1 / 36

Workshop Websites:

Report from ‘ECFA High Luminosity LHC Experiments Workshop’ and the ‘Review of the LHC and Injector complex Upgrade Plans’ [RLIUP]. Workshop Websites:. http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&confId=252045. ECFA High Luminosity LHC Experiments :

acton-pruitt
Download Presentation

Workshop Websites:

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. Report from ‘ECFA High Luminosity LHC Experiments Workshop’ and the ‘Review of the LHC and Injector complex Upgrade Plans’ [RLIUP]

  2. Workshop Websites: http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&confId=252045 • ECFA High Luminosity LHC Experiments: • 1.-3. October in Aix Les Bain • Review of the LHC and Injector Upgrade Plans: • 29.-31. October in Archamps together with the C-MAC https://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=260492 Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 2

  3. Motivation: Review the performance potential and expectations based on the operational experience with the LHC RunI. Need for Coordinating the various upgrade plans (ATLAS, CMS, LHCb, ALICE, LHC machine and injector complex). Review the shutdown and operation plans before HL-LHC project start to maximize the LHC physics potential before HL-LHC (e.g. LINAC4 connection, ATLAS and CMS upgrade plans versus LHCb and ALICE and required LHC and injector consolidation prior to HL-LHC) Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 3

  4. Discussion Topics: • Performance summary of RunI • Questions, assumptions and comments for upgrade planning • Current Baseline schedule • HL-LHC Performance Expectations • Need to review future upgrade plans in view of RunI experience -how quickly can – will we reach hardware limits after LS1 [cryo limit of triplets, pile-up limit of detectors]) -how much integrated luminosity can one hope for in RunII • Shutdown Requirements • What is required for LS2? And prior to LS3? • When can we connect LINAC4? • Need to review running scenarios and configurations in view of LHC RunI experience • Case studies for RLIUP workshop: • PIC (1ab-1), Upgrade Scenario 1 (2ab-1), Upgrade Scenario 2 (3ab-1) = Full HL-LHC Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 4

  5. Performance Summary of RunI: • 2010: 0.04 fb-1 • 7 TeVCoM • Commissioning • 2011: 6.1 fb-1 • 7 TeVCoM • Exploring the limits • 2012: 23.3 fb-1 • 8 TeV CoM • Production 2012 Performance: 77% of design luminosity- @ 4/7 design energy - >> nominal bunch intensity- ~70% nominal emittance- b*= 0.6 m (design 0.55 m) @ 4 TeV - 50ns  half nominal number of bunches and twice the nominal pile-up! Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 5

  6. 2011: average 12 events/xing, with tails up to ~20 2012: ~30 events/xing at beginning of fill with tails up to ~ 40. Z μμ event from 2012 data with 25 reconstructed vertices Z μμ • Huge efforts over last months to prepare for high lumi and pile-up expected in 2012: • optimized trigger and offline algorithms (tracking, calonoise treatment, physics objects) •  mitigate impact of pile-up on CPU, rates, efficiency, identification, resolution • in spite of x2 larger CPU/event and event size  we do not request additional computing • resources (optimized computing model, increased fraction of fast simulation, etc.)

  7. Performance Summary of RunI: Batch Compression Merging Splitting Scheme: Double batch injection (4+4 bunches) into PS • bunch merging; triple and two double splittings 4 * 12 = 48 bunches per PS cycle. Nominal: Double batch injection (4+2 bunches) into PS • triple and two double splitting of 4 + 2 bunches  6 * 12 = 72 bunches per PS cycle. h = 9 10  1112  13  14  7  21 Huge performance potential for high brightness beams generation in the injector complex!!! 50ns operation in RunI has shown that these high brightness beams can be brought into collision in the LHC! +4 bunches 4 bunches h = 21  42  84 h = 9 h = 21 Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 7

