Magnet considerations for ARIES IFE L. Bromberg With contributions from J.H. Schultz MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center ARIES Meeting Madison, WI September.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Superconducting Magnet Program S. Gourlay CERN March 11-12, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory IR Quad R&D Program LHC IR Upgrade Stephen A.
Advertisements

Lesson 17 HEAT GENERATION
First Wall Heat Loads Mike Ulrickson November 15, 2014.
Zian Zhu Superconducting Solenoid Magnet BESIII Workshop Zian Zhu Beijing, Oct.13,2001.
Japan-US Workshop held at San Diego on April 6-7, 2002 How can we keep structural integrity of the first wall having micro cracks? R. Kurihara JAERI-Naka.
MUTAC Review, 9 April MuCOOL and MICE Coupling Magnet Status Michael A. Green Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Berkeley CA
Progress on the MICE Cooling Channel Solenoid Magnet System
23 October 2005MICE Meeting at RAL1 MICE Tracker Magnets, 4 K Coolers, and Magnet Coupling during a Quench Michael A. Green Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.
1 Configuration Development for HIF Final Focus Superconducting Quadrupole Array HIF Final Focus Meeting July 2, 2002 Tom Brown Chang Jun Phil Heitzenroeder.
Preliminary Analysis of the Target System Magnets 1.Version with a 6-T copper magnet insert 2.Version with a 6-T high-temperature superconductor insert.
Magnet System Definition L. Bromberg P. Titus MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center ARIES meeting November 4-5, 2004.
The Heavy Ion Fusion Virtual National Laboratory Comparison of final focus magnetic systems for the Assisted Pinched Transport and the RPD-2002 J. Barnard,
Status of the Coil Structure Design and Magnetic-Structural Analysis Presented by X.R. Wang Contributors: UCSD: S. Malang, A.R. Raffray PPPL: H.M. Fan.
ARIES-Stellerator studies Magnet issues L. Bromberg P. Titus MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center Cambridge MA May 7, 2003.
ARIES IFE Final Focusing Magnets L. Bromberg Magnet Technology group at MIT MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center ARIES Meeting UCSD April 23, 2002.
Physics of fusion power Lecture 8 : The tokamak continued.
HTS Magnets for ARIES-AT L. Bromberg J.H. Schultz MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center ARIES Meeting March 20, 2000.
Stellarator magnets L. Bromberg J.H. Schultz MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center ARIES meeting March 8-9, 2004.
Twin Solenoid Twin Solenoid - conceptual design for FCC-hh detector magnet - Matthias GT Mentink Alexey Dudarev Helder Pais Da Silva Leonardo Erik Gerritse.
1 Radiation Environment at Final Optics of HAPL Mohamed Sawan Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI HAPL GIMM Conference Call.
ARIES CS Magnet definition L. Bromberg MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center USCD November 18, 2005.
Stellarator magnet conductors L. Bromberg J. Schultz MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center Cambridge MA Aries Meeting, Georgia Tech September 3, 2003.
Magnet Options for Modular Stellarator Power Plants Leslie Bromberg J.H. Schultz ARIES team MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center Cambridge MA US/Japan.
Magnet considerations for ARIES IFE HTS/LTS algorithms and design options L. Bromberg With contributions from J.H. Schultz MIT Plasma Science and Fusion.
Final Focus Magnet Shielding Update Jeff Latkowski and Wayne Meier ARIES Meeting October 2-4, 2002 Work performed under the auspices of the U. S. Department.
Aug 29, 2006S. Kahn T HTS Solenoid1 A Proposal for a 50 T HTS Solenoid Steve Kahn Muons Inc. August 29, 2006.
Magnet costs L. Bromberg J.H. Schultz ARIES Meeting & Review PPPL, October
Superconducting Large Bore Sextupole for ILC
FETS-HIPSTER (Front End Test Stand – High Intensity Proton Source for Testing Effects of Radiation) Proposal for a new high-intensity proton irradiation.
Martin Wilson Lecture 1 slide 1 JUAS February 2012 NbTi manufacture vacuum melting of NbTi billets hot extrusion of the copper NbTi composite sequence.
ZTF Cryostat Finite Element Analysis Andrew Lambert ZTF Technical Meeting 1.
Status of CEPC Detector magnet
