1 / 36

Inner Triplet Phase I Corrector Design Status:

Inner Triplet Phase I Corrector Design Status:. Corrector Package. Q3. ~5..7 m. M C S (T) X. D1. MCBXV. MCBXH. M Q S X. MQXC. B PM. A2. A1. B1. B3/(B6?). M. Karppinen AT/MCS 24/07/08. To IP . Outline. Corrector requirements and constraints

avon
Download Presentation

Inner Triplet Phase I Corrector 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. Inner Triplet Phase I Corrector Design Status: Corrector Package Q3 ~5..7 m M C S (T) X D1 MCBXV MCBXH M Q S X MQXC B PM A2 A1 B1 B3/(B6?) M. Karppinen AT/MCS 24/07/08 To IP 

  2. Outline • Corrector requirements and constraints • Some corrector specific fabrication aspects • Design status: • MCBX (CERN) • MQSX (STFC/RAL & CERN) • MCSX (CIEMAT & CERN) • Summary M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  3. Requirements & Constraints • Fit all correctors in dedicated cryo-assembly within 5..7 m between Q3 and D1 • Aperture ø120 mm (TBC!) • Operating temperature 1.9 K or 4.5 K (TBC!) • (Try to) Use existing: • Power converter • Bus-bars • Current leads • Quench detection & protection systems M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  4. Requirements.. (cont) • MCBX • correct for a triplet misalignment of 1mm • 1-1.5 Tm for generation of X-angle, parallel separation, and transverse adjustment of the IP • 6 Tm in H- and V-plane (presently 3 x 1.51/1.56 Tm) • MQSX • Compensate for triplet roll of 4 mrad • 20 Tm/m or 40 T/mx 0.5 m • MCSX • correct for b3 (6 units) of D1 (29 Tm) • 25 T/m2x 0.5 m • MCTX • MQX systematic b6 (1 unit) correction • 0.02 Tm @R40mm (may be suppressed) • MCSOX • Not yet clear if required… M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  5. Fabrication Aspects • Flat cable • Purpose built machine to bond 2-25 enamel insulated wires together • Tolerance +0.02/-0.01 mm, unit length up to 160 m • Wires are connected in series on connection plate • Sometimes problems with cable splitting during winding • Coil winding • Dipole coils with standard winding machine • Counter-winding technique used for single winding block coils • All coils epoxy impregnated in vacuum or by wet-laying • Assembly • Epoxy-glass around the coils by vacuum impregnation or pre-preg • Pre-stress from shrink-fitted Alu/St.steel cylinders or collars • Off-center laminations M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  6. Nb47%Ti PVA insulation RRR >100 Filament diameter 6-7 micrometer. Limited quantity available for model magnets Superconducting wire M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  7. Coil winding Counter-winding (MQSX) Dipole winding (MCBM) M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  8. Coil assembly M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  9. M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  10. M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  11. Electrial connections M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  12. MCBX for Phase I • From 3 nested to 2 separate H/V-orbit correctors • Central field: 3 T => ~3.5 T • Total length: 0.7 m => ~2 m/unit • Aperture: ø90 mm => ø120 mm • Stored energy: 44kJ => ~150 kJ • Field quality < 1unit @30 mm • Quench protection: none => active protection • Collar based structure as an alternative for the present mechanical concept • First design iteration for Inom<600 A • Wire #4, Wire #3, New larger X-section • Alternative compact high current design based on MQY cable M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  13. Parameters: 600 A design M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  14. Cable design, 4.5K • Based on MQY Inner Cable • Fabrication easier than 600 A design • All harmonics < 1 unit @30 mm • db3 ≈ 20 units (can be reduced) • Probably requires heaters and/or Rdump M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  15. 600 A Design wp = ~60 % on the LL 8-way cable PVA insulated wire Potted coils Each coil consists of 8 electrical circuits in series with a quench stopper in between Quench stopper between the coils Existing power converters Std. LHC QP system M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  16. MCBX: Quench analysis • Four cases analysed at this point • Wire #4, 1.9 K, no dump resistor • Wire #4, 1.9 K, with dump resistor • Wire #4, 4.5 K, with dump resistor • Wire #3, 1.9 K, with dump resistor Additional case to look into • New Larger Wire, no/with dump resistor • Cable version, with heaters/dump resistor M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  17. Ver1: Wire#4, 1.9 K, no Rdump M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  18. Ver1: Wire#4, 1.9 K, no Rdump Tmax = 220 K Ugnd = 500 V UR= 1500 V => Probably OK (?) Tmax M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  19. LHC 600 A circuit Courtesy of Gert-Jan Coelingh (AT-MEI) Design for Rd=0.7 Ω with 2 x