The CLIC project
• Brief overview of the CLIC machine and collaboration
organisation
• Status: Feasibility studies and Conceptual Design Report
(CDR)
• Physics Guidance, stages and energy ranges – the best
possible machine
• Plans for 2012-16 and towards implementation
Steinar Stapnes on behalf of the CLIC collaboration
The CLIC Layout
D. Schulte
ICHEP Paris, July 24, 2010
2
CLIC Power Source Concept
Delay Loop  2
gap creation, pulse
compression & frequency
multiplication
Drive Beam Accelerator
efficient acceleration in fully loaded linac
RF Transverse
Deflectors
Combiner Ring  3
pulse compression &
frequency
multiplication
Combiner Ring  4
pulse compression &
frequency multiplication
CLIC RF POWER SOURCE LAYOUT
Drive Beam Decelerator Section (2

24 in total)
Power Extraction
Drive beam time structure - initial
240 ns
140 ms train length - 24  24 sub-pulses
4.2 A - 2.4 GeV – 60 cm between bunches
D. Schulte
Drive beam time structure - final
240 ns
5.8 ms
24 pulses – 101 A – 2.5 cm between bunches
ICHEP Paris, July 24, 2010
3
The CLIC collaboration
CLIC multi-lateral collaboration
41 Institutes from 21 countries
ACAS (Australia)
Aarhus University (Denmark)
Ankara University (Turkey)
Argonne National Laboratory (USA)
Athens University (Greece)
BINP (Russia)
CERN
CIEMAT (Spain)
Cockcroft Institute (UK)
ETHZurich (Switzerland)
FNAL (USA)
Gazi Universities (Turkey)
Helsinki Institute of Physics (Finland)
IAP (Russia)
IAP NASU (Ukraine)
IHEP (China)
INFN / LNF (Italy)
Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular (Spain)
IRFU / Saclay (France)
Jefferson Lab (USA)
John Adams Institute/Oxford (UK)
John Adams Institute/RHUL (UK)
JINR (Russia)
Karlsruhe University (Germany)
KEK (Japan)
LAL / Orsay (France)
LAPP / ESIA (France)
NIKHEF/Amsterdam (Netherland)
NCP (Pakistan)
North-West. Univ. Illinois (USA)
Patras University (Greece)
Polytech. University of Catalonia (Spain)
PSI (Switzerland)
RAL (UK)
RRCAT / Indore (India)
SLAC (USA)
Thrace University (Greece)
Tsinghua University (China)
University of Oslo (Norway)
Uppsala University (Sweden)
UCSC SCIPP (USA)
Structure of the project
CB: Every 6 months,
links to WP update and
status to provide active
feedback/discussion
basis to collaborators
Might interact with
overall global LC
consortium at some stage
(CB and CSC)
CLIC/CTF3 Collab. Board
CLIC Steering Committee
Repr. from accelerator and
detector/physics management
structures
CLJC accelerator activities and
management
Detector/Physics activities and
management
CLIC Detector Issues
•
•
•
Detector requirements are close to those for ILC detectors
• First studies indicate that ILC performances are sufficient in many cases
• Adapt ILD and SID concepts for CLIC
• Close collaboration with validated ILC designs and work
Differences to ILC
• Larger beam energy loss
• Time structure (0.5 ns vs. 738 ns)
• Higher background due to:
• Higher energy
• Smaller bunch spacing
• Other parameters are slightly modified
• Crossing angle of 20 mradian (ILC: 14 mradian)
• Larger beam pipe radius in CLIC (30mm)
• Denser and deeper calorimetry
Linear Collider Detector study has been established at CERN beginning of 2009 (see
http://www.cern.ch/lcd)
6
CLIC main parameters
Centre-of-mass energy
Total (Peak 1%) luminosity
Total site length (km)
Loaded accel. gradient (MV/m)
