1. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 1 Interlock team – the AB/CO point of view M.Zerlauth, R.Harrison Powering Interlocks A common task shared between AB-CO, AB-PO and AT-MEL

2. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 2 Current and future installations Protection of ~1600 electrical circuits with 10 000 sc magnets Protection of ~ 150 nc magnets Protection of ~ 800 nc magnets in SPS extractions lines & CNGS Protection of ~ 100 nc magnets in LEIR + + 1. Superconducting Magnets 3. Other installations (e.g. CTF3, PS, SPS consolidation…) 2. Normal conducting magnets

3. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 3 Powering Interlocks as service and client of AB-CO The powering Interlock systems are at the same time service to the accelerator operation and client of AB/CO Service: Provide connectivity between power converters and magnets/quench protection system Provide additional functionality (global aborts, anticipatory shut downs) and interface towards the beam interlock controllers Provide remote monitoring and failure diagnostics Client: PVSS support from CO-IS (Industrial Systems section) Database support for asset management, controls layout, naming and configuration from CO-DM (Data Management section) Logging, PM and ALARMS client from CO-DM & CO-AP (Application section) Tools for automated commissioning (PVSS-CMW client, sequencer from AP…)

4. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 4 Power Conver ter Power Conver ter Power Conver ter QPS Architecture - The different levels of the project Power Conver ter PC_PERMIT PC_FAST_ABORT POWERING_FAILURE Magnet / QPS CIRCUIT_QUENCH / MAGNET OVERTEMP Profibus PLC for process control and configuration HW Current loops for connections of clients Ethernet Technical Network LHC Ref DB PVSS Operator Console and Server for remote monitoring and system configuration (in the Field Control Room, CCC or CCR) AUG UPS Beam Permit Beam Interlock system PIC/WIC Patch Panels and Electronics

5. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 5 Status of the different levels for the PIC project Version 1.0 ready Automatic configuration from RefDB PVSS server installed and consoles configured in the lab and FCR Done by CO-IS Version 1.0 ready Functionality test implemented History buffer implemented Automatic configuration from RefDB Done by interlock team Prototypes finished Pre-series currently in production EMC, radiation tolerance and functionality tests Test system for Individual System Test completed Done by interlock team

6. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 6 Status of the different levels for the WIC project Supervision for TI8 operational Local touch screens for LEIR Support for LHC Supervision required TI8 version by interlock team (future PVSS support by IS?) Generic SW used for LEIR and LHC Version 1.0 ready Standard and Safety PLC components used TI8 and LEIR installed and commissioned Done by interlock team HW installations for TI8 and LEIR installed TI2 and LHC installations partially installed Done by interlock team Cable Patches for collection of thermo switches, Elettas…

7. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 7 Key dates for LHC commissioning Sector 81 LSS L8 A78 –PIC Installation and support during short circuit tests in UA83 –subsector cool down and power tests in LSS left of IR8 partly in parallel with QRL test of whole sector –power tests in Arc 78 –power tests in sector 81 –Installations for WIC LHC Jan/Feb 2006 July 2006 September 2005 July 2006 in parallel with PIC

8. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 8 Magnet Interlocks CERN wide: by CO ? We received several request for participation to magnet interlock systems in other CERN installation –LEIR –PS –CTF3 Should we become responsible for such installations ?  In general, it is a good idea that only one team should be responsible for magnet interlocks at CERN (for normal conducting magnets and superconducting magnets)  Todays priority are the interlock systems for LHC and injection lines from SPS to LHC. This is required to start LHC operation.  Interlock systems in existing installations are aging, and consolidation is required. For several accelerators, machine operation relies on these interlocks systems. If they fail, no LHC operation.

9. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 9 Magnet Interlocks CERN wide: Issues  No clear indication that massive failures are expected in the near future, consolidation has not the first priority  Interlock systems in new installations: on one hand it is desirable that this is done by our team, on the other hand systems required for LHC operation have priority. We see two options: –we do not get involved before LHC is completed –we do get involved with additional manpower (e.g. FSU). We would first evaluate budget and amount and type of manpower required for such system, and then discuss realisation. It would be with the same type of generic system as for LHC and LEIR based on PLCs  Commissioning of interlock system would have to be well organised.  Long-term maintenance: our team will cover magnet interlocks at LHC, transfer lines SPS-LHC, SPS and LEIR. Manpower for maintenance will be evaluated. There might be a kind of "piquet" service required.

10. AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September 2005 10 Conclusions and outlook  Powering Interlock design and installations are well advanced, based on an efficient and close collaboration with the equipment groups (AB-PO, AT- MEL) –PIC, WIC-TI8, WIC-TI2, WIC-LEIR, WIC-LHC –CTF3, PS…  Documentation and commissioning procedures mostly finished  Support within CO is excellent and will have to continue throughout HWC and future installations  For the PIC, the automated tools for commissioning are a MUST, and have to be operational for HWC proper in February 2006 –To fulfill the parallel installation/commissioning, we rely on the additional manpower for hardware commissioning that was requested  Software interlocks (and exchange of interlock data on the supervision level) has been agreed– documentation to be written and to be agreed by OP & AP in order to use same methods to access data (e.g. LHC state machine, sequencer…)