brian foster - lcuk lancaster 1 summary of uk meetings and general lc world situation brian foster...

Brian Foster - LCUK Lancaster

1

Summary of UK meetings and general LC world situation

Brian Foster

Oxford

Summary of Steering Committee and Collaboration Council.

Report on world-wide developments since last LCUK

Outlook

LancasterJune 30th , 2004


2

LCUK Summary

Many thanks to everyone who read and commented onour submission to the Treasury on the 10-year forwardlook for science. It was submitted on time.

Most of the items discussed at the Steering Committee andCollaboration Council will be discussed in the main bodyof the report.

Lord Sainsbury visited SLAC on June 8th and spent about three hours there, visiting the accelerator test labs., theBaBar control room and the synchrotron radiation lab. Hewas very engaged and positive and he had a 10 minutesprivate conversation with J. Dorfan. Reports back fromhis private office said the visit was very successful.


3

LCUK Summary

We spent considerable time discussing the CLIC situationboth in the Steering Committee and the CollaborationCouncil. There was representation from the UK at thespecial meeting called by the DG to ask for member stateinput into CLIC R&D, but PPARC do not have any resourcesfor this at the moment. It is in any case essential that CLICis not used as a “spoiler” for the 1 TeV LC; but equally,in the long term, CLIC technology may provide a route toMulti-TeV energies.

The next LCUK meeting will be on December 21st,at Imperial College (tbc).


4

ICFA & ILCSC actions

ICFA met in Paris in March and welcomed the January 2004 OECD Ministerial Statement on International Cooperation on Large Accelerator-based Projects in High-Energy Physics. It reaffirmed its conviction that the highest priority for a new machine for particle physics is a linear electron-positron collider with an initial energy of 500 GeV, extendible up to about 1 TeV, with a significant period of concurrent running with the LHC.”

M. Tigner’s term as Chair of ILCSC was extended until 31.12.04. A successor will be discussed in August.


5

ICFA & ILCSC actionsILCSC meeting in Paris mostly discussed the Ozaki report on the Global Design Initiative (GDI). The report had been agreed by the Ozaki panel consisting of Ozaki, Dorfan, Foster, Namkung, Totsuka, Wagner. GDI planned to evolve from a first stage in which the workmostly goes on in the regions and is an extension of thecurrent work going on in the major labs, with central coordination by the GDI staff led by a Director supported by3 regional directors and a staff of around 20 – 30. GDI will be established as soon as ICFA have ratified the ITRP technology recommendation that will develop the chosen technology and coordinate and lead the remaining required R&D to produce a CDR and then TDR. In the later stages, as we approach the final TDR, governments will be formally associated with the endeavour.


6

GDI organisationFirst phase:


7

GDI organisationSecond phase:


8

ICFA & ILCSC actionsIn the discussion of the report, the ILCSC also discussed the implementation. It agreed that it would invite bids from suitable sites, either particle or nuclear physics laboratories, to host the GDI. An evaluation panel will be appointed, with two people selected by each of the three regional steering groups. The panel will be given a charge and bidder requirements. The announcement of the venue not be made before the technology selection is announced. Some labs may bid as the venue only if a specific technology is chosen, but such bids will be rated lower than bids made irrespective of technology choice. It wascommented that appropriate access to the host site is an important criterion. The panel will produce a list of sites grouped into broad categories, e.g. acceptable, highly acceptable etc, for the ILCSC, which will make a selection and report it to ICFA.


9

ICFA & ILCSC actions

It was also agreed that an informal search committee would be set up to consider names for the Director of the GDI. The search committee would consist of the Directors of the major labs on ILCSC, i.e. Aymar, Dorfan, Totsuka, Wagner, Witherell.

It is clear that there is significant linkage between the choices of Director, Site and Technology. It was agreed that these choices would be linked as far as is possible without making a decision impossible.

The CCLRC bid for the GDI site was submitted to ICFAyesterday.


