Status of Mu2e Solenoids Michael Lamm for the Mu2e Project Working Group Meeting March 17, 2010 •Organization •Technical Progress •Cost and Schedule
Feb 24, 2016
Status of Mu2e Solenoids
Michael Lammfor the Mu2e Project
Working Group Meeting
March 17, 2010
•Organization•Technical Progress•Cost and Schedule
2
Mu2e Goals• Measure the Rare Process: m- + N e- + N relative to m-
+ N(A,Z) n + N(A, X) – Goal: 4 orders of magnitude increase in sensitivity over previous
experimentsHow to do it:– Create a beam of high intensity, low momentum “in time” muons– Stop muons in aluminum target: form muonic atom– Turn experiment off for 700 nS to suppress “in time” background– Precisely measure mono-energetic electrons emitted from muon recoil from
an Aluminum stopping target
• Magnets role in Mu2e– Focus, momentum select and transport of m-
from primary target– Gradient field in transport to prevent out of time
other particles from reaching stopping target – Provide a uniform stable field for the final
captured electron spectrometer
m
105 MeV e-
Working Group Meeting 3March 17, 2010
Solenoid System
12206
25687
• Production Solenoid
8 GeV P• Transport Solenoid
• Graded field to collect conv. e- (2T1T)
• Uniform field for e- Spectrometer (1T)
e- Spectrometer ST
PT
CC
• 8 GeV P hit target. Reflect and focus p/m’s into muon transport
• Strong Axial Gradient Solenoid Field 5T2.5T
• Sign/momentum Selection• Negative Axial Gradient in S.S. to suppress
trapped particles ~0.2 T/m
• Detector Solenoid
Working Group Meeting 4March 17, 2010
Magnet Procurement StrategyFermilab will act as a “General Contractor”:• PS and DS will likely be built in industry
– Need to develop a strong conceptual design and technical specifications for vendors
– Final engineering design done by industry– Similar strategy for most detector solenoids
• TS will likely be designed/built “in house”– Cryostat, mechanical supports built by outside vendors– Coils wound in-house or industry depending on technology choice– Final assemble and test at Fermilab
• Solenoid task has responsibility for all interfaces– Significant magnet coupling between PS-TS and TS-DS– Tight mechanical interfaces– Cryoplant, power supplies, instrumentation…
Working Group Meeting 5March 17, 2010
Mu2e Functional and Interface Specifications for Solenoid Sub-system
PS
Building/ Mechanical
Cryoplant Powering Quench Prot./Instr.
Vacuum
Absorber
TargetCollimator
Beam Dump Beam DumpStopping Target
Tracker and Calorimeter
DS
Feedbox
TSn TSn TSn TSn
Denotes functional + interface spec responsibility
Iron Shielding
Iron Shielding
Proton Beamline
Denotes interface spec co-responsibility
Absorber
Working Group Meeting 6March 17, 2010
WBS Structure
WBS1.5 Mu2e Solenoid WBS1.5.1 Management1.5.2 Conceptual Design Report1.5.3 R&D Items and Design Studies1.5.4 Production Solenoid1.5.5 Transport Solenoid1.5.6 Detector Solenoid1.5.7 Cryogenic System1.5.8 Cryoplant and Infrastructure1.5.9 Power System1.5.10 Quench Protection System1.5.11 System Integration and Interfaces1.5.12 Tooling1.5.13 Installation1.5.14 Commissioning
Where we are now
Fabrication Phase
Install and Commission
Working Group Meeting 7March 17, 2010
Conceptual Design WBS Org Chart
• Most of team is in place
1.5.2.1 Production Solenoid ·Vadim Kashikhin Nikolai Andreev Igor Novitski V. Pronskikh R. Rabehl
1.5.2.3 Detector Solenoid·Ryuji Yamada Masayoshi Wake Bob Wands Group (PPD)
1.5.2.4 Cryogenic System ·Tom Nicol·Tom Peterson·Jeff Brandt
1.5.2.7 Quench Protection ·G. Ambrosio·M. Lamm
1.5.2.6 Power System ·Sandor Feher·Walt Jaskierney (PPD)
