LBE Paper - Revision history

Starvale: /* Liquid metal targets as an alternative= */

2016-12-19T13:55:27Z

Liquid metal targets as an alternative=

Starvale: /* Liquid metal targets as an alternative= */

2016-12-19T13:55:03Z

Liquid metal targets as an alternative=

Starvale: /* Liquid metal targets as an alternative= */

2016-12-19T13:54:41Z

Liquid metal targets as an alternative=

Starvale: /* Liquid metal targets as an alternative= */

2016-12-19T13:53:24Z

Liquid metal targets as an alternative=

Starvale: /* Liquid metal targets as an alternative= */

2016-12-19T13:52:03Z

Liquid metal targets as an alternative=

Starvale: /* References */

2016-12-19T13:51:23Z

References

Starvale: /* References */

2016-12-19T13:50:41Z

References

Starvale: /* References */

2016-12-19T13:50:03Z

References

Starvale: /* Need for positrons */

2016-12-19T13:49:38Z

Need for positrons

Foretony: Created page with "Liquid Lead Bismuth Target for Positron Production =Intro= ==Need for positrons== ==Conventional W target (for a 10 MeV electron beam) – power limits?== =Liquid metal targets …"

2016-12-16T19:44:03Z

Created page with "Liquid Lead Bismuth Target for Positron Production =Intro= ==Need for positrons== ==Conventional W target (for a 10 MeV electron beam) – power limits?== =Liquid metal targets …"

New page

Liquid Lead Bismuth Target for Positron Production

=Intro=
==Need for positrons==
==Conventional W target (for a 10 MeV electron beam) – power limits?==
=Liquid metal targets as an alternative==

=Beam Power capability of W -vs- LBE=
==Simple 1D calculations of heat transfer and temperature gradients==
==If we can back it up with ANSYS that would be great==

=Impact of windows on positron production=
==Walls might be needed for liquid LBE – windowless design is tricky ==
==Effect of thin windows (different materials, different thickness) needs to be evaluated - by how much the production rate drops==

=Impact of LBE flow rate=
==Maximum LBE flow rate is defined by corrosion and depends on the material of the window (~ 2 m/s)==
==Limit on the flow rate means limit on the beam current and e+ production rate. ==

=Conclusions=
=References=

[[Positrons]]

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 Optimum LBE converter thickness was simulated using MCNX and G4Beamline (see Figure 1) and was found to be about 2 mm which corresponded to ~2 x 10-3 e+/e-. Momentum distribution of the positrons and electron after the 2 mm LBE converter were also simulated (see Figure 2).
 [[File:Fi1.jpg]]
 =Beam Power capability of W -vs- LBE=

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:55, 19 December 2016
Line 12:		Line 12:

	Optimum LBE converter thickness was simulated using MCNX and G4Beamline (see Figure 1) and was found to be about 2 mm which corresponded to ~2 x 10-3 e+/e-. Momentum distribution of the positrons and electron after the 2 mm LBE converter were also simulated (see Figure 2).		Optimum LBE converter thickness was simulated using MCNX and G4Beamline (see Figure 1) and was found to be about 2 mm which corresponded to ~2 x 10-3 e+/e-. Momentum distribution of the positrons and electron after the 2 mm LBE converter were also simulated (see Figure 2).
		+	[[File:Fi1.jpg]]

	=Beam Power capability of W -vs- LBE=		=Beam Power capability of W -vs- LBE=

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:54, 19 December 2016
Line 12:		Line 12:

	Optimum LBE converter thickness was simulated using MCNX and G4Beamline (see Figure 1) and was found to be about 2 mm which corresponded to ~2 x 10-3 e+/e-. Momentum distribution of the positrons and electron after the 2 mm LBE converter were also simulated (see Figure 2).		Optimum LBE converter thickness was simulated using MCNX and G4Beamline (see Figure 1) and was found to be about 2 mm which corresponded to ~2 x 10-3 e+/e-. Momentum distribution of the positrons and electron after the 2 mm LBE converter were also simulated (see Figure 2).
−	~~[[File:Example.jpg]]~~
−	~~[[File:Example.jpg]]~~
−	~~[[File:Example.jpg]]~~

	=Beam Power capability of W -vs- LBE=		=Beam Power capability of W -vs- LBE=

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:53, 19 December 2016
Line 12:		Line 12:

	Optimum LBE converter thickness was simulated using MCNX and G4Beamline (see Figure 1) and was found to be about 2 mm which corresponded to ~2 x 10-3 e+/e-. Momentum distribution of the positrons and electron after the 2 mm LBE converter were also simulated (see Figure 2).		Optimum LBE converter thickness was simulated using MCNX and G4Beamline (see Figure 1) and was found to be about 2 mm which corresponded to ~2 x 10-3 e+/e-. Momentum distribution of the positrons and electron after the 2 mm LBE converter were also simulated (see Figure 2).
		+	[[File:Example.jpg]]
		+	[[File:Example.jpg]]
		+	[[File:Example.jpg]]

	=Beam Power capability of W -vs- LBE=		=Beam Power capability of W -vs- LBE=

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 =Conclusions=
 =References=
-. 	Lee KH, Yang G, Koymen AR, et al (1994) Positron annihilation induced Auger electron spectroscopy studies of submonolayer Au on Cu(100): Direct evidence for positron localization at sites containing Au atoms. Phys Rev Lett 72:1866–1869. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.1866/
+. 	Lee KH, Yang G, Koymen AR, et al (1994) Positron annihilation induced Auger electron spectroscopy studies of submonolayer Au on Cu(100): Direct evidence for positron localization at sites containing Au atoms. Phys Rev Lett 72:1866–1869. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.1866
 . 	Martin P, Strong AW, Jean P, et al (2012) Galactic annihilation emission from nucleosynthesis positrons. Astron Astrophys Vol 543, idA3, 15 pp. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118721
 . 	Gabrielse G, Bowden NS, Oxley P, et al (2002) Background-Free Observation of Cold Antihydrogen with Field-Ionization Analysis of Its States. Phys Rev Lett 89:213401. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.213401
 . 	Amoretti M, Amsler C, Bonomi G, et al (2002) Production and detection of cold antihydrogen atoms. Nature 419:456–459. doi: 10.1038/nature01096
 . 	Kalaydzhyan T (2016) Gravitational mass of positron from LEP synchrotron losses. Sci Rep 6:30461. doi: 10.1038/srep30461
 . 	Perez P, Sacquin Y, G B-LA and C, et al (2012) The GBAR experiment: gravitational behaviour of antihydrogen at rest. Class Quantum Gravity 29:184008. doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/29/18/184008
 . 	Green J, Lee J (1964) Positronium chemistry. Academic Press
 . 	Jensen K, Walker A (1990) Positron thermalization and non-thermal trapping in metals. J. Phys. Condens. Matter
 . 	Danielson JR, Hurst NC, Surko CM (2013) Progress towards a practical multicell positron trap. In: AIP Conf. Proc. American Institute of PhysicsAIP, pp 101–112
 . 	Chemerisov S, Jonah CD, Jean P KJLVAMRJPSGKTBJ and VG, et al (2011) Development of high intensity source of thermal positrons APosS (Argonne Positron Source). J Phys Conf Ser 262:012012. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/262/1/012012
 . 	Abbott D, Adderley P, Adeyemi A, et al (2016) Production of highly-polarized positrons using polarized electrons at MeV energies. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.214801

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ==Conventional W target (for a 10 MeV electron beam) – power limits?==
 =Liquid metal targets as an alternative==
 =Beam Power capability of W -vs- LBE=