Public Report Akira Yamamoto, Marc Ross, and Nick Walker ILC-GDE Project Managers Prepared for ILC-PAC Review, Prague, Nov. 14-15, 2011 Preparation for

SCRF Industrialization

Public Report

Akira Yamamoto, Marc Ross, and Nick Walker

ILC-GDE Project Managers

Prepared for ILC-PAC Review, Prague, Nov. 14-15, 2011

Preparation forSCRF Industrialization

GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 1


Outline

• Introduction– Industrialization models

• Progress in Communication with industry

• Plan for further study


SCRF-ML Technology RequiredRDR Parameters Value

C.M. Energy 500 GeV

Peak luminosity 2x1034 cm-2s-1

Beam Rep. rate 5 Hz

Pulse time duration 1 ms

Average current 9 mA 　 (in pulse)

Av. field gradient 31.5 MV/m

# 9-cell cavity ~ 18,000(14,560 + ) a x 1.11

# cryomodule (8+4Q4+8, in study)

~ 2,000 (1,680+ )b x 1.08

# RF units ~ (560+ )g x 1.08

3GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011

RDR SB2009


Cavity Fabrication Process

He Tank

GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 SCRF Industrialization 4

Material/Sub-component

Cavity Fabrication

Surface Process

LHe-Tank Assembly

Vertical Test =Cavity RF Test

CryomoduleAssembly and RF Test


SCRF Procurement/Manufacturing Model

Regional hub-laboratories responsible to regional procurements to be open for any world-wide industry participation

Regional Hub-Lab:E, & …

Regional Hub-Lab:

A

Regional Hub-Lab:

B

Regional Hub-Lab:

D

World-wideIndustry responsible to

‘Build-to-Print’ manufacturing

ILC Host-Lab

Regional Hub-Lab:C: responsible to Hosting System

Test and Gradient Performance

Technical Coordinationfor Lab-Consortium

: Technical coordination link : Procurement link


Production Process/Responsibility

Step hosted Industry Industry/Laboratory

Hub-laboratory

ILC Host-laboratory

Regional constraint no yes yes yes

Accelerator - Integration, Commissioning

Accelerator sys. Integ.

SCRF Cryomodule - Perofrmance Test

Cold, gradient test

As partly as hub-lab

Cryomodule/Cavity- Assembly

Coupler, tuner, cav-string/cryomoduleassmbly work


Cryomodule component- Manufacturing

V. vessel, cold-mass ...

9-cell Cavity- Performance Test

Cold, gradient test


9-cell Cavity - Manufacturing

9-cell-cavity assembly, Chem-process, He-Jacketing

Sub-comp/material- Production/Procurement

Nb, Ti, specific comp. …

Procurement


Reference for Cavity Specification • Technical guideline for ILC-GDE TDR and the cost estimate:

– referring Specifications for E-XFEL SCRF 1.3 GHz Cavity, issued by DESY• EXFEL/001 and associated documents :Rev.B, June 2009, by courtesy of W. Singer (DESY-XFEL)),• The reference specification is available with ILC-GDE PMs, under permission of W. Singer (DESY-XFEL) • URL: http://ilcagenda.linearcollider.org/event/ILC-SCRF-TR


scrf-treq

Courtesy:W. Singer

http://ilcagenda.linearcollider.org/event/ILC-SCRF-TR

Technical Specification Example for Nb Sheet

• Electrical Properties– RRR: > 300

• Chemical contents– see table

• Microstructure– Re-crystalized 100 %– Grain-size: ASTM 6 or finer– Local grain size: ASTM 4-5

• Mechanical Properties– Ultimate strength: > 140 N/mm2, RT– Yield strength: TBD (> xx N/mm2, RT)– Elogation; > 30 %– Hardness: ≤ 60

• Shape/size: TBD – Rect. Sheet : ~ 300 mm sq. or – Circular sheet: ~280 mm dia. with a center-hole

• Possibility of Blanking (in consortium: to be discussed)

– Thickness : 2.8 mm +/- 0.1 mm– Flatness: 2 % or better– Surface roughness: < 15 mm (RF side)


Cavity Deliverable assuming EXFEL cavity specification


• From EXFEL specification: 02L BQM-Cavity in He Tank

Courtesy:W. Singer

10

Cavity with plug-compatibility Important for Global Cooperation

Plug-compatible interface need to be establishedGDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 SCRF Industrialization

Blade and Slide-Jack Tuners



Outline

• Introduction

• Progress in Communication with industry– Progress since May 2011 and status

• Plan for further study



SCRF Industrialization Study • Our efforts:

– Understand status of industry, and discuss technology and the cost saving effort for the ILC scale production

