east area day, 1 february 2012 lau gatignon / en-mef

The East Area of tomorrow

East Area Day, 1 February 2012

Lau Gatignon / EN-MEF

The East Area of tomorrow 2

Outline

Introduction and Motivation- General introduction to present East Area- The different problematic issues- Changing user requirements- History of the present proposals

Design considerations for new layout Proposal for a new layout Overall consolidation program Summary

Lau Gatignon, 1-2-2012

Cost, staging and coordination: in a separate talk


Introduction and Motivation

The East Area is among the oldest experimental areas at CERN Its latest reincarnation dates from ~ 15 years ago (EHNL) However, most of the infrastructure and equipment dates from

the early 1960’s Over the years the East Area has served a number of

experiments and test beams, complementing facilities elsewhere at CERN.

Globally, the offer of medium and high-energy test beams has diminished dramatically over the years and the CERN test beams are almost unique world-wide.

Unfortunately the number of serious equipment failures is increasing and the repairs are often long and costly in dose ……



The East Area layout (schematic)



The East Area is increasingly popular


2 beams


Hardware issues (general)

The driver of the present study was the repeated breakdowns of critical magnets (in particular F61S.BHZ01). W.Kalbreier pointed out in 2007 (ATC days) that the East Area requires as many resources in the magnet group as the North Area.

Some critical magnets are or were in the PS zone, difficult to access, and require a stop of the PS (+SPS + LHC) during their repairs. Examples: MNP23, SMH1,…

The majority of the other magnets are in the primary zone, covered by ~ 6 m of shielding. Any repair stops the whole of the East Area for several weeks.

The present East Area consists of 63 magnets of 22 different types, many without operational spares!



Hardware issues (list)A non-exhaustive list of serious magnet failures: End 2004: failure of F61S.BHZ01, premature end of DIRAC run In 2006: 3new MNP23 magnets were installed, all failed within days.

Each time ~1 week lost for the whole PS+SPS complex (now: +LHC!)Full year lost for DIRAC and IRRAD. Replaced by MCB magnet.

In 2010 replace MNP23 magnet in T9 by a spare. Initially leaking…Top momentum of T9 lowered from 15 to 10 GeV/c (12 GeV/c on request)

In 2011 premature end of run for T10 beam due to ZT10.BHZ1 leak plus a failure of ZT9.QDE1 (water leak, Q74magnet to be replaced by a different type)

IRRAD start in 2011 delayed by 10 days due to splitter jaw position fault Three Q120 quadrupoles replaced in 2008/9 shutdown, two Q800 quads in

T10 only hold up to 6 GeV/c (instead of 7), no spares available.



Example of a magnet replacement (2009)



Hardware issues (F61S.BHZ01)

Up to 2006 the beam was dispatched to the North and South branches via the combination of a splitter magnet F61.SMH1 and a septum magnet (MNP23-type) F61S.BHZ01.

This allowed to serve on the same cycle the test beam complex and IRRAD (not DIRAC for beam quality reasons)

However, MNP23 is a very complex magnet (400 kW power consumption DC!) and needed extreme cooling flow. A fast interlock (20 ms sampling) ensured that the magnet would not over-heat.

At least 3 new magnets failed soon after their installation, some even before having seen first beam. The one in T9 was still running in 2011.



Layout of F61S.BHZ01 and splitter region



Other equipment issues

The rectifiers are very old (> 30 years for most of them). Many need to be replaced, for the more recent ones the thyristors need to be replaced.

The vacuum system is very old and has no remote control.

The marguerite targets are old, very radioactive and subject to faults. They serve not only as targets but also as TV screens, there for no monitoring of beam steering during physics.



Operational issues

When the MNP23 magnet in F61S.BHZ01 was replaced by a C-shaped magnet (MCB) the facility to operate the test beams and IRRAD on the same cycle was lost.

New cycles were defined:EASTA for the test beams (North branch)EASTB for the DIRAC experimentEASTC for IRRAD

As at the same time the number of allowed EAST cycles was restricted because of the weakness of the PS main power supply, the East Area has suffered from a shortage of cycles since:duty cycle ~1% for the test beams for most of the time!

This shortage is aggravated by the presence of DIRAC and IRRAD



Radiation issues

The radiation situation in the East Hall is not very pleasant, radiation levels being quite high in most of the primary one, in IRRAD and around the splitters. There are several reasons for this:

The splitter (when it was used like a splitter) leads to significant beam losses

The EASTA beam traverses partly (~50%) the North target and is dumped in or just after ZT9.BHZ1 (a delicate MNP23 magnet!), thus ‘polluting’ most of the primary zone. Equipment access in that zone is very awkward in that region.

There is no ventilation in the primary zones. The Ozone produced where the beam passes through air leads to severe oxidation of equipment

The shielding is weak in some places, e.g. around IRRAD.Lau Gatignon, 1-2-2012


Where is the North ranch dumped?


