Upload
kerry-grimes
View
17
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
US-LARP Progress on IR Upgrades. Tanaji Sen FNAL. Topics. IR optics designs Energy deposition calculations Magnet designs Beam-beam experiment at RHIC Strong-strong beam-beam simulations Future plans. US-LARP effort on IR designs. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
US-LARP Progress US-LARP Progress on on
IR UpgradesIR Upgrades
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen
FNALFNAL
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 22
TopicsTopics
IR optics designsIR optics designs
Energy deposition calculationsEnergy deposition calculations
Magnet designsMagnet designs
Beam-beam experiment at RHICBeam-beam experiment at RHIC
Strong-strong beam-beam simulationsStrong-strong beam-beam simulations
Future plansFuture plans
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 33
US-LARP effort on IR designsUS-LARP effort on IR designs
Main motivation is to provide guidance for Main motivation is to provide guidance for magnet designersmagnet designersExample: aperture and gradient are no longer Example: aperture and gradient are no longer determined by beam optics alone. Energy determined by beam optics alone. Energy deposition in the IR magnets is a key component deposition in the IR magnets is a key component in determining these parametersin determining these parametersUse as an example for field quality requirementsUse as an example for field quality requirementsExamine alternative scenarios Examine alternative scenarios Not intended to propose optimized optics Not intended to propose optimized optics designsdesigns
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 44
IR designsIR designs
Quadrupoles first – extension of baselineQuadrupoles first – extension of baseline
Dipoles first – triplet focusingDipoles first – triplet focusing
Dipoles first – doublet focusingDipoles first – doublet focusing
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 55
Triplet first opticsTriplet first optics
J. Johnstone β* = 0.25Nominal β* = 0.5
Lattice Vers. 6.2
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 66
Gradients, beta max – quads first opticsGradients, beta max – quads first opticsQuadQuad B’[T/m]B’[T/m]
LeftLeft
B’[T/m]B’[T/m]
RightRight
ββmaxmax[m][m]
LeftLeft ββmaxmax[m][m]
RightRightQ1Q1
Q2Q2
Q3Q3
Q4Q4
Q5Q5
Q6Q6
Q7Q7
Q8Q8
Q9Q9
Q10Q10
QT11QT11
QT12QT12
QT13QT13
-200-200
200200
-200-200
8282
-67-67
5959
-199-199
150150
-164-164
184184
5757
-43-43
-40-40
-Q1.L-Q1.L
-Q2.L-Q2.L
-Q3.L-Q3.L
-Q4.L-Q4.L
-Q5.L-Q5.L
-58-58
199199
-155-155
166166
-193-193
-56-56
-55-55
-QT13.L-QT13.L
45374537
91899189
93339333
94409440
33223322
15591559
984984
285285
241241
291291
141141
170170
176176
45454545
92059205
93509350
94249424
33273327
15611561
986986
285285
261261
270270
154154
179179
174174
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 77
Dipole first optics Dipole first optics
Earlier layoutEarlier layout
(PAC 03)(PAC 03)
Present layoutPresent layout
D1 dipoleD1 dipole
TAN absorberTAN absorber
ββ* *
ββmaxmax
10m long10m long
After D1After D1
0.26 m0.26 m
23 km23 km
D1a 1.5m long, D1a 1.5m long, D1b 8.5m longD1b 8.5m long
TAS2, after D1aTAS2, after D1a
TAN after D1bTAN after D1b
0.25 m0.25 m
27 km27 km
Additional TAS absorber in the present layout – per N. Mokhov
IPD1a TAS2 D1b TAN
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 88
Dipoles First - MatchingDipoles First - MatchingBeams in separate focusing channels Beams in separate focusing channels Matching done from QT13(left) to QT13(right)Matching done from QT13(left) to QT13(right) Lattice Version 6.2Lattice Version 6.2Triplet quads Q1 – Q3 at fixed gradient = 200 Triplet quads Q1 – Q3 at fixed gradient = 200 T/m, exactly anti-symmetricT/m, exactly anti-symmetricPositions and lengths of magnets Q4-QT13 kept Positions and lengths of magnets Q4-QT13 kept the same the same Strengths of quads Q4 to Q9 < 200 T/mStrengths of quads Q4 to Q9 < 200 T/m
Q10 on the left has 230 T/m. Could be changedQ10 on the left has 230 T/m. Could be changed if positions and lengths of Q4-Q7 are changed.if positions and lengths of Q4-Q7 are changed.
