The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme 7 Capacities Specific Programme, Grant Agreement 284404.

HL-LHC and (V)HE-LHC accelerator designs and plans

Lucio RossiCERN

@ CLIC workshop, 28 January 2013

2

Content• Recap of the HL-LHC project• Scope• Technology• Plan

• HE-LHC• Scope• Technology• VE-LHC variant• Plan 28

Jan2

013

3

Two Reasons for upgrade: Performance & Technical (Consolidation)

Shut down to fix interconnects and overcome energy limitation (LHC incident of Sept 2008) and R2E Shut down

to overcome beam intensity limitation (Injectors, collimation and more…)

Full upgrade

28Ja

n201

3

4

Final goal : 3000 fb-1 by 2030’s…5 1034 levelled lumi (25 1034 virtual peak lumi)140 pile up (average) 3 fb-1 per day60% of efficiency250 fb-1 /year300 fb-1/year as «ultimate»

Full project

Just continue improvingperformance through vigorous consolidation

28Ja

n201

3

5

Official Beam Parameters (see PLC by O.Bruning)

Parameter nominal 25ns 50ns

N 1.15E+11 2.2E+11 3.5E+11nb 2808 2808 1404beam current [A] 0.58 1.12 0.89

x-ing angle [mrad] 300 590 590

beam separation [s] 10 12.5 11.4b* [m] 0.55 0.15 0.15en [mm] 3.75 2.5 3.0eL [eVs] 2.51 2.5 2.5

energy spread 1.20E-04 1.20E-04 1.20E-04

bunch length [m] 7.50E-02 7.50E-02 7.50E-02IBS horizontal [h] 80 -> 106 20.0 20.7IBS longitudinal [h] 61 -> 60 15.8 13.2Piwinski parameter 0.68 3.1 2.9geom. reduction 0.83 0.35 0.33beam-beam / IP 3.10E-03 3.9E-03 5.0E-03Peak Luminosity 1 1034 7.4 1034 8.5 1034

Virtual Luminosity 1.2 1034 21 1034 26 1034

(Leveled to 5 1034 cm-2 s-1

and 2.5 1034 cm-2 s-

1)

Events / crossing (peak & leveled L) 19 210 475 140 140

6.2 1014 and 4.9 1014

p/beam

sufficient room for leveling (with Crab Cavities)

Virtual luminosity (25ns) ofL = 7.4 / 0.35 1034 cm-2 s-1

= 21 1034 cm-2 s-1 (‘k’ = 5)

Virtual luminosity (50ns) ofL = 8.5 / 0.33 1034 cm-2 s-1

= 26 1034 cm-2 s-1 (‘k’ = 10)

28 28Ja

n201

3

6

1.2 km of new equipment in the LHC…

6.5 kW@4.5K cryoplant

2 x 18 kW @4.5K cryoplants for IRs

28Ja

n201

3

7

Technical Progress (incomplete …) - 2•WP3• LARP: HQ (1m-120 mm) and LQ3 (3.6 m -90 mm), very positive.

• Aperture 150 mm, 4.5+4.5 m long, W-shielded, more rad-dam limited than heat depo limited, new plan for LARP+CERN

• EU (CEA, INFN)+ JP

Target:200 T/m gradient at 1.9 K

3.3 m coils90 mm aperture

LQS03: 208 T/m at 4.6 K 210 T/m at 1.9 K1st quench: 86% s.s. limit

HQ: 120 mm; 12 T passed

28Ja

n201

3

8

Technical Progress (incomplete …) - 3•WP4• First CC (from UK) arrived at CERN, first test done in Nov 2012!

• ODU-SLAC CC also very near, BNL under way

• Interest from Fermilab for cryomodule design and proto

From virtual to actual reality!

28Ja

n201

3

9

HiLumi: Two branches (with overlap)• PIC - Performance Improving

Consolidation upgrade (1000 fb-1)• IR quad change (rad. Damage,

enhanced cooling)• Cryogenics (P4, IP4,IP5)

separation Arc -RF and IR(?)• Enhanced Collimation (11T?)• SC links (in part) and rad.

