ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
We report on an effort to improve the performance of superconducting radiofrequency cavities by the use of heat treatment in a temperature range sufficient to dissociate the natural surface oxide. We find that the residual resistance is significantly decreased, and we find an unexpected reduction in the BCS resistance. Together these result in extremely high quality factor values at relatively large accelerating fields Eacc ~20 MV/m: Q0 of 3-4x10^11 at <1.5 K and Q0 ~5x10^10 at 2.0 K. In one cavity, measurements of surface resistance versus temperature showed an extremely small residual resistance of just 0.63+/-0.06 nOhms at 16 MV/m. SIMS measurements confirm that the oxide was significantly dissociated, but they also show the presence of nitrogen after heat treatment. We also present studies of surface oxidation via exposure to air and to water, as well as the effects of very light surface removal via HF rinse. The possibilities for applications and the planned future development are discussed.
The proposed linear electron-positron collider TESLA is based on 1.3 GHz superconducting niobium cavities for particle acceleration. For a centre-of-mass energy of 500 GeV, an accelerating field of 23.4 MV/m is required which is reliably achieved wit
Nb3Sn is a promising next-generation material for superconducting radiofrequency cavities, with significant potential for both large scale and compact accelerator applications. However, so far, Nb3Sn cavities have been limited to cw accelerating fiel
As a result of a collaboration between Jefferson Lab and niobium manufacturer CBMM, ingot niobium was explored as a possible material for superconducting radiofrequency (SRF) cavity fabrication. The first single cell cavity from large grain high puri
We report a strong effect of the cooling dynamics through $T_mathrm{c}$ on the amount of trapped external magnetic flux in superconducting niobium cavities. The effect is similar for fine grain and single crystal niobium and all surface treatments in
In a recent comment [arXiv:1405.2978v1 (2014)] Romanenko and Grassellino made unsubstantiated statements about our work [Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 092601 (2014)] and ascribed to us wrong points which we had not made. Here we show that the claims of Roma