Trim quad strengths QT11 to QT13 < 160T/mTrim quad strengths QT11 to QT13 < 160T/m
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 99
Dipole first – collision optics, tripletsDipole first – collision optics, triplets
TAS1 absorber (1.8m) before D1a Dipole D1a starts 23 m from IP TAS2 absorber (1.5m) after D1a 0.5m space between D1a-TAS2 and TAS2-D1b L(D1b) = 8.5m D1, D2 – each 10m long, ~14T 5m long space after D2 for a TAN absorber Q1 starts 55.5 m from the IP L(Q1) = L(Q3) = 4.99 m, L(Q2a) = L(Q2b) = 4.61m
Collision optics β*= 0.25m
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1010
Gradients, beta max – dipoles first, tripletsGradients, beta max – dipoles first, tripletsQuadQuad B’[T/m]B’[T/m]
LeftLeft
B’[T/m]B’[T/m]
RightRight
ββmaxmax[m][m]
LeftLeft
ββmaxmax[m][m]
RightRight
Coil apertureCoil aperture
2(1.1*9*2(1.1*9*σσ+8.6++8.6+4.5+3) mm4.5+3) mm
Q1Q1
Q2Q2
Q3Q3
Q4Q4
Q5Q5
Q6Q6
Q7Q7
Q8Q8
Q9Q9
Q10Q10
QT11QT11
QT12QT12
QT13QT13
-200-200
200200
-200-200
7878
-104-104
8080
-146-146
107107
-92-92
230230
170170
161161
-158-158
-Q1.L-Q1.L
-Q2.L-Q2.L
-Q3.L-Q3.L
-112-112
137137
-38-38
172172
-196-196
3131
-120-120
4141
-156-156
-160-160
1847818478
2693626936
2713527135
81838183
34413441
28582858
21852185
953953
14181418
210210
192192
185185
176176
1861918619
2714327143
2692626926
82538253
38453845
932932
30893089
460460
164164
206206
210210
167167
174174
9393
106106
106106
7373
6060
5656
5757
4646
4949
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1111
Dipoles first and doublet focusingDipoles first and doublet focusing
IP D1
D2
D2
Q1
Q2
Features
• Requires beams to be in separate focusing channels
• Fewer magnets
• Beams are not round at the IP
• Polarity of Q1 determined by crossing plane – larger beam size in the crossing plane to increase overlap
• Opposite polarity focusing at other IR to equalize beam-beam tune shifts
• Significant changes to outer triplet magnets in matching section.
Focusing symmetric about IP
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1212
Doublet Optics – Beta functionsDoublet Optics – Beta functions
J. Johnstone
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1313
Gradients, beta max – dipoles first, doubletsGradients, beta max – dipoles first, doubletsQuadQuad B’[T/m]B’[T/m]
LeftLeft
B’[T/m]B’[T/m]
RightRight
ββmaxmax[m][m]
LeftLeft
ββmaxmax[m][m]
RightRight
Coil apertureCoil aperture
2(1.1*9*2(1.1*9*σσ+8.6++8.6+4.5+3) mm4.5+3) mm
Q1Q1
Q2Q2
Q3Q3
Q4Q4
Q5Q5
Q6Q6
Q7Q7
Q8Q8
Q9Q9
Q10Q10
QT11QT11
QT12QT12
QT13QT13
-200-200
200200
4646
-50-50
00
-155-155
-31-31
147147
-204-204
186186
-98-98
-27-27
9292
Q1.LQ1.L
Q2.LQ2.L
Q3.LQ3.L
-Q4.L-Q4.L
-Q5.L-Q5.L
-Q6.L-Q6.L
-Q7.L-Q7.L
-147-147
205205
-198-198
7878
-44-44
-108-108
2444624446
2444624446
44624462
39083908
15491549
13541354
443443
388388
267267
199199
185185
168168
176176
2444624446
2444624446
44624462
39093909
15471547
13671367
512512
356356
257257
209209
190190
170170
173173
102102
102102
6262
6060
5050
4949
4242
4141
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1414
Features of this doublet opticsFeatures of this doublet opticsSymmetric about IP from Q1 to Q3, anti-symmetric from Symmetric about IP from Q1 to Q3, anti-symmetric from Q4 onwardsQ4 onwardsQ1, Q2 are identical quads, Q1T is a trim quad (125 Q1, Q2 are identical quads, Q1T is a trim quad (125 T/m). L(Q1) = L(Q2) = 6.6 mT/m). L(Q1) = L(Q2) = 6.6 m Q3 to Q6 are at positions different from baseline opticsQ3 to Q6 are at positions different from baseline opticsAll gradients under 205 T/mAll gradients under 205 T/mPhase advance preserved from injection to collisionPhase advance preserved from injection to collisionAt collision, At collision, ββ**xx= 0.462m, = 0.462m, ββ**yy = 0.135m, = 0.135m, ββ**effeff= 0.25m= 0.25mSame separation in units of beam size with a smaller Same separation in units of beam size with a smaller crossing angle crossing angle ΦΦEE = √( = √(ββ**RR/ / ββ**EE) ) ΦΦR R = 0.74 = 0.74 ΦΦR R
