stefano redaelli, cern, be-abp for the collimation project and hl-lhc-wp5 teams the lhc collimation...
TRANSCRIPT
Stefano Redaelli, CERN, BE-ABPfor the Collimation Project and HL-LHC-WP5 teams
The LHC Collimation
Baseline for HL-LHC
3rd Joint HiLumi LHC-LARP Annual MeetingNovember 11th-15th, 2013
Daresbury Laboratory - Warrington, UK
The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme 7 Capacities Specific Programme, Grant Agreement 284404.
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 2
Outline
Introduction
Where we are (140MJ@4TeV, 60cm β*)
OP feedback and upgrade plans
Advanced collimator concepts
Conclusions
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 3
Acknowledgements
B. Salvachua, R. Bruce and ABP collimation teamR. Losito, A. Lechner, F. Cerutti for the EN-STI team
G. Stancari, A. Valishev (FNAL)A. Bertarelli (EN-MME)T. Markiewicz (SLAC),
W. Scandale, D. Mirarchi (crystal studies)G.Arduini, O. Bruning, L. Rossi
R. Appleby (Manchester)
Core collimation team in the LHC accelerator physics group: R. Bruce, M. Cauchi, L. Lari, D. Mirarchi, E. Quaranta,M. Salvachua, A. Rossi, A. Marsili, G. Valentino.People who have recently left the team: R. Assmann, D. Wollmann, D. Deboy
Many thanks to R. Assmann!
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 43
Introduction
Superconducting coil: T = 1.9 K, quench limit
~ 15-50mJ/cm3
LHC 2012: 145 MJLHC design: 360 MJ
HL-LHC: 500MJ!
Factor 9.7 x 10 9
Aperture: r = 17/22 mm
LHC “Run 1” 2010-2013: No quench with
circulating beam, with stored energies up
to 70 times of previous state-of-the-art!
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 5
LHC collimation layout
Picture by C. Bracco
Two warm cleaning insertions, 3 collimation planes
IR3: Momentum cleaning1 primary (H)4 secondary (H)4 shower abs. (H,V)
IR7: Betatron cleaning3 primary (H,V,S)11 secondary (H,V,S)5 shower abs. (H,V)
Local cleaning at triplets8 tertiary (2 per IP)
Passive absorbers for warm magnets
Physics debris absorbers
Transfer lines (13 collimators)Injection and dump protection (10)
Total of 108 collimators (100 movable).Two jaws (4 motors) per collimator!
Momentumcleaning
Betatroncleaning
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 6
Collimator gaps in 2012
Transverse cuts from H, V and S primary collimators in IR7
3σ beam envelope
2012: achieved the our design 7 TeV primary collimator setting!Secondary collimator retraction still above nominal (~2.5σ retraction instead than 1σ).Possible limitations: impedance and OP efficiency (more frequent alignments).
60 cm flat active length, gap = ± 1.05 mmσv = 250 microns!
L. Gentini
Vertical primary collimators: 2012 settings
1 pound
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 7
Collimation cleaning at 4 TeV (β*=60cm)
Off-momentumDump
TCTs
TCTsTCTs
TCTs
Betatron
1/10000 0.00001
0.000001
Beam 1
Highest COLD loss location: efficiency of > 99.99% ! Most of the ring actually > 99.999%
B. Salvachua
Cle
anin
g in
effic
ienc
y [B
LM/B
LMtc
p]
Cleaning defined here as:
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 8
Stability of cleaning
Excellent stability achieved with 1 align-ment per year in IR3/6/7 (2x30 devices).
New alignments are only repeated for new physics configurations(it remains crucial to be efficient!)
PhD by G. Valentino: average alignment ➙time < 5 min per collimator using the BLMs.
B. Salvachua
Setup time per collimator (2010-2012)
Setup time per collimator (2010-2012)
G. Valentino
p-p runsp-p runs p-Pb/Pb-p runsp-Pb/Pb-p runs
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 9
Outline
Introduction
Where we are (140MJ@4TeV, 60cm β*)
OP feedback and upgrade plans
Advanced collimator concepts
Conclusions
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 10
Why we need a collimation upgrade?
LHC points
Cleaning efficiency 3, 7
Collimator impedance 3, 7
Operational improvements, β* all
Collimation in experiments (debris cleaning) 1, 2, 5, 8
Halo control mechanisms 4
Activation, full remote handling all
Collimator lifetime, consolidation all
Collimation cleaning not enough to define the LHC performance: beam lifetime and quench limits at 7 TeV must be must be understood.