2 nd Joint HiLumi LHC – LARP Annual Meeting INFN Frascati – November 14 th to 16 th 2012 Helene Felice Paolo Ferracin LQ Mechanical Behavior Overview and.
Magnets for muon collider ring and interaction regions V.V. Kashikhin, FNAL December 03, 2009.
ARIES AT Project Meeting - Princeton, NJ 18 Sept 00 1 ARIES-AT Toroidal Field (TF) and Poloidal Field (PF) Coils Tom Brown, Fred Dahlgren, Phil Heitzenroeder.
Chapter 22 Gauss’s Law Chapter 22 opener. Gauss’s law is an elegant relation between electric charge and electric field. It is more general than Coulomb’s.
The Heavy Ion Fusion Virtual National Laboratory Pulsed Normal Quadrupoles for a Heavy Ion Fusion Driver Final Focus Section D. Shuman, S. S. Yu, LBNL.
Abstract: The Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment (MICE) is an international effort sited at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, which will demonstrate ionization.
February 13, 2012 Mu2e Production Solenoid Design V.V. Kashikhin Workshop on Radiation Effects in Superconducting Magnet Materials (RESMM'12)
Review of Quench Limits FermilabAccelerator Physics Center Nikolai Mokhov Fermilab 1 st HiLumi LHC / LARP Collaboration Meeting CERN November 16-18, 2011.
Magnet for ARIES-CS Magnet protection Cooling of magnet structure L. Bromberg J.H. Schultz MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center ARIES meeting UCSD January.
CERN Accelerator School Superconductivity for Accelerators Case study 1 Paolo Ferracin ( ) European Organization for Nuclear Research.
1 US PFC Meeting, UCLA, August 3-6, 2010 DIONISOS: Upgrading to the high temperature regime G.M. Wright, K. Woller, R. Sullivan, H. Barnard, P. Stahle,
GROUP C – Case study no.4 Dr. Nadezda BAGRETS (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology) Dr. Andrea CORNACCHINI (CERN EN Dept.) Mr. Miguel FERNANDES (CERN BE.
BNL High Field and HTS Magnet Program Ramesh Gupta BNL, NY USA H T.
Muon Cooling Channel Superconducting Magnet Systems Muon Collider Task Force Meeting on July 31, 2006 V.S. Kashikhin.
CERN Accelerator School Superconductivity for Accelerators Case study 3 Paolo Ferracin ( ) European Organization for Nuclear Research.
Stellarator magnet options. Electrical/winding issues Elegant solution for ARIES-AT does not extrapolate well for ARIES-CS –High Temperature Superconductor.
Muons, Inc. 14 Jan 2010 S. Kahn--IR Quads 1 IR Quadrupoles with Exotic Materials Steve Kahn, Muons Inc. Bob Palmer, BNL Don Summers, Ole Miss.
Present status of production target and Room design Takashi Hashimoto, IBS/RISP 2015, February.
Magnetics Program Highlights VLT Conference Call September 13, 2000 presented by J.V. Minervini MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center.
Thermal screen of the cryostat Presented by Evgeny Koshurnikov, GSI, Darmstadt September 8, 2015 Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (Dubna)
FNAL Workshop, July 19, 2007 ILC Main Linac Superconducting Quadrupole V.Kashikhin 1 ILC Main Linac Superconducting Quadrupole (ILC HGQ1) V. Kashikhin.
Superconducting Cryogen Free Splittable Quadrupole for Linear Accelerators Progress Report V. Kashikhin for the FNAL Superconducting Magnet Team (presented.
1 Radiation Environment at Final Optics of HAPL Mohamed Sawan Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI HAPL Meeting ORNL March.
CHATS-AS 2011clam1 Integrated analysis of quench propagation in a system of magnetically coupled solenoids CHATS-AS 2011 Claudio Marinucci, Luca Bottura,
September 27, 2007 ILC Main Linac - KOF 1 ILC Main Linac Superconducting Quadrupole V. Kashikhin for Magnet group.
Yingshun Zhu Design of Small Aperture Quadrupole Magnet for HEPS-TF
HTS and LTS Magnet Design and Prototyping for RAON
Hervé Allain, R. van Weelderen (CERN)
CERN Accelerator School Superconductivity for Accelerators Case study 2 Paolo Ferracin European Organization for Nuclear Research.
PROGRESS TOWARDS AN OPEN MIDPLANE SEPARATION DIPOLE
Design of Nb3Sn IR quadrupoles with apertures larger than 120 mm
Laser Cutting Archish Bharadwaj V S
Design of Nb3Sn IR quadrupoles with apertures larger than 120 mm
Physics 122B Electricity and Magnetism
Review of Quench Limits
IR Beam Transport Status
Heat Treatment Mimetic Diagram
S. Bettoni on behalf of the whole team
Presentation transcript:

Magnet considerations for ARIES IFE L. Bromberg With contributions from J.H. Schultz MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center ARIES Meeting Madison, WI September 20, 2001

 Status of near term magnet development for IFE  High current transport experiment (low energy)  Acceleration section (medium energy acceleration)  High temperature superconductor magnet options for IFE  Insulation considerations ARIES IFE

 HCX (High Current Transport Experiment):  800 m A x MeV, front-end of:  IRE (Integrated Research Experiment):  200 A x 200 MeV  Possible front-end of HIFSA commercial reactor:  10 kA x 10 GeV) Present work in magnet community for IFE

HCX cylindrical

HCX Plate racetrack

IRE design of array

 For IFE with HI driver, cost minimization of magnet system is paramount  Cost minimization of final optics by  Epitaxial techniques  High Tc to minimize quench requirements and cost of the cryogenic system (dry system)  Optimize structural requirements Implications of technology program for HU IFE final optics magnets

IFE magnet construction Epitaxial YBCO films

BSCCO 2212 layered pancakes on silver (L. Bromberg, MIT, 1997)

Magnet configuration options  Plate magnets, with superconductor on the surface of structural plates  Two different arrangements are possible (a = 0 or b = 0)  ~ r 2 (a sin (2  ) + b cos (2  ) sin (2  )cos (2  )

Current distribution in plate quad arrays  The current density for the two cases is different  For the sin (2  ):  |K wall | = 4 A x /  o (on the x-wall), -a < x < a  |K wall | = 4 A y /  o (on the y-wall), -a < y < a  For the cos (2  ):  |K wall | = 4 A a /  o  In both cases, the magnetic field is:  |  | = 2 A r  and the gradient is  |  |’ = 2 A

Current distribution in quad arrays  Superconductor is deposited directly on structural plates  Epitaxial techniques can be used to achieve desired current density for optimal quadrupole field generation  Deposition of superconducting material directly on structural substrate minimized motion of SC and heat generation  Insulation is achieved by depositing thin insulating layer between superconductor and substrate  Ce 2 O is presently used in the manufacturing of YBCO tapes  For sin (2  ) arrays, SC is deposited with uneven spacing to simulate K ~ x distribution  For cos (2  ) arrays, SC is deposited uniformly

Superconductor implications  YBCO material is very sensitive to field orientation  preferred orientation of field is parallel to YBCO tape, (B || ab)  Preliminary critical current density: A/m 2  For sin (2  ) arrays, field is perpendicular to SC  For cos (2  ) arrays, field is parallel to SC  sin (2  ) requires non-uniform current density, which means that for similar average current density, peak is higher (for comparable thicknesses, current density is higher)  cos (2  ) requires uniform current density

Forces in Epitaxial quad arrays  Because of symmetry, forces are mostly along the substrate (I.e., tension or compression, with almost no shear)  For both sin (2  ) and cos (2  ) arrays:  F = 4 A 2 a 3 /  o   = F/t (t : thickness of structural plate)  To limit strain in SC to 0.2% (comparable to LTS), the maximum tensile stress in structure is ~500 MPa

HTS Superconductor options and comparison with LTS (YBCO tape at 4 K and at 75 K) Courtesy of Lee, UW Madison

YBCO Current density with field in the “bad” direction (B||c) as a function of temperature

Typical Quad magnet design

YBCO for IFE magnets  Current density can be as high as A/m 2 (1 MA/cm 2 ) for fields as high as 9 T, a temperatures between 20 K and 77 K  At 9T (B || c), T < 20K  Temperatures between 4 K and 77 K can be achieved by using dry system (no liquid coolant)  Cooling is provided by conduction cooling to a cryocooler head.

