The implementation of hysteresis in the FIDEL model and implications for the LHC operation P. Hagen November 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ecosystem Modeling I Kate Hedstrom, ARSC November 2008.
Advertisements

Cable inventory, relative measurements and 1 st mechanical computations STUDY OF THE QUADRUPOLE COLLAR STRUCTURE P. Fessia, F. Regis Magnets, Cryostats.
Computational Complexity, Physical Mapping III + Perl CIS 667 March 4, 2004.
Magnetic Behavior of LHC Correctors: Issues for Machine Operation W. Venturini Delsolaro AT-MTM; Inputs from A. Lombardi, M. Giovannozzi, S. Fartoukh,
The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme.
Field Quality Working Group-14/12/04 - Stephane Sanfilippo AT-MTM-AS Field Quality measurements at cold. Standard program v.s extended tests. Presented.
FIDEL meeting 22/02/07 - Stephane Sanfilippo AT-MTM Status of data retrieval (SSS and S4 tested in SM18). Data retrieval : goals, agenda. Procedure of.
Updates to WISE for LHC run II Per Hagen May 2015.
Bernhard Holzer * IP5 IP1 IP2 IP8 IR 7 ”Beam Dynamics for Nb3Sn dipoles... latest news"
E. Todesco FIELD MODEL AT 7 TEV N. Aquilina, E. Todesco CERN, Geneva, Switzerland On behalf of the FiDeL team CERN, 17 th June.
Field Description of the LHC FiDeL - Status and Plan Presented by L. Bottura based on contributions of many MARIC and LHCCWG
Geneva, 12/06/ Results of Magnetic Measurements on MQXC 02 L. Fiscarelli on behalf of TE/MSC/MM section
Analysis of MBXW and MBW Per Hagen (TE/MSC) Acknowledgements: R. Wolf (2008 analysis), G. de Rijk (ROXIE model), B. Auchmann (ROXIE support),
General Considerations for the Upgrade of the LHC Insertion Magnets
Jeopardy Category 1 Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 Category
Field Model for the Multipoles Factory FQWG, 17/3/2004 S.Amet, L.Deniau, M.Haverkamp, L.Larsson, T.Pieloni, S.Sanfilippo, M. Schneider, R. Wolf, G.Ambrosio.
LSA/FiDeL1 Deliverables Commissioning:Commissioning: Transfer functions [MB, MQ, MQY, MQM, MQX etc…] DC components Decay prediction Snapback prediction.
Nominal intensity bunches ● First ramp with nominal intensity bunches suffered from an instability appearing around 1.8 TeV. ● Nominal intensity bunches.
AT-MEL, CERN, 1211 Geneva 23 R.Wolf-LHCCWG Magnet Setup Cycling for LHC R. Wolf for the FQWG et al. Contents -Overview -Details of individual cycles.
Inductance and magnetization measurements on main dipoles in SM18 Emmanuele Ravaioli Thanks to A. Verweij, S. Le Naour TE-MPE-TM
OMC – Online Model - G. Roy 1 Online Model Ghislain Roy Work very much in progress building upon the efforts and realisations of many people.
E. Todesco EXPERIENCE WITH FIELD MODELING IN THE LHC E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland Thanks to the FiDeL team CERN, Space charge th April 2013.
“WISE” Simulation of optical imperfections in LHC P. Hagen AT/MCS Acknowledgements: Colleagues in AT/MAS, AT/MEL, AT/MTM, AB/ABP CERN, October 2006.
AT-MAS/SC A. Verweij 21 Mar 2003 Present Status and Trends of Cable Properties and Impact on FQ Workshop on Field Quality Steering of the Dipole Production.
How precisely can we control our magnets? Experience and impact on the expected control of machine parameters (tune and chromaticity) Thanks to: M.Lamont,
First Demonstration of Optics Measurement and Correction during Acceleration Chuyu Liu Collider Accelerator Department, BNL.
Highlights of Prototype SC Magnet Tests (LCLSII- 4.5-EN-0612) and Proposed Production Magnet Test Plan (LCLSII-4.5-EN-611-R0) and XFEL Magnet Test Results.
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,
E. Todesco CAN WE IMPROVE THE MAGNETIC CYCLE/MODEL AND THEIR EFFECTS? E. Todesco For the FiDeL team: C. Alabau Pons, L. Bottura, M. Buzio, L. Deniau, L.
