Conventional Positron Target for a Tesla Formatted Beam(LCC-0133)
Conventional Positron Target for a Tesla Formatted Beam(LCC-0133)
复制标题
用于特斯拉格式光束的传统正电子目标（LCC-0133）
DOI：
10.2172/826573
复制
发表时间：
2003
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Sheppard
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Sheppard
摘要：本注合理考虑了能量沉积i与梁的抗拉强度之比，与梁的尺寸相比较，得出此结论没有必要。对于一个大型的附加问题，直线对撞机协作技术备注：本备注合理考虑能量沉积的抗拉强度与束流尺寸的比值，此结论没有必要。对于一个大型的附加问题，线性对撞机协作技术笔记来定位在电子商务。最后，本文给出了一组表达式，用于探讨对于特斯拉格式光束来说，它是否是合理的光源。关键的问题是，能量沉积的诱导应力与目标物质的极限抗拉强度的比例，与束的大小与声波速度的比率相比，束脉冲在短时间内与总脉冲持续时间相比是大的，并且留下了一个传统的正电子目标，特斯拉格式束。CA提供了一组表达式，用于探讨特斯拉格式光束是否为传统正电子源的问题。关键问题是转换目标和诱导应力与最终材料的比较。由于入射光束脉冲的长度与声速相比较大，因此同步压力脉冲在很短的时间内消散，只留下半静态热应力。切向目标速度为100-125 m/s，两个正电子目标速度为250 m/s，有可能单个目标可以处理到能量沉积。最后给出了待解决的问题。这张便条是非正式的。J. C. Sheppard， 2003年3月17日修订：2003年11月21日摘要本文记录了一组用于探讨Tesla格式束流是否合理考虑传统正电子源问题的表达式。关键问题是能量在转化靶中的沉积以及诱导应力与靶材极限抗拉强度的比较。由于入射光束脉冲的长度与光束尺寸与声速之比相比较大，因此与总脉冲持续时间相比，并发压力脉冲在短时间内消散，只剩下半静态热应力。本文的结论是，切向靶速度为100-125米/秒时，需要两个正电子靶。对于速度为250 m/s的目标，单个目标可以处理3个能量沉积。最后给出了需要解决的其他问题。这张便条是非正式的。本文记录了一组表达式，用于探讨是否合理地考虑传统正电子源的特斯拉格式光束的问题。关键问题是能量在转化靶中的沉积以及诱导应力与靶材极限抗拉强度的比较。由于入射光束脉冲的长度与光束尺寸与声速之比相比较大，因此与总脉冲持续时间相比，并发压力脉冲在短时间内消散，只剩下半静态热应力。本文的结论是，切向靶速度为100-125米/秒时，需要两个正电子靶。对于速度为250 m/s的目标，单个目标可以处理3个能量沉积。最后给出了需要解决的其他问题。这张便条是非正式的。参考文献：[1]lc -0089，“Tesla TDR正电子靶的结构建模”，Werner Stein, John C. Sheppard， 2002年7月。[10] [lc -0088]，“NLC正电子靶的热应力分析”，W. Stein， A. Sunwoo， J. C. Sheppard， V. Bharadwaj， D. Schultz， 2002年7月。[3] http://wwwproject.slac.stanford.edu/lc/local/systems/Injector/Talks%20and%20Papers/BINP_Report s/append1.pdf附录1：目标材料的水动力行为，Tatiana A. Vsevolozhskaya， BINP， 2000年1月12日。MatLab M-File: Z:\正电子\egs4\常规\wtarget。M和。\wtargetde。“个人沟通”，Y. Batygin。问题：是否可以考虑将传统的正电子目标系统用于特斯拉光束格式？回答：为什么不呢？要考虑的主要问题是目标中的能量沉积问题。如果这被证明是可以接受的，那么就可以在开发细节方面做大量的工作。下表列出了正电子束、电子束和靶参数以及钨-26铼材料数据。表格后面是一系列表达式，用于确定需要多少目标来处理入射驱动光束功率。为了验证参数化方法的有效性，将这些参数化结果与LLNL仿真结果进行了比较。后续任务列表如下
This note do consider a conventional conversion target and th Since the length of the i concurrent pressure puls Abstract: This note d reasonable to conside of energy deposition i tensile strength of the the ratio of beam size compared to the overa conclusion of this not necessary. For a targe Additional issues that Linear Collider Collaboration Tech Notes This note d reasonable to conside of energy deposition i tensile strength of the the ratio of beam size compared to the overa conclusion of this not necessary. For a targe Additional issues that Linear Collider Collaboration Tech Notes cume to posit on in the e com ial. ncide d, the e dis nly the ocum r a co n the targ to th ll pu e is t t spe need nts a set of expressions used to explore the issue of whether or not it is reasonable ron source for a Tesla formatted beam. The critical issue is that of energy depositi parison of the induced stress with the ultimate tensile strength of the target mater nt beam pulse is large in comparison to the ratio of beam size to the speed of soun sipates in a time short compared to the overall pulse duration and one is left with o Conventional Positron Target for a Tesla Formatted Beam John C. Sheppard Stanford Linear Accelerator Center Stanford University 2575 Sand Hill Road Menlo Park, CA ents a set of expressions used to explore the issue of whether or not it is nventional positron source for a Tesla formatted beam. The critical issue is that conversion target and the comparison of the induced stress with the ultimate et material. Since the length of the incident beam pulse is large in comparison to e speed of sound, the concurrent pressure pulse dissipates in a time short lse duration and one is left with only the