workshop on test facilities and measurement equipment needed for the lhc exploitation april 12, 2006...

Workshop on Test Facilities and measurement equipment needed for the LHC exploitation

April 12, 2006

Outcome of the workshop on the installation on CERN site of Magnet Rescue Facilities

F. Savary

Outcome of the workshop on the installation on CERN site of MAR - FS 2April 12th, 2006W

ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Outlook

Organization Scope of the workshop Program

Insertion region magnets The main dipoles The main quadrupoles The spool pieces Radioprotection and INB requirements Cryostating and beam screen integration Normal conducting magnets for LHC, PS and SPS Possible beam lines in the future Possible scenarios for MAR at CERN Discussion

Conclusions – Working group on MAR


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Organization

By AT-MAS Held on March 21st 2006 at CERN, half a day More information available at the url:

https://workshop-mar.web.cern.ch/workshop%2DMAR/ There were 9 presentations and a discussion 41 invitees + the speakers 34 people attended the workshop


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Motivation for the workshop

To repair magnets following possible failure during the LHC commissioning and/or operation and for the maintenance & consolidation of other accelerator magnets, the AT department considers the implantation on CERN site of “Magnet Rescue Facilities”

To cover the different types of magnets that are part of the LHC machine and other accelerators, i.e. the main dipoles, the main quadrupoles, the insertion magnets, the spool pieces, the correctors and the normal-conducting magnets

To collect the information from the different groups involved, i.e. define the needs and answer to a number of questions:

Scope of the workshop:


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Scope of the workshop, cont’d

What are the basic characters of the magnets concerned? What kind of and how many failures per year are we expecting? How many spare magnets will be available from the contracts? What are the contractual obligations of the manufacturers in terms

of warranty? For how long are we covered? Will the manufacturers keep the tools operational until the end of

the warranty period? Do we have the necessary tooling available on CERN site or do

we have a plan to recover them from industry? To show what are the different scenarios envisaged for the

installation on CERN site of Magnet Rescue Facilities, taking into account the availability of the spare magnets, the safety requirements (radioprotection and INB issues) and other possible constraints


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Program


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Insertion region magnets

Insertion quadrupoles 31 types for 82 installed in the LHC 16 spare magnets from Tesla (MQMC, MQM, MQML) and 6 spare

magnets from Accel (MQY), kept in kits The magnets delivered yoked. They are tested in block 4 at CERN 2 year warranty after provisional acceptance (PA). PA after cold

tests (a delay of up to one year is accepted) Cold mass assembling in building 181 by AT-MEL Only electrical failures were recorded to date (voltage tap, q.h.

connection and leakage to ground): 4 cases Repair technique developed (open window, cut off end cover) Recovery of tooling from Tesla and Accel is planned and part of

the contractual agreements. The tooling would be combined so as to get a complete set (some tooling poorly documented – assistance from the company needed)


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Insertion region magnets, cont’d

Low- quadrupoles Fermilab/KEK produced and tested 27 magnets (production ends

in May 2006) There is 1 spare Q1, 1 Q2 and 1 Q3, completed and tested KEK will deliver two other MQXA (Q1) No provision for repair of failed magnets Cryostating tooling for Q1 and Q3 to be transferred to CERN

Separation dipoles BNL produced and tested 20 magnets (D1, D2, D3 and D4) There is 1 spare of each type, tested No provision for repair of failed magnets Decryostating of D2-D4 should be possible with CERN tooling


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Insertion region magnets, cont’d

181 and storage in I8 are necessary


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion The main dipoles

4 types of cold masses for 1232 installed in the LHC Electrical failures are most critical (18 cases out of 1027) 2 year warranty following PA, shall not exceed 30 months from the

date of delivery PA after cold tests Today, there are 74 c.m. out of warranty In 18 months, 567 + 30 c.m. will be still under warranty Recovery of tooling from the CMAs is planned and part of the

contractual agreements. We plan to recover the equivalent of a complete production line from cable winding to cold mass finishing

There will be 46-5 = 41 spare c. m. (about 10 of each type) Storing conditions to be improved

There are also spare parts and raw materials left over (space needed) Minor repairs (c.m. envelope, IFS and diode) already done at CERN Interventions on the coils require the special tooling


