Technology & Engineering Division Lead Stabilization Alexey Radovinsky (PSFC, MIT) MICE CC Cryostat Design Review Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Q1 for JLAB’s 12 Gev/c Super High Momentum Spectrometer S.R. Lassiter, P.B. Brindza, M. J. Fowler, S.R. Milward, P. Penfold, R. Locke Q1 SHMS HMS Q2 Q3.
Advertisements

The Use of Small Coolers for Hydrogen and Helium Liquefaction
Interim Design Amy Eckerle Andrew Whittington Philip Witherspoon Team 16.
Extended Surface Heat Transfer
MUTAC Review, 9 April MuCOOL and MICE Coupling Magnet Status Michael A. Green Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Berkeley CA
Progress on the MICE Cooling Channel Solenoid Magnet System
-1- Wang, Li The 23rd MICE Collaboration Meeting to 17 HIT/CHINA WANG, Li Institute of Cryogenics and Superconductivity Technology.
Spectrometer Solenoid Design and Procurement Review Steve Virostek Mike Green Mike Zisman Lawrence Berkeley National Lab MICE Collaboration Meeting October.
23 October 2005MICE Meeting at RAL1 MICE Tracker Magnets, 4 K Coolers, and Magnet Coupling during a Quench Michael A. Green Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.
1 Update on Focus Coil Design and Configuration M. A. Green, G. Barr, W. Lau, R. S. Senanayake, and S. Q. Yang University of Oxford Department of Physics.
Spectrometer Solenoid Update Steve Virostek - LBNL MICE Video Conference #129 February 25, 2010.
9 June 2006MICE CM-15 Fermilab1 Progress on the MICE Cooling Channel and Tracker Magnets since CM-14 Michael A. Green Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.
1 The Genoa Tracker Solenoids and their Contribution toward a New Design Michael A. Green Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and Pasquale Fabbricatore.
Magnet and Absorber Heat Loads and Cooling with Various Small Coolers
CM-18 June Magnet Conductor Parameters and How They affect Conductor Selection for MICE Magnets Michael Green Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Berkeley.
MICE Spectrometer Solenoid Update Michael S. Zisman Center for Beam Physics Accelerator & Fusion Research Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Spectrometer Solenoid and RFCC Update Michael S. Zisman Center for Beam Physics Accelerator & Fusion Research Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Spectrometer Solenoid Fabrication & Testing Update Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab MICE Collaboration Meeting #26 University of California.
Chapter 2 Transformers.
MICE Spectrometer Solenoid Review Some inputs for the in person meeting to be discussed at the November 13, 2009 phone meeting P.Fabbricatore on behalf.
Progress on the MuCool and MICE Coupling Coils * L. Wang a, X. K Liu a, F. Y. Xu a, A. B. Chen a, H. Pan a, H. Wu a, X. L. Guo a, S. X Zheng a, D. Summers.
Spectrometer Solenoid Update Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Roy Preece Rutherford Appleton Lab October 28, 2011 MICE Collaboration Meeting.
A novel model for Minimum Quench Energy calculation of impregnated Nb 3 Sn cables and verification on real conductors W.M. de Rapper, S. Le Naour and H.H.J.
Status and Integration of the Spectrometer Solenoid Magnets Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab MICE RAL June 15, 2007.
ZTF Cryostat Finite Element Analysis Andrew Lambert ZTF Technical Meeting 1.
Possible HTS wire implementation Amalia Ballarino Care HHH Working Meeting LHC beam-beam effects and beam-beam interaction CERN, 28 th August 2008.
LBNL Test Cryostat Preliminary Design Review Tuning – Field Correction Soren Prestemon, Diego Arbelaez, Heng Pan, Scott Myers, Taekyung Ki.
Magnet quench during a training run Successfully trained to peak currents and operationally tested Thermal performance requirements met 3D magnetic bore.
Bias Magnet for the Booster’s 2-nd Harmonic Cavity An attempt to evaluate the scope of work based of the existing RF design of the cavity 9/10/2015I. T.
Spectrometer Solenoid Test Plan Workshop: Spectrometer Solenoid Overview Steve Virostek - LBNL February 17, 2012.
A. Verweij, TE-MPE. 3 Feb 2009, LHC Performance Workshop – Chamonix 2009 Arjan Verweij TE-MPE - joint stability - what was wrong with the ‘old’ bus-bar.
MICE CC Test Status Ruben Carcagno 11/06/13 1. Cooldown Coil Temperature (calculated average in each of 8 coil segments) SC Transition (voltages across.
Hall D Target Design Status Jim Fochtman- February 22, 2012.
One-Dimensional Steady-State Conduction