– Study the ILC SCRF industrialization models

• Two approaches in 2011~:– Visiting and communication with potential industry

• visit industry and discuss ‘request for information’ for cost-study, with currently available industrial technology

– Study on specific subjects with small-contracts• Possible Factory layout for cavity production (in AS; KEK centered)• System engineering for mass production (in EU; CERN centered)

– The coordination meeting held at CERN, in May, July, Sept., 2011• Mass production technology study prepared (in AMs; Fermilab centered)



Communication with Industry in 2011

• Visit factories, and Request for information– Based on currently available manufacturing technology and available

information with worldwide industry

• Assume the EXFEL ‘build-to-print’ specifications as a common reference,

and

• Allow alternate designs with ‘plug-compativility’ and with the equivalent or

lestt cost and/or with better performance

• Requests for information to companies

1. Cost comparisons: 20/50/100 % in 3 / 6 year after 2-year preparation ?

2. Factory-site location: company or laboratory ?

3. Sharing responsibilities for the cost-effective production ?

4. Deliverables with ‘build-to-print’ fabrication?

5. Consortium to be considered or not


Communication with CompaniesNb, NbTi Material Venders

Date Company Place Technical sbject

1 2/8 Hitachi Tokyo (JP) Cavity/Cryomodule

2 2/8 Toshiba Yokohana (JP) Cavity/Cryomodule, SCM

3 2/9 MHI Kobe (JP) Cavity / Cryomodule

4 2/9 Tokyo Denkai Tokyo (JP) Material (Nb)

5 2/18 OTIC NingXia (CN) Material (Nb, NbTi, Ti)

6 (3/3), 9/14 Zanon Via Vicenza (IT) Cavity/Cryomodule

7 3/4, RI Koeln (DE) Cavity

8 (3/14), 4/8 AES Medford, NY (US) Cavity

9 (3/15), 4/7 Niowave Lansing, MI (US) Cavity/Cryomodule

10 4/6 PAVAC Vancouver (CA) Cavity

11 4/25 ATI Wah-Chang Albany, OR (US) Material (Nb, Nb-Ti, Ti)

12 4/27 Plansee Ruette (AS) Material (Nb, Nb-Ti, Ti)

13 5/24 SDMS Sr. Romans (FR) Cavity

14 7/6 Heraeus Hanau (DE) Material (Nb, Nb-Ti, Ti)

15 10/18 Babcock-Noell Wurzburg (DE) CM assembly study

16 11/11 SST Maisach (DE) Electron Beam Welder15

Material Cost-study compared with RDR & EXFEL (updated: Nov., 2011)

ILC:RDR

EXFEL ILC:TD OT AW PL

Prep.+Prod. Yrs. 2+3 ~1.5 2+6-1 2+6-1 2+6-1 2+6-1

Fraction 100% 100% 20%(max.)

20% 20% 20%

# Cavity(Nb sheet weight)

17,000 600 3,200, (98 tons)

3,200 3,200 3,200

SC Material

Currentcy unit

GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 16SCRF Industrialization

Note: The aboveILC material cost is 9-cell cavity’s central part only, Total SC material cost including end-group need to be ~ 10 % higherWe assume the material cost : 20 x (1+0.1) = 22 K ILCU Including the QA/QC cost of “ 2 ”, the total material cost : >>> 22+2 = 24 k-ILCU

Communication with CompaniesSC Cavity Manufacturers

Date Company Place Technical sbject

1 2/8 Hitachi Tokyo (JP) Cavity/Cryomodule

2 2/8 Toshiba Yokohana (JP) Cavity/Cryomodule, SCM

3 2/9 MHI Kobe (JP) Cavity / Cryomodule

4 2/9 Tokyo Denkai Tokyo (JP) Material (Nb)

5 2/18 OTIC NingXia (CN) Material (Nb, NbTi, Ti)

6 (3/3), 9/14 Zanon Via Vicenza (IT) Cavity/Cryomodule

7 3/4, RI Koeln (DE) Cavity

8 (3/14), 4/8 AES Medford, NY (US) Cavity

9 (3/15), 4/7 Niowave Lansing, MI (US) Cavity/Cryomodule

10 4/6 PAVAC Vancouver (CA) Cavity

11 4/25 ATI Wah-Chang Albany, OR (US) Material (Nb, Nb-Ti, Ti)

12 4/27 Plansee Ruette (AS) Material (Nb, Nb-Ti, Ti)

13 5/24 SDMS Sr. Romans (FR) Cavity

14 7/6 Heraeus Hanau (DE) Material (Nb, Nb-Ti, Ti)

15 10/18 Babcock-Noell Wurzburg (DE) CM assembly study

16 11/11 SST Maisach (DE) Electron Beam Welder17

Cavity Cost-study compared w/ RDR and EXFEL (updated, Nov., 2011)

ILC:RDR

EXFEL:Original 300

Courtesy, H.W.

