Muon Collider R&D in the US. Muon Collider Program Closely coupled with R&D on the Neutrino Factory u IDS-NF The R&D program is now encompassed in

Muon Collider R&D in the US

Alan Bross UKNF Meeting Lancaster April 22, 2009 2

Muon Collider Program

· Closely coupled with R&D on the Neutrino Factory IDS-NF

· The R&D program is now encompassed in a 5 Year Plan Proposal submitted to DOE in December, 2008

· Two Main Thrusts Support on-going international commitments

MICE IDS

Deliver a Muon Collider Design Feasibility Study by 2013


Muon Complex Evolution At Fermilab

• Starting with a high-intensity proton source: Project X• We see a natural evolution of

“muon” program for Fermilab• Project X ® Low-Energy NF

(pointing to Homestake) ® High-Energy NF ® 1.5 TeV MC ® 4 TeV MC


Part I: IDS-NF


IDS-NF Option: 4 GeV n-Factory

· Fermilab to DUSEL (South Dakota) baseline -1290km

· 4 GeV muons yield appropriate L/En

· Use a magnetized totally active scintillator detector

Ankenbrandt, Bogacz, Bross, Geer, Johnstone, Neuffer, PopovicFermilab-Pub-09-001-APC; Submitted to PRSTAB

Geer, Mena, Pascoli Phys. ReV D 75, 093001 (2007)Bross, Ellis, Geer, Mena, Pascoli Phys. ReV D 77, 093012 (2008)


The Energy Frontier via m+ m- Collisions

MC: One Concept 4 TeV Center-of-Mass

• Rapid-Cycling Synchrotron Acceleration


Muon Collider - Motivation

Reach Multi-TeV Lepton-Lepton Collisions at High Luminosity

Muon Colliders may have special role for precision measurements.

Small DE beam spread –Precise energy scans

Small Footprint -Could Fit on Existing Laboratory Site


The Supersymmetric Particle Zoo

· Independent of actual supersymmetric mass scale and the reach of the ILC, the 2004 CLIC Study conclusions are still valid “A Multi-TeV

machine is needed for extended coverage of the mass range


The Gospel According to Snowmass

Do we really need a multi-TeV COM Lepton Collider?


But the Physics Case is Not Static

A typical sample “compressed” Higgs and superpartner mass spectrum with WDMh2 = 0.11An unfortunate feature, quite common to this scenario for dark matter, is that no visible superpartners would be within reach of a linear collider with √s = 500 GeV

Stephen Martinhep-ph/0703097

March, 2007

StrongCase for

considering Multi-TeV

Lepton Collider

U.S. Muon Acceleration R&D Community

The Usual Suspects


OrganizationWe have been around a while – “You can’t tell the players without a

score card”

• NFMCC (Neutrino Factory & Muon Collider Collab.)– National collaboration funded since 1999.– Pursues Neutrino Factory & Muon Collider R&D.– NF R&D pursued with international partners

• MCTF (Muon Collider Task Force)– Task Force established at Fermilab in 2006– Pursues Muon Collider R&D, utilizing FNAL assets and

extends & complements the NFMCC program• MCCC (Muon Collider Coordinating Committee)– Leadership of NFMCC (Bross, Kirk, Zisman) and MCTF

(Geer, Shiltsev)– Co-ordinates NFMCC & MCTF plans to optimize the

overall program … has worked well and resulted in a joint 5 year plan for future activities.


Muon Acceleration R&D Organization

· R&D Program carried out by two groups Neutrino Factory and Muon Collider Collaboration Fermilab Muon Collider Task Force

MUON COLLIDER R&D CO-ORD COMMITTEE

MUONCOLLIDERR&DPROGRAM

NFMCCLEADERSHIPA. Bross, H. Kirk

M. Zisman

MCTFLEADERSHIP

S. GeerV. Shiltsev

+

MuCoolMICE

IDS-NFLow-Energy NFDesign & Sim.

MTA Beam LineHP RF

Helical CoolingHigh-Tc SC

Design & Sim

NEUTRINOFACTORYR&DPROGRAM

The Muon Collider

Addressing the Technological Challenges


Parameters of Different MC options

Low Emit. High Emit. MCTF07 MCTF08s (TeV) 1.5Av. Luminosity (1034/cm2/s) * 2.7 1 1.33-2 Av. Bending field (T) 10 6 6Mean radius (m) 361.4 500 500 495No. of IPs 4 2 2Proton Driver Rep Rate (Hz) 65 13 40-60Beam-beam parameter/IP 0.052 0.087 0.1* (cm) 0.5 1 1Bunch length (cm) 0.5 1 1No. bunches / beam 10 1 1No. muons/bunch (1011) 1 20 11.3Norm. Trans. Emit. (m) 2.1 25 12.3Energy spread (%) 1 0.1 0.2Norm. long. Emit. (m) 0.35 0.07 0.14Total RF voltage (GV) at 800MHz 407103c 0.21** 0.84** 0.3†

