1 / 33

PS Booster Energy Upgrade K. Hanke for the PSB Upgrade WG CERN MAC 26-28 April 2010

PS Booster Energy Upgrade K. Hanke for the PSB Upgrade WG CERN MAC 26-28 April 2010. PS Booster. construction 1972; most of the equipment original 4 superimposed synchrotrons, circumference 157 m complex beam splitting up and recombination harmonic 1 and 2, max number of bunches 8

tex
Download Presentation

PS Booster Energy Upgrade K. Hanke for the PSB Upgrade WG CERN MAC 26-28 April 2010

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. PS Booster Energy Upgrade K. Hanke for the PSB Upgrade WG CERN MAC 26-28 April 2010

  2. PS Booster • construction 1972; most of the equipment original • 4 superimposed synchrotrons, circumference 157 m • complex beam splitting up and recombination • harmonic 1 and 2, max number of bunches 8 • present energy range 50 MeV to 1.4 GeV • energy upgrades from 800 MeV to 1 GeV (1988), and from 1 GeV to 1.4 GeV (1999) • 7 flavors of LHC beams, 10 types of fixed target beams, intensity and emittances cover • several orders of magnitude in ppm operation (1.2 s cycle length) KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  3. PS Booster Energy Upgrade • Follow-up of the 2010 LHC performance workshop at Chamonix • http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&confId=67839 • remove bottlenecks in the LHC injector chain • consolidation of the injectors is necessary anyway • see • https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/PSBUpgrade/WebHome KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  4. Mandate • The aim of the study is to evaluate the technical feasibility of an increase in beam • energy of the CERN PS Booster from presently 1.4 GeV to about 2 GeV as proposed • at the Chamonix 2010 workshop. • The study comprises: • Confirm the potential gain in terms of intensity and brilliance for LHC-type beams as • presented at the Chamonix 2010 workshop. • Confirm the technical feasibility. Identify accelerator components and equipment • that need to be upgraded or exchanged. Identify potential showstoppers and point out • solutions. Assign the responsible groups/units. Provide first rough time estimates for the • various interventions needed. • Provide a first estimate of material and personnel resources needed to complete • the upgrade. Draft a project break-down into work packages, in preparation for a project • to be launched by the director of accelerators. KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  5. Working Group Organisation KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  6. Impact on LHC Luminosity • Nominal 25 ns LHC beam in the PSB: • - 1.6E12 protons/bunch within 2.5 p mm mrad * • - 6 bunches in two injections into the PS (will go to one injection with Linac4). • - translates into 1.15E11 protons/bunch in the LHC (“nominal”); includes 15% losses • The PS complex machines can deliver nominal 25 ns LHC beam on an • operational basis today. • Ultimate 25 ns LHC beam in the PSB: • - 2.4E12 protons/bunch within 2.5 p mm mrad * • - 6 bunches in two injections into the PS. • - translates into 1.7E11 protons/bunch in the LHC (“ultimate”); includes 15% losses • Out of range today. Will become possible in the PSB with Linac4. • In order to inject into PS, will need PSB energy upgrade. • Beyond Ultimate • - theoretical upper limit of 3.24E12 protons/bunch injected into PS quoted by M.Giovannozzi • - would translate into 2.7E11 protons/bunch in the LHC; extremely optimistic (no losses). • Need Linac4 and energy upgrade in place • * 3.5 p mm mrad at SPS extraction, includes budget for emittance blow up (not used) KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  7. LHC Beams in the PSB as of Today * maximum nominal ultimate ultimate nominal 3.5 p mm mrad 3.5 p mm mrad 2.5 p mm mrad 2.5 p mm mrad G.Rumolo 25 ns beam intensity vs transverse emittance; relaxing on the 2.5 p mm mrad may allow us to reach something between nominal and ultimate with the present injectors KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  8. Feasibility Study, First Overview KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  9. WP 1 Beam Dynamics • issues: • no critical issues are anticipated in the PSB with 2 GeV operation; • in the PS a few issues must be looked into in detail: • longitudinal coupled-bunch instabilities during ramp and at flat top • electron cloud and transverse instabilities at flat top • resistive wall head-tail