable to 1 TeV • Two detectors • Single IR in push-pull configuration • Detector change-over in not more than 1 week

The ILC Reference Design ~31 km • 200-500 GeV centre-of-mass • Luminosity: 2×1034 cm-2s-1 • Based on accelerating gradient of 31.5 MV/m(1.3GHz SCRF)

ILC Reference Design • High-gradient R&D • Industrialisation • Mass-production

ILC Reference Design Positronproduction 150 GeV primary e- beam used to generate gammas via a helical undulator. Thin-target conversion into e+e- pairs 1.2 km insert into main SCRF linac Additional “keep-alive” independent thick-target source (10% nominal)

ILC Reference Design • 6.4 km Damping Rings • e+ / e- • Located centrally • around Interaction Region (IR) • 10 m above IR plane • Both rings housed in same tunnel (stacked) Cockcroft institute, UK

ILC Reference Design • Beam Delivery System • Diagnostics • Beam halo collimation • Demagnification of the beam at the Interaction Point • Geometry laid out for Ecm ~ 1 TeV • Not all magnets installed for 1 TeV • ±2.2 km • Single interaction region • Push/pull detector concept assumed SLAC

Cost (VALUE) Estimate • Estimated cost (2007) ~6.7 Billion ILCU* • 4.87 BILCU shared • 1.78 BILCU site-specific • 10,000 person-years “implicit” labour

Cost (VALUE) Estimate CFS identified as a major cost driver with high-potential for cost-saving CFS requirements driven by machine design & layout

Cost (VALUE) Estimate 75% Reduction of underground volume (tunnels, shafts, vaults) a primary target

Stated TD Phase Goals (1/2) From the R&D Plan rel 2 (chapter 4) • Definition of the basic parameters and layout of a “minimum machine configuration”, as a basis for understand cost-increments and cost-performance trade-offs (beginning 2009) • Cost-reduction and performance studies (parametric studies) of the minimum machine, leading to possible options for the re-baseline. Evaluation of estimated cost and performance risk impact (end 2009). • As part of the above, studies of a cost-optimised “shallow site” with a view to defining an optimum ‘reference site’ for further design studies (end 2009).

Stated TD Phase Goals (2/2) From the R&D Plan rel 2 (chapter 4) • Evaluation of cost-reduction studies and status of critical R&D, leading to an agreed re-baseline of the reference machine (end of TD Phase 1, 2010) • Needs well-defined process; international community buy-off etc. • Produce technical component specifications for technical systems; technical design of systems leading to cost estimates; value-engineering iteration (TD Phase 2) • Generation and publication of TDR with updated technical design and VALUE estimate (end of TD Phase 2, 2012)

“Minimum Machine” Philosophy • Direct performance • considered a physics ‘figure of merit’ • centre-of-mass energy or • peak luminosity. • Understanding the derivatives of the direct cost of these physics performance parameters • Indirect performance • into which we place margin, redundancy, etc. • tend to impact operational aspects or • performance risk • potentially affecting integrated luminosity within a given time frame • Concentrate on Indirect • Do not change basic physics parameters

Published Top-Level Schedule today

Published Top-Level Schedule Minimum machine studies Re-baseline in 2010 (publish in interim report) today

Minimum Machine: Current Definition • “Minimum Machine” now refers to a set of identified options (elements) which may prove cost-effective • Not a minimum in a definable sense • But a potential reduced-cost solutions… • with a potentially less margin (performance) • An alternative design for study purposes • Comparison with RDR baseline • Cost (not performance) driven • options which were not studied during RDR phase • Important to restrict options to manageable levels • available resources

Identified Minimum Machine Elements

Minimum Machine Elements • Single-tunnel solution(s) • Klystron Cluster concept • Central region integration • Low beam power option • Single-stage compressor • Quantify cost of TeV upgrade support • “Value engineering”

