1 st BLMTWG Meeting, 27.05.2014, B. Auchmann, O. Picha with help from M. Sapinski, E.B. Holzer, A. Priebe.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LHC Commissioning WG 27/03/ Commissioning of BLM system L. Ponce With the contribution of B. Dehning, E.B. Holzer, M. Sapinski, C. Zamantzas and.
Advertisements

LHC Beam Operation CommitteeJune, 14 th UFOs in the LHC Tobias Baer LBOC June, 14 th 2011 Acknowledgements: N. Garrel, B. Goddard, E.B. Holzer, S.
BLM thresholds for MQW magnets V. Raginel, B. Auchmann, D. Wollmann BLM Threshold Working Group meeting, 24/02/2015.
Loss maps of RHIC Guillaume Robert-Demolaize, BNL CERN-GSI Meeting on Collective Effects, 2-3 October 2007 Beam losses, halo generation, and Collimation.
Andrzej SIEMKO, CERN/AT-MTM Slide 1 14th “Chamonix Workshop”, January 2005 Beam loss induced quench levels A. Siemko and M. Calvi Machine Protection Issues.
LSWG day, Sept. 2, 2014, B. Auchmann for the BLMTWG Collaboration of many teams: OP, RF, BI, Collimation, LIBD, FLUKA, etc. T. Baer, M. Bednarek, G. Bellodi,
BIQ Workshop, September 15 Collaboration of many teams: BLM, Collimation, FLUKA, LIBD, OP, RF, etc. B. Auchmann, T. Baer, M. Bednarek, G. Bellodi, C.
4 th BLMTWG Meeting, January 13, 2015 by B. Auchmann, A. Bertarelli, R. Bruce, F. Cerutti, B. Dehning, L. Esposito, E.B. Holzer, M. Kalliokoski, A. Lechner,
2 nd BLMTWG meeting, B. Auchmann, O. Picha, with A. Lechner.
Beam-induced Quench Tests of LHC Magnets Beam-induced Quench Tests of LHC Magnets, B.Dehning 1 B. Auchmann, T. Baer, M. Bednarek, G. Bellodi, C. Bracco,
LMC 30 LPC A. Verweij, TE-MPE. 30 Sept 2009, LMC meeting 1.9 K, 0 T, 7.5 kA run Heat pulse.
Workshop on Beam Induced Quenches Summary of session 4 “Heat Transfer R&D” SpeakersTopics Pier Paolo Granieri Steady-State Heat Transfer in the LHC Superconducting.
Status of FLUKA Simulations for Collimation BLM Thresholds 6 th BLM Threshold Working Group 10/02/2015 E.Skordis On behalf of the FLUKA team Sixtrack input.
6 th QTAWG meeting, March 28, Overview 6 tests/events have been analyzed. RegimeMethodCERN namingMagnet typeTemperature shortkick750 µrad kick eventMB1.9.
“Beam Losses” Christian Carli PSB H - Injection Review, 9 th November 2011 Several topics more or less related to beam losses, a study still somewhat at.
B. Auchmann, O. Picha, Joint CWG/BLMTWG Meeting August
Bus-Bar Quench Studies Summary of Available Calculations LMC Meeting August 5 th 2009 Bus-Bar Quench Studies Summary of Available Calculations LMC Meeting.
Mariusz Sapinski BI/BL Acknowledgements: 1 Planning of quench tests - LMC158 Draft planning of beam induced quench tests at the end of 2013 run LHC Machine.
Background Simulations for the LHCb Beam Condition Monitor Overview: ● The LHCb Beam Condition Monitor (BCM) – Purpose, Design and Function – Implementation.
1 Question to the 50GeV group 3GeV からの 54π と 81π 、 6.1π の関係 fast extraction 部の acceptance (81π?) Comments on neutrino beamline optics?
Simulation comparisons to BLM data E.Skordis On behalf of the FLUKA team Tracking for Collimation Workshop 30/10/2015 E. Skordis1.
AOB: Adjustments to BLM Thresholds in Light of Run-2 Experience with UFOs B. Auchmann, J. Ghini, L. Grob, A. Lechner, D. Wollmann. 118 th MPP,
Eva Barbara Holzer July 16, LHC MPP Eva Barbara Holzer for the BLM team LHC MPP CERN, July 17, 2010 Proposal on Threshold Corrections for RC Filters.
