LARP DOE Review, 7/9/2012Magnet Systems Introduction – G. Sabbi 1 Magnet Systems Overview and HQ...

LARP DOE Review, 7/9/2012 Magnet Systems Introduction – G. Sabbi 1

Magnet Systems

Overview and HQ Program

GianLuca Sabbi

2012 DOE Review of LARP

SLAC, July 9, 2012

BNL - FNAL - LBNL - SLAC


LARP Magnet Program

Goal: Develop Nb3Sn quadrupoles for the LHC luminosity upgrade

Potential to operate at higher field and larger temperature margin

R&D phases:

• 2004-2010: technology development using the SQ and TQ models• 2006-2012: length scale-up to 4 meters using the LR and LQ models• 2008-2014: incorporation of accelerator quality features in HQ/LHQ

Program achievements to date:

• TQ models (90 mm aperture, 1 m length) reached 240 T/m gradient• LQ models (90 mm aperture, 4 m length) reached 220 T/m gradient• HQ models (120 mm aperture, 1 m length) reached 184 T/m gradient

Current activities:

• Completion of LQ program: test of LQS03 to reproduce TQS03 result • Optimization of HQ, fabrication of LHQ (technology demonstration)• Design and planning of the MQXF IR Quadrupole development


Magnet Systems Agenda

Morning:

10:45 Overview and HQ program Sabbi (45)

11:30 LQ program Ambrosio (30)

12:00 Discussion (30)

Afternoon

13:30 Materials program Ghosh (30)

14:00 LHQ Program and

Nb3Sn Technology Demonstration Ambrosio (30)

14:30 LHC IR Quadrupole Development Sabbi (30)

15:00 Discussion (30)


R&D Program Components

Long QuadrupoleLQS3.7 m long90 mm bore

Long High-Field Quadrupole (LHQ)120 mm bore – Length TBD (3.5-4.5m)

Long QuadrupoleLQS3.7 m long90 mm bore

Long High-Field Quadrupole (LHQ)120 mm bore – Length TBD (3.5-4.5m)

SM

TQS

HQ

LR

LQS

LHQ

• Racetrack coils, shell based structure• Technology R&D in simple geometry• Length scale up from 0.3 m to 4 m

• Cos2 coils with 90 mm aperture • Incorporation of more complex layout• Length scale up from 1 m to 4 m

• Cos2 coils with 120 mm aperture• Explore force/stress/energy limits• Address accelerator quality requirements


Technology Demonstration Chart

2004-06

2005-10

2008-13

2011-15


Overview of LARP Magnets

SQSM TQS

LR

LQS

HQTQC


Program Achievements - Timeline (1/3)

Mar. 2006 SQ02 reaches 97% of SSL at both 4.5K and 1.9K • Demonstrates MJR 54/61conductor performance for TQ

Jun. 2007 TQS02a surpasses 220 T/m at both 4.5K and 1.9K (*)• Achieved 200 T/m goal with RRP 54/61 conductor

Jan. 2008 LRS02 reaches 96% of SSL at 4.5K with RRP 54/61 • Coil & shell structure scale-up from 0.3 m to 4 m

July 2009 TQS03a achieves 240 T/m (1.9K) with RRP 108/127 (*)• Increased stability with smaller filament size

Dec. 2009 TQS03b operates at 200 MPa (average) coil stress (*)• Widens Nb3Sn design space (as required…)

(*) Tests performed at CERN



Dec. 2009 LQS01a reaches 200 T/m at both 4.5K and 1.9K • LARP meets its “defining” milestone

Feb. 2010 TQS03d shows no degradation after 1000 cycles (*) • Comparable to operational lifetime in HL-LHC

July 2010 LQS01b achieves 220 T/m with RRP 54/61• Same TQS02 level at 4.5K, but no degradation at 1.9K

Apr. 2011 HQ01d achieves 170 T/m in 120 mm aperture at 4.5 K• At HL-LHC operational level with good field quality

Oct. 2011 HQM02 achieves ~90% of SSL at both 4.6 K and 2.2 K• First demonstration coil with reduced compaction

(*) Test performed at CERN



Apr. 2012 HQ01e reaches 184 T/m at 1.9K (*)• Still using first generation coils, several known issues• Above linear scaling from TQ (240/120*90=180 T/m)

Jun. 2012 HQM04 reaches 97% SSL at 4.6K and 94% at 2.2K• Successful demonstration of revised coil design• Single-pass cored cable, lower compaction

Next Steps:

Aug. 2012 LQS03 test: reproduce TQS03 using 108/127 conductor

Dec. 2012 HQ02a test: improve performance with 2nd generation coils

(*) Test performed at CERN


Recommendations of 2011 DOE Review

1. Undertake a substantial effort for modeling energy deposition and radiation damage from beam losses and other collider issues related to the IR quad aperture decision