7 th March 2008 Magnet Modelling N. Sammut On behalf of the FIDEL Working Group.
Saturday 11.9 ● From Friday – Minimum required crossing angle is 100  rad in 2010 – Plenty of aperture at triplets: > 13  (n1 > 10) – Can stay with 170.
Top couplings: ILC-B physics interplay Top couplings: ILC-B physics interplay TYL-FJPPL B physics TYL-FJPPL B physics February 20, 2015 LAL February 20,
“ Decay & snapback in main LHC dipoles vs injection current”, LUMI-05, Arcidosso, 1 September 2005, Page 1/4 During ramps, boundary-induced.
Tune: Decay at Injection and Snapback Michaela Schaumann In cooperation with: Mariusz Juchno, Matteo Solfaroli Camillocci, Jorg Wennigner.
PC Current Interlocking for the SPS Fast Extractions. 1 J. Wenninger July 2009.
E. Todesco THE LHC MAGNETIC MODEL AT 6.5 TEV E. Todesco CERN, Geneva Switzerland With contributions from N. Aquilina, L. Bottura, R. De Maria, L. Deniau,
Linear optics - I Low beta* at injection –Reduction of injection could potentially reduce time to collisions and allow for a more relaxed ramp&squeeze,
CERN –GSI/CEA MM preparation meeting, Magnetic Measurements WP.
MQM and MQY harmonics in Fidel Walter Venturini Delsolaro FIDEL meeting, 28 April 2009.
Expected field quality in LHC magnets E. Todesco AT-MAS With contributions of S. Fartoukh, M. Giovannozzi, A. Lombardi, F. Schmidt (beam dynamics) N. Catalan-Lasheras,
2nd ATF2 Project Meeting (May 30, 2006)M. Woodley [SLAC]1 ATF2 Layout/Optics (v3.3) nBPM (SLAC) nBPM (KEK) FONT Compton / laserwire ODR Existing ATF Extraction.
1 LHC Beam Energy J. Wenninger CERN Beams Department Operation group / LHC Acknowledgments: E. Todesco.
Threading / LTC/ JW1 How difficult is threading at the LHC ? When MADX meets the control system … J. Wenninger AB-OP &
17 th April 2007 Nicholas J. Sammut Decay Prediction and Minimisation During LHC Operation University of Malta Field Quality Working Group with several.
Fabio Follin Delphine Jacquet For the LHC operation team
Motivation We would like to be able to scale the SHMS Golden Tune we determine this Fall from 2.2 GeV/c to other momenta with linearity errors less than.
Alignment and beam-based correction
Saturday Coordinators weekend: Mike Lamont, Eva Barbara Holzer
Validated magnetic data at cold
The HL-LHC Circuits: Global View and Open Questions
FiDeL: the model to predict the magnetic state of the LHC
Optimization of Triplet Field Quality in Collision
Tune and Chromaticity: Decay and Snapback
Field model deliverables for sector test and commissioning: when and what? The implementation of an accurate magnetic model will be vital for efficient.
Status of Magnet Setup Cycling for LHC
Field quality to achieve the required lifetime goals (single beam)
LHC Status Wed Morning 13-April R. Assmann, B. Holzer et al
UPDATE ON DYNAMIC APERTURE SIMULATIONS
Cycle-to-cycle reproducibility and magnet modeling.
Thursday 17th May 01:11 Fill #2633 dump in squeeze arc circulator load channel Ad1B 03:16 Fill #2644 Stable beams, lumi 5.2e33 cm-2s-1 04:38 Dumped by.
5 TeV Settings Mike Lamont.
LHC OPERATION AND SUPPORT
Planning at 5 o’clock meeting Friday
Beam-Based Alignment Results
Tuesday morning 08:30-09:00 Squeeze with probe.
MD Planning Fri – Sat (1. – 2.7.)
Triplet corrector layout and strength specifications
Linear beam dynamics simulations for XFEL beam distribution system
15/12/2009 Vacuum interlock in sector 78 understood  out-gassing of a Penning gauge ignited as a result of ionization or dust arcing In conclusion: NO.
On reproducibility From several inputs of N. Sammut, S. Sanfilippo, W. Venturini Presented by L. Bottura LHCCWG
Presentation transcript:

