HLTC 28 th June 2013

2 Aim and expected results The aim of the workshop was: To create a CERN wide survey of all needs in the mentioned domain To collect the information on technical solutions, which have been put in place or which people intend to develop. The workshop yielded: A spread of information to all concerned parties, such that people with a specific need might already find a solution produced somewhere else. The information that fully remote handling is an expert domain, which is extremely labor intensive. It requires some specific technologies (can be centralized), but more importantly the design process has to be lead by the equipment experts. As proposal for the next step: a working group spanning the accelerator and physics sector in order to quantify the problem for the LHC (expected dose, thresholds, list of equipment needing remotely assisted handling, fully remote handling)

3 Agenda Provide an overview of the needs, existing initiatives and solutions Including the panorama of future radioactive zones and tools and systems to reduce the dose of workers

4 Agenda Integrating present experience at CERN and outside CERN

5 Impressions during the workshop Conclusions on the workshop presentations Good level of presentations on present activities at CERN - important exchange of information on present implementations - interesting to see the high effort needed for real remote manipulations at JET First global expectations of needs in the next 10 years: - constant and known needs for non-LHC activities - growing need for LHC (almost proportional to integrated luminosity)

6 Impressions during the workshop  Good agreement between model-predicted yearly doses and measured yearly doses  No significant evolution of yearly doses expected in all CERN accelerators except for the LHC  Expectations within proposed operational scenario well defined up to LS3  No studied scenario for dismantling/recovery after major incidents or  equipment failures.  Existing equipment: remote diagnostics, technical solutions for very specific,repetitive tasks (ex: ISOLDE target removal)  On-going development objectives:  reduce intervention teams in size plus reduce intervention time  construction of very specific tools, which can carry load and which lower the exposure rate of a somewhat remote human operator.  easy removal/installation interface to neighboring equipment  No coordination of present and future activities spanning across accelerator and physics sector  (Small) teams exist at CERN; every solution is specific and needs experts from concerned equipment teams. CERN does not have a central infrastructure, which could fully develop solutions for a new problem.  Significant experience outside CERN. Potential for fruitful collaborations.

7 Workshop post-discussion Panel: I. Bejar Alonso, O. Beltramelo, H. Burkhardt‎; P. Bonnal‎; R. Losito H. Schmickler Conclusions of the panel The HL TC needs the support of a thematic Working Group on Remote manipulations / diagnostics in radioactive areas and handling of radioactive material. This Working Group should have representatives not only from the machine work packages but also from the experiments concerned by this subject. Several tasks could be entrusted to this Working group: List of equipment to be handled during the operation of LHC or its upgrades or the upgrades of the experiments that are in zones where we could expect high doses. Requirements/technical solutions for the remote handling of the equipment when considered necessary. Engineering best practises to allow remote handling on equipment to be design for the upgrade of the LHC or its experiments. All engineers working in the project must have the possibility to learn from the exchange of best practises on the field of remote handling. A thorough research has been done in order to identify an international conference in the matter. None has been found. The European Project Puresafe has on its mandate the organization of events on telerobotics and systems engineering for scientific facilities. The 2nd workshop will be held in GSI Darmstadt on 26th of September 2013 and CERN is committed to organize the 3rd one in January While we can use this opportunity to have the first international conference, the community needs a standing conference. Synergies can be found with the nuclear fusion community.

8 Workshop post-discussion Conclusions of the panel There must be a common agreement on which kind of operations require remote handling. The discussion demonstrated a common interest in the existence of an ALARA committee that could deal with the specificities of the different manoeuvres and the protection of workers. Other points discussed Concerning the possibility of a centralised handling team or group it raised from the discussion that while it is needed to share information and have support from experts the work must be done in the groups. EN/HE is currently the group providing the technologies needed for remote handling for the AT sector. If they receive many requests they should request their management the resources required.

9 Workshop Conclusions Recommendation for follow-up: Creation of a joint working group (accelerator sector and physics sector) reporting to the HLTC and another body in PH Each necessary technical solution will be done under the full responsibility of the group, which is responsible for the equipment per se. No outsourcing of the remote handling to a central unit. A central unit should be mandated to have competent people available for support in specific technical questions. Depending on the quantity of solutions to be found this group will need extra resources (to be decided later) Collaborations with outside firms/institutes will be very useful for individual solutions Regular workshops will be needed in order to keep people at CERN informed about the available technologies. We suggest to use the next two already planned workshops in Sept 2013 and Jan If needed create a standing international workshop on this subject with specific emphasis on accelerators.

10 Workshop Conclusions Mandate of Remote manipulations / diagnostics in radioactive areas and handling of radioactive material Working Group: Define exactly at what residual radioactivity/length of operation/complexity of a specific operation a remote intervention will be mandatory. Make a clear distinction between full remote handling and robot assisted local human intervention Within the first calendar year produce a catalogue of equipment, which in the time span will need remote handling/robot assisted local interventions for repair or exchange (=HL upgrade). (300 fb-1) In the same period produce a catalogue of equipment, which needs to be designed/redesigned for remote handling for the period 2023 – 2035 (3000 fb-1) In the following years follow up solutions