500 GeV
3 TeV
2.3(1.4)·1034
5.9(2.0)·1034
13.0
48.3
80
100
Main linac RF frequency (GHz)
12
Beam power/beam (MW)
4.9
14
Bunch charge (109 e+/-)
6.8
3.72
Bunch separation (ns)
Beam pulse duration (ns)
0.5
177
Repetition rate (Hz)
Hor./vert. norm. emitt (10-6/10-9)
156
50
4.8/25
0.66/20
202 / 2.3
40 / 1
Hadronic events/crossing at IP
0.19
2.7
Coherent pairs at IP
100
3.8 108
4.1%
5.0%
240
560
Hor./vert. IP beam size (nm)
Wall plug to beam transfer eff
Total power consumption (MW)
Feasibility studies and the CDR
Feasibility issues (some examples in the following slides):
•
Drive beam generation
•
Beam driven RF power generation
•
Accelerating Structures
•
Two Beam Acceleration
•
Ultra low emittances and beam sizes
•
Alignment
•
Vertical stabilization
•
Operation and Machine Protection System
CDRs:
•
Vol 1: The CLIC accelerator and site facilities (H.Schmickler)
• CLIC concept with exploration over multi-TeV energy range up to 3 TeV
• Feasibility study of CLIC parameters optimized at 3 TeV (most demanding)
• Consider also 500 GeV, and intermediate energy ranges
•
Vol 2: The CLIC physics and detectors (L.Linssen)
•
Vol 3: CLIC study summary (S.Stapnes)
• Summary and input to the European Strategy process, including possible implementation stages for a
CLIC machine as well as costing and cost-drives
• Proposing objectives and work plan of post CDR phase (2012-16)
•
Timescales:
• By end 2011: Vol 1 and 2 completed
• Spring/mid 2012: Vol 3 ready for the European Strategy Open Meeting
Key CTF3 feasibility milestones: drive beam generation
Fully loaded acceleration RF to beam
transfer: 95.3 % measured.
No issues found with transverse wakes in
structures. Operation is routinely with full
loading
1.2 us drive beam pulse
Drive beam current stability at the end of the
fully loaded linac : better than CLIC
specification: 0.75 10-3
Full commissioning of x 4
combiner ring
Unloaded gradient at CLIC 4*10-7 BDR and 180 ns pulse length
T18 – strong tapering
1400
T18 – strong tapering
3900
T18 – strong tapering (now with recirculation)
280
T18 – strong tapering (CERN built)
550
conditioning
time [hr]
TD18 – waveguide damping
60
1300
TD18 – waveguide damping
3200
T24 – high efficiency
600
T24 – high efficiency
1570
70
80
90
MV/m
100
110
120
Interrupted by earthquake in Japan
130
Generations of structures
Gradient, BDR and pulse length
2010: Two-beam acceleration with a gradient of 106 MV/m
December 14, 2010:
Probe beam accelerated by
23 MV in a TD24
accelerating structure,
corresponding to 106 MV/m,
in a reproducible way.
Meas. PETS power input to
structure ~ 80 MW (~200
MW in the resonant loop)
Drive beam: 12.5 A, 113 MV, 12
GHz in CLEX (1.5 GHz beam
combined factor 8), 140 ns pulse
length
Probe beam: 0.08 A, 173 MV, 1.5
GHz, 8 ns pulse length
Two Beam Test Stand (TBST) results 2011
Well established two beam acceleration experiments
Calibration converging, structure correctly tuned
Interesting breakdown studies started
Very preliminary, RF parts in early conditioning phase
Blue: all components, Orange: limited to structures



2011 : CTF3 TBTS
running for full after
winter shut-down.
Gradients of 110 –
130 MV/m are
routinely reached
(20% above CLIC
target).
Experimental results on vertical
nano stabilization
Design, hardware and
methods are being
developed.