Spectrometer Solenoid: Plans to Fix Magnet 2 Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Spectrometer Solenoid Review November 18, 2009.
1 WANG,Li/SINAP WANG Li, WANG ShuHua, LIU YiYong, SUN Sen, HU Xiao, YIN LiXin Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, CAS, Shanghai , China Shanghai.
Preliminary Design for the Coupling Coil Cryostat in MICE
Abstract: The Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment (MICE) is an international effort sited at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, which will demonstrate ionization.
February 13, 2012 Mu2e Production Solenoid Design V.V. Kashikhin Workshop on Radiation Effects in Superconducting Magnet Materials (RESMM'12)
Spectrometer Solenoid Fabrication & Testing Update Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab MICE CM25 at RAL November 6, 2009.
Spectrometer Solenoid Fabrication Status and Schedule Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab MICE RAL October 20, 2008.
MICE Cooling Channel Magnets: Spectrometer Solenoid Procurement RF Module Coupling Coil Proposal Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab NFMCC 07.
Magnet for ARIES-CS Magnet protection Cooling of magnet structure L. Bromberg J.H. Schultz MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center ARIES meeting UCSD January.
Spectrometer Solenoid Update Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab MICE Collaboration Meeting #28 Sofia, Bulgaria.
CM-26 Cooler and Lead Test1 Tests of a PT415 Cooler with HTS Leads in the Drop-in Mode Michael A. Green Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley CA 94720,
Spectrometer Solenoid Fabrication Update Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab NFMCC at LBNL January 25, 2009.
MICE/MuCool Coupling Magnets to 22 ICST/HIT MICE/Muool Coupling Magnets Progress Li Wang for MICE Group Institute of Cryogenics.
22 October 2005MICE Meeting at RAL1 Tracker Solenoid Overview Michael A. Green Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory MICE Collaboration Meeting 22 October 2005.
Spacing of Cu clamp = 10” Clamp plate width = 2.5”, thickness = 0.375” Thickness of conductor insulation = 0.03” Thickness of coil ground wrap = 0.03”
Cavity support scheme options Thomas Jones 25/06/15 1.
1 Small Coolers for MICE Michael A. Green University of Oxford Department of Physics Oxford OX1 3RH, UK MICE Collaboration Meeting RAL.
Spectrometer Solenoid Design and Test Results Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Spectrometer Solenoid Review November 18, 2009.
Mike Struik / LHC-CRI INSTRUMENTATION FEEDTHROUGH SYSTEM FOR LHC MACHINE ARC QUADRUPOLE MAGNETS. 123rd LHC Vacuum Design Meeting 19 April 1999.
Study of the HTS Insert Quench Protection M. Sorbi and A. Stenvall 1 HFM-EuCARD, ESAC meeting, WP 7.4.1CEA Saclay 28 feb. 2013,
-1- Steve Virostek (LBNL) and Li Wang (SINAP) Instrumentation for the MICE Coupling Coil Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab February.
MICE Spectrometer Solenoid Recovery Review - December 3-4, Steve Virostek MICE Spectrometer Solenoid Design and Assembly.
Cooling Circuit Design Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab February 29, 2012 MICE Coupling Coil Cryostat Design Review Lawrence Berkeley National.
MICE CC Magnet Cryostat Design Overview Derun Li Center for Beam Physics Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory MICE CC Cryostat Design Review LBNL, February.
Henryk Piekarz SC Magnets at Fermilab HTS Cable Test for a Fast-Cycling Accelerator Dipole Magnet E4R Test Goals and Arrangement Review September 10, 2009.
Thermal screen of the cryostat Presented by Evgeny Koshurnikov, GSI, Darmstadt September 8, 2015 Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (Dubna)
MICE Coupling Coil Fabrication Steps to Complete Allan DeMello Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Coupling Coil Working Group January 28, 2014 January.
CHATS-AS 2011clam1 Integrated analysis of quench propagation in a system of magnetically coupled solenoids CHATS-AS 2011 Claudio Marinucci, Luca Bottura,
Michael A. Green and Heng Pan
One-Dimensional Steady-State Conduction
Quench estimations of the CBM magnet
Small Coolers for MICE MICE Collaboration Meeting RAL Michael A. Green
FP420 Detector Cooling Thermal Considerations
The Quench Detection-Wire-Feedthrough Plug-In of W7-X
Quench calculations of the CBM magnet
F.Pasdeloup, H.Prin, L. Williams
Presentation transcript:

