the accelerator directorate the organization, priorities and accelerator r&d may 5, 2011

The Accelerator Directorate The Organization, Priorities and Accelerator R&D

May 5, 2011

Norbert Holtkamp

Topics

• My first 100 days

• Organizational adjustments

• Priorities

• Where do we go with Accelerator R&D

• Long range planning

• Summary

2Accelerator R&D: Strategy

My First 100 Days…Observations

• The observations were heavily influenced by the review of AED. – Business systems + Document management systems are up to

standards– “Shadow organizations” and “Shadow systems” exist

• Systems Engineering is not consistent across AD/Lab• Significant frustration regarding Accelerator R&D.• Lack of trust towards upper management.• In spite of all that: Operation of user facilities and

construction of new ones is doing very well.


A fantastic Toy: LCLS Achievements “… and then there was light”. Coherent light. Immediately.

Very short transition from commissioning to user operation

Low charge (20pC) bunches for short bunch length (<10fs)

Extended energy range, .5keV – 10keV

Second Harmonic After Burner (SHAB) for x-rays to approx. 20 keV

Operation at 120 Hz (and 120 Hz controls feedback) was seamless

Operating now at approx. 4000 hrs. per year at greater than 95% accelerator availability

Accelerator R&D: Strategy4

The OrganizationThe Resources

Present Accelerator Directorate Organization

Norbert Holtkamp, ALDBob Hettel, Deputy

John Seeman, Deputy

LCLS AcceleratorSystems Division

D. Schultz

Accelerator Engineering Division

K. Fant

Accelerator Operations

& Safety DivisionR. Erickson

Accelerator Research DivisionT. Raubenheimer

S0-20 Accelerator Division

U. Wienands

Strategic Projects Division

J. Galayda

SPEAR3Accelerator Division

J. Schmerge

ESH&QMike

ScharfensteinActing

AdministrationH. O’Donnell

Business OfficeC. Lowe

• The Accelerator Directorate has a total of ~ 600 FTE.• Approximately 275 FTE are funded directly or indirectly in

support of the LCLS.• Approximately 170 FTE are “hard” matrixed to the LCLS.


Organizational Adjustments

• Is there anything wrong with the existing organization?• Observations:

– 28% of all AD employees are coded supervisors– Present org charts mix between administrative and functional supervision– Up to seven levels of management– PAUSE event pointed out deficiencies in communication and lack of

clarity in supervision

– Dissatisfied customers– In some areas the mission and the organization are not aligned.– Some of the current structure has been in place for more than a decade

and can be rigid, cumbersome and inflexible– Rates are too high. Substantial UDT across the organization


What Do We Have? - What Do We Want?

Accelerator R&D: Strategy 8

The Present Organization


The Biggest Change: Engineering Organization

• Owns more than 2/3 of AF (>400 people)

• Only 2 options:1. AED is a directorate2. AED splits up into 3

~90 ~130 ~180


Restructured Organization


Funding Sources

WBS 1PhotonScienceSIMES INSTPULSE INSTSUNCAT INST

WBS 3SSRL ScienceBL OperationsUsersExperiments

WBS 8Accelerator Support for PPA, SSRL, LCLSOperations, Safety and MaintenanceUpgrades – AIPs, small projectsResearch and Future DevelopmentCore Competencies and TechnologiesService CentersProjects – LCLS II, LUSI, FACET, MEC (WBS 7)

WBS 9Lab-wide Support

Allocation Pools&Service CentersDirector’s OfficeCOO OfficePlanning & AssessmentFinanceProcurementHuman ResourcesESHProject Mgmt OfficeFacilitiesComputingCommunications

Infrastructure Projects(directly funded)