Methods: Stabilization
(mechanical filters), beambased feedback and vibration
sensor based feed-forward
used
No dynamic imperfections (but
budget for static ones used
fully) L = 120% (20% overhead
for dynamic effects)
CMS-based ground motion model
(hall floor)
L = 53%
Plus transfer function of tested
system
L = 108%
Plus transfer function of system
that will be
developed
L = 118%
DR: comparison to other projects
• CLIC requirements close to new generation
synchrotron light sources (Operation- Projects)
• CLIC 500 GeV similar as ILC and demonstrated
in ATF/KEK (normalized emittance)
• CLIC 3 TeV similar as PEPX/SLAC project.
• Close collaboration with ATF/KEK (small
emittances) and CESRTA/Cornell (electron
clouds)
Emittance conservation a challenges:
• For example, CLIC main linac design fulfills
emittance requirements. Tight, but feasible
component specification
Tunnel implementations (laser straight)
Central Injector complex
Central MDI & Interaction
18 Region
Linear Collider Detector project @ CERN
LCD: addressing physics and detectors at CLIC and ILC
Current focus:
Preparation of conceptual design report for CLIC
detectors => developed into a truly international
effort in 2010
Experimental issues for a CLIC experiment now
well understood, and detector geometries for the
CLIC benchmark studies were fixed
Affiliation of CLIC CDR editors


Beam test with a tungsten-based
HCAL for linear collider, CALICE
collaboration
CLIC energy scans (for a single stage)
Requirement from physics : vary the c.m. energy for a given CLIC machine. Main options :
• Early extraction lines : significant hardware modifications needed
• Reduce gradient : disadvantage: need to scale down bunch charge linearly with gradient for
stability, leading to a significant luminosity loss (green)
• CLIC drive beam scheme: gradient can be reduced while increasing pulse length. A large
fraction of the luminosity loss is recovered (black). Modifications to drive beam generation are
minimal.
Lower gradient can be achieved by switching of phase of
incoming drive beam bunches :
Drive beam energy after extraction
There are limits to the CLIC performance
(luminosity) during an energy scan
What is the physics ?
- some production cross-sections -
One of many possible
models for new physics
SM physics, for example
top studies should not be
forgotten (not included in
this plot)
Or whatever your favorite
model is …
CLIC energy staging
CLIC two-beam scheme
compatible with energy staging to
provide the optimal machine for a
large energy range
Linac 1
0.5 TeV Stage
Lower energy machine can run
most of the time during the
construction of the next stage.
Physics results will determine the
energies of the stages.
Optimization need to take into
many account many others
parameters: performance and
luminosities at various energies,
costs, construction and
commissioning times,
manufacturing/re-use/move of
components, etc
Linac 1
I.P.
Linac 2
Injector Complex
4 km
4 km
~14 km
Linac 1
1 TeV Stage
I.P.
Linac 2
The drive beam setups can
deal with various stages of the
machine
Injector Complex
7.0 km
7.0 km
~20 km
I.P.
3 TeV Stage
Linac 2
Injector Complex
20.8 km
3 km
3 km
48.2 km
20.8 km
CLIC implementation questions
•
Many questions:
•
•
•
•
Waiting for physics guidance: Current trend are increasing limits on squark/gluino masses (but loop holes
exist) – and currently no information about other SUSY particles (can be much lighter in some models) or
Higgs (Standard Model or several)
– Any wiser after summer conferences ?
– Benefits of running close to thresholds versus at highest energy, and distribution of luminosities as
function of energy
– We assume that we have to be sensitive from a light Higgs threshold (~200 GeV) to multi-TeV, in
several stages
What are the integrated luminosities needed and what it is the flexibility needed within a stage
– Interested in looking in more detail for at least one model in order to make sure the machine
implementation plan can cope with whatever will be needed
– Complementarity with LHC a key
What are reasonable commissioning and luminosity ramp up times ?