  8. Assumptions for HL-LHC Collision Parameters: • 5% intensity loss assumed during the cycle from SPS extraction to LHC collisions Average lifetime along the cycle before collision of ~22 hours • But minimum lifetime > 0.2 hours (assuming tight collimator settings) limited by power deposited on the collimators • Emittance blow-up of 20% from SPS extraction to LHC collision when compatible with inevitable sources of blow-up  IBS • Margin of ~10-15 % on the average emittance blow-up on top of IBS • IBS calculations including injection/ramp and squeeze assuming controlled-longitudinal blow-up to keep bunch length at 10 cm up to flat-top [G. Arduinicomparing performance with PIC & LLRF SPS upgrade @ RLIUP workshop] Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 8

  9. General Considerations & Questions: • LHC machine: • How long can the machine run without TS? (Cryogenics, maintenance…) • Review of Performance potential based on RunI experience • Injectors: • Linac4 connection, timing and staging of LIU upgrades • Risks of running with Linac2 until 2018/2019 • Experiments: • Coordinating and planning for ALL Upgrades: LS2& LS3, EYETS? • Detector performance: • Pileup and pileup density limitations [140 and 0.6/mm to 1.3/mm for HL-LHC] • Luminosity leveling between all experiments (5 orders of magnitude) • Longer-term strategy: • Accelerator technology development time • Detector technology development time, funding profiles for the upgrades… • Radiation issues and personnel protection during installation work Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 9

  10. Extended Year End Technical Stop (EYETS): [Mike Lamont @ RLIUP] • CMS: • 4 layer pixel ready to install at end of 2016 [all preparations, including new beam pipe and cooling systeminstalled in LS1.] • 4.5 months beam to beam (plus some contingency) • Other experiments • ATLAS don’t need it • Not of any significant benefit to ALICE and LHCb but… • Cryogenics • magnets would be kept cold below 80K during this "physics break” • could imagine some training quenches in order to push towards 7 TeV. • some opportunity for selective maintenance • LIU preparation • Could use time in Booster/PS – e.g. cable cleanup Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 10

  11. Baseline Schedule: Standard Operation Year [Mike Lamont @ RLIUP] Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 11

  12. Baseline schedule and Performance: HL-LHC Installation LIU (PSB, L4 and SPS), collimation and Experiment upgrades Splice Consolidation & Energy Increase Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 12

  13. [MalikaMeddahi @ Preparation of RLIUP] Reference Schedule after LS3: Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 13

  14. Main points from ECFA workshop: • Request for a minimum goal of 3000 fb-1 • The HL-LHC is a Higgs factory (measure self-coupling at the 10% level) • Major upgrades for LHCb and ALICE planed in LS2 • New concept of Pileup density limit and luminous region control for the General Purpose experiments!  HL-LHC performance limit!?! • Interest - no complaint - if LS2 gets delayed by one year • TAS and TAN upgrades required for HL-LHC  interplay with experimental beam pipes • LS2 should last 18 month • LS3 should last 2-3 years • Ion operation is a vital part of the HL-LHC program • Wishes for special operation modes before HL-LHC:  e.g. Proton-Proton operation at lower center-of-mass energy Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 14

  15. LS2 Requests fromExperiments: [Mike Lamont @ RLIUP] • ALICE • Major upgrade of ALICE detector, for installation in 2018/19 • “we assume LS2 is 18 months” • “would not violently object if LS2 shifts to 2019” – would provide important contingency • LHCb • Requires 18 months • A later start of LS2 at end 2018 would be advantageous for LHCb • Further delay of the start of LS2 beyond 2018 would be disfavoured • ATLAS • Assumes baseline (LS2 14 months and starting in 2018) • CMS • LS2: Assumes 14 to 18 months • Prefers LS2 starting end 2018  preparatory work for LS3 (e.g. TAS) [Worry about radiation levels forcing potential constraints/cool-down time etc. ] & • “to collect sufficient data… LS2 must not start before summer 2018” Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 15

