superb as source for synchrotron light · 2020. 1. 16. · january 2012 – società italiana luce...

January 2012 – Società Italiana Luce di Sincrotrone SuperB as source for Synchrotron Radiation

SuperB as source for Synchrotron Radiation

Riccardo Bartolini(1), Maurizio Benfatto(2), Marica Biagini(2), Michele Cianci(3)*, Marcello Coreno(4), Francesco D’Acapito(6), Luca Giannessi(7), Carlo Mariani(8)*, Luigi Paolasini(5)

(1) Diamond Light Source Ltd Diamond House Harwell Science and Innovation Campus Didcot Oxfordshire OX11 0DE, (2) INFN – LNF Via E. Fermi, 40 00044 Frascati (Roma) Italy , (3) European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Hamburg outstation, c/o DESY, Notkestrasse 85, Hamburg, 22603, Germany, (4) CNR-IMIP (Montelibretti) c/o TASC Laboratory S.S. 14, Km 163.5 in Area Science Park 34149 Basovizza (Trieste) – ITALY, (5) European Synchrotron Radiation Facility BP 220 38043 Grenoble Cedex France, (6) CNR-IOM-OGG c/o ESRF, 6 rue Jules Horowitz, F-38043 Grenoble (7) Theory Group ENEA C.R. Frascati, Via E. Fermi 45, 00044 Frascati, (8), Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Roma "La Sapienza" Piazzale Aldo Moro 2, I-00185 Roma. * corresponding authors, e-mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Abstract The feasibility of implementing the SuperB machine with beam-lines in order to exploit

synchrotron radiation is shown, on the basis of the available public documents on the machine, highligthing advantages and disadvantages of this choice. This short note is the result of a working group appointed by the Italian Society of Synchrotron Radiation (SILS), and it wishes to constitute a contribution of users and collaborating research groups to this aim. The availability of low emittance and very high current densities is a clear advantage, which however poses new challenges in terms of front-end and optics development. The necessity of planning the machine together with synchrotron radiation experts is strongly suggested in the following phases of design and development.

1. Introduction The SuperB collider project [1] has been recently approved by the Italian Government as part

of the National Research Plan, with a 5 years construction budget. SuperB is a high luminosity (1036 cm-2 s-1) asymmetric e+e- collider at the Ψ(4S) energy. The accelerator design is based on the lessons learned from modern low-emittance synchrotron light sources and ILC/CLIC R&D, and an innovative new idea for the interaction region of the storage rings, the “large Piwinski angle and crab waist” collision scheme, - already successfully tested at the DAΦNE Φ-Factory in Frascati, Italy -, to reach luminosities over 50 times greater than those obtained by earlier B-factories (KEKB at KEK and PEP-II at SLAC). There is an attractive, cost-effective accelerator design, including polarized beams, which is designed to incorporate some PEP-II components to save significantly on construction costs. This facility promises to deliver fundamental discovery-level science at the luminosity frontier. The collider consists of two rings (e+ at 6.7, HER, and e- at 4.2 GeV, LER) with beams of extremely low-emittances and small beam sizes at the interaction point, colliding in a common interaction region. As unique features, the electron beam will be longitudinally polarized at the IP and the rings will be able to ramp down to collide at the τ/charm energy threshold with a luminosity of 1035 cm-2 s-1. The relatively low beam currents (about 2 A) will allow for low running (power) costs compared to similar machines. The insertion of beam lines for synchrotron radiation (SR) users is the latest feature included in the design. The lattice has been recently modified to accommodate insertion devices for X-rays production. This project builds on a long history of successful e+e- colliders built around the

1

mailto:[email protected]



world, as illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Peak luminosity versus e+e- collider center-of-mass energy. SuperB is shown at the center of the plot at a luminosity of 1036/cm2/s.

The construction time for this collider is expected to be four years. The new tunnel can be bored in about a year. The new accelerator components can be built and installed in about 4 years. The shipping of components from PEP-II at SLAC to Italy will take about a year. A new linac and damping ring complex for the injector for the rings can be built in about three years. The commissioning of the accelerator will take about a year including the new electron and positron sources, new linac, new damping ring, new beam transport lines, two new collider rings and the Interaction Region. The new particle physics detector can be commissioned simultaneously with the accelerator. Once beam collisions start for particle physics, the luminosity will increase with time, likely reaching full design specifications after about two to three years of operation. The intent is to run this accelerator about ten months each year with about one month for accelerator turn-on and nine months for colliding beams. The collider will need to operate for about 10 years to provide the required data. Both beams in this collider will have properties that are excellent for use as sources for synchrotron radiation (SR). The expected photon properties are comparable to those of PETRA-3 or NSLS-II. The beam lines and user facilities needed to carry out this SR program are being investigated.