– LHC will need 3 years to get to 50 fb-1 and collects ~50 fb-1/year at 1034 (roughly)
How would we in practice do the tunneling and productions/installation of parts in a multistage
approach
– Cheapest (overall) to do in one go but we don’t know final energy needed, and it is likely that we can
make significant technical process before we get to stage 3 (or even 2?)
– Timescales for getting into operation, and getting from one stage to another
• Answers are possible but must be found based on all available information at the time the
project is launched
CLIC next phases
European Strategy
for Particle Physics
@ CERN Council
Final CLIC CDR and
feasibility established
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 ….
Feasibility issues (Accelerator&Detector)
Conceptual design & preliminary cost estimation
Engineering, industrialisation & cost optimisation
Project Preparation
Project Implementation
?
?
After 2016 – Project Implementation phase:
2011-2016
– Goal:
Develop
a project
implementation
plan
for a Linear(CLIC
Collider
• Including
an initial
project
to lay the
grounds for full
construction
0 – a: significant part of
• Addressing
the key
physics goals as emerging from the LHC data
the drive beam
facility)
•• With
a well-defined
scope
(i.e. technical
and
operation
Finalization
of the CLIC
technical
design, implementation
taking into accoun
the
results ofmodel,
technical studies done
energy
and
luminosity),
cost
and
schedule
in the previous phase, and final energy staging scenario based on the LHC Physics results, which
• With
a solid
technical
basis
should
be fully
available
by for
thethe
timekey elements of the machine and detector
•• Including
the necessary preparation
for production
siting the machine
CERN
Further industrialization
and pre-series
of large at
series
components with validation
• Within
a
project
governance
structure
as
defined
with
international
partners
facilities
The next steps – focusing points
In order to achieve the overall goal for 2016 the follow four primary objectives for 2011—16 can defined:
These are to be addressed by activities (studies, working groups, task forces) or work-packages (technical
developments, prototyping and tests of single components or larger systems at various places)
Define the scope, strategy and cost of the project implementation.
Main input:
•
The evolution of the physics findings at LHC and other relevant data
•
Findings from the CDR and further studies, in particular concerning minimization of the technical risks, cost, power as well as the site
implementation.
•
A Governance Model as developed with partners.
Define and keep an up-to-date optimized overall baseline design that can achieve the scope within a reasonable schedule, budget and risk.
•
Beyond beam line design, the energy and luminosity of the machine, key studies will address stability and alignment, timing and
phasing, stray fields and dynamic vacuum including collective effects.
•
Other studies will address failure modes and operation issues.
Indentify and carry out system tests and programs to address the key performance and operation goals and mitigate risks associated to
the project implementation.
•
The priorities are the measurements in: CTF3+, ATF and related to the CLIC Zero Injector addressing the issues of drivebeam
stability, RF power generation and two beam acceleration, as we as the beam delivery system.
(other system tests to be specified)
(technical work-packages and studies addressing system performance parameters)
Develop the20technical design basis. i.e. move toward a technical design for crucial items of the machine and detectors, the MD interface,
and the site.15
•
Priorities
10 are the modulators/klystrons, module/structure development including testing facilities, and site studies.
