Energy Energy deposition in Q0 deposition in Q0

Elena Wildner

19/04/0719/04/07

StrategyStrategy

1. Define a TAS to protect the Q02. Optics: *= 0.25m3. Calculate, with some optimization of the

TAS layout, the heat deposition in the Q0 magnets

4. Check experiment

Point 4 still to be treated

Layout of scenario Layout of scenario

Q01

13 m 3 m

IP Tas

3.0 m

Q02

3.5 m

9 m

IP

Modeling the QuadsModeling the Quads

FeHe

Cu

4.5

Fe

10.5

28.0

30.0

16.5

P. Limon, G. KirbyP. Limon, G. Kirby

Define the efficient TAS openingDefine the efficient TAS opening

mmmmdD 6.12)3(2)5.725.9(1.1min

Beam sep.

Spurious disp. orbit

Beam size

Mech. tol. and alignment

Depends on

beating orbit

L= 10 E 35

-dependence of opening -dependence of opening

*IP TAS opening for small beta function:

more debris are intercepted by shield

TAS opening for large beta function: less debris are intercepted by shield

Debris cones

Beta function

ModelModel

JT

JF

JN

JD

IP

TAS (Cu)

1 m 2 m

r=10 cm r=1.6 cm

R=25 cm

TAS Aperture, 3 cases chosen TAS Aperture, 3 cases chosen

Small Large

Staggered

mW/cm3

TAS opening: resultsTAS opening: results

Deposition [W] Q01 Q02 TAS

Small Aperture 123 151 1518

Large Aperture 821 377 253

Staggered Aperture

114 150 1582

Back to experiment, JD hole Back to experiment, JD hole and Flangeand Flange

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10Energy1

10

100

1000

10000

All

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10Energy

0.1

1

10

100

1000

All

Has to be evaluated with complete ATLAS model.

Scoring in the specific sensitive ATLAS regions!

Energy deposition in coilEnergy deposition in coilLarge Aperture Small Aperture

No Field

in mW/cm3

Aim: < 39 mW/cm3 Margin to be added

With and without magnetic fieldWith and without magnetic field

mW/cm3

Liner, 2 cm, iron Liner, 2 cm, iron mW/cm3

Necessary opening in Q0 for beam (diameter): 3.5 cmWith liner the opening is 5 cm

The TAS ApertureThe TAS Aperture

Power Deposition [W] Q01 Q02 TAS

Staggered Aperture (liner) 198 (100) 331 (150) 1530

Staggered Aperture, liner & solenoid field

197 330 1550

Staggered Aperture, no liner

114 150 1582

Without and with LinerWithout and with Liner

mW/cm3

Power in the cables: Q01Power in the cables: Q01

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

10

20

30

40

50InnerCable:Blue, Next:Red, Yellow, Green

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

10

20

30

40

50

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

10

20

30

40

50

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

10

20

30

40

50

Binning as cable: 4 radial bins (1 per cable): 15 mm 600 azimuthal bins: ~ 1 mm wide

The longitudinal bins are 10 cm long.

mW/cm3

5 x 300 particles !

Power in the cables: Q02Power in the cables: Q02

mW/cm3

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

10

20

30

40

50InnerCable:Blue, Next:Red, Yellow, Green

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

10

20

30

40

50

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

10

20

30

40

50

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

10

20

30

40

50

Binning as cable: 4 radial bins (1 per cable): 15 mm 600 azimuthal bins: ~ 1 mm wide

The longitudinal bins are 10 cm long.

10-20 cm

Inner cable of Q02Inner cable of Q02

10

20

30

200

400

600

0

20

40

60

80

0

20

40

60

80

mW/cm3

FLUKA model of ATLAS: JTFLUKA model of ATLAS: JT

TAS to be inserted

Summary 1Summary 1Staggered TAS with a liner in the Q0 seems to

be a reasonable solution: – magnet developers can continue

Power deposition in the coil will be below 39 mW/cm3 (limit for quench) with some optimization. Margin needed.

Solenoid field: no significant impactCrossing angle: no significant impactTungsten TAS: no significant impact

Summary 2Summary 2

Shorter TAS (1 m) put at same distance (back edge) and 2 m closer to IP with adapted opening: more heat in magnet

After optimization, more particles in FLUKA runs for better statistics necessary

ATLAS model to be run with their scoring in their regions of interest. Compare:

Model without new TASModel with new TAS