BES #1funds

HEP ##funds

BES #2funds

BES #3 funds

Other FundSourcesWFOAgenciesStanford

WBS 4LCLS ScienceBL OperationsUsersExperiments

WBS 2PPA ScienceKIPACElem ParticleBabar D&DService Centers

HEP ##funds


Detailed Breakdown


HEP LCLS SSRL Other Grand Total

TOTAL WBS 8.0 38,765 95,688 12,335 6,721 153,510

8.02 SPEAR3 Core Team 0 0 8,629 0 8,629SPEAR3 Core Team Management 0 0 5,591 0 5,591SPEAR3 Operations and Mainten 0 0 2,264 0 2,264SPEAR3 Upgrades 0 0 773 0 773

8.03 LCLS Core Team 0 68,593 0 0 68,593LCLS Core Team Management 0 2,086 0 0 2,086LCLS Operations and Maintenanc 0 39,807 0 0 39,807LCLS Upgrades 0 26,701 0 0 26,701

8.04Sect 0 to 20 & FACET Core Team 6,938 6,015 0 0 12,953S0-20 Core Team Management 445 462 0 0 906S0-20 Operations and Maintenan 4,448 5,235 0 0 9,683S0-20 Upgrades 2,046 318 0 0 2,364

8.05Accelerator Operations & Safet 1,288 12,881 3,706 0 17,876AOS Division Office 226 696 234 0 1,157Maintenance Coord, Statistics, 0 622 0 0 622Document Control 0 449 0 0 449Beam Operations 350 4,321 1,537 0 6,208MCC Systems 0 703 0 0 703SPEAR3 Control Center Systems 0 0 20 0 20Power 712 6,090 1,915 0 8,717

8.06Accelerator Research & Develop 30,539 8,199 0 6,721 45,460ARD Division Office 107 0 0 0 107LCLS 0 6,403 0 2,242 8,645Spear3 0 0 0 205 205Test Facilities 5,599 0 0 0 5,599ILC 4,237 0 0 0 4,237LARP and LHC Upgrades 2,361 0 0 0 2,361Accelerator Design - Physics & 1,452 0 0 0 1,452RF Source & Structure Developm 8,813 0 0 1,617 10,430Novel Acceleration Research 3,666 0 0 0 3,666High Gradient Research 3,157 0 0 0 3,157Accelerator Technology Develop 648 1,796 0 239 2,683AD Work For Others 498 0 0 1,983 2,481Other Accelerator R&D 0 0 0 436 436

Long Range Planning


Ten Year View of SLAC FundingTotal in $Millions Base - Research, Operations & Maintenance FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 Outyears TotalHigh Energy Physics (HEP) 93 89 91 92 94 97 99 102 104 107 109 Basic Eenerty Science (BES) - SSRL 33 34 45 48 51 54 55 57 59 61 63 BES LCLS 106 123 143 157 170 185 201 217 223 228 234 BES Photon Science 18 20 23 30 36 43 52 62 75 90 107 Other - EM, Safeguard & Security, BER 10 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23

Ttl SLAC Base 261 279 316 343 367 397 426 458 481 507 537

0 0 0 Non-Base - Projects Science Laboratory Infrastrcutre (SLI)-Research Support Bldg (RSB) 7 41 12 36 - - - - - - - - 96 SLI-Scientific User and Support Bldg (SUSB) - - 12 33 19 1 - - - - - - 65 SLI-Photon Science Laboratory Bldg - - - - - - 5 30 25 - - - 60 BES-LCLS I & PULSE 39 BES-LCLS II 1 7 30 91 115 95 45 15 - - - - 399 BES-LCLS 2025 - - - - - - - - 5 17 40 538 600 BES-PEP X - - - - - - - - - 6 25 469 500 HEP-LSST - - 12 25 44 37 24 14 - - - - 156 BES-SSRL BL, incl Addt'l Staff Suprt - 2 5 10 11 11 13 13 9 7 7 7 93

