FCC-hh MDI 5 th Meeting Friday 13 th March 2015 Civil Engineering Layouts for Experimental Caverns – First Draft Charlie Cook (GS), John Osborne (GS)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Kitakami IR Access Discussions T. Markiewicz/SLAC 13 May 2014 SiD Meeting / AWLC Fermilab.
Advertisements

CERN TS Department / Civil Engineering Group 8 February 2008 Civil Engineering Layouts & Tunnel Cross Section 1 CLIC/ILC Collaboration Meeting 8 Feb 2008.
Plasma Wakefield (AWAKE) Project Meeting 18 October 2012 Civil Engineering Feasibility Issues for the West Area EDMS : John Osborne GS-SE.
Assembly Hall in Hybrid-A’ and ILD 2014/9/6 Yasuhiro Sugimoto 1.
Partial Underground Analysis– TRTP Project Project Segment 8A Corridor October 29, 2011.
Experimental hall in Japanese mountain site Y. Sugimoto ILD MDI/Integration 1.
Infrastructure & Operation 27 th May 2015 Infrastructure & Operation 27 th May 2015 Update on optimisation of tunnel footprint and location Charlie Cook.
Construction and Installation of the CLIC Experimental Area
TOT-FCC: Tunnel Optimisation Tool for the Future Circular Collider Introduction and lessons learnt C. Cook, J. Osborne, P. Lebrun, Y. Robert, M. Jones,
CES Status J.Osborne 6 November 2009 Status Report from Civil Engineering and Services Working Group J.Osborne GS/SEM for CES Working Group.
1 Alternative assembly option of ILD Y.Sugimoto 2010/10/18 ILD Integration
Experimental hall in Japanese mountain site Y. Sugimoto 1.
ARUP Studies Update ILC Interaction Region Design Requirements John Osborne CERN, Yung Loo & Matt Sykes (ARUP) CFS-ADI Joint Meeting - University of Tokyo.
TS Department / Civil Engineering Group 17 October 2007 Civil Engineering Layouts & Tunnel Cross Section 1 CLIC workshop – Working group: Two beam hardware.
1. Civil Engineering works for Linear Colliders* : -Brief introduction on the overall machine layout (just for CLIC at this stage) -Experimental Area.
FCC Tunnel Civil Engineering and Geology John Osborne (CERN GS-SE) 4 April 2014.
ILC experimental area - How to ‘develop’ CFS details for TDP (cavern size, number of shafts, HVAC, EL spec etc) ? - KEK site specific issues CFS V.Kuchler.
November 17, st XFEL / ILC Meeting 1 ILC GLOBAL Design Effort The Current ILC Twin Tunnel Design Wilhelm Bialowons and Nicholas Walker · MPY.
1 CLIC / ILC Collaboration for CES issues JOHN OSBORNE – CES 8 April 2009.
1 Global Design Effort TILC08 - WG1 Summary WG-1: Cost Reduction Studies J. Carwardine, T. Shidara, N. Walker (For WG-1 participants)
John Osborne : GS-SEM Civil Engineering 19 May 2009 Report on behalf of CLIC Civil Engineering and Services (CES) WG CTC 19 May 2009 Tunnel Cross Section.
J. Pasternak First Ideas on the Design of the Beam Transport and the Final Focus for the NF Target J. Pasternak, Imperial College London / RAL STFC ,
Structure Update Installation & Building Update Revisions Outlined Costs Revisited (since given to Gina) Jeff Nelson Fermilab.
LEP3: integration issues at the LHC tunnel M. Koratzinos 2 nd LEP3 day, 23 October 2012.
A. Hervé - 17 Oct CLIC-Workshop CLIC Workshop: 17 Oct. 07 Interaction Region Engineering at ILC Push-Pull Option A. Hervé/CERN.
