E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
QXF Quench Protection: issues and plans Giorgio Ambrosio Fermilab QXF Video-meeting August 1, 2013 The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High.
Advertisements

2 nd Joint HiLumi LHC – LARP Annual Meeting INFN Frascati – November 14 th to 16 th 2012 LBNL: Helene Felice – Tiina Salmi – Ray Hafalia – Maxim Martchevsky.
Protection study options for HQ01e-3 Tiina Salmi QXF meeting, 27 Nov 2012.
MQXF state of work and analysis of HQ experimental current decays with the QLASA model used for MQXF Vittorio Marinozzi 10/28/
CLIQ Coupling Loss Induced Quench Magnet protection system for HQ test Overview 1) CLIQ system overview 2) Adding lead to pizza box 3) remote triggering.
Overview of main results from first HQ02a test For HQ meeting 7/30/13.
HQ02b Meeting 4/24/14High Miits Study – G. Sabbi 1 High MIITs Study GianLuca Sabbi Video meeting on HQ02b test results – April 24, 2014.
E. Todesco PROPOSAL OF APERTURE FOR THE INNER TRIPLET E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland With relevant inputs from colleagues F. Cerutti, S. Fartoukh,
Impact of Cu/NonCu on Quench Protection 1 Impact of Cu/NonCu on MQXF Quench Protection G. Ambrosio, V. Marinozzi, E. Todesco Conductor Video Mtg. April.
Brookhaven - fermilab - berkeley US LHC ACCELERATOR PROJECT LHC IR Quad Heaters.
QXF protection heater design : Overview and status Tiina Salmi QXF quench protection meeting April 30, 2013.
E. Todesco HL-LHC: OUTLOOK ON PROTECTION FOR IR MAGNETS (WP3) E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland CERN, 23 rd April 2015 MPE meeting.
The HiLumi LHC Design Study (a sub-system of HL-LHC) is co-funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme 7 Capacities Specific Programme,
HFM High Field Model, EuCARD WP7 review, 20/1/2011, Philippe Fazilleau, 1/16 EuCARD-WP7-HFM Dipole Conceptual Review Nb 3 Sn dipole protection Philippe.
HL-LHC Annual Meeting, November 2013HQ Planning – G. Sabbi 1 HQ Status and Plans G. Sabbi High Luminosity LHC Annual Meeting Daresbury, UK, November 11-14,
E. Todesco PROTECTION IN MAGNET DESIGN E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland With help from B. Auchmann, L. Bottura, H. Felice, J. Fleiter, T. Salmi, M.
G.A.Kirby 4th Nov.08 High Field Magnet Fresca 2 Introduction Existing strand designs, PIT and OST’s RRP are being used in the conceptual designs for two.
HQ01e3 test summary December 2012 M. Marchevsky, LBNL.
Upper limits for QPS thresholds for selected 600 A circuits B. Auchmann, D. Rasmussen, A. Verweij with kind help from J. Feuvrier, E. Garde, C. Gilloux,
E. Todesco OUTPUT OF THE CABLE REVIEW E. Todesco and the QXF team CERN, Geneva Switzerland CERN, 10 th December 2014 QXF design review, CERN.
HQM01 Test Summary Outline -Magnet Instrumentation and Shim System -SG Data -Short Sample Limits -Quench Training at 4.6 K and 2.2 K -Ramp rate and Temperature.
E. Todesco PROTECTION FOR QXF E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland QXF protection meeting 28 th October 2013.
FRESCA II dipole review, 28/ 03/2012, Ph. Fazilleau, M. Durante, 1/19 FRESCA II Dipole review March 28 th, CERN Magnet protection Protection studies.
E. Todesco MAGNET (RE)Training E. Todesco Magnets, Superconductors and Cryostats Group Technology Department, CERN LHC risk review, 5 th March 2009 Acknowledgements:
E. Todesco ENERGY OF THE LHC AFTER LONG SHUTDOWN 1 ( ) C. Lorin, E. Todesco and M. Bajko CERN, Geneva Switzerland With relevant inputs from colleagues.
E. Todesco INTERACTION REGION MAGNETS E. Todesco On behalf of the WP3 collaboration CERN, Geneva, Switzerland CERN, 27 th October 2015.
QXF protection meeting, 4/29/14HQ High Miits Study – H. Bajas, G. Sabbi 1 HQ02 High MIITs Studies Preliminary findings and next steps Hugo Bajas, GianLuca.
MQXF protection: work in progress and plans Vittorio Marinozzi 9/23/ QLASA calibration with HQ02 data.
Heaters for the QXF magnets: designs and testing and QC M. Marchevsky (LBNL)
HQ02A2 TEST RESULTS November 7, 2013 FERMILAB. HQ02 test at Fermilab 2  First HQ quadrupole with coils (#15-17, #20) of the optimized design o Only coil.
MQXFS1 Test Results G. Chlachidze, J. DiMarco, S. Izquierdo-Bermudez, E. Ravaioli, S. Stoynev, T. Strauss et al. Joint LARP CM26/Hi-Lumi Meeting SLAC May.
MQXFSM1 results Guram Chlachidze Stoyan Stoynev 10 June 2015LARP meeting.
2 nd LARP / HiLumi Collaboration Mtg, May 9, 2012LHQ Goals and Status – G. Ambrosio 11 Quench Protection of Long Nb 3 Sn Quads Giorgio Ambrosio Fermilab.
HQ02 TEST STATUS April 4, 2013 FERMILAB. Test status  Magnet delivery to FermilabApr. 02  SG checkoutApr. 04  LE & RE interface plate mounting Apr.
MQXFS1 Protection heater delays vs. Simulations 9 May 2016 Tiina Salmi, Tampere university of technology Acknowledgement: Guram Chlachidze (FNAL), Emmanuele.
The most likely cause of death for a superconducting magnet Input data for thermal modeling of Nb 3 Sn Superconducting Magnets by Andrew Davies Find the.
Tests on production cryomodules Bob Kephart Sept 30, 2006.
E. Todesco RETRAINING AND DETRAINING IN THE LHC E. Todesco Magnets, Superconductors and Cryostats Group Technology Department, CERN LHC Machine Advisory.
LHC Post Mortem Workshop - 1, CERN, January 2007 (slide 1/52) AB-CO Measurement & Analysis Present status of the individual.
CERN, 11th November 2011 Hi-lumi meeting
11T Magnet Test Plan Guram Chlachidze
MQY-30 Test Result Report
Quench Simulation at GSI
MQXF Quench Protection and Meeting Goals
MQXF Planning Paolo Fessia, Frederic Savary, Ezio Todesco, Lucio Rossi - CERN Mike Anerella, Peter Wanderer - BNL Giorgio Ambrosio, Mark Kaducak - FNAL.
E. Todesco for the QBT CERN, Geneva Switzerland
ANALYSIS OF THE PRODUCTION DATA AFTER THERMAL CYCLE SECOND PART
CERN Conductor and Cable Development for the 11T Dipole
Potential failure scenarios that can lead to very fast orbit changes and machine protection requirements for HL-LHC operation Daniel Wollmann with input.
Quench protection of the MAGIX high-order correctors
FMEA of a CLIQ-based protection of D1
Update on voltage calculations
HO Corrector Magnets: decapole test and future plans
Update on circuit protection simulations of the HL-LHC Inner Triplet circuit Matthias Mentink, Circuit specifics + STEAM simulations: Samer Yammine, LEDET.
Quench Protection Measurements & Analysis
B. Auchmann, D. Rasmussen, A. Verweij
DESIGN OPTIONS IN THE T RANGE
POSSIBLE SCENARIOS FOR TRAINING
Automated Code Coverage Analysis
HIGH LUMINOSITY LHC: MAGNETS
REVIEW OF ESTIMATES OF RANDOM COMPONENTS IN THE INNER TRIPLET
HL LHC WP3 (magnets) TASK 2 ADVANCEMENT
Hilumi WP3 meeting, 1 October 2014
PROPOSAL OF APERTURE FOR THE INNER TRIPLET
Guram Chlachidze Stoyan Stoynev
PANDA solenoid quench calculations
07/08/2010 Fill #1264 dump at 02:14:38.
MQXFS1e – PH-to-Coil hipot tests
Quench calculations of the CBM magnet
Long term behavior of MQXFS1
Presentation transcript:

