1 / 16

Review of Powering procedures

Review of Powering procedures. W. Venturini Delsolaro, N. Catalan Lasheras Amalia Ballarino; Boris Bellesia; Knud Dahlerup-Petersen; Giorgio D'Angelo; Reiner Denz; Robert Henry Flora; Glyn Kirby; Sandrine Le Naour; Valerie Montabonnet; David Nisbet; Mirko Pojer; A.Siemko; Markus Zerlauth.

lacker
Télécharger la présentation

Review of Powering procedures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Review of Powering procedures W. Venturini Delsolaro, N. Catalan Lasheras Amalia Ballarino; Boris Bellesia; Knud Dahlerup-Petersen; Giorgio D'Angelo; Reiner Denz; Robert Henry Flora; Glyn Kirby; Sandrine Le Naour; Valerie Montabonnet; David Nisbet; Mirko Pojer; A.Siemko; Markus Zerlauth.

  2. Questions • Procedures and their realisation in sequences: can they be lighter? • EDMS approval of procedures and their changes • Analysis and approval of test steps in CCC – can it be improved? • Specifics for sectors

  3. Scope • Powering procedures  huge influence on efficiency • Reviewed by mini-teams (procedures for main magnets, insertion magnets, correctors and ‘ergonomics’) • Looking for possible simplificationswhile securing a sufficient hardware qualification for operation of the LHC • In all cases the procedures specify the commissioning steps to a nominal current I_PNOwhich is kept as a parameter. • Any circuit is released for operation at (maximum) I_PNO only onceall the stepsof the related procedureare successfully passed (circuits locked at I_PNO)

  4. What simplifications? • Type tests were suppressed (quench at high current in main circuits, unbalanced quenches for IPQ) • Suppression of steps that were more software checks rather than hardware • Number of step approvals was cut (for ex. MPP at each new current level, not at each step (as was already specified)

  5. Only in case of no training quenches RB procedures I_PNO 7 kA

  6. RB procedures, summary • No changes in the sequence (minimize work for sequencer and MTF teams) • Suppressed 7 steps and the provoked quench at nominal • Gain estimation: 1-2 shifts/sector

  7. 1 hr flat top (Time_INTERM_2 RQ procedures I_PNO 7 kA

  8. RQ procedures, summary • No changes in the sequence (minimize work for sequencer and MTF teams) • Suppressed 8 steps and the provoked quench at nominal • Gain estimation: 1-2 shifts/sector

  9. IPD procedures Concerns: D1, D2,D3,D4 magnets (16 circuits) Changes: • No quench at high current but fast power abort (-1 quench/circuit) = - 16 quenches • Current leads endurance test done at the same time

  10. IPQ procedures Concerns: Q4 to Q10 magnets (82 circuits) Changes: • No quench at high current but fast power abort (-2 quenches/circuit) = - 164 quenches! • Current leads endurance test done in the second test • Last test is canceled (benefit of having FPA instead of quenches

  11. EE from QPS from CCC only 600 A procedures Concerns: (410 circuits) Changes: • Three steps at 200 A and one at I_PNO suppressed • EE from QPS at 200 A from the CCC • Detailed measurement of switch opening (from the tunnel) is only done at nominal

  12. 60 A/ 120 A Procedures are well optimized  NO changes Automatic analysis operational, some troubles with tolerances  Tolerance revision under way

  13. Step approval • General rule: all steps are approved by at least one expert team • All approval steps have been revised • MPP approval: only at change of current level and in case of sequence failure due to circuit behavior (quench, short circuit…) • PO and QPS approval rationalized

  14. Nonconformities and tools • Step approval in CCC will still represent a huge workload • Difficult to dig in unstructured PM data to reconstruct the history of a circuit • A tool for central handling of NC is needed • Plus some improvements in the “powering status” on the web (more information)

  15. Procedures in EDMS and implementation of changes Keep the present philosophy: one general document plus one sector-specific containing the list of circuits with current ratings Delta files (sequences changes) transmitted immediately to the sequencer/MTF teams Advisable (and not always sufficient) to test the sequences on the field before the start of the run (procedure authors + developer {+ expert?}) General documents (valid for all sectors), incorporating the changes, to be re routed in EDMS

  16. Conclusions • A thorough review of all powering procedures has been carried out • Substantial simplifications were possible thanks to the experience gained in sector 4-5 • The new procedures will be approved with the EDMS system • Circuits are commissioned up to I_PNO • Time/resources estimates for future work should be revised according to the new procedures

More Related