1 / 36

Vision from LHC to HL-LHC operation

Vision from LHC to HL-LHC operation. Lucio Rossi For the HL-LHC project. LHC performance evolution ( guess !). 0.75 10 34 cm -2 s -1 50 ns bunch high pile up 40. 1.5 10 34 cm -2 s -1 25 ns bunch pile up 40. 1.7-2.2 10 34 cm -2 s -1 25 ns bunch pile up 60.

cairo-schultz
Download Presentation

Vision from LHC to HL-LHC operation

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. Vision from LHC to HL-LHC operation Lucio Rossi For the HL-LHC project

  2. LHC performance evolution (guess!) 0.75 1034 cm-2s-1 50 ns bunchhigh pile up 40 1.5 1034 cm-2s-1 25 ns bunchpile up 40 1.7-2.2 1034 cm-2s-1 25 ns bunch pile up 60 Technicallimits (experiments, too) like : 50  25 ns LRossi@R2E Workshop 14Oct2014

  3. Lumievolutiontill 2035 (no learnimg…) 5 1034cm-2s-1, levelling, 250 fb-1/y, 3000 fb-1 Whenlearningcurveisfolded in (250f-1/y in 2028)  need to plan eventually 300 fb-1/y, with 7-7.5 1034 cm-2s-1 . Design should also able to allow to 4000 fb-1, if needed. LRossi@R2E Workshop 14Oct2014

  4. High lumi insertions: higher, larger... Longer Quads; Shorter D1 (thanks to SC) LHC triplet 70 mm 8 T 11 kA ATLAS CMS E. Todesco ATLAS CMS HL LHC triplet > 12 T 150 mm 15-17 kA LRossi@R2E Workshop 14Oct2014

  5. The HL-LHC Nb-T imagnet zoo… D1 (KEK) HO correctors: superferric (INFN) Nestedorbit corrector (CIEMAT) See WP3 webpage E. Todesco et al. D2 corr Q4 (CEA) D2 (INFN) Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  6. Effect of the crabcavities • RF crab cavity deflects head and tail in opposite direction so that collision is effectively “head on” and then luminosity is maximized • This are COMPACT CC, completely new design! Must work synchronized (0.001) on each side of the IP! Lucio Rossi@ICHEP2014

  7. Latest cavity designs toward accelerator Coupler concepts RF Dipole: Waveguide or waveguide-coax couplers Double ¼-wave: Coaxial couplers with hook-type antenna Concentrate on two designs 4-rod: Coaxial couplers with different antenna types Presentbaseline: 3 cavity /cyomodule 4 cavity/cryomodisunderstudy for CrabKissing TEST in SPS underpreparation (A. MacPherson) Lucio Rossi@ICHEP2014

