US Particle Accelerator School Sub-committee Report: Basic Energy Sciences Facilities Prioritization...

US Particle Accelerator School

Sub-committee Report:Basic Energy Sciences Facilities Prioritization

William A. BarlettaDirector, United States Particle Accelerator School

Department of Physics, MIT


Members of Subcommittee on BES Facilities Prioritization

John Hemminger (co-chair) University of California-IrvineWilliam Barletta (co-chair) MITSimon Bare UOPGordon Brown Stanford UniversityJohn Spence Arizona StateErnie Hall GE Global ResearchBill McCurdy LBNL/Universiry of California-DavisJohn Tranquada BNLDoug Tobias University of California-IrvineSunil SinhaRob McQueeny

University of California-San DiegoAmes Laboratory

Tony Rollett Carnegie MellonMonica Olvera de la Cruz NorthwesternGary Rubloff University of MarylandKeith Moffatt University of ChicagoRob Dimeo NIST


Charge to the committee

Provide input for a 10-year prioritization of scientific facilities in their respective programs from 2014 to 2024

Basis for characterization1. Ability of the facility to contribute to world-leading science

2. Readiness of the facility for construction

What to consider1. Present & proposed facilities listed by BES

2. Potential facilities that require a minimum investment of $100 M

Provide a report that assigns each facility to a category & provides a short justification for that categorization

Do not rank order the facilities


Ability of the facility to contribute to world-leading science (2014- 2024)

Would it answer the most important scientific questions Could other facilities answer these questions; Would it contribute to many areas of research Would the facility address needs of the broad community

of users including those supported by other agencies What is the level of user demand Place each facility or upgrade in one of 4 categories:

1. Absolutely central

2. Important

3. Lower priority

4. Don't know enough yet


Readiness for construction

Has the concept of the facility been formally studied What is the level of confidence that the technical

challenges involved in building the facility can be met Is the R&D performed to date sufficient to assure technical

feasibility Is the cost to build & operate the facility understood Place each facility in one of three categories:

1. ready to initiate construction;

2. significant scientific/engineering challenges to resolve before initiating construction

3. mission and technical requirements not yet fully defined


Briefings to the sub-committee

APS & APS-U Eric Isaacs (ANL) NSLS & NSLS-II Steve Dierker (BNL) SSRL, LCLS, & LCLS-II Chi-Chang Kao (SLAC) ALS & NGLS Paul Alivisatos (LBNL) HIFAR, SNS & Second Target Station Thom Mason (ORNL) Lujan Neutron Scattering Center Mark Bourke (LANL) Center for Functional Nanomaterials Emilio Mendez (BNL) Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies David Morris (LANL) Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences Sean Smith (ORNL) Center for Nanoscale Materials Amanda Petford-Long (ANL) Molecular Foundry Omar Yaghi (LBNL)

Facilities also submitted written input to the sub-committee


Characterization of Existing Facilities


Advance Light Source

ALS has a world-wide reputation for excellence in the use of soft X-ray synchrotron radiation science Strong user demand & high productivity with strong impact

ALS is a leader in developing tools for soft X-ray science Strong international competition

The ALS is “important” to US “world-leading science”


Advanced Photon Source

Leading US source for hard X-rays Optimized for very bright x‐rays in

medium (2‐15 keV) & hard ( >15 keV) energy ranges

Large user demand (>5000 users)

Strong competition from European & Japanese light sources

The APS is “absolutely central” to US “world-leading science”


National Synchrotron Light Source

Long history of high productivity and high impact Large user demand Diverse Capabilities over Broad Spectral Range

Will cease operations no later than Sep, 2014 Operations at Brookhaven will transfer to NSLS-II

NSLS operation is “lower priority”

for US “world-leading science”


National Synchrotron Light Source-II

Large, ultra-low emittance ring Capable of housing 50 beamlines 30 are presently under development

Potential to be best in class from IR to hard X-rays Short pulse operation (~15 ps rms)

On schedule for early completion in June, 2014 Presently – 85% complete

NSLS-II is “absolutely central”

to US “world-leading science”


Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource

Mid-energy x-ray synchrotron user facility In 2004, successfully completed a major upgrade Exciting potential for sub-ps X-rays

~1600 users with high user satisfaction Operational synergies with LCLS

SSRL is “important” to US “world-leading science”


Linac Coherent Light Source

World’s first hard X-ray FEL A stunning success for US science Uses last third of SLAC linac

Highly over-subscribed (~25% get beam time) 60% of papers in high impact journals

LCLS is “absolutely central” to US “world-leading science”


Spallation Neutron Source

World’s highest power spallation source Highly competitive in machine capability Neutron instruments in US are far fewer than in Europe