The Italian Society for Synchrotron Radiation (SILS), during the general assembly held in Trieste on September 2, 2011 commissioned to the authors a preparatory analysis on the potential use of the SuperB machine as a source for synchrotron radiation (SR). SILS collects a wide interdisciplinary scientific community of users and collaborating research groups in SR. The following short document highlights advantages and limits for the use of SuperB as new source of SR, also by comparison with present existing SR sources (among which the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility, ESRF). It can be taken as a contribution of the Italian community of users and builders of SR beam-lines to a possible exploitation of SuperB as a productive SR source.

2


2. Short machine description The machine, including the foreseen beamlines, has been planned to stay 10-13 meters below

the ground level. The foreseen beam-line length is about 100 meters (Figure 2). Ten beam-lines are planned so far. Machine parameters have changed slightly from the ones described in the CDR [2]. Dispersion in the regions where undulators are positioned is negligible, but the length of a putative undulator section is around three meters. The design of the straight sections for the IDs is being reconsidered in view of a better exploitation of SuperB as a light source.

In particular the overall length and optics functions in the straight section will be re-optimized to increase the flux from the IDs or to install two canted undulators.

Figure 2: Proposed layout for SuperB ring at Univerisita' Tor Vergata, Rome (Italy). 3. Comparison with Existing/Under construction Facilities SR machines of recent construction or newly planned SR sources can produce a photon beam

with emittance <1nmrad achieved with currents up to 500 mA. Limitation of current values to 500 mA is largely due to the development of Front Ends (FE) capable of sustaining the thermal load generated by higher currents. A more productive approach is the minimization of emittance, with consequent brilliance improvement, with an improved lattice design.

Parameter

Unit SuperB HER (e+)

SuperB LER (e-)

S P R I N G 8

A P S (e-)

E S R F (e-)

P E T R A

III

NSLS II

D I A M O N d

So L E I l

M A X IV

E L E T T R A

Cirumference m 1258.4 1258.4 1486 1104 844.4 2304 792 561.6 354 528 259.2

3


Storage Energy GeV 6.7 4.18 8 7 6.03 6.0 3 3 2.75 3 2.0 Beam current mA 1892 2447 100 150 200 100 500 300 n/a 500 300 βx m @ IP 0.026 @ IP 0.32 40.15 22 35.2 16.2 20.1 22.6 10.1 26.59 n/a βy m @ IP

0.00025 @ IP 0.00020 18.35 7.5 2.52 2.6 3.4 26.6 8.01 9.184 n/a

Emittance x nm 2 2.46 3.4 3.3 4 1 0.5 2.5 3.7 0.2 7 Emittance y pm 5 6.15 6.8 50 10 10 8 27.4 n/a <8 n/a Coupling % n/a n/a 0.2 n/a 0.25 n/a n/a 0.15 n/a 1 n/a RF frequency MHz 476 476 508.58 351.9 355 500 500 500 352.2 100 n/a Lifetime (single-bunch)

hours n/a n/a 15 @1mA n/a 6 2 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Lifetime (multi-bunch)

hours 0.074 0.075 200 n/a 75 24 n/a 10 43 4 n/a

Table 1: Parameters for different light sources used to compare figures of merit of synchrotron

radiation. 4. Using the radiation produced in bending magnets on SuperB Radiation from bending magnets (BM) has been the first source of synchrotron radiation

since the first generation of machines. BM are still widely used even in third generation machines: 20 of them are found at Spring8 and APS, and 17 at ESRF. In particular, 2 BM beam-lines are part of the Upgrade Program of ESRF. Radiation from the bending magnets presents a smooth energy spectrum and good vertical collimation that constitute an attractive solution for techniques requiring variable energy and/or a moderate photon density on the samples. Magnets are a natural constituent part of a ring, so no perturbation on its operation is caused by these sources. In the present investigation, the radiation from magnets of SuperB both by the low-energy ring (LER) and high-energy ring (HER) has been studied and compared with the emission from the high-field magnet of ESRF in operating conditions. The main parameters used for the calculation are listed below (Table 2):

Parameter ESRF HER LER

Energy (GeV) 6.03 6.7 4.18

Magnetic Radius (m) 23.7 87.0 23.0

Magn. Field (T) 0.805 0.26 0.61

Crit. Energy (eV) 19551 7672 7029

Current (A) 0.2 0.5 0.5

Power (W/mrad hor) 157 163 93

Table 2. For the calculation of the emission in Photons/s in 0.1% Band Width an acceptance of 1mrad horiz. *10mrad vert. has been considered.