EXFEL:+ 80

Courtesy, H.W.

ILC:RI AES MHI

Prep.+Prod. Yrs. 2+3 1+2.5 ? 2+6 2+6 2+6

Fraction 100% 2 x 50% ~ same 20% 20% 20%

# cavity 17,000 300 +80 3,200 3,200, 3,200

SC Material (supplied)

Mech. Fabrication including EBW

Chemistry

Ti He-Vessel

Others

Factory investment

Fab. Cost/cavity(+ SC-mat.= Sum)

Unit

Cost Comparison in ILCU

18

Updated Cavity Cost-study compared with RDR and E-FXEL (as of Oct., 2011)

ILC:RDR

EXFEL:Original 300

Courtesy, H.W.

EXFEL:+ 80

Courtesy, H.W.

ILC:RI AES MHI

Prep.+Prod. Yrs. 2+3 1+2.5 ? 2+6 2+6 2+6

Fraction 100% 2 x 50% ~ same 20% 20% 20%

# cavity 17,000 300 +80 3,200 3,200, 3,200

SC Material (supplied)

Mech. Fabrication including EBW

Chemistry

Ti He-Vessel

Accept. Test (RT)

Factory investment

Fab. Cost/cavity(+ SC-mat.= Sum)

Unit

Cost Comparison in ILCU

19

Confidential

Further mass production cost study with contracts in progress: - RI-DESY: 50, 100 % production cost including

facility cost- AES-FNAL: 20 % (& more as option) facility investment

cost- MHI-KEK: 50, 100 % production cost w/ facility

cost

To be completed by spring, 2012.


Outline

• Introduction

• Progress in Communication with industry

• Plan for further study– Evaluation of technical input– Further detail cost studies with regional efforts

through key laboratories,



Plan for Further Work

• Evaluation of the industrial response – Frame and common format suggested for smooth

comparisons.

• Cost estimate process and conditions:– Technical survey and investigation for cost-effective

production – Model dependent cost comparison (20~100%) to be further

quantitatively evaluated – Hub laboratory’s input inevitable specially for cryomodule

assembly and cold test – Project management scope how global cooperation and

sharing the production to be taken into account– More mutual work with cost-engineers inevitable



Technical Information Received


- To be carefully evaluated, in cooperation of PMs and Cost-engineers


Further Plans to prepare TDR

• Cost-estimate work for TDR (by April, 2012)– Communication with industry under contract

• Cavity: RI (w/ DESY), AES (w/ Fermilab), MHI (w/ KEK), • Cryomodule Assembly: BN (w/ CERN), Hitachi (w/ KEK), • Quadrupole: Toshiba (Q, w/KEK)• HLRF (SLAC, KEK)

– Communication with laboratories • Fermilab, JLab, CERN, DESY, Saclay, INFN, KEK, …

• Technical specification to be fixed for TDR cost – SCRF meeting at IHEP, Dec. 8-9, 2011– SCRF-TBR, Jan. 19-20, 2011– GDE meeting, 23-26, April

• GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 23


Technical Issues toward TDR• Cavity gradient :

– Update and fix the cavity production and process recipe.

– Update and fix the successful production yield definition in production stage, • including new parameters such as radiation, and the process w/ tumbling

– Gradient spread of 31.5 MV/m +/-20 %, with sorting method,

– Gradient degradation after assembly into the cryomodule (see: HLRF/DRFS w/ circulator)

• Cavity Integration– A baseline design chosen for the TDR cost-estimate base,

• Including selection of tuner, coupler, beam-flange, magnetic shield, and LHe tank

– Plug-compatible design to be allowed in case of cost equivalent or more cost effective.

– Cavity delivery condition with LHe-tank, and cold-test sequence/monitor,

• Cryomodule and Cavity-string Assembly– Cryomodule string configuration with 8 + (4+Q+4) + 8 cavity-string assembly

– Simplification of 5K radiation-shield: simplification of bottom, and removal at inter-connect.

– Split-yoke, conduction-cooled quadrupoles

– Efficient alignment

• Cavity and Cryomodule Test – Warm conditioning of Input Coupler: before or after installation into the tunnel

– Cold performance test: How much fraction to be cold tested? Subjects to be tested?



