Muon Decay Ring

Norbert Collomb STFC Technology8th December 2011

1. Start with Lattice deck

• MADX translated into Excel• Identify systems and corresponding locations• Summarise into a configuration document/schematic• Use to create basic 2D sketch• Interpret into more detailed 3D layout

2. Interpreting requirements

• Clarify systems – determines size• Introduce systems not catered for in lattice, i.e. vacuum• Sketch update with additional detail, clash analysis

3. Closed Loop process

• Feed info back to lattice designer

Costing

25 GeV Muon Decay Ring SchematicSeptum (4m)Kicker (10m)

SeptumKicker

1m alternatingQF - QD Magnets2m Dipole Magnet

Oval Vacuum chamber 111 x 167mm, 2mm wall thickness

0.7m Drift 0.7m Drift

ARC CELL GIRDER ASSEMBLY (58 off):

LONG STRAIGHT 600.2m

MatchingSection36.1m

ARC Section132m

Circumference: 1608.8m(2x600.2 + 2x132 + 4x36.1)

Magnets: Defocusing Quad (Arc)

Focusing Quad (Arc)

Dipole (Arc)

Focusing Quad (LS)

Defocusing Quad (LS)

Dipole (MS)

Focusing Quad (MS)

Dipole (MS)

De/Focusing Quad (MS)

Defocusing Quad (MS)

Dipole (MS)

Magnet Cryogenic Modules

Field/Gradient: -23.77 24.18 -4.27 0.464 -0.464 0.35 4.1 -1.9 11.6 -9.2 -0.64 Arc: 58 double + 4 single

Type: SC SC SC NC NC NC SC SC SC SC NC MS: 20 various single

QTY: 60 60 60 48 48 4 4 4 8 4 4 82

1m QDMagnet

2m Dipole Magnet

2m Dipole Magnet1m QFMagnet

Power and Cryogenic Cell proposal (15 per Arc):

2.4m Dipole Magnet0.8m QFMagnet

0.6m DipoleMagnet

1.6m QDMagnet

1.6m QFMagnet

0.8mDipoleMagnet 4m Dipole Magnet

0.8m QF Magnet2.4m Dipole Magnet

Circular Vacuum chamber ∅316mm, 2mm wall thickness

0.9m Drift 7.28m Drift

MATCHING SECTION ASSEMBLY (4 off):

14.25m Drift

0.6m DipoleMagnet

0.45

m D

rift

1.6m QD Magnet

0.45

m D

rift

1.6m QF Magnet

0.5m

Dri

ft

0.8m DipoleMagnet

0.41

m D

rift

4m Dipole Magnet

0.41

m D

rift

1.5m QFMagnet

4m SeptumMagnet

10m Kicker Magnet

3m QDMagnet

3m QFMagnet

25 GeV Muon Decay Ring SchematicSeptum (4m)Kicker (10m)

LONG STRAIGHT 600.2mMatchingSection36.1mARC

Section132m

Circumference: 1608.8m(2x600.2 + 2x132 + 4x36.1)

3m QDMagnet

3m QFMagnet

3m QF Magnet

Circular Vacuum chamber ∅316mm, 2mm wall thickness

21.975m Drift

LONG STRAIGHT:

3m QD Magnet

21.975m Drift

3m QD Magnet3m QF Magnet

21.975m Drift

The rf cavities, tune control and collimation depicted in the IDS – IDR (Fig. 67) were never designed in detail.In the original design it was assumed those systems would be located in the "spare" production straight (i.e. the straight not sending neutrinos to a detector).If we want to populate the ring with both muon signs at the same time there will be no spare production straight so if those systems are needed they will need to be in the arc.RF is not needed in the scenario of single muon sign injection but may be needed if we inject both signs at the same time. The above is based on the latest lattice information and assumes both muon signs are injected.

10m Kicker Magnet0.087T Dipole Field

Circular Vacuum chamber ∅316mm, 2mm wall thickness

10.9875m Drift 16.9875m Drift

SEPTUM - KICKER SECTION :(Quadrupole not shown for clarity)

4m Septum Magnet-1.27T Field

0.98

75m

Dri

ft

0.98

75m

Dri

ft

Vertical, Horizontal, Compound Angle Injection?Muon Decay Ring 1 at 18 degree and Muon Decay Ring 2 at 36 degree inclination.

Reference and progress

• Have made start on populating spreadsheet with details to get initial cost (warm section almost complete – controls and diagnostics outstanding).

