← Back to search

Thermal feedback in coaxial superconducting radio frequency cavities

Mattias McMullin, Philipp Kolb, Zhongyuan Yao, Robert Laxdal, Tobias Junginger

DOI 10.1103/PhysRevAccelBeams.27.092001 · Physical Review Accelerators and Beams

T1

Active bibliographic source — not scientific approval

Bibliographic access preserves source history; it does not approve extracted materials or validate reported claims. Review warnings on each occurrence separately.

Abstract

The surface resistance of superconducting radio frequency (SRF) cavities depends on the strength of the applied rf field. This field dependence is caused by a combination of intrinsic losses and the extrinsic thermal feedback (TFB) effect. To test theories of intrinsic field dependence, the extrinsic part must be compensated for when analyzing experimental data from SRF cavity tests. Performing this compensation requires knowing thermal parameters that describe heat flow in the cavity walls. The relevant thermal parameters have been measured in the case of superfluid helium, below 2.177 K, but no detailed measurements have yet been reported for cooling of niobium surfaces in normal fluid helium baths. Because of this, the impact of TFB on the field dependence at temperatures near 4.2 K is unknown. In the present study, we report measurements of normal fluid helium boiling from niobium surfaces and its dependence on the orientation of the boiling surface and bath temperature. These measurements are used to create a finite-element model of heat transfer in cavities from TRIUMF’s coaxial test program. This tool is then used to compensate for TFB when analyzing a range of datasets from this program. Results are presented showing that TFB has a weak impact for the temperatures of 2.0 and 4.2 K, where SRF cavities are usually operated, but it is an important effect at intermediate temperatures.

Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval

FormulaReported Tc (K)Pressure (GPa)Type
Nb

Archive — visibility unverified

Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.

9.2Pressure not reportedunknown

Similar papers