For most of the beam m0menta, the primaryprotons are dumped inside the MNP23 magnetZT9.BHZ1…..

The East Area of tomorrow 15Lau Gatignon, 1-2-2012


Instrumentation and controls

Until ~two years ago there was no useful instrumentation for beam tuning in the secondary lines (only XWCA chambers that provide no signal for typical test beam intensities). Now a DWC and a scintillator exists in each beam.

There are no beam loss monitors in the primary lines.

There are some old threshold Cerenkov counters(but H/W identical to WA and NA counters) in the test beams, but without electronics and only manual pressure control. PH responsibility.

Magnet control is with knobs and working sets. No useful beam file management (archives are not convenient for test beam users).No remote control for collimators. Instrumentation can only be used with expert programs. There is no local beam control in user barracks.


Suitable controls software exists in the North Area (Cesar) and can’ easily’ be adapted


Infrastructure issues

The building is ~50 years old, therefore the roof, insulation, windows are severely degraded or not up to present standards.

The presence of asbestos limits the scope of what can reasonably be done

Cooling and ventilation of the building is obsolete and not monitored.The primary zones are not ventilated.

The magnet cooling circuit is common to primary and secondary beams.

The electrical infrastructure is partly obsolete, e.g. 50 years old transformers, and needs serious consolidation. Many cables contain halogen.

Both cranes have become unreliable. There is no infrastructure attached for repairs at height (e.g.lighting)

The user barracks are obsolete, made of wood, with dangerous roofs.Lau Gatignon, 1-2-2012


Safety considerations

Many safety issues are related to radiation safety (see previous slides).The situation in and around the present IRRAD facility is marginal and access requires a stop (+ cool-down) of the whole East Area.The present radiation monitoring is still based on ARCON.

There is no access control to the building.

The access to a number of magnets and other beam equipment is cumbersome, dangerous from general safety and RP point of view

The obsolete state of infrastructure has potential safety implications.

A safety file must be prepared.Lau Gatignon, 1-2-2012


Changing user requirements

It is understood that DIRAC will end this year.

CLOUD will continue. They have quite some infrastructure in T11, but space is very (too?) limited on the long term. They require a zone where they can do installation work on their detectors without compromising beam time for other users. See Antti’s presentation

The IRRAD facility will continue with intense programs for R2E and AIDA. These projects foresee some funding for upgrades. See Michael and Markus presentations.

The test beams are as important as ever. New users are coming, e.g. LC, n tests, …. An overlap in energy range with the North Area beams seems important. The fact that the present beams do not allow to select specific particle types (e/h/m) is making life more difficult for many users. Horst will summarize the user needs.

The ease of access to the beam areas is often a real advantage ( > 6’ in many NA zones)!Lau Gatignon, 1-2-2012


Towards a new East Area In this context the idea of renovating the East Area came up in 2007,

triggered by the repeated F61S.BHZ01 failures (W.Kalbreier, ATC days).

In 2009 a conceptual layout for a new East Area was proposed that addresses most of the issues outlined before (L.G., ABOC/ATC days), leading to a recommendation to prepare a detailed design.

This technical design was presented in 2010 with a cost estimate of ~1.5 MCHF for the change of beam layout (L.G., IEFC workshop). The need for consolidation was hinted at, but the cost was not yet evaluated.

During 2010 a working group, reporting to EATM, evaluated the full consolidation costs and reported to the 2011 IEFC workshop.

Following the workshop a full document (~80 pages) has been prepared and will be updated and finalized following the outcome of this EA day.



Design considerations for new East Area - 1 Use fewer, but reliable, types of magnets with sufficient spares.

No splitters, septa and other complex and delicate objects.

Improve access to the equipment, also by suppressing rarely used beam lines (T7, T11). Move CLOUD to behind T9.Improve beam performance to use beam time more efficiently.

Improve significantly the RP and general safety aspects.Restrict radiation to where it is necessary, by dumping unused protons cleanly and immediately after the targets.

Reduce intervention times as much as possible, by optimizing the layout of the shielding and zone separations.

Improve instrumentation and controls (Cesar as in North Area).



Design considerations for new East Area - 2 The proton beam requirements for IRRAD’ are very similar to the

present DIRAC beam. Do not change this beam as seen by the user.Abandon the T7 secondary beam and IRRAD-T7.

Combine the proton and mixed field irradiations in a single zone (T8).This improves proton economy and also allows better accessibility and shielding, with enough space to manage radiation properly.Access only stops this facility and not the North branch.

Provide two better test beams with proper instrumentation and control over particle type. Cover an energy range as large as possible (from ~0.5 to 15 and 12 GeV/c). The limit comes from available length ( L ~ √p )

Prepare proper documentation for operation, maintenance, safety, etc.



Proposal for the new layout

The detailed proposal has already been presented in previous workshops. Technical details will be covered by the technical presentations in the afternoon session.

