beam vacuum to tracker interfaces for lhc exps

33
1 M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012 https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/ default.aspx Beam Vacuum to Tracker Interfaces for LHC Exps.

Upload: virgil

Post on 03-Feb-2016

57 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Beam Vacuum to Tracker Interfaces for LHC Exps. Overview. Introduction LHC Experimental Beampipes (LEB) Working Group at CERN Work of the LEB Mechanical Considerations Machine considerations Detector supports Bakeout Safety Future ideas Summary. Introduction. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

1

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Beam Vacuum to Tracker Interfaces for LHC Exps.

2

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Overview

Introduction LHC Experimental Beampipes (LEB) Working Group at CERN Work of the LEB

Mechanical Considerations Machine considerations

Detector supports Bakeout Safety Future ideas Summary

3

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Introduction

Tracker performance is critical to the operation of detectors. Tracker performance can be improved by a reduction in vacuum chamber diameter (to a limit), or reduction of material in the acceptance region.

This seminar will introduce the considerations for reducing the diameter of an experimental vacuum chamber, along with an overview of the materials and bakeout technologies currently available.

Future ideas and concepts will be introduced.

4

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

LEB at CERN - Mandate

The LEB Working Group was set up to consider new vacuum chamber geometries or supports in the LHC experimental areas. Its mandate is the following:

Define, set priorities and follow-up the activities for the consolidation and upgrade (phase I and II) of the experimental vacuum sectors in the LHC (Q1-Q1).

Mandate covers all topics to ensure the implementation and operation, new beam vacuum components and their associated supports, alignment, and access equipment. This includes definition of apertures, specification and follow-up of R&D and design.

The working group shall request approval from the [LHC Machine Committee]. It shall be composed of a member from each experimental collaboration, plus representatives from vacuum, survey, collimation, accelerator physics, safety and machine coordination.

5

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

LEB at CERN - Mandate

Requests so far:

Reduction in diameter of ATLAS central chamber from 58 mm ID to 47 mm ID;

Reduction in diameter of CMS central chamber from 58 mm ID to 43.4 mm ID;

Reduction in diameter of ALICE central chamber from 58 mm ID to 34.4 mm ID;

Reduction in diameter of LHCb UX85/1 region from 50 mm ID to 40 mm ID.

6

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

LEB at CERN - Methodology

Machine Protection

Injection Optics & Beam Dump

Collimation

Positioning Tolerances

Mechanical Tolerances

Stability Tolerances

New Vacuum Chamber Geometry

Aperture for n1 value

Background

Impedance Heating

E-Cloud

Dynamic Vacuum

(Sector layout now defined)

Aperture approval

with LEB>LMC

Static Vacuum

New Vacuum Chamber Geometry

Machine Protection

Injection Optics & Beam Dump

Collimation

Positioning Tolerances

Mechanical Tolerances

Stability Tolerances

Aperture for n1 value

Background

Impedance Heating

E-Cloud

Dynamic Vacuum

Static Vacuum

Aperture approval

with LEB>LMC

7

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Mechanical

The following mechanical considerations need to be addressed before defining the chamber aperture and layout: Construction tolerances (sag, machining and assembly);Experiment stability;Installation tolerances.

Generally beryllium is used for the central experimental chambers. Experience has been gained with their construction; therefore more accurate prediction is possible.

8

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Mechanical

Example of construction tolerances for the LHCb UX85/3 beryllium chamber (6m length):

9

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Mechanical

Example of construction tolerances for the CMS central beryllium chamber (6.24m length):

Chamber construction within +/- 0.5 mm

10

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Mechanical

In terms of experiment stability, the stability of the caverns needs to be taken into account. The figure below shows stability of the CMS cavern over 5 years.

11

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Mechanical

Position and stability can also be verified by nuclear interaction tomography. Below is a reconstructed image from ATLAS, verifying the beam position.