Other important aspects: impedance contribution, settings hierarchy and β* reach.
Physics debris collimation: high-luminosity experiments for protons + ion operation.
Cannot cover all the topics - more focus on
aspects covered by HiLumi-WP5 + US-LARP.
Relying on many companion talks at this WS.
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 11
Minimum beam lifetime in 2012Beam intensity versus time Minimum (assumed)
beam lifetime Quench limit of SC magnets
Collimation cleaning at limiting cold location
Beam lifetime gives the loss rate on collimators. Cleaning η gives the peak losses in magnets. Collimator design: 500 KW!
SQUEEZESQUEEZE
ADJUSTADJUST
1 hour1 hour
1 hour1 hour
2012: Minimum lifetime with gaps equiv. to 7 TeV: 0.2 - 1 hour
Bea
m li
feti
me
[ h
]
B. Salvachua
See talk by E. Métral: to what extend this depends on collimators?
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 12
Collimation quench test
11 Gy/s at the TCP.B6R7.B2 in IR7 for a peak loss up to 1050 kW
Beam 2
Achieved controlled losses of 5.8MJ, about 3 Tevatron full beams, in 15 s.
Peak loss up to 1.05 MW, exceeding assumed quench limits by more than a
factor 3 without quenching!
Major effort undertaken to perform in Feb. 2012 quench tests with beam in operational
conditions.Unfortunately, not possible with ion beams...
B. Salvachua
Ongoing work on different CERN working
groups to understand this in detail.
E. Skordis (fluka team)
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 13
Predicted intensity reach from cleaning
Consider minimum lifetime of 0.2 h based on the 2012 experience- Perhaps pessimistic, but ~10% of fills reached τb<0.5-1h!- Reviewers felt that it could get worse (25ns vs 50ns, higher E, larger
impedance)
Different models to scale losses to 6.5 TeV: Intensity reach from proton cleaning in IR7 is 3 to 6 times the nominal LHC (3.2x1014p). Less margin at 7 TeV (different for 2 available quench models).HL-LHC intensity goal reduce this window by a factor ~2.
For more than a factor 2 above LHC design, we have to worry also about collimator robustness!
We might have to set BLM thresholds to protect the collimators!
Ions: ALICE luminosity upgrade target is at least a factor 2 above quench limits. Same limitations apply for IR1 and IR5 that have less priority for ion runs.
No additional limitations in IR1/5 until LS3 from physics debris thanks to the use of 3 TCL collimators.Expect the same result for HiLumi, but need to prove this with final IR layouts.Backup slide in case more details are needed. See also talk by L.Esposito.
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 14
DS collimation: requirements by IR
Until HL-LHC (before LS3)[L=2.5x1034cm-2s-1, Itot=3.2x1014p]
HL-LHC era (after LS3)(L=5x1034cm-2s-1, Itot=6.2x1014p)
Protons Ions Protons Ions
IR7 Betatron cleaning Needed?(unlikely)
Needed?(unlikely)
NeededTBC (ATS?)
Needed?
IR3Momentum
cleaningNot needed Not needed Not needed Not needed
IR1/5 ATLAS/CMS Not needed NeededNeeded?(unlikely) Needed
IR2 ALICE Not needed Needed Not neededNeeded
IR8 LHCb Not needed Not operating Not needed Not operating
Goal for the collimation project: have a solution available to address already in
LS2 possible cleaning limitations revealed by the post-LS1 operation.
Larger uncertainties for HL-LHC era, but more time to decide on DS collimation!
Uncertainty on quench limits and performance, solved in 2015.
Can we have 11 T dipoles in time? Do we need to consider alternative
layouts (moving magnets)?
Local collimation in DS addresses successfully limitations in all IRs!
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 15
Collimation review outcome
https://indico.cern.ch/event/251588
External review panel:Mike Seidel (PSI, Chair), Giorgio Apollinari (FNAL), Wolfram Fischer (BNL), Marzio Nessi (ATLAS), Rudiger Schmidt (CERN/ESS), Carsten Omet (GSI).
