experimental facilities john hill efac review october 19 th , 2006

1 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Experimental Facilities

John Hill

EFAC review October 19th , 2006


Contributors to XFD Portion of CDRJames AblettMarc AllaireDieter SchneiderWuxian ShiVivian StojanoffRobert Sweet Mark ChanceMike DudleyPaul NorthrupPeter StephensJoe WoicikSushil SharmaSteve HulbertToshi TanabeSam KrinskyGeorge RakowskyAnatoly Snigirev*

Jorg Maser*Ken Evans-LutterodtDeming ShuAlfred Baron*Yuri Shvyd’ko*Clement BurnsAlec Sandy*Simon Mochrie*Ian Robinson*Dario ArenaCecilia Sanchez-HankeLonny BermanPeter TakacsPeter SiddonsChristie NelsonZhong ZhongHarald Reichart

Chris Jacobsen*Chris HomesWayne BettsBarrett ClayBob DelasioTony KuczewskiJeff LandgrafJerome LauretDennis PoshkaIvan SoZhijian YinRoger DejusNick SimosElaine DiMasiMohan Ramanathan*Thomas Gog*Larry Carr

Lisa MillerElio VescovoPeter JohnsonLin YangQun ShenPK JobQiong WuPaul DumasScott CoburnRuben Reininger*Natasha BozovicIvan BozovicPaul O’ConnorSal PjerovOliver Hignette*Marc Tricard*Christian Schroer*

* NSLS-II Visitor


Design Specifications

• Ultra-high brightness- Drives emittance, energy spread, stability.

• High flux- Drives current, top-up, length of straight sections.

• Wide spectral range: 0.1 meV to 100 keV- Drives user devices (BM, undulators, SCW), storage

ring energy.

Experimental View:


Importance of Electron Emittance

2222 '' phelpheltot

tot

4Fraction of flux into focused spot =

So, as el 0, tot

4

Horizontal emittance

Vertical emittance

=1A

4' phph

Where

and

..and fraction of flux delivered in spot 1


Effect of Energy Spread

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

910

-5

2

So

urc

e ve

rtic

al a

ng

ula

r d

iver

gen

ce [

rad

]

103

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

104

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

105

Photon Energy (eV)

U14 SCU14mm, L=2.0m, Kmax=2.2

Ring parameters: 3.0 GeV, 0.5A, h=0.55nm, v=0.01nm, energy spread=0.001

Straight section parameters: 5m length: h=2.7m, v=0.945m; 8m length: h=18.2m, v=3.09m; h=v=h=v=h=v=0

Bend magnet parameters: h=0.65m, v=25.1m, h=0.032, v=-0.044, h=0.04m, h=0.056, v=v=0

Natural


Effect of Insertion Device Length

2 3 4 5 6 70

2

4

6

8

10x 10

21

Bri

gh

tne

ss,

ph

/s/0

.1%

BW

/mm2

/mra

d2

at

8.3

3 k

eV

(5

th h

arm

on

ic)

ID length, m

00.1%0.2%

E=8.33 keV, 5th harmonic of U19


Effect of

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

=L/2Maximum brightness

L=3m=0.5 nm

To a zeroth approximation, users want the most photons in the smallest spot, with the smallest divergence: Brightness

For L=3m then optimum =0.5m


Current Parameters

Size Divergence Size Divergence Size DivergenceVert. 5.9 m 12 rad 5.9 m 12 rad 6.3 m 11.9 radHoriz. 14 m 44 rad 39 m 18.6 rad 100 m 13 rad

x=18.1m, y=3.1m

8mx=2.7m, y=0.95m

5m

Angular acceptance of C(111)

vertical Has minimal impact on photon beam.horiz Allows some tuning of photon divergence and beam size

Photon Beam

1st harmonic, 3m U19

5m* x=0.3 m, y=0.95m

* Possible low-beta option


NSLS-II Insertion Devices

Name U14 U19 U45 U100 DW-1.8T SCW Type SCU CPMU EPU EPU PMW SCW

Photon energy range Hard x-ray

(1.8-30keV)