This is the task of Design Study WP 10 (Energy Deposition) Led by CERN but Work Package co-leader is Nikolai Mokhov On magnet side prepare for use of rad-hard epoxies, if required

• Status/plans will be discussed in following presentations

2. Establish a formalism for the dialog and protocol which will provide the needed specifications in time to meet agreed upon milestones

Design study WP1 (management) includes parameter control Various channels to discuss magnet development plans However, formal protocol still needs to be established


Program Organization

WBS Description CoordinatorBNL FNAL LBNL

2.1 Design Studies Sabbi2.1.5.1 Hi-Lumi DS Wanderer Ambrosio Sabbi

2.2 Model Quadrupoles Sabbi2.2.2.2 Coil fabrication and instrumentation traces Schmalzle Bossert Hafalia2.2.2.5 Mechanical structure and assembly Anerella Bossert Felice2.2.2.6 Quench protection and test Chlachidze Martchevskii

2.3 Long Quadrupoles Ambrosio2.3.4 LQ

2.3.4.1 Coil & Collar Fab. (FNAL) Nobrega2.3.4.2 Coil Fab. (BNL) Schmalzle2.3.4.3 Shell fab. Felice2.3.4.4 Instruments & Quench Prot. Martchevskii2.3.4.5 Test Prep & Tests Chlachidze2.3.5 LHQ

2.3.5.2 Coil fabrication and instrumentation traces Schmalzle Bossert2.3.5.4 Mechanical structure and assembly Felice

2.4 Materials Ghosh2.4.1.1 Conductor qualification Ghosh Godeke2.4.1.2 Cable design and fabrication Dietderich2.4.1.3 Conductor procurement Ghosh Yamada Dietderich

Task Leader


FY12 Initial Budget

BNL FNAL LBNL SLAC Total BNL FNAL LBNL SLAC Total BNL FNAL LBNL SLAC Total

Magnet Systems Sabbi 1,213 773 1,897 - 3,883 513 350 493 - 1,356 1,726 1,123 2,390 - 5,239Design Studies 50 50 50 - 150 - - - - - 50 50 50 - 150

High Luminosity LHC 50 50 50 - 150 - - - - - 50 50 50 - 150Hi-Lumi DS PW/GA/GS 50 50 50 - 150 - - - - - 50 50 50 - 150

Model Quadrupoles (1-meter) Sabbi 594 261 754 - 1,609 38 113 66 - 217 632 374 820 - 1,826HQ (summary) 594 261 754 - 1,609 38 113 66 - 217 632 374 820 - 1,826

HQ Coil Fab. + Instrum. Traces JS/RB/RH 594 121 325 - 1,040 38 93 18 - 149 632 214 343 - 1,189HQ Mech. Structure and Assy MA/RB/HF - - 229 - 229 - - 18 - 18 - - 247 - 247HQ Quench protection and test GC/MM - 140 200 - 340 - 20 30 - 50 - 160 230 - 390

Long Quadrupoles (4-meter) Ambrosio 341 462 583 - 1,386 16 237 350 - 603 357 699 933 - 1,989LQ (summary) - 200 224 - 424 - 50 34 - 84 - 250 258 - 508

Coil & Collar Fab. (FNAL) Nobrega - 50 - - 50 - - - - - - 50 - - 50Coil Fabrication (BNL) Schmalzle - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Shell Fabrication Felice - - 184 - 184 - - 34 - 34 - - 218 - 218Instruments & Quench Prot. Martchevskii - - 40 - 40 - - - - - - - 40 - 40Test Preparation + Tests Chlachidze - 150 - - 150 - 50 - - 50 - 200 - - 200

LHQ (summary) 341 262 359 - 962 16 187 316 - 519 357 449 675 - 1,481LHQ Coil Fab. + Instrum. Traces JS/RB 341 262 209 16 187 16 357 449 225 - 1,031LHQ Mech. Structure and Assy Felice - - 150 - 150 - - 300 - 300 - - 450 - 450

Materials Ghosh 228 - 510 - 738 459 - 77 - 536 687 - 587 - 1,274Conductor Support (summary)

Conductor qualification AG/ArnoG 218 - 143 - 361 59 - 37 - 96 277 - 180 - 457Cable design and fabrication Dietderich - - 367 - 367 - - 40 - 40 - - 407 - 407Conductor procurement AG/RY/DD 10 - - - 10 400 - - - 400 410 - - - 410

Labor Material TotalFY12 Budget - LARP Magnet Systems (as of October 1st, 2011)

