LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Magnet R&D Plan for GianLuca Sabbi LARP Collaboration Meeting 15 SLAC, November 1 st, 2010 BNL - FNAL - LBNL - SLAC

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Outline Magnet R&D Program components Progress since CM14 Preparing for the 2013 technology selection  Ongoing activities (Materials, LQ, HQ)  New activities (LHQ, HL-LHC Design study) MS parallel session organization  Working group participants/agenda Summary

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Program Components 1.Materials R&D: Strand specification and procurement Cable fabrication, insulation and qualification Heat treatment optimization 2.Technology development with Racetrack Coils: Subscale Quadrupole (SQ) Long Racetrack (LR) 3.Cos 2  Quadrupoles with 90 mm aperture: Technology Quadrupole (TQ) Long Quadrupole (LQ) 4.Cos 2  Quadrupoles with 120 mm aperture: High-Field Quadrupole (HQ) Long High-Field Quadrupole (LHQ) Ongoing Completed ~75% ~30% Starting

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Magnet Development Chart Completed Ongoing Starting

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Magnet Series SQ SM TQS LR LQS-4m HQ TQC

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Magnet Tests in the last 12 months Dec LQS01a (first Long Quadrupole) - FNAL Achieved target gradient of 200 T/m Dec TQS03c (high stress) - CERN 88% SSL w/200 MPa average coil stress Feb TQS03e (cycling) - CERN No degradation after 1000 cycles CM14 May 2010 HQS01a (first High-Field Quadrupole) - LBNL >155 already above NbTi June 2010 HQS01b (revised coil-structure shims) - LBNL First Quench >150 T/m (78%); insulation failure July 2010 LQS01b (revised coil-structure shims) - FNAL Rapid training to >220 retained at 1.9K Oct HQS0c (two new coils) - LBNL Insulation OK, but lower quench levels (~135 T/m)

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Next Milestone: 2013 Technology Selection Consensus within LARP/DOE and with CERN on the basic strategy:  Aperture: build on existing platforms (90 mm & 120 mm)  LQ for reproducibility, length effects, process optimization  Short HQ models for high field and accelerator quality  Long HQ (LHQ) to demonstrate scale-up of 120 mm design CERN will proceed with 120 mm aperture, 2m long NbTi models  Direct performance comparison will be a key input for TS Several critical questions need to be addressed:  Accelerator quality targets and platform (1-m or 2-m models)  LHQ length and strategy for scale-up to production length  R&D coordination with CERN, EU, Japan programs Need official protocol to guide design decisions & R&D priorities  A CERN-US working group has been formed to define it

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Materials Procurement and R&D Conductor Procurement  Conductor availability still limiting cable R&D/production  Significant orders placed in FY10 – all 108/127, Ta-doped  Expect strand inventory ok after 2/2011, cable to follow  Rapidly increasing demand (ITER+HEP) is an issue Cable insulation  Fiber Innovation S-glass sleeve was used in all LARP magnets  FI production line has been discontinued  Several options are being investigated: For R&D: alternative vendors/materials for sleeve For production: direct braiding or tape wrap  Need to fully qualify one or more alternative solutions

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Cable R&D and Production Significant and positive experience in LARP: TQ (30 UL, 65 m); LQ (18 UL, 200 m); LR (3 UL, 200 m); HQ (14 UL, 100 m) Good results with 2-step process: first pass, anneal and re-roll  However, labor intensive and difficult to integrate cores Several R&D runs were carried out in FY-2010:  Two-pass Ti-doped 108/127 (qualify for future use) - coil 11  One-pass w/pre-annealed wire (lower cost, SS core) - coil 13  One-pass w/SS core (control of dynamic effects) - coil 12 These cables are being used/tested in HQ 1-meter coils Need to converge on a final design for HQ and LHQ