Bernhard Auchmann, Scott Rowan 11/12/2014 UFO Interactions at 6.5 TeV.
Chamonix 2006, B.Dehning 1 Commissioning of Beam Loss Monitors B. Dehning CERN AB/BDI.
Beam Induced Quench Session 2: quench test at LHC B. Dehning, C. Bracco.
Faster ramp rates in main LHC magnets Attilio Milanese 7 Oct Thanks to M. Bajko, L. Bottura, P. Fessia, M. Modena, E. Todesco, D. Tommasini, A. Verweij,
Case study: Energy deposition in superconducting magnets in IR7 AMT Workshop A.Ferrari, M.Magistris, M.Santana, V.Vlachoudis CERN Fri 4/3/2005.
Simulations and BLM Scaling Studies for the Collimation Quench Test (with protons) A. Mereghetti CWG Meeting, CERN, 22 nd Oct 2015.
Future Circular Collider Study Kickoff Meeting CERN ERL TEST FACILITY STAGES AND OPTICS 12–15 February 2014, University of Geneva Alessandra Valloni.
Tools in CTF3 Simona Bettoni for the CTF3 operation team.
Pier Paolo Granieri, TE-CRG Collimation Upgrade Specification Meeting #35 21 st March, 2014.
Energy deposition with and without IR3 upgrade Predicted energy deposition with and without IR3 (IR7)dispersion suppressor collimators. Gain from collimators.
E.B. Holzer BLM Meeting: Q & A March 20, Questions and Answers.
Benchmarking Headtail with e-cloud observations with LHC 25ns beam H. Bartosik, W. Höfle, G. Iadarola, Y. Papaphilippou, G. Rumolo.
2 nd BLMTWG meeting, B. Auchmann, O. Picha, with A. Lechner.
Eva Barbara Holzer LHC Machine Protection ReviewSeptember 6, Eva Barbara Holzer LHC Machine Protection ReviewSeptember 6, Eva Barbara Holzer.
ENERGY DEPOSITION AND TAS DIAMETER
Ion Run 2015: measurements in cells 11 for P1 and P5 P–Ion Run 2016: analysis of cell 8 for P1, P5, P2 and P8 Corinna Martinella EN-EA R2E-MCWG 04/07/2017.
Workshop on Beam Induced Quenches, Sept. 15, 2014
R2E-MD preliminary report – 3rd/4th July th July LSWG meeting
Hervé Allain, R. van Weelderen (CERN)
Hervé Allain, R. van Weelderen (CERN)
Tracking simulations of protons quench test
R2E impact of TCL settings: input for 2017 operation
Second look at the results of the 2012 analysis of triplet thresholds
Little module (HeatLoadCalculator) available at:
MD2036: UFO dynamics studies and UFO fast detection
Injection region BLMs – ECR
16L2 aperture measurements
3 issues identified in review
Energy deposition studies in IR7 for HL-LHC
Intensity Evolution Estimate for LHC
Remote setting of LHC BLM thresholds?
SC Overview 2013 White & Rouge The Codes in Comparison The Noise Issue
Beam-Induced Energy Deposition Studies in IR Magnets
Verification of the Beam Loss studies at start-up
Assessment of BLM thresholds at cold magnets
BLM changes HV software interlock (SIS)
Sensitivity tests of BLM_S chamber in PSB dump
Using the code QP3 to calculate quench thresholds for the MB
Commissioning of BLM system
Beam Loss Monitoring Eva Barbara Holzer, CERN
Why do BLMs need to know the Quench Levels?
Status of energy deposition studies IR7
Warm Magnet Thresholds
Commissioning of the Beam Conditions Monitor of the LHCb Experiment at CERN Ch. Ilgner, October 23, 2008 on behalf of the LHCb BCM group at TU Dortmund:
FLUKA Energy deposition simulations for quench tests
Shall we modify BLM Thresholds on Superconducting Magnets?
Friday 15th February - morning
Presentation transcript:

