FCC Infrastructure & Operation studies: outcome of the kick-off meeting and work program Ph. Lebrun & P. Collier 2 nd FCC Infrastructure & Operation meeting CERN, 26 February 2014

Participation in I&O breakout session Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Participation Quite a lively session 31 participants (8 from outside CERN) No structured set of presentations  Presented the proposed WBS  Presentation on the Geological study Went round the table to discuss the individual infrastructure systems and concepts to see the next steps  CE  Cooling/Ventilation  Survey  Cryogenics  Operation – Reliability  Safety –RP aspects  Safety systems  Cabling and electrical distribution

Civil Engineering – next steps ARUP presented their workplan: Stage 1: Development of geological model and GIS alignment decision aid tool Stage 2: Identification of key alignment layout optimisation requirements and constructability Stage 3: Refinement of above stages and establish concept for Pre-Feasibility Stage Stage 1: Feb 2014  June 2014 Stage 2: July 2014  Dec 2014 Stage 3: Jan 2015  May 2015

CE Discussion: Stage 1 is quite general – basic geology of the region Mentioned that other specific studies exist.  Several ideas – invited to contact John with possible links As we enter stage 2 there needs to be a limited number of options to study in more depth:  A requirements document is needed by early summer setting out the parameters of the (limited number of) options to study.  This could include constraints/requirements on:  the number of tunnels  Surface points/shafts  footprint/form of the machine  Inclination and planarity Preparation of such a document is the responsibility of the I&O coordination group  The timescale is rather short!!  Take into account all aspects including spoil at the relevant level of detail. Nothing is cast in concrete at this point – but we cannot study everything!!

Cooling & Ventilation General consensus concerning Ventilation  The maximum heat load should be taken by water cooling  The ventilation system should rather be determined by legislative requirements for access and safety  The length of sectors is important – but CV can actually help define or constrain this.  The use of multiple tunnels as mechanisms for ventilation needs to be elaborated.  Intermediate shafts – just big enough for CV and emergency access should be considered Water Cooling:  Cooling towers will most likely be required, but these are not so easy to sell to the general population  Possibilities for waste heat recovery – for the CERN surface installations?  Synchronization between production and need!!  Dumping heat into the tunnel surroundings? (CE models exist)  Use of Lake water discussed for part of the machine – but would this work if different temperatures were delivered to different parts of the machine?

Survey We need to extend the present CERN co-ordinate system!  Link the CERN system to the Swiss and French systems  Accuracy and quality of the data is different.  Minor inaccuracies here can have a major impact on the scale of FCC.  Number of access points is an important factor for the accuracy of the alignment! What are the constraints on the machine being at a specific inclination? What are the constraints on the machine being in a plane?? Alignment accuracy in the experiments  FCC-ee seems an extreme case with the mm beta*  Alignment of the machine to the detector – taking into account earth movements during and after excavation! FCC-ee seems to be the driver here!

Cryogenics A lot of basic scaling work has been done! Major areas of study:  Pushing the state of the art cryo-plant (presently ~25kW) versus the complexity of multiple plants.  Separate Cryo feedline?  Minimizing the He Inventory in conjunction with the magnet(RF) designers Location:  Nominally the 4.5K cryoplants would be on the surface and the 1.9K plants in the tunnel  But hydrostatic pressure is an important consideration here and the depth of the tunnel might be problematic  Discussion if we should consider underground intermediate caverns for infrastructure  Lower visibility on the surface  Still accessible during operation  Simplify hydrostatic pressure constraints.

