CLIC Project Status. Roger Ruber. Uppsala University. On behalf of the CLIC Collaborations. Thanks to all colleagues for materials

Transcription

1 CLIC Project Status Roger Ruber Uppsala University On behalf of the CLIC Collaborations Thanks to all colleagues for materials IAS 2018 Program on High Energy Physics Hong Kong, 23 January 2018

2 CLIC Collaborations 32 Countries over 70 Institutes 2

3 Outline Reminder of the CLIC project Project staging Technical highlights Strategic plans 2019 and beyond Apologies for skipping many results + details 3

4 CLIC Layout (3 TeV) 1.5 TeV / beam L = few cm -2 s -1 4

5 Drive Beam Recombination x24 recombination 12 GHz from 0.5 GHz 100 A peak from 5.2 A 240 ns bunch length from 140 µs 5

6 Two-Beam Acceleration Drive Beam (DB) Power extraction and transfer structures (PETS) Main Beam (MB) Accelerating structures (AS) The RF power is extracted from a low energy and high intensity drive beam, to accelerate a lower intensity, higher energy main beam. 6

7 High gradients, but only if high frequency short pulse lengths: < 1μs limited by RF breakdown High Gradient Acceleration Higher frequencies smaller structures cq. equipment Resistive structures short fill time t fill = 1/v G dz, order <100 ns (~ms for SCRF) easier manufacturing, unlike SRF, no special chemical procedures, no clean room 11.4 GHz structure (NLC) 1 cm 12 GHz structure (CLIC) 30 GHz structure (CLIC) 7

8 CLIC Detector Model return yoke (Fe) with muon-id detectors superconducting solenoid, 4 Tesla fine grained (PFA) calorimetry, Λ i, Si-W ECAL, Sc-FE HCAL silicon tracker, (large pixels / short strips) Note: final beam focusing is outside the detector 11.4 m end-coils for field shaping forward region with compact forward calorimeters ultra low-mass vertex detector, ~25 μm pixels 8 Lucie Linssen

9 Updated Baseline Document CERN arxiv: New reference plots for physics, luminosity, power, costs 9

10 CERN scientific strategy: 3 main pillars F. Gianotti 11/1/17 10

11 CERN scientific strategy: 3 main pillars F. Gianotti 11/1/17 11

12 CERN scientific strategy: 3 main pillars We are vigorously preparing input for European Strategy PP Update: Project Plan for CLIC as a credible post-lhc option for CERN Initial costs compatible with current CERN budget scale Upgradeable in stages over years F. Gianotti 11/1/17 12

13 Optimize the machine design w.r.t. cost and power for a staged approach to reach multi-tev scales PROJECT STAGING 13

14 CERN 14

15 Staging Scenario The CLIC program builds on energy stages: Maximizes physics output, enables realistic funding profiles, delivers key physics early 380 GeV 1.5 TeV 3 TeV Dedicated to top mass threshold scan Integrated luminosity including commissioning with beam and stops for energy upgrades CERN

16 CLIC Physics Context Energy-frontier capability for electron-positron collisions, for precision exploration of potential new physics that may emerge from LHC 380 GeV (350 GeV), 600 fb -1 : precision Higgs and top physics no later than TeV, 1.5 ab -1 : BSM searches, Higgs-Top and Higgs self-coupling 3 TeV, 3 ab -1 : BSM searches, Higgs self-coupling 16

17 Motivation: So far top quark only measured at hadron colliders. Precision top physics in e + e - : sensitive to many BSM scenarios understanding electro-weak symmetry breaking (EWSB) test ground of QCD CLIC Top Physics Top physics programme currently studied: Top quark mass - tt threshold scan at 350 GeV; reconstructed mass above threshold Electroweak couplings to the top quark at 380 GeV, and above 1 TeV (boosted top) - - Couplings in tth and ttz production Rare decays (strongly suppressed in SM) Searches using boosted top quarks Top physics at CLIC paper in preparation, first draft completed 17

18 Higgs Coupling Capabilities at CLIC arxiv: H. Abramowicz et al, Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017)

19 Higgs Coupling Capabilities at CLIC Higgs couplings to heavy particles benefit from higher C.M. energies: tth ~ 4% HH ~ 20% arxiv: H. Abramowicz et al, Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017)

20 Automatic Parameter Determination Structure design fixed by few parameters a 1,a 2,d 1,d 2,N c,φ,g Beam parameters derived automatically to reach specific energy and luminosity Consistency of structure with RF constraints is checked Repeat for 1.7 billion cases Design choices and specific studies Use 50Hz operation for beam stability Scale horizontal emittance with charge to keep the same risk in damping ring Scale for constant local stability in main linac, i.e. tolerances vary but stay above CDR values BDS design similar to CDR, use improved β x -reach as reserve 20

21 Rebaselined Parameters Parameter Unit 380 GeV 3 TeV Centre-of-mass energy TeV Total luminosity cm -2 s Luminosity above 99% of S cm -2 s Repetition frequency Hz Number of bunches Bunch separation ns Accelerating gradient MV/m 72 72/100 Site length km

