WG-4 Magnets Tom Myers Everson-Tesla
Click here to get the file
Size
3.3 kB
-
File type
text/plain
File contents
The bullet-point summary for the Magnet Working Group Meeting at LCFOA
on 9/22/05 is as follows-
* Attendees = FNAL (5), Everson Tesla (1), Vector Fields (1)
* An overview of the various magnets thought to be required for
the ILC was provided by David Harding and John Tompkins of FNAL. We
noted that the magnets are roughly 6% of the preliminary ILC cost
estimate.
* The main magnet groups included are those in the Main Linac, the
Damping Rings (or Dog-bones), and the Interaction Region. Much of the
comments made by the FNAL folks were based on the DESY TTF Technical
Design Review (http://tesla.desy.de/new_pages/TDR_CD) and the August
2005 ILC meeting at Snowmass.
* About 1,000 S/C quadrupoles are required for Main Linac. The
main concerns are the need for precise alignment, good stability, and
low stray field (micro-tesla range) at the nearest SCRF cavity. The
stray field measurements will be difficult and a simple empirical test
to prove out performance without making these costly measurements every
time is preferred and will likely require some R&D funding (perhaps
during the Proton Driver development or elsewhere). These
specifications may be more difficult to meet with the quadrupole in the
middle of the cryomodule, as opposed to locating it in a separate
cryostat.
* The Damping Ring will contain hundreds of standard
electromagnets, including dipoles, quadrupoles, sextupoles, and wiggler
magnets. The 17km-long Dog-bone design contains more variations of
these magnet types, whereas the 6km-diameter ring alternative design
contains a number of groupings of magnets that vary only by length and
may be manufactured more efficiently. The straight section of the
Dog-bone is designed to be in the same tunnel as the Main Linac and
offers that cost reduction. These magnets are somewhat similar to those
used in the Main Injector Ring of FNAL's Tevatron accelerator, although
the ILC versions are typically lower in field strength, but have tighter
field quality specifications. There will definitely need to be scrutiny
of the quality control process for these numerous magnets in the effort
to reduce manufacturing costs. The issue of durability and MTBF was
discussed and thought to be doable if the design, operating parameters,
and utilities were carefully considered.
* The Interaction Region may contain the biggest technical hurdles
for the focusing magnets required for the small ILC beamline. Radiation
effects may also be severe and rad-resistance must be designed into the
magnets. Previous lessons learned at FNAL and elsewhere should be used.
* The Who/What/Where/When of ILC magnet R&D should be considered,
so these problems do not crop up late in the design.
* If ILC R&D is delayed, then trying to get these questions
answered via the Proton Driver work may suffice.
* The ILC laboratories should look for ways to facilitate input
from industrial members.
* The ILC laboratories should let industrial members know if there
are other ways for them to offer support.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Tom Myers
Everson Tesla Inc.
Regional Account Manager
Mobile/VM: 651-494-4348
E-Mail: tmyers@eversontesla.com
Website: <http://www.eversontesla.com/> www.eversontesla.com
Main Office Phone: 610-746-1520
Main Office Fax: 610-746-1530
Tom's Fax: 651-423-9609 (call first)
Created by
lockyer
Last modified
2005-09-30 04:03 PM
Forgot your password?
