1. P5: UJ56 Relocation Study Contributions from BE -ABP -ASR -BI -CO DG -RP EN -CV -EL -MEF -STI GS -SEM -ASE IT -CSPH -CMXTE -CRG -EPC -MPE 09/06/20101martin.gastal@cern.ch

2. Project overview and scope Current knowledge: → Expected levels of radiation in UJ56 are known → Shielding along the LHC side of the tunnel will not provide a long term solution to avoid single event upset in the electronics systems installed in the UJ56 → We cannot wait until the second long shutdown (~2014) without major risks to the electronics → Relocation of equipment has to be considered Purpose of study: → Identify what can be done during the next shutdown in 2012 → Identify potential showstoppers 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch2

3. What equipment is at risk? 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch3 Gnd floor: Infrastructure electronics for EN-EL, EN-CV and GS-ASE S Maridor EN-MEF

4. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch4 Power converters 24 racks What equipment is at risk? S Maridor EN-MEF

5. → First attempt – build a shielding wall on the tunnel side of the UJ56 → Initial assessment made in 2009 and presented on Feb 9 th 2010. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch5 Is there any quick fix?... No Shielding Effectiveness: - Ground floor: ~10 - First floor: ~2 Without shielding With shielding © R. Versaci et al.

6. → Goal: Find a permanent solution to relocate the electronics currently in the UJ56 during the 2012 shutdown → Limitation: For some equipment the cable length is critical (compensators) → Priority: Racks located on the first floor should be taken care of first since they are the most vulnerable → Asset: CMS has offered to assist in finding space in its experimental area → Synergies: Opportunity to improve accessibility to equipment during operation 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch6 Introducing the relocation effort

7. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch7 Proposal → Move sensitive equipment from 1 st floor and GND floor → Use the UJ561 personnel galley as much as possible → Choice of escape route for CMS/LHC personnel to be revisited → Use parts of the USC55 when needed → Use UL55 Bypass tunnel when needed

8. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch8 Scenarios → Common approach: use the UJ561 and USC55 S4 → 3 options for the CMS escape route → Scenario A: use space UL55 bypass tunnel in addition → Scenario B: use space in USC55 control room in addition S4 CTRL UJ561 UL55

9. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch9 Investing the space in UJ561 → Step 1: Assess what pieces of equipment need to move All power converters 17 racks Some racks will stay, others will be merged or eliminated

10. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch10 Investing the space in UJ561 → Step 1: Assess what equipment needs to move 5 Components of the safe room targeted for relocation in the UJ561

11. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch11 Investing the space in UJ561 → Step 2: suggest a layout Philippe Orlandi, JC Guillaume, N Dos Santos [EN-EL] Equipment organised by cable length limitations New safe room Rack Area Power converters Evacuating the UJ561 might require new openings to the Bypass

12. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch12 Investing the space in UJ561 RQX.R5 RTQX2.R5 RYCA01-02 GYPOS 01 à 03 DYPG01 & 02 CYCIP01 CYNET01EYC01 à 03 EYU01 – EYP01 RYMCB01 à 05 RYLB01 RYLC01 RYSC01 → Step 3: Assign location to equipment Philippe Orlandi, JC Guillaume, N Dos Santos [EN-EL]

13. → Remarks: → If adequately equipped, UJ561 could be accessible through the USC55 at all times → Sectorisation scheme would have to be revisited → Space left between the power converters and the wall is ~1m. → Cooling will require demineralised water → Ventilation scheme would include fan coils with a chilled water link → New cable tray capacity will have to be found → Cable ducts to be created using coring techniques → Impact on the CMS escape route to be assessed 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch13 Investing the space in UJ561

14. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch14 Insertion of service ducts through coring Cooled cables Ctrl cables DC Power cables Bottle neck Ø=350mm L<12m From 1 st floor

15. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch15 Alternative to study for water cooled cables Length ~ 15m, Ø=350mm Similar jobs were done between UA and RA UP56 UJ56 1 st floor 2 nd floor Insertion of service ducts through coring If excavation could start from bypass: Better for schedule Allows work in UP56 in parallel

16. → Feasibility studies will have to be carried out by GS-SEM → Impact on neighbouring equipment to be assessed → Impact on overall schedule to be assessed 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch16 Insertion of service ducts through coring

