Addendum for
Design Study for the Interaction Region
Push-Pull System for the ILC
Authors
A. Seryi (JAI), K. Buesser (DESY), P. Burrows (Oxford), A. Hervé (ETH Zurich), T.
Markiewicz (SLAC), M. Oriunno (SLAC), T. Tauchi (KEK)
Participants and Resources
This table summarises the main participants and the engineering resources, which are
committed and requested for the implementation of this proposal.
The table from the main text is reproduced here for completeness. For each particular
table row (#), explanations are given below.
#
Participant
Task
Nos.
Description of work
Commitment
(FTE)
1
CERN
1,2,3,
4
0.0
2
ETH Zurich
1,2,3,
4
1.0
0.0
3
DESY
1,2,3
1.0
0.0
4
KEK
1,2,3
0.4
1.5*
5
LAL
3,7
0.4
0.0
6
LLR
3,7
0.25
0.5
7
JAI
6,8
1
2
8
SLAC
1,2,3,
6
0.4
1.5
9
10
FNAL
BARC
2
2
Hall design, detector services,
push-pull motion system,
movable detector services
supplies
Hall design, detector services,
push-pull motion system,
movable detector services
supplies
Hall design, push-pull motion
system, radiation shields,
magnetic shielding
Hall design, Vibration studies,
detector integration, radiation
shielding
Detector integration, vacuum
studies
Detector integration, beam
pipe design
Intra-train feedback system,
design integration
Beam pipe and VTX support,
push-pull motion system,
alignment, rad. physics
Push-pull IR CFS integration
Push-pull IR to extraction and
dump line interface
Additional
Request
(FTE)
2.0
1.5
1.0
1.5
1.0
11
CI & ASTEC
7
Vacuum design for push-pull
IR
12 JINR
2
Push-pull IR at shallow site
13 BNL
5,6
Magnet design integration for
push-pull IR
14 LAPP
2,3,6
FD & Detector stability
Table 1: Engineering Resources1
0.5
1.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
1.0
0.3
1.0
* : This 1.5 FTE was recently supported by the KEK Director General, which is dedicated to study
on the experimental hall design and the detector integration in the CFS group formed in April,
2010, at KEK.
The request above is explained in the following terms:
a.
b.
c.
d.
1
2
3
4
What is it for?
Is there an identified person?
Has the identified lab management been approached?
Is there flexibility for that task to get the support elsewhere?
CERN
a. The efforts are for design of critical elements of the push-pull system.
There is strongest synergy with the efforts ongoing and planned for CLIC.
The design of push-pull system can be common for ILC and CLIC.
b. Yes, a participation of John Osborne (already engaged on CLIC and ILC
civil engineering studies) and of his assistant Martin Gastal for the
services part, together with the participation of Andrea Gaddi and Hubert
Gerwig for the push-pull project, would be welcome. As ILC and CLIC are
clearly engaging on fairly similar lines for the experimental area, the pushpull systems and the distribution of services in the experimental area, an
additional effort to support ILC would not be detrimental to the CLIC
effort, as the same engineers could be engaged on both projects and this
could bring cross-fertilization.
c. Yes
d. Given the extremely valuable and unique expertise gained at CERN during
LHC construction, it is unlikely to find relevant expertise elsewhere
ETH Zurich
a. Not applicable, as request is 0
DESY
a. Not applicable, as request is 0
KEK
a. The efforts are for studies of the experimental hall design and the detector
integration. The requested 1.5 FTE was recently supported by the KEK
Director General, which is dedicated in the CFS group formed in April
2010, at KEK.
Disclaimer: The Commitment numbers in this table represent the current best estimations of the participants and do
not necessarily reflect a formal commitment for the entire duration of the planned efforts. Distribution of efforts
among the listed laboratories takes into account established collaborative connections however it represents just one
possible scenario.
1
5
6
7
8
b. Yes.
c. The lab management has already, recently, identified and supported the
needed efforts
d. The efforts have been already deployed
LAL
a. Not applicable, as request is 0
LLR
a. Global detector integration and assembly studies together with Catherine
Clerc and Henri Videau. Also support for a design study of the beryllium
beam pipe.
b. None yet
c. Has been discussed with Henri Videau (former director of LLR)
d. No known flexibility elsewhere. Support could also be located in close by
institution, e.g. LAL, Orsay or Paris-Sud
JAI
a. Intra-train feedback in push-pull system; and overall MDI integration (of
different tasks).