Main outcome on DS collimation:Due to the uncertainties on the extrapolations of beam lifetime and quench limits at 7 TeV, “The committee strongly encourages the development and prototyping of one 11 T (5.5 m) dipole magnet, and the cryogenic bypass collimator unit. … Build at least 4 units (1 unit consists of 2 magnets + bypass + collimator) since this would cover 2 possible cases…”Additionally: support for reduced impedance collimators and hollow elens works!
The review panel recognized that DS collimation:- is needed for ions in IR2/1/5, already in LS2 (ALICE upgrade).- is probably not needed in LS2 but we cannot guarantee that at this stage.- is certainly beneficial for the HL-LHC era (ATS optics). - this technology will be clearly useful for the HL-LHC era Recommendation to work hard to achieve a minimum of 4 by LS2!
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 16
Progress towards final layouts
R. Bruce
Finalized layouts and lattices for IR2 and IR7 (IR1/5 ongoing) with 11 T magnets.
Massive simulation campaigns (tracking + energy deposition) to understand the cleaning improvement and to determine key collimator parameters (length and material) specification for load cases are essentially ready.➙
Updated collimator design taking new constraints into account.
Provided inputs for the ongoing detailed integration studies.
Starting iteration with WP11 for studying quench limits and magnet protection.
This is part of the important HiLumi WP5 activity on the LHC collimation that will be discussed in details in the parallel WP5 section!
Beam
Improved design based on 80 cm length, EN-MEE
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 17
More pictures on DS collimators
Lot of preparatory work done in preparation of the 2011 baseline solution base on moving magnets. Major re-design and integration work is needed, though.
EN-MME,TE-MSC
M. Karppinen for WP11
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 18
New collimator materials
Main goal: reduce impedance of IR7 (and IR3) collimators, representing 90% of LHC impedance at top energy.
See talks by E. Métral and N. Mounet for motivation!
More robust tertiary collimators, might allow to push further beta*
All new collimators will used improved mechanical design with integrated BPMS.
LHC points
Cleaning efficiency 3, 7
Collimator impedance 3, 7
Operational improvements, β* all
Collimation in experiments (debris cleaning) 1, 2, 5, 8
Halo control mechanisms 4
Activation, full remote handling all
Collimator lifetime, consolidation all
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 19
Gain from new collimators
N. Mounet
The present collimators contribute to about 90% of the total machine impedance!The collimation contribution is reduced to 10 % if we consider a Mo coding (example here: Mo-Gr jaw coated by Mo).
This is considered as a main show stopper to achieve the HL-LHC high intensity goal!
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 20
TCTP prototype assembly
Timeline for new secondary collimators
Our ambitious plan: - Build a machine-ready prototype for installation in the Christmas stop 2015!- Based on post-LS1 experience and results of prototyping, launch a production line for action during LS2!
Many challenges ahead:- Finalize new collimator design- Production techniques for new materials, including coating- Beam validation of full scale prototype at CERN HiRadMat- Crucial tests of material properties under high irradiation Results expected from US-LARP (BNL) and Kurchatov See talk by N. Simos
Cu-CD Fracture Analysis
Mo-Gr composite
Cu-CD composite
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 21
Outline
Introduction
Where we are (140MJ@4TeV, 60cm β*)
OP feedback and upgrade plans
Advanced collimator concepts
Conclusions
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 22
Hollow e-lens for the LHC
Tevatron hollow beams allow to control selectively (by amplitude) the diffusion ➙speed of halo particles control the ➙ “steady” tail population; decide when loosing halo (remove fast, erratic loss spikes); no affect on the beam core!
Why do we need it?1. If we are limited by quenches:Great advantage if we can control the time distribution of losses.This is the main motivation for the use of hollow e-lens for collimation!2. If we do not quench:Design lifetime (0.2h) with the HL-LHC intensity we will cause lossesexceeding the plastic deformation of primary/secondary collimators.3. Halo population control critical for operation with crab-cavities
CERN strategy, presented at the last US-LARP meeting:Focus present resources on achieving a conceptual design report by 2013, and a complete design report by end of 2014 to decide in 2015 about LHC installation.
Beam population
Diffusion speed
Talk by G. Stancari on Thursday
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 23
Status of activities with US-LARPAt CERN, we established links to achieve a design report by the end of 2014Collimation (S. Redaelli), beam instrumentation (R. Jones) and engineering team (A. Bertarelli).Synergy with halo monitoring H. Schmickler.➙
Planning now to setup an experimental test stand to characterize electron beams.
