Download
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Ramped superferric dipole magnet for NESR PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Ramped superferric dipole magnet for NESR

Ramped superferric dipole magnet for NESR

146 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Ramped superferric dipole magnet for NESR

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. COOLSB2 Ramped superferric dipole magnet for NESR Hanno Leibrock, GSI Darmstadt Kick-off meeting for EU Design Study "DIRACsecondary-Beams" for the FAIR project April 14-15, 2005

  2. NESR in FAIR FAIR Stage 1 versatile storage ring NESR decelarated beams => ramped dipoles

  3. Tasks EU FP6 task COOLSB2: superferric NESR-dipole for 1 T/s ramp rate Subtasks: • Magnet layout, yoke design • Superconducting coil design • Cryostat design => functioning prototype magnet

  4. Dipole Parameters NESR Dipoles moderate field (<1.6 T), large aperture → superferric design Because • allows large apertures since the flux is guided by the iron and the field quality is defined by the pole shape, • field enhancement by the iron, • low operation costs challenges in red !

  5. Preliminary 2D - design (by C. Muehle) Nuclotron cable 6000 A, 10 turns, 150 A/ mm2 (coil) curved (sagitta 69 mm)

  6. Field distribution

  7. Field distribution

  8. SC coil design: choice of the conductor • ramp rate 1 T/s → low inductance needed → cable Rutherford cable CICC Nuclotron cable • eddy currents in helium containment (bobbin) and cryostat • → 'tube' forced-flow-cooling • → 'non'-conducting cryostat

  9. Gantt diagram for R&D with milestones Milestones: Feasibility studies: December 31, 2005 Model cryostat delivered: June 30, 2006 Prototype dipole delivered: December 20, 2007

  10. Conclusions • moderate field (<1.6 T), large aperture → superferric design (low operation costs) • ramp rate 1 T/s → low inductance needed → cable • a preliminary magnet design exists • the design of the cryostat has to make sure that eddy current effects are negligible • planned prototype dipole delivery: december 2007

  11. Die Leere

  12. Advantages of superconducting and resistive magnets

  13. Normal conducting CR-dipoles • Use of the same yoke for the normal conducting solution • => Problems: • Purcel filter -> loss of ampere turns • High flux density in yoke -> loss of ampere turns • Small coil window -> high current density • => 465kW power loss per magnet • Use of an appropriate (enlarged) yoke for the normal conducting solution • No purcel filter, but enlarged pole • Enlarged yoke for lower flux density • Enlarged coil window • => approx. 200kW power loss per magnet

  14. Investment costs

  15. Operation costs

  16. Superferric dipole in the A1900 FRS at MSU

  17. Nuclotron dipole at JINR in Dubna