1. RaDIATE February Technical MeetingFebruary 5 2016 BLIP Irradiation Planning Radiation Damage In Accelerator Target Environments

2. RaDIATE News and Notes  HPTW (High Power Targetry Workshop) 2016  April 11-15 at Oxford  At least one materials session  NSUF pre-proposal accepted  Fermilab, PNNL, Michigan, Oxford  Triple-beam irradiation of beryllium at Michigan  PIE at PNNL  Full proposal submitted next week February 5 2016 P. Hurh 2

3. BLIP Irradiation Planning  Proton budget developments  Water total thickness cap is limit (keeping temperature of samples/water in check)  Total energy use is around 60 MeV (means can go to next lower energy from Linac, 181 MeV)  Could perhaps go for 15 weeks at 150 uA and 181 MeV for same cost?  Low-Z upstream (0.046 DPA Be) or High-Z upstream (0.055 DPA Be)?  Need to decide on these items within the next week! February 5 2016 P. Hurh 3

4. BLIP Irradiation Planning  MARS analysis developments  Kavin completed low-statistics run of entire stack-up as per proton energy budget v1 with new raster pattern (Thanks to Zwaska and Mokhov)  Good agreement with SRIM (within 0.5 MeV!)  Indicates about 0.046 DPA for Be capsule (15 weeks at 200 MeV and 150 uA) and 2.1 DPA for Ti alloy and 12.2 DPA for Ir  High statistics, double-checked run needed before we can share the results  Note: We will have lots of SS window material receiving about 2.4 DPA at temperatures ranging from 40 to 120 C. Can anybody use? February 5 2016 P. Hurh 4

5. BLIP Irradiation Planning  Start of irradiation in February 2017  Has to fit RHIC schedule  Has to fit isotope demand  May be more expensive (inflation and running at higher current)  Even though this seems like a long way off, need to start analysis and design ASAP February 5 2016 P. Hurh 5

6. Questions to be answered  What will be the path for design, fabrication, and assembly of capsules/holders/basket/drive box?  Design and analysis by “user” under guidance from BNL? or by BNL engineering?  Sample fabrication by user?  Capsule fabrication by user/BNL?  Capsule assembly (welding) at BNL? Should “users” be present?  Do we need interface document to formalize “user”/BNL interface (responsibilities)? February 5 2016 P. Hurh 6

7. Questions to be answered  What is impact of non-uniform coatings or thickness of polished samples?  Estimate for ESS coated Al is difference of 0.19 MeV  Varying thickness of samples will also affect cooling (larger than expected gaps  Will “energy shims” be necessary to compensate? February 5 2016 P. Hurh 7

8. Questions to be answered  Activation calculations (especially for mid-Z, high-Z) and how does this affect harvesting in the BNL hot cell(s)?  Specialized PIE equipment?  FNAL-KEK Fatigue tester  ESS photo-spectrometer  Others? February 5 2016 P. Hurh 8

9. Next Steps  Finalize test matrix  Solidify PIE plans  High statistics MARS analysis (N. Simos can start his more detailed FLUKA analysis)  First pass thermal analyses of capsule by user  Water flow assumptions need to be worked out (22 gpm)  FNAL will do:  Be Capsule  Carbon Capsule  Titanium alloy Capsule  ESS will do:  Al alloy Capsule  CERN will do:  Si Capsule (with input from FNAL/KEK)  Heavy Capsule  Impact of potential boiling? (especially on heavy capsule) February 5 2016 P. Hurh 9

10. Next Steps  Detailed design/modeling of samples  “filler” pieces  Thought to how to assemble/weld  How to mark samples with identification numbers/symbols  Full design finalized  Final full FLUKA analysis by Simos  Second pass thermal analysis (with details) by BNL or by user?  Tweak vacuum degrader design as necessary  Start procurement process February 5 2016 P. Hurh 10

11. Proton energy budget and Capsule/samples review  Go through each capsule and confirm:  Thicknesses  Temperatures (approximate at this point)  Sample geometries  Some FNAL questions:  Need to add larger HiRadMat sample material for:  Be  Graphite?  Ti alloy?  Others?  How many changes on the heavy capsule?  Can we have one of the heavy capsules be available for other “novel” materials (MAX phase, SiC-SiC, etc)? This could require a matching vacuum degrader to account for different energy loss.  To reduce potential for boiling, go with only one layer of TZM? February 5 2016 P. Hurh 11

12. Schedule  Some samples are time-consuming to prepare (Be, SiC coated graphite, iridium?)  Don’t forget pre-irradiation material characterization!  Samples should be ready for assembly/welding on Dec 1 2016  Final design should be done by June 1 to allow ~6 months for sample procurement and preparation  Where needed, samples could begin procurement earlier at risk of changes later  Matrix should be set by April 1 to allow ~2 months for final design  Thermal analysis should be done ASAP February 5 2016 P. Hurh 12

13. “Heavy Capsule”  Materials:  TZM layer  1 layer of tensile (BNL or PNNL geometry?), 0.5 mm thick each, Filler samples for CTE etc  Iridium layer  1 layer of tensile (BNL or PNNL geometry?), 0.5 mm thick each, Filler samples for CTE etc  TZM layer  1 layer of tensile (BNL or PNNL geometry?), 0.5 mm thick each, Filler samples for CTE etc  Atmosphere: Argon  Peak temp estimate (˚C)  TZM: 830  Ir: 1100 February 5 2016 P. Hurh 13 layer p energy in (MeV) energy loss/p (MeV) p energy out (MeV) 1171.631.58170.05 2 2.89167.16 3 1.61165.55 PIE at: ??