We are very happy with the collaboration with the US-LARP team (G. Stancari, V. Valishev) and we wish that this could continue further.
Recently we explored an exchange student program in collaboration with EPFL (L. Rivkin). Can we extend the Toohig fellow to PhD student? Giulio and Sasha suggested to consider the Fermilab joint PhD program as a model.
Topics that we are going to address:- Analysis of Tevatron data relevant for LHC- Tracking simulations hollow e-lens excitation
(continuation of V. Previtali, Toohig fellow)- Measurements of hollow beam in lab test stands
(at Fermilab and CERN)- Analysis of diffusion model at the LHC
(continuation of measurements done in 2012)
V. Moens, Diploma thesis, Sep. 2013.
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 24
Crystal collimation studies
Several open questions: - Can crystal collimation compete with the present very good cleaning system? - Uncertainty for the scaling to higher energy (e.g.: single diffractive losses). - Operational challenges for the complex operational cycle (ramp, squeeze, etc...). - Some outstanding machine protection concerns must be addressed. - Can we absorb more than 1 MW in one single block?Real need to improve the present system will be assessed in 2015 within the context of the collimation upgrade plans.
Primary
Secondaries
Absorbers
Beam
Standard collimation
Beam
Absorber
Crystal
???
Crystal-based collimation
Promises of crystal collimation:1. Improved DS cleaning in channeling;2. Reduce impedance: less secondary collimators and larger gaps;3. Much improved cleaning for ion beams.Note: only applicable to IR7 betatron cleaning, not useful for physics debris!
Promising results at the SPS.
Uncertainties on the extrapolation to unknown
energy territories and operational challenges call
for solid experimental validation before this
technology can be relied upon for future designs.
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 25
Status of crystal proposal for LHC
•Converged on IR7 layouts for machine studies in horizontal and vertical planes.
•Existing secondary collimators to be used as absorbers during low-intensity MD’s only. Worked out preliminary settings that optimize cleaning of a crystal-based system.
•Identified locations of additional detectors.
•LHC engineering change request (ECR) under approval with the following proposal:
•Cabling for complete experiment;
•Installation of 2 goniometers;
•Space reservations for detectors.(nice to have but not essential for the initially feasibility demonstration)
Talk by W. Scandale on Thursday!
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 26
Update on SLAC rotatory collimator
Nice concept. Might be reconsider it in light of the recent material tests and updated safe limits? Cannot be considered as candidate until fully validated by beam tests (HRM, SPS?)A beam test strategy will be established as soon as we have the chance to test it at CERN!Being shipped to CERN now!
See talk by T. Markiewicz on Thursday!
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 27
Scope of collimation consolidation“Optimistic” ballpark figures assuming that all upgrades discussed here are adopted for HL-LHC:- 22-30 new secondary collimators;- 4 more robust TCT collimators;- additional collimators in IR’s (new);- several DS collimator (new).
THIS LEAVES IN THE MACHINE AT LEAST 70 HIGH-PRECISION COLLIMATORS THAT WILL HAVE MORE THAN 15 YEARS BY LS3!
Several concerns:Mechanical wear in operationChallenging radiation environmentRadiation wear of componentsPerformance reduction from
thermo-mechanical and electrical property degradation due from radiation.
Talk by N. Simos tomorrow
S. Redaelli, 3rd HiLumi meeting 12/11/2013 28
ConclusionsThe LHC collimation upgrade is an integral part of HL-LHC
The present upgrade baseline was discussed. We have solutions to address the main critical issues identified for the
HL era! For us, important guidelines on upgrade strategy can only come in 2015,
as also recognized by a recent external review that supported our baseline.
From design to construction project:We are well advanced in terms of layouts, machine slots, space
reservations.TCLD + 11T dipoles: converged on baseline layouts for critical IR’s.New collimator materials: slots essentially ready, further improved in LS1.Outstanding issue: integration of hollow e-lens in IR4 PLC!➙
We set aggressive timelines to be ready for possible actions in LS2Very challenging schedule for 11 T dipoles (DS collimators in the shade)Working hard to get a fully validated prototype for tests after 2015 to improve the LHC impedance.
Solid solutions for the main challenges, but keep pushing new ideas: Advanced collimator concepts are more then ever on the table! Considering improved settings and operational conditions to address other limitations: some discussed in WP5 sessions, other in the pipeline.