Technology & Engineering Division Lead Stabilization Alexey Radovinsky (PSFC, MIT) MICE CC Cryostat Design Review Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 29 February 2012

Technology & Engineering Division Current Design Cu CC 1 st Stage Cryocoolers (CC) Cu Current Lead HTS Current Lead Cu Terminals Bracket G10 Insulating Plate G10 Insulating Inserts Radiation Shield (transparent) Stabilized SC Leads (redesigned-?) Cu Current Lead HTS Current Lead Cu CC 1 st Stage G10 Spacer RT Feedthrough

Technology & Engineering Division McFee Optimized Cu Current Leads Cold End: T=T0, Q=Q0 Warm (RT) End: T=T1=300 K, Q=Q1=0 0Lx K(RRR,T)*d 2 T/dx 2 + dK(RRR,T)/dT*(dT/dx) 2 + rho(RRR,T)*(Ic/A) 2 = 0 RRROptimum (L*Ic/A)T0Q0A (Ic=210 A, L=0.3 m) A/mKWmm^ E E E Here K(RRR,T), rho(RRR,T) – Cu thermal conductivity and resistivity by NIST Iterate with boundary conditions, T| x=L =T1, dT/dx| x=L =0, and adjusting the cross section, A, till the cold end acquires the required temperature, T| x=0 = T0, Calculate Q0= - K(RRR,T0)*A*dT/dx| x=0 Cold end temperature, T0, is set to 46 K  Low sensitivity of optimum (L*Ic/A) to RRR, within tolerances on A  Cold end heat load about 10 W per lead (agrees with M.Green)

Technology & Engineering Division McFee Optimized Cu Current Leads (2) RRR=10 RRR=50 RRR=100

Technology & Engineering Division Challengers of CU Current Leads analyses Question is what is the appropriate temperature of the cold end of the Cu Current Lead, T0 Account for the balance of heat loads at the intermediate cooling station integrating 3 cryocoolers on 3 copper plates connected by 2 pairs of copper joint straps, and 2 copper blocks with prongs for terminals for the RT and HTS current leads Cryocooler cooling power is a function of the temperature of its first and second stages Temperatures at the first stage of the Central and Side cryocoolers are different Temperature drop between the cryocooler first stage and Cu Lead cold end is calculated by FEA Heat loads are defined with a wide margin of probability – up to 100% contingency is applied Usually analyses iterate between the cryocooler performance characteristics and the intermediate cooling station temperature distribution FEA A method is developed to converge in one step

Technology & Engineering Division Prior Art (0): References WANG, Li, “Calculations and FEA simulations for MICE/ Muool Coupling Magnet Cryostat Design,” Review at SINAP/Shanghai, Michael A. Green, “Results from the Cooler and Lead Tests,” MICE Note 291, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 20 June 2010 “Coupling Solenoid Magnet Engineering Design Report,” INSTITUTE OF CRYOGENICS AND SUPERCONDUCTIVITY TECHNOLOGY. HARBIN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. CHINA, Solid Works Coupling Coil for 20MIT/ Next 4 slides summarize conclusions and the data from these studies used for the present analyses Highlighted in RED

Technology & Engineering Division Prior Art (1): Heat Loads at the First Stage of the Cryocooler Heat loads from 300K to 60K (W) Previous designCurrent LBL design Copper leads from 300 K19.30 Cold mass supports (intercept T=72-77 K) Radiation Heat to the Shields * Instrumentation wires0.092 He Cooling Tubes Level sensor tube Cooler SS sleeves9.73 Neck shield supports0.88 Heat shield supports (longer support) Sub-total (calculated) Total Heat Load with 50% Contingency Total Heat Load with 100% Contingency Total heat load at the first station from all sources, except for the Current Leads is set to 74 W. It conservatively accounts for an ~ 100% contingency.

Technology & Engineering Division Prior Art (2): Heat Loads at the Second Stage of the Cryocooler Heat load from 60K to 4.2K (W) Previous designCurrent LBL design HTS current leads ( Warm HTS end T = 64 K) K Cold mass supports (intercept T=73-78K) Radiation heat to 4.2K cold mass (Shield Tave =70K) (W) (MLI layer is 20)* Instrumentation Wires He cooling tubes Level sensor tube Cooler SS sleeves** Superconducting Splices at 10 nW per splice and 210 A 0.01 Sub-total (calculated) Total with 50% Contingency Total with 100% Contingency Total heat load at the second station with a 100% contingency is close to the full capacity of 3 PT415 cryocoolers. Certified Performance: with We can assume 4.2 K at the second stage.