4


Figure 3: Flux from the BM of ESRF (operated at 200mA, blue) compared with SuperB LER (green) and

HER (red) operated at 500mA. The energy points at equal flux are indicated by the arrows The results are shown below (Figure 3). For the softer part of the spectrum a fourfold increase respect to ESRF is reported for HER and a rough twofold increase for LER. This advantage is rapidly lost as energy increases with cutoff values (i.e. same flux as ESRF) at 9.6 keV for LER and 16.9 keV for HER. Despite the high energy of the electron beam, the competitiveness of BM beamlines on SuperB with respect to those on the ESRF is thus limited to the wavelength region well above 1 Å (12.4 keV), the harder part (most interesting for diffraction or XAS on 5d transition metals) being dominated by the ESRF bending magnets. The radiated power per millirad (hor) is in the same range as in the case of ESRF.

5. Undulator beam line at ESRF vs. SuperB. We compared the brightness performances of SuperB for the HER and LER parameters vs. the

European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) (Table 3).

ESRF Ring parameters Energy GeV 6.03 Maximum Current mA 200 Horizontal Emittance nm 4 Vertical Emittance (*minimum achieved) pm 25 (10*) Coupling (*minimum achieved) % 0.6 (0.25*) Revolution frequency kHz 355 Number of bunches 1 to 992 Time between bunches ns 2816 to 2.82

Beam @ ID (odd ID section) Horizontal beta function m 0.5 Horizontal dispersion m 0.037 Horizontal rms beam size µm 59 Horizontal divergence µrad 90 Vertical beta function m 2.73 Vertical rms beam size (*10 pm vert. em.) µm 5.2 Vertical divergence (*10 pm vert. em.) µrad 1.9

Table 3. ESRF beam parameters available at [3]. As a reference, we consider two insertion devices optimized for high-energy photons, namely the U23 (installed at the ID27 in ESRF) and U18, with a shorter period and a higher on axis field (Table 4).

Undulator Period (mm) Length (m) Periods Max Field (T) Max K (peak) U18 18 5 278 0.92 1.546 U23 23 4 174 0.75 1.611

Table 4. Undulators parameters for U23 and U18. The SuperB (HER parameters) (Table 5) are derived from Tab 18.2 in [2]. The undulator length for SUPERB has been scaled to 3m to match the length of the straight sections (see Figure 4).

5


SuperB HER Ring parameters

Energy GeV 6.7 Maximum Current mA 1892 Horizontal Emittance nm 2.0 Vertical Emittance pm 8.1

Beam @ ID Horizontal beta function m 1.8 Horizontal dispersion m 0.0 Horizontal rms beam size µm 60 Horizontal divergence µrad 33.3 Vertical beta function m 2.73 Vertical rms beam size µm 3.0 Vertical divergence µrad 2.7

Table 5. Main SuperB HER ring parameters used in the comparison. The lattice parameters match the beam size and divergence indicated in [2].

Figure 4. Example of Beta Twiss and dispersion at the ID location area in the optimization of the SuperB lattice . The ID straight section region is indicated in grey.

The brightness comparison is shown in the following plots (Figure 5) for both the undulators in the SuperB-HER configuration. The first seven odd harmonics are considered. The difference, more then one order of magnitude reflects mainly the difference in average current between the set of parameters of the two storage rings.

6


Figure 5. Comparison between ESRF and SuperB (HER) brightness with the undulator (U23), left and (U18) right). uperB (HER) with the set of parameters used shows a substantial increase in the brightness with respect to ESRF.

The same comparison has been repeated for the SuperB low energy ring (Figure 6). The parameters used are listed in the table below (Table 6):

SuperB LER Ring parameters Energy GeV 4.18 Maximum Current mA 2447 Horizontal Emittance nm 2.46 Vertical Emittance pm 7.2

Beam @ ID Horizontal beta function m 1.81 Horizontal dispersion m 0.0 Horizontal rms beam size µm 67 Horizontal divergence µrad 37 Vertical beta function m 1.25 Vertical rms beam size µm 3.0 Vertical divergence µrad 2.4

Table 6. Main SuperB LER ring parameters used in the comparison. The lattice parameters match the beam size and divergence indicated in [2].

