et_wp3_1311

Comments

Transcription

et_wp3_1311
Daresbury, 8th November 2013
LARP Hilumi meeting
MAGNET STATUS AND OpEN ISSUeS
E. Todesco
CERN, Geneva Switzerland
Acknowledgements: G. Ambrosio, P. Ferracin, J. M. Rifflet,T.
Nakamoto, L. Rossi, G. L. Sabbi, F. Toral, G. Volpini
E. Todesco
PROJECT TIMELINE
Exploration of four layouts 120/140 mm Nb3Sn Nb-Ti
Selection of 150 mm aperture for triplet
2012
2013
2015
2014
Layout Q1-D1-D2-Q4
Target:
Models tested
Start of triplet design
Start of Q4 design
Selection of apertures, technology, field,
lengths, margin – first baseline Q1-D1
Start of D1 design
Radiation damage, shielding, heat loads
for 150 mm layout, cooling scheme
E. Todesco
Lay out for HL LHC from IP to D1 - 2
WHeRE ARE WE
Past six months
Engineering design phase for Q1-3, D1, Q4 [P. Ferracin, T. Nakamoto talks]
First analysis of D2 conceptual design [G. L. Sabbi, R. Gupta talk]
Integration issues [see P. Fessia talk]
Beam screen [see R. Kersevan talk]
Cooling [see R. V. Weelderen talk]
First energy deposition on D2, Q4, and matching section [see F. Cerutti
talk]
E. Todesco
Protection in magnet design - 3
layout
Q2a
6.8
20
30
50
distance to IP (m)
Q2b
6.8
60
Q3
1.2
4.0
40
50
distance to IP (m)
70
CP
4.0
MCBX
1.2
MCBX
4.0
Q: 200 T/m
MCBX: 3.3 T 1.5 T m
D1: 1.8 T
26 T m
60
80
D1
SM
6.3
2.2
MCBX
40
Q1
4.0
MCBX
MCBX
MCBX
Thick boxes are magnetic lengths
Thin boxes are cryostats
30
D1
DFB
Q: 140 T/m
MCBX: 2.1 T 2.5/4.5 T m
D1: 5.6 T
35 T m
70
HL LHC
E. Todesco
20
Q3
Q2b
Q2a
LHC
Q1
80
Lay out for HL LHC from IP to D1 - 4
Layout AFTER D1
Q1
Q2a
4.0
1.2
6.8
20
30
100
distance to IP (m)
Q2b
6.8
120
Q3
1.2
4.0
4.0
40
50
distance to IP (m)
60
Q4
140
CP
MCBX
4.0
80
D2
160
D1
180
SM
6.3
2.2
MCBX
60
MCBX
Thick boxes are magnetic lengths
Thin boxes are cryostats
40
D1
Q: 140 T/m
MCBX: 2.1 T 2.5/4.5 T m
D1: 5.6 T
35 T m
70
HL LHC
E. Todesco
20
Q3
HL LHC
Q2a Q2b
Q1
Q1-3: 140 T/m
MCBX: 2.2 T 2.5/4.5 T m
D1: 5.6 T
35 T m
D2: 3.5 T
35 T m
Q4: 120 T/m
80
Lay out for HL LHC from IP to D1 - 5
TRIPLETS
Design completed [see P. Ferracin talk]
Procurement in progress
First dummy coils wound at CERN and in US
Two strands manufacturers
Cryostat design being addressed
[D. Duarte Ramos, M. Anarella]
HQ (120 mm, father of QXF)
HQ02 succesful second test at FNAL
89% short sample at 2.2 K achived
80% after thermal cycle without training
HQ03 coils in progress, test in 2014
Plans
5 short models foreseen, first in mid 2015
3 prototypes, first in end 2016
E. Todesco
Protection in magnet design - 6
ORBIT CORRECTORS
Field 2.1 T (in each plane)
Two lenghts, 1.2 and 2.2 m
Nb-Ti, Rutherford cable 4.5 mm width of SLHC, wide margin
Mechanical lock needed
Construction of a 1.2-m-long prototype by CIEMAT (ES)
January 2014 – kick off
June 2014 – conceptual design
February 2015 – engineering design
June 2016 – test at 4.2 at Ciemat
November 2016 – test at 1.9 K at CERN
Options
Orbit corrector design for SLHC
[M. Karppinen, D. Smekens]
Raising the field to 3 T, and having a larger cable width
This would leave 40 cm more around Q1, Q2, and 80 cm more
around Q3
E. Todesco
Protection in magnet design - 7
NONLINEAR CORRECTORS
D1
60
a5 b 5
b
a3 3
a2
b6
MCBX
Main choices to be done
Q3
b4 a4
No nested, easier operation
Short heads
Pole field of around 2 T
About 10% saturation
a6
Superferric technology used for SLHC
65
70
75
distance to IP (m)
Iron shape and alignement
Wire and insulation
Construction of 5 prototypes by INFN
January 2014 – kick off
March 2015 – sextupole test
March 2016 – octupole and decapole test
July 2016 – Quadrupole and dodecapole test
E. Todesco
Superferric correctors
[F, Toral]
Protection in magnet design - 8
D1
Field: 5.6 T, length 6.25 m
Nb-Ti technology, LHC dipole outer layer cable
Challenges: large aperture, large saturation