Technology & Engineering Division Prior Art (3): Cryocooler Performance Diagram Specification by Cryomech Data taken by Florida State University, confirmed by M. Green P415 = *T *T^ *T^ *T^4 PT415 first stage capacity, P415 [W], vs. temperature, T [K], for the second stage at 4.2 K P415 (W) First stage T (K)

Technology & Engineering Division Prior Art (4): LBL Design and Temperature Distribution at Intermediate Station 60.0 K at the Cryocooler Flange 69.6 K at Cu Lead side 63.5 K at HTS Lead side  G10 spacer with dT≈150 K unaccounted in design  6 bolts connecting Cu Bracket and Cu Plate electrically insulated by G10 inserts.  1-mm thick G10 electrical insulator between the Cu Bracket and Cu Plate.  Too complex and unreliable.  Temperature drop between the first stage of the cryocooler and the cold end of the Copper Lead dT~9 K.  Too much. Alex Zhukovsky proposed redesign of the Cu Brackets mounting on the Cu Plate

Technology & Engineering Division Proposed redesign of the Cu Brackets The Copper Block has no holes in it. It is wrapped into Kapton and clamped to the Copper Plate by 2 SS plates, one below the Copper Block and one above the Copper Plate, tied together by 6 bolts, 3 in a row on each side of the Copper Block. SS plates are insulated from the Copper Block by Kapton and their connection bolts need no insulation from the Copper Plates. A 2-mil ( mm) layer of Kapton with thermal conductivity of 0.15 W/m-K is easily sufficient for a 1-kV max voltage defined by Brad Smith quench analyses The distance between the holes and the edge of the Copper Plate is sufficient for the present bolted connection to the radiation shield. To make this possible the width of the Copper Blocks is reduced from 82 mm to 60 mm. The width of the terminal prongs is scaled in the same proportion, 60/82. This redesign is implemented in the FE model of the intermediate cooling station

Technology & Engineering Division Vector Fields FEM Parts Diagram Bottom ViewTop View Central (c) Copper Plate shown in blue and two Side (s) Copper Plates shown in magenta are treated as separate parts. Below parameters related to these plates are marked by respective extensions, “_c” and “_s”.

Technology & Engineering Division Power Balance Power balances for the Central and the Side Copper Plate subassemblies Central:- P415_c(T415_c) + P_shield_c + 2*P_straps = 0 Side:- P415_s(T415_s) + P_shield_s + P_300k + P_4k - P_straps = 0 Here Cryocooler Heat Capacities P415_c(T415_c) = * T415_c * T415_c ^ * T415_c ^ * T415_c ^4 P415_s(T415_s) = * T415_s * T415_s ^ * T415_s ^ * T415_s ^4 P_300k = 10 W and P_4k = W - power loads from the RT and HTS Current Leads P_straps = dPdT*( T415_s - T415_c), where dPdT= 11.2 W/K from subsidary model Solving nonlinear system of equations calculate a combination of values of the temperature and cooling power of cryocoolers, (T415_c, P415_c) and (T415_s, P415_s), which is expected to provide a power balance between the plates subassemblies with the account of heat transfer through the straps.

Technology & Engineering Division Vector Fields FEM Boundary Conditions BCs Flux_cryo_s and Temp_cryo_s BCs Flux_cryo_c and Temp_cryo_c BC Flux_shield_sBC Flux_shield_c BC Flux_4k BC Flux_300k

Technology & Engineering Division Vector Fields FEM Boundary Conditions (2) Calculated (T415_c, P415_c) and (T415_s, P415_s) are shown in BLUE Heat flux, Flux_shield_c = Flux_shield_s = Flux_shield, is defined by smearing 74 W, the total heat load at the first station from all sources, except for the Current Leads, over the outer perimeter of the Cu Plates contacting the radiation shield. Verification: FEM calculated power transferred through a pair of Straps is W, which is close to the expected |P_straps| = W in the table

Technology & Engineering Division FEM Results Due to the abundance of the cooling power at the first stations of the cryocoolers their temperatures are close to 37 K and the cooling power is evenly shared between 29 W in the Central cryocooler and 32 W in the Side cryocoolers 1.5-cm thick Copper Plates provide sufficient thermal conductivity to limit temperature drops between the cryocooler and any point of the Copper Plate to less than 1 K With a 2-mil Kapton insulator between the Copper Plate and the Copper Block the warmest point of the model, the Copper Current Lead terminal of the Copper Block, is just 2 K warmer than the first station of the cryocooler attached to the Side Copper Plate. Temperature drop across the insulator is a fraction of 1 K.

