XFELX-Ray Free-Electron Laseri

Optimizing Magnetic Shielding vs. Cryogenics

XFELX-Ray Free-Electron LaseriConfigurations ILC (~16 000 cavités)

XFELX-Ray Free-Electron LaseriConfigurations ILC (~10 000 cavités)

XFELX-Ray Free-Electron LaseriConfigurations ILC (~10 000 cavités)

XFELX-Ray Free-Electron LaseriDouble Blindage

XFELX-Ray Free-Electron LaseriDouble 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 KCoP(2K) = 700 W/Wmagnetic shield = 1000€ / cavitycryogenics = 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

€

XFELX-Ray Free-Electron LaseriMagnetic Shielding

Magnetic shields are qualified by the excellent dynamic cryogenic performance of XM-3

Produced by MecaMagnetic from Aperam/Cryophy 1mm sheets

0 4,000,000 8,000,000 12,000,000 16,000,0001E+10

2E+10

3E+10

4E+10

AC114 AC156 AC146 AC154AC157 AC158 AC151 AC152

Eacc [MV/m]

Qo

9J. 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

XFELX-Ray Free-Electron LaseriConclusion

Increasing Q0 of ILC cavities by whatever means, is GREEN

Better magnetic shielding is one possible cost efficient way.