Total NonBase Projects 47 49 71 195 189 143 87 72 39 30 72 1,014 1,969

Total SLAC - NonARRA 308 328 387 538 557 540 513 529 520 537 608 1,014 1,969 ARRA Projects 33 40 21 - - - - - - - - - 94 Total SLAC 340 368 409 538 557 540 513 529 520 537 608 1,014 2,063 Out Year Input from PPA - R. Alva; SSRL - S. Carlson; LCLS - S. Honl; Photon Sci - N. Matlin Current Fiscal Year

DRAFT

Where are We Going: Priorities, Accelerator R&D

SLACs Lab Agenda

Mission• Grow into the premier

Photon Science Laboratory

• Maintain our position as the premier [electron] accelerator laboratory

• Build targeted programs in particle physics, particle astrophysics & cosmology

16 Accelerator R&D: Strategy

SLAC Particle Physics+Astronomy and Accelerator Research

PPA • FERMI• LSST• LHC support• EXO• LC• Super B

Accelerators• NC LC Technology• High Power RF • High Gradients • FACET• LASER Acceleration• TEST beams


… the programs, facilities and infrastructure SLAC operates

Example: Maintain our Status as the Premier Electron Accelerator Laboratory

• Innovative technologies for accelerators– NC high gradient acceleration – Dielectric – Plasma – NC accelerator for DOE (and

worldwide)

FACET

• Novel approach for high brightness beams– Beam generation– Beam/ -manipulation – Laser-Beam

manipulation/diagnostics

ECHO 4


Beyond HEP: The SLAC Multi-Program Environment

PPA • Detector R&D• Computing • Data acquisition &

management

AD• Beam Dynamics• Technology

infrastructure • Test Facilities• Research on future

colliders• Computation


LCLS,SSRL & Photon Science

LCLS Operations LCLS Experiments

Data acquisition

Data storage High brightness

beams Low Emittance

Beam Acceleration New light source

concepts

… the technology HEP supports at SLAC benefits the entire lab……and back

The Laboratory Mission - The Accelerator Role

Grow into the premier Photon Science Laboratory

Maintain our position as the premier [electron] accelerator laboratory

Build targeted programs in particle physics, particle astrophysics & cosmology

Seeding schemes that will change FEL designs

R&D Program @LCLS LC, Beam Manipulation

Next Generation Injectors Injector Test Infrastructure LC, Super KEKB, Ultra short pulses Diagnostics.

Timing/Synchronization LC

User adapted applications Linac designs for specific needs

LC, MC

Enabling Technology RF Power (at any band) and new power sources

LC, MAP, Project X, everywhere

The “ultimate” storage ring Beam Dynamics and Feedback systems

Super B / Super KEK B

“Doubling the energy” Plasma Wake Field Acceleration

FACET and its experimental program


Accelerator R&D: Strategy

Priorities:LCLS-II as a Part of LCLS-2025: What SLAC Envisions

present LCLSNEHHall

LCLS-2025

FEHHall

LCLS II is key step on path to LCLS 2025

soft x-rayhard x-ray

LCLS Accompanying FEL R&D Program

Z.HuangJ.HastingsB.Hettel

Sector 0 FEL R&D Test Facility

A staged approach to a five to 15 to 30 Million$ Test Facility that serves SLAC and others (LBNL,ANL)


Redirecting where: Status on the Photon Side

• The R&D plan is consistent with SLACs mission statement

• The plan includes other laboratories and serves not only SLAC but other national programs and the worldwide community

• All elements of the plan will happen depending on time and funding because they are all mission critical

• … it’s a good and complete plan, although details are missing!


Redirecting where: What about the HEP part?