semi-static thermal stress. The hat for tangential target speeds of 100-125 m/s, two positron targets are ed of 250 m/s, it is possible that a single target can handle to energy deposition. to be addressed are given at the end. This note is informal in nature. Conventional Positron Target for a Tesla Formatted Beam J. C. Sheppard rev. 0: March 17, 2003 rev. 2: November 21, 2003 Abstract This note documents a set of expressions used to explore the issue of whether or not it is reasonable to consider a conventional positron source for a Tesla formatted beam. The critical issue is that of energy deposition in the conversion target and the comparison of the induced stress with the ultimate tensile strength of the target material. Since the length of the incident beam pulse is large in comparison to the ratio of beam size to the speed of sound, the concurrent pressure pulse dissipates in a time short compared to the overall pulse duration and one is left with only the semi-static thermal stress. The conclusion of this note is that for tangential target speeds of 100-125 m/s, two positron targets are necessary. For a target speed of 250 m/s, it is possible that a single target can handle to energy deposition. Additional issues that need to be addressed are given at the end. This note is informal in nature.This note documents a set of expressions used to explore the issue of whether or not it is reasonable to consider a conventional positron source for a Tesla formatted beam. The critical issue is that of energy deposition in the conversion target and the comparison of the induced stress with the ultimate tensile strength of the target material. Since the length of the incident beam pulse is large in comparison to the ratio of beam size to the speed of sound, the concurrent pressure pulse dissipates in a time short compared to the overall pulse duration and one is left with only the semi-static thermal stress. The conclusion of this note is that for tangential target speeds of 100-125 m/s, two positron targets are necessary. For a target speed of 250 m/s, it is possible that a single target can handle to energy deposition. Additional issues that need to be addressed are given at the end. This note is informal in nature. References: [1] LCC-0089, "Structural Modeling of Tesla TDR Positron Target," Werner Stein, John C. Sheppard, July 2002. [2] LCC-0088, "Thermal Stress Analyses for the NLC Positron Target," W. Stein, A. Sunwoo, J. C. Sheppard, V. Bharadwaj, D. C. Schultz, July 2002. [3] http://wwwproject.slac.stanford.edu/lc/local/systems/Injector/Talks%20and%20Papers/BINP_Report s/append1.pdf Appendix 1:HYDRODYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF TARGET MATERIAL,Tatiana A. Vsevolozhskaya, BINP, January 12, 2000. [4] MatLab M-File: Z:\positrons\egs4\conventional\wtarget.m and .\wtargetde.m, March, 2003 [5] Y. Batygin, Personal Communication. Question: Can one consider a conventional positron target system for a Tesla beam format? Answer: Why not. The primary issue to consider is that of the energy deposition in the target. If this turns out to be acceptable, then one gets to do significant work in developing the details. Given below are tables listing positron beam, electron beam, and target parameters and Tungsten-26 Rhenium material data. The tables are followed by a series of expressions which are used to determine how many targets are required to handle to incident drive beam power. A comparison of these parametric results with LLNL simulations are made in order to check the validity of the parametric approach. A list of follow-on tasks is