C75 Commissioning Michael Drury SRF Operations Support

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tom Powers Practical Aspects of SRF Cavity Testing and Operations SRF Workshop 2011 Tutorial Session.
Advertisements

Vertical Test Area RF qualification of C100 cavities for 12 GeV project Mircea Stirbet Open Collaboration Meeting on Superconducting Linacs for High Power.
RF Unit Test Facility at NML & CM1 Test Plan Bob Kephart Fermilab IWLC-10 October 20, 2010.
Stimulating a discussion on cavity performance metrics.
SRF_BizPlan_31Oct2010_Rev_14 Production Preparations at JLAB JLab SRF Team EDMS – PLM DESY TeamCenter Meeting at SLAC 31 MAR 2014.
Cavity status; recent KEK activities : Hayano (1) STF CM-1 cavities are; MHI-014: 3-rd VT:36MV/m (finished) MHI-015: 3-rd VT: > 18.4MV/m.
S.Noguchi (KEK) ILC08 Chicago , Nov . 17, Cavity Package Test in STF STF Phase-1 E. Kako, S. Noguchi, H. Hayano, T. Shishido, M. Sato, K. Watanabe,
1Matthias LiepeAugust 2, 2007 LLRF for the ERL Matthias Liepe.
Marc Ross Nick Walker Akira Yamamoto ‘Overhead and Margin’ – an attempt to set standard terminology 10 Sept 2010 Overhead and Margin 1.
Test plan for SPL short cryomodule O. Brunner, W. Weingarten WW 1SPL cryo-module meeting 19 October 2010.
E. KAKO (KEK) 2009' Oct. 26 ILC KEK Global Design Effort 1 Cavity Preparation for S1-Global Eiji Kako (KEK, Japan)
Spoke test in vertical cryostat IPNO-UU Meeting on spoke test program, 2 nd -3 st October 2013 IPNO Team.
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Department of Energy Kirk Davis.
Preliminary Results from First Blade Tuner Tests in HTS Yuriy Pischalnikov Warren Schappert Serena Barbannoti Matteo Scorrano.
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Page 1 CEBAF Cryo & SRF Workshop April 3, 2014 Jonathan Creel Electrical / Cryogenics Engineer Cryogenics.
1 new module Seven cell Cavity, 0.7 m long (high Q L ) 8 Cavities per Cryomodule Fits the existing Cryomodule footprint.
EXAMPLE OF REDUCED CRYOMODULE HEAT CAPACITY DUE TO HELIUM PRESSURE RETURN LEVELS 0L04 CASE HISTORY.
Evolution of Field Emission Characteristics Selected C100 Cryomodules Michael Drury.
C100 summary of performance degradation - VTA to Cryomodule Ari Deibert Palczewski SRF Scientist July 5, 2016.
Microphonics Discussion For LLRF Design Review Tom Powers 13 June 2016 Not for release outside of JLAB There are several MSWord documents located at: M:\asd\asddata\C100Microphonics2016.
Microphonics Discussion For LLRF Design Review Tom Powers 13 June 2016 Not for release outside of JLAB There are several MSWord documents located at: M:\asd\asddata\C100Microphonics2016.
RF System for C100 Cryomodule C100 GDR mode – Original/Modified Tuner Phase noise 25.6 deg rms /14 Hz rms Phase noise 7.5 deg rms /4 Hz rms.
Guillaume Olry on behalf the IPN Orsay SPIRAL2 team TTC Meeting – Milan, 28 Feb-3 March 2011.
Recent Result for the STF-2 Cryomodule Operation
SRF Operating Experience at JLab
Cost Optimization Models for SRF Linacs
R100/C100 Cryomodule Microphonics
Introduction Six-Month Follow-Up on Action Items of Feb 2016 CEBAF Field Emitter Workshop Rongli Geng September 12, 2016.
LCLS-II Technical Requirements
S1G Experiment Schedule Plan
Cryomodule test stand at ESS site
Test of the dressed spoke cavity
Power Couplers, HOM Couplers and Tuners for the XFEL
TTC Topical Workshop - CW SRF, Cornell 12th – 14th June 2013
Design Fabrication and Processing Group H. Padamsee
Update on HW commissioning
Test plan of ESS HB elliptical cavity
S1-G Webex meeting Global Design Effort
SNS Operational History
Test plan of ESS HB elliptical cavity
Operational Experience - Field Emission
XFEL cavities and cryomodules measurements at AMTF
Experience with High Loaded Q cavity Operation at JLAB
Jefferson Lab Low Level RF Controls
C100 Operational Performance
CW Operation of XFEL Modules
Regular cryomodule maintenance plans (radiation damage, seals, etc)
C75 System Specifications
Degradation and possible sources Statistic of resonators
Microphonics and Energy Jitter
Test plan of ESS HB elliptical cavity
Test plan of ESS HB elliptical cavity
High gradients in TESLA nine-cell cavities
Thoughts on Energy Reach
EU-XFEL summary of performance degradation
Retreatment of Superconducting Cavities for the European XFEL
FRIB summary of performance degradation - VTA to cryomodule
First High Power Test of the ESS Double Spoke Cavity package
Performance Recovery at CEBAF
PIT Task Lists Long Range PIT Team F. Lin.
Outline: Recent CEBAF performance JLAB-TN-022 Energy Reach Plan
Cryomodule Test Schedule
Field Emission Onset for C50 Cryomodules in the CMTF
Field Emission and Mitigation in the CEBAF Linacs R Legg, R Geng Jlab SRF Ops Dept. TTC,
Field Emission onset data from VTA testing of C50 pairs
JLab Users Organization Annual Meeting June 24, 2019
Comparison between 4K and 2K operation performance of CEBAF injector cryomodules Grigory Eremeev Monday, August 19, 2019.
C100 Operation Enhancing gradient reach for the
C100 Cavity Faults as Determined By Time Domain Waveforms
Summary of the maximum SCRF voltage in XFEL
Presentation transcript:

