Overview Status of the LAMP Modeling efforts
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Accelerator Design, Technology, and Operations↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “LAMP, LANSCE Upgrade”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
LAMP RFQ vane tip macro-based 3D modeling
This report covers the workflow and the demonstration of modeling the radiofrequency quadrupole (RFQ) vane tip geometry in 3D, for the Front End Upgrade of the LANSCE Modernization Project (LAMP). The goal is to develop an automated procedure to generate the 3D model of the LAMP RFQ vane tip geometry, so as to eliminate the need to manually enter the design parameters for each RFQ cell, when building the 3D model. With the developed procedure, the LAMP RFQ design optimization work can be significantly more efficient.
43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
LANSCE Facility Longevity Assessment
This LANSCE Facility Longevity Assessment examined 34 total systems critical to the operation of the LANSCE accelerator complex. These systems are primarily owned, operated, and maintained by AOT Division. Based on the criteria used in this assessment, there are 12 AOT Division systems that are potential high risk as related to longterm LANSCE operations. These systems may also impact the success of LAMP. Also summarized in this report are the facility activities planned over the next decade. These include general facility maintenance and infrastructure upgrades, as well as planned electrical system upgrades. The LANSCE Facility Operations (LFO) Division is responsible for this activity scope and budget planning. Most of the planned activities are general in nature and should have little impact on accelerator operations or LAMP activities as currently envisioned. However, close coordination with between AOT, LFO, and LAMP would be prudent. A next step should be to develop an actionable plan to address the high-risk systems. Potential criteria for developing such a plan could include: (1) Evaluating the global impact of the system (operations, program, safety, etc.), (2) Ranking by impact (ranked now by risk), (3) Estimating cost to implement the corrective actions (Is there already a plan or not?), and (4) Estimating the time required for corrective actions. An alternative could include integration of the assessment data into both the Asset Management System and the Maintenance Analytics Risk Register.
43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
LAMP-PSR Scoping Studies Report
This report summarizes work performed from July – September 2023, performing an initial evaluation for the LANSCE Proton Storage Ring upgrade option “B.” The studies identified potential pathsforward, performing initial beam dynamics studies, and surveying various technology options different aspects of the upgrade. Taken together, the studies provide an “early look” at the feasibility, challenges and alternative methods for pursuing Option “B,” and give guidance towards more detailed design concept development needed as work progresses. Generally speaking, no major obstacles were identified in pursuing the Option “B” PSR upgrade path in terms of the machine physics or overall system architecture. Several areas of concern have been identified; we note that these primarily center on technology choice and must be addressed regardless of the upgrade path selected, and none of the concerns are considered insurmountable.
43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
Post-DTL Beam Delivery
Ensuring that the beam delivered from the upgraded Front-End (FE) meets the Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) at each user facility is critical to the success of the LANSCE Accelerator Modernization Project (LAMP). For a high-intensity, multi-user facility like LANSCE, compliance with beam loss and radiation thresholds is as important as the charge delivered to each target. While early LAMPF/LANSCE operations relied on iterative tuning to minimize losses from beam halo and tail particles, the new FE may introduce different beam distributions and loss modes—making predictive modeling essential. To manage this, the F2E (Front-End to End) effort is developing detailed particle-tracking models that reflect realistic beamline conditions, including halo formation and expected diagnostic readings. These "snapshot" simulations aim to benchmark live machine performance at a given moment. This will help quantify how beam quality from the new FE will propagate downstream through the facility. Only by validating these models can we confidently assess and mitigate the potential impacts of the LAMP FE on beam delivery. Post-DTL, the beam splits to serve five major user facilities. Historically, low-energy beam transport has been modeled using TRACE, and higher-energy sections with TRANSPORT. These have now been unified into MAD-X format and validated with codes such as Elegant, pyOrbit, XSuite, Impact-Z, and HPSim. The primary focus now is on accurate modeling of full particle distributions (including beam halo) as they traverse the accelerator and beamlines to each experimental station. All models are at various stages of validation with empirical data.
43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
LAMP Overview [Slides]
The LANSCE Modernization Project (LAMP) is an essential element of LANSCE sustainment. The LANSCE Front End is a single point-of-failure, long-term facility risk due to obsolescence and unexpected failures. The high-TRL LAMP front end will use modern supply chains to position LANSCE for decades of operation. The existing PSR is a risk to consistent and reliable beam delivery for material science and nuclear physics at Lujan. We have developed several options for the PSR upgrade, each of which builds upon the previous option.
42 ENGINEERING↗
Charge per Micro-Pulse Calculation for Ideal Lujan and WNR beams
A complete redesign of the LANSCE front-end is currently under development for the Los Alamos Modernization Project (LAMP). This includes the replacement of the traditional Cockroft-Walton injection system to the newer radiofrequency quadrupole (RFQ) standard. LANSCE accelerates both H- and H+ beams and therefore requires an unconventional application for RFQ systems. A new facility could consider using an independent RFQ for each beam species. However, with the tight space of the LANSCE injector facility, it would prove difficult to instrument. Our initial studies have shown that a single RFQ could be used. The negatively- and positively-charged direct current (DC) beams are shaped, bunched, and accelerated out of phase to each other, with very little interaction. This would work for all possible H+ beam gates and most H- Beam gates. However, a challenge arises with the Weapons Neutron Research (WNR) beam structure that requires the acceleration of bunched beams at higher charge density per pulse. The Long Bunch Enable Gate (LBEG) used for the Lujan center is the best example of a standard injector beam gate. The beam gate, or Macro-Pulse (MP), is 625-us long, separated by at least 8.3 ms. A chopper is used to dice the MP into 1750 mini-Pulses (mP), which are 290-ns wide. After chopping, the MP contains 100,000 micro-Pulses (uP), which are generated by the linac acceleration structure modulated at 201.25 MHz; that is, the micro-Pulses are separated 5 ns apart from each other. The H+ beam structure will be very similar once a chopper is added to its transport. However, the Multi-Pulse Enable Gate (MPEG) used for WNR is significantly different in structure. In this case, the mP is chopped to be only 35-ns wide. This width is then rotated into a single 201.25 MHz RF bucket using the Low Frequency Buncher (LFB). This is proving difficult for the RFQ design in the LAMP upgrade. We began investigating the amount of current sent to WNR for two reasons. Firstly, we wanted to find a solution to avoid using the Low Frequency Buncher to simplify the LAMP RFQ design. It is simple to inject and accelerate a 35 mA DC beam in the LAMP RFQ (this is done in numerous accelerator facilities). However, injecting a short bunch with a larger current (once compressed to 5 ns to meet the RFQ frequency) may be difficult. Second, we have a technique called PSR2WNR in which we do not employ the Low Frequency Buncher, but rather accumulate 5 LBEG uP (5 ns) in the PSR and deliver the accumulated beam to WNR every 1.8 us. As a result, we could provide to WNR with five accumulated LBEG uPs every shot. The goal here is to create a rapid kicker with a frequency response of 555 kHz. DARHT-II and other accelerator facilities have constructed kickers of this type for other uses, and our engineers consider this technology as feasible.
43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