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans LQ Status and Next Steps Fully reproduce performance of the TQ short models  Higher gradient (220 T/m in TQS02, 240 T/m in TQS03)  Fast training (plateau in 5-10 quenches, no retraining)  Clear progress already demonstrated in LQS01b Systematic analysis of coil length effects  Detailed modeling of the reaction process  Understand/optimize coil strain state after reaction Design and process optimization for construction  Coil size control/reproducibility  Protection heater design, esp. for inner layer  One-side loading with 4 m keys/bladders  Cable insulation techniques for production

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans LQ Plan

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans HQ insulation failure: Review comments Work is now beginning to understand the causes of the failure and remedy those causes in the design or in the fabrication procedures. This effort is of course the highest priority of the LARP team and is being approached in that way. The recent failure of HQ2 raises an urgent need to understand its origins and modify design or fabrication to remedy them. The team is responding with urgency and effective organization to this challenge, such failures are part of R&D, and this should be seen as simply a step towards ultimate success.

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans HQ Status and Next Steps Electrical integrity issues: HQ01c test shows that the failure analysis and new QA is working – program can proceed by coil selection and process improvements HQ01c test also confirms focus on coil design and fabrication In parallel: coil design modifications for improved robustness Short model R&D using baseline, alternative and mirror structures:  Feedback on cable/coil design and fabrication  Pre-load targets & uniformity, quench performance  Quench protection and thermal studies  Design features for production and accelerator integration  Field quality characterization and optimization  Performance verification for 2 half-length coils in one structure

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans HQ Plan

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Status of HQ Scale-up planning Ongoing planning discussions by LARP magnet steering committee, Luminosity Task force, CM14, DOE Review, US-CERN WG Decision timeline: balance long lead times with the requirement of a strong foundation from technical and programmatic standpoint Expected magnetic length of HL-LHC IR Quads in the range of 7-10 m Full-length quad preferred for project, half-length can be considered Full-length models not feasible for LARP, especially on TS time scale Converging on two options: LQ length or slightly above (4.5 m total) Key considerations:  Infrastructure and resource/material availability  Trade-offs between length, schedule, cost, risk  Integration with APUL, DS dipole, base programs

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans HL-LHC WP 3.2 (Nb 3 Sn Quadrupoles) 36 man-months over 3-4 years Consistent with FY11 MS funding allocation (~0.8 FTE) WBS options: MS design studies or JIRS

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans From LARP R&D to HL-LHC Construction Assuming technology decision at the end of 2013 and installation in years for coil fabrication requires 2 production lines of full length coils 64 full length coils required i.e. one new coil completed every ~2 weeks

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Length considerations for the IR upgrade HQ short sample gradient is K & K Assume operation at 170 T/m and same basic layout as baseline LHC  magnet length is ~7.4 m (Q1 & Q3), 6.4 m (Q2a & Q2b) Half length elements: ~4.1 m (Q1/Q3), ~3.5 m (Q2a/b) w/10% factor Technical comparison: - Full length elements are clearly preferred for optimal IR performance - Full length elements should be less costly for production  However, they require new infrastructure - Full length elements need to be demonstrated experimentally  This can impact the schedule and decision process - Half-length elements could be considered as a fall-back solution  Loss of efficiency is 5-15% depending on implementation

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans MS Parallel Session Organization Tuesday morning: working group meetings (3+3 sessions): 9 (8:30) to 10:30  A1AHQ coil, current designHelene Felice  A1BHQ structuresPaolo Ferracin  A1CMedium term plansGiorgio Ambrosio 10:50 to 12:20  A2AHQ coil, new designHelene Felice  A2BMagnet testingGuram Chlachidze  A2CMaterials Arup Ghosh Tuesday afternoon: WG reports and general discussion Check CM15 agenda in indico for meeting room and remote connection info