• Power Supply and cooling requirement included –> floor space requirement -> tunnel/cavern sizing and location.

• Electrical info estimated based on data available (Cable Data, string powered, power consumption, tunnel heat load, etc).

• All info interpreted from ILC costing work package.

Challenges• Need to transport modules from access shaft to location.

• Installation is “simple” as it can be carried out in series.

• Replacement modules need different transport system and tunnel layout (maybe).

• Size of modules drives access shaft and associated cost.

• Legislation needs to be adhered to (Fire, He, etc).

Solutions - Overview

MDR Long Straight

First Arc

Second Arc

Simple 3D CAD sketch

Ring in horizontal plane

Starting with a ‘skeleton’ and putting more meat on the bone as information becomes knownLattice info needs to be revised – contains insufficient data currently and inaccuracies

Solutions - Overview

Matching Section

First Arc

Simple 3D CAD sketch

Ring in horizontal plane

Using lattice to create first 3D sketch to provide visual idea of layout.

Crude placeholders used to represent systems.

Permits further suggestions to be developed with regards to tunnel layout.

Allows placing of spatial requirements for electrical equipment, cooling, controls, i.e. racks.

Solutions - Overview

Internal Diameter 8.7m access shaft(450m deep sketch)

Caverns 20m long x10m wide x 10m vaulted height

Ring shown with 36° inclination

Internal Diameter 8.7m access shaft (50m deep sketch)

Access Tunnels either side internal diameter 4.5m

Must be able to lower pre-assembled systems (complete girder, 3m long)

Access shafts need to accommodate cabling, cooling, Health and Safety, etc. systems.

Caverns need to house cryogenics, controls, racks and other auxiliaries.

Access shafts need to be off-set from cavern (not as shown).

Same diameter access tunnels as beam tunnel (not shown for clarity).

Solutions,……..one of manyHVAC, He extraction*

Personnel enclosure

Maintenance Access

36 degree inclination

Steps:200mm Rise,345mm Go1.5m Quad

representation

Crane, Funicular, Transport on ceiling?

4.5m Internal Diameter

Towards centre of racetrack

* Not required for long straight sections

Discussion• There are many details still unknown and currently a reference to similar

systems is used to establish a possible solution.

• Legislative advice on Safety (number of alcoves, Emergency egress, extraction, etc.) required

• Surface Buildings (Cooling Towers, Power Station and Cryogenics Plant?).

• Heating – Ventilation – Air Conditioning (HVAC).

• Survey and Alignment.

• Lighting, Water and Cabling.

• Inclination is 36 degree for far detector, transport (people and equipment).

End of presentation

• Thank you for your attention.

• Questions?

Costing – general approach• Once we know what we need – who provides info and when?

Project manager: Garth Fader

Magnet System

John Smith

Charlie Brown

Sue Sonso

Tom Cat Jerry Mouse

Luke Groundwalker

Barry Whyte

Coils Aug‘12

Steel Sept ‘12

Cooling July ‘12

Modelling May ’12

Electrical June ‘12

Controls June ‘12

Support Aug ‘12

Mover October ‘12

Responsibility Assignment Matrix (could use RACI)

MUON Acceleration Technology & Building Concepts

Neil Bliss, STFC Technology, Daresbury LaboratoryK. Middleman, A. Moss, S. Pattalawar, STFC ASTeC

Revised 25 GeV FFAG Parameters

Revised FFAG Lattice Designs for the IDS Neutrino Factory, 5 April 2011, document 090721-110405.pdf

FDF TripletLong drift 5mShort drift 0.75m

Short drift has been increased to accommodate overlapping magnet yoke end plates and some additional space for a BPM between D and F magnets

Updated lattice also provides symmetry for the beams.

For Symmetry an odd number of cells is needed, since we have a odd number of cells at injection – see layout on next slide

25 GeV Muon FFAG Layout Schematic

Circumference 699 m

~ 222

.21

m

Extraction µ-

Extraction µ+ Injection µ+

Injection µ-

SC Septum

Kicker

Kicker

SC Septum

KickerKicker

KickerKicker

SC Septum

SC Septum

SC Magnet Modules 67

Straights SectionsSC Cavities (2 cells per cavity) 50Injection kickers 2Injection SC septums 2Extraction kickers 4Extraction SC septums 2Empty straights 7

Cell(Next Slide)

Sector 1

Sector 2

Sector 3

Sector 4

Sector 5

Sector 6

Sector 7

Sector 8

DiagnosticsBPM 134Beam profile 12

VacuumVacuum sectors 8Valves 9Ion pumps 40Pirani gauge 8IMG gauge 8RGA 8Pumping valves 8

FFAG Cell Layout Schematic (with warm sections)

D MagnetF Magnet F Magnet Cavity

RF Input Coupler

Cryostat Insulating vacuum chamber

4K He ChamberThermal shield (40 – 60K)

Location for BPM Location for BPM

Warm Section or long strings ?

