1. JLEIC Engineering Status
T. Michalski
August 31, 2017
F. Lin

2. JLEIC Engineering Status
R&D Plans for SC Magnets
Schedule and budget for TAMU Model Dipole completion
IR Magnets – collaboration with BNL
IR Magnets – TOSCA designs at JLab
LDRD Proposal for 6T SC Dipoles and 3T Fast Ramping SC Dipoles
Design and Layout
IR Layout – initial layout – developing further details on magnets and vacuum pipe design requirements
Tunnel size and cross section validation
Work with FML – site vibration study
Staffing

3. TAMU Model Dipole $358k supplemental R&D allocated for FY’17
$230k (less G&A) to TAMU, awaiting arrival of funds to get PR started
$128k for JLab to support TAMU, seek test location, develop test plan
FY’17 Deliverables
Fabricate FRP core structure
Fabricate of 125m length of CICC
Start coil winding on FRP core
Completion of analyses in support of a robust magnet design
Start development of a test plan and site selection

4. TAMU Model Dipole – TAMU Portion
SOW: 3 Deliverables
Fabricate FRP Core
125m CIC Conductor – will be made in 2 x 63m lengths
Start winding CICC on FRP Core
Contract being developed – should be finalized next week
Awaiting schedule of milestones from TAMU

5. TAMU Model Dipole – JLab Portion
SOW: 2 Deliverables
Completion of analyses in support of a robust magnet design, including DFMEA – Probir Ghoshal/George Biallas
Start development of a test plan and site selection – TBD (desire to use Ruben Fair for this activity)
Also considering development of the splice joint – George Biallas – need to discuss with TAMU

6. TAMU Magnet - CICC analysis
EM analysis – TAMU - COMPLETE
Thermal and structural analysis – TAMU/JLab - COMPLETE
PKG setting up the tools to evaluate/calculate the following (a few, not yet reviewed analyses, are shown as snap shots of the analysis tool in place in the following slides)-
AC loss calculations and incorporate into the overall heating of the magnet during ramping - JLab
dP (pressure drop) in the conductor with Magnetic field and changing temp of the cooling fluid/cryogen - JLab
Quench analysis..- JLab
Conductor stability…and impact on MQE - JLab
Splice design and stability - JLab
FMEA design and overall system FMEA - JLab
Risk analysis to the overall system - JLab

7. Snap shot of the analysis undertaking by JLab-
1. Critical temp. cals. for the conductor based on Bottura model

8. Snap shot of the analysis undertaking by JLab-
2. AC loss calculations for the conductor – Wilson model
Eddy current/Coupling losses
Hysteresis losses
Penetration losses in Sc

9. 3. Pressure drop Calculations - AC losses feed into the conductor model at varying field

10. 3. Pressure drop Calculations - AC losses feed into the conductor model at varying field (Cont’d)

11. 3. Pressure drop Calculations - AC losses feed into the conductor model at varying field (Cont’d)
BRIEF SUMMARY

12. IR Magnet – BNL Collaboration
$38k in supplemental R&D allocated for FY’17
Focus will be on higher field magnets – looking at Nb3Sn as the conductor
Review requirements towards JLEIC IR in FY’17
BNL to develop concept design of a FFQ using LARP/LHC-HL Nb3Sn prototype coils
Also looking at modeling with 2 dipoles
Timing – update discussion in late Sept/early Oct
Presentation at Collaboration
Concept design early calendar year
Report in early spring*

13. IR Magnet – TOSCA Modeling

14. IR Magnets Design Status

15. IR Magnets Design Status-Summary
There are total 15 magnets (Dipoles and Quadrupoles) in the IR region; 2-Dipoles, 12-Quadrupoles and 1-permanent magnet Quadrupole.
Preliminary design for 10 (out of 12) Quadrupole IR magnets has been done.
Paul Brindza is looking at the Dipole Design.
Peak Field in the coils, effective length of the magnet and gradient of the magnet is calculated using OPERA EM software.
The design parameters listed in the table are based on the preliminary design, these designs will be further optimized.
The peak field for 3 (out of 6) quadrupoles in the Ion-IR region is very high (between 11.4 to 16.7T), for the other three also peak field is expected to be high.
The peak field for 2 (out of 6) quadrupoles in the Electron-IR region is slightly high (around 7T), but this need further optimization.
The EM interaction between magnets QFFB1_US, QFFB4e and QFFB3e has been looked, there is EM interaction between these magnets. This will be looked in more detail after further coil optimization.

