US LHC Accelerator Research Program bnl - fnal- lbnl - slac
LARP Magnet Program
S. Gourlay
LARP Collaboration Meeting Napa, CA
October 19, 2004
Directives
DOE Guidance
“It is our firm intention that the LARP activities serve to explore the limits of the technologies described herein. While the end products of LARP will be applied to the LHC, LARP is not intended to be an engineering an construction service organization to that facility.” “The LARP is not intended to replace existing base program support at the various laboratories in superconducting magnet development and other ongoing areas.”
LARP Proposal
“have fully developed and proven accelerator-ready magnet designs, ready for production, by about 2012, as required to support the LHC physics program.”
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004 LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay 2
Magnet Program Goals
• Improve long-term physics research opportunities of the LHC by providing magnet options for an LHC luminosity upgrade
Large aperture, high gradient quadrupoles (main emphasis)
High-aspect ratio, large aperture separation dipoles • Deliverables will be a successful R&D program, leading to accelerator-ready magnet design(s) (production magnets are out of scope) • Develop a collaborative environment between US national labs • Develop world-wide collaboration on high field magnets
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
3
Program Elements and Timeline
“Three-year plan” to focus initial effort (FY05 – FY07) Must include development of technology for future US projects But . . . be conservative and focused enough to meet LHC goals. Start aggressively evaluate status and the challenge ahead
FY05
Research Technology Base-Building
FY08
FY10
FY12
Focused Development Prototype
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
4
Goals of the Three-Year Plan
Assess challenges
Determine parameter “reach” and scope for development program
Aperture Quads and high aspect ratio dipoles Mechanical structures Provide AP with range of options* and understand trade-offs
*Key to “dipole first” option is a large aperture dipole in high radiation environment
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
5
Aperture
Bigger is better IR performance Radiation load 90 mm is initial baseline aperture Challenging enough! Leaves option of 2-layer coil with G > 200 T/m (Operating) Start with 2 layers of a 4-layer design (TQ1a) Affordable in FY05 Simple cable parameters (2-layer design requires time to study cabling issues) Quick start
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
6
Gradient As a Function of Bore Size
300 300 285 270 tesla 255 m 240 225 210 195 180 165 150 150 35 35 40 45 50 55 60 60 Rbore( Scale) 1000
Gradient as a function of Bore radius
Nb3Sn at 1.8K Nb3Sn at 4.35K
0.01 Scale 1
0.01 Scale 2
0.01 Scale 3
0.01 Scale 4
NbTi at 1.8K NbTi at 4.35K
mm
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004 LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
Organization
Superconducting Magnets
S.Gourlay
Magnet Steering Committee (MSC)
– Define program, identify tasks
FNAL Representative
A.V.Zlobin
LBNL Representative
G.Sabbi
BNL Representative
P. Wanderer
and assign task managers
Lab Representatives
G. Sabbi, P. Wanderer, Z. Zlobin
Lab representatives oversee tasks/sub-tasks at host laboratory
Three Working Groups –
Design Studies Model Magnet R&D Supporting R&D
Lab Management Representatives
S. Gourlay, M. Harrison, R. Stanek
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
8
Management Structure
LARP Magnet Program S. Gourlay
Task 1 Task 2
Magnet Steering Committee
Task 3
Task 4
Working Groups
Design Studies
Task 5
Model Magnets
Supporting R&D
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
9
FY04 Activities
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
10
FY04 Quadrupole Development
• Design Studies –Dual-bore –Aperture –Geometries • Support Structure –Design and hardware
0
22
44
0
10
20
30
40
Rel. field errors (x10E-5)
Rel. field errors (x10E-5)
0
2 4
6
8 10 12 14 16 18 20
0
2
4
6
8
10 12 14 16 18 20
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
11
FY04 Dipole Development
• Based on “Dipole-first” IR design –Large aperture, asymmetric –Non-cos-theta –Split coil geometry –High field, high radiation environment
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
12
FY04 Sub-scale Development
•Magnet parameters
–Clear bore 110 mm –Peak field 11 T –Gradient 100 T/m
Uses existing coil design ~ $25k in additional parts
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
13
Racetrack Quadrupole with Sub-scale Coils
Clear bore: 110 mm Magnet short sample Iss = 11.4 kA Bpeak = 11.2 T (in the end) Gss = 95 T/m Stored energy at Iss = 175 kJ Inductance at Iss = 2.7 mH
F┴ F║
21 Quenches to 93% of short sample
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004 LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay 14
FY05 Program
TQ1a – 2/4 layer 90mm quad
Fabricate and test
Open-midplane dipole
3-D mechanical design Thermal analysis
Sub-scale magnets TQ2 – 2-layer 90mm quad
Engineering design Dipole and/or quad as resources permit Heat x-fer, support structure, fab, assembly, etc. Combine with materials studies?