• B.Brinkman (Oct 2009)• There are a number of promising emerging accelerator

technologies now under investigation with HEP support:– High-Gradient RF Structures– Muon Accelerators &Colliders– Photonic Band-Gap Structures– Superconducting Radio Frequency– Wake Fields in Plasmas or Dielectrics


Other SLAC Accelerator Research Program

• Strong programs in Advanced Accelerator concepts, High Power RF (HPRF) and Beam physics and Diagnostics– Utilize SLAC core competencies in HPRF and accelerator design– Leverage SLAC test facilities, infrastructure and computation effort

• SLAC HEP Accelerator R&D program at crossroads– World-leading accelerator research program with unique but expensive

infrastructure and test facilities

– Most near-term application industrial or scientific radiation sources– Accelerators have potential to impact community and economy


B&R Description FY 2010FY 2011Feb AFP

FY 2011 Budget

KA120201 B-Factory Operations Total 12,019 8,880 9,341KA120202 B-Factory Support Total 2,930 900 4,664

B-Factory Complex Total 14,949 9,780 14,005KA1101021 Proton: Energy Frontier 4,300 3,800 4,245KA1201020 Electron 8,312 6,667 7,230KA1301021 Non-Accelerator: Cosmic Frontier 17,332 12,000 15,884KA1301022 Non-Accelerator: Intensity Frontier 3,463 1,500 1,678KA1401020 Theoretical Research 7,795 7,620 8,665

Core EPP Research 41,202 31,587 37,701KA1501020 Accelerator Science 8,659 9,534 10,617KA1502011 Accelerator Development 3,333 3,647 3,537KA1503020 Detector R&D 4,341 3,578 3,400

Core Technologies R&D 16,333 16,759 17,555Core Programs 57,535 48,346 55,256Core Programs FTEs 220

KA1301031 LSSTKA1301032 CDMS/SNO R&D 300 0 700KA1301032 LSST R&D 2,145 4,000 4,812KA1301025 EXO Operations 0 1,500 1,778KA1301025 FGST Operations 0 5,000 2,884KA1501050 FACET Operations 0 6,000 6,000

Research Projects Total 2,445 16,500 16,174KA1102053 LHC Support (LARP) 2,281 1,845 2,371KA1102054 ATLAS Operations 2,328 1,509 1,446

LHC R&D Program Total 4,609 3,354 3,817ILC R&D Total 11,766 8,257 9,257Other Total 2,479 44 2,826Projects/LHC/ILC/Other 21,299 28,155 32,074SLAC HEP Total 93,783 86,281 101,335Core Programs + EXO/ISOC Ops 57,535 59,918Core Programs + EXO/ISOC Ops FTEs 220

The Reality: FY2011 funding vs budget situation

• Where will SLAC be in 3-5 years?

• Following trend: ~ $ 6-7 M• Following trend ~ $ 3 M

• 0 unless there is a FACET II

• Following trend ~ $ 3.5 M• Depends: 0- < $ 2 M_______________________________

That’s ~ $ 15 M versus ~ $ 31M


28

Programmatic Elements and Direction in the Future

Advanced Accelerator R&D: High Gradient, LASERs/PLASMA

FEL Physics InstrumentationHigh rep rate, ultrafast

Accelerator Computations

Pulsed PowerModulators

BEAM DynamicsHigh Power RF

Fully aligned with SLAC mission

DOE fully funds100%

Unique capability @SLAC. DOE will partially fund

Very useful for SLACLargely funded through grants

NC Linac Design & Construction


AD-Status Overview and Outlook• R&D infrastructure:

– HEP funded AD infrastructure is about $ 30M / y• Probably shrink to $ 10M / y by 2015

– BES funded AD infrastructure is << $ 10M / y • could grow to $ 20M / y

• In order to maintain and grow this infrastructure AD would need a ~$30M - $40M program by 2015.

• Sources: DARPA, BES, NP, HEP, FS, DOD, Industry, NIH• AD is approx $ 150M/y now and will be in 2015/2016 because

LCLS II construction money. Without WFO AD can not grow/maintain.

• Management decision: not more than 20% of the AD base!


Other Sources of Funding- is it a Solution?

• WFO funding can support infrastructure and technology that can not be full covered by funding through base/core programs.

• SLAC has technology, infrastructure and intellectual capabilities that can benefit industries, other agencies and the nation.