instabilities at flat bottom • TMCI at transition crossing • proposed technical solutions: • MD proposals have been submitted and machine studies will start during • the present 2010 run • potential solutions have been suggested for each point • budget: tentatively allocated 50 kCHF • time lines: first conclusions from MD studies end of 2010/11 run KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  10. WP 2 Magnets • issues: • concern over life span due to mechanical stress during permanent pulsing • at 2 GeV • saturation of outer rings will increase even more • main unit cooling, present system insufficient • auxiliary magnets: majority not affected, but study to be completed • 15-18/59 transfer line magnets presumably require exchange; need optics studies for final confirmation • PS injection bumpers, correctors and quads being studied; preliminary results suggest that the majority of PS low-energy magnets will need to be replaced • proposed technical solutions: • stress test being prepared in SM18; if necessary add shimming between coils and • retaining plates • change solid retaining plates by laminated ones to reduce/eliminate saturation • new POPS-type main power supply, reduce RMS current and make only minor • modifications on the water cooling necessary (in situ); furthermore divide machine in 2 circuits and make Trim power supply obsolete; see Power Converters • modification/replacement of ~30% of the transfer line magnets • replacement of many low-energy magnets • budget: 3525 kCHF (increased rms) / 3120 – 160 (cons.) = 2960 kCHF (similar rms) • time lines:next two longer shutdowns (2012/13 and 14/15) KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  11. WP 2 Magnets Booster main magnet (spare) on test bench KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  12. WP 2 Magnets – First Budget and Manpower Estimate all cost items in [kCHF] If considering only LHC beams, all items unchanged except that the BTP line would have to be made ppmat an additional cost of 150 kCHF KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  13. WP 3 RF System • issues: • If consolidation in place before 2 GeV upgrade: essentially no issues. • It is under discussion to give the Booster rf consolidation high priority and to advance it • such that it is completed by 2015 (presently in the longer term planning). • Otherwise: (for 2 GeV upgrade before start of Linac4) • proposed technical solution: • hw modifications on the LL RF • C04 amplifier upgrade • budget:2000 kCHF plus 75 kCHF for LL RF • time lines:3 years KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  14. WP 3 RF System – First Budget and Manpower Estimate all cost items in [kCHF] If upgrade comes when planned rf consolidation in place, no issues and no cost. If upgrade must be done before consolidation, cost for project as quoted above. All presently produced beams or only LHC beams makes no difference. KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  15. WP 4 Beam Intercepting Devices • issues: • present dump and BTP beam stopper not appropriate • proposed technical solution: • re-design dump and BTP stopper (has started in the frame of consolidation) • budget:700 kCHF – 700 kCHF (cons.) = 0 kCHF • time lines:completion 2013 • remark:consolidation issue; not to be accounted in the frame of this study KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  16. WP 5 Power Converters • issues: • present MPS is not able to deliver a 2 GeV cycle; in addition it cannot deliver required • RMS current; increasing peak power using traditional thyristor technology would cause • inadmissible effect on Meyrin network • The present 1.4 GeV is the limit, any higher energy will require a new MPS • number of smaller power converters needs to be changed • number of power converters in the PS to be upgraded • ppm operation between 1.0/1.4 GeV (ISOLDE) and 2 GeV (PS) is feasible • proposed technical solution: • new POPS-type MPS using capacitor bank • some civil engineering needed • divide machine in 2 circuits (inner and outer rings); will make 1+4 Trim power supply • obsolete • replacement of a number of smaller power supplies • if the ISOLDE 1 GeV option would be eliminated, about 320 kCHF could be saved • budget:20850 kCHF (cost driver), 320 kCHF less when eliminating ISOLDE 1 GeV option • time lines:if approved 2010 can be completed 2015 KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  17. simulations F. Boattini MAC 26-28 April 2010

