Global Magnet Systems including Field Mapping MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 M Courthold – RAL R Preece - RAL

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 Global Magnet Systems – definitions and responsibilities –Top level integration of all MICE magnet sub systems into a complete Cooling Channel - hardware, software, and interlocks –Global consideration of delivery, integration and commissioning schedules and resulting logistical issues –Provide a conduit for dialog between individual sub system owners, infrastructure providers, and control system providers –Keep a watchful eye on overall Cooling Channel integration, to identify deficiencies, oversights, and impending issues 2

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 Sub System Responsibility Table –The first task in coordinating the Global Magnet Systems is to produce a Sub System Responsibility Table –This was discussed in detail in the Controls presentation –NB: MICE Global Magnet systems and Control systems are closely related, so responsibility tables can be combined into a single document –The same table structure can be used to record: –Responsibilities –Timescales –Priority –for the following categories: –Software –Hardware –Interlocks 3

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 Sub System Responsibility Table - Getting Started –Need to first identify the responsible person for each sub- system –Then identify the sub-system components that apply to each step –Next consider when magnets are due to be delivered within each step –Thus deduce what sub-systems and infrastructure will be needed for each of the magnets 4

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 Sub System Responsibility Table 5

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 General Issues and Considerations –The schedule is driven by the delivery of individual sub-systems –Common infrastructure items should be used where possible –For example: –Vacuum, water, and compressed air systems –Power supplies, including circuit-breakers, dump-resistors and diodes –Sensors – temperature, pressure, flow, level, etc. –Due to purchasing methods, and existing purchases, it might be expedient to divide common spares into UK/USA-managed sub-systems –Where does the responsibility of the Global Magnet System coordinators and sub-system owners begin/end? This needs to be clarified, to ensure that nothing is overlooked. –Space in the MICE Hall and MICE LCR is very tight, and must be carefully coordinated –Of special concern is the potential effect of magnetic fields on sub systems and their hardware –How many EPICS controls systems are required? – Mobile & dedicated 6

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 Field Mapping considerations –Where should field mapping be done? – at manufacturer or RAL? –What level of field mapping required before/after delivery? –If field mapping done at RAL, who accepts responsibility for failure to perform to specification? –AFC contract has this clearly defined. What about other sub systems? –Advantages of performing field mapping at RAL –Field mapping instrument kept in one fixed place, instead of travelling around the world –This might also aid delivering the Spectrometer Solenoids to RAL earlier, by: –bringing back the schedule, by not carrying out the mapping at Wang NMR –allowing the team at LBNL to concentrate on the second solenoid assembly –Disadvantages –Extra infrastructure requirements and supplies needed in R9 –Inability to do field mapping at full field in R9 – although field maps should scale, due to absence of yoke 7

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 Field Mapping Device Progress –Excellent progress has been made with the MICE Field Mapping Device: –It is fully funded –The mechanics are in construction. It will be tested for vibrations, etc. –Will be ready for mapping the AFC in the MICE Hall in October. Waiting for the dates! –Probes and data acquisition system are available –The team will interact with MICE for: –the exact measurement strategy (also stray fields in the hall) –data handling strategy (what to do with all these measurements) –The following images feature the special adaption for use with the smaller aperture of the AFC module 8

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 MICE Field Mapping Device 9

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 MICE Field Mapping Device 10

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 MICE Field Mapping Device 11

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 Risk Summary –Sub systems suffer damage during transportation to RAL –Need to identify ways to mitigate transport risks –Need to produce acceptance tests before/after delivery –Manpower restrictions/key staff availability –Sub system requirements incorrectly/inadequately defined, requiring corrective action at RAL –Infrastructure, mechanical envelope, installation issues (size, weight, etc.) –We already have examples of this with both the EMR and Coupling Coils: With modifications now needed for the south mezzanine, the hydrogen delivery systems, and the AFC modules. –Unexpected sub system interactions –Quench consequences and/or forces –Detrimental effect on field map of neighbouring magnets –Late arrival of dependent sub systems –Late arrival of control system software or hardware, infrastructure components, etc. 12

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 Risk Summary - cntd –Mobile EPICS control systems might not be available when required –Space in the MICE Hall and MICE LCR is very tight, and could potentially be exceeded in key areas –Of special concern is the potential effect of magnetic fields on sub systems and their hardware 13

MICE Project Board 28 th June 2011 Summary –The MICE Field Mapping Device is now complete, and ready for use –Work is well underway re Global Magnet Systems –Sub system owners have been identified –Responsibility tables are being populated –Issues and concerns are being identified and addressed –The outcomes will depend heavily upon cooperation between all involved parties within MICE –There is still much to do 14