Recent design tuning
Margin reduced from 30% to 25%
D1 design
[Q. Xu, T. Nakamoto]
Field increased from 5.2 to 5.6 T, length from 6.7 to 6.25 m
Mainly done to fit test station constraints
Construction of a short (2-m-long) model by KEK
Mid 2015: short model test
2016-2017: tentative dates for full prototype including cryostat
2018-2011: production of 4+2 magnets
E. Todesco
Protection in magnet design - 9
D2
This is the magnet less developed
Specifications: 35 T m, max lenght of 10 m, 105 mm aperture
Challenges: strong cross-talk, large fringe field
Better to stay with low field of 3.5 T with 10 m length
Iron shaping to optimize field quality
Work is in progress
Saturation can be compensated, but
compensation of cross talk is critical
Field has the same direction in apertures
This complicates the situation
And adds fringe field
D2 design [R. Gupta]
E. Todesco
Protection in magnet design - 10
D2
Another option being explored
Left-right asymmetric coil to compensate cross-talk
Ironless D2 with asymmetric cross-section [X. Wang, G. L. Sabbi]
D2 design will be taken over by INFN-Genova
Conceptual design starting from 2014
June 2015: Magnetic design
December 2015: Mechanical design
December 2016: Engineering design
E. Todesco
Protection in magnet design - 11
Q4
Design done, engineering details being completed
Agreement with CEA-Saclay for single aperture 2-m-long
model [J. M. Rifflet, M. Segreti]
December 2014: engineering design completed
September 2015: first coil
June 2016: test
One layer
LHC dipole cable
20% margin
E. Todesco
Protection in magnet design - 12
SUMMARY OF DESIGN CHOICES
Aperture
Field
Gradient
Mag. Length
Int field
Int gradient
Peak field
Current
(mm)
(T)
(T/m)
(m)
(T m)
(T)
(T)
(kA)
j overall
(A/mm2)
Loadline margin (%)
Stored energy (MJ/m)
Saturation
(%)
Material
N. layers
Cable width
(mm)
E. Todesco
Orbit
Triplet
corrector
Q1,Q3/Q2a,b MCBX
150
150
2.1
140
8.0/6.8
1.2/2.2
2.5/4.5
1120/938
12.1
3.9
17.5
2.2
528
18%
1.440
9.0%
Nb3Sn
2
18.1
455
45%
0.090
0.0%
Nb-Ti
1+1
4.37
Sep.
dipole
D1
150
5.6
6.3
35
6.5
11.8
1816
25%
0.338
12.0%
Nb-Ti
1
15.1
Recom. Large 2-indipole
1 quad
D2
Q4
105
90
3.5
120
10.0
4.5
35
544
4.1
5.9
6.8
16.0
1040
56%
0.140
13.0%
Nb-Ti
1
15.1
2458
20%
0.204
Nb-Ti
1
15.1
Protection in magnet design - 13
TENTATIVE PLAN
Note: phases overlap, for each year we show the dominant phase
Note: short model partly includes final part engineering design
Q1-Q3
Design
D1
Design
MCBX
Correct.
E. Todesco
Short model
Prototype
Design
2012
2014
Prototype
Prototype
Design
Design
Q4
2010
Prototype
Design
D2
Production
Short model
Production
Production
Production
Short model Prototype
Short model
2016
Prototype
2018
Production
Production
2020
2022
Protection in magnet design - 14
A GLOBAL PROJECT
As for Charles V empire, the sun never sets on HiLumi
this poses some problems when organizing videconferences
Q1
20
Q2a Q2b
40
Q3
60
Q1-3: 140 T/m
MCBX: 2.2 T 2.5/4.5 T m
D1: 5.6 T
35 T m
D2: 3.5 T
35 T m
Q4: 120 T/m
D1
80
100
distance to IP (m)
120
D2
140
Q4
160
180
Note: models/prototypes agreed, production partly to be attributed
Note: Italy contribution to D2 is design only, model TBD
E. Todesco
Protection in magnet design - 15
CONCLUSIONS
Design phase being completed for triplet, D1, Q4
First dummy coil wound for the triplet
Good quench performance of HQ02
First short models in 2015
Design phase for orbit correctors and non linear correctors
To be started in 2014 – CIEMAT and INFN
Design phase for D2 (LARP, then INFN)
Conceptual design in progress
Agreements being signed for the model phase
Aiming at having first models in 2015, models of all magnets by 2016
First analysis of integration aspects
First planning for prototypes and production
E. Todesco
Protection in magnet design - 16

Similar documents