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion The main quadrupoles

MQ-Arc 40 types for 360 installed in the LHC Mainly electrical failures (short to ground of auxiliary bus bars, bus bars

fixed point, quench heater, instrumentation) 16 spares pre-assembled (cold mass not finished). Some will be used to

replace defective cold masses (at least 8 cases to date) MQ-DS

16 types for 32 installed in the LHC Design problem for the stabilizer (9 repairs done, 3 passed cold tests

successfully) Spare cold masses not available, only spare parts Need to recover parts from defective cold masses is urgent (if feasible)

For both types of MQ cold masses, higher risk concerning the bus bars

Plan to recover the vertical assembling bench (for c.m. assembly) from Accel but still under discussion

Accel seen as a possible option (interim solution) for repairs and storage (on the condition the c.m. have not seen the beam)

Need to have mobile facilities for the mounting of the pressure plugs


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion The main quadrupoles, tooling from ACCEL


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion The spool pieces

15 types, all need different tooling 2 year warranty following PA Contractors must keep the tooling (stored but not necessarily

operational) until the end of warranty Not clear who owns the tooling (one must check the contractual / call

for tender documents) Spares will be available but in some cases there will be only one per

type, e.g. MQSX, MCSOX and MCSTX Up to date, no failure following PA Practically no spare parts available Building 288 equipped for the MQTL and spool pieces Need more space: extension of building 230 seen as the best option

to house the tooling recovered from industry Only skilled staff can do wet-laying and vacuum impregnation


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Radioprotection and INB requirements

Beam losses lead to prompt radiation and activation of the magnets During magnet repair one has to cope, at the same time, with

Activation Work on an activated magnet allowed only in a specially designated and

equipped “work sector” (protection of staff and of environment against production of radioactive wastes, dust, grease, metal chips, …)

External exposure Staff working on activated magnets takes up doses By optimized work procedures, elaborated between the department and the

radioprotection group The workshop can/should be located at CERN

A suitable work sector must be constructed and equipped Personnel must be trained for the specific work and for the optimization

process accompanying it Magnets from straight sections produce higher dose rate than main

dipoles in the arcs Cool down storage necessary for radioactive decay The LHC magnets fall into INB regulations, parts must be traceable


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Cryostat assembly and beam screen integration

1st estimate of infrastructure and space needs: Cryo-dipole assembly (presently done in SMA18), including bottom tray

assembling, vacuum vessel measuring bench, cryostating bench and fiducialization: ~300 m2

SSS/connection cryostat assembly (presently done in 904): ~1000 m2

Connection cryostat cold mass assembly & interconnections (including storage, testing equipment for bellows, mock-ups for training, …): ~750 m2

Storage space: ~ 1000 m2

Typical failure scenario/repair time from cryostating experience < 2 weeks for cryo-dipole, e.g. mishandling, IFS electrical fault, leaks, diode < 6 weeks for SSS, e.g. mishandling, connection tube replacement, DCF failure,

leaks Resources

Re-insourcing of know-how to skilful and experienced operators required Maintain cryo-assembly technical competence (i.e. AT/CRI experts)

Beam screen integration: ~ 300 m2

Manufacturing/testing facilities should be preserved (laser welding, beam screen cleaning in 118 and cold testing in 927, c.b.t. cleaning machine, clean area, …)

Any de-cryostating requires removing the BS, same for fiducialization


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Normal conducting magnets for LHC, PS and SPS

~ 2516 magnets in existing accelerators and 1195 in new accelerators (LHC main ring and transfer lines, CNGS and CTF3)

Existing accelerators (PS, SPS, LEIR, Linac2, experimental and tranfer lines): PS magnets consolidation program launched in 2003, 2 phases until 2009 and

2015 Repair and refurbishment must continue (in building 151, under RP control, for PS

and in building 867 for SPS): Funds and manpower required An LHC without an injector chain will not work

New beamlines (15 types of magnets): Repair and refurbishment must start one day:

Investment into multi-purpose tooling for dipoles required Investment into specific tooling for quadrupoles required Specific tooling recuperated from industry is not sufficient

Imminent concerns: Radiation levels:

Cool down and storage needed, specific inspection, transport and repair tooling required The unknowns:

Early failures


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Potential beam lines in the future

In hall 181, there is a potential clash with the PS2/PS+, which could pass straight through the hall

In hall 180-183 there is a potential clash with a beam line coming from PS2/PS+ passing close to the ‘back’ wall of the hall


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Possible scenarios for MAR at CERN

Total surface of the building

[m2]

Surface needed

[m2]

Tot. surface needed

[m2]