Here I will repeat a few key aspects of the new layout.

The only part that has not yet been presented is the proposed layout for the new IRRAD facility in T8. The overall layout will be shown here, but details for the proton and mixed field facilities will be covered in the presentations by M.Moll and M.Brugger.



New primary beam layout - schematic



New optics for proton line


NEW T8 PROTON BEAM OPTICS


Schematic implementation of secondary beams


L.Gatignon, ATOP, 6 March 2009 Reorganisation of East Area Beam Lines 27

~5x better transmission than present lines!Uses “dummy magnets”

e± pure h±

m±

GENERIC NEW EAST AREA TEST BEAM OPTICS


Parameters of secondary beams



Stop radiation cleanly and immediately



The primary zone is reduced in size:



Roof and side shielding proposal


PS zone

Primary zone Sec. zone Open

DIRAC

Side shielding thickness 6 to 6.4 m (as now)2.4 m roof shielding, i.e. 0.8 m Fe + 1.6 m ConcreteNeed ventilation (cf nTOF target area)Optimise entrance chicane

Thickness of shielding 2.4 m (as shown before)Height of walls > 4 m to reduce sky-shine

No roof shielding requiredOptimise access chicaneOptimise target design (shielding vs intervention time)

OK as it proposed

Courtesy Thomas Otto(RP at the time)

The new layout proposal

Note: DIRAC to be replaced by IRRAD (see later)


The magnets used



Shortcomings of existing IRRAD

Use T7 (EASTC) for protons and T8 (EASTB) for mixed field, where T8 is parasitic to DIRAC → Need two big proton users!Competition with DIRAC for proton spills.

Very limited space and shielding, limiting proton flux and leading to high doses to personnel.

No possibility to irradiate big objects or equipment requiring services

Access requires stop of the whole East Area plus long cool-down

CNRAD and H4IRRAD cannot cover all the needs


R2E proposal (mixed fields) → Markus Brugger talkAIDA proposal (protons) → Michael Moll presentation


Proposal for new IRRAD facility

Use the space that will be liberated by DIRAC

Access independent of the rest of the East Area

Optimised layout for shielding and dose reduction to personnel,with ventilation, local shielding, infrastructure and space for easy accessibility

Provision for services

Can use same proton cycles for both facilities

Funding could be available from the projects

Aggressive time scale imposed by LHC needs (R2E) and AIDA project durationLau Gatignon, 1-2-2012


Proposed layout of new IRRAD facility



The mixed field facility (R2E)



Energy spectrum in mixed field facility



Overall consolidation program - 1 The layout change per se has a cost of 1.5 kCHF + 3 FTE,

the consolidation alone ≈12.4 MCHF + 15 FTEand the IRRAD upgrade ≈2 MCHF + 2.5 FTE

The consolidation activities will be presented in more detail in the afternoon sessions, at least for the more complex cases.

The civil engineering and CV efforts are strongly coupled and driven by the relative impossibility to remove all asbestos.

It is proposed to renovate only one of the two cranes (40 tons).

Electrical infrastructure and PVC containing cables will be consolidated respectively replaced.



Overall consolidation program - 2

Rectifier consolidation is one of the bigger cost factors (2.8 MCHF)

The primary zone magnets shall get their own cooling circuit

The primary zone and IRRAD will be ventilated

Beam stoppers and targets will be renovated

The control rooms will be replaced by new ones conforming to safety standards (e.g. Algeco)

Migration from ARCON to RAMSES-II

Details are available in the written report.



Summary

A new layout of the East Area beam lines is proposed, that

addresses a number of operational, technical, RP and safety issues

The cost of the layout change is small compared to the overall

consolidation needs

The overall cost of the project is 16 MCHF, including an upgrade of

the IRRAD facility which could be funded mostly by R2E and AIDA,

depending on the timescales. Both request IRRAD’ in 2014

Details of costs and staging options will be discussed in the last

session



Summary - 2

A detailed description of all aspects of the proposed renovation is available in the draft report (79 pages).

This report has been prepared with the help of many persons from different departments and groups.

The consolidation needs and proposals were discussed in many meetings through 2010 and 2011, with regular reporting to EATM.

The layout was based on many ‘private’ discussions with representatives of the user community (physics coordinators, spokespersons, test beam coordinators, important and small users, etcetera.

The purpose of today is to officially confront the proposals with the requirements, to validate or adjust the proposal in order to arrive at the best possible East Area for many years to come.Lau Gatignon, 1-2-2012


Acknowledgements



Spare slides



MORE SPACE FOR T9 AND T10 AREAS

east area day, 1 february 2012 lau gatignon / en-mef

Documents

present east area

east area of tomorrow5

motivationthe east area

east area of tomorrow7example

east area of tomorrow2cost

north area

dose lau gatignon

popularlau gatignon