Muon survival N/N0 0.31 0.07 0.2 ?+ in collision / proton 0.047 0.01 0.03 ?8 GeV proton beam power 3.62*** 3.2 1.9-2.8 ?---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Muon Collider Facility


R&D Program Overview II

High Power Targetry – NF & MC (MERIT Experiment) Initial Cooling – NF & MC (MICE (4D Cooling)) 200 (& 805) MHz RF - NF & MC (MuCool and Muon’s Inc)

Investigate RF cavities in presence of high magnetic fields Obtain high accelerating gradients (~15MV/m) Investigate Gas-Filled RF cavities

Intense 6D Cooling – MC RFOFO “Guggenheim” Helical Channel Cooling (MANX Proposal) Parametric Resonance Ionization Cooling

Bunch Recombination - MC Acceleration– A cost driver for both NF & MC, but in very

different ways FFAG’s – (EMMA Demonstration) Multi-turn RLA’s – a BIG cost reducer RCS for MC

Storage Ring(s) – NF & MC Theoretical Studies NF & MC

Analytic Calculations Lattice Designs Numeric Simulations


The Experiment Reached 30TP @ 24 GeV

· Beam pulse energy = 115kJ· B-field = 15T· Jet Velocity = 20 m/s· Measured Disruption Length = 28 cm· Required “Refill” time is then 28cm/20m/s = 14ms

Rep rate of 70Hz Proton beam power at that rate is 115kJ *70 = 8MW


The Basic Problem – B Field Effect805 MHz Studies

· Data seem to follow universal curve Max stable

gradient degrades quickly with B field

· Re-measured Same results

Gra

die

nt

in M

V/m

Peak Magnetic Field in T at the Window

>2X Reduction @ required field


805 MHz Imaging


201 MHz Cavity RunningSummary I (B=0)

Design Gradient

Limited by RFPower


201 MHz Cavity RunningSummary II (B>0)


Facing the RF B Field Challenge

· Three Approaches to a Solution Reduce/eliminate field emission

Process cavities utilizing SCRF techniques Material Studies

– Surface coatings– Non-Cu bodies

RF cavities filled with High-Pressure gas (H2)

Utilize Paschen effect to stop breakdown Magnetic Insulation

Eliminate magnetic focusing– Not Yet Tested


High-Gradient RF Operation B Field

· Promising indications @ a Solution SCRF Processing techniques help

Reduce dark current– More advanced techniques (Atomic-Layer-

Deposition) may do more

Cavity material properties seem to be important

TiN helps– Coupled with SCRF processing may reduce FE

even more Mo, Be Coatings?

Gas-filled cavities show promise Operation with beam critical next test

Muon Collider Design

Emphasis on Cooling


Muon Collider Design Progress

· Muon Collider designs start with a NF front-end, but require a much more ambitious cooling channel (6D cooling ~ O(106) c.f. 4D cooling ~ O(100).

· In the last 5 years concepts for a complete end-to-end self con-sistent cooling scheme have been developed Requires beyond state-of-art components: need to be

developed Hardware development and further simulations need to

proceed together to inform choices between alternative technologies

· Also progress on acceleration scheme & Collider ring design, but the cooling channel presently provides the main Muon Collider challenge

NFFRONTEND


A Muon Collider Cooling Scenario

Guggenheim RFOFO - Simulations

RF

liquid H2

solenoid

Pavel Snopok


Helical Cooling Channel

· Magnetic field is solenoid B0+ dipole + quad

· System is filled with H2 gas, includes rf cavities

· Cools 6-D (large E means longer path length)

· But, incorporating RF is Engineering challenge!


HCC Magnet Design & Prototyping

· Helical solenoid (HS): Smaller coils than in a “snake” design Smaller peak field Lower cost

· Field components in HS determined by geometry Over constrained Coil radius is not free

parameter· 4 Coil Demonstration

Model Validate mechanical

structure and fabrication methods

Study quench performance and margins, field quality, quench protection

Use SSC conductor

Outer bandage rings

Inner bobbin

Superconducting coils (one layer, hard bend wound)


Final Cooling

· LH2 absorbers tested in MICE· 50 T Solenoids

National Very High Field Superconducting Magnet Collaboration

2 Year $4M program to study HTS conductor and cable

Acceleration


Acceleration - Overview

· RLA: get more passes Ramp linac magnets, get more

passes (12) Non-scaling FFAG arcs: get 2 passes

per arc, maybe more· Fast ramping synchrotron (RCS)

Potential for many more passes· FFAG: not studied much as yet for

Muon Collider

0.6 GeV/pass

3.6 GeV

0.9 GeV

244 MeV 146 m

79 m

2 GeV/pass

264 m

12.6 GeV

Dogbone RLA - footprint

-5000

-4000

-3000

-2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000 11000 16000 21000 26000 31000

z [cm]

x [cm]