Coordinator


FY12 Mid-Year Contingency AllocationWBS # Coordinator Description Notes

Labor M&S Labor M&S Labor M&S2.2 Sabbi Model Quadrupoles

2.2.2 HQ2.2.2.2 Schmalzle HQ Coil Fabrication and Instrum. Traces 148 10 Coil 19 reaction/potting2.2.2.2 Bossert HQ Coil Fabrication and Instrum. Traces2.2.2.2 Hafalia HQ Coil Fabrication and Instrum. Traces 81 5 Coil 20 winding/curing2.2.2.5 Anerella HQ Mechanical Structure and Assembly 95 4 Complete analysis and retest 6'' mechanical model 2.2.2.5 Bossert HQ Mechanical Structure and Assembly2.2.2.5 Felice HQ Mechanical Structure and Assembly2.2.2.6 Chlachidze HQ Quench Protection and Test -200 Canceled coil 14 test2.2.2.6 Martchevskii HQ Quench Protection and Test 50 Support/travel for HQ test at CERN

2.3 Ambrosio Long Quadrupoles2.3.4 LQ

2.3.4.3 Felice Shell fab.2.3.4.4 Martchevskii Instruments & Quench Prot. 35 Cover negative and complete LQS032.3.4.5 Chlachidze Test Prep & Tests -55 Test/analysis support by LBNL is covered in previous tasks2.3.4.5 Chlachidze Test Prep & Tests 20 Additional support for LQS03 test2.3.5 LHQ

2.3.5.2 Schmalzle LHQ Coil Fabrication and Instrum. Traces2.3.5.2 Bossert LHQ Coil Fabrication and Instrum. Traces 50 400 R/I tooling procurement2.3.5.2 Bossert LHQ Coil Fabrication and Instrum. Traces 16 72 40K for coil 3 and 4 parts, 30K+ for plasma coating (drafting, procurement & inspection), 10K+ LHQ wind&cure tooling2.3.5.2 Hafalia LHQ Coil Fabrication and Instrum. Traces2.3.5.4 Felice LHQ Mechanical Structure and Assembly

2.4 Ghosh Materials2.4.1.1 Ghosh Conductor Qualification 107 26 25 additional samples2.4.1.1 Godeke Conductor Qualification 86 16 15 additional samples; strand test database2.4.1.2 Dietderich Cable design and fabrication 10 34 LHQ -2 runs (6 to 4); add 1 LHQ run with Ti-ternary; add two LHQ UL ins at NEWC; add 140 mm aperture cable development2.4.1.3 Ghosh Conductor procurement -129 Move 129k$ reserved for conductor procurement at BNL to FNAL, to cover overspent account2.4.1.3 Yamada Conductor procurement 129 Move 129k$ reserved for conductor procurement at BNL to FNAL, to cover overspent account

Totals (Labor/M&S) 350 -89 66 421 207 55 1010 Total (3 Labs)

BNL FNAL LBNL


R&D and Prototype Funding Profiles

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

LQX Test Infrastructure and Tests

LQX Fab (150 mm prototype)

QX (150 mm short model) - CERN

QX (150 mm short model) - LARP

LHQ rad-hard coils

LHQ

HQ (LARP+CERN)

Design Study

Program components/year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018Design Study 400 400 300 200HQ (LARP+CERN) 1945 1845 600 300LHQ 3673 3333 450LHQ rad-hard coils 1177QX (150 mm short model) - LARP 620 824 1170 920QX (150 mm short model) - CERN 1000 2930 2160 320LQX Fab (150 mm prototype) 2500 7113 5200 4114 365LQX Test Infrastructure and Tests 0 1452 2212 517 854


Summary

• Steady progress in addressing technology issues that were initially perceoved as potential show stoppers• Examples: conductor performance, cabling, degradation due to stress/cycling,

length scale up, structure and coil alignment, field quality, training, quench protection, cooling, radiation lifetime

• However, need to catch up in addressing accelerator quality and production relevant features, after a long period spent on more basic issues• control of eddy currents, rad-hard components, insulation systems compatible

with long magnets, more robust insulation in general, process documentation and QA, evaluation of latest generation of conductors

• Stepped up the pace in introducing these features, generally good results but some risk• Present overall strategy for evaluation/introduction of rad-hard materials

• Stepping up the pace, ok for now, but some risk• Funding details to be discussed in following talks


High-Field Quadrupole (HQ) Design

• 120 mm aperture, coil peak field of 15.1 T at 219 T/m (1.9K SSL)• 190 MPa coil stress at SSL (150 MPa if preloaded for 180 T/m) • Stress minimization is primary goal at all design steps (from x-section) • Coil and yoke designed for small geometric and saturation harmonics• Full alignment during coil fabrication, magnet assembly and powering

