HL-LHC activities during LS2, highlight of changes with respect to last year

2. HL-LHC activities during LS2, highlight of changes with respect to last year Laurent Tavian (ATS-DO) Many thanks to HL-LHC WP leaders and engineers for their contributions

3. Outline • Highlight of changes with respect to Chamonix’14 workshop, in particular: • 11 T dipoles, cryo-bypasses and TCLD collimators configuration • Cold/warm powering • Cryogenics at P4 • In-situ coating of IT beam screen at P2 and P8 • Civil engineering work • Safety of personnel working in the HL-LHC underground areas during LHC Run 3 Different scenarios under study with their impacts on LS2 activities • Conclusions

4. HL-LHC project structure WP4: Mainly SPS/BA6 activities (see Julie and Giovanna presentation) Avoid large upgrade and consolidation activities in test or assembly facilities in parallel with (E)YETS and LS With potential installation activities during YETS, EYETS and LS2

5. 11 T dipoles, cryo-bypass & TCLD = 1 unit Remainder of ECR rules: - Changes affecting the configuration Baseline of HL-LHC  HL-LHC ECRwill be used to trace decisions and actions that will come from changes on components. (discussed at the HL-LHC-TCC) - Installation of new components affecting the present LHC configurationLHC ECR will be used to trace the LHC configuration change. (discussed at the LMC) First unit to be ready before the beginning of LS2 (end 2018) Second unit not later than end 2019 Long cryo-bypass design/manufacture on the critical path for LS2 installation

6. Collimation (DS excepted)

7. Cold and warm powering

8. New Q5 quadrupoles at Point 6 HL-LHC proposal (Increase of longi-tudinal dimension by 3650 mm) • Alternative under study to keep the existing Q5 quadrupoles and operate it at 1.9 K: • Additional impact on cryo(WP9) which has to supply and install 2 new QRL service modules • If validated probably to be postponed in LS3

9. Upgrade of cryogenics at P4

10. In-situ amorphous-carbon coating of beam screens

11. Beam diagnostic

12. Beam transfer and kickers D1 mask TDIS

13. Collider-Experiment interface Neutral adsorber TAXN

14. Civil engineering Shaft UA gallery UL gallery UL gallery UA gallery Cavern UR gallery

15. Civil-engineering present schedule Time slot now available for services installation (lighting, ventilation, electrical distribution, doors…)… but what about personnel safety due to the non-availability of evacuation bypasses? Connection to the LHC tunnel (including personnel evacuation bypasses) foreseen beginning of LS3

16. Safety of personnel Basic rule: no dead-ends i.e. having always escape paths at each end (the PM shaft on one side and UA extremities in the other side) No access need in UL, i.e. fence at the entrance. (special measures during HTS link and cryo-line installation) Evacuation bypass at the extremity of the UAs LHC tunnel Discussion in close collaboration with HSE Unit

17. Safety of personnel during Run 3: Option 1 • Keep the initial schedule for service installation in underground areas: • no use of the new available time slot • underground access forbidden • start of activities during LS3 after the completion of the CE work, i.e. important level of coactivity with associated risks (safety, delays…)

18. Safety of personnel during Run 3: Option 2 • Installation of a safe room at the end of the UR. • Operation and maintenance of the room during 2 years? • Training of personnel (periodicity?) or dedicated operators? • “GVA Police du feu” recommendation: if you use a safe room, be sure that you can rescue the group of persons in less than few hours.

19. Safety of personnel during Run 3: Option 3 Pressurized sas Interlocked door Evacuation bypass UA Fire & pressure resistant door Protection sas LHC tunnel Construction of the evacuation bypasses during LS2: • Impact on schedule (extra time for excavation?) • Impact on LHC activity: • Rerouting of services which could be on the LHC tunnel wall • Removal of fragile hardware in LHC tunnel? • creation of a protection sasin the LHC tunnel to prevent dust migration during the LHC wall drilling phase. • Impact on logistics/coactivity: no transport across the protection sas areas • Impact on extra services required: interconnection of the LHC and HL-LHC will require the implementation of: • Pressure-fire-resistant ventilation doors • Active pressurization (DP= 20-40 Pa) of a interface sas protecting the HL-LHC areas against tunnel air inlet. • Beam interlock system (beam dump in case of door opening during Run 3) • ODH and radiation monitoring?

20. Conclusions HL-LHC activities will be present during the LS2 and must be coordinated and included in the LS2 master schedule. Some alternatives to the HL-LHC baseline are still under study. Decisions and/or HL-LHC ECR must be done in the coming months to allow sufficient procurement/fabrication time. For all (E)YETS & LS2 HL-LHC activities impacting the LHC configuration, LHC ECRs must be issued. Civil engineering for underground areas is now integrated in the LS2 and will be on the critical path. Post-LS2 personnel safety in HL-LHC underground areas has to be addressed. Decision has to be taken in collaboration with HSE. Option 3 seems more attractive but the impacts on LHC, on additional works and on LS2 schedule must be studied more in detail. Remarks: If all the addressed HL-LHC LS2 activities are accepted, the warm-up of 7/8 LHC sectors will be required.