Demonstrations and Evaluation of Various Couplers and Tuners in S1-Global

• Every coupler and tuner demonstrated, as expected, and be applicable for ILC cavities

• Finding various subjects to be further investigated and settledGDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 25

Continued

• Cryogenics– Location and the options (reducing the number of station) of cryogenic

systems,– Capacity optimization and heat balance with cryomodule heat-load

• HLRF– KCS/DRFS/RDR-unit HLRF system configuration including backup

power supply and utilities with the single tunnel design– Marx generator to be a baseline modulator, – AC power capacity optimization with gradient spreads, – Adaptability against cavity degradation after installation into cryomodule,

by using circulator and power distribution system, – Optimizations for low-power and high-power option. – Tunable power distbribution system

• ML Integration – Beam dynamics

• Quadrupole/BPM periodicity, locations, alignment, and beam tunability, • Bunch spacing limit specially on KCS (requirement of DR beam dynamics)

– Availability, reliability, and backup of cryomodules to be required GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 SCRF Industrialization 26

How to prepare for TDR?

• Discussion during LCWS

• Further technical discussion in TTC, Dec. 5 - 8• ILC Specific discussion in post-TTC, Dec. 8-9,

• Consensus for TDR writing, BTR at KEK, Jan. 19 – 20, 2012



Summary

• Cost-study in Communication with industry– Major companies responded to our ‘request for information’, and we

have received costing information.– More effort required to reduce the mass production cost, – We are in progress to communicate with industry ,

• to figure out production scale and cost-effective facility (recent reports attached), • to prepare for the information on the model dependent cost estimates (20 ~ 100 %).

– Further study required on risk-mitigation in the various models.

• Cost study in Communication with Laboratories – Communication with potential regional hub-laboratories will be

important to establish a whole scope of the cryomodule assembly/test.• DESY, Fermilab, and KEK are working to understand more mass production with

globally distributed production and/or single facility prodcution, • CERN’s involvement is very important to figure out a lab-hosting cryomodule

assembly and test models, in contract with industry



Backup Slides

• Reference information to establish baseline design for the TDR cost estimates


SCRF Industrialization 30

9-cell cavities: ~ 18,000 (17,325) production

Required Production in ILC

Cryomodule: ~2,000 (1,824) production

Pre-production 2 years +Full production 6 years

GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011

Standard Procedure Establishedfor ILC-SCRF Cavity evaluation, in guidance of TTC

Standard Fabrication/Process

Fabrication Nb-sheet purchasing

Component Fabrication

Cavity assembly with EBW

Process EP-1 (~150um)

Ultrasonic degreasing with detergent, or ethanol rinse

High-pressure pure-water rinsing

Hydrogen degassing at > 600 C

Field flatness tuning

EP-2 (~20um)

Ultrasonic degreasing or ethanol (or EP 5 um with fresh acid)

High-pressure pure-water rinsing

Antenna Assembly

Baking at 120 C

Cold Test (vertical test)

Performance Test with temperature and mode measurement

31GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 SCRF Industrialization

Key ProcessFabrication• Material • EBW• Shape

Process • Electro-Polishing

• Ethanol Rinsing or • Ultra sonic. + Detergent

Rins.

• High Pr. Pure Water cleaning

allow twice

Cryomodule Gradient Spread and Degradation Observed at DESY and KEK, as of Nov. 2010

• FLASH: – 3 PXFEL cryomodules

• ILC R&D:– S1-Global cryomodule– CM1 (S1-Local @ Fermilab)

• Current status: – 12/40 degraded with ~ 20 %


1 - AC129 2 - AC123 3 - AC125 4 - Z143 5 - Z103 6 - Z93 7 - Z100 8 - AC1130

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

FLASH 30MV/m XFEL goal

13.07.2009

EA

CC [M

V/m

]

cavity

Cavity tests: Vertical ( CW ) Horizontal (10Hz) CMTB M8 (10Hz) CMTB (10Hz)

very

long

CW

cond

ition

ing

Cavities gradient limits

1 - Z141 2 - AC150 3 - Z133 4 - Z139 5 - AC122 6 - AC121 7 - AC128 8 - AC1150

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


XFEL goal

04.05.2010

EA

CC [M

V/m

]

cavity

Cavity tests: Vertical ( CW ) Horizontal(10Hz) CMTB (10Hz)

MP

1 - Z135 2 - AC124 3 - Z88 4 - Z134 5 - Z101 6 - AC127 7 - Z140 8 - Z970

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


XFEL goal

13.09.2010E

AC

C [

MV

/m]

cavity

Cavity tests: Vertical ( CW ) Horizontal(10Hz) CMTB (10Hz)