• Risks:– Fluctuations in funding can not be covered by Laboratory Base

budget– Effort becomes very scattered without clear direction and alignment

with lab core mission– AD can’t raise the ~$ 35M /y and AD infrastructure will fade away– WFO becomes substantial part of base budget and threatens lab

core missions through shift in priority


WFO: Is It Realistic?Lab Topic Time Funding

ScaleFunding

Risk

CERN Ongoing structure fabrication & testing 2010-11 ~300k None

LLNL First phase of MEGa-ray construction 2010-11 ~750k None

FNAL Project-X rf system development 2011 ~400k None

LANL Design studies for MARIE 2011 ~300k Low

LCLS SLED pulse compressor upgrade 2011-12 ~600k Low

LLNL Complete MEGa-ray 250 MeV linac 2011-12 ~1600k Low

LLNL Joint LLNL/SLAC DARPA AxIS Prop. 2011-14 ~7200k Med

CERN Additional CLIC structure testing at SLAC 2012-13 ~800k Med

CERN Three additional klystron-based test stands (SATS) 2012-14 ~2200k# Low

LANL R&D for MARIE on high grad. long-pulse linacs 2012-14 ~5000k High

LCLS X-band deflector (klystron, waveguide, …) 2013 ~800k Med

LCLS-II Bunch compressor linearizer 2013 ~800k Low

LCLS Energy dither (600 MeV w/ 4 XL4’s & 16 struct.) 2014-15 ~5400k High

ELI-NP High gradient 600 MeV linac for gamma ICS 2014-16 ~8000k# Med

PSI Energy dither / energy upgrade (0.4 ~ 2 GeV) 2016 ~10M$ per GeV# High

# = funding may be split between SLAC and industry~500k additional internal SLAC LDRD funding in FY1131


WFO by Directorate at SLAC Today *

Directorate

Photon science $ 826

Particle & Astro $1,096

SSRL $5,961

LCLS $105

Operations $1,729

Accelerator $3,434

AD-BES $1.901

Adv Sci Comp $132

$13,151


We intend to grow this to > $ 22M in FY12 !!!

More recent initiatives – We will do!

• The Muons: Engage in MAP-Berkeley and SLAC will make a proposal together. Approx 6 FTEs each.

• Plan for FACET II• Maintain the Linear Collider (at SLAC or elsewhere)

• Engage with HP RF industry • Start WFO others program (and infrastructure)

• Be the center for normal conducting RF accelerators and especially linacs, HP RF sources and pulsed power


Budget Realities

• SLAC operates the only hard x-ray laser for another couple of years.

• There a core competencies that SLAC wants to maintain and that the DOE wants to maintain within the complex

• There are new projects and opportunities for the Accelerator directorate:– LCLS II, ITF, FEL R&D programs, NGLS participation…– Develop, implement and execute a healthy Work For Others

program– Look for the future of HEP: SUPER B, LHC, Linear Collider, Muon

Collider… but better be patient!

34 Accelerator R&D: Strategy

Summary

• The largest part of the Accelerator Directorate is very straightforward although challenging to maintain and to improve

• The Accelerator Research and Development is facing a major shift and we need to calibrate ourselves whether:– The path makes sense– The path is realistic– The path allows address to the full breath of opportunities

• There will be a series of talks addressing the elements of the plan


Flat Organizations …

• Tuned for matrix organizations

• Reduces the number of layers “above” – We will go from ~>20% supervisors to ~ 6%

Þ Empowers employeesÞ reduces layers through which to filter messages thus

improves communicationÞ Reduces costs to the organization (= efficiencies)Þ Encourages accountabilityÞ Enhances creativity and productivity through empowerment