1.5.2.2 Transport Solenoid ·Giorgio Ambrosio Nikolai Andreev Dan Evbota Mau Lopes
1.5.2 Conceptual Design·Michael Lamm (L2)·Tom Page (L2 Project Engineer)
Mechanical Design Oversight Vadim KashikhinMagnetic Design Oversight Nikolai AndreevIntegration Rodger Bossert
1.5.2.5 Cryoplant Design ·Jay Theilacker Group (AD)
1.5.2.8 Tooling Concepts(Tom Page)
1.5.2.9 Installation Concepts(Tom Page)
Present Level of Effort• Engineering 5.0 FTE• Designers 1.5 FTE• Proj. Management 0.75• Off project Scientists 2.0
Significant input and collaboration from outside of Solenoid Task:
Rick ColemanPeter LimonJim MillerJim PoppProject Management…
Working Group Meeting 8March 17, 2010
Engineering Challenges
• PS/TS/DS: three separate magnet designs but…..• Coupled together magnetically
– Really ONE Big Magnet• Significant Forces (~100 Tons on end of DS from TS)• Tight physical tolerances
– Cold vs. Warm , with field excitation– Particularly with odd shaped TS
• Integration issues– It is our job to makes sure magnets built from different vendors,
fit together, produce the required magnetic field
Working Group Meeting 9March 17, 2010
MECO (BNL) vs. Mu2e Magnet Concept
Copper Bar
SSC cable
MECO Mu2e switches to… why?
Coils 96 Solenoid Rings Longer Solenoids Less Joints, Less Field Ripple, smaller conductor volume
SC Conductor SSC Excess Cable* New High Current Cable (PS/DS)
Less layers, smaller inductance: benefits cooling
and quench protection
Quench Stabilizer Copper Extruded Aluminum (PS/DS)Less nuclear heating, vendor
experience with modern detector solenoids
Cooling Scheme Bath Cooled (PS) and Conduction (TS/DS)
Conduction onlySimplify cryostat design.
Possible in PS with Al stab. and new cable
*100 km of cable lost between 2005-2008
Working Group Meeting 10March 17, 2010
Production Solenoid Challenges• Large Volume : Aperture (1.8 m), Length ~5
m • High field (5.6 T on NbTi) • Large Amount of Stored energy (100 MJ) • Asymmetric forces on ends (unlike HEP
detector solenoids)• 8 GeV Target in aperture produces 50 kW of
power. • Absorbers will intercept most beam energy
however• Could be 100 W energy distributed into
coils• Challenge for cooling• Possibility of radiation damage to
insulation and conductor
Field profile well matched to requirements
Working Group Meeting 11March 17, 2010
Progress on Several Fronts on PS Design• Simplified Coil Geometry (3 uniform wound
solenoid coils using same conductor x section) yet meets field longitudinal gradient requirements
• Superconductor cross section specified• Conceptual Design of Mechanical Structure for
radial support (hoop stress) • Winding, bussing and splice scenarios considered• Preliminary Radiation studies completed
• Insulation and structural damage• Conductor stabilizer degradation from atomic
defects• Initial proposal for cooling scheme • Quench protection studies to size aluminum
stabilizer
PS Coil Profile with iron Yoke
Design Concepts for PSPreload shell
Outer support tube
Pure Al layers (RRR>3000)
0.5mm fiberglass around cable
0.25mm fiberglass at each side of Al layer
0.5mm fiberglass at support tube
12
Vadim Kashikhin
23.9
MN
1
0.4
MN
1
0.9
MN
N. MokhovV. Pronskikh
Neutron Flux DensityMechanical Analysis
Structural Support Model
Magnetic Model
Coil and Insulation
13
Detector Solenoid
2 Tesla2.5 m Aperture5 meters long
Atlas Solenoid• Large Volume : Aperture (2 m), Length 11 m • Upstream: Axially graded field (2T1T)• Downstream: Uniform 0.1% 1 T field (similar to
ATLAS)• Large Amount of Stored energy (35 MJ) • Large asymmetric axial forces (unlike HEP
