Update for muon studies Helmut Vincke. Additional dump calculations Two options were studied: Option...
-
Upload
tyrone-parsons -
Category
Documents
-
view
222 -
download
1
Transcript of Update for muon studies Helmut Vincke. Additional dump calculations Two options were studied: Option...
Update for muon studies
Helmut Vincke
Additional dump calculations
Two options were studied:
Option 1: beam is bend by 2 degree towards soil and beam impacts dump 2 m below surface
DUMP
DUMP
Option 2: beam is NOT bend and beam impacts dump 4 m below surface
Dump design
In contrast to first set of calculations the dump is slightly modified to reduce backscattering of particles.
Iron or carbon core (radius 20 cm length 2 m) was set to vacuum
Iron dump (radius: 1.5 m, length: 7 m)
Concrete part (radius: 5 m, length 9 m)
Beam on dump Muon axis inside and outside CERN
Distances: Beam impact point to end of West hall: ~300 mBeam impact point to CERN fence: ~600 m
Option 1 Bending beam by 2 degree, beam impact point in a
depth of 2 m below surface
In order to get result in reasonable time transformation of situation into cylinder symmetric description is required.
FLOORDump
Muon dose rate expected for Option 1
CERN FENCE
Except for some statistical fluctuations (caused by heavy biasing) both dose rate outside the West Hall and outside the CERN territory fulfill the optimization criteria (10 uSv/year for public and 100 uSv/year for CERN).
In order to get result in reasonable time transformation of situation into cylinder symmetric description is required.
Option 2Beam is NOT bend and beam impacts dump 4 m below surface
FLOORDump
Muon dose rate expected for Option 2
CERN Fence
Conclusion to option 2:• Also here statistical fluctuation due to strong biasing leading to some spikes inside
and outside CERN showing a dose rate above optimization limit.• No surface morphology considered yet. => beam might reappear in case the height
profile downstream the West Area is dropping by 4 m. Range of muons of the maximum energy can travel more than a km in earth.
Conclusion
Both options seem to be feasible for continuous operation with an intensity of 3E13 protons per shot at a frequency of 1/30 Hz.
Final depth of the beam impact point are expected to be in the range of 2 m for option 1 (bending beam by 2 degree) and at 4 m for option 2.
This information should be sufficient for our CDR
Muon dose rate expected for Option 1 (better statistics)
CERN FENCE
More accurate results for option 1
Dose rate along beam axis (important for option2): at 600 m the dose rate is about 10 uSv/year. If option 2: height profile of area downstream West hall required!!
Additional comments for option 1
• Considering only particles on dump: situation is controllable.
• However, losses in the beam line on the surface must be kept at a bare minimum otherwise the muon problem reappears. Two reasons:• Lost particles do not see our dump!!!! additional hadron dose• Produced pions have much longer flight path for decaying into muons than
considered in the beam-on-dump case much higher muon dose
• In order to cope with losses (hadrons and muons) we need to shield heavily the beam line at the surface to the forward direction and lateral.
• From a certain beam loss level (~1E13 per year) the loss situation becomes “unshieldable”!!!!! See slide 19, muons in direction of beam axis (beam impinging on 7m of iron).
• For a more realistic (but still very heavy) shielding the loss level should be rather in the range of 1E12 protons per year.
• Question: What is the beam loss level we have to expect? Do we have a chance to have such low levels?