Steady growth in users Significant headroom for power upgrade

SNS is “absolutely central” to US “world-leading science”


High Flux Isotope Reactor

Nation’s highest flux continuous neutron beams 99% reliability operations

An exceptional resource for materials irradiation & neutron activation analysis Significant national security usage

Continuing mission in isotope production

HFIR is “important” to US “world-leading science”


Lujan Neutron Scattering Center

Strongly leverages NNSA investment in LANSCE Extra capability & capacity is helpful

Neutron instruments in US are far fewer than in Europe

Accessories not at the other facilities high field, high pressure, plutonium, irradiate materials exploited the sample environments, in situ strain is unique important but not essential

LNSC is “lower priority” for US “world-leading science”


Characterization of

Nanoscience Research Centers


General comments

Nanoscience Research Centers add high value through twin missions of pursuing top-quality science and enabling the same for external users through access to NSRC facilities and/or collaboration with NSRC researchers.

They are commended for the quality of their research, strong connections to relevant research centers, & their successes in enabling successes of external users.

The committee identified particular value in synergies between science programs of NSRC researchers, special facilities they develop, benefits available to users


Center for Nanoscale Materials (ANL)

CNM exploits the hard x-ray nanoprobe at APS a unique facility - for a host of collaborations with key industry

labs as well as universities

Excellent access to environmental nanoprobes

CNM is “absolutely central” for US “world-leading science”


Center for Functional Nanomaterials (BNL)

World class TEM capabilities. Plans in place for strong coupling with NSLS II

CFN is “important” for US “world-leading science”


The Molecular Foundry (LBNL)

Strong cross-disciplinary portfolio to support users in one building Enable staff & users to take their projects all the way to screening

& prototyping.

Very strong chemical synthesis of nanoscale materials integrated with characterization/measurements

Well coupled to leadership scale computing platform at LBNL & to ALS

The Molecular Foundry is “absolutely central” for US “world-leading science”


Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences(ORNL)

Excellent in theory & scanning probes Well coupled to leadership scale computing platform at

ORNL

CNMS is “important” for US “world-leading science”


Creates a growing number of Discovery Platforms Uses SNL MESA facility & CINT labs, as new MEMS-based

science platforms readily delivered to users or employed in collaborations with CINT scientists.

Unique capability for user platforms

Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies (SNL/LANL)

CINT is “absolutely central” for US “world-leading science”


Sub-committee characterization of Proposed Upgrades & Facilities


Advanced Photon Source Upgrade

Keeps US capabilities highly competitive with hard X-ray facilities in Europe & Asia

Offers exciting possibilities for short pulse X-rays (~2 ps)

∗ Hardware approach for 2 ps pulses requires vetting this spring

The APS-U is “absolutely central” to US leadership in science

APS-U is “ready to initiate construction” *


Linear Coherent Light Source - II

Maintains LCLS leadership in ultra-short pulse science Broadens LCLS capabilities

Extends wavelength range Substantial Increase in average brightness

Substantially increases LCLS capacity

LCLS-II is “absolutely central” to US leadership in science

LCLS-II is “ready to initiate construction”


Next Generation Light Source

High rep rate, soft X-ray source Would be the world’s highest average power electron accelerator

Further discussion based on BESAC Light Source Charge

∗ Would in principle allow unique, multiple pulse experiments, including the possibility of "multi-dimensional" experiments

∗ Would in principle access science at the ~ 1fs time scale

NGLS could be “absolutely central” * to US leadership in science

NGLS has “significant scientific/engineeringchallenges to resolve

before initiating construction”


SNS Second Target Station

Increases SNS power > 2 MW to improve neutron scattering performance Will keep SNS competitive with ESS

Adds new instruments to US capabilities & capacity Helps but does not close capacity gap with Western Europe Which instruments to be decided with strong user input

SNS-STS is “absolutely central” to US leadership in science

SNS-STS has “scientific/engineering challenges to resolve before initiating construction”


Additional opportunities discussed by the sub-committee

If you wish to add facilities or upgrades,

please consider only those

that require a minimum investment of $100 M


Future Light Sources

In addition to the completion of NSLS-II & upgrades of APS & LCLS

A future light source is “absolutely central” to continued US leadership in science

All options (FEL, ERL, Ultimate Storage Ring) have

“significant scientific/engineering challenges

to resolve before initiating construction”

We look forward to the BESAC study this spring


Discussion

US Particle Accelerator School Sub-committee Report: Basic Energy Sciences Facilities Prioritization...

Documents

Transcript of US Particle Accelerator School Sub-committee Report: Basic Energy Sciences Facilities Prioritization...