  16. Case Studies for RLIUP: • Performance Improving Consolidation (PIC) only  can one reach 1000fb-1 with 10 years of operation? • Upgrade Scenario 1 (PIC plus selected upgrade options)  can one reach 2000fb-1 with 10 years of operation? • Upgrade Scenario 2 (PIC plus all upgrade options)  can one reach more than 3000fb-1 with 10 years of operation? Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 16

  17. Main points from RLIUP: • Very high brightness performance in LHC limited by IBS. • Experiments are NOT interested in an extended EYEST [> 9 month] with LINAC4 connection between LS1 and LS2. • Concept of Pileup density limitation and luminous region control is a key ingredient defining the running scenarios and optimum upgrade options for the General Purpose experiments in HL-LHC. • Experiments would not complain if LS2 delays by 1 year • LS2 should last 18 month • LS3 should last 2-3 years Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 17

  18. Main points from RLIUP: • US1 (2000fb-1) can be reached with full LIU upgrade + PIC (new triplet and collimation upgrade) in the LHC! • Upgrade costs are small compared to LHC operation cost  upgrade for maximum performance as fast as possible! • US2 goal is challenging with pile-up density limit! • Machine reliability is critical for success of HL-LHC! • Remote handling requirements for TS after LS3! • New RF options: 200 MHz, 800MHz (for IBS, Crab Kissing scheme, e-cloud, and luminous region control) • New e-cloud backup scheme: 8b4e with 25ns Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 18

  19. Challenge of Reaching US2 Goals: • Fill lengths in 2011 and 2012  exponentials. • ~30% of the fills are dumped by OP. J. Wenninger 2011 2012 • An exponential fill length distribution is used for the performance figures quoted in the next slides. [RLIUP Session 2 Summary byGianluigiArduini] Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 19

  20. Challenge of Reaching US2 Goals: [R. De Maria] US2 • HL experiments accept 140 events/crossing, with 1.3 mm-1 density (performance limit with impact on efficiency) • Long fills (>6 h) andhigh pile-up (>140) are key ingredients for US2 integrated luminosity target. • Main challenges besides e-cloud: effective leveling method and good reliability. Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 20

  21. LS2 Requests from Injectors: Some co-commissioning injectors/LHC might be necessary Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 21

  22. Experiments Perspective for Ions: • Pb-Pb Performance wishes: • 3nbarn-1 by LS3 in ATLAS. All experiments like to collect at least 1nbarn-1 during RunII. • 10nbarn-1 for ALICE after upgrade during LS2. • LHCb: p-Pb NOT at the end of ion program of RunII compatibility with ALICE plan? • ALICE requires leveling during Pb-Pb and p-Pb (while ATLAS and CMS do not)  Physics and Machine coordination!!! • The Pb-Pb runs in 2015 and 2016 can NOT be grouped (trigger configurations)  No to an extended ion run as part of LS1.5 and the LINAC4 connection! • LHCb would like 10 times more integrated luminosity with p-Pb as compared to Run1. • ALICE polarity reversals on regular basis. • Performance wishes after LS2: • Different beam species: Pb-Pb, p-Pb, Ar-Ar, p-Ar • 10 fold increase in beam performance expected from ALICE  collimation upgrade and vacuum conditions? Requires SPS and LINAC3 upgrades and increase in LEIR intensity! Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 22

  23. Ion beam Performance and machine upgrade plans: • Performance summary of RunI: • 2 bunches, 200ns spacing in PS  24 bunches in SPS  360 bunches in LHC • Upgrade Plans: • Increasing the bunch intensity is not a viable option (IBS and luminosity burn off) • 100ns batch compression in the SPS (already envisaged for RunII in the PS but without the SPS injection upgrade  432 bunches for RunII). • Increasing the number of injections would increase the injection time and thus the emittance growth  keep the number of PS injections into the SPS at 12  requires SPS injection system upgrade (recuperated equipment from PSB energy upgrade, not requiring new kicker magnets)  624 bunches in the LHC @ collision • Requires higher bunch intensities in LEIR (already above design and currently limited)  further studies required • Slip stacking in the SPS to be re-evaluated  smaller bunch spacing (e.g. 50ns?) • LINAC3 pulsing @ 10Hz (source already pulsing @ 10Hz) • Wish for a dedicated source test stand for future source developments Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 23