Location for beam screen, vacuum equipment

Thermal transition4K - 293K Beam vacuum chamber

2.5K He Pipes

FFAG Cell CAD Model (with warm sections)

Magnets and Cavities in separate cryostats

F

FD

Cavity

Cryostat End Transition to a Warm Section

4K

40K

293K

Bellows to account for thermal expansion

Edge welded bellows to provide thermal barrier between regions of differing temperatures

PAMELA Cryostat

Cryostat Design Options• Options

A. Many individual cryostats (CEBAF, SNS)B. Long strings combining many modules, typically 100m+ in length. Welded assemblies in-situ. Bellows

welded in or bolted at module intersections.

• Option A Advantages– If you have a problem an individual cryostat can be removed and repaired, relatively quickly with a

spare module. – But, It’s a high cost option. – There are many more joints and feedthroughs to go wrong and more chance of component failures.

• Option B Advantages1. No external cryogenic transfer lines2. No warm to cold transition (reduced heat load )3. Improved cryo-stability 4. Less cryo- instrumentation >>> easy and reliable cryogenic control5. No vacuum valves between modules 6. And many more with significant reduction in cost

• Option B is the design approach has already been successfully demonstrated on XFEL (144 m long string of 12 cryomodules) based on FLASH experience. LHC, ILC, Project X,... have also adopted similar approach – BUT, if you get a failure its very serous. Difficult to find a problem. A long time to fix it.

Linac & RLA Modules

• Are the cryostats separate or long strings ?• Is there enough space between them ?• If not enough space then impact on physics

design and building costs !

Study IIb images

Intersection

Cryogenics• Various subsystems for NF will require cryogenic refrigeration power at several different

temperatures ranging from 1.9 K to 60 K• Design study II has estimated an Total Equivalent Load (cooling power) at 80 KW (105 KW

with 30% contingency) at 4.5K. • Update is needed for costing• Changes in the design or numbers of cryomodules is not likely to have a major impact on

the demand for overall refrigeration• Experience with LHC and other large installations indicate that large capacity refrigerators

are relatively economical in terms of capital and operation costs with improved reliability.• Using the design approach taken form LHC, all the necessary power can be obtained from 4

large refrigerators with an equivalent cooling powers of approximately 20 kW. CEBAF uses a single large plant (largest in the world) to provide refrigeration power of 4.8 kW at 2.1K (exceeding an equivalent capacity 40 kW at 4.5 K)

• Refrigeration at T>= 4.5 K will be provided by these large refrigerators• Refrigeration at T< 4.5 K may be created locally within individual cryomodule using sub-

atmospheric systems consisting of with JT valve and heat exchangers.• Cryogenic distribution will be highly dependent on the design of individual cryostats and

their interconnections.

Triplet Magnet Design (IDR report)

Half of the F magnetDesign based on LHC

“cos θ” geometry

Iron yoke

2 conductor blocks

3 conductor blocks

Magnet Design Options3 Options• IDR described magnet

2 layer

• Combined function double helix with many layers

• JParc 30 - 50 GeV neutrino beam line combined function magnet - Toru Ogitsu

Timescales and Costs for SC modulesFor the 28 superconducting combined function magnets for the

KEK Neutrino beamline• R&D design, construction & test of a prototype module ~2.5

years program (Cost ?)• Production manufacture ~3.5 years (Cost ?)• Total ~6 year program• For NF muon acceleration and storage

– Linac modules (3 types)– FFAG module– Storage arc moduleEven longer timescales for SCRF Linac modules Do we include prototyping costs in the overall costing ? or

separate costs for numerous items for a prototype phase.

Next Steps and Timeline• Progress technology solutions, concepts and decisions or

“decisions/assumptions appropriate for the costing”• Develop cost models based on the technology choices with

assumptions and sufficient engineering detail• Request more engineering effort to do that or do the best

with what we have• There is huge amount of work to do• Timescales

– Dec 2011 Costing Workshop @ CERN– June 2012 2nd pass costing– April 2013 3rd pass costing– Summer - Autumn 2013 Reference Design Report

Thank you for your attention