# Presentation: 756936

## LARP Magnet Program

- S. Gourlay
- LARP Collaboration Meeting
- Napa, CA
- October 19, 2004

***bnl - fnal- lbnl - slac***

_**US LHC Accelerator Research Program**_

## Directives

**DOE Guidance**
- “It is our firm intention that the LARP activities serve to explore the limits of the technologies described herein. While the end products of LARP will be applied to the LHC, LARP is not intended to be an engineering an construction service organization to that facility.”
- “The LARP is not intended to replace existing base program support at the various laboratories in superconducting magnet development and other ongoing areas.”
**LARP Proposal**
- “have fully developed and proven accelerator-ready magnet designs, ready for production, by about 2012, as required to support the LHC physics program.”

## Magnet Program Goals

- Improve long-term physics research opportunities of the LHC by providing magnet options for an LHC luminosity upgrade
- 		Large aperture, high gradient quadrupoles (main emphasis)
- 		High-aspect ratio, large aperture separation dipoles
- Deliverables will be a successful R&D program, leading to accelerator-ready magnet design(s)  (production magnets are out of scope)
- Develop a collaborative environment between US national labs
- Develop world-wide collaboration on high field magnets

## Program Elements and Timeline

- “Three-year plan” to focus initial effort (FY05 – FY07)
- Must include development of technology for future US projects
- But . . . be conservative and focused enough to meet LHC goals.
- Start aggressively
- 	evaluate status and the challenge ahead

## Goals of the Three-Year Plan

**Assess challenges**
- 	Determine parameter “reach” and scope for development program
- 		Aperture
- 		Quads and high aspect ratio dipoles
- 		Mechanical structures
- Provide AP with range of options* and understand trade-offs
***Key to “dipole first” option is a large aperture dipole in high radiation environment**

## Aperture

- Bigger _is_ better
- 	IR performance
- 	Radiation load
- 90 mm is initial baseline aperture
- 	Challenging enough!
- 	Leaves option of 2-layer coil with G > 200 T/m (Operating)
- Start with 2 layers of a 4-layer design (TQ1a)
- 	Affordable in FY05
- 	Simple cable parameters (2-layer design requires time to study cabling issues)
- 	Quick start

## Gradient As a Function of Bore Size

**mm**

- S. Caspi LBNL

## Organization

- Lab representatives oversee
- tasks/sub-tasks at host laboratory

**Magnet Steering Committee (MSC)**
- – Define program, identify tasks
- and assign task managers
- Lab Representatives
- G. Sabbi, P. Wanderer, Z. Zlobin
- Lab Management Representatives
- S. Gourlay, M. Harrison, R. Stanek

- Three Working Groups –
-     Design Studies
-     Model Magnet R&D
-     Supporting R&D

## Management Structure

**FY04 Activities**

## FY04 Quadrupole Development

-    Design Studies
- Dual-bore
- Aperture
- Geometries
-    Support Structure
- Design and hardware

## FY04 Dipole Development

-  Based on “Dipole-first” IR design
- Large aperture, asymmetric
- Non-cos-theta
- Split coil geometry
- High field, high radiation environment

## FY04 Sub-scale Development

- Magnet parameters
- Clear bore 110 mm
- Peak field 11 T
- Gradient 100 T/m

- Uses existing coil design
- ~ $25k in additional parts

## Racetrack Quadrupole with Sub-scale Coils

- Clear bore: **110 mm**
- Magnet **short sample**
- Iss = 11.4 kA
- Bpeak = 11.2 T (in the end)
- Gss = **95 T/m**
**Stored energy** at Iss = 175 kJ
**Inductance** at Iss = 2.7 mH

- 21 Quenches to 93% of short sample

## FY05 Program

- TQ1a – 2/4 layer 90mm quad
- 	Fabricate and test
- TQ2 – 2-layer 90mm quad
- 	Engineering design
- Conductor and Cable
- 	Conductor procurement* 	Cable R&D
- *Conductor Development Program

- Open-midplane dipole
- 	3-D mechanical design
- 	Thermal analysis
- Sub-scale magnets
- 	Dipole and/or quad as 	resources permit
- 	Heat x-fer, support 	structure, fab, assembly, etc.
- 	Combine with materials
- 	studies?
- Long magnet issues
- 	Base program

**Highest Priority**

## FY05 Task Distribution

- TQ1a
- Design/Analysis – LBNL/FNAL
- Winding – FNAL
- Reaction – LBNL
- Impregnation – LBNL
- Assembly – LBNL
- Test – BNL
- Sub-Scale Tests **(hold-back victim)**
- Fabrication – LBNL/BNL
- Test – BNL

- Quadrupole Development
- Design Studies - FNAL/LBNL
- Dipole Development
- Design Studies – BNL
- Conductor and Cable
- Measurements – BNL/LBNL/FNAL
- Cabling – LBNL

## FY06

- Build and test 2 “more complex” Nb3Sn quadrupole models
- Include two mechanical structure schemes
- Build and test a “simplified” open mid-plane Nb3Sn dipole
- Develop infrastructure for a long coil
- Conductor and material development
- Major conductor procurement

## Long Magnet R&D

- Very high priority but funding limited
- 	Infrastructure
- 		Reaction furnace
- 		Handling
- 		VPI chamber or fixture
- 		Materials cost
- FY04, 05 – Study issues (No budget – base program)
- FY06 – Infrastructure development
- FY07 – Fabrication and test of 3 – 4 m coil (long sub-scale)
- 		Essential first step
- 			- cost effective
- 			- established baseline with sub-scale coils

**As proposed at last**
**collaboration meeting.**
**Topic for discussion – **
**Can we improve the schedule?**
**Is there a better way?**

## Task Distribution

## Three-Year Program

## At the end of the “Three-year” plan

- Some limited participation from CERN
- CARE program
- Networking activities (ongoing)
- NED’s birthday
- Participation by KEK?
- Several LARP magnets (new experience base)
- Conductor progress
- Maybe some LHC operating experience

**New collaborative**
**opportunities**

**New directions?**

## LAPAC Comments

- – Recommend concentrating resources on a limited number of options.  Main effort should be on quadrupoles, and effort on dipoles should be limited:
- “Given the limited resources the magnet program must be well focused on the most demanding challenge given the present knowledge of the luminosity upgrade layouts.”
- “Consequently the red line through the program must be to go from short quadrupole models as fast as possible to the first long quadrupole magnet and to reduce the parallel tracks to a minimum.”
- “... it may be worthwhile ... to select a baseline design and to stick to it for the short model and long prototype magnet fabrication.”
- 	=>	FY05 program is consistent with LAPAC.
-      	FY06 program will be tuned based on LAPAC advice as well as	experience with FY05 program.

## Goals for the Meeting

- FY05
- Program details
- Revise and update task sheets
- Establish framework for FY06 and FY07 programs
- Organization
- WG and MSC meetings
- Videoconferences

## Summary

- Proposed funding profile is modest given program goals
- We must maintain expected funding and base program support in order to be successful
- The program should integrate and utilize all available program resources
- Broad-based R&D program to establish a firm technological foundation and provide a variety of options
- Focused development to achieve LHC priorities