SABER Overview and Management, Costs and Schedule

1
SABEROverview and Management, Costs and
Schedule

• John Seeman
• Assistant Director
• Particle and Particle-Astrophysics Directorate
• SLAC
• December 6, 2006

2
Overview

• There was a constant demand for electron and
  positron beams in the Final Focus Test beam
  (FFTB) from a wide variety of accelerator physics
  users.
• However, the FFTB has recently been removed to
  make room for the Linac Coherent Light Source
  (LCLS).
• The FFTB accelerator beam capabilities can be
  relocated in a straight forward way to an area of
  the SLC South Arc tunnel called SABER (South Arc
  Beam Experimental Region).
• The existing electron longitudinal bunch
  compressor at the 1/3 point in the linac can be
  modified to compress positron bunches, as well,
  opening world-unique new opportunities for
  accelerator research.
• A bypass line from Sector 20 to the end of the
  Linac can be built to deliver beams to SABER,
  independent of LCLS.

3
History of SABER Design Effort

• In 2003 P. Krejcik proposed a SLC South Arc
  Instrument Section solution for an FFTB
  replacement.
• In 2004 P. Emma proposed B-Target Room solution.
• In June 2005 P. Drell charged the Accelerator
  Systems Division to develop the detailed
  accelerator options, organized by R. Erickson.
• In March 2006 held a User Workshop run by R.
  Siemann and C. Joshi defined focus topics of
  experimental accelerator physics and endorsed the
  South Arc Option, now called SABER.
• First draft SABER White Paper Spring 2006.
• August 2006 SABER White Paper submitted to DOE
  HEP.
• DOE Germantown visit for SABER in August 2006.
• SABER DOE review December 2006.

4

Initial SABER Layout Possibilities

ESA
LCLS tunnel
ESB B Target Room
South Arc
5
Historical Beam Line Possibilities

• 1) SLC South Arc (SABER)
• 2) SLC North Arc (NABER)
• 3) B-Target Room (BTR)
• 4) End Station A (ESA)
• 5) Reinstall FFTB in LCLS tunnel where FFTB was
  before.
• 6) PEP-II North Injection Transport (NIT)
• 7) PEP-II South Injection Transport (SIT)

6
Conclusions of 2005 study

• SLC North Arc does not have an Instrument Section
  and no easy experimenter entrance.
• ESA dipole bends are too strong and quadrupoles
  too weak to allow small emittance beams to pass.
  ? Complete overhaul!
• B-Target-Room (BTR) would be ideal but no
  transport exists now. It would take many years
  (4) (assuming modest funding) before the first
  beam would go through.
• LCLS tunnel construction and operation allows no
  access until late 2009 or 2010 at the earliest.
• PEP-II Injection lines have bends that are too
  strong for emittance preservation and the energy
  is too low.
• SLC South Arc was designed for low emittance
  preservation and the basic hardware exists. This
  transport provides same beam quality as BTR.
  Experimenters can access region with LCLS and
  PEP-II running. Good shielding. Only modest but
  adequate experimenter space.

7
Present ProposalSLAC Overview with SABER in SLC
South Arc

• SABER consists of three main components
• (1) Experimental area with final focus and beam
  dump in SLC South Arc tunnel.
• (2) Linac Pulse Compressor upgrade to compress
  positron bunches.
• (3) Bypass Line to deliver e- or e beams to
  SABER, bypassing the LCLS.

(2)
e
e-
(3)
(1)

8
Three basic SABER areas

• Final Focus Makes a small beam spot (lt10
  microns) for experimenters. Similar design and
  layout as FFTB final focus.
• Sector 10 compressor for e Allows the
  production of positrons by e- and the delivery of
  short bunch length e to the experimenter. Same
  design and layout as present e- compressor.
• Bypass line Allows independent operation from
  LCLS. Similar design and layout as PEP-II
  injection bypass lines.
• ? The technology is the same as the former FFTB,
  SLC arcs, and existing PEP-II injection bypass
  lines.
• ? Minimal design and engineering needed!

9
SABER Design Team

• Head R. Erickson
• Mechanical engineers L. Bentson, D. Blankenship,
  S. DeBarger, N. Li, H. Shin
• Area Manager A. Baker
• Optics Y. Nosochkov, M. Woodley
• Alignment C. LeCocq
• Beam dynamics K. Bane, P. Emma
• Radiation physics J. Bauer, A. Prinz
• Personnel Protection System P. Bong, K. Turner
• Experimental region M. Hogan, D. Walz
• Physics consultants R. Iverson, P. Krejcik, T.
  Fieguth
• Budget J. Seeman

10
Basic SABER Beam Parameters

• Beam Energy 28 GeV
• Single bunch per pulse
• 30 Hz (120 Hz possible)
• Charge per bunch 1 x 109 to 2-3.5 x 1010
• Bunch length 30 microns
• Transverse spot size at experiment lt10 microns
• Energy spread 0.5 to 4

11
South Arc Tunnel
(Hogan, Erickson)
Beam Instrument Section
User experiments to be set up in this area.

12
Positron Compressor Chicane

• The Sector 10 chicane can be modified to be
  symmetric for electrons and positrons.

e
e-
(Bentson)
13
Bypass Line

• A Bypass Line from Sector 20 to the South Arc
  will allow delivery of 28 GeV electrons to SABER
  without passing through the last third of linac.
• SABER will then be independent of LCLS
  operations.
• An optics design has been fully worked out.
• Value engineering is ongoing to minimize the
  cost.
• The proposal is to reuse a PEP-II injection
  bypass line to save costs (5 M). (To be
  modified in Fall 2008 after the PEP-II run ends.)