7


Figure 6. Brilliance for U23 (left) and U18 (right), comparison between ESRF and SuperB LER. The SuperB parameters lead, both for the HER and LER rings, to an estimate of the brightness which is substantially higher than the one available at ESRF. The difference is mainly due to the higher average current assumed, which is foreseen together with an emittance comparable to the ESRF value. From the brilliance plots it is evident the energy gap between the first and the third harmonic which generates a region, between 15 keV and 20 keV, or between 10 and 15 keV with an important flux loss. This behaviour is due to the undulator considered, with a short period and a limitation of the K parameter generating poor energy tuning with the gap. The behaviour would be different with an undulator with longer period, and a K value of 5-10 which could give a substantially larger energy tuning. It has to be noted that operation currents of 2500 mA could produce an unbearable heat load on beam line front ends. State-of-art front end can take up to around 500 mA (personal communication of L. Paolasini with L. Zhang, ESRF expert for front ends and thermal loads at ESRF). This could be a potential problem for the use of SuperB for parasitical production of SR. The constraints on the frontend thermal load, require to limit the total power emitted. This may be obtained by reducing the undulator length (and the undulator considered is already substantially shorter than the ESRF one) or to operate the IDs at low K (undulator strength). The operation in this case would be limited mainly to the fundamental harmonic and a “revolver configuration” could be considered to maintain the possibility to tune the wavelength in an acceptable spectral range. The alternative would be to reduce the average current. In both cases the advantage in terms of brightness with respect to the existing ESRF ring would be somewhat reduced. The limitations in spectra and brilliance would make the machine less competitive with high-energy machines like ESRF/APS/SPRING-8. In order to estimate this effect the next set of brightness calculations (for the ID U23) was obtained reducing the maximum average current to 500mA (Figure 7). All the other parameters are those previously listed.

8


Figure 7. Replica of the ESRF-SuperB-HER(left) and LER (right) ring performance comparison, with the SuperB average current limited to 0.5A. The difference in brilliance between ESRF and SuperB when planning operation at 500 mA and undulator lengths of three meters, is reduced to about a factor of 2/4 depending on the ring configuration (HER/LER).

6. SuperB as a Synchrotron Radiation source The machine characteristics of SuperB make this storage rings an interesting source of

Synchrotron Radiation (SR). The small emittance (1nmrad) allows to produce photon beam with brilliance higher than a third-generation machine, depending on the operating conditions, and an energy ranging from 4 to 80 keV. These characteristics put SuperB as an outstanding third-generation SR source in terms of flux and brilliance (of a factor 4 to 10), when used at high current and once solved the challenges in terms of optics and front-end development. The characteristics of the two rings of SuperB allow to design and build up beam-lines dedicated to the study of advanced materials in a variety of fields, from material science (high Tc superconductors, hybrid organic-inorganic systems, nano-materials), to matter at extreme conditions and to biological systems, using mainly imaging and spectroscopical techniques done with a spatial resolution at the µm or even lower scale. Another important issue is the possibility to follow the real-time evolution of systems on the time scale of elementary processes using a pumping-probe scheme. In this field, it is possible to investigate ultra-fast photo-induced structural changes in molecules, crystals, materials and proteins using as structural probes x-ray diffraction (XRD) and x-ray absorption (XAS) from core levels. For example, ultrafast x-ray diffraction has found many applications including the study of coherent phonons, and phase transitions in solid materials, while the first x-ray diffraction study on protein crystals has been achieved with 100 ps time resolution. Time resolved XAS spectroscopy reaches the level of several tens of pico-second in time resolution in the third generation SR facility (see Swiss light source) and now this limit can be pushed down using the modern high repetition rate lasers [5]. With the present bunch time-structure, time resolution of the order of 100 ps can be easily achieved. However, the increase by almost one order of magnitude of the brilliance could allow the achievement of a temporal resolution of few pico-seconds, or even lower, with a good S/N ratio, good

9


enough to perform quantitative data analysis, if machine parts and beam-lines are appropiately designed from the very beginning.