Luminosity gain compared to round beamLuminosity gain compared to round beam
Including the hourglass factor,
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1515
Chromaticity comparisonChromaticity comparison
ββ* = 0.25m* = 0.25m
CompleteComplete
Q’Q’xx
InsertionInsertion
Q’Q’yy
InnerInner
Q’Q’xx
MagnetsMagnets
Q’Q’yy
Quads firstQuads first
Dipoles first – Dipoles first – tripletstriplets
Dipoles firstDipoles first
- doublets- doublets
-48-48
-99-99
-105-105
-48-48
-96-96
-121-121
-44-44
-82-82
-103-103
-44-44
-82-82
-112-112
Including IR1 and IR5Chromaticity of dipoles first with triplets is 99 units larger per plane than quads firstChromaticity of dipoles first with doublets is 31 units larger per plane than dipoles first with triplets
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1616
Chromaticity contributionsChromaticity contributions
Inner triplet and inner doublet dominate the chromaticity Anti-symmetric optics: upstream and downstream quads have opposite chromaticities Symmetric optics: upstream and downstream quads have the same sign of chromaticities
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1717
Energy DepositionEnergy Deposition
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1818
Energy Deposition IssuesEnergy Deposition Issues
Quench stability: Peak power densityQuench stability: Peak power density
Dynamic heat loads: Power dissipation and Dynamic heat loads: Power dissipation and cryogenic implicationscryogenic implications
Residual dose rates: hands on maintenanceResidual dose rates: hands on maintenance
Components lifetime: peak radiation dose and Components lifetime: peak radiation dose and lifetime limits for various materialslifetime limits for various materials
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 1919
Energy Deposition in Quads FirstEnergy Deposition in Quads FirstEnergy deposition and radiation are Energy deposition and radiation are majormajor issues for new IRs. issues for new IRs.
In quad-first IR, Edep increases with L and decreases with quad aperture.In quad-first IR, Edep increases with L and decreases with quad aperture.
– Emax > 4 mW/g, (P/L)max > 120 W/m, Ptriplet >1.6 kW Emax > 4 mW/g, (P/L)max > 120 W/m, Ptriplet >1.6 kW at L = 10at L = 103535 cm cm-2-2 s s-1-1..
– Radiation lifetime for G11CR < 6 months at hottest spots. More radiation hard material required.Radiation lifetime for G11CR < 6 months at hottest spots. More radiation hard material required.
A. Zlobin et al, EPAC 2002N, Mokhov
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 2020
Energy deposition in dipolesEnergy deposition in dipolesProblem is even more severe for dipole-first IR.
Cosine theta dipoleOn-axis field sprays particleshorizontally power deposition is concentrated in the mid-plane
L = 1035 cm-2 s-1
Emax on mid-plane (Cu spacers) ~ 50 mW/g; Emax in coils ~ 13 mW/gQuench limit ~ 1.6 mW/gPower deposited ~3.5 kW
Power deposition at the non-IP end of D1N. Mokhov et al, PAC 2003
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 2121
Open mid-plane dipoleOpen mid-plane dipole
Open mid-plane => showers originate outside the coils; peak power density in coils is reasonable.Tungsten rods at LN temperature absorb significant radiation.