Aluminum collar

Bladder location

Aluminum shellMaster key

Loading keys

Yoke-shell alignment

Pole alignment key

Quench heater

Coil


Contributions to the HQ Development

• Cable design and fabrication LBNL• Magnetic design & analysis FNAL, LBNL• Mechanical design & analysis LBNL• Coil parts design and procurement FNAL• Instrumentation & quench protection LBNL• Winding and curing tooling design LBNL, FNAL• Reaction and potting tooling design BNL• Coil winding and curing LBNL, (CERN)• Coil reaction and potting BNL, LBNL, (CERN)• Coil handling and shipping tooling BNL• Structures (quadrupole & mirror) LBNL, FNAL, BNL• Assembly (quadrupole & mirror) LBNL, FNAL, (BNL, CERN)• Magnet test LBNL, FNAL, (CERN)• Accelerator Integration BNL, LBNL, FNAL, (CERN)


HQ Performance Issues

Time (s)

Extr

actio

n Vo

ltage

(V)

Mechanical issues:

•Ramp rate dependence of first three models is indicative of conductor damage

Electrical issues:

•Large number of insulation failures in coils, in particular inter-layer and coil to parts

HQ01b extraction voltageHQ01a-d Ramp Rate dependence


Coil Analysis Findings

Both mechanical and electrical issues were traced to excessive compaction during the coil reaction phase:

• HQ design assumed less space for inter-turn insulation than TQ/LQ Reaction cavity limits radial & azimuthal expansion

• No/insufficient gaps were included between pole parts to limit longitudinal strain

Coil spring back in tooling (Over) size measurements of completed coil


Initial confirmation by Coil Test in Mirror

Mirror structure allows to test single coils:• Efficient way to study design variations

Two special coil were fabricated and tested:

• #12-HQM01: larger cavity (& cored cable)• #13-HQM02: standard cavity, one less turn

Iron Yoke

Iron Mirror Block

Stainless Skin

G-10 and Kaptonmidplane shims

Horizontal “side shims” are placed here

Side “ear”

Results:

•Coil 12 showed some performance limitations, probably related to splice fabrication oversight

•Coil 13: significant improvements over previous coils, both at 4.5K and 1.9K, using RRP54/61

Ramp rate dependence


Coil Design Revisions and Verification

Based on the analysis and tests results, the following changes were applied:

•A new cable design was developed using smaller strand diameter (from 0.800 mm to 0.778 mm, to decrease compaction without changes in parts and tooling •Longitudinal gaps were progressively increased and 4mm/m was selected•Some end part modifications to increase insulation layers, avoid sharp points•Increased inter-layer insulation layer thickness to 0.5 mm

Verification of new design:

•Test of coil 14 (first coil of the new design) in the mirror structure (Dec-Jan)•HQ01e test at CERN: evaluate 1.9K performance and perform independent magnetic measurements (Jan-Feb)•Test of coil 15 (new design and cored cable) in HQ or HQM (Mar-Apr)•A new effort is being organized to understand persisting electrical weaknesses (shorts in coil 14) and apply findings/corrections to both HQ and LHQ


Accelerator Quality Requirements

Detailed specifications will be developed by the HL-LHC design study

Preliminary guidance was formulated by CERN in four areas:

Ramp rate: no quench at -150 A/s, starting from 80% of SSL

• Requires control of eddy current losses, particularly in cables

Transfer function: < 1 unit reproducibility in the operating range < 10 units spread for I< Imax/2 & <5 units for I>Imax/2

• Requires control of magnetization and eddy current effects

Persistent currents: injection |b6|<10 units, spread < 10 units

• Requires control of conductor magnetization

Magnetic center: stable during ramp-up within ± 0.04 mm

• Requires control of magnetization and eddy current effects


Current Accelerator Quality Developments

• Structure optimization for alignment, uniform pre-load, minimal training• Field quality measurements and new design features to meet requirements• Structure development oriented toward magnet production and installation • Quench protection, rad-hard epoxy and cooling system studies


HQ01d-e Magnetic Measurements

• Geometric harmonics are small, indicating good uniformity and alignment• Large persistent current effects indicate need for smaller filament conductors• Large dynamic effects indicate need to better control inter-strand resistance

Geometric and persistent current harmonics Eddy current harmonics for different ramp rates


HQ Funding History and Projection


Summary

LARP DOE Review, 7/9/2012Magnet Systems Introduction – G. Sabbi 1 Magnet Systems Overview and HQ...

Documents

Transcript of LARP DOE Review, 7/9/2012Magnet Systems Introduction – G. Sabbi 1 Magnet Systems Overview and HQ...