Conductor and Cable
Conductor procurement* Cable R&D
*Conductor Development Program
Long magnet issues
Base program
15
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
FY05 Task Distribution
TQ1a
Design/Analysis – LBNL/FNAL Winding – FNAL Reaction – LBNL Impregnation – LBNL
Quadrupole Development
Design Studies - FNAL/LBNL
Dipole Development
Design Studies – BNL
Assembly – LBNL Test – BNL
Conductor and Cable
Measurements – BNL/LBNL/FNAL Cabling – LBNL
Sub-Scale Tests (hold-back victim)
Fabrication – LBNL/BNL Test – BNL
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
16
FY06
– Build and test 2 “more complex” Nb3Sn quadrupole models
– Include two mechanical structure schemes
– Build and test a “simplified” open mid-plane Nb3Sn dipole
– Develop infrastructure for a long coil
– Conductor and material development – Major conductor procurement
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
17
Long Magnet R&D
Very high priority but funding limited Infrastructure Reaction furnace Handling VPI chamber or fixture Materials cost
As proposed at last collaboration meeting.
Topic for discussion – Can we improve the schedule? Is there a better way?
FY04, 05 – Study issues (No budget – base program) FY06 – Infrastructure development FY07 – Fabrication and test of 3 – 4 m coil (long sub-scale) Essential first step - cost effective - established baseline with sub-scale coils
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004 LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay 18
Task Distribution
3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 FY05 FY06
Quads Dipoles Long Mag Sub-scale Cond/Cable R&D Cond Proc
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
19
Three-Year Program
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
20
At the end of the “Three-year” plan
– Some limited participation from CERN – CARE program
Networking activities (ongoing) NED’s birthday
New collaborative opportunities
– Participation by KEK?
– Several LARP magnets (new experience base)
– Conductor progress – Maybe some LHC operating experience New directions?
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
21
LAPAC Comments
– Recommend concentrating resources on a limited number of options. Main effort should be on quadrupoles, and effort on dipoles should be limited:
“Given the limited resources the magnet program must be well focused on the most demanding challenge given the present knowledge of the luminosity upgrade layouts.” “Consequently the red line through the program must be to go from short quadrupole models as fast as possible to the first long quadrupole magnet and to reduce the parallel tracks to a minimum.” “… it may be worthwhile … to select a baseline design and to stick to it for the short model and long prototype magnet fabrication.”
=> FY05 program is consistent with LAPAC. FY06 program will be tuned based on LAPAC advice as well as experience with FY05 program.
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004 LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay 22
Goals for the Meeting
FY05 • Program details • Revise and update task sheets Establish framework for FY06 and FY07 programs Organization • WG and MSC meetings • Videoconferences
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
23
Summary
Proposed funding profile is modest given program goals – We must maintain expected funding and base program support in order to be successful The program should integrate and utilize all available program resources – Broad-based R&D program to establish a firm technological foundation and provide a variety of options – Focused development to achieve LHC priorities
LARP Collaboration Meeting October 2004
LARP Magnet Program – S. Gourlay
24