Optimizing Magnetic Shielding vs. Cryogenics i XFEL - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

XFEL

X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i

Optimizing Magnetic Shielding vs. Cryogenics

XFEL

X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i

Configurations ILC (~16 000 cavités)

XFEL

X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i

Configurations ILC (~10 000 cavités)

XFEL

X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i

Configurations ILC (~10 000 cavités)

XFEL

X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i

Double Blindage

XFEL

X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i

Double Blindage

Cryonomics

05/12/2011

• O. Napoly

7

If I am allowed to extrapolate the 75% increase of Q0 shown by E. Kako with a double

magnetic shielding, to ILC cavities with Eacc = 31.5 MV/m and with the assumptions: grid power = 0,15 € /kWh@300 K CoP(2K) = 700 W/W magnetic shield = 1000€ / cavity cryogenics = 1 M€/100 W@2K Q0 = 8 1010 (RDR ) €

• Pdyn. = 9.6 kW@2K , 6.7 MW @ 300 K
• Pdyn. = 5.5 kW@2K , 3.8 MW

Q0 = 1.4 1010 €

XFEL

X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i

Magnetic Shielding Magnetic shields are qualified by the excellent dynamic cryogenic performance of XM-3 Produced by MecaMagnetic from Aperam/Cryophy 1mm sheets

1.E+10 2.E+10 3.E+10 4.E+10 4 8 12 16 Qo Eacc [MV/m] AC114 AC156 AC146 AC154 AC157 AC158 AC151 AC152

9

• J. Sekutowicz, Towards More Flexibility in Operation of the XFEL Linac, DESY, October 25th, 2013

XM-3 cavities: vertical tests at 2K (7 Large Grain +1 Fine Grain cavity)

• 2. cw and lp operation; 3 experiments
• c. Dynamic heat load for Large Grain Cryomodule

Measured dynamic heat load

XFEL

X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i

Conclusion Increasing Q0 of ILC cavities by whatever means, is GREEN Better magnetic shielding is one possible cost efficient way.