SPS New Wire Scanner Mechanics Review Ray Veness BE/BI

Project timeline and funding Motivation for this meeting Contents Introduction Wire scanners Requirement and concept for the new wire scanner Project timeline and funding Motivation for this meeting What BI would like from this meeting

Wire scanner design review; B.Dehning Limitations Reproducibility much larger as required by specification Beam size min LHC 130, PSB 2000 um Flexible design of wire fork Deformation of fork are not measured Angular position measurement outside of vacuum system Lever arm play is not measured Speed regulation circuit Analog feedback loop difficult to optimize Secondary particle acquisition system Requires accurate adjustment of working range Saturation effect of PM Dynamic of working range small < 200 Tail measurement limited by noise High intensity beams cause an increase of background signal Dynamic of working range reduced Aging of bellows Motor & Position sensor 18.04.2013 Wire scanner design review; B.Dehning

Methodology - Conceptual Design Vacuum chamber Optic Fiber Motor Stator Optic Disc in vacuum Resolver Shaft Bearings Fork Rotor in vacuum This figure shows the adopted conceptual design for the new wire scanner instrument This conceptual design has been decided before the beginning of this thesis work The design provides 2 main advantage respect to the state of the art (1) no mechanical transmission between the motor and the shaft -> improve accuracy (2) the position measurement device is located directly in the shaft (in vacuum) (3) no bellows are required to transmit the moved -> reliability is improved and maintenance work is simplified Beam Vacuum pipe Wire Slide Courtesy of J.Herranz Alvarez

From Schematic to Design Vacuum chamber Optic Fiber Motor Stator Optic Disc in vacuum Magnetic lock Bearings Resolver Shaft Rotor in vacuum RF screen Fork Wire

Wire scanner design review; B.Dehning The Project Project timeline Dec 2012: Production of a prototype for SPS installation launched with MME April 2013: External design review validates design May 2014: Installation of the prototype tank in SPS sector 517 Jan 2015: Installation of the prototype instrument in the tank EYETS 2016: Installation of a PS Booster prototype LS2: Installation of 18 instruments + spares in PS, PSB, SPS LS2-LS3: Installation of 4 or 8 instruments + spares in the LHC Funding Fully funded by LIU for the injectors and HL-LHC for the LHC 18.04.2013 Wire scanner design review; B.Dehning

Motivations for the Meeting Smaller beam sizes and higher intensities will make this new design specification essential for transverse profile meaurement post-LS2, so it is a key instrument for the LIU project Existing instruments are 30+ years old and suffer from obsolescence and reliability issues Other projects and labs are already interested in this design We have a prototype that has been designed, built, installed in the SPS and has been operated in the lab, however… Manufacture cost was high, acceptable for a prototype but not for a series of 20-40 instruments We need to address this both in design and production engineering Manufacture time was long and relied heavily on CERN-specific skills, (i.e. EB welding) at a time when CERN workshops were loaded i.e. during LS1) Some vacuum issues were found late during acceptance testing We need to make all the qualification tests needed and agree early on materials, treatments (and bakeout for the LHC) The SPS prototype design we have will not fit in the PS Booster There are clear benefits from having one design, with a few different components across the whole accelerator complex

What BI would like from this meeting A list of all the things that we think we can improve from the prototype: Design, standardisation, materials, manufacturing technology, ease of manufacture, alignment … and cost! Discussion on the best way forward: Communication between BI, MME and VSC In house manufacture vs. sub-contracting Is this a large series?