Overhead crane capacity

[t]

Height

[m]

927 ( collaring) + 180Scenario 1

927: 4’800180: 10’000

927: 2’559180: 2’958

5’517927: 7.5*180: 40 and 60

927: 5180: 9.5

927 ( pole ass.) + 180Scenario 2

927: 4’800180: 10’000

927: 1’539180: 4’080

5’619927: 7.5180: 40 and 60

927: 5180: 9.5

180 (everything)Scenario 3

10’000 5’327 5’327 40 and 60 9.5

927 ( pole ass.) + SMA18Scenario 4, variant

927: 4’800SMA18: 3’600

927: 1’539SMA18: 3’600

5’139927: 7.5-

927: 5-

181** 2’400 500 40 -

* The capacity of the overhead crane in building 927 needs to be upgraded to 15 t for the collared coils** Keep it operational for the insertion magnets and potentially completed for the main quadrupoles

(500 m2), excluding the main dipolesIn all cases, de-cryostating, beam screen integration, c.b.t. cleaning and fiducialization in SMI2


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Scenario 2, 927 – Poles for main dipoles

927 – 1539 m2

C.b.t. and b.b. insulation/repair


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Scenario 2, 180 – C.c. and c.m. for main dipoles

180 – 4080 m2


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Building 181

NEG Coating

IR Quad Cold Masses Assembly

Triplet Assemblies and DFBX Reception and Storage


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Discussion

Introduction Experience from Fermilab-Tevatron

Keep one set of tooling for a few years Keep an inventory of spares or “almost complete” spares

Test the spares from time-to-time Keep a number of leak-checking and magnet-change tooling and vehicles

P. Limon recommends having some leak-check equipment that will work on gasses other than helium

Have a small (few stand) cold-test operation always available Keep, and renew the skilled labor (scientists, engineers, technicians) required

to do all this work They will keep busy doing the R&D work needed for the future of CERN Did not experience failures necessitating collared coils replacement Had a design error in the bus, had to repair almost all magnets (in-situ) Steady stream of questions have come: testing magnets needed to answer They change about 1 component per year (mostly leaks)

Experience from Desy-Hera They did not recover the tooling from the CMAs, no repair facility at Desy The equivalent of the CERN IFS had to be replaced due to a design fault Only two dipoles were changed for spare ones


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Discussion items

For the spool pieces and correctors, an urgent decision is needed regarding the spares (numerous incidents experienced with the SSS)

One should check with TS-MME the vacuum impregnation matter Are injection tests dangerous for the magnets? One should fix precisely the critical level of radioactivity Normal conducting magnets in the straight sections will suffer more that the main

superconducting magnets in the arcs It does not help grouping normal conducting and superconducting magnets Is there any synergy between SSS and dipole cryostating? AT-CRI and TS-SU are studying a clean mole to do geometric measurements in the

beam screen Existing workshops (151 and 867) for the normal conducting magnets necessitate

interventions to comply with RP regulations Putting winding and collaring operations in 180 would be a bad use of the overhead

cranes capacity One should check whether the buildings proposed for MAR are suitable to satisfy RP

rules (or to be made compliant with) MAR shall be seen as insurance policy. It makes sense seen the overall cost of the

machine Workforce and MAR should be “ready to go” otherwise, one looses know-how The spare for D1 does not fulfill the specification The installation of MAR should be done quickly otherwise skilled people will disappear

(both at CERN and in industry) Tooling without maintenance/know-how does not help It is urgent to get a decision on where to install MAR (building???)


ork

sho

p o

n T

est

Fa

cilit

ies

an

d m

ea

sure

me

nt

eq

uip

me

nt

ne

ed

ed

fo

r th

e L

HC

exp

loita

tion Working Group on MAR

On the request of Ph. Lebrun

Members:F. Savary; K-M. Schirm; D. Tommasini; R. Ostojic; W. Kalbreier; M. Karppinen; V. Parma

Mandate: To produce a detailed proposal (with few variants, if any) substantiated with cost and manpower estimates;

In view of the decisions to be taken this spring, give conclusions by mid May, with a presentation at MARIC immediately after (by the end of May)

workshop on test facilities and measurement equipment needed for the lhc exploitation april 12, 2006...

Documents

test facilities

measurement equipment

lhc exploitationmotivation

lhc exploitationscope

lhc exploitationapril

lhc exploitationprogramoutcome

lhc exploitationorganizationby

lhc machine