Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy High Energy Physics FY 2008 OMB Presentation Dr. Robin...

Office of Science

U.S. Department of Energy

High Energy Physics

FY 2008 OMB Presentation

Dr. Robin Staffin, Associate Director

Office of High Energy Physics

Office of Science

(Grannis contributions)

Office of Science


2

Top physics candidates

Office of Science


3

New Higgs boson limits (see next slide). 1 inverse femtobarn accumulated luminosity improves many measurements of top quark, supersymmetry searches, b-quark hadron properties. Tevatron has set new records.

Tevatron experiments measure Bs mixing frequency (important because ratio of Bs and Bd mixing removes the major theoretical source of error due to B meson wave function, thus permitting much improved search for new physics.

Observation of separated dark and visible matter in distant galaxies (did DOE have enough stake in this to count it?)

NUMI experiment surpasses previous K2K measurement of the neutrino mass (squared) difference using accelerator generated neutrinos.

Attaining xx GV/m accelerating gradient in plasma and laser driven plasma acceleration.

Cosmic ray events in both Atlas and CMS, in preparation for 2007 LHC start.

ILC R&D program established under the international GDE team, with approximately equal funding from Asia, Europe and Americas.

Candidate top HEP results in FY06:

Office of Science


4

Results from FY 2005

The Tevatron has now delivered over 1.7 inverse femtobarns to CDF and DØ. Physics analyses based on up to 1 fb-1 in summer 2006 have now reduced the limit on Standard Model Higgs production to within about a factor of five above the SM.

Revised estimates now predict 95% confidence level limits within the mass range 115 to 185 GeV with 8 fb-1 of data, and evidence or discovery in some mass regions.

Rat

io o

f cu

rren

t lim

it t

o S

M c

ross

sec

tio

n

Office of Science


5

SC RF infrastructure

Office of Science


6

SC RF R&D and Infrastructure

Superconducting rf acceleration is the new standard for accelerators across the DOE SC spectrum – new light sources, energy recovery linacs, electron accelerators for nuclear physics, neutron spallation facilities, heavy ion accelerators, neutrino sources and the high energy HEP frontier – enabling new advances in many branches of science.

SCRF has been developed largely in HEP and exported to other applications. SCRF is the enabling technology for the ILC.

Advancing SCRF requires major investments both in infrastructure at laboratories (Nb surface processing, new fabrication methods, testing single cavities, cryomodules, strings of cryomodules), and to transfer technology to industry and develop cost effective production capability.

Office of Science


7

Past advances in increasing the accelerating gradients have been made in Germany and Japan.

Developing expertise in US industry and labs needed for the next generation of US facilities, e.g. to make the US a credible candidate ILC host, our SCRF capability must be enhanced. Developing reliable SCRF is key ILC R&D priority.

The cost of SCRF infrastructure is large; DESY spent over $150M over several years (European accounting). Proposal to EU Framework 7 for new SCRF facility at CERN. Japan is building a large new test facility.

If $60M for ILC in FY2007, plan to spend $23M for SCRF infrastructure and industry procurements; explicit tracking of this category.

SC RF R&D and Infrastructure

Office of Science


8

FY2008 SC RF over target request

Request $47M over target to develop the US capability in superconducting rf acceleration, to benefit the broader goals of SC.

1. Produce sufficient quantities of SC cavities in industry to develop production techniques in a tight loop feedback process. Over target request $22M

2. Build infrastructure at laboratories to develop surface treatment processes, single cavity and cryomodule test stands and associated cryogenic, rf power, diagnostic instrumentation at laboratories. Over target request $25M

Office of Science


9

SC RF Laboratories

Coordinating role at Fermilab, with infrastructure development for cavity, cryomodule and string tests.

ANL: High volume facility for surface preparation using buffered chemical polishing and electropolishing.

TJNAF: Development of new materials and maintain modest volume capability for cavity fabrication and electropolishing.

LANL: test stand for single cavities

SLAC/LLNL: develop high power rf power systems

Universities* (Cornell, Michigan State): modest surface preparation facilities, develop new electropolishing techniques, new cavity fabrication techniques.

* Joint DOE/NSF support

Office of Science


10

ILC

Office of Science


11

FY 2006 ILC accomplishments

Global Design Effort team developed the ILC baseline design and puts it under change control.

First review of US ILC R&D (joint DOE/NSF) program by international team of consultants.

First single cell Nb cavity with over 50 MV/m gradient. First US 9 cell cavity at ILC gradient.

Beam test shows proof of principle for polarized positron source.

Lab tests indicate a solution for ‘electron cloud’ instability problem.