14. Ti alloy capsule  Materials:  Ti 6Al-4V & ELI grades  2 layers of tensile (PNNL geometry), 0.5 mm thick each, Filler samples for CTE, HiRadMat bars?  2 layers of fatigue samples, 1 mm thick each  Note: each layer is ½ Ti 6-4 and ½ Ti 6-4 ELI  Atmosphere: Helium  Peak temp estimate (˚C)  Ti: 190  SS: 90 Possible boiling February 5 2016 P. Hurh 14 layer p energy in (MeV) energy loss/p (MeV) p energy out (MeV) 1162.974.89158.08 PIE at: PNNL

15. Ti alloy – water cooled  Materials:  Ti 6Al-4V – 4 micro-structures  2 layers of tensile (BLIP geometry), 0.5 mm thick each, Filler samples for CTE 1 mm thick each, HiRadMat bars?  Note: Each layer is ½ and ½ of each micro-structure (3 samples of each grade)  Atmosphere: Direct water cooled  Peak temp estimate (˚C)  Ti: 40  SS: N/A February 5 2016 P. Hurh 15 layer p energy in (MeV) energy loss/p (MeV) p energy out (MeV) 1156.091.68154.41 PIE at: BNL

16. Aluminum alloy capsule  Materials:  Al 6061-T6 & Al 5754-O  2 layers of 6061 tensile, 0.7 mm thick each  2 layers of 5754 tensile, 0.3 mm thick each  2 layers of 6061 coated discs, 0.7 mm thick each  2 layers of 5754 non-coated discs, 0.3 mm thick each  Note: Discs interleaved as fillers between tensiles  Note: dE/dx calculated as 6061 without coating. Coating on discs only is about 0.19 MeV non-uniformity need to check  Atmosphere: Helium  Peak temp estimate (˚C)  Al: 140  SS: 115 Possible boiling February 5 2016 P. Hurh 16 layer p energy in (MeV) energy loss/p (MeV) p energy out (MeV) 1152.392.28150.11 PIE at: ??

17. Silicon capsule  Materials:  Si single crystal  One layer of bend/CTE bars (1 mm thick each)  Si poly-crystal  One layer of bend/CTE bars (1 mm thick each)  SiC coated graphite  1 disc 1-2 mm thick  Note: Entered as SiC-SiC composite in energy budget. Needs to be corrected  Sapphire (alpha-Al 2 O 3 )  Filler pieces (1 mm thick) around periphery, will need to also add graphite (2 mm thick) to get energy matching  Atmosphere: Helium?  Peak temp estimate (˚C)  Al: ??  SS: ?? Possible boiling February 5 2016 P. Hurh 17 layer p energy in (MeV) energy loss/p (MeV) p energy out (MeV) 1147.351.03146.32 2 1.04145.28 3 1.44143.84 PIE at: ??

18. Carbon capsule  Materials:  POCO ZXF-5Q  One layer Tensile 1 mm thick; One layer Bend/CTE bar 1 mm thick  IG-430  One layer Tensile 1 mm thick; One layer Bend/CTE bar 1 mm thick  Glassy Carbon  One layer Bend/CTE bar 1 mm thick  C-C 3D Composite  One filler sample layer (bend/CTE bar) 2 mm thick interleaved with tensile sample layers  Atmosphere: Vacuum  Peak temp estimate (˚C)  C: ??  SS: ?? Possible boiling February 5 2016 P. Hurh 18 layer p energy in (MeV) energy loss/p (MeV) p energy out (MeV) 1141.001.80139.20 2 1.74137.46 3 0.77136.69 PIE at: BNL

19. Beryllium capsule  Materials:  S-65H  Four tensile layers 0.5 mm thick each & two bend bar layers 1 mm thick each; filler with HRMT samples; hole fillers as compression?  PF-60  same as above  UHP  same as above  Note: mat’ls will be arranged within layers to achieve all 3 grades at all temperature regimes  Atmosphere: Argon  Peak temp estimate (˚C)  Be: 570  SS: 70 February 5 2016 P. Hurh 19 layer p energy in (MeV) energy loss/p (MeV) p energy out (MeV) 1133.743.56130.18 2 3.63126.56 3 3.70122.86 PIE at: PNNL, Oxford

20. Capsule and “Basket” Geometry  Capsules contain layers of samples  Capsule design is within our control (within reason)  Capsules sit within capsule holders which fit inside the BLIP target basket  We will make our own basket  Basket MUST conform to the BLIP requirements on outside dimensions and features to interface with BLIP drive box  Basket will be designed to interface with our custom capsules on the inside  Each “user” will be responsible for:  Design and fabrication of their samples to fit capsules  Conceptual design of their capsule(s) for thermal/structural performance  But expected to follow BLIP/Fermilab guidance  Most likely capsules will be fabricated, assembled and welded at BNL or Fermilab February 5 2016 P. Hurh 20

21. Capsule and Basket from 2010 February 5 2016 P. Hurh 21

22. Capsule loaded with samples February 5 2016 P. Hurh 22

23. BLIP drive box and basket February 5 2016 P. Hurh 23

24. Drawings and Layouts February 5 2016 P. Hurh 24

25. Capsule Holder Geometry February 5 2016 P. Hurh 25

26. Tensile Sample Geometry (depends on PIE equipment!) February 5 2016 P. Hurh 26

27. “CTE” sample geometry February 5 2016 P. Hurh 27