12

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Mechanical Positioning tolerances are given by survey. They are very dependant on

the measuring system and the number of transfers that need to be made. Precision is generally between 1-2 mm depending on complexity of the network. Below is an example of the network for CMS.

13

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Mechanical More accurate tolerances have been possible due to improved

operational knowledge; therefore a gain in physical aperture to the beam. Below is an example of the tolerances for CMS and ATLAS after installation in 2008 and again after review in 2011.

2008 Values(All Experiments)

2011 Design ValuesATLAS

2011 Design ValuesCMS

Composition of beampipe radius (mm)Mechanical Construction and Assembly 2.6  1.95  1.15

Installation Survey 2.62.6 at 2 sigma (95.4%)

 1.6 at 2 sigma (95.4%)

Cavern Stability 5.8 0.5/year 0.5/year

Stability Margin 0 0 2.3

Sum of Tolerances 11.07.05 (for 5 years between alignments)

6.55 (for 3 years between alignments)

Chamber Radius 29 23.5 21.7Aperture (Radius-Tolerance Sum) 18.0 16.45 15.15

14

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Machine

With the mechanical considerations addressed, the layout can now be analysed for aperture, vacuum, impedance, and machine protection.

15

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Machine

With the given construction tolerances, the layout is defined and the aperture calculated. At CERN we use n1 sigma to define the beam size. This must remain higher in the experimental areas when compared with the rest of the machine to prevent aperture restriction. Below is the calculated aperture for ATLAS at injection.

N1 sigma > 10, therefore not a restriction for the machine

16

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Machine

With the layout frozen, impedance must be considered. For the new CMS central vacuum chamber, impedance was analysed. Below is the conclusion of this analysis.

• Power loss increased by ~30% if radius reduced from 29mm to 21.7mm. CMS case is similar to ATLAS.

• Longitudinal and transverse effective impedances increase significantly with the radius. Negligible with respect to the rest of the ring. The CMS case is again similar to the ATLAS case.

• Taper angle 1.7deg has negligible impact on imaginary impedance.

• Assumed that there are no bellows changes.

New chamber presents no impedance issues

17

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Machine

Now that the layout is defined, the vacuum profile needs to be analysed. Below is an analysis for the new CMS central chamber showing no difference between the old and new chambers.

18

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Work of the LEB at CERN - Machine

The dynamic vacuum must also be considered. Below is an example of the analysis from CMS.

Fully Activated NEG 1/100 No Ion Pumps

Critical Current 91.7 67.2 Unstable

(same as currently installed)

• Vacuum stability (TAS to TAS):

• Dynamic vacuum:• Synchrotron radiation• electron cloud after scrubbing (no multipacting) less than 10-10 mbar

Finally, machine protection, collimation, and injection must be discussed. It is generally accepted that these will be satisfactory, providing that that the n1 value is sufficiently high. Other machine protection issue such as kicker failures and TDI showers need to be considered for experiments such as ALICE and LHCb.

19

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Detector Supports (LHCb example)

Section 4 supports (fixed and sliding): design optimized for assembly and rigidity

Section 1 and 3 thin wires supports (x-y position): design optimized for transparency

Section 2 and 3 stretched wires supports (fix): design optimized for best achievable transparency within schedule and for safety during alignment

Current Supports

20

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Detector Supports (LHCb example)

• 8 stainless steel rods and 8 cables

• 2 aluminium collars• 2 vespel rings

LHCb current layout: Support a sorce of background

21

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Detector supports (LHCb example)

• 8 carbon fibre rods• 8 Technora ropes• 2 beryllium collars• 2 Celazole rings

LHCb new layout: Reduced background Increased transparency

22

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Detector supports (LHCb example)

Collar (alu prototype)RopeCarbon Fibre Tube

Celazole interface ringRope wheel +

alu pin

CFRP rod termination

Collar S2F S3F

Current Volume (105mm3) 1.47 7.35

New Volume (105mm3) 0.77 2.90

Volume reduction 47% 60%

23

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Detector supports (LHCb example)

