Investigation of High Temperature Baking of Jacketed Quarter Wave Resonators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Superconducting booster Linac at IUAC has been delivering accelerated beams for scheduled experiments since 2013. It has three accelerating modules with 8 Quarter Wave Resonators (QWR)in each. The QWRs for the first module were built at Argonne National Laboratory while those for the second and third modules have been built in-house. During the electropolishing of one of the indigenously built resonators (QWR # I03) the RF surface got spoiled due to a wrong acid mixture that was being used for etching. In subsequent cold tests of the cavity, its performance was poor (2.6 MV/m @ 4W). There was evidence of Q disease also, as the performance deteriorated further (~20%) when the cavity was held at 100-120K for ~8 hours .In an attempt to recover the cavity it was baked at 650 °C for 10 hours along with its stainless steel jacket. A series of tests were conducted thereafter wherein, a substantial improvement (factor of two) in the performance was observed. Encouraged with the results another QWR designed for a lower beta (β=0.05) was also heat treated identically. This paper presents the different treatments followed to enhance the cavity performance vis-à-vis the test results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".