Office of Science


12

FY 2007 effort

The Reference Design Report (RDR) will be completed in early 2007, based on four sample sites worldwide (near Fermilab for US). Flexibility has been built to allow revisions responding to need to control of major cost drivers.

Cost estimation will be completed with Reference Design Report, based on ‘value’ methodology similar to ITER, that allows translation into any national accounting scheme.

R&D will address both the elements of the baseline design, and the alternates holding promise for cost reduction or improved reliability.

On the international level, work to regularize the commitment to the R&D-phase program.

Office of Science


13

FY 2007 plan

1. International review of cost estimate

2. Initiate the technical (engineering) design

3. R&D themes (with President’s request of $60M):a) Perfect the cavity surface treatment and fabrication steps for high yield

and reliability

b) Cryomodule design and prototype fabrication

c) Develop/prototype/test the main components of the rf power system and distribution

d) Demonstrate the essential features of the damping rings for generating low emittance

e) High availability electronics & instrumentation systems

f) Design of positron source systems

4. Deliver the goal/milestone/resources plan for US ILC R&D (late 2006) and the GDE international plans.

Office of Science


14

FY 2008 plan

With $75M (25% increase over FY2007 President’s request) and no over-target increase for SCRF infrastructure and R&D, would support modest increase in FTE effort, and raise the M&S component by about 50%.

This should allow completion of the R&D aimed at demonstating reliable high yield fabrication of cavities and the rf power systems, but will not permit development of the prototypes of 8-cavity cryomodules or preparation of the infrastructure needed for string tests of the full acceleration systems.

There are important tasks in developing the US capability for key technologies and positioning the US to make a credible bid to host if the government decides to do so.

Office of Science


15

FY 2008 plan

Goals if target budget

Look at kephart time line; look at MOUs at slac, anl, lbl

Additional activities at over-target

Kephart time line for cryomodule tests, string test, materials research. Extra engagement in industry (22M?)

Prototype Marx? Sheet beam klystrons?

Office of Science


16

With over target budget for SCRF infrastructure and R&D, ILC R&D will be able to prepare cryomodule and string tests during FY 2008 – 2010. The 5 year integral with SCRF meets the EPP2010 recommended R&D spending.

$50M

$100M

$150M

$200M

$250M

200 1

200 2

200 3

200 4

200 5

200 6

200 7

200 8

200 9

201 0

201 1

201 2

ILC R&D

SCRF

Detectors

The R&D phase of ILC R&D should follow a profile similar to that of a construction project. The synergy with SCRF activity is important to ILC as well as serving the broader DOE SC program. Without the SCRF effort the profile fails to meet the need to validate the ILC design or satisfy the 10-15% (of project cost) rule of thumb.

ILC R&D phase profile

Office of Science


17

2nd iteration

Office of Science


18

1. Epp2010 $500M over 5 yrs (plus elements of regional needs, detector), cern strategy (‘essential’)r&d phase now underway to lead to construction start 2012; r&d to set ground work for making the project decision. Most benefit beyond HEP stems from r&d

2. fy07 investment and plan with 60M; r&d plan by ART, GDE task forces; 3. What done at what labs/universities4. Need for scrf r&d and infrastructure; DESY investment; Framework 7, Japan.

This is basis for the $47M over target. Summarize US accelerators, and what enabled them from HEP

5. Fy08 plan, with overtarget – what general themes (r&d, detector, scrf infra, industry, management costs)what is deferred if not the overtarget

6. International scene: FALC activities; discussions with Japan, china, india, europe, russia, canada

7. Timeline – parallel efforts by GDE, FALC, funding

Office of Science


19

The US and its international partners are in the R&D phase to validate the technology, prepare the detailed design and cost of a future ILC project. ILC project approval will require successful completion of this R&D phase, validation of the scientific potential at the LHC, selection of a site and preliminary agreement on the partnership and potential roles. Project start would not occur before FY2012.

The R&D phase will deliver much of the societal benefits – development of superconducting rf acceleration technology.

Current R&D expenditures are equal in Asia, Europe and Americas (at $60M/yr in US accounting).

ILC R&D

Office of Science


20

EPP2010 Report “The US should launch a major† program of R&D, design, industrialization, and management and financing studies of the ILC accelerator and detectors.” (as the highest priority future effort.

European strategy for particle physics (2006): “It is fundamental* to complement the results of the LHC with measurements at a linear collider.”