  8. P2 - DS collimators ions – 11 T (LS2 -2018) 11 T Nb3Sn FNAL - CERN Lucio Rossi@ICHEP2014

  9. Lowimpedencecollimators(LS2 & LS3) Maybealready in LS2 New material: MoGr Reduceimpedance by > 2) S. Redaelli et al. Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  10. LRBBW: an enablingtoolthatneeds a definitive test NOT baseline (yet) • Test using an adaptedcollimator • Test isexpensive! • The final system cannotbe an electricwireembedded in a jaw! • e-lensused as e-wire • Howeverweeneed > 200 Am!  9.3  Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  11. Controlling halo diffusion rate: hollow e-lens (synergywith LRBBCW) NOT baseline (yet) Promises of hollow e-lens:1. Control the halo dynamics without affecting the beam core;2. Control the time-profile of beam losses (avoid loss spikes); 3. Control the steady halo population (crucial in case of CC fast failures). Remarks: - very convincing experimental experience in other machines! - full potential can be exploited if appropriate halo monitoring is available. Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  12. Crystal collimation: a new paradigme in collimation (DS – partially– and primary NOT baseline (yet) Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  13. EliminatingTechnicalBottlenecksCryogenics P4- P1 –P5 IT IT RF RF New Plant  6 kW in P4 IN LS2 Two new 18 kW Plants in P1 and P5 IT IT IT IT IT IT Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  14. New IR Cryo-scheme (sepration IR-Arc) L. Tavian R. Van Weelderen S. Claudet Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  15. Displacing EPC and DFB in the adjacent TDZ tunnel ( 500 m away) via SC linksIt si also a TEST! D4 Q4 Q11, Q10…Q7 DFBM DFBA Q6 D3 Q5 IP 6 4.5 K IP7 DQR 8.75 m 1 m Warm magnets (PCs in UJ 76) RR 73 RR 73 Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  16. L = 20 m (252) 1 kA @ 25 K, LHC Link P7 Feb 2014: World record for HTS transport current (A. Ballarino) Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  17. Baseline Parameters (last PLC) Collision values ATS required Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  18. The Achromatic Telescopic Squeezing (ATS) scheme Small b* is limited by aperture but not only: optics matching & flexibility (round and flat optics), chromatic effects (not only Q’), spurious dispersion from X-angle,.. A novel optics scheme was developed toreach un-precedent b* w/o chromatic limit based on a kind of generalized squeeze involving 50% of the ring (S. Fartoukh) b*= 40 cm b*= 10 cm  Proof of principle demonstrated in the LHC down to a b* of 10-15 cm at IP1 and IP5 The new IR is sort of 8 km long ! ATS is not an option is critical for the upgrade; implementation in Run II or Run III is beneficial! Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  19. The ``crab-kissing’’ (CK) scheme (2/5) [mm-1] HL-LHC w/o CK scheme: Plan A (solid) and Plan B(dotted) - 12.5 MV crabs in X-plane, round optics (15/15 cm), sz =7.5 cm (Plan A) - or bb wire, flat optics (50/10 cm), sz =10 cm (Plan B) “HL-LHC+” with CK scheme and Gaussian bunch profile ..adding crab-cavities to Plan B in X and || planes (6 MV+7 MV) “HL-LHC++” with CK scheme andrectangular bunch profile ... adding a new 800 MHz RF system (still keeping sz =10 cm) (S. Fartoukh)@ECFA HL –LHC Exper. Workshop, Aix-les-Bains 7October 2013 z [m] w.r.t. IP A net gain by a factor 2 at each step .... at nearly constant integrated performance Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  20. Operation & Intensity • Levelling cycle • Beamintensity limitation(s) • To beassessed in next LHC run • TDIS in LS2 (don’tliketoosmall emittance beams!) • Heating of kickers (MKI): new high Tc ferrite and coating for e-clouds (prototype installed in LS2). Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  21. Efficiency for Ldt   50% High reliability and availbility are key goals R. DeMaria, RLIUP All ourassumptions are based on forecast for the operation cycle: Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  22. Integral luminosity: the final goal of HL_LHC M. Brugger The total number of particles created at collider (e.g. total number of Higgs bosons) is proportional to the Integrated Luminosity (expressed in fb-1): In the past, the most efficient way of increasing was by increasing .This is why accelerator people usually refer to . There are many workshops and conferences around the world discussing how to increase ….. HL-LHC is a gamechanger: forthefirst time, is limited (due to pile-up and other considerations), to a certain extend... The onlyfreeparametersistheintegral: howlongcan HL-LHC sustainoperation a? Directlyrelatedtotheavailabiltyof HL-LHC – thisisthemotivationforthisworkshop.

  23. Global Workshop Objectives • Understand availability limitations due to radiationeffects (SEE, TID, DD) as well as other effects onto accelerator equipment and quantify the required equipment performance to reach the luminosity goals  Run 2, Run 3, HL-LHC. • Identify what is required (tools, facilities, expertise) to quantify and mitigate radiation effects on equipment. • Identify appropriate mitigation measures: radiation tolerant developments (tunnel electronics, PC), displacement of sensitive equipment (superconducting links etc.) and other aspects. • Identify the long-term requirements for electronic systems. • Address IR3-IR7 life time issues linked to radiation and equipment maintenance planning. • Understand how development of electronics for radiation environment is addressed in the LHC experiments.