  24. Main points from RLIUP: • Recommendation for full LIU upgrade including PSB 2 GeV Energy upgrade  required for margins and confidence to produce US1 and US2 parameters! • With all upgrade ingredients endorsed, one needs a resource loaded schedule to identify what upgrades can actually be implemented during which shutdown • Recommendation for full HL-LHC upgrade with development of novel schemes that can alleviate limitations (pile-up density and e-cloud) and-or improve performance: New SC RF (200MHz, 800MHz, Crab Cavities); LRBB wire; Stochastic Cooling • Recommendation to evaluate means for maximizing the machine availability during HL-LHC Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 24

  25. HL-LHCgoal could be reached by end 2035 M. Lamont, 7th HL-LHC Coordination Group, Jul.2013 L. Rossi @Kick-off Meeting 11 Nov 2013

  26. Slipped baseline+12 Schedule: Mike Lamont @ RLIUP  HL start in 2025; HL goal could be reached by end 2037 Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 26

  27. Backup Transparencies: -e-cloud and 8b4e backup -scrubbing fills Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 28

  28. Operation Cycle: MatteoSolfaroli@ Evian 2012 26min Squeeze LHC Operation Cycle @ 7Tev: 70min 31min 50min Turnaround Time Total Minimum Turnaround Time: 176min or 3 hours

  29. ‘Stretched’ Baseline Parameters following 2nd HL-LHC-LIU: HL-LHC Performance Estimates 6.2 1014 and4.9 1014 p/beam • sufficient room for leveling • (with Crab Cavities) • Virtual luminosity (25ns) of • L = 7.4 / 0.35 1034 cm-2 s-1 • = 21 1034 cm-2 s-1 (‘k’ = 5) • Virtual luminosity (50ns) of • L = 8.5 / 0.33 1034 cm-2 s-1 • = 26 1034 cm-2 s-1 (‘k’ = 10) (Leveled to 5 1034 cm-2 s-1 and 2.5 1034 cm-2 s-1) Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 30

  30. Peak Performance Summary: 77% of design luminosity: - @ 4/7 design energy - >> nominal bunch intensity- ~70% nominal emittance- b*= 0.6 m (design 0.55 m) @ 4 TeV - 50ns  half nominal number of bunches and twice the nominal pile-up! Impressive performance after only 3 years of operation and at E = 4 TeV! Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 31

  31. E-cloud G. Rumolo, G. Iadarola Arc dipole, 2808b, 1 beam Arc quadrupole, 2808b, 1 beam PIC SEY=1.4 SEY=1.3 US1, US2 • E-cloud solution currently betting on: • Scrubbing for dipoles for suppression of electron cloud • Expected to be difficult to eliminate the electron cloud in the quadrupole • Effects on on beam only at injection (optimize injection duration) 29-31. October; Review of the LHC and Injector Upgrade Plans; Archamps

  32. G. Rumolo * From L. Tavian, Evian Workshop 2012 If dipoles not fully scrubbed (but maybe just enough to cope with heat load), the higher intensity bunches of US1 and US2 could still suffer more from the interaction with the electron cloud 29-31. October; Review of the LHC and Injector Upgrade Plans; Archamps

  33. Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 34

  34. Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 35

  35. Reference Schedule before LS3: Baseline Schedule until LS3: LS1 RUN 2 LS2 RUN 3 LS3 [Mike Lamont @ RLIUP] Oliver BrüningCERN 3rdJointHiLumi LHC-LARP Annual Meeting, Daresbury 11-15 November 2013 36

More Related