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

i XFEL X-Ray Free-Electron Laser Optimizing Magnetic Shielding vs. Cryogenics

i XFEL Configurations ILC (~16 000 cavités) X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i XFEL Configurations ILC (~10 000 cavités) X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i XFEL Configurations ILC (~10 000 cavités) X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i XFEL Double Blindage X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

i XFEL Double Blindage X-Ray Free-Electron Laser

Cryonomics If I am allowed to extrapolate the 75% increase of Q 0 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 P dyn. = 5.5 kW@2K , 3.8 MW P dyn. = 9.6 kW@2K , 6.7 MW @ 300 K € € Q0 = 8 10 10 (RDR ) Q0 = 1.4 10 10 05/12/2011 O. Napoly 7

i XFEL Magnetic Shielding X-Ray Free-Electron Laser Produced by MecaMagnetic from Aperam/Cryophy 1mm sheets Magnetic shields are qualified by the excellent dynamic cryogenic performance of XM-3

2. cw and lp operation; 3 experiments c. Dynamic heat load for Large Grain Cryomodule XM-3 cavities: vertical tests at 2K (7 Large Grain +1 Fine Grain cavity) 4.E+10 Qo 3.E+10 2.E+10 AC114 AC156 AC146 AC154 AC157 AC158 AC151 AC152 1.E+10 0 4 8 12 16 Eacc [MV/m] Measured dynamic heat load J. Sekutowicz, Towards More Flexibility in Operation of the XFEL Linac, DESY, October 25th, 2013 9

i XFEL Conclusion X-Ray Free-Electron Laser Increasing Q0 of ILC cavities by whatever means, is GREEN Better magnetic shielding is one possible cost efficient way.