EURISOL DS: European Isotope Separation On-Line Radioactive Ion Beam Facility

1
EURISOL DS European Isotope Separation
On-Line Radioactive Ion Beam Facility
EURISOL
Design Study
OUTCOME FROM THE PROJECT ACTIVITY in the period
20 March- 8 June, 2006
G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
2
Report on the joint meeting of task 2, 3, 4 ,5.
Legnaro March 20-21, 2006
EURISOL
Design Study
Y. Kadi (CERN), T. Stora (CERN), L. Tecchio
(INFN-LNL), D. Ridikas (CEA), A. Herrera-Martinez
(CERN), M. Felcini (CERN), R. Mormann (Julich),
I. Platinieks (IPUL), T. Dury (PSI), F. Groeshel
(PSI) J. Neuhausen (PSI), B. Rapp (CEA), R.
Wilfinger (CERN), L. Penescu (CERN), G. Prete
(INFN-LNL), P. Zanonato (UNI-PD), G. Meneghetti
(UNI-PD), E. Manfrin (PSI), L. Zanini (PSI), N.
Thiolliere (CEA), O. Alyakrinskiy (INFN-LNL), C.
Lau (IPNO), G. Lhersonneau (INFN-LNL), G. Fortuna
(INFN-LNL).
Preparatory Work Reports by Task Leaders

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
3

R. Battistella Caen 30/11/2005
4

R. Battistella Caen 30/11/2005
5

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
6

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
7

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
8
Report on extended capabilities of the driver
accelerator GSI, Darmstadt May 5, 2006
EURISOL
Design Study
Joint Meeting of tasks 11,7,3,8, (2,4)
Jean Luc Biarotte (IPN Orsay), Yorick Blumenfeld
(IPN Orsay), Sébastien Bousson (IPN Orsay), John
Cornell (GANIL), John DAuria (Simon Fraser U./
TRIUMF) Alberto Facco (LNL Legnaro), Graziano
Fortuna (LNL Legnaro), Aleksandra Kelic (GSI),
Jacques Lettry (CERN), Mats Lindroos (CERN),
Strahinja Lukic (GSI), Valentina Ricciardi (GSI),
Karl Heinz Schmidt (GSI), Thierry Stora (CERN),
Luigi Tecchio (LNL Legnaro), Martin Veselsky (IOP
Bratislava)
Preparatory Work Preliminary report on the
benefit of extended capabilities of the driver
accelerator by task 11 Joint Meeting of task 7,
8 held at Soreq (Israel) on 2-4 April 06

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
9
EURISOL
List of possible extended capabilities of the CW
driver accelerator optimized for 1GeV, 5 mA,
proton beam
Design Study

• A higher energy proton beam (2-3 GeV)
• A high energy deuteron beam (1 GeV)
• A low energy deuteron beam (200 MeV)
• A 2 GeV 3He beam
• Heavy ion (HI) beams for A/Q 2
• High energy HI-beams for A/Q up to 3
• HI- beams for A/Q up to 3 for Fermi Energy
  regime nuclear reactions (30 AMeV)

G. Fortuna, Athens 2006
10

EURISOL
Main Conclusions on the Driver extended
Capabilities
Design Study

1. 1 GeV, 5mA, proton beam is, by far, the preferred
   solution for the EURISOL driver, being the best
   overall, cost effective compromise between
   Physics requirements and technologies involved in
   the facility realization.
2. gaps and limitations in ISOL elements should
   be overcome through a vigorous RD programme on
   target-ion source systems, an extended use of
   Resonant Ionization Laser Ion Sources and the
   availability of an easy high energy ( 2 GeV)
   beam, like 3He .
3. 1 GeV deuteron beam incident on a converter
   target does not bring any substantial advantage
   with respect to a 1 GeV proton beam.
4. An intense medium- energy deuteron (100-200 MeV)
   beam brings higher energy, forward focused
   neutrons from a Carbon converter and thus a more
   efficient use of 238U target. Whether the amount
   of very n-rich products is higher than that
   obtained in the classical case (Hg converter)
   is still debated, and no clear conclusion is
   given.