10

ITRP progress

After initial exploratory meeting at RAL, ITRP visitschedule has been intensive:DESY and TESLA on 5/6 April 2004;3rd meeting: SLAC 26/27 April4th meeting: KEK 25/26 May5th meeting: Caltech 28/30 June6th meeting: Korea 11/13 August

Homework given to both technology proponents: answering ~ 34 questions

TopicsCommon LC technology comparison related questionsCost and Schedule related questions


11

ITRP progress

The feedback I have had is that the visits have gone very well, both technologies look rather impressive and that the committee are going to have a difficult job. However, they are working very well together and seem determined to come to a decision by the summer if at all possible. Certainly thatis the view of the chairman.

The current meeting is looking at implications from thedetector point of view of the technology choice and willhave a preliminary discussion of conclusions, with anaim to come to the final decision in the August meetingin South Korea, which can then be communicated to theBeijing meeting of ILCSC and ICFA.


12

Technology progressCold design: synergy with X-FEL.

planned LC

Site chosen

to make maximum use of DESY infrastructure

to avoid interference XFEL/LC

Preparation of legal approval

‘Staatsvertrag’ in preparation


13

Technology progress

AC70: gradient of 39.4 MV/m at 2K using EP at DESY not treated at 1400 C

High gradients is a high priority item at DESY and in TESLA collab.

1,00E+09

1,00E+10

1,00E+11

0 10 20 30 40

Eacc [MV/m]

Q0

2 K

1,8 K

1,6 K

1011

109

1010 Test of 1/8th of a TESLA cryomodule at 5 Hz, 500 s fill, 800s flat-top->35 MV/m with no interruption related to cavity-coupler-klystron for more than 1000 hours

No field emission

One cavity installed in TTF and has reached without problems 35 MV/m with beam

TESLA cavity progress.


14

Other events

By the CERN convention, CERN Council is supposed totake a view of particle physics in Europe, as well as the CERNlab. This function has rather withered away in the intervening 50 years; it is now being re-animated, although inmy view the changes in procedure necessary to make thiswork have not yet been discussed or agreed.

Council have had several discussions on LC-related issues.An important step is that a Council meeting outside CERNwill be held, on July 19th, in Rome. The only item on theagenda will be a discussion of the Linear Collider. Both theDirector of DESY and the Chair of ICFA have been invited.


15

Other events

The recent London meeting of the Halliday group was generally thought to be very positive, with agreement being reached by all parties on aiming to have a LC running by 2015, with an “exit path” in case LHC results clearly indicate that a 1 TeV LC would not be sensible, around 2009-10. The minutes of this meeting have been interpreted rather differently by different actors; the July meeting will hopefully introduce some further clarity.

An “ad-hoc” group of funding authorities has had twomeetings in London, chaired by Ian Halliday. This will alsomeet again, directly after Council. There is a clear dynamicof urgency from several countries, particularly USA.


16

Other events

Timetable for future events:

Continuation of discussion between funding agencies

Further studies of organisation structures

• Selection of Collider Technology (warm or cold) and setting up of an international project team with branches in America, Asia and Europe

2005 Start of work of project teams (Global Design Initiative)

2006 Completion of the project layout (CDR) including costing

2007 Submission of TDR to governments to go ahead with LC

2009 Start major spending

2015 Start of commissioning


17

Other events

The International LC Workshop was held in Paris on 19th – 23rd April. There was a very large attendance of around 320 and reports on a wide variety of work. B. Barish gave an update on the work of the ITRP.


18

EU & particle physics

CARE has now got well under way. There is growing activity both in the Network, where several workshops are being organised in the next few months, and in the Joint Research Activity, where real work has started.

The EU have recently sent the first tranche of payment of 5.235M€, which is being disbursed to the variousprime contractors.

CARE has discussed the reporting and organisation of the publications that will result from the activity.