Global Design Effort - CFS TILC08 Working Group 1 - March 5, CFS Cost Reductions Conventional Facilities and Siting Group A. Enomoto, V.
What’s The Next Step to Beginning a Drawing……. You already Know: Measurements Tools.
John Osborne : GS-SEM Civil Engineering 18 May 2009 CES 9 June News from ILC Japan CFS review 1-3 June 2010 :
A. Hervé - 17 Sept ILC-IRENG IRENG07 Workshop: 17 Sept. 07 Various Possibilities for disposition of Experimental Area A. Hervé/CERN.
ILC D RAFT P ROJECT S CHEDULE K LYCLUSTER 500GeV K Foraz & M Gastal ILC Mechanical & Electrical Review and CFS Baseline Technical Review Many thanks to.
General Infrastructures Services Department Civil Engineering planning for LSS4 Option, presented at review workshop 30/7/ months Planning and Resources:
FHI 32: FCC tunnel layout and transferline update Tuesday, 9 February 2016 CE Updates: Comparison of 100km Intersecting and Non-Intersecting options New.
March 22, –  Design Concept & Hall Layout  Access Tunnel  Top heading Tunnel  Displacement of detector hall by push-pull operation.
Philip Burrows MDI Panel Meeting 15/08/06 Philip Burrows John Adams Institute Oxford University SiD and IR/MDI Issues.
MDI 9 th Meeting - 22 nd January 2016 FCC Experimental Caverns - Feasibility and Excavation C. Cook (GS), J. Osborne (GS),
Infrastructure and Operation meeting 20 th January 2016 Amberg’s Report Summary : Comparison of 100km Intersecting and Non-Intersecting options C. Cook.
ILD and SiD in Japanese site (from discussions in SiD/ILD E/D Interface Working Meeting) Yasuhiro Sugimoto, Marco Oriunno 2011/12/15 SiD
Survey Meeting John Osborne, CERN 8 February 2016
Review of FCC tunnel footprint & implementation Introduction & scope Philippe Lebrun Review of FCC tunnel footprint & implementation CERN, 11 June 2015.
Experimental hall in Japanese mountain site 2011/11/30 Yasuhiro CFS Webex meeting 1.
1 Building Design Progress Dan Wilcox March 2012.
Experimental Hall in Mountain Regions
FCC Underground Infrastructure
Civil Engineering for FCC-eh and LHeC
Civil Engineering update - alignment configuration
FCC Civil Engineering Optimisation and Design Development
CLIC Handling Engineering Update
CLIC Civil Engineering Update
LBNF CAD models, Drawings and Component list
Updated Design of Detector Hall
CLIC Civil Engineering Update
Yasuhiro Sugimoto 2012/2/1 ILD integration meeting
FCC Civil Engineering John Osborne, Jo Stanyard, Matt Stuart(SMB - Site Engineering - FAS Section) Cost & schedule Phase 3 - specification 10th May 2017.
Marco Oriunno (SLAC), March 12, 2014 MDI WG
CLIC Civil Engineering & Infrastructure
FCC Civil Engineering John Osborne & Jo Stanyard (SMB - Site Engineering - FAS Section) FCC week outline 10th May 2017.
Acknowledgements to all FCC study teams
Experimental hall design in Japanese site
FCC lifts Layout, characteristics etc.
Tunnel Cross Section Studies
CLIC / ILC Collaboration for CFS works
Interaction Region Alternative Layouts
FCC Civil Engineering update
Latest ILC tunnel cross section May 2017
FCC-ee MDI Civil Engineering update
FCC Tunnel and Shaft Cross Sections
Civil Engineering for FCC-eh IR
CLIC Civil Engineering Update
Detector hall in mountain regions
RDR Baseline Layouts for Interaction Region
Presentation transcript:

FCC-hh MDI 5 th Meeting Friday 13 th March 2015 Civil Engineering Layouts for Experimental Caverns – First Draft Charlie Cook (GS), John Osborne (GS)

Outline Detector space requirements (as understood from MDI 4 th Meeting) Cavern access CATIA models

Detector space requirements Detector Option Detector design Shaft/tunnel diameter Required dimensions for installation Option 1Solenoid Option 2Twin Solenoid28m65x30x36 Option 3Toroid14m86x36x42 Option 1 - SolenoidOption 2 - Twin Solenoid Option 3 – Toroid Extra space required for opening/closing & repair? “ ”

Detector space requirements Detector Option Detector design Shaft/tunnel diameter [m] Required dimensions for installation [m] Width of metallic structures/services [m] Cavern dimensions (LxWxH) [m] Span [m] Option 1Solenoid Option 2Twin Solenoid2865x30x36865x38x3638 Option 3Toroid1486x36x42886x44x4244 Option 1 - SolenoidOption 2 - Twin Solenoid Option 3 – Toroid

Detector space requirements Detector Option Detector design Shaft/tunnel diameter [m] Required dimensions for installation [m] Width of metallic structures/services [m] Cavern dimensions (LxWxH) [m] Span [m] Corner cavities [m] Span with cavities [m] Option 1Solenoid Option 2Twin Solenoid2865x30x36865x38x363812x543 Option 3Toroid1486x36x42886x44x424412x549 Option 1 - SolenoidOption 2 - Twin Solenoid Option 3 – Toroid

Cavern Access Shaft (vertical) vs. Inclined tunnel? 2800m 395m 3o3o

Cavern Access Shaft (vertical) vs. Inclined tunnel? 2800m 395m 3o3o Shaft Inclined tunnel ~400m ~3000m 6%

Cavern Access Option 2 - Twin Solenoid Access options Ø28m shaft Ø26m circular modules + 0.8m clearance for safety ~1.5x diameter of CMS shaft (Ø20m) Moderate CE challenge at depths ~200m Very high CE challenge at depths 300m-400m Roadheader 28mx7.5m inclined tunnel Ø28m Extremely large diameter tunnel Too large for Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) Possible construction method could be roadheader excavation to create a rectangular cross-section (28m x 7.5m) Height of tunnel = 7.5m; assumes flatbed truck (2m) + ventilation ducts on tunnel ceiling (1m) + for safety (0.5m)

Cavern Access Option 3 - ToroidAccess options Ø22m shaft Moderate CE challenge at depths ~200m Very high CE challenge at depths 300m-400m Roadheader 5mx14m inclined tunnel Coil height (10.1m) + flatbed truck (2m) + ventilation duct (1m) + safety (0.9m) = 14m Width of coil/diameter of tube? Space to rotate final coil must be considered in any access option 14m 5m 1m 2m 10.1m 0.9m

CERN SITG VUE BA5 Twin Solenoid cavern with shaft Alcoves are not preferred solution by CE – increased cavern span Can detector requirements be met without these?

CATIA Model: ST _01 36 m 38 m 65 m Ø28 m Twin Solenoid cavern with shaft Detector Option Detector design Shaft/tunnel diameter [m] Required dimensions for installation [m] Width of metallic structures [m] Cavern dimensions (LxWxH) [m] Span [m] Corner cavities [m] Span with cavities [m] Option 1Solenoid Option 2Twin Solenoid2865x30x36865x38x363812x543 Option 3Toroid1486x36x42886x44x424412x549

Twin Solenoid cavern with shaft

CERN SITG VUE BA5 Toroid cavern with inclined tunnel Alcoves are not preferred solution by CE – increased cavern span Can detector requirements be met without these? Tunnel boring machine excavated inclined tunnel shown here, not roadheader solution

CATIA Model: ST _01 42 m 44 m 86 m Ø14 m Toroid cavern with inclined tunnel Detector Option Detector design Shaft/tunnel diameter [m] Required dimensions for installation [m] Width of metallic structures [m] Cavern dimensions (LxWxH) [m] Span [m] Corner cavities [m] Span with cavities [m] Option 1Solenoid Option 2Twin Solenoid2865x30x36865x38x363812x543 Option 3Toroid1486x36x42886x44x424412x549

Toroid cavern with inclined tunnel

Summary Cavern dimensions driven by space required by detector (installation, opening/closing, repair) plus extra width for metallic structures/services Access options include: Shaft (large shafts preferable in shallower locations) Inclined tunnel (a possible alternative in deep locations) Improving inclined tunnel design: Expansion at connection to the cavern for the rotation of final toroid coil Enter the cavern at a different angle in horizontal plane. Currently 90 o to beam line Explore limits for angle in vertical plane – 6-7% slope is maximum for truck access? Use of tracks could allow for more inclined tunnel + smaller ventilation ducts => smaller tunnel requirements Alcoves would considerably increase the cavern costs and could possibly represent a feasibility issue