The implementation of hysteresis in the FIDEL model and implications for the LHC operation P. Hagen November 2010

2 Hysteresis in the FiDeL model o The FiDeL description of the magnets assume / require that a specific pre-cycle has been followed o The reason being that the hysteresis depend upon the magnet history o There are 3 components in the FiDeL model which contribute to hysteresis: o PEN - current penetration in the cable filaments o DCMAG - persistent currents in SC magnets o RESMAG – residual magnetisation of materials o PEN is only used in MQM and MQY to model exponential low B o DCMAG depends upon the sign of the dI/dt (ramp up or down). We do not know the exact conditions (Δt, ΔI) causing a switch of branch o RESMAG depends upon the history (previous cycle)

3 Example of TF with RESMAG hysteresis o The curves a, b, c, d correspond to different pre-cycles (Imin and Imax) o The person implementing FiDeL for a magnet must decide upon which curve (or something in-between) based upon how the magnet is used o Example MQWA, pre-cycle constrained by power supply + magnet only ramp-up (dI/dt > 0) so we only use that specific branch

4 Extending the FiDeL model to 4 quadrants! o In FiDeL we basically model one quadrant (1 or 4) o The sign of the current is not given by FiDeL but by the powering scheme o The width of the hysteresis depends on the previous Imin and Imax I > 0I < 0 Imin < 0 I < 0 I > 0 Imin >

5 LHC magnets and hysteresis

6 Cat A – no operational issues o Magnets which operate in a current range with little hysteresis o and.. or … o Magnets which only ramp-up with beam present, well-defined pre-cycle and relevant hysteresis components are included in the FiDeL model o Most main magnets belong to this category Il buono (the good)

7 Cat B – minor operational issues o Magnets which operate in a current range with hysteresis and relevant hysteresis components are NOT included in the FiDeL model o … but it is assumed that they do not cause operational problems o We pretend they behave linearly in the low-current region o Most corrector magnets belong to this category… o The neglect of hysteresis in orbit, tune and coupling correctors is compensated by real-time measurements and adjustments o Correctors without well-defined operational cycles are probably impossible to model wrt hysteresis o Nevertheless, we believe there are corrector magnets which have known cycles and where model could be improved if justified by operation: MCD, MCO, MQTLI, MSS ? Il buono? (the good?)

8 Cat C – assumed operational issue il brutto (the bad) o Magnets which operate in a current range with hysteresis and relevant hysteresis components are NOT included in the FiDeL model o … and it is assumed that they do cause operational problems o We have so far only put the corrector MCS into this category o The current crosses 0 during LHC ramp-up so there will be an error in TF of several %

9 Cat D – known operational issue il cattivo (the ugly) o Magnets which change ramp direction during operation (dI/dt) and which include a FiDeL DCMAG component o This happens to the final focus and insertion quads during the squeeze: MQXA, MQXB, MQM/C/L, MQY o This causes the TF to jump, if we literally follow the FiDeL model o LSA adds smoothing in order to keep power supplies happy o They require continuous I function with well-defined constraints on dI/dt, d 2 I/dt 2 o But … trims of these magnets become unpredictable as it may cause the DCMAG component to change sign, so it gives an upper limit on the smallest possible trim

10 The question is, to branch or not to branch? Ignorance (pretend it does not happen) Or … Complexity when trimming A persistent answer is needed for 2011 run Keep in mind the effect will ~ disappear with 7 TeV

11 MQXA1.L2 (1.9K) In following slides, red numbers give DCMAG in units of GEOmetric component. This is ½ width of hysteresis 0.7

12 RQ10.L1B2 1.9K)

13 RQ10.L2B2 1.9K)

14 RQ10.L4B2 1.9K) 1.8

15 RQ4.L1B2 4.5K) 0.0

16 RQ4.L2B1 4.5K) ~ worst case DCMAG amplitude for MQY

17 RQ7.L4B2 1.9K) 1.8

18 RQ7.L8B2 1.9K)

19 RQ7.R2B1 1.9K)

20 RQ8.R2B1 1.9K) ~ worst case DCMAG amplitude for MQM

21 RQ9.L5B2 1.9K)

22

23 RQ10.R5B2 1.9K) 1.8 ΔI DCMAG = 2 * 1.8 / * 2334 A = 0.84 A The trim discrepancy of 5 A seems not justified!