Reliability General discussion on reliability of components, sub-systems, systems and the accelerator as a whole Consensus that this will be key to making the machine(s) work WBS contains a simulation WU on reliability accelerator simulation that could help developing early fault detection and fault prevention scenarios. A model would need to be developed and should be fed with data from existing LHC monitoring data. Today we do not have the required analytics infrastructures to work on detecting patterns and correlations. Other labs can contribute to this LHC is the nearest in scale, but is a ‘young’ machine Tevatron attempted this kind of analysis and has a 25-year history of improvements and ‘tweaks’. Every facility has the same problem on different scales Tests, ideas and pilot schemes are directly applicable to operating facilities world-wide “We can study for the future while improving the reliability of our existing facilities”

Transport, handling Experience shows that redundant lifts would make life much easier!! Maintenance during operation also very desirable, Horizontal transport between shafts is a challenge if the distance becomes large Inductive powering systems look promising Monorail technologies are not advised if they are also to be used for the installation of large loads. Can envisage personal transport systems of 20-30km/h underground Should we consider an underground intervention system? Discussion on robotics/remote handling Clearly desirable in ’hot’ areas of the machine Less obvious for the rest. General survey/video remote facilities are clearly interesting everywhere. Design machine and systems with remote/automated intervention in mind from the beginning on

RP Issues Choice of materials is important to minimize activation Electronics gets more radiation sensitive as feature density increases. Possibility to have controllers close to machine, but radiation protected would be desirable in view of ever increasing beam instrumentation and monitoring data production. Noted that the ee and the hh machines are very different: hh is very clean in the arcs – but not in the experimental SS and in the beam cleaning LSS ee is relatively clean in the LSS, all the main radiation is concentrated in the arcs! Need a simple study of the radiation field in the different cases. This can be refined as we make progress Basically looking at the impact on surrounding materials Input for the decision on the need for a service tunnel … a safety/access tunnel We need this for R2E Safe access Infrastructure installation

Conclusions Lots to do!!!!! External collaborators are keen to be involved! In the next 6 months we need to produce a requirements doc for the CE studies with a limited number of options!!!! Beginning of a consensus around the table that we cannot manage with a single tunnel! Still possibilities of a large split tunnel RP and safety will be the key factors here If the service and safety areas are sufficiently far away they can be accessible during operation of the machine. Reliability is considered as critical Not enough discussion on electrical distribution and surface vs. tunnel distribution of services.  Still, indications that a complete underground distribution of services might be necessary.

Phases of the FCC study Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Phase 1: Explore Understand –Functional relations between different systems –Basic scaling laws governing technical feasibility, capex, construction & installation schedules, operability and opex Explore and iterate –Alternative designs –Conventional vs non-conventional approaches –Paths towards globally optimized solutions Deliver –Baseline solutions, possibly with variants, for detailed study in Phase 2 Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Civil Engineering WBS Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program civil engineering (J. Osborne) Geological studies –A 3d geological model will be produced to allow various layouts for the machines to be analysed. This model will allow different tunnel shapes, circumferences, inclinations etc. to be entered into the model and determine the rock types housing the machine. External companies will be employed to assist in these geological studies. Layouts –The design criteria for each machine will be collected and layout drawings produced showing all the underground structures required to house the accelerator and detectors. Accelerator & experiment civil structures –The design criteria for surface buildings (Electricity, Ventilation, Cryo, Access, Detector etc) will be gathered and layout drawings produced for the various sites around the colliders. The need for a new campus will be analysed. –The design criteria for the collider tunnel will be collected and the underground volume optimised to house all machine components and services. –The design criteria for experimental areas will be collected and integrated into the overall layout for the machines. The need for access shafts or inclined access tunnels for detector installation will be analysed. Ph. Lebrun & P. Collier16FCC I&O meeting,

