1. Options for Possible Sector Test Mike Lamont

2. LHC sector test2 4-3-2008

3. LHC sector test3 4-3-2008

4. LHC sector test4 4-3-2008

5. LHC sector test5 4-3-2008 Outline Motivation Options  Space & Time Access Pre-requisites Cold checkout Impact Schedule Conclusions

6. LHC sector test6 4-3-2008 Baseline 1 week with beam Pilot Beam for the most part:  single bunch of 5 - 10 x 10 9 protons Total intensity:  2 - 3 x 10 13 protons

7. LHC sector test7 4-3-2008 Motivation Beam tests form a integral part of full beam commissioning This has got to be done anyway  but gives lead time for problem resolution, improvements etc. Beam:  Polarity of magnetic elements  Aperture in the cold machine  Response of key beam instrumentation  Magnet field quality Very Visible Milestone

8. LHC sector test8 4-3-2008 Integration Full test of a majority of subsystems over more than one eighth of the ring Allows staged approach to the full problem space Time to fully resolve problems before the real thing  Analysis, improvements, resolution, adjustment The lessons learnt will reduce the time needed for full commissioning Breathing space if there are any serious problem (less true now perhaps)

9. LHC sector test9 4-3-2008 Integration & commission with beam: Full-blown system wide integration test

10. LHC sector test10 4-3-2008 Option 1 layout

11. LHC sector test11 4-3-2008 Option 1: Injection R8 – A78 – R7 No temporary dump to be installed at IR7 - use collimators instead (3 primaries, 5 secondaries for the single beam). No temporary installation of beam instrumentation at IR7. Need small part of 8-1, all 7-8 hardware commissioned to 450 GeV+. Minimal Impact Solution

12. LHC sector test12 4-3-2008 Option 1: Pros and Cons Minimal requirements on Cryogenics & HWC  2 sectors Less area classified by RP Less impact on other systems  BI, LBDS Only one sector test - less systems tested  BI, LBDS, collimators missed BI configuration not perfect  Rely on in situ instrumentation  Not ideal – no BCT – some implications for measurements

13. LHC sector test13 4-3-2008 Option 2

14. LHC sector test14 4-3-2008 Option 2: Injection R8 – A78 – A67 – Dump Use TCDQ and TCS to block down stream aperture – safeguard only - no installation of temporary dump. RP approval/study required Beam onto TDE Can use correctors to steer into dump channel - so should be able to guarantee very little beam goes onto TCDQ etc. Rely on in situ instrumentation (BCT in dump line etc.). No temporary installation required. Need small part of 8-1, all 7-8, all 6-7 hardware commissioned to 450 GeV+.

15. LHC sector test15 4-3-2008 Option 2: Pros & Cons Test beam dump and related systems Don't irradiate ring - beam onto TDE (beam dump block) Check IR7 optics, performance of warm magnets Beam through 3 IRs, 2 full sectors Full suite of Beam Instrumentation in place  FBCT, Screens, BLMs Support required for 3 cold sectors cold while work in progress elsewhere in ring - clearly test has more of an impact. Favoured Solution

16. LHC sector test16 4-3-2008 Option 3 – Injection point 2 Outside possibility – would imply problems elsewhere Need partial 1-2, complete 2-3 Dump on collimators in IR3

17. LHC sector test17 4-3-2008 Tests

18. LHC sector test18 4-3-2008 Access – closing the whole ring Pre-preparation, DSO tests  2 months Closing the ring: patrols etc  3-4 days Experiments out for a week  “a disturbance but acceptable” Access during test possible  to areas that don’t see beam Supervised areas after test  Given analysis, and measurements during and after the test, it is envisaged that: Certain areas might be declared controlled areas for the first few days after the test; Thereafter these areas would join the rest of the sectors involved as supervised areas

19. LHC sector test19 4-3-2008 Monitoring Radiation monitoring  RAMSES operational  LHCb: 4-5 monitors planned under RAMSES Beam Loss Monitors  Sensitive to losses at 1% level with pilot bunch intensity Beam Intensities  Beam extracted, injected (and to dump) to be logged RPG survey after the event and perhaps during the test to ensure that activation remains low.  Careful survey afterwards planned after the test near the injection dump and dump itself.

20. LHC sector test20 4-3-2008 BIC 3/16 of LHC Beam Interlock System SPS Extr. Kicker BIC SPS Extraction Lines Interlock System Radiation levels BLM Powering Interlock Warm Magnet Interlock Vacuum LHCb Access system will provide input to BIS which will inhibit SPS extraction. Configurable if the case of extraction required & LHC not ready (e.g. extraction tests) BIS

21. Required circuits Beam 2 Circuits only For limited recycling, it would be preferable for listed circuits to be available to, say, the equivalent 1-2 TeV level.

22. LHC sector test22 4-3-2008 Injection RQ5.R8Q5 quadrupole RQ4.R8Q4 quadrupole RD2.R8D2 recombination dipole RD1.R8D1 recombination dipole

23. LHC sector test23 4-3-2008 Triplets & LHCb RQX.R8Inner triplet RQX.L8Inner triplet RD1.L8D1 recombination dipole

24. LHC sector test24 4-3-2008 LL5 & DS.L5 RQ7.L82*MQM RQ8.L8MQML RQ9.L8MQM MQMC RQ10.L8MQML RQTL11.L8B2MQTLI RQT12.L8B2MQT RQT13.L8B2MQT