Magnet design challenges addressed• Good field quality• Minimizing peak field in coils• Dealing with large Lorentz forces w/o a structure between coils• Minimizing heat deposition• Designing a support structure
R. Gupta et al, PAC 2005
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 2222
Energy deposition in open mid-plane dipoleEnergy deposition in open mid-plane dipoleTAS TAS2 TAN
Optimized dipole with TAS2IP end of D1 is well protected by TAS.Non-IP end of D1 needs protection. Magnetized TAS is not useful. Estimated field 20 T-mInstead split D1 into D1A and D1B. Spray from D1A is absorbed by additional absorber TAS2Results (N. Mokhov) Peak power density in SC coils ~0.4mW/g, well below the quench limit Dynamic heat load to D1 is drastically reduced. Estimated lifetime based on displacements per atom is ~10 years
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 2323
MagnetsMagnets
Tanaji Sen US-LARP: IR Upgrades 24
Gradient vs Bore size
Nb3Sn at 1.8K
Nb3Sn at 4.35K
NbTi at 1.8K
NbTi at 4.35K
CurrentLHC
mm
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 2525
Magnet Program GoalsMagnet Program GoalsProvide options for future upgrades of the LHC Interaction RegionsProvide options for future upgrades of the LHC Interaction Regions
Demonstrate by 2009Demonstrate by 2009 that Nb3Sn magnets are a viable choice for an LHC that Nb3Sn magnets are a viable choice for an LHC IR upgrade (Developed in consultation with CERN and LAPAC)IR upgrade (Developed in consultation with CERN and LAPAC)
Focus on major issues: consistency, bore/gradient (field) and lengthFocus on major issues: consistency, bore/gradient (field) and length
1.
Supporting R&D o Sub-scale dipoles & quads with L=0.3 m, Bcoil = 11-12 T issues relevant to the whole program (end-preload, training, quench protection, alignment of support structures) o Long coil fabrication and tests with L=4 m, Bcoil = 11-12 To Radiation hard insulation
1. Capability to deliver predictable, reproducible performance: TQ (Technology Quads): D = 90 mm, L = 1 m, Gnom > 200 T/m2. Capability to scale-up the magnet length: LQ (Long Quads) : D = 90 mm, L = 4 m, Gnom > 200 T/m 3. Capability to reach high gradients in large apertures: HQ (High Gradient Quads): D = 90 mm, L = 1 m, Gnom > 250 T/m
Tanaji Sen US-LARP: IR Upgrades 26
Short Quad Models: FY08-FY09
Goal: increase Quad gradient using 3-layer and/or 4-layer coils
Engineering design starts in FY06 and fabrication in FY07
3-layer: G=260-290 T/m 4-layer: G=280-310 T/m
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 2727
Magnet R&D challengesMagnet R&D challengesAll designs put a premium on achieving very high field:
Maximizes quadrupole aperture for a given gradient.Separates the beams quickly in the dipole first IR => bring quads as close as possible to the IP.Push Bop from 8 T -> 13~15 T in dipoles or at pole of quad => Nb3Sn.
All designs put a premium on large apertures:Decreasing * increases max => quad aperture up to 110 mm?Large beam offset at non-IP end of first dipole.=> Dipole horizontal aperture >130 mm.
Energy deposition: quench stability, cooling, radiation hard materials. Nb3Sn is favored for maximum field and temperature margin, but considerable R&D is required to master this technology.
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 2828
Beam-beam phenomenaBeam-beam phenomena
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 2929
RHIC Beam-beam experimentRHIC Beam-beam experiment
Beam Conditions 1 bunch of protons in each ring Injection Energy 24,3 GeV Bunch intensities ~ 2 x 1011
1 parasitic interaction per bunch Bunches separated by ~10σ at opposite parasitic
Question: Do parasitic interactions in RHIC have an impact on the beam ?