Hard x-ray (1.5-

20keV)

Soft x-ray (180eV-7keV)

VUV (8eV-4keV)

Broad band

(<10eV-100keV)

Very hard x-ray

(<10eV-200keV)

Type of straight section

5m 5m 5m 8m 8m 5m

Period length (mm) 14 19 45 100 100 60 Total undulator length (m) 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 7.0 1.0 Number of periods 143 158 89 40 70 17 Magnetic gap (mm) 5 5 10 10 15 15 Peak magnetic field strength B (T) 1.68 1.21

0.68(Heli) 1.03 (Lin) 1.50 1.80 3.50

K 2.20 2.03 (eff) 2.87 (eff) 4.67 (eff) 14.01 15.92 (eff) 19.61

h fundamental, eV 1788.8 1469.7 183.1 8.6

h critical, keV 11.8 21.0 2.4

Total power (kW) 16.08 11.18 12.09 25.64 64.60 34.89

G(K) 0.9842 0.9818 0.9959 0.9996 0.9997 0.9998

On-axis power density (kW/mrad2)

103.70 77.86 40.03 26.33 55.30 25.60


Brightness Curves

1015

1016

1017

1018

1019

1020

1021

1022

Bri

gh

tnes

s [p

ho

ton

s/se

c/0.

1%b

w/m

m2 /m

rad

2 ]

10 eV 100 eV 1keV 10keV 100keV

Photon Energy

VUVhcrit

EPU100 VUV undulator100mm, L=4m, Kmax=14.0

EPU45 SXU45mm, L=4.0m, Kmax=4.33

U14 SCU14mm, L=2.0m, Kmax=2.2

W60 SCW,B=3.5T, 60mm,L=1.0m, K=19.6

DW100-1.8T,B=1.8T, 100mm,L=7m, K=16.8

U19 CPMU19mm, L=3.0m, Kmax=2.03




25m-radius bend,B=0.4T, Ec=2.39keV


Flux Curves

1013

2

4

6

1014

2

4

6

1015

2

4

6

1016

Flu

x [p

ho

ton

s/se

c/0.

1%b

w]

10 eV 100 eV 1keV 10keV 100keV

Photon Energy

VUVhcrit

EPU100 VUV undulator100mm, L=4m, Kmax=14.0

EPU45 SXU45mm, L=4.0m, Kmax=4.33 U14 SCU

14mm, L=2.0m, Kmax=2.2

W60 SCW,B=3.5T, 60mm,L=1.0m, K=19.6

DW100-1.8T,B=1.8T, 100mm,L=7m, K=16.8

U19 CPMU19mm, L=3.0m, Kmax=2.03




25m-radius bend,B=0.4T, Ec=2.39keV


IR from Bending Magnets

Extraction of IR from BM appears feasible with good performance down to 1 cm-1

Currently looking into impact on accelerator and cost.


Far-IR performance

NSLS-II std gap dipoles

NSLS-II large gap dipoles (60 mm)

NSLS-II v. large gap dipoles (90 mm)


Beamlines

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

For the purposes of obtaining a detailed cost estimate and to explore the technical issues for state-of-the-art beamlines at NSLS-II, Five insertion device beamlines were explored in some detail:

1) Inelastic X-ray Scattering (Hill, Shvyd’ko and Baron)2) Hard X-ray Nanoprobe (Gog, Evans-Lutterodt)3) Hard X-ray Coherent Scattering (Sandy, Mochrie, Robinson)4) Soft x-ray Imaging and Coherent scattering (Sanchez-Hanke, Hulbert,

Reinginer)5) Soft x-ray resonant scattering and inelastic scattering (Arena, Hulbert,

Reinginer)


Beamlines

SuperconductingMagnet

NSLS IIExperimental floor

In addition, we have considered a number of other beamlines at a less detailed level:

• High magnetic field (Nelson)

• High Energy (Zhong)

• SAXS (Yang)

• IR (Carr)

• Imaging (Shen)

• Damping Wigglers (Berman)

• PX (Berman)

• ARPES (Johnson/Vescovo)

• Bending Magnet (Berman/Arena)


Beamline Development

• Beamline Access Teams (BATs) Facility receives funding to design, construct, and operate beamlines.