Biological systems could be investigated using dedicated beam-lines, following the experience of the major third-generation storage ring sources. X-ray diffraction and Small Angle Scattering (SAXS) are the most used techniques in this field and these studies normally use samples of some microns in size. For example, diffraction data are routinely measured on crystals of the size of 10-100 µm using microfocus beamlines. Very recently, experiments have allowed the measurement of diffraction data using a beam size of 1 µm [6]. The rise of the brilliance should allow a decrease of the minimum crystal size dimension able to give Bragg peaks. This is quite important in this field because small crystals are easier to grow than the larger ones, for example most of the precipitates obtained during the crystallization trials contain crystals of extremely small size. Some efforts should be made to combine in a single beam-line the possibility of performing more than one experiment (for example XRD and XAS) on the same sample.

The energy range would also certainly favour specific programs in synchrotron radiation-based medical research related both to imaging for diagnosis and to irradiation for therapy and potentially clinical applications.

The major part of the approaches use hard X-rays (2.5-80 keV), although soft x-rays beamlines (like for instance ID08 at ESRF) could be as well envisaged. These kinds of applications primarily require a good beam stability, both source and thermal stability of the optics. Thus, it is very important to limit the rms noise during the top-up operation, which would limit the performances for polarized absorption and resonant spectroscopies and high-resolution optics (inelastic scattering techniques). This is one of the challenges to be clearly faced. Thermal and vibrational stability should be achieved jointly between machine and beamlines, and this is only possible when machine and beamlines are constructed on the same monolithic support structure, so to guarantee geometrical and mechanical stability to the photon beam. Beam lines will develop over a length of 100 meters, to which support laboratories and logistic spaces must be envisaged from the beginning. HER is a 7GeV ring, LER is a 4GeV ring. The border-line energy to develop low energy applications is around 3 GeV. It appears that both HER and LER are machines not really suitable for low energy work making use of straight sections. There could still be room for low energy beamlines on bending magnets, and to develop specific Pump-Probe applications exploiting the high current per bunch.

The opportunity given by having two machines (HER/LER) with opposite particle beam direction, as shown in Figure 2, makes it possible to construct an experimental station where the two photon beams can be used on the same experiment, for time Holography. Particle beam synchronization could be envisaged.

7. Conclusions, perspectives and further discussion points

In this short work, we have brought to light potential feasibility of SR by means of a SuperB machine. A more detailed investigation of the SR production scenarios appears necessary, though, in order to clarify the following main issues:

- Machine and beam-lines To guarantee the mechanical and geometrical stability of the machine lattice and of the

beam-lines, necessary to take advantage of SuperB specifications, both elements should be built on the same monolithic structure so that oscillations of machine and beam-lines due to environmental noise, will happen coherently. Post adaptation or post development of pre-existing structures will not guarantee same stability level, which is needed to exploit the characteristics of SuperB.

Time-resolved experiments need design of machine parts and beam-lines from the very beginning, in order to allow time-resolution at the ps-scale.

10


- Dedicated machine/top-up related issues The very high-brilliance of SuperB is one of the most interesting characteristics of this

machine, as shown above. This can be fruitful exploited for micro-imaging and spectroscopy only by ensuring a very high stability of the machine and of the particle beams.

There are doubts on the possibility of using the machine simultaneously for SR and as a collider; issues are (i) the particle beam stability with Top-Up operation at high frequency (50Hz), (ii) the high-average current required by the collider, (iii) the influence of the insertion devices on the operating collider.

A current stability of 0.05 mA RMS should be achieved over normal periods of operation of 24 hours. If the machine does not operate in a collider regime, the lifetime will increase to few hours, and it would be possible to have a top-up with lower frequencies (i.e. injections over few minutes) with stability issues similar to the ones of other facilities.

This issue could be solved by using SuperB as a SR facility and as a collider, in a sequential/independent way and not in parallel (parasitic use). We do believe this issue as a crucial and fundamental aspect for using SuperB as a SR machine.

- Number and kind of beam-lines As it is known now, five beam-lines are foreseen on HER and five beam-lines on LER. Only

undulators can be used competitively as a source. Such a limited number of beam-lines (normally > 40 beamlines are found on sources with comparable running costs) and the restricted time dedicated to SR generation could question the economic sustainability of the SuperB machine for this application. Finally, the fact of having a machine about 10m underground raises serious concerns about the possibility of expanding the beamline portfolio after the construction as instead routinely done on dedicated sources.