Main Linac Specific • Removal of support tunnel (single tunnel) • klystron cluster • XFEL-like • shallow site (JINR/Dubna) • Klystron Cluster (HLRF) • 30 klystrons located in localised surface buildings • ~300 MW RF power distributed in beam tunnel via over-moded waveguide • effectively ~1km RF unit • Marx modulator • ongoing SLAC prototype • Reduced cost solution for process-water cooling • Higher DT specification (e.g. klystron cooling) alternative options

Main Linac Support Tunnel • RDR (two-tunnel) • Access to equipment during ops • Reliability/availability • Shallow sites • Cut and cover like solutions • “service tunnel” on the surface • Single tunnel • European XFEL-like solution • availability / reliability

Klystron Cluster Concept • RF power “piped” into accelerator tunnel • Removal of service tunnel • Access to klystrons maintained • R&D needed to show power handling • Planned (SLAC, KEK) SLAC

Central Region Integration Initial “integration” studies show conceptually possible (See draft document on PAC agenda web-site for details) • Undulator-based positron source moved to end of linac(250 GeV point) • e+ and e- sources share same tunnel as BDS • upstream BDS (optimised integration) • Including 5GeV injector linacs • Removal of RDR “Keep Alive Source” • replace by few % ‘auxiliary’ source using main (photon) target • 500 MV warm linac, also in same tunnel • Damping Rings • in BDS plane but horizontally displaced to avoid IR Hall • Injection/Ejection in same straight section • Circumference • 6.4 km (current RDR baseline) • 3.2 km (possible low-P option) alternative options

RDR Parameter Plane Revisited • RDR machine design around so-called “Parameter Plane” • 1 nominal + 3 ‘scaled’ parameter sets representing various possible ‘performance issues’ • Low charge – failure to make single bunch charge • Low power – failure to make number of bunches • Large sy– failure to make emittance / vertical IP beam size • As part of MM studies, review ‘parameter plane’ from a cost/performance issue Main Linac $$$$

Reduced Beam Power Option • Reduce nb by factor of 2 (study scenario) • Maintain luminosity by pushing on beam-beam • Similar to RDR Low-P parameter set, but • possible use of “travelling focus” concept • “Minimum Cost” point of RDR parameter plane • Largest cost leverage of all sets in the table • Spectrum of possible savings • ½ number of klystrons and modulators • reduced circumference damping ring (6.4  3.2km) • reduced associated CFS

RDR Parameters Reviewed SLAC

Remaining MM Study Elements • Single-stage compressor • Factor 20 bunch compression (sz300mm @IP) • (RDR two-stage compressor with factor 45) • Quantify cost of TeV upgrade support in RDR • Minimum length 500 GeV Ecm BDS • (High-power dumps?) • Other “VALUE Engineering” • Water cooling • Vacuum solutions • Magnets & Power supplies • … Encouraged activities Considered parallel (on-going) to main ‘layout’ discussions (not primary cost drivers)

Ball-Park Cost Increments VERY PRELIMINARY! to be confirmed • Main Linac (total) ~ 300 MILCU • Low-Power option ~ 400 MILCU • Central injector Integration ~ 100 MILCU • Single-stage compressor ~ 100 MILCU • Min. 500GeV BDS ~ 100 MILCU • VERY preliminary: better estimates must be made • But still based/scaled from RDR value estimate • Forms part of the justification for minimum machine studies • Elements not independent! Careful of potential double counting! • Cost vs Performance vs Risk: important data for making informed decisions in 2010

Types of Studies (2009) • Interference / Integration • Lattice layouts • Tunnel cross-section models (CAD) • (Installation related) • Component placement etc • Operations, Commissioning, Availability • Less independent machine operation • Reliability issues (accessibility) • Commissioning strategiesetc. • Hardware development, R&D • High-power RF distribution concept • Marx modulator (on-going) • Increased RF pulse length (low-P) • Beam Dynamics • Emittance preservation • BDS tuning • Travelling focus ‘stability’ • …