“The first general meeting of the [Japanese] Federation of Diet members to promote the realisation of ILC … As an important international project in the fundamental sciences, the Federation decided to give strong support toward the realisation of the ILC.” (ILC News, 6-22-06)

* CERN strategy group lexicon:

† EPP2010 identified R&D costs as $500M over FY2007 -- 2011. Adding FY2006 actual and FY2012 estimate, detector R&D, SCRF infrastructure raises this to $820M.

Worldwide commitment to ILC

Office of Science


21

GDE FY2007 plans

Complete Reference Design, cost estimate. Aim for international review under FALC oversight (Lehman from US).

R&D on most critical baseline elements and those alternates holding promise for cost saving or improvement in reliability.

Restructure the GDE to begin the Technical (engineering) Design activities. This will require more engineering worldwide, and more authority for GDE to direct activities and deploy funds.

Develop world R&D phase plan. At present 4 task forces (cavities and cryomodule, string tests, damping rings, final focus/beam delivery) are established to define the goals, timelines, allocation of effort around the world. Expect first reports around end 2006, with further elaboration of the R&D plan in 2007.

Office of Science


22

Past investment by HEP in SCRF has led to current facilities CEBAF and SNS. The future of light sources (for material science, environmental studies, structural biology), energy recovery linacs, rare isotope accelerators, heavy ion research, and intense neutrino beams depends on expanding the capability of SCRF.

Shorter high gradient linacs should provide spin-offs for medical and industrial applications (e.g. neutron therapy)

In the near term high gradient SCRF relies on the ILC R&D program.

The chief broader benefit of the ILC R&D program is acquisition of the SCRF technology.

HEP has enabled past advances in other fields: the SPPS and LCLS at SLAC for short time resolution imaging, structural biology, plasma studies, chemical kinetics are dependent on the investment and experience at the SLAC linac.

Superconducting rf acceleration – the key to future accelerators

Office of Science


23

DOE/OHEP has recognized the generic importance of SCRF R&D and infrastructure and will define a budget category for it in FY 2007. Budget $23M (if FY2007 appropriation is at $60M).

The FY2008 over target request of $47M for SCRF infrastructure and industrial partnership is essential for advancing ILC R&D, and for establishing the basis for future SC facilities. Without such infrastructure and industrial capability, the advanced DOE/SC accelerator facilities will not be possible.

Developing high yield, cost-effective and reproducible SC cavities is the highest priority for the ILC R&D program worldwide.


Office of Science


24

US lags Europe and Japan in developing superconducting rf (SCRF) technology. With ~20,000 SCRF cavities in ILC, it is probable that all three regions must contribute. Hosting ILC requires SCRF industrial and laboratory test capability in the US.

DESY Tesla Test Facility: Cost was >$150M (~FY1995), SWF not included.

Where we are now


Current estimate for 6 year cost of SCRF infrastructure and industrial procurement of cavities and cryomodules is $452M

Office of Science


25

SC RF Effort

Coordinating role at Fermilab, with infrastructure development for cavity, cryomodule and string tests.

ANL: High volume facility for surface preparation using buffered chemical polishing and electropolishing.

TJNAF: Development of new materials and maintain modest volume capability for cavity fabrication and electropolishing.

LANL: test stand for single cavities

SLAC/LLNL: develop high power rf power systems

Universities* (Cornell, Michigan State, William&Mary, Old Dominion, Wisconsin, Northwestern): modest surface preparation facilities, develop new electropolishing techniques, new cavity fabrication techniques, materials research.

* DOE and NSF support

Office of Science


26

US FY2007 plans (assuming $60M)

~$120M in work package requests for R&D and engineering design from labs and universities, prioritized to fit $60M budget.

* Generic R&D examples: high availability power supplies, beam simulations, laser development, high power rf sources, SCRF materials research … .

Top R&D priority is getting reliable 35 MV/m cavities and infrastructure needed to refine process and test prototypes.

By end 2006, complete a 3 year R&D plan for US R&D: goals, resource needs, milestones, deliverables. (Must be iterated with GDE guidance on worldwide plans)

Detector R&D multiyear plan with goals, milestones, resource needs.

Category Budget % request

ILC specific R&D $6.9 57%

Generic* R&D $4.4 32%

SCRF infrastructure/industry $23.2 42%

Engineering design $9.4 59%

Management $4.6 74%

Detector $5.0 35%

Reserve $6.5

Office of Science


27

Deployment of FY2007 Labs effort

FNAL (47%): SCRF cavity, cryomodule; SCRF test infrastructure; beam optics; civil construction; outreach; magnet design.

SLAC (37%): rf power sources and tests; rf distribution; high availabilty power supplies; controls; electron/positron sources; damping ring optics; bunch compressor; beam alignment; wakefield studies; magnet design; electron cloud tests; beam instrumentation.