19


The Design Studies are a separate EU initiativeare aimed at contributing to studies related to future facilities of European or World-wide significance by supporting feasibility studies and technical preparatory work (development and testing of critical components, subsystems …)

There are three pp activities that can be made tofit with this description: the LC, both TESLA & CLIC; NFand all its associated activity, including SPL (notethat the beams proposal was integrated in the EURISOL proposal led by nuclear physics and thereforewas not considered in competition with these) ; DAPHNEupgrade. The EU had announced 3 calls for DS, each separated by a year and each with the same resources.


20


It was clear that our chances would be maximised by submitting one DS to each of the three calls. ECFA took the view that the order of urgency and priority should be that the LC bid was submitted to this round, the NF to the next and the DAPHNE bid to the final call. This resulted in the EUROTEV bid being put onto the fast track and being submitted to the EU on 3rd March, with input from 27 different institutions across Europe. This enormous effort was coordinated by Eckhard Elsen at DESY, assisted by Nick Walker and Karsten Buesser, and by Gilbert Guignard at CERN. The total sum involved was 29M€, with 11.25M€ requested from EU.


21


The EU rep to the CERN Council 2 weeks ago announced that EuroTeV and EuroFEL (the FEL DS) had been approved, having come respectively 2nd and 1st in the rankedlist of projects from the referees. Although I have not seenthe definitive number, I believe that EuroTeV will be fundedat the level of around 9M€ from the EU.


22


Extract from the general comments of the referees:

“This is an outstanding proposal, complete and compelling in every regard. It will prepare for major European participation and leadership in the most technically challenging accelerator ever built. The tasks are very well organised and the complementarity of the participants is fully exploited.”

“Furthermore the anticipated scientific productivity of this machine is as high as any infrastructure of comparable scale in any field. The budgetary needs for this project are significant but justified. A larger contribution from the participating institutions should be considered.”


23


“There is a significant risk associated with this Design Study, namely staffing. The budget request is built upon a need for supporting a workforce roughly equivalent to 50 full time and 55 temporary personnel over the three-year performance period. This is a daunting task to identify and hire experts in all these areas, particularly for the temporary workers who may need to be released at the end of the DS.”

“This is especially challenging in light of the demands of accelerator physicists, engineers and technologists for other projects building up, including the LHC, XFEL, GSI upgrade, etc.”


24


“Furthermore, in the specific case of the EUROTeV project, it is not possible to justify a recommendation of funding at the maximum level at this time. The choice of the main linac technology by the International Technology Review Panel (ITRP), to be made shortly, will play a determining role in the prioritisation and exact technical description of the eight Work Packages. At that time, a more accurate assessment of the individual and total budgets required can be made. It should be emphasized also that this proposal should only be supported insofar as the EUROTeV collaboration is firmly committed to support and work within the framework of the international process for selection of the technology, leading to the construction of the ILC at the earliest possible time.”


25


That was the good news. The bad news is that apparently the EU has decided to scrap the next DS calls in order to concentrate on funding as manyproposals as possible from this DS round.

There will be further I3 calls in the near future. We willcertainly not get another Accelerator R&D I3, but perhapswe can submit extensions and addenda to the currentCARE package.


26

SummaryThe status of LC work in the UK is good. The AcceleratorInstitutes are starting to get off the ground and work on LC-ABD is under way. The detector development is makingexcellent progress.

The developments world-wide are also positive. Fundingagencies, particularly in the US, are starting to becomeinvolved. The ITRP is making every effort to make a promptdecision on the technology. There is broad agreement on thetimescales for going forward, and unanimity has beenexpressed on the need for a LC with overlap with LHCstarting operation in 2015.

There is a lot to do and the next 12 months will be a crucial time.

brian foster - lcuk lancaster 1 summary of uk meetings and general lc world situation brian foster...

Documents

project layout cdr

international project

europestart of work

summary of uk meetings

costingsubmission of