1. Secondary beam production facility layout discussions SBLNF meeting 5 th Dec. 2012 M. Calviani, A. Ferrari, R. Losito (EN/STI) H. Vincke (DGS/RP)

2. Outline 2  Update on the conceptual functional layout  Neutrino production area  Annex services (“morgue”, hot handling area, etc.)  Building sizes and requirements  Comparison with similar installations in USA/Japan 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout

3. Updates on the neutrino production area 3  Present solution adopts the “trench/chase” approach: ~20/25 meters long, for an internal size of ~3 meters  New proposition:  Machine (cooling systems) rooms on the lateral/size to the target area  Depends on the size of the trench that can be excavated  Impact on costs but reduced pipings  Morgue and local shielding storage lateral to the target area  Hot handling cell located downstream the target vault  Personnel access to the target building from upstream  Shielding thickness adapted to radiation levels at 240 kW (MC, link)link  Disclaimer: this proposition reflects requirements – it’s not integrated with services groups (CV, EL, etc.)! 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout

4. Access conditions and H*(10) levels 4  No routine access to the target hall during operation  Shielding should be designed to respect an H*(10) of < 15  Sv/h on the target vault during operation at 240 kW  Levels outside the building will have to be <0.5  Sv/h (non designated) 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout  Decay pipe:  250 cm thick concrete shielding  5  Sv/h at 10 m from beam axis – DP possibly fenced on the surface  Concrete/soil interface at ~30 mSv/h  5 mSv/h would require ~400 cm thick concrete 5  Sv/h level H*(10) (mSv/h) Z averaged middle DP Vertical direction

5. Neutrino production area proposition 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout5

6. Neutrino production area proposition 65th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout  Shielding:  There are margins to reduce the H*(10) on the vault floor by adding concrete blocks  Chase size matched with a 3 m diameter DP < 15  Sv/h < 1 mSv/h< 10 mSv/h  Present configuration assume:  Machine rooms & morgue excavated lateral to chase

7. Possible configuration of the “morgue” 7  Two possibilities could be envisaged for the radioactive material disposal area  Ground level lateral from the main target vault  Less underground works  Need significant shielding + complex transport?  Located in a separate trench lateral to the target chase  Easier shielding in case of very hot objects (objects could reach ~Sv/h)  Can be used also to temporary store shielding blocks  More complex CE works to excavate the trench  Could be used to prepare the shielded transport cask  Size will depend on assumptions on hot objects exchange rates & transport requirements – temporary storage? 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout

8. Neutrino production area 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout8

9. Hot handling work cell possible configuration 9  Potential use of a “radioactive working cell”:  Horn mechanical connection to the shielding module, remote strip line clamp, waterline connection to horn, electrical connection to horn, target inspection 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout  Location?  On the target vault floor, downstream the chase shielding  Easier manipulation and access  Concrete enclosure, w/ internal cameras for local inspection  No lead glass window Front side

10. He-vessel conceptual 10  He-vessel enclosure, 1 atm He-gas:  Pros:  Reduce pion absorption  Suppress 3 H by ~25% wrt air  Suppress NO x production and corrosion (factor of ~100x)  Suppress 7 Be, 41 Ar, 32 P, etc.  sure benefits for global releases  See H. Vincke, linklink  Cons:  Quite complicated to build – huge He volume to handle – need to guarantee leak tightness for feedthroughs  Expensive solution  Target station & decay volume – unique volume  No beam window required between TS and DP 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout

11. He-vessel conceptual 11  Configuration:  Thick steel layer – ~20 m (L), 3 m (W), 8 m (H)  Evacuation of the He-vessel required to remove air and avoid condensation (i.e. corrosion) during operation  Cooling channels might be needed to cool down the vessel (~20/30 kW deposited)  Air/water cooled?  Is a shutter separating the TS from the DP during access required?  In order to recuperate He during evacuation, need of external compartments  Total volume ~1100 m 3 (480 TS + 620 DP)  It’s urgent to study the viability of this option vs. an open air circulation system 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout

12. What needs to be cooled in the chase? 12  Target – possibly an He cooling system  Horn/reflector – water cooling  He-vessel circulation (*) – He cooling system  He-vessel plates (*) – water (or air?) cooling  DP collimator (?) – water cooling  Hadron Absorber – water cooling  Upstream collimator/baffle – cooling not needed? 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout (*) with an open air atmosphere these would be probably exchanged for a forced air cooling loop

13. Decay pipe 13  3 or 3.5 m Ø ~90 meters long volume (~110 m from target)  Shape cylindrical or parallelepiped (a-la-T2K)  What’s the level of the moraine/molasse interface?  1974 bore: close to TCC2, waterbed in moraine at 20 m below ground level (431 m)  Molasse ~429 m (22 m from surface) 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout Courtesy: J. Osborne

14. DP - geomembrane  DP: high level of prompt dose rate over a large distance  risks of soil and water activation  Geosynthetic barrier system: protect the surrounding groundwater from any possible tritiated water escaping the decay region 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout14  Separate barriers (LBNE approach):  Geomembrane  Geosynthetic clay liner barrier  Geonet leak detection layer http://lbne2- docdb.fnal.gov:8080/0046/004623/006/C DR_Vol_5_MI-10CF_20120313.pdf

15. Hadron absorber area 155th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout

16. Hadron absorber area 165th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout  Pit1/HS  Absorber cooling mandatory – cooling station will be certainly quite hot (~50 kW power to dissipate)  Access limited for maintenance  Pit1 access requires local bunker due to material activation  Crane required  Pit2:  Could potentially be even a barrack – no RP issues foreseen (H. Vincke, link)link  No fixed crane required Pit1/HSPit2

17. FNAL NuMI configuration  NuMI target station deep underground (beam level ~50 meters below ground); target hall is ~40 meters deep  Facility adapted to handle 400 kW beam power  Surface target service building to access the deeper vault 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout17 Target hall = 53 m length, ~8 m wide

18. FNAL NuMI configuration 185th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout

19. JPARC/T2K configuration  JPARC has a surface target vault, with a beam axis located ~20 meters below ground level  Facility adapted to handle 750 kW (1.6 MW) beam power  Several annex buildings are located on the surface 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout19

20. JPARC/T2K configuration 205th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout

21. Conclusions 21  Updated secondary beam line functional specifications  Location of the morgue to be confirmed in collaboration with DGS/RP  Cooling station/hot service rooms location to be confirmed/discussed with DGS/RP and GS/SE, as the target vault/chase size depends on this as well  He-vessel certainly an advantage, but costs and technical complexity worth? 5th December 2012MC - Updates on SBLNF secondary beam facility layout