MP

FE

FE

PXFEL-1 PXFEL-2 PFEL-3

S1-Global

D. Kostin & E. Kako

Current statistics on cavity gradient degradation

Institute ProjectFraction of

Degradation　　DESY/FLASH PXFEL Prototype-1 2/8

　　　 PXFEL Prototype-2 2/8　　　 PXFEL Prototype-3 1/8　　Fermi Lab CM-1 4/8　　KEK S1-Global 3/8　　Total 　 12/40


•Statistics, available now (see right table)

•Rate of degradation with > ~ 20 % ~12/40, which leads to ~30%. This is too high, and efforts of improving is required. How improved? Maybe up to ~10%. (acceptable?) 　•Sorting after vertical test is planed in DRFS. Furthermore 10% decrease of gradient is likely occurred and this reality should included at the construction plan. This effect also results in cost-up.

a. Numbers of cavities and rf units must be increased if total acceleration is short and it is not compensated by the overhead.

b. Since DRFS employs one rf unit feeds powers to 2 or 4 cavities without using circulator, and therefore cavity gradient sorting is inevitable, effect of unexpected cavity gradient degradation is larger than other scheme such as RDR and KCS.

Operational experiences


Estimate assuming 1/10 cavities degraded with 20 %

• Simple Calculation – 80 % pairs with full performance and 20 % pairs with

0.8 x full performance • 0.8 x 1 + 0.2 x 0.8 = 0.96 without circulators, • 0.8 x 1 + 0.2 x {(1 +0.8)/2} = 0.98 with circulators, • Difference to be 0.02 = 2 % of {Cavity+HLRF} cost required to

add/compensate this degradation,

– Necessary study • Full circulator + distributors cost to be evaluated in comparison

with the additional cryomodule backup cost (additional extension of linac).

• Operational flexibility and better efficiency by circulators and power distributors to be evaluated

GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011

Cavity Deliverable assuming EXFEL cavity specification


• From EXFEL specification: 02L BQM-Cavity in He Tank

Courtesy:W. Singer

EXFEL Cavity and Tuner


S1-Global Assembly/Test with Global Effort

GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 SCRF Industrialization

DESY, FNAL, Jan., 2010

INFNand FNALFeb. 2010

FNAL & INFN, July, 2010

DESY, May, 2010March, 2010 June, 2010 ~

DESY, Sept. 2010

37

38

MHI-09MHI-07

MHI-06MHI-05AES004 ACC011 Z108 Z109

FNAL DESY KEK

Comparison of cavity performance ave. Eacc,max VT : 30 MV/m1 cav : 27 MV/m7 cav : 26 MV/m

D

C

D : DetuneC : Coupler

D

Performance reduction in two cavities and one couplerTuner mechanics trouble in two cavities

GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011 SCRF Industrialization

Stability in 6300 sec.LLRF stability study with 7 cavities operation at 25MV/m

Field Waveform of each cavity

- Vector-sum stability: 24.995MV/m ~ 24.988MV/m (~0.03%)- Amplitude stability in pulse flat-top: < 60ppm=0.006%rms- Phase stability in pulse flat-top: < 0.0017 degree.rms

vector-sum gradient

amplitude stability in pulse flat-top

phase stability in pulse flat-top

7-cavity operation by digital LLRF



A Proposal Revised

• Keep the concept of 8 cavity sting unit, to be simplified• Accept two typs of Cryomodules (from Cryomodule

manufacturing)

9 4 + Q +4 9

8 8Q 8

8 4 + Q +4 8



Quadrupole Cross-Section

LHe tank for current leads connections

Beam pipe Iron yoke

V. Kashikhin, FNAL Review, March 2, 2010GDE-PMs, 14th Nov. 2011


R&D/Demonstration Required

• Rapid response to beam handling – Study by K. Kubo and K. Yokoya

• R&D cooperation under discussion between Fermilab and KEK– Magnet by Fermilab and Conduction cooling by KEK

Peak field Response required

Quadrupole 30 T/m*m 0.01 T/m*m/sec (0.03% /sec)

Dipole 0.05 T*m 3E-4 Tm/sec (0.6 % /sec)


Access Routes with Mountain-site


Layout of 2K Cryoplants

ML BDS IP

2K Cryoplants

RDR-based

How about this?


High-Level RF SolutionsKlystron Cluster Scheme, KCS (SLAC)

Distributed RF Sources, DRFS (KEK)

2×35 10MW MB klystrons


~4000×800kW klystrons

Documents

Public Report Akira Yamamoto, Marc Ross, and Nick Walker ILC-GDE Project Managers Prepared for ILC-PAC Review, Prague, Nov. 14-15, 2011 Preparation for