Experiment – April 2005 Change the vertical separation between the beams at 1 parasitic interaction Observe beam losses, lifetimes, tunes vs separation
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3030
RHIC beam-beam experimentRHIC beam-beam experiment
Observations !st set of studies: tunes of blue and yellow beam were asymmetric about diagonal Blue beam losses increased as separation decreased. No influence on yellow beam.
Next set of studies: tunes symmetric about diagonal Onset of significant losses in both beams for separations below 7σ
There is something to compensate Phenomena is tune dependent Remote participation at FNAL
W. Fischer et al (BNL)
Orbit data – time stamp corresponds to time of measurement, Not to time of orbitchangeShift orbit data to the right
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3131
RHIC – Wire compensatorRHIC – Wire compensator
Possible location of wire
Parasitic interaction
Phase advance from parasitic to wire = 6o
IP6
RHIC provides unique environmentto study experimentally long-range beam-beam effects akin to LHC
Proposal: Install wire compensatorIn summer of 2006, downstream of Q3 in IR6
Proposed TaskDesign and construct a wire compensatorInstall wire compensator on movable stand in a ringFirst study with 1 proton bunch in each ring with 1 parasitic at flat top. Compensate losses for each separation with wireTest robustness of compensation w.r.t current ripple, non-round beams, alignment errors, …
New LARP Task for FY06
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3232
Strong-strong beam-beam simulationsStrong-strong beam-beam simulations
Strong-strong simulations done with Strong-strong simulations done with PIC style code Beambeam3D (LBNL)PIC style code Beambeam3D (LBNL)Emphasis on emittance growth due to Emphasis on emittance growth due to head-on interactions under different head-on interactions under different situationssituationsBeam offset at IP Beam offset at IP Mismatched emittances and Mismatched emittances and intensitiesintensities
Numerical noise is an issue – growth Numerical noise is an issue – growth rate depends on number of macro-rate depends on number of macro-particles M. Continuing studies to particles M. Continuing studies to extract asymptotic (in M) growth extract asymptotic (in M) growth rates. rates. Continuing additions to code: Continuing additions to code: crossing angles, long-range crossing angles, long-range interactionsinteractions
Nominal case
Beams offset by 0.15 sigma
Emittance growth 50% larger
J. Qiang, LBL
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3333
IR and Beam-beam tasks – FY06-07IR and Beam-beam tasks – FY06-07
IR designIR design
Quad first – lowest feasible Quad first – lowest feasible * consistent with gradients and * consistent with gradients and apertures, field qualityapertures, field quality
Dipoles first – Triplet: Dipoles first – Triplet: *, apertures, gradients, field quality*, apertures, gradients, field quality
Dipoles first – Doublet: explore feasibilityDipoles first – Doublet: explore feasibility
Beam-beam compensationBeam-beam compensation
Phase 2: Build wire compensator, machine studies in RHIC Phase 2: Build wire compensator, machine studies in RHIC and weak-strong simulations with BBSIMand weak-strong simulations with BBSIM
Strong-strong beam-beam simulations: emittance growth with swept Strong-strong beam-beam simulations: emittance growth with swept beams (luminosity monitor), beams (luminosity monitor), wire compensationwire compensation, and halo , and halo formation (Beambeam3D)formation (Beambeam3D)
Energy DepositionEnergy Deposition
IR designs (quadrupole and dipole first), tertiary collimators, and IR designs (quadrupole and dipole first), tertiary collimators, and the forward detector regions (CMS, TOTEM, FP420 and ZDC). the forward detector regions (CMS, TOTEM, FP420 and ZDC).
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3434
IssuesIssuesIR design issuesIR design issues
- What are the space constraints from Q4 to Q7?- What are the space constraints from Q4 to Q7? - By how much can L* be reduced, if at all?- By how much can L* be reduced, if at all? - Solutions need to be updated for Lattice Version 6.5. MAD8 version - Solutions need to be updated for Lattice Version 6.5. MAD8 version
of the lattice would be helpful.of the lattice would be helpful.
Beam-beam experiment at RHICBeam-beam experiment at RHIC - How can the RHIC experiments be more useful to the LHC? Is a - How can the RHIC experiments be more useful to the LHC? Is a
pulsed wire necessary in the LHC?pulsed wire necessary in the LHC?