Material Dimensions(mm)

RadiationLength (mm)

d (mm) I (transparency

indicator)

Transparencyincrease

current solutionS2F and S3Fupstream wire

downstream wire

Stainless steel rod

Stainless steel cable

8

3

17.6

17.6

6.3

2.4

0.36

0.13

solution n_1S2F and S3Fupstream wire

downstream wire

CFRP tube

HMPA rope

ID:14 - OD:18

5

230300

> 289

5.65.6

2.9

2.4.10-2

1.8.10-2

<1.3.10-2

93%

90%

Factor of 15-20

Factor of 10

Transparency indicator: I=d/ l with l the radiation length and

Characteristic length distribution for a rod Characteristic length distribution for a tube

24

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Detector supports (CMS Concept)

Concept is single piece collar mounted before final closure weld of the chamber. Stiffness and transparency are increased when compared to a two piece support collar

Current collarTwo pieceSingle piece

25

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Safety Considerations

Beryllium supports:

The use of beryllium is subjected to some safety rules [EDMS 1173433, 1173433]. In particular, any friction must be avoided during commissioning between the beryllium collar and other contact faces in order to avoid any particle or dust generation.

Aluminium inserts

Polyimide foil

Plastic target support

26

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Bakeout

Three types of bakeout system:Standard (removable) – allow 20 mm radial clearance and then

remove if necessary. For areas with easy access or low activation. Example: ALICE, CMS, LHCb

20 mm

27

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Bakeout

Three types of bakeout system:Oven – slid in around vacuum chamber on guide rails. Example: CMS

central chamber.

28

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Bakeout

Three types of bakeout system:In-situ – allow 5 mm radial clearance. Minimised equipment with

Aerogel, and Kapton heaters for areas with limited access or high activation. Example: ATLAS

29

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Bakeout

Aerogel (Pyrogel AR 5223, Silica, Tmax 650oC, density 110 kg/m3):Single layer (approx. 5 mm) – as shown by the Figure below, at 250oC

on the heater side, the opposite side would be around 100oC, which decreases to 60oC with two layers (10 mm) and 30oC with three (15 mm).

30

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Future work (Supports)

Activation is a key issue for the access of personnel into the cavern. This is one area where we are extremely active in finding solutions. One concept of a motorised support system for the ATLAS forward regions is shown below. This would allow chamber alignment without personnel intervening

31

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Future Work (Bakeout & Chambers)

Ideas for bakeout in the future include the following:Rigid insulation – solid ceramic foam to allow mounting of detectors

directly on the outside of the insulation.

Activation in lab – activation in the laboratory, transportation and installation under Neon. Avoids need for long bellows and bakeout equipment; Higher risk if NEG saturation occurs.

New chambersAlternatives to beryllium in development for reasons of safety and

manufacturability;Current promising technologies are Metal Matrix Composites (MMCs),

honeycomb and glassy carbon.

32

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Summary

The LEB Working Group at CERN is currently re-analysing vacuum chamber apertures based on gained machine running knowledge.

Many aspects need to be considered before a reduction in chamber aperture.

The LHC experiments are constantly requesting more and more transparent supports. These needs are being met with new materials, including beryllium.

Activation is taken seriously and technologies that allow remote access are being developed.

The CERN Vacuum Group is currently investigating possible alternatives to beryllium for vacuum chamber materials. Promising technologies are MMCs, Glassy Carbon, Honeycomb structures.

33

M Gallilee TE-VSC July 03, 2012

https://espace.cern.ch/te-vsc-upgrades/default.aspx

Summary

AcknowledgementsCERN LEB Working Group, particularly Antje Behrens, Gloria Corti, Massimo Giovannozzi, Giulia Lanza, and from TE-VSC, Paul Cruikshank, Cedric Garion,

Louise Leduc, Hendrik Kos, Patrick Lepeule and Pedro Noguera (AVS)

Merci!

Thanks!