C75 Commissioning Michael Drury SRF Operations Support Wednesday, January 02, 2019

Outline C50-13 Commissioning Results C50-13 Operational Performance C75 Test Plan – Schedule and Labor Talk Title Here

First C75 Cavities – Commissioning Results Two C75 cavities installed in the the C50-13 cryomodule in the 1 and 2 positions Cryomodule skipped Acceptance Testing in the CMTF Cryomodule was installed in the North Linac in zone 1L13 Commissioned in October 2017 First test run was completed prior to connecting cryomodule to the beamline Beamline connections accomplished using new particulate mitigation procedures Slow bleed up pumps Improved clean rooms with separate gowning area. Improvements in work area hygiene After beamline connection, a reduced set of tests were completed to identify changes in Field Emission characteristics and maximum gradient. No degradation was observed Some improvement was noted –particularly Cavity 1 Confirms that new particulate hygiene procedures are valid C75 Commissioning

First C75 Cavities – Commissioning Results Cavity QextFPC Emax VTA Emax tunnel Emax (GMES) Emaxop DRVH FE Onset VTA FE Onset tunnel Limit Qo VTA Qo tunnel 1 1.26E+07 19.4 19.1 18.0 18.6 13.5 17.9 Quench 9.0E+09 7.6E+09 2 1.89E+07 13.7 14.2 13.6 9.9 10.9 8.3E+09 7.7E+09 3 1.59E+07 18.3 16.6 16.1 15.6 9.6E+09 6.5E+09 4 1.50E+07 19.9 17.4 17.6 16.9 15.0 9.4 WGVac 8.5E+09 4.3E+09 5 1.58E+07 9.2 9.1 8.7 8.5 quench *7.6e+09 *7.0E+09 6 9.81E+06 15.1 14.0 14.4 14.1 7.8E+09 5.8E+09 7 1.32E+07 17.1 16.4 7.0E+09 6.0E+09 8 7.44E+06 15.5 15.8 7.6 6.7E+09 4.5E+09 Qo’s listed are at 12.5 MV/m and T = 2.07K Highest Qo’s measured in a C50 cryomodule DRVH = suggested Max GSET for Operations 13.5 MV/m is a limit imposed by the analog llrf Cavity 1 currently operating at 13.5 MV/m Cavity 2 currently operating at 13.0 MV/m Operated for several days at 13.5 MV/m before quenching 13.5 MV/m too close to quench gradient Potential Voltage = 51.6 MV C75 Commissioning

C75-1 Field Emission VTA field emission onset at 17.9 MV/m Initial Commissioning measurements indicated lower onset gradient along with apparent processing. After beamline connection, Field emission had processed away . C75 Commissioning

C75-2 Field Emission VTA field emission onset at 9.9 MV/m Commissioning measurements indicated higher onset gradient After beamline connection, approximately unchanged C75 Commissioning

C75 Qo vs. Eacc Typical C50 Qo’s 5E+09 or lower C75 Qo’s > 7E=09 C75 Commissioning

