1 / 11

DESIGN STUDY FOR THE LHC UPGRADE WP3: MAGNETS

CERN, 20 th July 2010. DESIGN STUDY FOR THE LHC UPGRADE WP3: MAGNETS. E. Todesco CERN, Geneva, Switzerland With inputs from L. Rossi. GOAL 0: SHOPPING LIST. Common technologies Radiation resistance estimates and materials Task 1 Needed magnets

dessa
Download Presentation

DESIGN STUDY FOR THE LHC UPGRADE WP3: MAGNETS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CERN, 20th July 2010 DESIGN STUDY FOR THE LHC UPGRADEWP3: MAGNETS E. Todesco CERN, Geneva, Switzerland With inputs from L. Rossi

  2. GOAL 0: SHOPPING LIST • Common technologies • Radiation resistance estimates and materials Task 1 • Needed magnets • Large aperture single-bore quadrupoles (Q1-Q3) • MQXC – Nb-Ti version Task 2 • MQXD – Nb3Sn version Task 3 • Separation dipoles Task 4 • D1 • D2 (needed?) • Correctors Task 5 • Nested corrector • Large aperture double bore quadrupoles (Q4-Q5) Task 6 • Plus • Cold powering Task 7 First guess on tasks, to bediscussed

  3. GOAL 1: TARGETS • Establish the targets for the hardware • For each magnet, we need to establish • Size, aperture or field /gradient and length • In some cases we will probably have to define a range and make a detailed study for the extreme cases • Target on performance • Training, detraining, behaviour after thermal cycle … • Target on field quality, alignment • Radiation resistance • New scenario w.r.t. phase I – they should last up to 2030 and 3000 fb-1 • Cryogenic loads • Targets to be agreed with WP2 and other actors involved • A lot of work done for Phase-I (SLHC-PP) – integrate the new scenario after Chamonix (only one upgrade in ~2020)

  4. GOAL 1: TARGETS • For the triplet package, profiting of the work done for Phase-I [R. Ostojic et al., LHC PR 1163] – review of the targets for MQXC • New scenario for radiation resistance and cryogenic load • Twice the peak luminosity (from 2.3×1034 to 5×1034 cm-1 s-2) • Should resist to 3000 fb-1 (or 1500 fb-1 minimum, if we assume 5 years lifetime) instead of 300 fb-1 as specified for Phase I • For the Nb3Sn option MQXD • What is the range of apertures? • Define a min and a max – gradient and length will follow • Can we simply adopt the same targets as for the MQXC? • Establish asap a target list • Work in progress [G. De Rijk]

  5. GOAL 2: FEASABILITY OF THE HARDWARE • Study of the feasibility of the hardware • To be verified on short models, tested in conditions similar as much as possible to operational conditions • Main issues • Length: is 1-m-long model enough for proving the technology? • Should we go to 2-m-long short model also for Nb3Sn • 3.4 m is enough ? • Cryogenic condition during test is different from the machine • Synergy with several ongoing programs • LARP: Nb3Sn quadrupoles for the triplet • EUCARD: Nb3Sn development, cold powering • SLHC-PP: Nb-Ti quadrupoles for the triplet

  6. GOAL 2: FEASABILITY OF THE HARDWARE • MQXC (Nb-Ti triplet) • 120 mm aperture: a few short models to be built (SLHC-PP) • Done: • Design completed [P. Fessia et al, SLHC PR 0001 – S. Russenschuck, Chamonix 2010] • Now construction phase • No need for a study at 110 or 100 mm aperture • Test for mid 2011 – to be followed • Thermal aspects very relevant • New insulation scheme to be tested MQXC cross-section New insulation scheme [D. Tommasini]

  7. GOAL 2: FEASABILITY OF THE HARDWARE • MQXD (Nb3Sn triplet) • 120 mm aperture HQ (LARP) • First test done • 80% reached, but problems with insulation • Evolution to be followed • Is this magnet already satisfying the targets ? What is missing? • How many we need to assess field quality? • Design studies (LARP) • Is this structure the final one? • A study of a larger aperture option (150 mm) • Evaluation of stresses – structure – costs • Study of the minimal size of interconnections • If we have to go for a 3.4 m long magnet, how much do we lose ? HQ cross-section

  8. GOAL 2: FEASABILITY OF THE HARDWARE • Nested dipole correctors • Continuing the activity of Phase-I [M. Karppinen] • Review the specifications to make them compatible with new scenario • Finalize design and construct a model • Cold powering (superconducting link) • Study the powering of the magnets involved in the upgrade • Verify the consistency with the present program of consolidation [A. Ballarino et al.] Dipole corrector (not nested) cross-section for Phase I [M. Karpinnen] Lay-out of powering forPhase I [A. Ballarino]

  9. GOAL 2: FEASABILITY OF THE HARDWARE • D1 (separation dipole) • Review specifications given for Phase I – WP2 info needed • Study two options: a large aperture (180 mm) and a small aperture ? • Nb-Ti option from BNL (profit of work done by APUL) • Nb3Al option from KEK • What range of fields? • Q4 (matching section quadrupoles) • Requirements to go to larger aperture • Nothing has been done up to now • Design study: • Maximal aperture for a 2-in-1 quadrupolewith 194 mm separation MQY cross-section

  10. GOAL 3: DESIGN STUDY • Final goal: participate to the conceptual design report • Offer performance vs cost for a few options • In most cases technical decisions have to be adopted on the main design choices of the hardware • In a few cases different options can be studied, cost estimated tso that the management can decide on performance VS cost • To be able to give a reasonable estimate of the schedule needed to build some hardware

  11. PARTNERS (TENTATIVE LIST) • EU: • CEA- Saclay (Fr) • CIEMAT (Sp) • LASA – INFN Milano (It) • STFC (Uk) • University of Geneva (Ch) • World • LARP: FNAL, BNL, LBL (Us) • KEK (Jp)

More Related