Technology & Engineering Division FEM Results (2) The purpose of Copper Straps is to allow independent flotation of the Copper Plates to avoid overstressing the structure of the cryocolers between the RT and the first station flanges due to its different thermal contraction. Structural analyses can show if the flexibility of the Straps made of solid copper as in the current design is sufficient for this purpose. One of the alternatives, free of these potential drawbacks can be using flexible thermal links made of laminated Cu sheets like MIT used in LDX L-coil. The spec for choosing these links is that thermal resistance of a connection between any of the Side Plates to the Central Plate at the 40-K temperature has to be no less than 11.2 W/K as defined in this study. A model was analyzed with no Straps connecting the Copper Plates to assess their value for the design. In this case the Central cryocooler delivers 3 times less power than each of the Side cryocoolers. It’s temperature is almost 6 K lower. Central: (T415_c, P415_c) = (33.7 K, W) Side: (T415_s, P415_s) = (39.4 K, W)

Technology & Engineering Division Optimized Cu Leads Sensitivity Conservative Case: 100% contingency on heat load – 74 W, T0-Tcc=9 K temperature drop between cryocooler and Cu lead cold end Optimistic Case: 0% contingency on heat load – 37 W, T0-Tcc=0 K temperature drop between cryocooler and Cu lead cold end Potential power disbalance at the RT end of Cu Lead is of the order of 1 W

Technology & Engineering Division Steady State Heat Leak thru Cu Ic=0 The maximum heat leak occurs when the temperature drop between the RT and the cold ends of the lead is the biggest. The lowest possible temperature at the first stage, 32 K, is defined by the Cryocooler Capacity diagram. Assuming T1=300 K and the cold end at T0=32 K we can calculate corresponding values of the heat leak, Q1= Q0. Q = -A/L*Integral[K(T), { T0, T1}] The maximum heat leak at the Lead RT end is small, about 7 W per lead. It can be removed by thermal conduction to the cryostat or by using a fan.

Technology & Engineering Division Cold End Temperature Rise at Cryocooler Failure If all cryocoolers fail at the same time at full coil current the emergency current dump scenario will be initiated. At this time we are not aware of the specifics of the current vs. time scenario of for this event. Let us assume that it is safe if the temperature of the conductor carrying full current, Ic, grows by deltaT=200 K and evaluate how long it will take for the cold and warm ends of the lead to increase its temperature from the normal operational value, T0 and T1 to T0+deltaT and T1+deltaT respectively. Under the most conservative adiabatic assumption this temperature rise is time0 = dens*(A/Ic)^2*Integral[Cp(T)/rho(T), { T0, T0+deltaT}] time1 = dens*(A/Ic)^2*Integral[Cp(T)/rho(T), { T1, T1+deltaT}] The minimum time for an adiabatic temperature rise of 200 K is about 150 seconds. This is quite sufficient for detecting the failure and quick discharge (124 s from kV at terminals)

Technology & Engineering Division HTS Current Lead Stabilization Design Cu stabilizer for SC Current Lead Insulation Pad Twisted Cu Bridge for Cu Leads (assumed properly sized)

Technology & Engineering Division HTS Current Lead Failure Modes 500 A HTS-110 current leads can go to 80 K before sudden thermal runaway occurs Mode 1: At the HTS Lead warm end all 3 cryocoolers fail simultaneously. How long does it take for the intermediare cooling station to go from 40 K to 80 K? Heat load, P=100 W, copper mass m=54 kg t = m/P*Integral[Cp,{T,40,80}] = 2900 s Mode 2: Quench of LTS conductor between HTS Lead cold end and the coil. Conductor: length, L=30 cm, Cu cross section area, A=1.2 mm 2. Shunted by Cu block: mass, m=0.15 kg How long does it take for the Cu block to go from 4.5 K to 80 K? Heat load, P=rho(T)*(Ic/A)2*(L*A) W t = m*A/(L*Ic 2 )*Integral[rho(T)*Cp(T),{T,4.5,80}] = 73 s This time is insufficient for detecting the failure and quick discharge. The mass of the stabilizer has to be at least doubled