C50-13 Microphonics Summary Data taken on individual cavities using FCC in SEL mode. I/Q data recorded at 20 kS/s and converted to delta F 25 seconds of data taken for each data series. Three to five data series were collected for each cavity. Peak microphonics ranged from 7.5 Hz to 21 Hz. The C75 cavities were cavities 1 and 2. Their microphonics were in the middle of the group. For some reason cavity 6 was very quiet. It is possible, but I do not think probable, that this was because the microphonics went quiet when we took that data. 120 Hz was present and probably due to a turbo pump which was on the insulating vacuum. Removing this harmonic from the data only caused slight improvements (less than a few Hz). Data and images of the plots can be found at: M:\asd\asddata\CMTF\C50 cryomodule tests\C50-13\Microphonics C50-13 (NL13) Microphonics data –Tom Powers

C75 – Microphonic Spectrum Cavity 1 Cavity 2 Turbo pump C50-13 (NL13) Microphonics data –Tom Powers

Summary of Peak and RMS Microphonics C75 Commissioning C50-13 (NL13) Microphonics data –Tom Powers

C50-13 Performance after Commissioning Cavity Proposed DRVH Current GSET Comments 1 13.5 2 13.0 Will run at 13.5 but will too close too quench gradient 3 10.0 WGVac? 4 13.1 Arc Rate Management 5 8.7 6 9.0 Mode Anode Current 7 11.2 Reason for reduction unknown – appeared to be quenching at 11.7 MV/m 8 Unable to operate at higher gradient –reason unclear Total Voltage 51.6 44.3 C75 Commissioning

C50-13 Trip Rates after Commissioning C75 Commissioning

C50-13 Trip Rates January: 261 trips total (3.5% of total trips) C75 trips – 106 total Feb so far: 23 trips total (0.9% of total trips) C75 trips – 6 total C50-13 Microphonics 13 Nov. 2017

C75 Test Plan – V1 Task Name Duration C75 Acceptance 20 days Install and Prep Cryomodule 4 days Install Cryomodule Leak Checks / Clean He Circuits etc. Electrical Connections Degaussing? Waveguide Connects Software Checks Cool down 2 days Low Pwr Test Initial Frequencies Tuner Range and Hysteresis (LP or HP) Passbands HOM spectra High Power Test 7 days High Pwr Checklist Max Gradient / Field Emission Qo Measurements / Pressure Sensitivity Lorentz Detuning microphonics Other Tests? ? Warm up 3 days Disconnect Module / Prep for Move Move CM to NL 1 day Installation Activities (more degaussing?) ~ 1.5 week C75 Commission 15 days 9 days Tune cavities Eight Cavity run 1 - 2 days Assume Cryomodule Installation single shift / 5 day schedule (CMTF or tunnel) Assume CMTF testing on a 2 shift / 7 day schedule Assume linac testing on a 1 shift / 7 day schedule Acceptance Testing ~20 days Install to remove Move and install in tunnel ~ 8 days Commission ~15 days Note Acceptance Testing is a necessity Detects typical mechanical failures (feedthrus) before installation in the tunnel Digital llrf is available in CMTF and as part of commissioning test stands. Labview used with epics to collect data and automate testing C75 Commissioning

C75 Test Plan – V1 Task Name Duration Person Hours Mech Tech / Mech Eng Elec Tech /Elec Eng C75 Acceptance 20 days Install and Prep Cryomodule 4 days Install Cryomodule 16 Leak Checks / Clean He Circuits etc. 8 Electrical Connections Degaussing? Waveguide Connects Software Checks Cool down 2 days 30 Low Pwr Test Initial Frequencies 4 Tuner Range and Hysteresis (LP or HP) Passbands HOM spectra High Power Test 7 days High Pwr Checklist Max Gradient / Field Emission 64 Qo Measurements / Pressure Sensitivity 24 Lorentz Detuning 1 microphonics Other Tests? ? Warm up 3 days 5 Disconnect Module / Prep for Move Move CM to NL 1 day Installation Activities (more degaussing?) ~ 1.5 week 120 20 C75 Commission 15 days 9 days Tune cavities 10 70 Eight Cavity run 1 - 2 days Some variability in labor types available for testing Acceptance Testing Mech Eng / Mech Tech ~130 hours Elec Tech / Elec Eng ~ 180 hours SStaff ~20 hours Move / Install Mech Eng / Mech Tech ~120 hours (mostly Mech Tech) Elec Tech / Elec Eng ~ 20 hours Commissioning Mech Eng / Mech Tech ~70 hours Elec Tech / Elec Eng ~ 130 hours C75 Commissioning

Summary Testing of the first two C75 cavities demonstrates improvements with respect to Qo’s over the C50 model Improved Qo’s Low or zero field emission Performance Comparisons before and after beampipe connection validate new particulate mitigation procedures. C50-13 currently operating at 85% of predicted voltage Testing and Installation activities require minimum ~2 months calendar time At least 4 months of labor. C75 Commissioning