1 / 13

HQ01e protection heater tests

HQ01e protection heater tests. Summary Aug 02, 2012 T. Salmi. HQ PH. Outer layer (OL). Inner layer (IL). Trace Stainless steel: 25.4 μm (1 mil), Kapton: 25.4 μm (with glue ~45 μm ). PH study overview. P rocedure I mag constant 1 PH strip fired

derora
Download Presentation

HQ01e protection heater tests

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. HQ01e protection heater tests Summary Aug 02, 2012 T. Salmi

  2. HQ PH Outer layer (OL) Inner layer (IL) Trace Stainless steel: 25.4 μm (1 mil), Kapton: 25.4 μm (with glue ~45 μm)

  3. PH study overview • Procedure • Imag constant • 1 PH strip fired • Delay to quench onset measured Parameters • Temperature [K]: 4.4, 1.9 • Imag[kA]: 5, 8, 11, 14 • IL, OL (Coil 9) VPH≈ 230 V  Pw0 ≈ 50 W/cm2 (OL)  Pw0 ≈ 50 W/cm2 (IL) τ = RC ≈ 40 ms Voltagetapsignal Voltage Quench detected Time PHdelay

  4. HQ01e: PH delays • PH delay scales with Iss •  Almost independent of temperature • OL quench faster than IL • EXCEPTION: 4.4 K &14 kA: IL quench faster (but slower propagation) Inner layer Outer layer HQ01e: 25.4 μm Kapton HQ01e at CERN: Pw0 = 50 W/cm2, tau 40 ms: Iss = 17.3 kA @ 4.4 K; 19.1 kA @ 1.9 K

  5. HQ01e vs. HQM01 and HQM04:Outer layer VPH = 230 V • HQ01e: 25.4 μm Kapton • HQM01: 50.8 μmKapton (+ 100 %)  PHdelay + 20 to 50 % • HQM04: 76.2 μm Kapton (+ 200 %)  PH delay + 60 to 150 % • Note: In HQM01 and HQM04 this is a typical result using tau = 46 ms. Using tau = 23 ms, if Imag = 5 kA, thequench in HQM04 is faster than inHQM01. HQM04 HQM01 HQ01e HQ01e at CERN: Pw0 = 50 W/cm2, tau 40 ms: Iss = 17.3 kA @ 4.4 K; 19.1 kA @ 1.9 K HQM04 at FNAL: Pw0 = 45 W/cm2, tau 46 ms: Iss = 16.2 kA @ 4.6 K; 18.2 kA @ 2.2 K HQM01 at FNAL: Pw0 = 47 W/cm2, tau 46 ms: Iss = 17.0 kA @ 4.6 K

  6. HQ01e vs. HQM04: Inner layer VPH = 230 V • NO difference for Imag < 12 kA! • Imag> 12 kA: Longer delay in HQM04 • Superfluid • Cooling for coil • Contact with coil HQM04 HQ01e: 25.4 μm Kapton HQM04: 76.2 μmKapton HQ01e HQ01e at CERN: Pw0 = 55 W/cm2, tau 40 ms: Iss = 17.3 kA @ 4.4 K; 19.1 kA @ 1.9 K HQM04 at FNAL: Pw0 = 49 W/cm2, tau 46 ms: Iss = 16.2 kA @ 4.6 K; 18.2 kA @ 2.2 K

  7. Summary • HQ01e: 25.4 μm Kapton between SS and coil • HQ01e: PH delays measured using VPH = 230 V, Pw0 = 50 W/cm2, tau = 40 ms • PH delays at 81 % of Iss: 7ms (OL) and 6 ms (IL) (+/- 1 ms) • PH delay seems almost independent of operating temperature • Imag <= 12 kA: IL quench slower than OL • Imag = 14 kA: IL quench faster • Need more data at high current to confirm • Comparison with coils tested in the mirror structure: HQM01: + 100 % Kapton (50.8 μm) OL: PH delay +20 … 50 % (IL not tested in HQM01) HQM04: + 200 % Kapton (76.2 μm)  OL: PH delay +60 … 150 % (OL) IL: No difference for Imag < 12 kA

  8. Thank you!

  9. PH delay definition – HQ01e Example: 11 kA – fired 9B02 – 4.4 K (qhi10) Quench onset At 11 kA and 14 kA quench signals are quite clear. Quench onset defined when a segment voltage starts the rise to quench.

  10. The distances between the taps (mm) Outer layer Inner layer HQ voltage tap locations

  11. 9A02 – 4.4. K – 14 kA 9A05-04 quenches (higher field). In other IL tests, 9A04-03 quench (More turns covered by PH).

  12. 9A02 – 4.4. K – 14 kA

  13. 9B02 – 4.4. K – 14 kA 9B04-05 quenches (typical). Slower first quench onset, but faster quench detection than in IL.

More Related