Crab cavitiesCrab cavities - How much space will be needed?- How much space will be needed? - Cornell has expertise and interest in designing these cavities- Cornell has expertise and interest in designing these cavities
Energy DepositionEnergy Deposition - Progress on quadrupole design which can absorb heat load at 10 - Progress on quadrupole design which can absorb heat load at 10
times higher luminositytimes higher luminosity
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3535
IR Workshop at FNALIR Workshop at FNAL
October 3-4. 2005 at FNALOctober 3-4. 2005 at FNAL
TopicsTopics
- IR designs for the upgrades- IR designs for the upgrades
- Energy deposition, quench levels, TAN/TAS - Energy deposition, quench levels, TAN/TAS integrationintegration
- Magnet designs for the IR magnets- Magnet designs for the IR magnets
- Beam-beam compensation: wires, e-lens- Beam-beam compensation: wires, e-lens
- Feasibility of large x-angles and crab cavities in - Feasibility of large x-angles and crab cavities in hadron collidershadron colliders
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3636
Backup Slides
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3737
Doublet optics - dispersionDoublet optics - dispersion
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3838
Design StudiesDesign Studies
A. ZlobinA. Zlobin– IR MagnetsIR Magnets
Magnetic design and analysisMagnetic design and analysis
Mechanical design and analysisMechanical design and analysis
Thermal analysisThermal analysis
Quench protection analysisQuench protection analysis
Test data analysisTest data analysis
Integrate with AP and LARP magnet tasksIntegrate with AP and LARP magnet tasks
– CryogenicsCryogenics
IR cryogenics and heat transfer studiesIR cryogenics and heat transfer studies
Radiation heat depositionRadiation heat deposition
Cryostat quench protectionCryostat quench protection
Tanaji SenTanaji Sen US-LARP: IR UpgradesUS-LARP: IR Upgrades 3939
Model Magnet R&DModel Magnet R&D
G.L. SabbiG.L. Sabbi
Main program focus (Technology Quadrupoles)Main program focus (Technology Quadrupoles)– 2-Layer quads, 90 mm aperture, G > 200 T/m ASAP2-Layer quads, 90 mm aperture, G > 200 T/m ASAP
ConsiderationsConsiderations
– Design approach – end loading options, preloadDesign approach – end loading options, preload– Fabrication techniquesFabrication techniques– Structure options – TQS, TQCStructure options – TQS, TQC
Opportunity to arrive at best-of-the-best and increase confidence in modeling
Convergence through working groups and internal reviews
Tanaji Sen US-LARP: IR Upgrades 40
Technology Quads: Features and Goals
Objective: develop the technology base for LQ and HQ:
• evaluate conductor and cable performance: stability, stress limits• develop and select coil fabrication procedures • select the mechanical design concept and support structure• demonstrate predictable and reproducible performance
Implementation: two series, same coil design, different structures:
• TQS models: shell-based structure • TQC models: collar-based structure
Magnet parameters:
• 1 m length, 90 mm aperture, 11-13 T coil peak field• Nominal gradient 200 T/m; maximum gradient 215-265 T/m
Tanaji Sen US-LARP: IR Upgrades 41
FY08-09: Long Quads (LQ)
FY06: fundamental scale-up issues addressed by Supporting R&D:
• general infrastructure and tooling• long racetrack coil fabrication and test• scale-up and alignment issues for shell-based structure
R&D issues:
• long cable fabrication and insulation• stress control during coil reaction, cable treatment, pole design• coil impregnation procedure, handling of reacted coils• support structures, assembly issues• reliability of design and fabrication
Plan: scale-up the TQ design to 4 meter length (LQ)
Tanaji Sen US-LARP: IR Upgrades 42
Block-type IRQ coils and mechanical structure (FNAL)
Tanaji Sen US-LARP: IR Upgrades 43
Larger-aperture separation dipole (LBNL)
~200 mm horizontal aperturethick internal absorber
Bmax=15-16 T, good field quality1.5-2 m iron OD
Shell-type coil design Block-type coil design
Current Status: Several IR quad designs were generated and compared with 90 mm shell-type quads including magnetic and mechanical parameters.