Technical Infrastructure WBS Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program cooling & ventilation (M. Nonis) Piped utilities –Work in 2014 shall consist on analysing different possible solutions for the general architecture of the cooling systems, evaluating advantages and drawbacks according to the main technical parameters; in particular, the study will focus on main water supply to CERN facilities and demineralized water systems more than on chilled water plants. If necessary, some study can be made on the fire fighting plants and on compressed air whereas no action is foreseen on sumps and raising systems. Studies on gas supplies are out of scope. HVAC –Heating, ventilation, air-conditioning. Work in 2014 shall consist on analysing different possible solutions for the general architecture of the ventilation systems for underground facilities, evaluating advantages and drawbacks according to the main technical parameters and safety constraints. It is considered that ventilation of surface building, being more standard, shall not require a specific study at this stage, unless specific cases that will be outlined in the coming months. Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program electrical distribution (F. Duval) Installed power –Collect requirements for normal, emergency and no-break power for the different colliders, injectors and detectors Distribution –Survey existing HV networks and assess their suitability for feeding machines –Explore distribution options: staging of voltages, network architecture, location of substations, routing of lines, need for HV lines in tunnel(s) Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program cryogenics (L. Tavian) Temperatures and heat loads –Refine first estimates, following progress of accelerator systems definition Cooling schemes –Study cooling schemes for superconducting devices, beam screens/beam pipes, including use of non-conventional fluids Cryoplants –Investigate routes for increase of plant unit size, including consequences on operability, cost, efficiency –Study implantation above and underground Cryogenic distribution –Explore variants of integrated piping vs separate cryoline(s) Cryogens –Address issues of cryogen inventory management Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program geodesy and survey (D. Missiaen) Accuracy & precision –Investigate requirements for different colliders and detectors and compare with existing state-of-the-art –Identify need/opportunity for new measurement/alignment methods and tools Reference systems –Extend topographic and geodesic networks to cover collider sites Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program personnel & equipment transport (I. Ruhl) Horizontal transport –Explore options for personnel and equipment transport –Study possible needs for remote/automated intervention system Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Operation & Energy Efficiency WBS Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program operation & energy (P. Collier) Reliability & availability –Develop and implement availability assessment tool based on compilation of CERN’s experience with failure and repair of accelerator and technical systems –Apply to colliders under study to identify unavailability drivers and explore mitigation measures Power and energy –Estimate power consumption in different operating and standby modes –Explore options for energy efficiency and waste heat recovery Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Computing & Data Services WBS Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program computing & data services (J. Gutleber) WBS Work Units defined in cooperation with department IT, EN, BE and PH Organizational goals for 2014: – Establish core working group at CERN – Establish cooperations with external institutes. Currently candidates are ESS, FNAL, INFN, SKA, FAIR – Use-cases submitted to openLab. Strong interest was shown Technical topics for 2014: – Create baselines for technology outlooks – Understand key parameters of accelerators & experiments – Understand and define where common working goals with CERN groups and external partners are possible – Survey of current software architectures and identification of areas, which call for thinking towards improvements – Define data analytics use cases for modeling and availability studies Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Integration WBS Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program integration (S. Baird) Tunnel cross-section –Draft cross sections of equipped tunnel(s) for different colliders and variants Experimental caverns –Draft cavern layouts integrating requirements of detectors, accelerators and technical systems Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Safety & Environment WBS Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program safety & environment (R. Trant) Ensure preliminary design work integrates safety aspects from the onset –Radiation safety –Radiation protection –Environment protection, radiological & conventional –Underground access & egress –Fire prevention –Air management Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Work program cost & schedule (Ph. Lebrun & K. Foraz) Cost –Generic cost scaling of tunnels & underground works –Generic cost scaling of infrastructure & technical systems –No analytical cost study of accelerator components –No costing of detectors Schedule –First scheduling exercises (Gannt) for colliders, injectors and experiments –Subject to progress of technical definition and availability of inputs Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

Some open questions What input/boundary conditions from accelerator design are needed to proceed with the study of technical I&O systems? –Ex: Tunnel footprint, number/length of LSS, cryoplant sizing,… Conversely, which studies in I&O can be undertaken without detailed or final input from accelerator design? –Ex: Principles of electrical distribution, longitudinal vs transverse ventilation,… What issues in I&O are transverse/common to several technical systems, and how to address them? –Ex: Parallel tunnels, tunnel cross section Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

WBS of FCC Study Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,

WBS of FCC I&O Study Ph. Lebrun & P. CollierFCC I&O meeting,