Initial Acceleration – Neutrino Factory

1300

Tue Jun 10 21:06:52 2008 OptiM - MAIN: - D:\IDS\Arcs\Arc1.opt

15

0

3-3

BE

TA_

X&

Y[m

]

DIS

P_

X&

Y[m

]

BETA_X BETA_Y DISP_X DISP_Y

Define beamlines/lattices for all components

34Alan Bross UKNF Meeting Lancaster April 22, 2009


Acceleration -RCS

The Way Forward

Joint NFMCC and Fermilab MCTF 5 Year Proposal to DOE


The 5 Year PlanA Proposal Has now been submitted to

DOE

· A joint US: NFMCC-MCTF Plan A measured program based on the solid muon

accelerator R&D achievements of the last decade Sufficiently ambitious to make substantial progress

before the next round of long-term decisions by the particle physics community

Includes accelerator, physics & detector studies – we also have plans & estimates for physics & detector studies, but will be in a separate proposal)

· Meets our existing commitments (NF-RDR, MICE) and in addition will deliver: MC performance requirements based on physics A first end-to-end MC simulation Critical component development & proof-of-principle

experiments A first MC cost estimate


“The 5 Year Plan”(developed by All-US Community, coordinated by

MCCC)

• Goals :I. establish feasibility of a Muon Collider by

2012-13

II. deliver MC-DFS by 2013 and NF-RDR by 2012

III. greatly narrow technology options, end-end simul’s

IV. give cost estimates for MC and NF

• Staged approach: PD MCTF NF MC

- perfectly aligned with Fermilab’s long term plan outlined in Steering Group Report and P5 report


5-Year Plan of Muon Accelerator R&DProgress to Date

· v1.0 presented to MUTAC in Aug’08· 1 hr briefing of D.Kovar and J.Blazey Nov’08· Presented at the Dec’08 DoE review of

Accelerator Science Elaborated coherently in presentations of 4

labs FNAL, LBNL, BNL and ANL

· Formally submitted to DoE in Dec’08 Current status: “interesting… wait” (CR,

ARRA, budget, etc)


Elements of the MC R&D Plan

Resources

FUNDING PROFILE

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

YEAR

FU

ND

S

(K$)

M&S

SWF

TOTAL

NOTE: Roll-over in years 4-5 provides an opportunity to initiate post-DFS activities, should the community wish us to proceed to the next step

PROPOSED EFFORT CONTRIBUTIONS

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

YEAR

EF

FO

RT

(F

TE

)

LBNLBNLFNALOTHERSUM

Alan Bross UKNF Meeting Lancaster April 22, 2009

» X3 Increase in Effort


Muon Collider Technical Foundation after 5 YearsFrom Here to There

Encouraging “Words”


Very High Field SC Magnet Collaboration

· The immediate goals (2 years): The immediate goal (2 years) is to understand if Bi 2212

is a suitable vehicle for this task. develop the technology to build magnets with B>30 T Funded for 2 years @ $2M/yr


The committee endorses the integrated NFMCC and MCTF 5-year plan with the following goals: - NF RDR - Muon Collider feasibility report which depends on: MC performance requirements based on physics End to end MC simulation Critical component development and testing First cost estimate

The collaboration estimates a factor of 3 increase in people resources is required and the committee agrees - Laboratories are not prepared to commit the full increment. The remainder will come from universities and SBIR initiatives - it is not clear to the committee that the expertise is available [ed. Help is Welcome!]We are impressed with the flow of new ideas, but concerned that given limited resources, options must be reduced.

April 2009 MUTAC Review“Selected Excerpts”


MICE

· Impressive progress MICE experimental running (parasitic) Civil engineering Instrumentation installation and testing Magnet design and procurement drives the

early steps in the programme. Cavity

· Coordination with the ISIS schedule puts constraints on a complex and demanding programme. Moms will be increasingly important in ensuring reactive scheduling.

· Five Year Plan Six step programme matches both Neutrino

and Muon programmes.


MICE

· Recommendations· To assess the performance of the 201 MHz

RF in the magnetic field levels for MICE to verify the assumption of dark current levels.

· Recognising the vital contribution that a timely delivery of MICE step VI will make to both the neutrino factory IDS and a Design Feasibility Study (DFS) for a Muon Collider, this committee recommends that maximum pressure is exerted by the collaboration on UK funding bodies to make a timely decision to fund the entire programme to the aspirational timescale.

· Provide an assessment of the timescales and costs of a wedge absorber test MICE

Documents

Muon Collider R&D in the US. Muon Collider Program Closely coupled with R&D on the Neutrino Factory u IDS-NF The R&D program is now encompassed in