17. → 3 options should be considered 1.Keep the CMS escape route going through the UJ561  Presence of flammable material  Small clearance between equipment and wall ~1m  Escape route would go through a safe room  No need for civil engineering  Identical to existing path 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch17 CMS escape route – Option 1

18. → 3 options should be considered 2.Use the UL55 Bypass as escape route  More complicated and longer escape path  Less favourable for ALARA (breezing of potentially activated air)  Limited need for civil engineering work  No need to enter the UJ561 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch18 CMS escape route – Option 2

19. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch19 CMS escape route – Option 2 J Bos PH-CMX New blast door

20. → 3 options should be considered 3.Create a new escape gallery Width >1.2m Height=2.3m  Civil engineering work required for ~ 3 months  Insertion in PM56 to be defined  Shorter and safer escape route  Fully compliant with standard emergency routes 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch20 CMS escape route – Option 3

21. UXC55 USC55 Pillar Wall UPX56 Shelter PM56 09/06/201021 UP56 UJ561 UJ561? martin.gastal@cern.ch A B C UJ56 3 routes considered at first Only limited tooling can be used CMS escape route – Option 3

22. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch22 CMS escape route – Option 3.a Formal request from CMS to consider a different position for the junction gallery The new gallery should not introduce any risk to compromise the classification of the USC55 as a non designated area Meeting with DG-RP (S Roesler) on 27/05@14:00 Possibility that the new junction gallery could introduce RP risk in the USC55 No time to produce simulations before the workshop JP Corso EN-MEF

23. B 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch23 CMS escape route – Option 3.b Services difficult to relocate

24. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch24 CMS escape route – Option 3.c CV equipment To relocate for R2E BRAN Gas Can be moved 6.92m J Bos PH-CMX

25. → Connection of route3 inside the UJ56 allows keeping most of the services in place 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch25 CMS escape route – Option 3.c J Bos PH-CMX

26. → Remarks: → CMS would like route 3.c to become the baseline → Impact of CE work on the overall work sequence to be assessed → Where should the excavation start from? → How to remove the spoil? → How to ventilate the work site? → How to seal off CMS and sensitive equipment in the UJ56? 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch26 CMS escape route Likely configuration of CMS during the 2012 shut down

27. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch27 Relocation in USC55 S4 TYCFL02 DYXF01 YYACS01RYSA01 - 02 CYCIB01 → Some rack users wish to group their electronics in the USC55 S4 Philippe Orlandi, JC Guillaume, N Dos Santos [EN-EL]

28. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch28 Relocation in USC55 S4 S Maridor EN-MEF Link between Bypass and USC55 is nearing saturation But should still be OK S4 area is part of the USC55 AUG network

29. → In addition to the UJ561 and the USC55S4 area, the UL55 bypass would be used. Because of the existing cable trays, smaller racks would have to be used  Equipment installed there would not be available during operation  Using space for future upgrade projects  No need for additional CE work  Work in an area relatively empty 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch29 Relocation scenario A

30. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch30 ERD1/56 EOD1/56 - EOD3/56 EBS1/56 - UPS machine QYC01 - 03 RYSA01- 02 CYTIM01 – CYFRE01 Relocation scenario A Philippe Orlandi, JC Guillaume, N Dos Santos [EN-EL]

31. → In addition to the UJ561 and the USC55S4 area, the USC55 control room area would be used  Need for new metallic structures  Need for 1 service duct (CE work) between UJ561 and USC55  Additional mixing of LHC/CMS networks (already the case in S4)  Equipment available at all times  Work on the metallic structures could be done during operation => no penalty for schedule  Space in Bypass remains available for future projects such as inner triplet upgrade  Synergies with CMS upgrade programs 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch31 Relocation scenario B

32. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch32 LHC EL ROOM 6 LHC racks Relocation scenario B JP Corso EN-MEF

33. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch33

34. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch34 A second emergency exit has to be foreseen for the Evacuation of personnel in the new control room

35. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch35

36. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch36 → Whatever scenario is chosen the UJ56 will still host some equipment → Radiation Hard or Radiation Tolerant → The space freed by the relocation will allow the erection of a shielding wall inside the UJ56, possibly with a roof → Such a wall might not be needed after all, depending on tests to be performed on EN-EL equipment at CNGS State of the UJ56 after relocation

37. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch37 State of the UJ56 after relocation Work method to be used to assemble the shielding wall still to be designed

38. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch38 ESD2/56 ESD3/56 ESD1/56 Commutation et distrib. 48 Vdc Chargeurs et bat. 48 Vdc 4 racks patch pannel Tabl. HT 18 kV Transfo 18/.4 kV EBD1/56 EBD2/56 EAD1/56 Ep. 1 m State of the UJ56 after relocation Philippe Orlandi, JC Guillaume, N Dos Santos [EN-EL]

39. State of the UJ56 after relocation → During relocation work, essential services would be powered through temporary switchboards installed on the 1 st floor of the UJ56 Space left free by relocation of Power Converters

40. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch40 State of the UJ56 after relocation → Should all equipment in the safe room be made radiation tolerant or be relocated, substantial cost saving would be made on both the inner and outer shielding of the UJ56

41. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch41 Remaining issues to study → Installation/construction methods and impact on schedule/cost → Shielding wall → CE work gallery/ducts → CV work (Water cooling and ventilation) → Cable tray capacity → Impact of work on CMS & LHC (loss of services, dust..) → Requests of a few racks owners

42. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch42 Very first draft time estimates Time window for CE and shielding work Total EN-EL work ~ 14.5 MonthsCE gallery ~ 3 months

43. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch43 Very first draft time estimates → Once the work methods will have been designed, opportunities to work in parallel could emerge. → Many pieces of information are still missing. This prevents the design of a reliable schedule. → It looks reasonable to assume that the work could not take less than 15 months.

44. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch44 Very first draft cost estimates → EN-EL work: ~ CHFM2.3 → Not including work to be done by other service groups contributing to the relocation of EN-EL equipment → GS-SEM work: → Escape gallery: < CHFM1 → Service ducts: CHF4,000/m → E.g: 15m link between UJ56 and bypass = CHF60,000 → Costs of fire doors, smoke detection, metallic structures, cooling and ventilation, re-commissioning still not assessed

45. 09/06/2010martin.gastal@cern.ch45 Summary → The relocation program at point 5 is a major undertaking. → It will remain a cross department effort → It will be a multimillion CHF project → It will be difficult to fit it into a 1 year shutdown → Many pieces of information are still missing → Defining a baseline scenario is urgently needed to focus the few resources available on detailed studies

46. CERN, February 9 th Extended R2E Seminar & Workshop Preparation CERN, February 9 th Extended R2E Seminar & Workshop Preparation F. DELSAUX ENVIRON 18 M HT LIBRE 2600 mm CHICANE UJ56 1500 R562 VERS UJ56 VERS UJ57 UJ56 Shielding Option 46

47. CERN, February 9 th Extended R2E Seminar & Workshop Preparation CERN, February 9 th Extended R2E Seminar & Workshop Preparation BLINDAGE UJ56 MUR FIXE ACIER HAUTEUR 2000mm COMPLEMENT BRIQUETTES ACIER HAUTEUR 600mm BLINDAGE ACIER DEMONTABLE EP. 400mm HAUTEUR 2000mm MONORAIL RAIL DE MANUTENTION DES BLOCS DE BLINDAGE 300mm 800mm 300mm 400mm xz view UJ56 Shielding Option F. DELSAUX 47 Added shilding

48. CERN, February 9 th Extended R2E Seminar & Workshop Preparation CERN, February 9 th Extended R2E Seminar & Workshop Preparation xz view UJ56 Shielding Option Assuming 1 year of operation at nominal luminosity (100 fb -1 ) Shielding Effectiveness: - Ground floor: ~10 - First floor: ~2 Upstream weak-point could be improved, so could be the maze … BUT 48 © R. Versaci et al.

49. CERN, February 9 th Extended R2E Seminar & Workshop Preparation CERN, February 9 th Extended R2E Seminar & Workshop Preparation Assuming 1 year of operation at nominal luminosity (100 fb -1 ) Shielding Effectiveness: - Ground floor: ~10 - First floor: ~2 w/o shielding UJ56 Shielding Option with shielding 1 st Floor-Shielding can hardly be improved -> First Floor Critical 49 © R. Versaci et al.