mass available Ugnd ≤ 420 V Present Rd tested with 113 kJ (+115°C) Breaker designed for 750 A 3 spare systems available M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  20. Ver1: Wire#4, 1.9 K, with Rdump M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  21. Ver1: Wire#4, 1.9 K, with Rdump Rd = 0.7 Ω (14.6 ms) Tmax = 140 K Ugnd = 400 V UR= 1100 V =>SAFE Tmax Quench origin M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  22. Ver1: Wire#4, 4.5 K, with Rdump Rd = 0.7 Ω (14.6 ms) Tmax = 110 K Ugnd = 350 V UR = 870 V =>SAFE Ver2: Wire#3, 1,9 K, with Rdump Rd = 0.9 Ω (14.6 ms) Tmax= 250 K Ugnd = 1000 V UR = 3100 V =>RISKY M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  23. Mechanical design: collars • Hor. Split yoke • St. steel/Al. collars • Welded st.steel skin • FEA underway Courtesy of Thomas Sahner (TS-MME) M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  24. MCBX plans • Magnetic design • X-sections for 600 A • Software development/testing • Quench analysis • No protection • Active protection • Design optimization • Mechanical design • 2D&3D magnetic design • Model magnet (Aug -09) • Model Test (Sep -09) • Prototype Design & Construction ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Underway Next step M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  25. MCBX Summary • 600 A design based on wire #4 seems the most attractive alternative and would allow re-using the existing powering and protection systems • 1.9 K operation: • More compact coils, shorter overall length • Savings in material and tooling cost • Reduced risk of fabrication failure • 1.9 K Cooling available in the area • Cable design most compact, but requires significant investment in powering and protection. Coil fabrication much easier. • URGENT decisions required (aperture, Inom, operating T) to start the detailed design and to meet the tight milestones for the project. M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  26. MQSX for Phase I • Gradient: 80 T/m => 40 T/m • Total length: 0.3 m => 0.8 m • Aperture: ø70 mm => ø120 mm • Stored energy: 4.2 kJ => ~10 kJ • Field quality < 1unit @30 mm (Main challenge) • Quench protection: none => probably none (TBC) • Mechanical design based on the present concept • First design iteration for Inom<600 A • Wire #3 M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  27. MQSX: Present design M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  28. MQSX: Parameters M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  29. Field quality requirement • Scale measured mean MQXB to 30 mm • Scale with ß (12.5 km/4.5 km)n/2 • MQSX strength 0.004 of MQXB • To stay in the shadow allow <10 % M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  30. Phase I MQSX M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  31. Next steps • Moving forward with the baseline 6 wire 2 block configuration, there are a number of issues to be addressed. • Magnetically • Quench protection-should not be a problem, same ampere turns as single block model, but needs to be confirmed • Effect of manufacturing tolerances on harmonic structure • 3d models • end effects • spacer optimisation • Mechanically • PeterLoveridge has started looking at mechanical design issues • Doing some hand calcs to check any future modelling. • Now we have a baseline. He will do an FEA model . • Baseline definition • key components • Preliminary drawings • Manufacturing costs James Rochford - STFC

  32. Project resources • How to deliver the project within budget? • At the moment we are trying to better understand of the design and manufacturing costs involved, these are not same at for the existing magnet • 2 end spacers not 1 e.t.c • We need to define what RAL can do within the scope of the present budget. • What we will need assistance with • Goal in next week or so is answer these questions James Rochford - STFC

  33. To summarise • We have • Shown the requirements for MQSX • Presented 2d optimisation study • Defined a baseline configuration capable of meeting the requirements for MQSX • Started the mechanical definition of the magnet • Started to look at resource scheduling needed to deliver this magnet James Rochford - STFC

  34. MCSX for Phase I Courtesy of Fernando Toral (CIEMAT) M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  35. MCSX: Parameters (Draft 1) Courtesy of Fernando Toral (CIEMAT) M. Karppinen AT/MCS

  36. Summary • MCBX can meet the Phase I requirements • 600 A design based on wire #4 with active protection is the most promising option • 1.9 K operation preferred for MCBX • MQSX can meet the Phase I requirements • Field quality spec is very tight and will translate into extremely tight mechanical tolerances • Super-ferric MCSX expected straight forward • Decision on aperture, operating current, and cooling URGENT M. Karppinen AT/MCS

More Related