1. East Hall under construction - 1962
EA Renovation – EATM –
S. Evrard – EN-EA, on behalf of the Project Team
With inputs from J. Bernhard, K. Papastergiou, R. Lopez, S. McIlwraith, J. Kirkby, A. Onnela, M. Lazzaroni , Q. Bouirek

2. Agenda Beam line layout Civil Engineering Cloud run during LS2 Summary
S.Evrard,
IEFC

3. East Area Renovation - Beam line layout
Today: Restriction to 1 cycle in 4.8s for East Area destinations
Certain laminated magnets (3 MCB in primary zone + 6 M200L in secondary zone) still cannot be cycled within 2.4s due to voltage and RMS power restrictions on the power supplies
Proposal:
Restrict destinations “Target A” to 1 cycle in 4.8s and “Target B” to 1 cycle in 4.8s
Double power supplies for F61.BHZ1 and F61.BHZ2 and BN.BHZ4
(“split coil solution”)
No restrictions on IRRAD/CHARM
Prerequisite: Pre-trigger / warning signal one cycle before the destination is triggered
J.Bernhard,
East Area Renovation - Beam line layout

4. Key elements PS 4.8sec magnetic cycles NORTH Branch SOUTH BRANCH
T8.BHZ1
T8.BHZ2
BN.BHZ3
BN.BHZ4
T8.BHZ3
T11 (CLOUD)
T10 T9
TARGET A
TARGET B
450A 0A
520A
T8.DUMP
700A
DUMP F61D
550A
T8 (IRRAD,CHARM)
260A
SOUTH BRANCH
NORTH Branch
2.4sec magnetic cycles
4.8sec magnetic cycles
Key elements PS

5. Double powering of MCBs
Use double powering with:
T8.BHZ1
T8.BHZ2
BN.BHZ4
sirius power converter selection curves
half magnet: 0.08Ω
Complete magnet: 0.16Ω
450ms
1200ms
Imagnet,pk2
50ms
Imagnet,pk1
MCB/2 OK
MCB
NOT OK
880A
Link to selection guide
0.31H
0.62H

6. Converter needs
All circuits to be powered by converters of the SIRIUS family:
Converter type Sirius S x21
Converter type Sirius 2P x29
Including 1 spare (stand-by) unit
Including 2 units with additional storage (customization)
Including 1 additional unit for double powering
Converter type Sirius 4P x14
Including 9 units with additional energy storage (customization)
Including 2 additional units for double powering

7. Magnet status 12 different designs instead of 20 for the actual layout
The performance option includes new designs (7)

8. There are 31 quadrupoles: 15 existing, 16 to be built
(4 new designs)

9. There are 16 bending magnets: 7 existing, 9 to be built
(2 new families)

10. There are 12 dipole correctors: half to be built, half to be converted into laminated units (1 new design)

11. Magnet status New design functional specifications ready
Existing quadrupoles (QFS, QDS, QFL)
Dedicated area in bldg. 181 is ready
Work started last week
Existing bending magnets (MCB)
Drawings for new water connections are ongoing
New designs
M100 L, M200 L, Q74 L, Q120 C, CR200 ongoing
MDX L, Q100 L and Q200 L to start in June

12. CE WORKS: Multicriteria analysis Under roof works moved after LS2
Baseline
2017 (Q4) to 2019 (Q1)
Alternative :
Facades during 2018
Under roof works moved after LS2
B /04/2017
SMB-SE

13. Multicriteria analysis
BASELINE
ALTERNATIVE
Advantages
-Project objectives met 2018:
Thermal insulation improved
Unsafe asbestos removed from building
Building rendered waterproof
Optimisation of natural light
-Duration of CE works minimised
-Asbestos legislation known
-Smaller space needed for worksite installations
Disadvantages
-Coactivity with Physics (mitigated through zoned planning)
-Larger space needed for worksite installations (mitigated through controlled delivery schedule)
-Project objectives met (2021?)
-Coactivity with Physics (possibility to mitigate?)
-Risk of asbestos legislation evolution
-Cost increase (site mobilisation x2, demobilisation x2, etc.)
-Space for worksite installations required twice
B /04/2017
SMB-SE

14. CE project planning
B /04/2017
SMB-SE

15. Worksite Planning and coordination1 2 3
Shielded Area 5
Shielded Area 6 4
Suspended scaffoldings zoned planning
 Additional safety measures can be taken above sensitive area
Shielded area
(no co-activity with Physics)
Sensitive area (co-activity with Physics)
B /04/2017
SMB-SE

16. Worksite Planning and coordination
Impact on Physics minimised: Optimisation of scaffolding installation and removal above sensitive zones during YETS/LS2.
Co-activities with Physics to coordinate
B /04/2017
SMB-SE

17. Prioritised site zones
750 m2 available on North Side
750 m2 available on South Side
One entrance (North or South) to storage building between 156/157 will remain accessible at all time
No superposition of site installations (North/South)
10m passage for trucks surrounding south site installations
These zones are prioritised but additional space may be required
B /04/2017
SMB-SE

18. B119 example
B /04/2017
SMB-SE

19. B119 example
B /04/2017
SMB-SE

20. CLOUD run programme
CLOUD can run with natural cosmic ray ionisation during LS2 ( ). However, basic services are required (control room, electricity, de-ionised water, chilled water, access…)
Ideal scenario, runs with beam:
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
CLOUD runs
CLOUD-MOTION ITN (tbc)
Good scenario, two runs with cosmics during EA renovation:
East Area Renovation
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
CLOUD runs
CLOUD-MOTION ITN (tbc)
Catastrophy scenario, 3 year gap between runs:
East Area Renovation
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
CLOUD runs
CLOUD-MOTION ITN (tbc)

21. Planning option with CLOUD run in 2019
TRANE displacement : Better in 2017, but budget needed to do it before 09/2017
CLOUD rearrangement from 02/19 (Barrack, racks, magnet removal, internet, demi water…)
AC distribution will possibly be done in 2018, if not temporary switchboard installation.
Quentin Bouirek,

22. Outcome of the last Project Board meeting
Budget:
The project board (PB) takes note of the ‘cost to completion’ reduction by 1’246 kCHF corresponding to the CVI 2017.
Resources:
As the operation of the EA is critical for the HL-LHC experiment upgrade activities after LS2, the PB reinforces the CSR recommendation: the EA renovation project priority should be raised to the same level as LIU and HL-LHC (3rd priority after safety and LHC operation related activities).
Frozen layout:
The final solution turns out to be a good and sound compromise between operation & safety requirements and technical & budget possibilities.
A TDR document should be approved asap by all groups involved.
S.Evrard,
Project Board meeting #1

23. Outcome of the last Project Board meeting
Civil Engineering Plan
The PB has fully considered the option of delaying the civil engineering work until the completion of the beam line work (post-LS2). The PB concludes that performing the whole Civil engineering work in one go is a better plan and will not lead to cost increase. Mitigations measures have been identified with regard to parking lot availability, planning and co-activity constraints.
Cloud Run in 2019
The PB has taken note of the Cloud Collaboration request for a run with cosmic ray in autumn The PB recommends to carry out a detailed study including the identification of technical and schedule possible showstoppers + mitigation measures. A cost analysis will be part of this study including a funding plan for possible extra costs. The final greenlight for such run would be given during the next Cost and Schedule Review (end 2017)
S.Evrard,
Project Board meeting #1