16. IR Magnet Design – Next Steps
Complete the preliminary design of rest of the 2 quadrupole magnets.
Define operating current and suitable conductor
Start looking at the interference/interaction between these magnets and correctors and skew quadrupoles
Discuss the interference/interaction with beam line physicist
Further optimization of the coil design

17. SC Magnet LDRD Probir has submitted a LDRD focused on:
6T SC dipoles for the Ion Collider Ring
Needed for 100 GeV center of mass energy
Alternate technology solution to SF magnets for
3T fast ramping dipoles for the Booster Ring
3T slower ramping dipoles for the Ion Collider Ring
Based on R&D Committee recommendations – insure we have backups for SF magnets
Will collaborate with LBNL on LDRD
UPDATE: Proposal was submitted and overview presentation presented – awaiting decision on FY’18 LDRD selections (early September) – not hopeful

18. JLEIC Interaction Region
IR magnets
SB1 IP
QFFB2
QFFB1
QFFB3
SB1
QFFB1_US
ions
QFFB2_US
QFFB3_US

19. IR Design Status – Mark Wiseman
Met with Vasiliy Morozov and Fanglei Lin to discuss the magnet requirements. Awaiting clarifications for some of the magnets.
Received the requirements for the correctors and skew quads for the Ion beam line.  These have been located in the CAD model.   Still have to do draft magnet designs for these. Still need electron beam corrector requirements
Met with Paul Brindza, Steve Lassiter, Mike Fowler to discuss the status and coordinate the designs being worked on by all
Initial coil designs, inner thermal shield and vacuum tubes have been added to some of the magnet models
Discussed the beam pipe and aperture requirements with Charles Hyde, Vasiliy Morozov, Fanglei Lin and are folding this information into the design.
Located one potential interference between the QFFB1_US (Ion beam) and the QFFB3e (electron beam).   Have not tried to solve the problem and have not discussed with the beam physicists yet.

20. e
MQAJ
MQAJ
MQAJ
MQAN
QFFDS03S
QFFDS22S
QFFB1
QFFDS02S i
ION SOL ANTI_DS
QFFB2
QFFB3
SB2

21. e
MQAJ IP
QFFB1e_US
EL SOL ANTI_US
QFFB3e_US i
QFFB2e_US
IPDSCORR1
QFFDS01S
SB1
IPDSCORR2
QFFB1

22. QFFUSO1S
QFFB1_US
IPUSCORR1
IPUSCORR2 i e IP
QFFB4e
QFFB3e
QFFB2e
QFFB1e

23. ION SOL ANTI_US
QFFB3_US
QFFUS22S i
QFFB2_US
QFFUS02S e
QFFUS03S
EL SOL ANTI_DS
MDAB

24. IR Magnet - Preliminary Mech. Design
Inner thermal shield and helium vessel based on available tube sizes
Coil sized around helium vessel
Skew quad location per Vasiliy Morozov
QFFUSO1S
(skew quad)
Helium vessel
Coils
QFFB1_US
Thermal shield
Vacuum tube
QFFB3e
QFFB4e

25. Design and Layout Site layout with all available rings now exist
Added tunnel, based on FML dimensions and cross section
IR Layout – adding details to IR magnets in NX as information comes available
Adding PEP-II RF Cavity to layout – expect we need to add more space behind the beamline

26. Electron, Ion and Booster Rings
Shown with main tunnel layout

27. SECTION SHOWING WALL BUMPED 30” TO GIVE 36” FROM PEP-II RF CAVITY TO WALL

28. Work with FML Site Vibration Study
Contract being finalized – award in September
Drilling and installing sensors – planned for October
Data Acquisition – planned for 1 month while CEBAF is operating at 12 GeV – December or January timeframe

29. Staffing Engineering staffing:
SC Magnet Engineer – Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal (80+%)
Mechanical Engineer – Mark Wiseman (80%)
Mechanical Designers – Chuck Hutton, Ron Lassiter
Anticipate adding the following staff in the next 4-6 weeks
Magnet Engineer –
Probir Ghoshal – LDRD and SF Model Dipole
George Biallas (60%) – CICC Splice, TME Lattice magnets, SF Model Dipole DFMEA