Conceptual design of superconducting correctors for Hi-Lumi Project (v2) F. Toral - CIEMAT CIEMAT, March 7th, 2013

Outline Last magnetic calculations Cross section of the magnets Superferric dipole design Conclusions 2

Last magnetic calculations New calculations have been done assuming a higher nonlinearity of the transfer function: 20% of saturation at nominal current. That is, the actual field at nominal current is 80% of the computed value by extrapolation of the transfer function at low currents. The requirement on integrated strength of the decapole and dodecapole, normal and skew in both cases, has been reduced by 25%. The cross talk between two identical consecutive magnets is negligible. Next model will include different magnets, to define the minimum distance between them. 3

Last magnetic calculations Roxie simulation Total length (m) 2,958   Superferric option WP2 requirements Order Aperture Int Strenght at 50 mm Int strength Mech length Strength Pole field 2-D Saturation Coil length Coil straight length Block current Number of turns Current Wire bare diameter L required/given (mm) (T m) (T/m^(n-2)) (m) (T/m^(n-1)) (T) (adim) (A) (H) MCQSX Skew 2 150 1,014 0,914 1,75 1,04 0,896 0,864 53000 346 153,2 0,7 1,99 1,00 1,01 MCSX Normal 3 0,060 0,136 1,25 0,116 0,092 24000 228 105,3 0,5 0,167 0,06 MCSSX MCOX 4 0,040 0,140 1,02 0,120 0,096 17400 165 105,5 0,093 0,04 MCOSX MCDX 5 0,170 1,40 1,05 0,150 0,126 0,138 MCDSX 0,02 2,00 MCTX 6 0,119 0,608 1,65 0,588 0,564 16600 100,6 0,6 0,12 MCTSX 0,020 0,144 0,124 0,100 14000 84,8 0,111 Roxie simulation Total length (m) 2,416   Superferric option WP2 requirements Order Aperture Int Strenght at 50 mm Int strength Mech length Strength Pole field 2-D Saturation Coil length Coil straight length Block current Number of turns Current Wire bare diameter L required/given (adim) (mm) (T m) (T/m^(n-2)) (m) (T/m^(n-1)) (T) (A) (H) MCQSX Skew 2 150 0,997 0,746 2,20 0,81 0,726 0,694 76000 738 103,0 0,7 5,86 1,00 MCSX Normal 3 0,060 0,136 1,25 0,96 0,116 0,092 24000 228 105,3 0,5 0,167 0,06 MCSSX MCOX 4 0,040 0,140 0,98 0,120 0,096 17400 165 105,5 0,093 0,04 MCOSX MCDX 5 0,031 2,00 0,80 0,072 25000 198 126,3 0,131 0,03 1,03 MCDSX 0,02 2,06 MCTX 6 0,382 2,10 0,362 0,338 185 135,1 0,403 0,09 1,02 MCTSX 0,016 0,104 0,084 20000 108,1 0,015 1,08 4

Outline Last magnetic calculations Cross section of the magnets Superferric dipole design Conclusions 5

Cross section: quadrupole 6

Transfer function: quadrupole Units (1E-4) Gradient T/m Normalized current Normalized current 7

Cross section: sextupole 8

Cross section: octupole 9

Cross section: decapole 10

Cross section: dodecapole 11

Cross section: dodecapole 12

Outline Last magnetic calculations Cross section of the magnets Superferric dipole design Conclusions 13

Superferric dipole design (I) 14

Superferric dipole design (II) The maximum allowed outer diameter is 620 mm. The present design has not included iron holes: there are holes for the cryogenic lines, but others can be used for the field shaping due to the iron saturation. The present optimization has been done only by iron pole morphing. The main field is about 1.5 T, which is too low to be competitive with a cos-theta design. What is the request for the field quality? 10 units (1E-3) is good enough? Optimization is still ongoing. 15

Conclusions A new design with higher saturation has been performed (20% of non-linearity of the transfer function). The cross talk between consecutive magnets is being computed. The cross section of the different magnets have been shown. A superferric dipole design is being analysed to provide 2.5 or 4 Tm. The optimization is still ongoing. The framework for this Collaboration needs to be defined. 16