Current engineering manpower is 1 FTE (Colin Perry) for development of
the electronics prototypes for the IP intra-train feedback components.
These are currently tested at ATF2.
In order to develop these into an integrated design with components
engineered to fit into the tight IP region additional effort at the level of 2
FTE is required.
The additional effort would focus on:
i. the design of real kickers, BPMs, BPM processors and feedback
boards: how would these be engineered; where would they be
located; vacuum issues; cabling issues; electromagnetic
interference issues; compatibility with push-pull operation (eg.
vacuum and cable breaks).
ii. performance simulations of the actual engineered devices in the
real locations to confirm feedback operation and viability.
iii. the interface with QD0 alignment systems and understanding the
interplay between the QD0 alignment and feedback operation in
terms of electrical centres, feedback set points, vibration issues etc.
iv. linking the IP feedback operation to the luminosity optimisation
using information from the Beamcal, as well as the interplay with
the upstream intra-train feedbacks (end of linac and RTML) and
the BDS 5Hz feedbacks.
v. overall MDI design and system integration
b. Within Oxford Particle Physics there are senior electrical and mechanical
engineering staff who are suitable for these tasks.
c. Yes: JAI - Seryi; Oxford Particle Physics - Foster
d. There is relevant expertise at CERN that is deployed on CLIC. We already
work closely with the CERN/CLIC BDS and MDI teams.
SLAC
a. The request is for engineering design tasks for the support and alignment
system of the detector mounted QD0 cryostat of the final doublet and for
the engineering and cost analysis of the push pull motion system,
Vibration analysis is an important component of both tasks.
9
10
11
12
13
b. The existing 0.4 FTE were drawn from engineer Marco Oriunno and
fractions of other colleagues. The additional 1.5 FTE will hopefully come
by increasing Oriunno’s fraction to 0.4, engaging ME John Amann at the
0.5-0.75 level and marshalling the partial efforts of 5 SLAC engineering
physicists.
c. The new MDI leader at SLAC Tom Markiewicz, the ARD leader Tor
Raubenheimer have been approached
d. Unlikely
FNAL
a. The request is for CFS push-pull related integration engineering efforts,
which comprise various design activities which are required for the IR
hall, nearby caverns, shafts, etc
b. There are engineers working on CFS at FNAL, however stronger emphasis
on push-pull will require additional resources, which haven’t yet been
identified by names. Possible use of consultants has been discussed to
offset the additional work load on FNAL engineering staff
c. The CFS head at FNAL Vic Kuchler has been approached
d. Possibly, there may be suitable expertise elsewhere
BARC
a. The efforts are to identify CFS engineering constraints resulted from beam
dump studies ongoing at BARC, onto push-pull related CFS issues such as
possible configuration of IR halls and shielding, compatible with radiation
and back-shine produced by beam dump.
b. There are identified experts at BARC
c. The leader of beam dump studies at BARC, Dr. Satyamurthy Polepalle has
been approached.
d. Possibly, there may be suitable expertise elsewhere
CI & ASTEC
a. The request is for vacuum design for push-pull IR which has particular
constraints and requirements.
b. There are identified experts, in particular Dr. Oleg Malyshev and Norbert
Colomb
c. The CI director Swapan Chattopadhyay and (now retired) ASTEC director
Mike Poole have been approached.
d. There may be suitable expertise elsewhere
JINR
a. The requested efforts are for studies of push-pull CFS issues for particular
configuration of a shallow site. JINR colleagues initiated and have
performed first studies of ILC location on a shallow site, and the specific
push-pull IR design efforts now need to be made. Shallow location may
alter our assumptions about detector assembly, hall shielding, push-pull
mechanisms, etc.
b. Likely there are identified experts, either at JINR or in the State
Construction Project Institution
c. The Chief engineer of JINR Prof. Grigori Shirkov has been approached
d. There only one shallow site considered so far, and looking for experts
elsewhere may not be efficient
BNL
14
a. The request is for enhanced efforts on Final Doublet integration into the
IR region. The FD design is based on a unique BNL direct winding
technology.
b. There are experts at BNL, however there are competing activities and
experts may be overbooked
c. Mike Harrison has been approached
d. The BNL expertise is rather unique and it is unlikely that suitable
expertise exist elsewhere
LAPP
a. The request is for enhanced efforts on detector stability and FD, building
up on ongoing efforts at LAPP
b. The additional experts were not identified
c. The leader of LAPP LAVISTA team, Andrea Jeremie, has been approached
d. It is possible that there is suitable expertise elsewhere