11t dipole for the lhc collimation upgrade a case study
DESCRIPTION
11T Dipole for the LHC Collimation upgrade A Case Study. Chris Segal Agnieszka Priebe Giovanni Terenziani Herve Dzitko Michele Bertucci. 05/02/13. Wire Parameters and Cabling. Cu stabilizer matrix with Cu/non-Cu ratio of 1.5 Strand diameter of 0.8 mm with filament diameter of 25 um. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
11T Dipole for the LHC Collimation upgrade
A Case Study
05/02/13
Chris Segal Agnieszka PriebeGiovanni TerenzianiHerve DzitkoMichele Bertucci
Wire Parameters and CablingCu stabilizer matrix with Cu/non-Cu ratio of 1.5Strand diameter of 0.8 mm with filament diameter of 25 um
Strand Diameter = 0.8 mm
15.8 mm1.
42m
m
strand diameter 0.8 mmCu/SC ratio 1.5Pitch Angle 16.03 degCable Width 15.8 mmCable Thickness 1.42 mmInsulation Thickness 0.15 mmFilling Factor K 0.33
12
3
56
4
7
Superconducting area (SC)
copper area (Cu)
1.5 : 1.0
Load Line and Short Sample Conditions
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 200
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
Nb3Sn, 1.9 KLoad LineNb3Sn 7 K
Field (T)
Criti
cal c
urre
nt d
ensit
y Jc
(A/m
m2)
1640
Jsc_ss 2,050 A/mm2
Jo_ss 677 A/mm2
Iss 17,838 ABpeak_ss 14.37 T
Bpeak_ss = 14.37 T 100% field in the coil
2050
Bpeak_op = 11.5 T
Jsc_op 1640 A/mm2Iop 14,300 AJo_op 541 A/mm^2B_peak_op 11.5 T
Coil LayoutThe angles needed to cancel B3 and B5 are (48°,60°,72°) or (36°,44°,64°)
There is a system of two equations, but with three unknowns, there is a degree of freedom allowing for a set of solutions rather than only oneEither layout removes the sextuple and decapole contributionInner layer needs more wedges since its closer to aperture
0)5sin()5sin()5sin(0)3sin()3sin()3sin(
123
123
α1
α3α2
EM Forces, stress
2
31
3
2
200
3/
0_ 34
32rarrarJrdfplanemid
2
1231
31
1
232
200
63634ln
123
3632
232
aaaaaa
aJ
Fx
3
131
2
132
200
121ln
41
121
232 aa
aaaJFy
Fx = 2.53 MN/mFy = -2.25 MN/m
σ = -265 MPa
Dimension iron yoke, collar, shrinking cylinder
iron yolk dimensions 172.43mmshrinking cylinder (support reaches 90% Iss) 6.32mmcollar 40mm
Dipole Section
Limitation in Magnetic support structure design
• Iron can’t take more than 2T (Bsat)
• Thickness of iron yoke = 21cm
• Magnetic pressure on iron yoke
MPaBPM 200*2 0
2
satBtBr
Compare Short sample, operational conditions, and margins with NbTi
0
5
10
15
20
0 10 20 30 40 50
Cen
tral f
ield
(T)
Coil width (mm)
r=28 mmr = 50 mmr = 75 mm
Nb3Sn 1.9 K
Nb-Ti 1.9 K
“Every [superconductor] is a [great superconductor]. But if you judge [NbTi] by its ability to [upgrade the LHC for high luminosity], it will live its whole life believing that it is [a poor superconductor].”
-Einstein
11T (NbTi saturation)
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
Cos(θ) vs Block
• J ~ Cos(θ)
• Self supporting structure
• Circular opening, compact coil
• Easy winding, has long history of use
• Block cable is not keystoned, perpendicular to the mid plane
• Additional internal structure needed
• Ratio central field/current density is 12% lower less effective than cosθ
• Bss is around 5% lower than by cosθ
High Pre-Stress vs Low Pre-Stress
• Less damage for the Sc parts.
•Optimal training
•Unloading but still good quench performance
• Stable plateau but small degradation
Support StructureCollar-based vs Shell-based
• Low field: shrinking outer shell• High field: collars + outer shell• Very high field: bladders, intermediate coil
supports.• If a magnet training does not improve from
4.2 to 1.9K, there is a mechanical limitation.
Advantages:• Proven coil positioning• Proven length scale-upR&D issues:• Deliver required pre-stress • Max. stress at assembly
Advantages:• Can deliver very high pre-stress• Large pre-stress increase at cool-down• Easily adjustableR&D issues:• Coil alignment accuracy• Length scale-up
Support Structure: Collar-based vs Shell-based
CoilAxial rod
ShellBladder
Key
YokePad
Filler
YokeGap
PreloadShim
ControlSpacer
Skin
Collar
YokeCollaringKey
Stress Relief Slotin inner pole
Courtesy of Peter Lee, Florida State University
Courtesy of Peter Lee, Florida State University
References
CERN Accelerator School on Superconductivity lectures (2013):
• Ezio Todesco, "Magnetic Design of SC Magnets"• Pierluigi Bruzzone, "Superconducting Cables"• Fernando Toral, "Mechanical Design of SC Magnets"
Thanks for listening!