  24. Global Workshop Objectives • Understand availability limitations due to radiationeffects (SEE, TID, DD) as well as other effects onto accelerator equipment and quantify the required equipment performance to reach the luminosity goals  Run 2, Run 3, HL-LHC. • Identify what is required (tools, facilities, expertise) to quantify and mitigate radiation effects on equipment. • Identify appropriate mitigation measures: radiation tolerant developments (tunnel electronics, PC), displacement of sensitive equipment (superconducting links etc.) and other aspects. • Identify the long-term requirements for electronic systems. • Address IR3-IR7 life time issues linked to radiation and equipment maintenance planning. • Understand how development of electronics for radiation environment is addressed in the LHC experiments.

  25. Workshop Goals • Aiming for high availability • Radiation effects • Single Event Errors (SEEs) • LS1 focus on mitigation • From MITIGATION to PREVENTION • Cumulative (long-term) damage (TID, DD) • so far not encountered at LHC (experience from injectors!) • Equipment failures (focus on electronics components) • experience, development needs, options • Components reaching the end of life • with and without radiation

  26. Workshop Goals • Concerns for what to do next, but also in view of 22 years of LHC: we need R&D NOW! • What needs to be done • up to LS2/LS3 • and for HL-LHC • Radiation damage and intervention concerns in IR3/7 • Design/test choices and synergies to be exploited • Requirements to reach the HL-LHC target • Availability • Expertise & Facilities • Developments & Qualification Needs

  27. Needs and Goals • In view of the 4 Workshop Sessions • Session-1: Fundamentals of R2E and Availability • Radiation Monitoring & Test Facilities: • improve/operate • R2E Expertise (LHC, Injectors, Experiments): • keep & develop • Availability: fault tracking, impact analysis: • improve/adopt

  28. Needs and Goals • In view of the 4 Workshop Sessions • Session-2: Concerned Equipment: up to LS2/LS3/HL-LHC • Development needs and R2E requirements: • R2E structure? • Maintenance and lifetime (with & w/o. rad.): • What is known and what needs to be? • How to improve availability: • What can and has to be done?

  29. Needs and Goals • In view of the 4 Workshop Sessions • Session-3: IR3/7 Damage/Maintenance Issues • Failure risks due to radiation/environment: • is there any show-stopper? • Needs: monitoring, handling, testing: • what is ok and what needs to be improved? • Maintenance, life-time & mitigation: • what is the equipment requirement/strategy?

  30. Needs and Goals • In view of the 4 Workshop Sessions • Session-4: Long-term strategy • Mitigation/Prevention strategy & needs: • are we on the right track? • SCL & rad-tol PC options/needs/roadmap: • what is the (combined) best strategy? • Required developments & synergies: • what are and can be common grounds?

  31. SC links  removal of EPCs, DFBsfrom tunnel to surface (or new gallery?) 1 pair 700 m 50 kA – LS2 4 pairs 300 m 150 kA (MS)– LS3 4 pairs 300 m 150 kA (IR) – LS3 tens of 6-18 kA CLs pairs in HTS 2150 kA Lucio Rossi@LMC184 9July2014

  32. In particular: do weneed to remove the Powering of the Arc magnets in IR1-IR5 ?

  33. Past Present Future Run 1: 25 fb-1 160 days HL-LHC: 210 fb-1 200 days HL-LHC: 260 fb-1 200 days + 20% availability HL-LHC: 300 fb-1

  34. R2E LHC Long-Term R2E SEE Failure Analysis • 2008-2011 • Analyze and mitigate all safety relevant cases and limit global impact • 2011-2012 • Focus on long downtimes and shielding • LS1 (2013/2014) • Final relocation and shielding • LS1-LS2 (2015-2018) • Tunnel equipment and power converters • -> LS3-HL-LHC • Tunnel Equipment (Injectors+ LHC) + RRs ~400 hDowntime ~250 hDowntime Relocation& Shielding ~12 dumps / fb-1 ~3 dumps / fb-1 Equipment Upgrades LS1 – LS2 Aiming for <0.5 dumps / fb-1 HL-LHC: < 0.1 dumps / fb-1

  35. R2E LHC Long-Term

More Related