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans Proposed WG participants A1A (HQ coil, current design): Helene Felice (coordinator), Rodger Bossert, Dan Cheng, Dan Dietderich, John Escallier, Ray Hafalia, Maxim Martchevskii, Fred Nobrega, Tiina Salmi, Jesse Schmalzle, Xiaorong Wang A1B (HQ structures): Paolo Ferracin (coordinator), Mike Anerella, Dariusz Bocian, Shlomo Caspi, John Cozzolino, Paolo Ferracin, Attilio Milanese, Soren Prestemon A1C (Medium term plans): Giorgio Ambrosio (coordinator), Arup Ghosh, Mike Lamm, GianLuca Sabbi, Bruce Strauss, Peter Wanderer, Sasha Zlobin, Ezio Todesco A2A (HQ coil, new design): Helene Felice (coordinator), Giorgio Ambrosio, Dariusz Bocian, Rodger Bossert, Shlomo Caspi, Paolo Ferracin, Fred Nobrega, Jesse Schmalzle, Attilio Milanese A2B (Magnet testing): Guram Chlachidze (coordinator), John Escallier, Mike Lamm, Maxim Martchevskii, Joe Muratore, Tiina Salmi, Peter Wanderer, Xiaorong Wang A2C (Materials): Arup Ghosh (coordinator), Emanuela Barzi, Dan Cheng, Dan Dietderich, Soren Prestemon, GianLuca Sabbi, Bruce Strauss, Ezio Todesco, Sasha Zlobin

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans WG Agenda Topics (1/2) A1B – HQ Structures Discuss/compare design features and FEA results for the two structures (follow up from 9/24 video meeting) Possible synergies, e.g. use of new bladders or collared coil in current structure Options/plans for testing two coils in the same structure (to check the performance using half-length coils) Options/plans for a test that will incorporate a pressure vessel over the aluminum shell Heat transfer calculations and design features for improved cooling A1C – Medium term plans US contributions to the LHC upgrades in Magnet Systems (APUL, LARP, 11T dipoles): coordination of goals and resources LHQ goals, schedule, effort distribution, budget envelope Selection of a suitable length for LHQ Field quality studies: determine if 1-m models are sufficient LARP support of HL-LHC design study Options for adding a winding/curing production line for HQ coils Radiation studies

LARP CM15, SLAC, 11/1/2010GianLuca SabbiMagnet R&D Plans WG Agenda Topics (2/2) A2A – HQ Coil, new design Cross-section: how to adapt to new insulation thickness, adjust cable thickness to include core and to account for growth in radial coil size Increased insulation thickness between layers and between coil and parts Changes in end part design for better fit Axial shift to mitigate insulation issues next to end shoes Optimization of end field quality Changes in the inter-layer ramp to increase the true straight section length Schedule for implementing design changes; Target coil number for new design A1B – Magnet testing Test requirements for the long HQ (consider two cases, 3.3 m coil length - same as LQ - and 4 m coil length): possible facilities and required upgrades. Large diameter probes for field quality measurements: probe fabrication, anti-cryostat/header modifications, possibility to perform measurements in LHe. Magnet protection from shorts/ground faults Quench Detection Electrical QA: status, analysis etc. A1C – Materials Conductor characterization/QA. Protocol for verification of as-delivered strand, cable qualification, coil witness samples. Match to LQ/HQ schedule. Work plan at each lab. Confirm cable production schedule for LQ/HQ in FY11, matched to conductor delivery and coil fabrication schedule Status of cored cable R&D, next steps leading to integration in HQ coil fabrication Cable insulation plan, in particular regarding evaluation and transition to new options Cables for LHQ (consider two cases, 3.3 m coil length - same as LQ - and 4 m coil length). Assume 2 UL in FY11, 4 in FY12, 4 in FY13. Are current procurements able to sustain production, in addition to LQ/HQ? Can we get a reasonable yield from the conductor inventory, given typical strand piece length? Based on past experience, what yield can we expect taking into account production issues (crossovers, etc) Discuss/compare design features and FEA results for the two structures