HL-LHC IR Quadrupole Development

1. BNL - FNAL - LBNL - SLAC HL-LHC IR Quadrupole Development GianLuca Sabbi 2012 DOE Review of LARP SLAC, July 9, 2012

2. Recent Progress in HL-LHC Planning • 01/11 HL-LHC project is formally initiated by CERN Directorate • 03/11 LARP/CERN/DOE agree on Nb3Sn technology demonstration goal • Successful test of 4 m long, 120 mm aperture LHQ by Dec. 2014 • 11/11 Start of EU-FP7 “Hi-Lumi LHC” design study: • Goal: PDR in early 2014, TDR in early 2016 • Collaboration of ~20 major Labs from EU, US and Japan • Nb3Sn technology is regarded as the baseline option for IR Quads • 02/12 DOE issues guidance & mandate on prototyping/production plan • 04/12 US-CERN task force set up to coordinate plans: • Consider different scenarios, depending on key design choices • Include critical milestones, risk analysis, fall back options • Define responsibilities and contributions by US and CERN • Perform preliminary cost estimates • 07/12 Design Study recommends 150 mm aperture as baseline for IR Quad

3. HL-LHC Design Study Organization

4. http://www.cern.ch/hilumi/wp3 Ezio Todesco, CERN

5. S. Fartoukh, joint LARP/HiLumi collaboration meeting (Fermilab, May 2012): new optics solution allows to exploit larger quadrupole apertures to lower b* Optimal coil aperture shifts from 120 mm to 140-150 mm (depending on radial space for He channel, cold bore, beam screen, shielding)

6. Total radial thickness 7.5 mm Ezio Todesco, CERN http://www.cern.ch/hilumi/wp3

7. Ezio Todesco, CERN Same as in previous case Total 13.2 mm Not included in previous case From 2.3 mm in previous case Analysis is underway to define additional shielding requirement

8. Scaling-up to 150 mm Aperture • Based on results of LARP models at 90 and 120 mm, and preliminary studies for larger aperture, no serious difficulties are anticipated for the 150 mm aperture IR quadrupole design, but some optimization is required • Conductor and cable: increase cable width from 14.8 mm to 18.5 mm to facilitate coil stress management and quench protection • Increase strand diameter from 0.778 to 0.85 mm to limit cable aspect ratio • Preliminary cable dimensions established for 0.85 mm wire: 18.5 mm width, 1.50 mm mid-thickness, 0.65 deg. keystone angle (D. Dietderich) • ~30 kg of 0.85 mm wire expected for mid-July, fabrication of prototype cable planned for this summer • Electrical integrity: high voltage testing requirements were established, and an increase of cable insulation thickness from 0.1 mm to 0.15 mm is planned • At this time, the key elements to start the cross-section design are available • An increase of the cold mass diameter from 57 cm to 63 cm was also approved as baseline, providing a key parameter needed to start the mechanical design

9. DOE Guidance on Project Planning • Assume successful completion of the technology demonstration by LARP, according to agreed upon plans • Focus on the next phase: development of final Quad design, short model and prototype • Separate prototyping phase from construction: • Prototype to be developed through LARP, with some organizational adjustments as needed and strong CERN involvement • Construction project to be initiated at a later time, when HL-LHC specs are defined, technology demonstration is completed, and some proof of the final design is available • Develop a credible plan (technical, schedule, resources, US/CERN responsibilities) compatible with installation during LS3

10. US-CERN Planning Group • Core team with members from US Labs and CERN • CERN Paolo Fessia, Frederic Savary, Ezio Todesco, Lucio Rossi • BNL Mike Anerella, Peter Wanderer • FNAL Giorgio Ambrosio, Mark Kaducak • LBNL Joseph Rasson, GianLuca Sabbi • Open meetings and documents posted on LARP server • https://plone.uslarp.org/MagnetRD/TDWG/ • Activities: • Analyzed four cases (two apertures and half or full-length coils): • Assess feasibility, critical milestones • Contributions from US and CERN • Conditions and preparations for realistic backup options

11. Choice of half-length vs. full length coils • Earliest test for pre-series prototype of the IR Quad will be 2017-18: • Need to define all interfaces, but HL-LHC TDR is in 2015-16 • CERN resources are focused on LS1 in 2013-14 • US resources are focused on technology demonstration in 2013-14 • To install in 2022, need significant commitments before prototype test • For a factor of 2 length increase from LQ/LHQ, risk is too high • A fall back option would require running a second option in parallel, but the schedule is already resource limited • A simplified “fast track” 8 m model was considered but discarded • For a new aperture, a short model program is needed • For L > 4 m, new infrastructure is needed • In the half-length coil scenario, we can confidently move forward based on 120mm aperture LHQ and 150 mm aperture short model

12. Implications of half vs. full-length coils • Loss in focusing strength (integrated gradient for given nominal gradient) • Depends on the details of the design, range may be 5-15% • Impact from a loss of effective length of ~50 cm seems acceptable • Shorter units provide technical opportunities in several areas • Materials cost are similar and in some case may be lower, but labor cost increases due to the higher number of coils • Production schedule is kept the same by increasing the number of lines – several sets of 4 m infrastructure are already available • Detailed analysis needed to estimate actual difference in cost • How effort scales with length of coil: look at individual elements • Larger production sample is intrinsically more robust and can be exploited in many ways: number of spares, sorting etc. • Hybrid scenario with Q1/Q3 as half-length, Q2 as full length?

13. Short Model Development Plans • Discussion focus #1: CERN and US contributions: • Common tasks: conceptual design, magnet assembly and test • LARP tasks: cable design/fabrication, structure fabrication • CERN tasks: coil tooling and fabrication • Discussion focus #2: time to first test • First HQ was tested ~21 months after “phase 1” aperture decision • Several performance issues – may or may not be related • Our current schedule shows ~36 months (5/2012 to 5/2015) • Reflects limited resource availability in 2012-14 • Integration of CERN and LARP collaboration • Establish organization, communication lines • Address limited overlap of work schedules • Fully incorporate HQ/LHQ experience

14. Development and Construction Schedule

15. Cost Estimates/Profiles for Short Models HQ (4.7 M$, LARP) QX (3.6 M$ LARP, 6.2 M$ CERN)

16. Cost Estimates/Profiles for Long Models LHQ (7.5 M$, LARP) LQX (24.8 M$, LARP) LHQ & LQX estimates by G. Ambrosio

17. Total Cost for R&D & Prototype Program

18. Summary • Considerable progress in HL-LHC planning was achieved during the last 6 months • DOE guidance in Feb. 2012 allowed the next planning phase to start • A US-CERN task force was established to analyze different scenarios and determine infrastructure requirements, schedules and contributions from US and CERN to develop the final design and prototype • The HL-LHC design study is providing and integrated framework to optimize the machine, and guidance to the magnet development effort on a range of issues – aperture, gradient, length, effect of half-length or full-length coils, space allocations, field quality, energy deposition etc. • Combining the results of the US-CERN task force and the guidance from the design study, a baseline plan for transitioning from LARP to the HL-LHC construction project has been formulated, and cost estimates were provided