(technical
work-packages providing input and interacting with all points above)
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
TE
General
Name
CLIC-001
Project Implementation
Scope. Cost. Power
Beam Physics
Beam physics and
machine parameters
Beam & System Tests
CTF3+ and CLIC zero,
other system-tests
Technical Systems
Technical design and
prototypes of critical
components
RF
RF components and testfacilities
Total
Material [MCHF] Personnel [FTE years]
CLIC General
Civil Engineering & Services
6
33
0.8
12
4.3
232
Project Implementation Studies
BPH-BASE
BPH-LUMI
BPH-BCKG
BPH-POL
BPH-MP
BPH-SRC E
BPH-SRC P
BPH-DR
BPH-RTML
BPH-ML
BPH-BDS
BPH-DRV
Integrated Baseline Design
Integrated Dynamic Studies
Background
Polarization
Machine Protection & Operational Scenarios
Main beam source, eMain beam source, e+
Damping Rings
Ring-To-Main-Linac
Main Linac - Two-Beam Acceleration
Deam Delivery System
Drive Beam Complex
CTF3-001
CTF3-002
CTF3-003
CTF3-004
CLIC0-001
BTS-001
CTF3 Consolidation & Upgrades
Drive Beam phase feed-forward and feedbacks
TBL+, X-band high power RF production & structure testing
Two-Beam module string, test with beam
CLIC 0 drive-beam front end facility (includin Photoinjector option)
Accelerator Beam System Tests (ATF, Damping Rings, FACET,…)
BTS-002
Sources Beam System Tests
CTC-001
CTC-002
CTC-003
CTC-004
CTC-005
CTC-006
CTC-007
CTC-008
CTC-011
CTC-012
CTC-013
CTC-014
CTC-015
CTC-016
DR SC Wiggler
Survey & Alignment
Quad Stability
Two-Beam module development
Warm Magnet Prototypes
Beam Instrumentation
Machine-Detector Interface (MDI) activities
Beam Disposal (post-collision line & dumps)
Controls
RF Systems (1 GHz klystrons & DB cavities, DR RF)
Powering (Modulators, magnet converters)
Vacuum Systems
Magnetic stray Fields Measurements
DR Exctraction System
RF-DESIGN
RF-XPROD
RF-XTESTING
RF-XTESTFAC
RF-R&D
XTBA-FAC
X-band Rf structure Design
X-band Rf structure Production
X-band Rf structure High Power Testing
Creation and Operation of x-band High power Testing Facilities
Basic High Gradient R&D & Outreach
Creation of an “In-House” TBA Production Facility
RF-MISC
Miscellaneous RF
R. Corsini, CLIC Project Meeting
1st June2011
Summary table
• Full info (as of end May):
https://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contr
ibId=10&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=1
34291
Present Status:
•
•
•
•
•
45.5
269
40.0
211
139.1
1071
Work-program organized in WPs covering from hardware (very straightforward WPs) to working-groups (attempt to also describe as WPs)
Description of work-packages in some detail done (see following example)
• Mainly top-down, but input from CERN groups and collaborators in
several areas
42.6
314 expressed interest to continue
All past collaborators
have
• New collaborators have been contacted and are getting involved (in
Germany, US, Russia, Belarus, UK, Spain ...)
Material and personnel profiles over 2012-2016 are reasonable agreement
with expected resources
• Some cuts in material budget already implemented
• Still need a 20-30% reduction
Expect to converge by end of 2011 – plan collaboration workshop in
November as an important event towards final plan
R. Corsini, CLIC Project Meeting
1st June2011
RF structures & High-power tests
• Basic feasibility  ~ OK
(for both accelerating structures & PETS)
Goals for the next phase (2011-2016):
• Implement full features
(damping material, wake-field monitors, vacuum,
cooling, PETS on-off …)
• Increase statistics, long-term running
PETS @ASTA - SLAC,
klystron powered
Typical RF pulse shape in ASTA
during the last 125h of operation
• Start industrialization/large-series production
C L IC target pulse
• Optimization of fabrication techniques for
cost/performance
BDR <1.2 x 10-7/pulse/PETS
• Explore potential for further improvements
PETS @ CTF3 – TBTS,
beam powered
Example of activity: X-band Rf structure
production
WP: RF-xprod
Purpose/Objectives/Goals
Deliverables
Schedule
Task 1: Construction of baseline
accelerating structures
Test structures for statistical and long term high-power
testing with all damping features and high power
couplers (for SATS and Test modules in CLEX)  we
have to make sure that we count all the structures.
including those for the CLEX modules
3 generations of test
structures, total quantity 48,
total cost ~6 MCHF.