The bending magnet radius on HER (87m) is not very attractive for the production of radiation at high energy (8-80 keV). The critical wavelength is very similar to a low energy ring where the curvature radius of 20 meters compensates the energy difference. BM-based beam-lines would benefit of a higher intensity in the low-energy range (<8 keV), with respect to existing facilities.

- Front End heating issues The brilliance of SuperB is due to an operating current 10 times higher than other facilities,

rather than to a groundbreaking emittance. In order to avoid current limitations, so to exploit the advantages of this machine, a serious study on the thermal load on Front ends and in general on the optics is strongly required.

8. References [1] M.E. Biagini, “The SuperB project: Accelerator Status and R&D”, Proc. of IPAC11, San Sebastian, Sep. 2011. [2] “SuperB Progress report – The Collider”, 2010, (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1009.6178v3) [3] http://www.esrf.eu/Accelerators/Performance[4] http://www.esrf.eu/Accelerators/Performance/Brilliance [5] Frederico A. Lima, Christopher J. Milne, Dimali C. V. Amarasinghe, Mercedes Hannelore Rittmann-Frank, Renske M. van der Veen1, Marco Reinhard, Van-Thai Pham, Susanne Karlsson, Steven L. Johnson, Daniel Grolimund, Camelia Borca, Thomas Huthwelker, Markus Janousch, Frank van Mourik, Rafael Abela, and Majed Chergui, “A high-repetition rate scheme for synchrotron-based

11

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1009.6178v3

http://www.esrf.eu/Accelerators/Performance


picosecond laser pump/x-ray probe experiments on chemical and biological systems in solution”, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 82, 063111 (2011); doi:10.1063/1.3600616 [6] Popov D, Burghammer M, Buléon A, Montesanti N, Putaux JL, Riekel C, “A-Amylose Single Crystals: Unit Cell Refinement from Synchrotron Radiation Microdiffraction Data”, Macromolecules 39, 3704–3706 (2006).

9. List of Authors

Riccardo Bartolini (e-mail: [email protected]) Riccardo Bartolini is Head of the Accelerator Physics Group at the Diamond Light Source and

University Lecturer at the John Adams Institute at the University of Oxford. His interests span third and fourth generation light sources, compact light sources based on plasma accelerators and advanced beam diagnostics. He teaches Accelerator Physics course for graduate and undergraduates in Oxford. He's member of the Machine Advisory Committee at ANKA Karlsruhe, LUNEX5 at SOLEIL and convener or member of the scientific programmes of many international conferences. He is author of forty refereed publications and more than 100 papers in conferences proceedings.

Maurizio Benfatto (e-mail: [email protected]) First Research staff member of the INFN-LNF and guest professor of University of Science and

Technology of China, Hefei - China. He is chairman of the Review Committee of the “Hard Condensed Matter – Structure” panel of ELETTRA synchrotron radiation (SR) facility, chairman of the LNF Scientific Committee for the use of Synchrotron Light at Dafne and person in charge for the INFN activity in the European programs (ELISA and CALIPSO) for synchrotron radiation transnational access. He is teacher at the “ Italian School on Synchrotron Radiation” held every two years in Italy. His research activity is devoted to the development of new theoretical tools for the interpretation of SR spectroscopies, in particular the X-ray Absorption from core states and the Elastic X-ray Scattering. Authors of more than 150 papers in peer-reviewed journals of high impact and almost seventy school and proceedings papers.

Maria Enrica Biagini (e-mail: [email protected] ) is staff physicist of the acceleration Division at LNF Frascati. She is responsible for SuperB

accelerator for the LNF Accelerator Division. She has contributed since the beginning to the definition of the project parameters, lattice design and coordination of the international collaboration. She has experience in designing, constructing and operating e+e- colliders, such as Adone and DAΦNE at Frascati, DCI at Orsay, PEP-II at SLAC. She’s chairman of the ICFA Group on High Luminosity e+e- colliders. She is author of more than 150 publications in the field.

Michele Cianci (e-mail: [email protected]) is responsible, at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) in Hamburg (DE), for the development of a new beam line (MX1) on the PETRA III (DESY) ring for macromolecular

12



crystallography. In the field of advanced methods for protein crystallography he has developed: a) use of "softer X-rays" for solving the phase problem and chemical biology; b) planning, construction and commissioning of instrumentation for in-crystallo spectroscopies. The Italian Association of Crystallography has awarded the ‘Mario Nardelli’ Prize 2008 to Michele Cianci for the relevant contribution given to the field of macromolecular crystallography and for the wide and productive activities at synchrotron radiation sources by applying and developing new and innovative technologies; Michele Cianci has some 19 publications in the field.