Mitigation (ALARA)• QPS and Machine Prot.• Kickers • Interlock system

• FP- Full Performance upgrade (3000 fb-1)

• Crab Cavities• HB feedback system (SPS)• Advanced collimation

systems• E-lens (?)• SC links (all)• R2E and remote handling

for 3000 fb-1 28Ja

n201

3

10

Preliminary budget estimate

Improving Consolidation

Full performance

Total HL-LHC

Mat. (MCHF) 476 360 836Pers. (MCHF) 182 31 213Pers. (FTE-y) 910 160 1070TOT (MCHF) 658 391 1,049

28Ja

n201

3

11

What SC can offer more to accelrators?

28Ja

n201

3

12

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

13

Parameters list of LHC upgrades(O. Dominguez and F. Zimmermann)

28Ja

n201

3

14

28Ja

n201

3

Need to be addressed

15

Technology: dipoles vs solenoids in time, a comparison

Factor 2 due toCoil «efficiency» and to force-stress management

BNLLBNL

CERNUT

LBNLLBNL

Use of HTS

28Ja

n201

3

16

Main dipoles: waht is needed? What has been achieved?

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

Looking at performance offered by practical SC, considering tunnel size and basic engineering (forces, stresses, energy) the practical limits is around 20 T. Such a challenge is similar to a 40 T solenoid (-C)

Nb-Ti operating dipoles; Nb3Sn block test dipoles Nb3Sn cos test dipoles

LBNL, with large boreSpring 2013

17

The « new » materials1 – Nb3Sn

• Recent 23.4 T (1 GHz) NMR Magnet for spectroscopy in Nb3Sn (and Nb-Ti). 15-

20 tons/year for NMR and HF solenoids. Experimental MRI is taking off

• ITER: 500 t in 2010-2015! It is comparable to LHC!

• HEP ITD (Internal Tin Diffusion):• High Jc., 3xJc ITER• Large filament (50 µm), large coupling

current...• Cost is 5 times LHC Nb-Ti

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

0.7 mm, 108/127 stack RRP from Oxford OST

1 mm, 192 tubes PIT from Bruker EAS

18

The « new » materials: HTSBi-2212

• DOE program 2009-11 in USA let to a factor 2 gain. We need another 50% and more uniformity, eliminating porosity and leakage

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

• Round wire, isotropous and suitable to cabling!

• HEP only users (good < 20K and for compact cable)

• Big issue: very low strain resistance, brittle

• Production ~ 0,

• cost ~ 2-5 times Nb3Sn (Ag stabilized)

19

The « new » materials: HTSYBCO

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

• Tape of 0.1-0.2 mm x 4-10 mm : difficult for compact (>85%) cables

• Current is EXCELENT but serious issue is the anisotropy;

• >90% of world effort on HTS are on YBCO! Great synergy with all community

• Cost : today is 10 times Nb3Sn, target is same price: components not expensive,

process difficult to be industrialize at low cost

• FP7 Eucard is developing EU Ybco

20

New (old) approach to cabling suitable for tapes

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

• An old type of cabling (Roebel) suitable for tapes has been recently rivisited (Karlsruhe, New Research Industry NZ)

• Here a first 2 m long test cable done at CERN

21

Magnet shapes (field optimization & structure)

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

Cos Coil

Block Coil

Canted Solenoid Coil

Hybrid Cos Block Coil

P. McIntyre

S. Caspi

22

First consistent cross section, 2010 WG and Malta (fits our tunnel)

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

0

20

40

60

80

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

y (m

m)

x (mm)

HTS

HTS

Nb3Snlow j

Nb-Ti

Nb-TiNb3Snlow j

Nb3Snlow j

Nb3Snhigh j

Nb3Snhigh j

Nb3Snhigh j

Nb3Snhigh j

Material N. turns Coil fraction Peak field Joverall (A/mm2) Nb-Ti 41 27% 8 380 Nb3Sn (high Jc) 55 37% 13 380 Nb3Sn (Low Jc) 30 20% 15 190 HTS 24 16% 20.5 380

