1 / 15

SECONDARY PARTICLE SHOWERS AND ENERGY DEPOSITION

SECONDARY PARTICLE SHOWERS AND ENERGY DEPOSITION. Francesco Cerutti team (EN-STI). HL-LHC Kick off Internal Meeting 2011 Apr 15 th. WP10 SCOPE [I]. radiation sources i. collision debris (~ luminosity)

franz
Download Presentation

SECONDARY PARTICLE SHOWERS AND ENERGY DEPOSITION

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. SECONDARY PARTICLE SHOWERS AND ENERGY DEPOSITION Francesco Cerutti team (EN-STI) HL-LHC Kick off Internal Meeting 2011 Apr 15th

  2. WP10 SCOPE [I] radiation sources i. collision debris (~ luminosity) ii. beam losses on the tertiary collimators[ ] iii. beam – residual gas interaction (~ beam intensity) (~ beam intensity and gas density) (synergic) overlap with other WP/activity

  3. WP10 SCOPE [II] • issues • quench • cooling • material damage (coils, sensitive equipment ...) • radiation to electronics (SEE) [ ] • working conditions of instrumentation [ ] • background to experiments [ ] • activation [ ] • warm (TAS, TAN) and cold absorber design in the following an overview of the scenario as presently pinned down through a lot of work by A. Mereghetti (past EN-STI fellow) in fruitful collaboration with TE-MSC (in particular E. Todesco and E. Wildner) and thanks to many LIUWG colleagues (synergic) overlap with other WP/activity

  4. THE COLLISION DEBRIS [I] 7 TeV p + 7 TeV p FLUKA (DPMJET) beyond the present TAS (absorbing ~150W at L=L0=1034cm-2s-1) about 2.5% of the interaction products and 35% of 14TeV, i.e. 630W at L=L0 with a 50mm aperture TAS about 3.5% of the interaction products and almost 40% of 14TeV, i.e. 3.5kW at L=5L0

  5. THE COLLISION DEBRIS [II] spectra evolution through the triplet FLUKA model of the present triplet in P1 striking capturing by the quadrupole magnetic field 204 T/m Q1 Q2a Q2b Q3 The TAS provides a significant protection for Q1 only (and reduces the background to the experiments) LHC Project Report 1167 (2008)

  6. IMPACT ON THE TAS-D2 REGION mW/cm3 for L=2.5L0 vertical plane neutral charged at L=5L0 1.1kW TAN peak of 840 mW/cm3 (i.e. 6 GGy/3000fb-1) Dx=2.5mm x Dy=2.5mm x Dz=5cm scoring grid 1kW horizontal plane

  7. (NOT) QUENCHING THE TRIPLET 225 urad half crossing angle vertical crossing 55mm TAS aperture idea and numbers by E. Todesco (L=2.5L0) the longer, the better results and plots by E. Wildner same gradient, larger aperture (“Phase II”)

  8. SHIELDING OPTIONS • ideally a continuous liner (here 3mm tungsten, green curve) is quite effective 130mm coil aperture L=2.5L0 • the role of the interconnections! jump at the Q2a front face with liner limited to the first element, blue curve Q2b Q2a Q3 Q1 • as an alternative, a thick liner in Q1 (here 13mm stainless steel, purple curve) casting a shadow over Q2a assumed as totally absorbing! blue curve Q3 Q2b Q2a • end plates of limited help Q1

  9. CROSSING SCHEME & TRIPLET CONFIGURATION L=2.5L0 110mm coil aperture Q1 Q2a Q2b Q3 10mm thick additional liner 75mm residual aperture FDDF mW cm-3 0.25 m from the IP face 8.05 m from the IP face 1.25 m from the IP face 9.55 m from the IP face total power at L=5L0: 800W @ 1.9 K + 200W in the absorber & beam screen

  10. CROSSING ANGLE/PLANE L=2.5L0 0 vs 142.5 vs 220 urad (half) y x vertical crossing z 10

  11. USE OF INCREASING APERTURES 180 140 (coil) aperture [mm] 120 45 L=2.5L0 worse case increasing aperture effect vertical dipole corrector skew quadrupole horizontal dipole corrector 10mm Cu liner effect sextupole (peak values depend on the coil azimuthal position!)

  12. MATERIAL DAMAGE [I] coil insulator 150 MGy per 3000 fb-1 mW/cm3 for L=2.5L0 MGy per 100 fb-1 dose radial profile Dr=2.5mm x Dj=2o x Dz=10cm scoring grid Dr=2.5mm x Dj=60o x Dz=10cm scoring grid vacuum gaskets 1.5 MGy per 3000 fb-1

  13. MATERIAL DAMAGE [II] particle fluence over the inner cable [cm-2 per 1000 fb-1] 200mm coil aperture photons 1 MeV peak of 1017 neutrons cm-2/3000 fb-1 neutrons positive pions DPA calculation

  14. RADIATION TO ELECTRONICS predicted high energy hadron fluence from 7 TeV p + 7 TeV p collisions in Point 1 [units of 106 cm-2 per 100 fb-1] TCL UL16 (14): 109 – 1010 UJ16 (14): 1010 – 5 1011 RR17 (13): 109 – 1011 per 3000 fb-1 RR17: ratio between beam - gas and beam - beam contributions beam – gas contribution (H2 equivalent density of 1015 molecules/m3, nominal beam intensity along 100 days per year) of the same order as the one from beam-beam collisions

  15. CONCLUDING REMARKS on the basis of the iterative evolution of the HL-LHC layout and optics (magnetic strengths, crossing angle), a major effort will be required for setting up a suitable geometry model, extending from the experimental vacuum chamber up to the Dispersion Suppressor, in order to assess energy deposition / fluence values and investigate the effectiveness of possible design solutions estimates – especially for point quantities – are affected by systematic uncertainties (due to the machine description and the critical dependence on few collision products emitted inside a tiny solid angle). Therefore reasonable margins should never be forgotten, and relative comparisons between different configurations have to be considered as inherently carrying a stronger reliability than absolute predictions, provided that a consistent simulation framework is constantly used in parallel, following the underway LHC operation, simulation benchmarking is happily ongoing

More Related