• Beamline Development Teams (BDTs)User group receives funding to design, construct, and operate beamline.

Two principal modes :

User groups would form and work with the facility to define the scientific mission and technical requirements for the beamline


Usage of Facility

Type IDs BMs Total IDs BMs Total

A IR/UV/soft x-ray spectroscopy 1 11 12 3 7 10B X-ray spectroscopy 6 3 9 0 9 9C soft-matter/biophysics scattering 4 0 4 0 8 8D hard matter/strongly correlated 9 1 10 3 5 8E powder/single Xtal/high-P/optics 7 3 10 3 8 11F Imaging/micro-probe 4 5 9 2 7 9G Macromolecular crystallography 7 0 7 2 8 10

Totals 38 23 61 13 52 65

NSLSNSLS-II

A strawman beamline distribution was constructed for one possible scenario for a mature facility:

Note: This process took into account the expected demand, the existing community and the enhanced NSLS-II capabilities. In this scenario a few IDs and a few BMs remain open.


Canting

Configuration Canting angle (half) x

Bare - 2.04 nm

5 x 7m 0 0.55 nm5 x (3.5m + 3.5m) 1.5 mrad 0.71 nm5 x (3.5m + 3.5m) 2.5 mrad 0.80 nm5 x (2.33m+2.33m+2.33m) 1 mrad 0.57 nm5 x (2.33m+2.33m+2.33m) 3 mrad 0.80 nm

8 x 7m 0 0.48 nm8 x (3.5m +3.5m) 1.5 mrad 0.54 nm

35m DW +1 x(1m +1m) 1 mrad 0.54 nm

The effects of canting have been studied as far as the impact on dispersion and hence emittance (Bengtsson):

Wigglers

Undulators

Device


R+D Overview

Four areas of proposed focus:

1) 1nm Spatial Resolution- Multi-layer Laue approach- Kinoform approach

2) 0.1 meV Energy Resolution- Asymmetric optics

3) Reflective Optics Metrology- Optical metrology- At wavelength testing

4) Detectors– Large area pixelated detectors– Integrated electronics


Tentative Process & Schedule

2007 2008 2009 20112010 2012 2013 2014 2015

1st beamBO Ring bldg

Construction Commiss-ioning

LOI: Select BATs

TDRProject BATs

Initial BDTs

Possible MIEs

CDR TDR

LOI: Select BDTs

Full proposal

CDR TDR Construction Commiss-ioning

Possible MIEs ?


Remainder of the Talks

TodayConventional Facilities- Marty FallierBeamline Development – Hill

TomorrowBeamlines

Hard x-ray undulator beamlines – HillSoft x-ray undulator beamlines – Steve HulbertDamping Wiggler and BM beamlines – Lonny BermanIR beamlines – Larry CarrCost Estimate/Trust Fund - Hill

R+D1nm – Evans-Lutterodt0.1 meV – Yuri Shvyd’koDetectors – Paul O’ConnorInsertion Devices – Toshi TanabeMetrology – Peter Takacs


Summary

• XFD portion of CDR is nearing completion. User requirements generated by this have driven accelerator and conventional facilities design.

• Conceptual designs have been carried out for a number of beamlines to inform a detailed cost estimate, and a number of others at a pre-conceptual level.

• Some beamlines will be built as part of the construction project utilizing a trust fund approach. These will begin commissioning in 2013.

• Remaining beamlines will be built with other funds (e.g. will pursue potential MIEs and other non-BES funds) and brought online in the following years.

• Items requiring R+D have been identified and a plan outlined.

• User Access modes and facility build-out issues have begun to be addressed.

experimental facilities john hill efac review october 19 th , 2006

Documents