Magnet design: 40 mm bore (depends on injection energy: > 1 Tev)Very challenging but feasable: 300 mm inter-beam; anticoils to reduce fluxApproximately 2.5 times more SC than LHC: 3000 tonnes!Multiple powering in the same magnet for FQ (and more sectioning for energy)Certainly only a first attempt: cos and other shapes will be also investigated

L. Rossi and E. Todesco

23

The EU programThe chance for HTS

• Last FP7 call in Nov2011: EuCARD2 (2013-16)

• Approved; under negotiation for signature

• WP-10Future Magnets• Assessment of YBCO and Bi-2212 for HE-LHC

• Development of 10 kA class HTS compact cable

• Prototype of a 5 T real accelerator quality magnet

• Test the coil in a 13-15 T background field to proof 18-20 T principle with 10 kA HTS conductor.

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

24

LHC, the construction timeline: a 25 year old project

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

25

What is the possibile for HE-LHC?

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

US 16 T small dipole

EuCARD 13 T large dipole+

18 T small insert

US 13 T Quads FP7-HiLumi

US NbSn-HTS development

15-20 T dip final proto &

Industrialization

Final delivery Magnets HE-LHC

HE-LHC start-up

HE-LHC preliminary

study

HTS for HE-LHC:

yes.or.no

LARP 11 T long quadEuCARD

R&D

Industry contracts, start

constrution

US basic programs and

LARP R&DEU FP6-CARE-NED

EuCARD2 full bore

dipole HTS

15-20 T R&D dipole

models and prototypes

Full profit of the HiLumi program

26

HE-LHC cost: rough evalution based on LHC• LHC (machine): about 3 BCHF, 1.7 BCHF for the magnet

system,

• HE-LHC: The non-magnet is same 1.5 BCHF

• Magnet System Nb3Sn (26 TeV c.o.m.) : 3.5 BCHF (for a

total of 5 BCHF for the whole machine)• Magnet System HTS (33 TeV c.o.m) : 5 BCHF

(for a total of 6.5 BCHF for the whole machine)• The above cost are for a new machine, like LHC. Economy

could be made because Cryo and other systems need only renovation; • however one should consider the cost of LHC removal) 28

Jan2

013

LRossi@CLIC

27

Other important issues (among many …)• Synchrotron radiation

• 15 to 30 times!

• The best is to use a window given by vacuum stability at around 50-60 K (gain a factor 15 in cryopower removal!)

• First study on beam impedance seems positive but to be verified carefully

• Use of HTS coating on beam screen?

• Beam in & out

• Both injection and beam dump region are constraints.

• Ideally one would need twice stronger kickers

• Beam dumps seems feasable by increasing rise time from 3 to 5s

• Injection would strongly benefit form stronger kickers otherwise a new lay-out is needed (different with or wihtout experiments) 28

Jan2

013

LRossi@CLIC

28

Beyond Linac4: possible SC SPS?

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

HE-LHC

Linac4

SPS+

New injectors optimization

29

Alternate scenarios for Injectors• Keeping SPS (and its transfer lines: 6 km!): Low Energy Ring in

LHC tunnel with superferric Pipetron magnets (W. Foster).

• Work done by Fermilab (H. Piekarz), see Malta workshop proc.

• cost of LER is lower than SC-SPS option.

• Integration is difficult but no show-stoppers

28Ja

n201

3

LRossi@CLIC

30

Steps for Potential Large Projects beyond the LHC infrastructure: the 47-80 km long ring tunnel• Several proposals exist for major projects at CERN to complement

/ succeed the LHC• CLIC, HE-LHC, TLEP, LHeC etc…

• Steps to undertake before starting construction planning• Determine requirements for the project

• Create basic civil engineering drawings

• Perform siting studies

• Perform feasibility studies to determine optimal location• Optimal is most feasible from civil engineering point of view

• Select optimal location

• Optimize civil engineering drawings according to identified optimal location

J. Osborne

28Ja

n201

3

31

Steps for Potential Projects

• Steps to undertake before starting construction planning• Determine requirements for the project • Depends on physics requirements

• Basic civil engineering drawings• Layout machine, dimensions etc.

• Siting studies• Identify several potential locations for the

project based on • Layout, infrastructure requirements,

accessibility etc.

