1. FLUKA status and plan Sixth TLEP workshop CERN, 16 -18 October 2013 F. Cerutti #, A. Ferrari #, L. Lari *, A. Mereghetti # # EN Dept. & *BE Dept.

2. Outline 2 1. A few reminders about Synchrotron Radiation 2. FLUKA implementation 3. Some geometrical considerations 4. Results 5. Conclusions & Future works October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop

3. SR Emission 3October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop Presented by A. Ferrari at the 4 th TLEP workshop (April 2013)

4. SR Emission 4October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop

5. Fluka implementation of SR 5October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop For more details see A. Ferrari at the 4 th TLEP workshop (April 2013)

6.  E e- =175 GeV  80km machine;  Radius at the dipole = 9.8 km  81% Bending Magnets;  E crit = 1.21 MeV;   E= 9 GeV/turn,  dE/ds=1.39 keV/cm in the dipoles  P = 9 x I[mA] MW = 9 x 10mA = 90 MW in the whole accelerator;  dP/ds= 1.39 x I[mA] W/cm in the dipoles  SR photons generated and tracked above 100 eV (99.999% of the total power), average energy of the photons =400 keV (E>100 eV) ; Assumed parameters 6October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop

7. The starting idea 7October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop Presented by A. Ferrari at the 4 th TLEP workshop (April 2013)

8. Preliminary layout of 1 FODO cell for TLEP 8October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop 1/2 Quad. 1.5m Quad. 1/2 Quad. ~21.3m long dipole Courtesy B. Holzer Circumference of 80km !!! 50 cm Sext.

9. Preliminary layout of 1 FODO cell for TLEP 9October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop 10.5m Dipole 50 m 50m -4*10.5m -2*1.5m -4*0.5m= 3 m3/10 =0.3m each interconnect 1.5m Quad. Note that Sextupoles were not yet considered in the actual Fluka model 1/2 Quad. 1.5m Quad. 1/2 Quad. ~21.3m long dipole 50 cm Sext.

10. Preliminary layout 10October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop Courtesy A. Milanese Courtesy R. Kersevan Not yet an available quad. design  but the B yes! Courtesy B. Holzer 2 proposed materials for the beam pipe EPOXY Updated cooling H2O channel ID 16mm 30 cm

11. 10.5 m long dipole for 1 Beam line 11October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop Beam pipe without shielding (no lead) but with cooling water channel TLEP 80 km

12. FLUKA model: summarizing 12October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop 10.5m Dipole 1.5m Quadrupole implemented just as the analytical magnetic field 0.3 m 5* 24 cm long Absorbers 0.3 m Centered S S S S 0.3 m 25 mm Cu-OFS (0.085% Ag) (20:10) QD Lead

13. Total power 13October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop All results take into account a Beam current = 10 [mA]

14. Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop H2O channel 14 October 17 th, 2013 Dipole S S S S Abs Q  Power in the H20 for all the ABSORBERS: 14.7 W (shield) and 4.5 W (no shield)  Power in the H20 for all the MAGNETS: 6.7 W (shield) and 87 W (no shield) 39 W42 W6 W 0.9 W 1.7 W 4.9 W0.1 W 7 W7.2 W0.16 W0.2 W0.05 W Heating of the in-pipe shield: need to move the H2O channel further in ?

15. Power density in the dipole beam-pipe 15October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop Averaged along the Dipole length

16. Peak power density in the dipole beam-pipe 16October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop Dipole length [cm]

17. Dose in the coils 17October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop Averaged along the Dipole length

18. Peak Dose on the coils 18October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop Mask?

19. Ozone production 19October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop Adapted from NCRP Report 51, under the assumption of no O 3 dissociation over the air renewal time  vent : For example, for P=10 W, V  10 8 cm 3,  vent  10 h  at saturation C O3  12 ppm Corrosion of the materials?

20.  For SR emission the effects of absorbers were shown for the 80km TLEP option.  A considerable reduction of the power deposited into the dipoles, in particular thanks to the absorbers immediately downstream of the dipoles.  Not a critical integrated energy into the water channels with and without absorbers.  A factor of 10 difference with and without absorbers for the power density in the dipole beam pipe and for the dose on the coils. Masks?  Ozone production has to be carefully considered for limiting the corrosion of the materials. Limits? Conclusions 20 October 17 th, 2013 Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop

21. Future work 21October 17 th, 2013Luisella Lari - Sixth TLEP workshop  Possible follow-up:  Other magnets design for dipoles, quadrupoles and sextupoles.  Following impedance considerations, an updated version of the in-pipe shielding with possible different integration of the water cooling channel into the absorbers.  Changing the orientation of the dipoles could be a gain for the ozone but not for the coils. See also L. Rossi at the 3 rd TLEP workshop (January 2013) TLEP 80 km