1 / 15

LIUWG Phase I – Conceptual Design Review Powering David Nisbet

LIUWG Phase I – Conceptual Design Review Powering David Nisbet. LIUWG Phase I – Conceptual Design Review Powering. Existing Triplet Circuit New Triplet Circuit Main options Corrector Circuits Radiation Baseline Circuit Status Quo Conclusions. Existing Triplet Quadrupole Circuit.

emerson-carlson
Download Presentation

LIUWG Phase I – Conceptual Design Review Powering David Nisbet

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. LIUWG Phase I – Conceptual Design Review Powering David Nisbet

  2. LIUWG Phase I – Conceptual Design Review Powering Existing Triplet Circuit New Triplet Circuit • Main options Corrector Circuits Radiation Baseline Circuit Status Quo Conclusions

  3. Existing Triplet Quadrupole Circuit Main RQX [7000A, 8V] i1 Trim RTQX1 [±600A, ±10V] i3 i2 ifwd3 Trim RTQX2 [5000A, 8V] Q1 Q2a Q2b Q3

  4. Phase I Triplet – Quadrupole design inputs • Re-use LHC cable • Quadrupole magnet nominal current is ~12kA • Magnet and equipment protection • Warm Energy Extraction required(?) (see Reiner) • Priority on ease and simplicity • Superconducting cold link will be used • DFB will be remote from the main tunnel and close to converters • Low warm circuit resistance

  5. Powering Options - Individual High Volume Robust • 4x [12kA, 8V] Power Converters • 24 x 19” Racks • 4x 12kA/3.7MJ Energy Extraction • 6 x 19” Racks • QPS + QHPS • 2 x 19” Racks • Total: 32 Racks • 8 x 12kA Current Leads

  6. Powering Options - Main Feed with 1Q Trims Low Volume Complex High Extraction Voltage • 1x [12kA, 8V] Power Converter • 3x [2kA, 8V] Power Converters • 9 x 19” Racks • 1x 12kA/15MJ Energy Extraction • 3 x 19” Racks • QPS + QHPS • 2 x 19” Racks • Total: 14 Racks • 2 x 12kA Current Leads • 3 x 2kA (12kA peak) Current Leads

  7. Powering Options - Split Powering Medium Volume Limited complexity Extraction Voltage <500V • 2x [12kA, 8V] Power Converter • 2x [2kA, 8V] Power Converters • 15 x 19” Racks • 2x 12kA/7.5MJ Energy Extraction • 6 x 19” Racks • QPS + QHPS • 2 x 19” Racks • Total: 23 Racks • 4 x 12kA Current Leads • 2 x 2kA (12kA peak) Current Leads

  8. Phase I Triplet – Powering Options Maximum volume, Minimum complexity, Greatest cost Baseline design Minimum volume, Maximum complexity, Lowest cost • Uses unipolar power converters (1Q) • Limited negative ramp capability

  9. D1 and Corrector Powering • Cold D1 supplied by RHIC • Assumption that correctors are powered up to ±600A • Higher current has not yet been done for this technology • 1x [8kA, 8V] Power Converter • 4x [±600A, ±10V] Power Converters • 7 x 19” Racks • 1x QPS + QHPS • 0.5 x 19” Racks • 4x 600A/200kJ (QPS + EE) • 2 x 19” Racks • Total: 10 Racks • 8 x 600A Current Leads • 2 x 6.8kA Current Leads

  10. Radiation – Single Event Upsets • Increased luminosity is expected to generate additional hadron fluence in the UJ14, UJ16 and UJ56 areas • Radiation forecasts for the nominal LHC in these areas are still being generated (see Elena/Francesco) • P5R (UJ56) is a vulnerable area • P1 (UJ14 and UJ16) not yet known • Experience from CNGS -> problems begin to appear at • 5 x108 cm-2yr-1 equivalent of 20MeV neutrons • Phase1 Upgrade should take into consideration any radiation effects in proximity to the interaction regions

  11. Single Event Upsets – Effect on layout • P5 • Move all powering equipment and DFB into the bypass (see Yvon) • This also resolves the issue of limited space in UJ56 • Both triplets are powered from same area (bypass) • Extra shielding required – eg chicane? • P1 • Present tunnel layout limits underground possibilities • QPS and QHPS can be moved to well shielded areas • Also possible to move 600A correctors • However difficult to move high current systems • Includes Energy Extraction and Power Converters • Is excavation an option? • Is surface powering an option? (see next slide)

  12. Surface Powering at P1 • Surface powering is technically feasible • However significant infrastructure required • For split powering • Water cooled DC cabling (~70 tonnes of Cu) • Add cabling in pit of PM15 • New transformers and power converters • Installation cost >5MCHF • Running cost >1MCHF/yr ~380m No radiation Very Expensive

  13. Baseline Concept for Phase 1 Powering

  14. Baseline Concept for Phase 1 Powering • Underground installation (see Yvon) • Low current (±600A) corrector circuits • Unipolar main circuits • Move as much equipment as possible from SEU areas Summary of 19” rack layout

  15. Conclusion • Several powering options have been considered • ‘Split powering’ of Q1+Q2 and Q2+Q3 appears to be best compromise • A baseline for D1 and Corrector powering has been presented • Increasing the current beyond ±600A will require significant development • Radiation knowledge in UJ areas are a key design factor for powering and protection equipment

More Related