1. http://indico.cern.ch/event/373053/ Beam Instrumentation during LS1 Ray Veness on behalf of the BE/BI group

2. Overview Ray Veness, BE-BI2 Introduction Activities around the beam lines Non-beam vacuum activities Overview of main issues Safety Interactions with other groups and services Scheduling Resources in BI Towards LS2 Conclusions

3. Instruments Removed during LS1 Ray Veness, BE-BI3 Typical activities Participation in CERN-wide activities (eg, SMACC, LSS1 cabling, layout changes) Consolidation and maintenance of instruments (eg, impedance issues in LHC-BSRTM, fatigue lifetime in LHC-BWS) New or replacement instruments (eg, SPS-BWSRE, LHC-BGV) Machine Complex In-Vacuum Beam Instruments Non-Vacuum Beam Instruments Total in placeRemovedTotal in placeRemoved PS45787109159 SPS4966341030 LHC12207339932300 Total217322345082489

4. LHC Beam Loss Monitoring System Ray Veness, BE-BI4 More than half of the 3989 ionisation chambers removed and replaced for SMACC and other interventions 834 chambers re-located with new supports All re-calibrated with radioactive sources More than 70 km of new cables installed Exchange of tunnel and surface electronics racks Effective participation from a Russian collaboration team

5. BLM Relocation for UFO Detection BLM system designed to protect from beam losses at maximum-beta locations (quadrupoles) During Run1 there were 3 BLMs per beam per Quadrupole Middle BLM moved to main dipole interconnect in order to protect efficiently from UFO losses Gain a factor 30 in sensitivity 5

6. Synchrotron Light Extraction Mirror (BSRTM) Mirror heating clearly correlated to beam intensity beam spectrum bunch length 6 Failure of mirror holder + blistering of mirror coating Metallic mirror holder + Silicon bulk mirror Complete Re-design EM Simulations Lab Measurements Metallic holder Silicon bulk mirror Beam SR

7. Synchrotron Light Extraction Mirror 7 OLD Extraction Mirror NEW Extraction Mirror Solution for Run II with low RF ‘footprint’ and shielded cavities

8. The Beam Gas Vertex Detector (BGV) Prototype installed on one beam during LS1 Detectors based on scintillating fibres read out with SiPMs Rhodri Jones @ IBIC14 – 17/9/2014The Challenges of LHC Operation at 7TeV 8 LHCb (CERN) EPFL (CH) Aachen (DE)

9. (Examples of) LS1 non-Beamline Activities Ray Veness, BE-BI9 Temperature controlled racks for LHC BPMs and BLMs Some 45 new racks in surface buildings with 150 crates EN-CV were an essential partner New beam position system infrastructure in the SPS (MOPOS project) 100’s of Km’s of optical fibres pulled by EN-EL New controls infrastructure Installation and commissioning of 100+ front-end computers DOROS (Diode ORbit and OScillation) project

10. LHC Orbit Stability Improvements Planned improvements Thermalised racks Maintains temperature within ±0.2°C Implementation 45 new racks with 150 crates Cooling system from EN-CV 10 from 2010 1 bin ~ 30um BPM position Temperature

11. Overview of main issues Ray Veness, BE-BI11 Categories of interventions Interventions for CERN-wide projects, changes of layout etc: Generally worked well as they were clearly defined and planned in advance New prototypes (eg,BGV, BWSRE) Working on ‘best effort’ basis reliant on other (overloaded) services BI worked with MEF and committees (eg, LMC) to closely follow priority and schedule Interventions where the solution to the problem was not clear at the start of the shutdown, or the problem was discovered during the shutdown Changes in accelerator operating parameters or instrument impedance, vacuum, performance) caused most problems (BWS, BQS, BSRT) These are not possible to plan in advance as the effort required is not known

12. Safety Ray Veness, BE-BI12

13. Interactions with other groups and services I Ray Veness, BE-BI13

14. Interactions with other groups and services II Ray Veness, BE-BI14 Machine Complex # Vacuum Acceptance Tests # Failure on First Test Success Rate PS5420 63% SPS2411 54% LHC4414 68% Total6825 63% VSC Statistics for vacuum acceptance test acceptance was lower than expected throughout LS1 (see below)

15. Scheduling Ray Veness, BE-BI15

16. Resources in BI Ray Veness, BE-BI16

17. Looking towards LS2 Ray Veness, BE-BI17

18. Conclusions Ray Veness, BE-BI18 99.5% of the original baseline work was completed, and more things besides Baseline, core activities generally went smoothly (eg, BLM, BTV, BCT, LSS1, North Area consolidation) Issues arose mainly where a problem was not identified or understood before the shutdown (eg, BQS, LHC-BWS), or with pre-identified ‘best effort’ projects (eg, BGV, BWSRE) Working closely with MEF later in the shutdown helped the few critical late items BI activities span all machines, experimental areas and transfer lines, LS2 needs global scheduling for all complexes, not neglecting the overlap between shutdown and commissioning in different machines Looking forward to LS2, BI already has a long list of high priorities Need to target the top priorities for CERN, identify critical instruments and prepare spares where budget allows – PLAN worked for LS1 and could be improved for LS2 Closer follow-up of progress, not only with MEF but also CERN services such as mechanical and electronic design and manufacture Be prepared to start activities as early as possible, and identify possible areas to postpone if required

19. …to all the people, groups and services who helped make this shutdown a success for BI THANKS! Ray Veness, BE-BI19