14
Bypass Transport Line will be like the PEP-II
lines
SABER Bypass could go here
PEP-II injection Lines (SABER Bypass could go
here)

e return line
Linac
15

Nosochkov

16

Example of new design Bypass Line Quadrupole
Design for 30 GeV

N. Li
August 2005
17
Proposed SABER Schedule

• Fall 2006 Restore safety systems, repair vacuum
  pumping and install temporary beam dump.
• February-March 2007 Inject initial 28 GeV beam
  through SLC Arc to future SABER region for
  checkout of existing hardware. (Compressed e- or
  non-compressed e but large beams.)
• Spring 2007 Start SABER relocation work.
• August 2007 Complete relocation of SABER final
  focus. Install initial experimental area. Provide
  first e- beam to SABER compressed and focused.
  (Assumes full SABER funding 2.5 M in FY2007.)
• FY2008 Deliver e- compressed focused beam to
  SABER. Deliver non-compressed positrons.
• Fall 2008 Installation of positron compressor
  chicane in Linac Sector 10. Some Bypass Line
  work.
• Winter 2009 Positron beam, fully compressed and
  focused to experimental region as beam time
  allows.
• Fall 2009 Bypass Line assembly and installation.
• FY2010 and beyond Four full months of SABER
  operation every year.

18

SLAC Tentative Beam Schedule

19
LCLS Injector with 135 MeV Spectrometer

SABER Beam (before bypass)
LCLS Beam
20
Initial beam specifications

21
SABER Management

• The management of SABER will be done with a
  similar mechanism to ongoing Accelerator
  Improvement Projects (AIP)
• AIP Management Mechanism
• Divide work into stand alone pieces.
• Define proposed technical scope and budget for
  each piece.
• DOE approves the proposals.
• A task manager is assigned.
• Monthly reviews are held covering technical
  issues, budget, man power, and schedule.
• Monthly budget statements are reviewed by task
  personnel, upper management and DOE.
• There is a formal task closeout with DOE when
  each task is finished.

22
Recent AIP Accelerator Improvement
Projects(handled with management tools described
above)
Budget
Completion date

• X-Y BPM upgrades 825k Done
• New HER Q5 vacuum chambers 650k Done
• New HER/LER Q2 chambers 436k Done
• HER-10 RF station 2800k Feb 2007
• LER-5 RF station 4380k Feb 2007
• HER power supply upgrade for higher
  tunes 680k Dec 2006
• New HER Q4 vacuum chambers 476k Done
• New IR2 Q2 bellows 150k Feb 2007
• LER IR HOM absorber 225k Dec 2006
• HER IR HOM absorber 210k Done
• LER BPM monitor upgrade 330k Apr 2007
• LER new high power bellows 300k Done
• LER NEG vacuum chamber upgrade 250k Done
• New Longitudinal feedback processor 494k Mar
  2007
• MCC network upgrade 290k Apr 2007
• Linac SCOR to MCOR Upgrade 690 Sept 2007

Total cost of these AIP projects is about 4 to 7
M per year. Most tasks will be finished in a few
months. Ready for new tasks.
23

24
Example AIP PEP-II HER RF Station
C. Carter
25
Example AIP PEP-II HER RF Station (Cont)
26
Methodology for Cost Estimates

• Estimate manpower required using present
  productivity rates (include training, safety, ).
• Identify all the components needed.
• Determine materials needed from existing designs
  of constructed components.
• Check projected costs against actual costs to
  build similar lines last time including
  inflation.
• Add SLAC burden rates of 6 on materials and
  39 on labor.
• Add contingency of 25 to 30.

27
SABER Relocation Costs with New Bypass Line

28
Reuse 1 km of PEP-II Injection Bypass Line

Linac Sector 21-30 (exists)
Sector 20 (exists)
51 Line (exists)
South Arc (exists)
Extraction Line (new)
Re-injection Line (new)
Drift Line (exists but 12 ? 30 GeV)
50 m
1000 m
50 m
Drift Line Reuse Vacuum chambers, pumps and
controls Beam position monitors Beam size
monitors Steering corrector magnets Quadrupole
magnets and power supplies New Extra quadrupole
magnets, power supplies, supports, water
29
SABER Relocation Costs with Reused Bypass Line

30
Manpower and Shop Availability

• The needed mechanical and electrical engineering
  for SABER will come from PEP-II activities which
  are winding down in FY2007. (Several semi-retired
  SLC electrical engineers are willing to work part
  time.)
• Much of the SABER work are supports and simple
  vacuum chambers. Many of the LCLS supports and
  vacuum chambers are being made with outside
  vendors.
• SABER installation and shop work dove-tails with
  LCLS work
• Install SABER final focus in spring-summer 2007
  when LCLS is not installing.
• e compressor installation in Fall 2008 is a
  relatively small task when LCLS is installing the
  last few items.
• Install SABER Bypass Line in Fall 2009 when LCLS
  installation is done.

31
Yearly Operational Costs for SABER (4 month
run/yr)(FY2006 k)
e- only
e and e-

• Linac Sectors 0-20 AC power for
  operations 1075 900
• SABER beam and transport AC power 281 281
• Linac Sector 0-20 Operations 900 750
• SABER Operations and Maintenance 2600 2460
• Total with burden (non-power sum x 1.33)
  6010 5450

32
Summary

• SABER has been defined to a level that final
  engineering and shop work can begin.
• The reuse of one of the PEP-II injection lines
  can significantly reduce the cost of the bypass
  (5 M).
• There is sufficient manpower and shop effort
  available at SLAC to do the work.
• This relocation activity can be divided into
  manageable sub-pieces (final focus, compressor,
  and bypass line)
• Management practices can be the same as those for
  other AIP activities which are of the same size
  and complexity.