1 st BLMTWG Meeting, , B. Auchmann, O. Picha with help from M. Sapinski, E.B. Holzer, A. Priebe.

Overview Recall the dynamic orbit-bump QT. History of the assumed signal at quench. Corrections due to dynamic orbit-bump QT. Re-analysis in QTAWG. Conclusions and next steps.

Dynamic Orbit Bump QT , 20h23. 3-corrector bump. courtesy A. Priebe

RS09 threshold at the time: 52 mGy/s for horizontal losses. Factor ~1/3 was applied for vert. losses.

Assumed BLM signal at quench The assumed signal at quench is composed of three input factors: Its units are

Assumed BLM signal at quench At LHC startup, MQ arc BLM thresholds were based on: Ch. Kurfürst diploma thesis on BLM thresholds in MQs, i.e., losses in the interconnections. Report 44 quench levels. In 2009 the assumed energy- deposition / proton in BLMs 2 and 3 were replaced by a Geant4 model for the first beam-induced quenches in MBs (Note 422, horizontal distributed losses)*. *…vague agreement. other sources? courtesy Ch. Kurfürst Note 422

Assumed BLM signal at quench In 2010 the steady-state quench level was still computed according to Report 44, but with input from the D. Bocian 2-D model. courtesy D. Bocian

Assumed BLM signal at quench From Note 422 it was inferred that BLM signals for vertical losses may be >3x lower than for horizontal losses. The below plots are from a preliminary analysis of the events in Oct The green lines represent the assumed BLM signal at quench in RS10 (5.24 s) divided by 3.5 to convert to a vertical loss scenario. RS10 courtesy M. Sapinski

Assumed BLM signal at quench Ad hoc corrections of thresholds for startup 2011 Question: Can we explain the factor 0.33 after a MAD- X/FLUKA/QP3 re-analysis? RS01RS02RS03RS04RS05RS06RS07RS08RS09RS10RS11RS12 Ad hoc MF0.1 High luminosity runs UFOs Preliminary dynamic orbit bump data

QTAWG results Re-understand the signals RS01-09: large variation for steady-state test!

QTAWG results Re-understand the signals Loss spike in the last 40 ms explains the variation, between running sums. Combined slow- and intermediate-duration loss scenario!

QTAWG results Re-understand the signals The cell 14 thresholds were reduced by a factor ~3.5; likely to adjust the assumed beam-loss scenario to vertical losses, based on Note 422 results.

QTAWG results Quench levels in RS09: Report 44 / Bocian: 200 mJ/cm 3 QP stack data: 240 mJ/cm 3 Quench levels for quench test loss profile QP stack data: 373mJ/cm 3 P. P. Granieri, Heat Transfer between the Superconducting Cables of the LHC Accelerator Magnets and the Superfluid Helium Bath. PhD thesis, EPFL, Lausanne, s 7 s

QTAWG results Energy deposition in coils: Kurfürst thesis: 1.1E-07 mJ/(cm 3 p) Note 422: 4.26E-09 mJ/(cm 3 p) FLUKA model: 6.1E-08 mJ/(cm 3 p) Consistency check Np = 0.88E10 QuenchLevel = 373 mJ/cm 3 x25 x1.8 ScenarioEdep x Np Kurfürst thesis968 mJ/cm 3 Note mJ/cm 3 FLUKA536 mJ/cm 3

QTAWG results BLM signals: Kurfürst thesis: 1.44E-06 mGy/p FLUKA model: 5.3E-06 mGy/p (validated within 30%) x1/4 MAD-X / FLUKA simulation normalized to losses in the last second. FLUKA data in FLUKA/BLM comparison is to be reduced by ~20% to account for losses on the collimators. Resulting BLM signal agreement within 30%. courtesy N. Shetty

Thresholds corrections RS09 (1.3 s) models vs. measurement in BLM position 2. ModelLossQuench Level [mJ/cm 3 ] Energy deposition [mJ/(cm 3 p)] BLM signal [mGy/p] BLM quench [mGy] Bocian/Kurf ürst hor E E-093 Bocian/Kurf ürst/422 hor E E-0967 QP3/FLUKAver E-085.3E-0921 QP3/FLUKA*hor.240/961.49E E-0912/5 Measuredver.11 Measured*hor.3 * …2013 steady-state orbit-bump quench test, threshold in RS11 re-scaled to RS09.

Conclusions and Next Steps Is a rectangular pulse in time always the best scenario for thresholds? Use of Note 422 energy deposition on MQ BLMs seems doubtful. Factor 3 was applied throughout (even where the Kurfürst energy deposition is used). This needs to be re-assessed. For future thresholds, we need to study in detail BLM positions 1 and 3.

2013 QT analysis

Master Threshold and Monitoring Factors The master threshold is computed per BLM family: The applied threshold is the comination of where can be set by the operators.