Types of Studies (2009) Requires CAD (CFS) engineer(s), optics (accelerator physics) expert(s). Look for a (conceptual) engineering solution. • Interference / Integration • Lattice layouts • Tunnel cross-section models (CAD) • (Installation related) • Component placement etc • Operations, Commissioning, Availability • Less independent machine operation • Reliability issues (accessibility) • Commissioning strategiesetc. • Hardware development, R&D • High-power RF distribution concept • Marx modulator (on-going) • Increased RF pulse length (low-P) • Beam Dynamics • Emittance preservation • BDS tuning • Travelling focus ‘stability’ • …

Types of Studies (2009) • Interference / Integration • Lattice layouts • Tunnel cross-section models (CAD) • (Installation related) • Component placement etc • Operations, Commissioning, Availability • Less independent machine operation • Reliability issues (accessibility) • Commissioning strategiesetc. • Hardware development, R&D • High-power RF distribution concept • Marx modulator (on-going) • Increased RF pulse length (low-P) • Beam Dynamics • Emittance preservation • BDS tuning • Travelling focus ‘stability’ • … Much more difficult to quantify. Looks for experienced experts Brainstorm qualitative concepts (solutions)

Types of Studies (2009) • Interference / Integration • Lattice layouts • Tunnel cross-section models (CAD) • (Installation related) • Component placement etc • Operations, Commissioning, Availability • Less independent machine operation • Reliability issues (accessibility) • Commissioning strategiesetc. • Hardware development, R&D • High-power RF distribution concept • Marx modulator (on-going) • Increased RF pulse length (low-P) • Beam Dynamics • Emittance preservation • BDS tuning • Travelling focus ‘stability’ • … FTE and MS required. Well defined goals for R&D programme. Acceptance criteria of proposed solution.

Types of Studies (2009) • Interference / Integration • Lattice layouts • Tunnel cross-section models (CAD) • (Installation related) • Component placement etc • Operations, Commissioning, Availability • Less independent machine operation • Reliability issues (accessibility) • Commissioning strategiesetc. • Hardware development, R&D • High-power RF distribution concept • Marx modulator (on-going) • Increased RF pulse length (low-P) • Beam Dynamics • Emittance preservation • BDS tuning • Travelling focus ‘stability’ • … Beam dynamics and simulation specialists (lc experts). (good coordination, well defined questions)

Towards a Re-Baselining in 2010 Re-Baseline New baseline engineering studies RDR Baseline (VALUE est.) • Process • RDR baseline & VALUE element are maintained • Formal baseline • MM elements needs to be studies/reviewed international • Regional balance in the AP&D groups involved • Regular meetings and discussions • (but top-down control from PM) • Formal review and re-baseline process beginning of 2010 • Exact process needs definition (a PM action item for 2009) • Community sign-off mandatory MM studies MM def (RDR ACD concepts and R&D) (RDR ACD concepts and R&D) Rejected elements 2009 2010 2012

Minimum Machine Document in Preparation • Draft document is preparation • (draft available on PAC website) • (One) Focus of ILC08 workshop • Study planning • Resources • Final publication end of year

MM Resources for 2009 • Need to make estimates of resource (and skill-set) requirements for the proposed studies • Proposed program will be part of MM 08 report • One of the goals for ILC08 • Must be aware of regional involvement • Not necessarily a strict balance but • Work should be shared across regions where possible • Do not see this as a resource intensive program • But we must be in a good position for the proposed re-baseline in 2010 • Regional Accelerator Physics & Design “centres” • Cockcroft Institute (UK) • FNAL • KEK • SLAC • … • CFS resources an issue • 3D-CAD layout etc. Needs Attention!

Summary • RDR design represents a solid and relative detailed baseline on which our current cost estimate is based • Assumption that design is ‘conservative • potential opportunities for significant cost reduction • Primary target for machine designers: reduction of underground volume! • Minimum machine accelerator physics/design activities for 2009 • Formal re-baseline in early 2010 for TD Phase 2 activities • Guesstimate ball-park savings ~1 BILCU • (In parallel with critical risk-mitigating R&D) • MM document defining scope and detailed 2009 study plans to be published after ILC08 • 2009 resources are an issue and need close scrutiny

Machine Design & Cost Reduction Activities