  18. WP 5 Power Converters – First Budget and Manpower Estimate all cost items in [kCHF] main cost driver; independent of scenario (increased cost of 250 kCHF for ppm operation of BTP line) KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  19. WP 6 Vacuum System • issues: • If main machine components (e.g. magnets) must be removed from the machine, a dismantling of the vacuum system is required, which might lead to surprises and consequences that cannot be judged at the moment. • No dynamic vacuum problems are anticipated in the PSB, but electron cloud induced pressure rises might become more significant in the PS. • proposed technical solution: • will depend on more precise input from Magnets, Transfer, Intercepting Devices • budget: • New BTP line: approx. 100 kCHF (including manpower), but new kicker, septa, bumpers, and PS injection are not included (at least partly counted in by WP 9). • Booster modifications: not known yet, needs input from other groups, but consolidation is foreseen. • time lines:uncritical if not too many parallel vacuum activities; planning is mainly driven by WP 2, 7 and 9 activities. KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  20. WP 7 Instrumentation • issues: • no critical issues identified; all equipment will work at 2 GeV • proposed technical solution: • some minor modifications on diagnostics (pick-ups and screens) due to the new • recombination and PS injection septa • budget:360 kCHF • time lines:no estimate yet, but not expected to be time driver KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  21. WP 8 Commissioning • issues: • set up magnetic cycle; commissioning and scheduling issues • proposed technical solution: • a magnetic cycle has been prepared for 50 MeV – 2 GeV, and another • one will be designed for 160 MeV – 2 GeV combining OP, EPC and RF constraints • - proposal/scheduling of commissioning steps once hardware changes are known • budget:tentatively allocated 50 kCHF • time lines:commissioning after hardware upgrade; expected 2015. • As this will coincide with commissioning of the 160 MeV H- PSB injection, one • would need to allocate additional time for energy upgrade commissioning. KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  22. WP 9 Extraction, Transfer, PS Injection • issues: • number of septa/kickers to be re-built , notably PSB extraction kicker, recombination septa and PS injection septum • re-design PS injection; under study; presently not yet solved completely • PS injection kicker rise time and ripple increase if used in short-circuit mode to obtain required deflection (emittance growth) • proposed technical solution: • PSB extraction kicker and septa need modification • PSB recombination kickers and septa need modification • longer PS injection septum under study • PS injection kickers either in short-circuit mode or supplementary PS injection kicker to be built • For injection into the PS two options being considered: • a) injection in the existing ss42: requires new septum, new bumpers, possibly supplementary new kicker in PS (53?) • b) injection in ss41: requires enlarged vacuum chamber in main dipole, new BTP line, new septum, new bumpers and possibly supplementary new kicker in PS (53?) KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  23. WP 9 – First Budget and Manpower Estimate all cost items in [kCHF] Solution for PS injection modifications still requires validation. budget:5763 kCHF – 550 kCHF (cons.) = 5213 kCHF time lines:to be completed 2014/15 shutdown KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  24. WP 10 Controls • issues: • the current system of generation of synthetic B-Train might not be able to • follow the requested magnetic field • provide the controls infrastructure required for all the equipment groups • proposed technical solution: • installation of a new system of B-Train generation (new hardware modules, cabling and repeaters) • foresee additional OASIS channels for observation of new equipment • EPC: installation of 2 PC-gateways to control via WordFip the MPS and some converters • budget: currently 134 kCHF, but might increase after feedback from all equipment groups • time lines:must be adapted to equipment groups KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  25. WP 11 Electrical Systems • issues: • present power consumption around 10 MVA • future electrical distribution will depend on the requests (power, magnets • and cooling) • 25 % increase is conceivable • no more power available from transformer for general services; 18 kV cubicles cannot • be extended; system needs consolidation • proposed technical solution: • pending the exact specs, but upgrade of HV and LV systems required (switchboards, cabling, LV transformer) • budget:~1550 kCHF, partly to be covered by consolidation (tbd.); • time lines:to be completed after 2014/2015 shutdown all cost items in [kCHF] KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  26. WP 12 Cooling and Ventilation • issues: • future design of cooling and ventilation will depend on the cooling needs, • mainly magnets, power and rf; presently not yet settled • - length of the shutdowns is a concern (might need ~6 months in a row) • proposed technical solution: • expect complete replacement of cooling station and some distribution piping, present system not sized for increase in pressure and cooling power • budget:5500 kCHF – 4500 kCHF (cons.) = 1000 kCHF • time lines: can be completed by 2014/15 if long shutdown all cost items in [kCHF] KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  27. WP 13 RP and Safety • issues: • loss figures will scale with energy • dose rate due to work on machine components, notably in the tunnel • proposed technical solution: • estimate of loss figures in progress (based on measurements at 1.4 GeV) • modernisation of monitoring system covered by RAMSES II project • dose planning and optimisation before upgrade work in PSB tunnel or transfer lines • budget, time lines: • 2 - 3 man-months study of radiation effects (activation, stray radiation) KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  28. WP 14 Transport and Handling • issues: • no major issues, equipment despite its age in good shape • consolidation of the Booster lift urgent • proposed technical solution: • estimate of loss figures in progress (based on measurements at 1.4 GeV) • budget:680 kCHF, of which 400 kCHF (mainly for lift/cranes) covered by consolidation • time lines: - KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  29. WP 15 Survey • issues: • no issues related to 2 GeV operation • if major equipment is removed from the tunnel, risk to lose stability of the geometry • proposed technical solution: • study of the impact on overall geometry and proposal of work steps • consultation for alignment/target/support design of new equipment • budget:allocated 50 kCHF for worst case scenario • time lines: - KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  30. Summary Resources • cabling not • always included all cost items in [kCHF] KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  31. Summary Time Lines • 2010-2011: LHC run with only minor interruptions • winter 2011/2012: usual injector shutdown • winter 2012/2013: usual injector shutdown • 2013/2014: LHC run with only minor interruptions • winter 2014/2015: longer shutdown for PSB injection modifications with Linac4 • Currently in Linac4 schedule only 1+3 months shutdown for PSB injection modifications • Need additional time for PSB 2 GeV energy upgrade modifications • Extended period for parallel commissioning of Linac4 + energy upgrade • Completion during 2014/15 shutdown tight, but feasible under following assumptions: • Need rapidly go-ahead for project going along with required budget • Manpower needs to be assured in time • Bring consolidation project in line with 2 GeV energy upgrade project • Delay 2015 start with p beam by a few months due to parallel Linac4 and 2 GeV Upgrade modifications and commissioning KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  32. Possible Contributions from Collaborations US-LARP involved (E.Prebys / FNAL) Propose help with simulations: e-cloud, beam loss etc. However we need mainly hardware: 1.) new main power supply 2.) large number of smaller power supplies 3.) new magnets 4.) septa and kickers 5.) lots of smaller items If LARP contributions are manpower rather than hardware, then somebody helping with MDs (PS injection) could be helpful, as well as during the commissioning phase. Meeting E.Prebys 3-4 May KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

  33. Summary • showstopper identification completed • no showstoppers, but a number of significant modifications identified • costing and scheduling ongoing. • - putting in place the energy upgrade before Linac4 (2015) is • a) schedule-/resource-wise unrealistic • b) more costly as consolidation will not be in place bythen • looked into 2 scenarios: energy upgrade with Linac2 and with Linac4 • recommend strongly to put in place the energy upgrade with Linac4 • significant savings (~3000 kCHF) could be made by upgrading only up to 1.7 GeV • seems not worth the effort • looked into case where all beams to the PS are at 2 GeV and where only LHC • beams (8 out of 18 1.2s cycles) are executed at 2 GeV and all other beams remain • at 1.4 GeV • cost would even slightly increase by looking at an ‘LHC-only’ energy upgrade; • recommend to implement energy upgrade for all beams sent to the PS • minor saving possible in case ISOLDE 1 GeV option would be suppressed KH MAC 26-28 April 2010

More Related