ANL (5%): damping ring design; cavity surface treatment.

BNL (3%): final focus magnets.

LBNL (3%): damping ring design; positron source; vacuum engineering.

LLNL (3%): rf couplers; rf pulse power systems; positron target; beam position monitor.

TJNAF (1%): cavity surface treatment, large grain Nb cavity development.

LANL (1%): cavity testing.

Office of Science


28

FY2008 plans ($75M ILC + $47M SCRF)

1. ILC R&D: Prototype & tests of key components – undulator for photons and positron source target, damping ring collective effects, final focus magnets and optics design, bunch compressor beam elements, ILC cryomodule fabrication, … (~$20M)

2. Generic R&D also needed for ILC: test high efficiency dc to pulse power modulators, develop and test high efficiency klystrons; test new cost reducing rf power components; test high availabilty power supplies, prototype large grain niobium cavities, … (~$17M)

3. Engineering design (largely manpower) (~$12M)

Sum of ILC R&D and design (items 1 -3) : $49M

Office of Science


29


4. Detector R&D: prototype energy flow calorimeters and test beam studies, development of pixel detector electronics with analog energy/time information, develop compact silicon sensors for muon/tracking signal collection, prototype data concentrators and signal multiplexing, integrated detector design, … ($20M). [This would raise the US detector R&D effort to that in Europe.]

5. Site evaluation: characterization of geological features of candidate sites, preliminary environmental assessment, impact of local land use, … ($4M)

6. Management: GDE common fund, salaries of top management; US communicator and public outreach … ($2M)

Office of Science


30


7. SCRF infrastructure: facilities for electropolishing, chemical polishing of Nb surfaces, electron beam welding stations, horizontal test stands for fully dressed cavities for high power tests (with cryogenic, rf, intrumentation infrastructure), cryomodule test stand (1 cryomodule = 8 cavities), facilities for string tests of rf units with beam (1 rf unit = 3 cryomodules, one quadrupole, powered by one klystron), … ($25M)

8. Industrial SCRF procurements: SCRF cavities for testing process steps & installation in test cryomodules, rf couplers, rf power components (klystrons, modulators, distribution), cryomodules, … ($22M)

Total SCRF infrastructure and R&D (items 7,8) ($47M)

With over target budget for SCRF infrastructure and ILC R&D, will be able to prepare cryomodule and string tests during FY 2008 – 2010, on timeline to match efforts in Europe and Japan and enable consideration of ILC project.

Office of Science


31

Out year projections

The R&D phase of ILC R&D should follow a profile similar to that of a construction project. The synergy with SCRF activity is important to ILC as well as serving the broader DOE SC program.

EPP2010 estimate (adding infrastructure, detector R&D not included) is a five-year integral of $820M.

Without the SCRF effort the profile fails to meet the need to validate the ILC design or put the US in a position to make a credible bid to host.

Office of Science


32

$50M

$100M

$150M

$200M

$250M200 1

200 2

200 3

200 4

200 5

200 6

200 7

200 8

200 9

201 0

201 1

201 2

ILC R&D

SCRF

Detectors

Out year projections

Office of Science


33

FALC = Funding Agencies Linear Collider (US DOE, US NSF, Canada, Germany, France, UK, Italy, CERN (smaller EU nations), Japan, S. Korea (India, China, Russia to be added?)

Have established small common fund for GDE.

International review of Reference Design cost estimate (2007)

Document technological benefits of ILC for governments/industry

Coordinate planning of large world projects (ILC, LHC upgrade, intense sources, CLIC R&D)

TO DO:

Establish procedure and time table for site proposals, evaluations (needed to complete TDR).

Formalize oversight and organization structure of GDE

International activities

Office of Science


34

International discussions

China: Staffin/Minister of Science and Technology in June 2006: “we will join the ILC”; discussing R&D involvement at $10M level

India: Staffin/Minister of Science and Technology in October 2006: Indian partnership with US in SCRF at $10M level?

So. Korea: first ILC specific funds allocated in 2006

Japan: Formation of Federation of Diet members for realizing the ILC (Sugawara), with statement of intent to propose ILC in Japan. Priority of JPARC had prevented official discussion of ILC in Japan; now MEXT expresses its desire to pursue ILC. First infusion of significant funds for detector R&D (JSPS).

Office of Science


35

International discussions

Office of Science


36

Office of Science


37

Office of Science


38

Office of Science


39

Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy High Energy Physics FY 2008 OMB Presentation Dr. Robin...

Documents

Transcript of Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy High Energy Physics FY 2008 OMB Presentation Dr. Robin...