1 / 21

HL-LHC Corrector Magnet 3D design status

HL-LHC Corrector Magnet 3D design status. Giovanni Volpini on behalf of the LASA team CERN, February 25, 2014. Work status. Being addressed. To be done. So far, looks OK. To start when a 3D em “stable” design is issued. First tests, first experiences….

massimo-neeson
Download Presentation

HL-LHC Corrector Magnet 3D design status

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. HL-LHCCorrector Magnet3D design status Giovanni Volpini on behalf of the LASA team CERN, February 25, 2014

  2. Work status Being addressed To be done So far, looks OK To start when a 3D em “stable” design is issued First tests, first experiences… Specification done, design in progress Magnets Design Problems waiting for us just round the (3D) corner… magnetic length cross-talk between magnets fringe field (“harmonics” at the magnet ends) forces between magnets Residual magnetization at I=0 and impact on the harmonics Cross check COMSOL results w/ Roxie (March 2014) Mechanical design (May 2014) Construction & test Wind & impregnate a dummy coil (June 2014) Design the test cryostat Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  3. Sextupolecross-section coil yoke bore Sextupole Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  4. 3D design: geometry COMSOL Roxie without flux return with flux return rectangular, race track, coils; iron yoke extruded; option for a stray flux return yoke investigated in the COMSOL model Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  5. Computationsperformed Using the two codes to cross-check & validate the results Linear iron (µr = 4000) to validate a model & cross-check results “Roxie”- like saturating iron with filling factor 0.985 Six cases {40 mm, 50 mm, 60 mm} x {with RY, without RY (Air)} For each the following current have been considered {20 A, 50 A, 100 A, 150 A, 200 A, 300 A, 400 A} For each case, Longitudinal & Integrated A3/B3, integrated harmonics, peak field on conductor Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  6. COMSOL vs Roxie Use two codes to cross-check & validate the results: COMSOL + Mathematica for harmonic analysis; Roxie 2D results: agreement within few parts/104 on fields; few % on relevant harmonics. Satisfactory for our purposes. WARNING: use of LSOLV in Roxie option leads to inaccurate results, with a discrepancy w.r.t. COMSOL as large as 3% on fields. 3D results: agreement within ~1% on fields; 10% on relevant harmonics. Acceptable but not exciting. Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  7. Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  8. Operating point & length, I …vs peak field on coils … vs integrated B3 Design operating current ratio vs. s.s. limit (40%) We compute the Ic at the peak field at s.s. limit. Dividing the magnetomotive force at s.s. limit by Ic, we get the no. of turns required. Dividing the operating magnetomotive force by the no. turns, we get the operating current. Design integrated strength 60 mT m Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  9. Operating point & length, II 2D design was made with 166 turns x 150 A, the operating point was around the 40% on the load line. Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  10. B3/A3 component inside and outside nominal spacing between magnets (100 mm) nominal “magnetic ½length” (60.5 mm) without flux return Iron length (w.o. flux return, if present) with flux return Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  11. a9 component In units 10-4 Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  12. summary For the sextupole, the overall 3D e.m. design seems compatible with the space constraints; Flux return at the magnet ends : for a given magnetomotive force and iron length, is less effective reduces the stray field reduces the integrated harmonics so it is probably OK: any drawback? hole shape Harmonics content not critical, numbers appear acceptable, Flux Return is also effective in reducing unwanted components. Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  13. open issues summary Questions to be answered as soon as possible… operating currents; outer iron diameter & shape; radiation hardness compliance, insulation & impregnation; field quality & fringe field; mechanical & electrical connection between magnets and LHe vessel to be defined, along with room for bus-bars etc.; …and, not to be forgotten: the MgB2 solution (playground) other solutions (combined function magnet)? Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  14. The End Exiting from Flatlandmay be a thoughexperience… Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  15. Other slides Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  16. Operating point@ 50% of s.s. 2D design was made with 166 turns x 150 A, it was around the 40% on the load line. Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  17. Infinite elements Ironhalflength 50 mm With flux return With (red) Without (purple) infinite elements Impact Integratedstrength < 0.1% Main component < 0.01 % Int b9 < 2 units Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  18. Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  19. magnet specs & operating features Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  20. 2D cross sections: 6-pole Yokeradius = 160 mm Bpeakiron = 3.7 T Jeng (overall) ~ 260 A/mm² Bpeak coil = 2.0 T Recooler bore D 50 mm @ r = 190 mm, so it’soutside the yoke 03.12.2013 p 140 Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

  21. 6- and 12-pole load lines Sextupole 1.9 K Ic 179 A @ 5 T, 4.22 K Bpeak on coil Dodecapole 4.22 K Sextupole B @ r=50mm Dodecapole Design current = 150 A Giovanni Volpini, CERN 25 February 2014

More Related