1. Conceptual design of superconducting correctors for Hi-Lumi Project (v2)
F. Toral - CIEMAT
CIEMAT, March 7th, 2013

2. Outline Last magnetic calculations Cross section of the magnets
Superferric dipole design
Conclusions 2

3. Last magnetic calculations
New calculations have been done assuming a higher nonlinearity of the transfer function: 20% of saturation at nominal current. That is, the actual field at nominal current is 80% of the computed value by extrapolation of the transfer function at low currents.
The requirement on integrated strength of the decapole and dodecapole, normal and skew in both cases, has been reduced by 25%.
The cross talk between two identical consecutive magnets is negligible. Next model will include different magnets, to define the minimum distance between them. 3

4. Last magnetic calculations
Roxie simulation
Total length (m)
2,958
Superferric option
WP2 requirements
Order
Aperture
Int Strenght at 50 mm
Int strength
Mech length
Strength
Pole field 2-D
Saturation
Coil length
Coil straight length
Block current
Number of turns
Current
Wire bare diameter L
required/given
(mm)
(T m)
(T/m^(n-2))
(m)
(T/m^(n-1))
(T)
(adim)
(A)
(H)
MCQSX
Skew 2
150
1,014
0,914
1,75
1,04
0,896
0,864
53000
346
153,2
0,7
1,99
1,00
1,01
MCSX
Normal 3
0,060
0,136
1,25
0,116
0,092
24000
228
105,3
0,5
0,167
0,06
MCSSX
MCOX 4
0,040
0,140
1,02
0,120
0,096
17400
165
105,5
0,093
0,04
MCOSX
MCDX 5
0,170
1,40
1,05
0,150
0,126
0,138
MCDSX
0,02
2,00
MCTX 6
0,119
0,608
1,65
0,588
0,564
16600
100,6
0,6
0,12
MCTSX
0,020
0,144
0,124
0,100
14000
84,8
0,111
Roxie simulation
Total length (m)
2,416
Superferric option
WP2 requirements
Order
Aperture
Int Strenght at 50 mm
Int strength
Mech length
Strength
Pole field 2-D
Saturation
Coil length
Coil straight length
Block current
Number of turns
Current
Wire bare diameter L
required/given
(adim)
(mm)
(T m)
(T/m^(n-2))
(m)
(T/m^(n-1))
(T)
(A)
(H)
MCQSX
Skew 2
150
0,997
0,746
2,20
0,81
0,726
0,694
76000
738
103,0
0,7
5,86
1,00
MCSX
Normal 3
0,060
0,136
1,25
0,96
0,116
0,092
24000
228
105,3
0,5
0,167
0,06
MCSSX
MCOX 4
0,040
0,140
0,98
0,120
0,096
17400
165
105,5
0,093
0,04
MCOSX
MCDX 5
0,031
2,00
0,80
0,072
25000
198
126,3
0,131
0,03
1,03
MCDSX
0,02
2,06
MCTX 6
0,382
2,10
0,362
0,338
185
135,1
0,403
0,09
1,02
MCTSX
0,016
0,104
0,084
20000
108,1
0,015
1,08 4

5. Outline Last magnetic calculations Cross section of the magnets
Superferric dipole design
Conclusions 5

6. Cross section: quadrupole6

7. Transfer function: quadrupole
Units (1E-4)
Gradient
T/m
Normalized current
Normalized current 7

8. Cross section: sextupole8

9. Cross section: octupole9

10. Cross section: decapole10

11. Cross section: dodecapole11

12. Cross section: dodecapole12

13. Outline Last magnetic calculations Cross section of the magnets
Superferric dipole design
Conclusions 13

14. Superferric dipole design (I)14

15. Superferric dipole design (II)
The maximum allowed outer diameter is 620 mm.
The present design has not included iron holes: there are holes for the cryogenic lines, but others can be used for the field shaping due to the iron saturation.
The present optimization has been done only by iron pole morphing. The main field is about 1.5 T, which is too low to be competitive with a cos-theta design.
What is the request for the field quality? 10 units (1E-3) is good enough?
Optimization is still ongoing. 15

16. Conclusions
A new design with higher saturation has been performed (20% of non-linearity of the transfer function).
The cross talk between consecutive magnets is being computed.
The cross section of the different magnets have been shown.
A superferric dipole design is being analysed to provide 2.5 or 4 Tm. The optimization is still ongoing.
The framework for this Collaboration needs to be defined. 16