Administrative Supervisor vs. Functional Lead

Functional Lead Role• Under the direction of the

supervisor:• Not a Position, but a Role

– Plan and assign work– Provide coaching and guidance on

performance of job duties – may be Subject Matter Expert

– Communicates and monitors compliance with policy, procedure and protocol

– Provides performance feedback to supervisor

– Executes WPC

• Does not replace BU leads

Administrative Supervisor• Makes all personnel actions

– Hires– Evaluates– Promotes– Transfers– Terminates

• Compensation decisions• Administers corrective action• Writes and delivers performance

evaluation• Responsible for WPC


“You Can’t Manage What You Don’t Measure”

Possible Metrics for AD

• Customer Satisfaction• Cost (overhead, UDT)• Turn-around time (determine baseline)• Quality of output (reliability and availability of

systems post installation and operation)• Long term safety performance• System function and performance vs customer

requirements


Living in the Matrix: An example


Functional Authority

Administrative Authority

FEL Accelerator R&D Test Facilities – One IdeaT. Raubenheimer

Cathode Test Facility/ASTA (low E)

Photocathode R&D aimed atunderstanding LCLS lifetime

and damage issuesTest rf gun modifications before

installation in LCLS-I or II

Longer term R&D aimedat high brightness cathodes

with lower thermal (coatings, smoothness,

new materials)

Injector R&D ProgramNLCTA Facility (<~250 MeV)Simulation and experimentalprogram aimed at significantimprovement in brightness; low-E seeding; technology

and ultrafast technique development

1) Design studies on rfgun design, CSR micro-bunching and cathodes

2) Rf gun development andtesting at NLCTA in 2012

3) NLCTA R&D on injectorbeam physics

LCLS-II Injector(135 MeV)

Full injector configuration; opportunity for R&D

before LCLS-II turn-on

Early construction, commissioning in ~2013/14 to study injector physics before LCLS-II operation

Combined HB program requires ~3M/yr

new funding

Three parallel experimental efforts:

Core Capabilities and how they map onto the Mission


Advanced Accelerator R&D LASERs/PLASMA

FEL Physics InstrumentationHigh rep rate, ultrafast

Computer Aided Design

Pulsed PowerModulators

BEAM DynamicsHigh Power RF

Fully aligned with SLAC mission

DOE fully funds100%

Unique capability @SLAC. DOE will partially fund

Very useful for SLACLargely funded through grants

NC Linac Design & construction

42


Presented at GAD Review Jan 2011:Scenario C ++

FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13GAD Funding 11,232 4,052 3,333 3,538LHC Accelerator Research 1,130 961 142 303 330INFN Super-B design 538 650 44Super – B 687 350X-band Klystron Development 359 605 1,806 1,000 500Power Source technology 1,100 1,900X-band rf technology 487 473 1,022 800 400

Normal Conducting RF 800 1,200High Performance rf modeling 294 369 316 385 420End Station Test Beam design 327 392 0 0 0FACET design 780 0 0 0 0FACET II 150 700CLIC R&D 560 549 78 0 0Project-X collaboration 65 63 0 0 0Feedback and LLRF program 348 224 136 192 210Spending Totals 9,646 4,888 4,286 3,544 5,417 6,010

Will it ever happen and even if, is it sufficient to support the base without a mayor

construction program??

43

HEP Accelerator R&D Priorities at SLAC

• Advanced accelerator R&D with potential for major impact– Plasma Wakefield program although $6M FACET operations

support will limit the user program severely– Dielectric laser acceleration and NLCTA programs– SLAC needs strong leadership and vision!!!

• Beam dynamics core capability and computing mostly supported externally already

• High gradient and X-band programs– Unique capability world-wide but applications unclear

• Must define approach to normal-conducting linacs– Ongoing High Power RF (HPRF) program

• Possibly redirect High Gradient program toward power sources– Continued collaborations with LLNL, LANL and CERN


the accelerator directorate the organization, priorities and accelerator r&d may 5, 2011

Documents

accelerator support

accelerator directorate

accelerator operations

funds12accelerator rd

lcls operations

accelerator research

lcls core team068

accelerator design physics