12 in 2013
24 in 2015
12 in 2016
Task 2: Supply of small series
development prototypes and/or
medium power test structures
Test structures for full features (4), wakefield monitor
equipped (4), optimized high-power design (8),
different machine energy optima (4), optimized process
(8), develop DDS (2) and choke (2), compressor (2)
Typically 12 variants in series
of 4 structures each, total
quantity 40, total cost ~6
MCHF.
8 structures per year
Task 3: Supply baseline PETS
(note: most PETS fabrication
accounted elsewhere, e.g. TBL)
PETS for statistical and long term high-power testing
4 PETS, total cost 0.2 MCHF.
3 in 2013
1 in 2015
Task 4: PETS for ON/OFF testing
PETS for on/ off test
2 generations 0.1 MCHF
Task 5: Alternative fabrication
method
Explore alternative fabrication methods
Structure fabricated with
alternative procedure
Task 5: Baseline to pre-series
development
Take the fully tested x band rf systems and evolve their
production techniques to an industrialized process
Resources:
2011
2012-2016
2015 onwards
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
Material breakdown
-
-
-
-
-
-
Personnel (CERN or
elsewhere)
-
-
-
-
-
-
http://indico.cern.ch/categoryDisplay.py?categId=3589
Summary
• CDR underway and good progress on feasibility issues
• Increased focus on ensuring the machine can be adapted to
running a several energies and be implemented in stages to
provide physics as quickly and efficiently as possible
• Plans 2011-2016 formulated towards implementation plan –
resources situation reasonable thanks to collaborative efforts
• CLIC organization adapted to new phase, being implemented
now
Combined ILC/CLIC working groups
+ General issues groups for accelerator, chairs M. Harrison (ILC)/P. Lebrun (CLIC)
Activity
Description
Deliverables (2016)
Proj. Implementation,
scope, cost studies, site,
physics reach
Update and improve CLIC
cost model & civil
engineering studies
• Technical Design (TD) and Project Implementation Plan (PIP) of CLIC Zero
• Improved cost model, feedback to CLIC baseline review, site studies
Beam physics studies
Beam physics and overall
design
• Review of the CLIC baseline design
• Beam dynamics studies for each area and overall – stability/alignment, timing and phasing, stray
fields …
• Studies towards CLIC Zero
CTF3 +
CTF3 consolidation and
upgrade
•
•
•
•
CLIC Zero
Injector for the CLIC drive
beam generation complex
• Build and commission 30 MeV Drive Beam injector with nominal CLIC parameters
• Build and commission a few Drive Beam accelerator nominal modules
• Participation to Technical Design of full CLIC Zero facility
RF Structures
Design and fabrication of
12 GHz accelerating
structures & PETS
and associated R&D
• Build and test close to 100 accelerating structures
• Build and test about 10 PETS prototype
• Establish manufacturing experience, quality control, brazing and assembly procedures for
structure fabrication at CERN
RF test infrastructure
Building, commissioning
and operation of highpower RF test stands
• Six 12 GHz klystron-based RF high-power test stations, for about 12 slots, running before 2016
• Continue high-power testing at 11.4 GHz (KEK and SLAC)
• Contribution to high-power testing in CTF3+ (TBL)
Prototypes of critical
components
Technical R&D – design,
build and test prototypes
of CLIC critical
components
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Material
Preliminary
budget
Alignment
Quadrupole stabilization system
Several nominal CLIC two-beam modules, mechanically tested, beam tested
R&D and prototyping of critical beam instrumentation
Design and studies of machine protection system
DR technologies , e.g. superconducting wiggler prototypes, test with beam, extraction kickers
prototypes
Warm magnet prototypes
MDI and Post collision lines and beam dumps
Controls
DB RF system and powering
See next slides
Consolidation and upgrade (higher energy, stability, reliability)
Drive beam phase feed-forward experiments
Upgrade and operate TBL as 12 GHz power production facility
Operation with beam for several CLIC two-beam modules