25. LHC sector test25 4-3-2008 A78 CircuitsNo. of circuitsPriority Main bendsMBRB.A7811 Main quadsMQRQF, RQD21 Skew quadsMQSRQS [B2]11 Trim quadsMQTRQTF,RQTD [B2]21 Orbit correctorsMCBRCB [B2]23 H & 24 V1 Lattice sextupolesMSRSF,RSD [B2]42 Lattice octupolesMOROD, ROF [B2]1- Skew sextupolesMSSRSS [B2]13 b3 spoolMCSRCS [B2]13 b4 spoolMCORCO [B2]1- b5 spoolMCDRCD [B2]1-

26. LHC sector test26 4-3-2008 MR4 RQT13.R7B2QT RQT12.R7B2QT RQTL11.R7B2QTLI RQTL10.R7B2QTLI RQTL9.R7B2QTLI RQTL8.R7B2QTLI RQTL7.R7B2QTLI RQ6.R7B26* QTLH

27. LHC sector test27 4-3-2008 6-7

28. LHC sector test28 4-3-2008 Other systems Injection elements: septa, kickers Collimators Machine Protection Beam Instrumentation:  BPMs, BLMs, BTV, BCT, BST Magnet Model Controls Software/tools Access system Radiation Protection Radiation Monitoring Optics, aperture model See Chamonix 2006 Test preparation largely orthogonal to HWC

29. LHC sector test29 4-3-2008 Near test schedule Phase Time Sectors checkout, interlock & machine protection tests etc. T start - 2 weeks Close ring T start – 4 day Access tests & final qualification T start – 4 day Beam to end TI8 T start – 1 day Tests with beam 1 week Radiation survey T end + 1 day Establish supervised areas T end + 2 day

30. LHC sector test30 4-3-2008 Injectors

31. LHC sector test31 4-3-2008

32. LHC sector test32 4-3-2008 Impact Sector test makes clear demands on:  What is needed to be cold & commissioned and to what level  Fairly limited: Beam 2 Circuits & limited recycling,. Cryogenics, QPS, HWC support required during test  In general, low current levels with occasional cycles  Interesting possibility of quenches Access  Experiments - “acceptable”  HWC – NB that commissioning in other sectors can continue  Scheduled access possible (could imagine access/day if we can guaranteed a reasonable efficient recovery). LHCb

33. LHC sector test33 4-3-2008 Conclusions A sector test would be a useful exercise and undoubtedly speed full commissioning with beam  most of it has to be done anyway Could provide a useful buffer if any major problems are discovered. The impact is not negligible, mainly because the whole ring has to be closed  This in itself is a very useful exercise  Machine as is or as will be. Work carries on elsewhere.  All major installation will have finished and access to the zones affected after the test will be limited. This is a back up - to be invoke if delays  3 months Need minimum lead time of some weeks for preparation

34. LHC sector test34 4-3-2008 Thanks… MagnetsLuca Bottura Beam InstrumentationRhodri Jones, Lars Jensen, Stephen Jackson InjectionBrennan Goddard, Jan Uythoven Radiation ProtectionDoris Forkel-Wirth, Helmut Vincke INB Ghislain Roy AccessPierre Ninin LHCbRolf Linder HWCRoberto Saban & team Installation Katy Foraz PlanningEsther Barbero Soto VacuumPaul Cruikshank, Miguel Jimenez ControlsRobin Lauckner ++ OP/APRoger Bailey, Verena Kain, Massimo Giovannozzi, Stephane Fartoukh, Helmut Burkhardt, Alex Koshick, Stefano Raedelli, Ralph Assmann, Frank Zimmerman… and the rest of the commissioning team.

35. LHC sector test35 4-3-2008 Chamonix 2006 Sector test with beam Overview, motivation and schedulingMike Lamont Proposed tests with beamBrennan Goddard Magnet quenches with beamAlex Koschik Beam InstrumentationLars Jensen Magnet requirementsLuca Bottura Controls requirementsRobin Lauckner Sector test preparationChair: Pierre Strubin PlanningEsther Barbero Soto Global Hardware StatusMiguel Jimenez Layout in LSS7Jan Uythoven Hardware CommissioningRoberto Saban State of LHCb for the testMassimiliano Ferro-Luzzi Radiation IssuesHelmut Vincke Access systemPierre Ninin

36. LHC sector test36 4-3-2008

37. Reserve slides

38. LHC sector test38 4-3-2008 LHCb Worst case scenario: it is estimated that a total 3 x 1011 protons will be lost in the LHCb region during the whole test. The losses will be distributed over time. It has to be noticed that this number is quite pessimistic – under “normal” beam conditions the losses are more in the order of 1x10-4. The aperture in LHCb is large; the injection optics means relatively small beams in the inner triplet to the right of the experiment; the separation and crossing angle bumps will be off; there is therefore no reason to expect significant losses in this region. RP conclusion (H. Vincke) (Preliminary, based on extrapolations of presently available exemplary calculations): Dose rates: All 3 x 1011 protons will be lost in carbon surrounded by steel and copper (already existing calculation) at the last day of the 14 days of tests: maximum 13 uSv/h. The 3 x 1011 protons will be lost in one point after one week. After the cooling time of another week the maximum dose rate will be 2.8 uSv/h. This scenario can be considered as a more realistic approximation of continuous losses (at the same loss point) over two weeks. Assuming that the new French law on area classification will not become stricter than the present Swiss one: Non-designated area: < 2.5 uSv/h for temporary stay (0.5 uSv/h for permanent working places, i.e. assuming 2000 hours/year) This goal seems to be achievable, even under pessimistic assumptions. In case the dose rates will be higher (e.g. due to an incident), the area (around the loss point) will have to be classified as supervised area (radiation workers B in the worst case, but most probably VCT status (physicists and technicians from outside institutes will receive dosimeters without medical certificate) will be sufficient – to be checked).