Fraction of cell not allocated to beam (linear ratio, not area ratio)

Fraction of cell not allocated to beam Field gradient = 300 T/m

Current density sin (2  ) and cos (2  ) quad arrays cos (2  )sin (2  )

cos (2  ) plate design options

sin (2  ) magnet section (not planar due to current return!)

Magnet quench  Energy in magnet is small (for both sin 2 theta and cos 2 theta): E = 16 A 2 a 4 L / 3  o (L is the quad length)  For typical magnets (L ~ 1 m), E ~ 20 kJ/quad  If 100 quads are in parallel, 2 MJ per supply  If single power A and 5 kV discharge,  dump ~ 1 s  However, very high current density, magnet will self destroy at this very high current density  Quench protection for HTS: passive, quench prevention by large thermal mass to avoid flux jumping, large heat release.

Edge conditions of the quad array Current density of outermost quad array boundary modified to control field profile

Coil Cooling  Assuming that quads are only cooled at each end  If only Ni-based material, large temperature raise to midplane of quad (  T ~ 100 K)  Cu placed in parallel to structural plates (bonded at the structural plate edges, to prevent warping) 1 mW/cm^3

Cryogenic advantages  Due to good design (as in the IRE design shown above), operation at 77 K only slightly reduces the required thermal insulation gap  Little radiation from 77 K to 4 K  Support can be long without implication to radial build  Required distance determined by requirement of no contact between 4 K and 77 K  Therefore, the use of HTS is not driven by cryogenic requirements.  Cryogenic requirements substantially reduced by operation at ~ 77 K (by about a factor of 8, scaling from IRE design)  Operation of HTS below 77 K by the use of cryocooler (dry operation)

Magnet assembly tolerance  Epitaxial techniques allows the manufacturing of the YBCO plates with high precision (~  m)  Plates can be assembled to tolerances of 5 mils (0.12 mm)  Plate supports can be assembled with 10 mil accuracy  Magnet racetrack can be placed with 10 mils accuracy (0.25 mm) along the entire way of the plate (~ 1 m across, 1 m apart).

Advantages of plate quad arrays  The forces are only in tension/compression in the plates  There are no loads that are perpendicular to the plates that need to be reacted in shear.  Very important consideration for insulator  These forces are easy to react, and do not require the need of large inter-quad structure  The only structure is needed to control off-normal loads, gravity and for accurate positioning of the plates.  The field is a perfect quadrupole field, with total absence (in the ideal conditions) of higher order components  Errors due to  misalignment  errors in plate manufacture  end-fields  Possibility for cheap manufacturing!

Irradiation considerations  Final focusing magnets will experience high dose:  40 MGray/year from  ’s, 8 MGray/year from neutrons (Latkowski)  Very high peaking, ~10 5 – 10 6 (Sawan, 1981)  Very high instantaneous dose rate: 10 5 – 10 6 Gray/s

Irradiation testing of insulators at M.I.T. Irradiation damage to organics mainly due to radiochemistry, driven mainly by electrons Radiation facility consisting of: E-beam unit (200 kV, 4 mA) Capable of large dose rates (up to Grad/s) Large sample capability (5cm x 5 cm) Capable of cryogenic testing

Summary  Design options for plate magnets for IFE quad final optics have been investigated  Use High temperature superconductor (YBCO)  sin (2  ) option requires angle elements (non-planar)  Epitaxial technique on flat plates, angle elements  Large number of elements, easily manufactured.  Design algorithms were developed  Only for high temperature superconductor  Comparison to LTS in the near future  Irradiation effect need to be determined  Lack of large shear between elements allows the possibility of all inorganic insulation  Very large dose rates