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
11

EURISOL
Main Conclusions on the Driver extended
Capabilities
Design Study
High energy HI-beams (several hundred MeV/A) do
not seem well suited for an ISOL scheme, because
of huge power deposited in the needed
production target. They are more suited for a
fragmentation facility, especially in Europe,
where the FAIR complex is getting in operation
by 2011-2012. In addition, the two-target
scheme seems competitive only for volatile
elements like Ne, Ar, Kr. Fermi energy HI-induced
reactions show very attractive cross sections
for many medium-mass, n-rich species. Again here
the targets are an issue, and such beams should
be available at high intensity stable beam
facilities (SPIRAL2). It is noted that n-rich
unstable beams from the post- accelerator could
be used to populate and study very n-rich
isotopes through such Deep Inelastic collisions.
G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
12
EURISOL
Main Conclusions on the Driver extended
Capabilities
Design Study
Accelerator issues Acceleration of beams like 2
GeV 3He, 250 MeV deuterons ,heavy ions with
A/Q2 up to 125 A MeV, and 1GeV H-, followed by
magnetic or laser stripping to enhance the
multi-user capability of the facility for CW-
proton beams would increase the cost of 20.
These additional capabilities have a very small
impact on the design of the accelerator, and
basically no impact on the design of the cavities
and on the work of task 8. Higher energy
deuterons and/or HI with A/Q up to 3 would entail
a very elaborate re-design of the accelerator and
a very large cost increase. Target Issues.
Changing the beam from proton, implies
development of radically different targets 3He
for example has a higher energy deposition than
protons. the liquid Hg converter will not be at
all adapted to 250 MeV deuterons. There are no
show stoppers but lack of resources in the DS
to produce engineering oriented designs of all
necessary targets.
G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
13
Report on Joint Meeting of Tasks 6, 9, 10 May 2,
2006, IPN-Orsay
EURISOL
Design Study
A.Bechtold, P.Bertrand, J-L Biarrotte, A.Pisent,
M.Comunian, P.Posocco, M-H. Moscatello, D.
Lunney, O. Kester, P. Delahaye, A. Jokinen, R.
Page, N. Orr, J. Cornell, Y. Blumenfeld, P. Butler
Preparatory Work Report on desirable beams and
machine characteristics by N. Orr on behalf of
task 10

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
14
EURISOL
Main recommendations for the base-line
configuration of the Eurisol post-accelerator
Design Study

1. The facility should have a minimum of two target
   ion sources operational at any given time, with
   the additional possibility of multiple ion
   sources coupled to the MMW target running
   simultaneously. The provision of two or more
   beam preparation lines (pre-separator, cooler,
   high resolution mass separator and charge
   breeder) will ensure the simultaneous
   availability of different radionuclides for
   multiple users.
2. The facility should have 3 separate
   post-accelerators a Very Low Energy accelerator
   (lt 1 MeV/u) for astrophysics and solid state
   physics applications, a linac for Coulomb barrier
   applications (1 - 5 MeV /u) and a high energy
   linac. The last should provide a maximum energy
   of 150 MeV/u for 132Sn and should have branches
   for different energy ranges in separate
   experimental halls (to be defined).

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
15
EURISOL
Main recommendations for the base-line
configuration of the Eurisol post-accelerator
Design Study

1. The beta-beam injector (100 MeV/u 6He and 18Ne)
   should be a separate accelerator to those
   considered for NP. The need for very high
   instantaneous beam currents will necessitate a
   separate machine study outside of task 6.
2. For normal use, the linac post-accelerators
   should not employ stripping foils because of
   safety, beam loss, and beam quality
   considerations. However, the provision of
   strippers as an option is desirable for physics
   applications requiring short-lived radio-nuclides
   or high energy high A beams.
3. The option of beam sharing from a single
   accelerator should be considered in order to
   accommodate parasite users requiring set-up or
   test beams (stable or radioactive). Task 6 should
   consider how to achieve the most flexible scheme.

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006
16

EURISOL
Design Study

G. Fortuna, Krakow 2006