E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland QXF protection meeting 28th October 2013 PROTECTION FOR QXF E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland

MARGIN VS COPPER Estimate of the gain in time margin and temperature vs copper fraction Estimate of the gain in time margin and temperature vs operational gradient

HQ RESULTS 14-17 ms available to So we are just there See the quench (5 ms) Validate (10 ms) So we are just there I took the MIITs at 350 K PRELIMINARY Quench integral measured in HQ [G. Chlachidze]

HQ RESULTS 27-32 ms available to So we are just there See the quench (5 ms) Validate (10 ms) Heater delay (15 ms) So we are just there I took the MIITs at 350 K Quench back could have helped but it will not PRELIMINARY Quench integral measured in HQ [G. Chlachidze]

EXTRAPOLATION TO QXF Hypothesis Tmax set at 350 K: this gives 33.2 MIITs Scaling of the MIITs consumed with HQ results So we gain 8 ms (previous estimates: in general QXF has 10 ms more margin w.r.t. HQ) Pretty compatible with previous estimate (see first slide giving 33 ms) So we have to gain 10-15 additional ms

CONCLUSIONS HQ test show that quench back induced by dump resistor in the machine will be nigligible To have some gain for protection one would need 8 circuits, not feasible Going from 2 to 4 power converter seems to add negligible margin Extrapolation to QXF shows that we have a margin of 35 ms, still 10-15 ms too small Limited impact of increasing copper Lowering gradient by 7% would solve the problem Quench back will not play a role in protection That’s why we put the core … It is the most difficult quantity to scale to QXF so we would need to wait until first test I feel more confident to have a QPS relying on other phenomena rather than quench back

CONCLUSIONS Until now we did not address the issues related to 90% operation But magnets must reach 90% We did not address issues related to failure of one or more circuits So even though we manage to have 50 ms time margin by lowering the operational gradient we would need additional margin This is to be provided with the other studies outlined in the working group