“Jura”80km

“Lakeside”80km

“Lakeside”47km

LHC

Molasse Limestone

Salè

ve M

ount

ain

Jura

Mou

ntain

s

Lake

Gen

eva

Example: potential locations 80km tunnel project

J. Osborne

28Ja

n201

3

32

Steps for Potential Projects

• Steps to undertake before starting construction planning• Perform feasibility studies to determine optimal location• Optimal is most feasible from civil engineering point of view

• Feasibility studies include:• Geotechnical challenges: identification, risk analysis and studies for possible

solutions• Environmental impacts: identification of potential impacts, check French and

Swiss regulations • This is not the Environmental Impact Assessment study itself, but a preliminary study

Hazard

Water Ingress

FaultingExpansive Anhydrite

Ground Stress

Degree of support

Effect on Urban Areas

Technical Risk

Total

Option

Lake 47km 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 10

Lake 80km 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 12

Jura 80km 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 19 Low

High

Feasibility

Example: geotechnical and environmental feasibility matrix

J. Osborne

28Ja

n201

3

33

Steps for Potential Projects

• Steps to undertake before starting construction planning• Feasibility studies include:• Geotechnical challenges: identification, risk analysis and studies for possible

solutions• Environmental impacts: identification of potential impacts, check French and

Swiss regulations• Tunneling & Construction: identify challenges, preferred construction

methodologies etc.• Costs: perform a preliminary costing studies

Example excavation techniques: ‘Cut and Cover’ Tunnel Boring Machine Special works such as ‘groundfreezing’

J. Osborne

28Ja

n201

3

34

Steps for Potential Projects

• Steps to undertake before starting construction planning• Select optimal site

• Optimize civil engineering drawings according to identified optimal location

Example: ILC CE optimized drawings

J. Osborne

28Ja

n201

3

35

Injection scheme: SC-SPSVHE-LHC is to expensive (50 MW power for cryo)

28Ja

n201

3

36

Possible arrangement in VHE-LHC tunnel

From H. Piekarz Malta Prooc. Pag. 101

30 mm V gap50 mm H gapBin = 0.5 TBextr = 1.5 T

28Ja

n201

3

37

Possible VHE-LHC with a LER suitable also for e+-e- collision (and VLHeC) – 100 MW sr

Advantage: cheap like resistive magnetsCentral gap could be shortcircuitedMagnet separated: provides electron 50 GeV and proton 5 TeV/beamLimited cryopower (HTS) in shadow of SCRF cavitiesSc cables developed already for SC links (HiLumi) and power application.SR taken at 300 K: is possible??? 28

Jan2

013

38

In principle a plan for all (?) is possible (for LHC exploitation): 2018-2020 is critical time

• According to Physics needs, the 80 km tunnel can:• Be alternative to HE-LHC• Or complementary to HE-LHC • Accomodating at negligible extra-cost TLEP and VLHeC (this last at

50GeV/5TeV and 350 GeV/50-100 TeV)• Skipping TLEP/VLHeC may shorten 5-10 years VHE-LHC

1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055

Proto & Industr.

Physics LHC

Stuty-R&D

Proto & Industr.

Proto & Industr.

Physics

Install LER

Physics TLEP LHeC

Physics VHE

Study. R&D

VHE- LHC +

leptons

HL- LHC

HE- LHC

Constr. VHE

Constr & Install.

Constr. LER

Tunnel construction

Constr. and Install. VHE

Study - R&D

Constr. & Install.

Constructions and Installation

Physics

reuse HE-LHCmagnets?

28Ja

n201

3

The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme 7 Capacities Specific Programme, Grant Agreement 284404.

HL-LHC is the test bed (on real scale) of new advanced technology: 11T and 13 T Magnets, CCs, new collimation

concepts, new diagnostics, SC Links, all working on a 1 GJ beam… (vacuum, cryogenics, kickers, protections…)

Synergy with CLIC?

For the HE-LHC today is the right moment to … invent … but the challenge in the next 6-8 years is to make a coherent R&D and Study with common tools of evaluation and same approach to common systems, infrastructure, power. Study on VHE-LHC not yet started beyond initial concept.