Marcello Coreno (e-mail : [email protected] ) Research scientist at the Elettra Synchrotron Light Laboratory (Trieste, Italy) for the Italian

National Research Council, Institute of Inorganic Methodologies and Plasmas (IMIP-CNR, Montelibretti, Rome); responsible of the Gas Phase Photoemission Beamline; research fellow of Sincrotrone Trieste ScpA as team leader of the Elettra research unit of the Italo-Slovenian Interregional Center of Photonic Technologies for Ultrafast Spectroscopy (CITIUS, University of Nova Gorica, Ajdovščina Campus, Slovenia). His scientific activity in the field of Atomic and Molecular Physics, synchrotron radiation research and technology has resulted in more than 140 papers on international journals (http://www.tasc.infm.it/research/gaph/staff/coreno.htm ).

Francesco D’Acapito (e-mail: [email protected]) is a researcher of CNR at the IOM institute, responsible of the GILDA beamline at the European

Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) in Grenoble and member of the italian delegation at the ESRF Advisory Financial Committee. He has carried out experiments using X-ray absorption spectroscopy in the field of point defects in crystals and glasses and developed experimental methods based on grazing incidence of X-rays. He is author of about 160 publications on international scientific journals.

Luca Giannessi (e-mail: [email protected]) Senior Scientist at ENEA, Physics technology and new materials department, responsible of

the SPARC single pass FEL physics and consultant for the commissioning of FERMI at Sincrotrone Trieste. His interests encompass the physics of high brightness beams and the processes of radiation emission from ultrarelativistic electrons. Author of more than 120 papers on scholarly journals he is also developer of widespread simulation codes, as TREDI and Perseo, for the simulation of high brightness beams and free electron laser dynamics respectively. He contributed to the first lasing of several free electron lasers in Europe, as Delta (Dortmund, 1999), the European Storage Ring FEL at Elettra (Trieste, 2000), SPARC (Frascati, 2009) and FERMI (Trieste, 2010).

Carlo Mariani ([email protected]) Professor at the Università di Roma La Sapienza, past-president of the Italian Society of

Synchrotron Radiation (SILS), chair-person of the Elettra Proposal Review Panel, member of the ESRF

13

http://www.tasc.infm.it/research/gaph/staff/coreno.htm



and Canadian Light Source proposal review panels. User Representative elected in the ELISA european programme (European LIght Sources Activity), co-proposer of the CALIPSO european synhcrotron radiation (SR) project for transnational access, and member of the executive board of the European SR-Users’ Organization (ESUO). Scientific interests: electronic, structural and magnetic properties of low-dimensional systems and hybrid nanostructured organic-inorganic interfaces; author of more than 130 papers on high impact journals. User of several SR sources (ESRF, Elettra, Soleil, Bessy, ...) with spectroscopy (ARUPS, XPS, NEXAFS, XMCD, ...) and structural (GIXD) techniques. http://server2.phys.uniroma1.it/gr/lotus/Mariani_carlo/Mariani_C.html

Luigi Paolasini (e-mail: [email protected] ) Scientist at ESRF, was responsible of ID20 beamline, specialized in the magnetic scattering on

magnetic materials. In the field of magnetic and resonant hard x-ray scattering, he developed the techniques of x-ray polarization analysis and control (crystal polarizers and phase plate retarders),the project on high magnetic fields, low temperatures and high pressures for the resonant x-ray diffraction on strongly correlated electron systems, the interference techniques for the study of magnetostriction in multiferroics and multi-fonctional materials. He is member of Diamond review panel. He is the coordinator of the working group for magnetism in the project DANTE (CNR) for the development of neutron polarization devices in the frame work of the European Spallation Source. User of both neutron and synchrotron radiation facilities. Scientific interests: electronic, magnetic and structural properties of strongly correlated electron systems, multiferroics and multi-functional materials, superconductors, itinerant magnetic systems. Author of about 90 papers on high impact journals. http://www.esrf.eu/Members/paolasin

14

http://www.esrf.eu/Members/paolasin

superb as source for synchrotron light · 2020. 1. 16. · january 2012 – società italiana luce...

Documents