Dubna Workshop に関する不完全なレポート

横谷GDE活動報告会　 2008.6.9

Global Design Effort

Focus GroupsA. Shallow solutions: Explore features and develo

p reduced-cost, shallow tunnel solutions. Both CLIC and ILC. Includes single tunnel.

B. Infrastructure: Review infrastructure requirements and develop cost-effective solutions for accelerator infrastructure – power, water, air etc. Both CLIC and ILC.

C. Siting: Examine possible sites and evaluate possible design differences that accommodate features. Includes staging, design modifications and upgrade issues.

D. Accelerator Systems: particular focus on the central injection complex, BDS and RTML.

Progress This Year (Highlights)• Cavity optical inspection system (Kyoto, KEK)

– Major breakthrough in S0 program• Progress on cryomodule plug compatibility specifications• Securing S1-global commitment

– 31.5 MV/m cryomodule– Collaboration DESY, FNAL, KEK

• RF distribution system tests – determining the power overhead

• 9mA tests at TTF2/FLASH (DESY)– Planning & preparatory work for full beam-loading experiments

• CesrTA initial phase installation work– First beam July

• Positron source undulator tests at RAL, UK (STFC)• ATF-2 installation – towards first beam end 2008

Opening, N.Walker

R&D Plan Release 2• Look! NO

DRAFT!

• Released today

• Next review and release:December 08

Global Design Effort

PIP (Project Implementation Plan) の導入

• Spans entire 4 year period• Phases:

– Definition of elements (2008)– (SCRF) Mass-production models (2009)– (SCRF) Cost models (2010)– Remainder of PIP elements (2012)

Design / Cost Reduction / PIP

Opening, N.Walker

Conventional Facilities Plan

• RDR based on “sample sites”– Accounts for about 1/3 of costs– Much specific information, but not cost minimized

• TD Phase proposed to produce “uniform” site study– Work together on siting to apply “value engineering” to

minimize costs– Investigate shallow sites, single tunnel, etc.– Define uniform site

• Develop Siting strategy– Desired features, requirements, cost and other information for

potential hosts– What is asked from hosts?

Opening, Barish

Uniform Site ????• Barry (opening talk)

– “Uniform” site study – Define uniform site

• Albrecht (siting strategy meeting)– Uniform という名称はよくない

• PM (Marc’s summary talk)– the ‘uniform’ (teamwork-based) site development approach –

• working closely together / • consolidating resources

• 私見– Barry の当初の考えは、

• shallow site を代表的なものとして study し、 LC は安いということを示し、

• あわよくば shallow からの差額をホストが支払うことにしてホストの負担を減らす、ということであったのではないか

– PM の意見は要するに• サイトについて各国別々にスタディするのでなく協力することによっ

てリソースを有効に使おうというもので、これまでやってきたのと大差ないだろう

Dubna Shallow Site• To replace 20m deep TBM

tunnel with on-surface gallery for services (following land contours) would be substantially cheaper

• Pre-cast concrete modules would be fabricated (planning advantages)

• Once site investigation reports are available, Dubna experts could execute detailed costing exercise in 2 to 3 months…

• Approx 10% saving on total CFS costs for replacing one bored tunnel with surface gallery Summary.A. Osborne

CFS Conclusions• Dubna solution looks very promising, but Site Investigation needed to allow

detailed costing (using same RDR principles)

• CFS will develop ‘Requirement Matrix’ over coming months

• Ground rules need to be defined by PM team eg which solutions do we pursue the most given resource levels, which safety legislation do we adopt…..site stragey

• XFEL progress to be followed closely, particularly during installation phase

• 3d Integration studies for ILC need to developed to allow CFS to better determine underground volumes

• ILC/CLIC collaboration is a promising development in CFS field

Summery.A. Osborne

Cost Saving Possibility in DR• 3km Ring

– Possible staging ( あとで 4-ring)– 3km ポッキリの意見は（多分）な

かった

• Dogbone– 以前から難題いろいろあり– 6km にすればいくつかは回避できる

（しかし dogbone の長所を失う）

• その他– Shorter wiggler length (staging)– Reduced RF

injection

extraction

現在のデザイン

Cost Saving Possibility in RTML

• DRML tunnel の transport tunnel を短縮– KAS は undulatortarget の drift 空間に移動– DR-BDS のレベル差を減らす（ 10m6m ） 450m 短縮

• If 6mm0,3mm only,– Shorter 2nd stage 　（ 2-300m 短縮）– Single stage （ 400m 短縮）

• Omit 15GeV dump 　（両側）

Service TunnelRTML/e+ KAS RTML/e+

~ 400 m

500 m

RTML

BDS ML

DRML

~400 m

300 m

RTML/e-

~10

0 m ~

100

m

BDS

• Merge main dump and tuning dump by micro-tunnel

• Simplified MD interface by longer L* (easier push-pull)

• Staging of energy

Positron• KAS

– Remove KAS, move undulator at linac end– Small KAS between undulator & target (Paters

on)– Thick WRe target for small KAS KAS (Kuriki)

• Liquid lead target (BINP)– For undulator or conventional source

DR+BDS Layout

• Same elevation for DR+BDS

今後の会合• GDE 全体会合は年 2 回程度

– 1 回は次回の Chicago のような総合的– 1 回は今回の Dubna のような thematic

• 次回 early2009, Asia– AAP を招く– 全体を plenary で

• AAP による review

Homework for LCWS 08 Chicago:based on Dubna priorities:• CFS / Accelerator Design updates

– Cost reduction

• CFS change requests– complete Value Engineering cycle started here

• Collaboration work and reports (e.g. CLIC – ILC)• R & D Plan updates

– trade offs developed here– (the basis of value engineering is cost/performance

trade off)

Closing, Marc Ross