SlideServe
Télécharger Obtenir Pro
Menu
Accueil Pro
Préférences
ApparenceLight Aide et commentaires
© SlideServe · v2026

Feasibility and Cost Analysis of the HE-LHC Injection Scheme

hana avatar
hana
16 diapositives · 313 Views · Jul 18, 2014

This document presents an analysis of the HE-LHC injection schemes, highlighting the various cost evaluations based on the current LHC setup. Key components discussed include the magnet systems using Nb3Sn and HTS technologies, potential cost savings from upgrades versus total replacements, and key engineering considerations for beam injection and dumps. The proposal emphasizes a new low-energy ring injection in the LHC tunnel, exploring options for using existing dipoles and optimizing new injectors due to advancements in superconducting magnet technology, all while addressing synchrotron radiation challenges.

#feasibility and cost analysis of the he-lhc injection scheme #feasibility and cost analysis of the he-lhc injection scheme ppt #powerpoint #presentation
Feasibility and Cost Analysis of the HE-LHC Injection Scheme - slide 1
01 / 16Feasibility and Cost Analysis of the HE-LHC Injection Scheme
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

Feasibility and Cost Analysis of the HE-LHC Injection Scheme
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation

  1. Possible Injection Scheme in the (80 km) TOE: Tunnel Of Everything Lucio Rossi, Attilio Milanese and Davide Tommasini CERN Work of H. Piekarz (FNAL) widelyused

  2. HE-LHC cost: rough evalutionbased on LHC • LHC (machine): about 3 BCHF (material, 2008), 1.7 BCHF for the magnet system, • HE-LHC: The non-magnet is  same 1.5 BCHF • Magnet System Nb3Sn (26 TeVc.o.m.) :  3.5 BCHF (for a total of 5 BCHF for the whole machine) • Magnet System HTS (33 TeVc.o.m) :  5 BCHF (for a total of 6.5 BCHF for the whole machine) • The abovecost are for a new machine, like LHC. Economycouldbe made becauseCryo and othersystemsneedonlyrenovation; • however one shouldconsidercost of LHC removal) LRossi@CLIC

  3. Other important issues, amongmany • Synchrotron radiation • 15 to 30 times! • The best is to use a windowgiven by vacuum stabilityataround 50-60 K (gain a factor 15 in cryopowerremoval!) • First study on beamimpedanceseems positive but to beverifiedcarefully • Use of HTS coatingat 50 K on beamscreento beexplored • Beam in & out • Both injection and beam dump region are constraints. • Ideally one wouldneedtwicestronger kickers • Beam dumps seemsfeasable by increasingrisetime from 3 to 5s • Injection wouldstronglybenefitfromstronger kickers otherwise a new lay-out isneeded (differentwith or wihtoutexperiments) LRossi@CLIC

  4. For HE-LHC :injection based on SPS+Possible use of Tevatron and HERA dipoles… HE-LHC SPS+ New injectorsoptimization Linac4 LRossi@CLIC

  5. Alternate scenarios for Injectors • Keeping SPS (and itstransferlines: 6 km!): LowEnergy Ring in LHC tunnel withsuperferricPipetronmagnets (W. Foster). • Workdone by Fermilab (H. Piekarz), see Malta workshop proc. • cost of LER is lower than SC-SPS option. • Integration is difficult but no show-stoppers LRossi@CLIC

  6. Specific issues of the VHE-LHC • BeamEnergy/Dipole Field optimizationmightbedifferent • Aperture canbelarger • Synchrotron radiation MUST beremovedat the highest possible temperature: Photon stopper? • A solution couldbe use of HTS coated on a beamscreenataround 100 K. The wallresistancewillbeverylow and the 2.5 MW/ring (about 30 W/m) canbecome 25(x2) MW of cryopower! • Kicker problemswillbestronglyreduced.

  7. Injection Scheme • The first baselinewas to use LHC • Eitherwith a SPS+ or wiht a LER in LHC • However if the LHC isused ONLY for injectoritis not worth • About 40 MW continuous power at plug for Cryoonly • Maintenance of a difficult 27 km tunnel and 7 km injection lines for 10% of use • Proposal: removeLHC and injectfrom SPS into a 80km-LER

  8. Injection scheme: SPS+ LHC  VHE-LHC is to expensive(50 MW power for cryo)

  9. Possible arrangement in VHE-LHC tunnel From H. Piekarz Malta Prooc. Pag. 101 30 mm V gap 50 mm H gap

  10. Possible VHE-LHC with a LER suitable for e+-e- collision (and VLHeC) Cheap likeresistivemagnets Central gap couldbeshortcircuited Or use of 4 beams to neutralize b-b LER canbendelectron 20-175 GeV proton 0.45-4 or 5 TeV/beam Limited power both for resisitive (e+e-) and for p-p (HTS) Sccablesdevelopedalready for SC links (HiLumi). SR by e- takenat 300 K

  11. A few numbers for proton injector 75 kA With I = 115-120 kA Bmax= 2 T

  12. A few numbers to use the samemagnet for e+ - e- I =3 kA The injection fieldislow, 74 Gauss (no diluition). Concern for fieldquaity. Wethinkispossîblewith «noble» Fe grain oriented but probablyalsowith normal Fe-Si. Alreadytested at100 Gauss. Nextmagnet (for RCS) willbetested to 50 Gauss. Diluitioncanalsobe a possibilty (not good for p-p injector)

  13. A Super-Resistivecable 20 mm thickshieldaroundcable Gaps: 2 x V30xH60 mm Cryostat : 60 mm He envelope : 50 mm SC part: 2 layers MgB2(Bi2212)150x1mm Cu innercore 40 mm Coolinghole: 10 mm Cable: innercore of 40 mm Cu (700 mm2) + outercore : 2 layers, 150 strands of MgB2, 1 kA each; Outer size 45 mm. 120 kA =>120 k€/km ! For electrons: us Cu water cooled, Jov 2.5 A/mm2 (easy): Pplug=11 MW/80km For protons: 800 A/strands 120 kA (for >2.1 T); the central copperis the stablizer Power: 0.1-W/m at Top = 10 K consumption/cableshouldbe possible: 10 kW of cold power: Pplug= few MW This is for eachchannel…

  14. Possible arrangement LER for e+e- 350 GeV 4 magnets, 8 channels 4 channel P = 44 MW (say 50) LER p-p injector 1 Magnet, 2 channels Top 10 K; Pcryostar < 10 MW If useful the second magnetispowered as return line TBS: 100 K ? ; P = 2x25 MW Photon stoppers are a must Use of 1 or 2 channels for e ring for a 150 GeV e- vs. 7-50 TeV p e- vs. Ions isalso possible

  15. Few preliminaryconsiderations • Probablydifferentoptimizationis possible for the channelsused as colliderat flat top and the onesused as synchrotrons for continuous injections • Relativelyfast cycle (Hz) seems possible • Very rough cost of the LER magnets (no cryo): <500 MCHF for 2 magnets (4 channels) • If the TLEP is to bepursuedbefore VHE-LHC and if thereis an interest for HE-LHC anyway in // one caninstall HE-LHC (27 TeV) meanwhileinstalling TLEP, and thenre-use the HE-LHC magnets and cryo-system for VHE-LHC (saving 1/3).

  16. In principle a plan for all is possible (for LHC exploitation): 2018-2020 iscritical time • According to Physicsneeds, the 80 km tunnel can: • Be alternative to HE-LHC • Or complementary to HE-LHC • Accomodatingatmoderate extra-cost TLEP and VLHeC • SkippingHE-LHC, TLEP/VLHeCmayshorten5-10years VHE-LHC