detector solenoids)
Design Status• Two concepts for Coil Geometry Considered
(which meet specs)• Started mechanical FEA analysis of coils (Wands)• Developing 3-D Solid Model to study interface
issues• Cryostat supports will likely be modeled after PS Solid Model DS End View
Working Group Meeting 14
5-Segment DS Coil Design
March 17, 2010
Iron yoke shapes the end field + is part of Cosmic Ray Veto
Field ProfileConductor Profile Wake/Yamada
Working Group Meeting 15March 17, 2010
Transport Solenoid Design from Meco • Meco Design has 60 solenoid rings• Divided into two cryostats• Gap in middle for P-bar and Vacuum Window• There is a collimator for momentum selection in center
region that cannot be adjusted• In order to get
desired field each coils has a unique amp-turns. Gap greatly complicates coil designs
Working Group Meeting 16March 17, 2010
Mu2e Ideas• Build center straight section as one removable piece
• Eliminates gap in center of SS• Collimator should be rotatable to allow passage of m+
for calibration (with minimal impact on magnets)• Can Toroid sections be built in simpler units?
Design Status• Very preliminary concept of SS design
which meets “negative gradient” spec.• Alignment tolerance study
completed (Lopes)• Feasibility study of toroid section
fabrication started
Working Group Meeting 17March 17, 2010
Coil Design Progress
Toroid Coil ConceptSS Coil Profile
Working Group Meeting 18March 17, 2010
Cryogenic Design
Cryogenic Distribution Boxes Function:• Supply liquid Helium
from cryoplant to magnet• Room Temperature to
Liquid Helium Power lead transition (power leads)
Other activities:• Magnet cryostat design• Thermal model for magnet cooling• Estimate heat loads and liquid
helium req. for operation and RTLHe cooldown
Working Group Meeting 19March 17, 2010
Cost Estimate• We are still working on the conceptual design so cost
estimation is not yet possible. As system components reach a mature conceptual design, the fabrication WBS levels will be filled in. Estimating schedule and resources / task will depend on the specific activity.
• Possible sources for “basis of estimates”• Our own experience with magnet fabrication
• Much of the APUL and CERN IR quad experience is relevant
• MECO WBS and Cost workbook, where applicable • We may hire consultants for specific processes• RFI may shed some light on fabrication process
Working Group Meeting 20March 17, 2010
Long/Short Term Schedule
Project Event Duration Completion
Bid process for final design 6 months 0.5 years
final design at industry 12 months 1.5 years
design reviews.. Approve. To proceed 6 months 2.0 years
Final assembly drawings 9 months 2.25 years
design and build tooling, order conductor 12 months 3 years
Build the coils (PS and DS) 18 months 4.5 years
Put into cryostat.. Test in cryostat 3 months 5 years
Ship to FNAL, Acceptance Tests 3 months 5.25 years
in place in mu2e hall 3 months 5.5 years
Install 6 months 6 years
commissioning tests 6 months 6.5 years
• Preliminary CD/Start RFI July 2010• Internal Reviews of CD Fall 2010• CDR Complete Jan 2011
First Pass at Long Term Schedule Relative to CD1 Approval
Working Group Meeting 21March 17, 2010
Conclusion
• Mu2e is an important “Intensity Frontier” experiment for this decade at Fermilab
– Fits well into lab program – Complements LHC program
• Substantial progress on solenoid conceptual design– Design team is largely in place– Short term goal is to complete CD by mid FY 2011– Detailed cost and schedule to follow – Solenoids likely to be on critical path throughout project