22 New CLIC Layout 380 GeV 22

23

24 Preliminary cost estimate (380GeV) For CDR 2012 WBS cost basis Optimised structures, beam parameters and RF system Some costs scaled from 500 GeV Further optimisation ongoing 24

25 Klystron Version (380 GeV) First look at costs preliminary High-efficiency klystron work very promising not yet included Costings relative to drive-beam version may be lower ~ 5% 25

26 AC Power Overview (1.5 TeV) Total 361 MW 26

27 Optimization w.r.t. cost and power, and industrialization of machine components TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS 27

28 Adjustable-field Permanent Magnets use PMs wherever possible Potential saving of 29MW Low Energy Quad Sideplate & Nut Plate Assembly Dipole design T-gearbox Motor Right angle - gearbox High Energy Quad Permanent Magnet Ballscrew Nut 28

29 CLIC Module 29

30 CLIC Module Installed at CTF3-TBTS 30

31 Beam off Beam on One to one steering Make the beam pass through Alignment Strategy Mechanical pre-alignment Active pre-alignment Beam based Alignment & Beam based feedbacks Dispersion Free Steering Optimize the position of BPM & quads by varying the beam energy ~ mm over 200 m µm over 200 m Minimization of AS offsets Using wakefield monitors & girders actuators AREAS OF POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT Minimization of the emittance growth Courtesy H. Mainaud Durand 31

32 study and propose an alternative solution for the high accuracy alignment using stretched wire and 5 DOF adjustment platform More than DB quadrupoles to be aligned 2 per 2 on a common support within a budget of error < 20 µm with shims: Alignment took more than 1 day per quadrupole! 5 DOF platform: Adjustment within 10, final alignment better than 10 µm PACMAN Particle Accelerator Components Metrology and Alignment to the Nanometre scale Helene Mainaud Durand 32

33 GHz X-band 100 MV/m Input power 50 MW Pulse length 200 ns Repetition rate 50 Hz CLIC Accelerating Structure Outside Inside Micron precision disk HOM damping waveguide 25 cm 6 mm diameter beam aperture 33

34 Accelerating Structure Performance latest structure series Jan Paszkiewicz, Walter Wuensch 34

35 Assembly towards industrialization 35

36 Assembly - machining of halves T24-Open ~90 MV/m at CLIC-BDR 36

37 High Efficiency Klystrons Klystron technology development was considered to be saturated 75% efficiency was the predicted limit, accounting for technological and cost reasons. New development possible with accurate 2D/3D computer codes capable of performing massive optimizations within a reasonable amount of time combine with new ideas for bunching optimization and depressed collector to enhance efficiency Klystron efficiency vs. perveance Challenge (a.u.) Common tubes, 95% of the market We still might do it? New bunching technology Reducing perveance best existing tube Depressed collector Ultimate(space charge free) limit Efficiency, % Igor Syratchev 37

38 Combined Modulator/Klystron Efficiencies 38

39 CTF3 Program Completed fully loaded acceleration of the drive beam beam recombination of the drive beam two-beam RF power production and transfer high gradient acceleration of the main beam drive beam 2-beam acceleration module in CTF3 main beam 39

40 CTF3 'CLEAR' CERN Linear Electron Accelerator for Research CALIFES injector former CLIC Module Plasma Lens Available test space Beam energy MeV Bunch charge nc Bunch length 300 µm -1.2mm Bunch spacing 1.5 GHz Norm. emittance 2 µm Rel. energy spread 1 % Repetition rate 1-5 Hz Spectrometer and in-air test stand 40

41 CompactLight EU design study for a Compact XFEL based on X-band structures Approved! Kick-off 25 Jan. 65 MV/m Energy: 4.6 GeV Rep. rate: Hz 41

42 CompactLight Objectives Our aim is to facilitate the widespread development of X-ray FEL facilities across Europe and beyond, by making them: more affordable to construct and to operate, through an optimum combination of emerging and innovative accelerator technologies. (Focus on conceptual design of a Facility rather than demonstration of the technical maturity of the X-band technology) We will design a Hard X-ray FEL facility using the very latest concepts for: bright electron photoinjectors very high gradient accelerating structures novel short period undulators The resulting facility will benefit from: a lower electron beam energy than current facilities, due to the enhanced undulator performance will be significantly more compact due to lower energy and high gradient structures will have a much lower electrical power demand than current facilities will have much lower construction cost and running cost 42

43 STRATEGIC PLANS 43

44 Aim: Outlook European Strategy Present CLIC as a credible post-lhc option for CERN Provide optimized, staged approach starting at 380 GeV, with costs and power not excessive compared with LHC, and leading to 3 TeV Upgrades in 2-3 stages over year horizon Maintain flexibility and align with LHC physics outcomes Key deliverables: Project plan: physics, machine parameters, cost, power, site, staging, construction schedule, summary of main tech. issues, preparation phase ( ) summary, detector studies Preparation-phase plan: critical parameters, status and next steps - what is needed before project construction, strategy, risks and how to address them 44

45 CLIC Roadmap 45

46 CLIC Workshop