TEVATRON LCW COOLING RECONFIGURATION ANALYSIS

TEVATRON DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITY

MEETING 2

Abhishek Deshpande

10/2011

1

OVERVIEW

A0’s flow requirements

Flexible scenario that accommodates for HX cleaning; redundancy

Scenarios simulated: Scenario A: 2 pumps at E4 and 2 pumps at F1 Scenario B: 2 pumps at F1 and 2 at F2

Scenario results

Reconfiguration of F1 and F2 service buildings to have 2 pumps

Conclusion2

A0’S FLOW REQUIREMENTS FINALIZED

3

Spoke to John Reid about A0’s flow requirements

John stated that the current flows are higher than what is actually necessary

John also said that the 4” LCW header at A0 would need a minimum of 60 GPM @ 75 Psig

One of the major loads: 3.9 GHz Klystron, that needs 25 GPM of flow, most probably will be moved to NML

Also, the heat load at A0 is very small: 24 kW

FLEXIBLE SCENARIO THAT ACCOMMODATES FOR HX CLEANING

4

Pump 1: OnPump 2: Off

Pump 1: OnPump 2: Off

Pump 1: OffPump 2: Off

Pump 1: OnPump 2: On

Pump 1: OnPump 2: On

Pump 1: OffPump 2: Off

Service building 1

Service building 1

Service building 1

Service building 2

Service building 2

Service building 2

Normal operation

Service building 1’s HX being

cleaned

Service building 2’s HX being

cleaned

5

Scenarios simulated:Scenario A:2 pumps at E4 and 2 pumps at F1

All the flow rate requirements of the loads leading up to F4 enclosure were satisfied, however, if 2 pumps were being operated at E4 while F1’s HX was being cleaned, the following flows were predicted at F4 and A0:

F4 service building summary for ( 2 Pumps at E4)Loads breakdown Pessimistic Optimistic Most likely Min Req.

Total flow through magnets, (gal/min) 36.32 50.85 43.58 56.68Total flow through power supplies, (gal/min) 18.94 26.52 22.73 40Total flow through MR chokes, (gal/min) 4.14 5.80 4.97 12Flow to CUB, (gal/min) 35.30 49.42 42.36 75Total flow for service building, (gal/min) 94.69 132.57 113.63 108.68

A0 load summary ( 2 Pumps at E4)Loads breakdown Pessimistic Optimistic Most likely Min Req.

A0L1 23.50 32.89 28.19 35A0L2 4.98 6.97 5.98 N/AA0L3 0.29 0.41 0.35 N/AA0L4 0.29 0.41 0.35 N/AA0L5 1.66 2.32 1.99 N/AA0L6 2.53 3.54 3.03 N/AA0L7 6.02 8.43 7.23 N/A

Total flow to A0, (gal/min) 39.27 54.98 47.13 60.00

6

Scenarios simulated:Scenario B: 2 pumps at F1 and 2 pumps at F2

All the flow rate requirements of the loads leading up to F4 enclosure were satisfied, and F4 and A0 flows are as below:

F4 service building summary for ( One pump at F1 and one pump at F2)Loads breakdown Pessimistic Optimistic Most likely Min Req.

Total flow through magnets, (gal/min) 92.15 129.01 110.58 56.68Total flow through power supplies, (gal/min) 42.25 59.15 50.70 40Total flow through MR chokes, (gal/min) 9.20 12.87 11.04 12Flow to CUB, (gal/min) 76.24 106.74 91.49 75Total flow for service building, (gal/min) 219.83 307.76 263.80 108.68

A0 load summary ( One pump at F1 and one pump at F2)Loads breakdown Pessimistic Optimistic Most likely Min Req.

A0L1 50.74 71.03 60.88 35A0L2 10.76 15.07 12.92 N/AA0L3 0.63 0.88 0.76 N/AA0L4 0.63 0.88 0.76 N/AA0L5 3.58 5.02 4.30 N/AA0L6 5.46 7.65 6.56 N/AA0L7 13.01 18.21 15.61 N/A

Total flow to A0, (gal/min) 84.82 118.74 101.78 60.00

Normal operation, one pump at F1 and one at F2

7

Scenarios simulated:Scenario B: 2 pumps at F1 and 2 pumps at F2

F4 service building summary for ( 2 Pumps at F2)

Loads breakdown Pessimistic OptimisticMost likely Min Req.

Total flow through magnets, (gal/min) 87.39 122.35 104.87 56.68Total flow through power supplies, (gal/min) 40.13 56.19 48.16 40Total flow through MR chokes, (gal/min) 8.74 12.23 10.48 12Flow to CUB, (gal/min) 72.50 101.51 87.00 75Total flow for service building, (gal/min) 208.76 292.27 250.52 108.68

A0 load summary ( 2 Pumps at F2)

Loads breakdown Pessimistic OptimisticMost likely Min Req.

A0L1 48.24 67.53 57.89 35A0L2 10.23 14.33 12.28 N/AA0L3 0.60 0.84 0.72 N/AA0L4 0.60 0.84 0.72 N/AA0L5 3.41 4.77 4.09 N/AA0L6 5.19 7.27 6.23 N/AA0L7 12.37 17.32 14.84 N/A

Total flow to A0, (gal/min) 80.64 112.89 96.77 60.00

F1 service building’s HX being cleaned, 2 pumps running at F2:

8

Scenarios simulated:Scenario B: 2 pumps at F1 and 2 pumps at F2

F2 service building’s HX being cleaned, 2 pumps running at F1:

F4 service building summary for ( Two pumps running at F1)Loads breakdown Pessimistic Optimistic Most likely Min Req.

Total flow through magnets, (gal/min) 70.83 99.17 85.00 56.68Total flow through power supplies, (gal/min) 29.80 41.72 35.76 40Total flow through MR chokes, (gal/min) 6.48 9.07 7.78 12Flow to CUB, (gal/min) 54.28 75.99 65.14 75Total flow for service building, (gal/min) 161.39 225.95 193.67 108.68

A0 load summary ( Two pumps running at F1)Loads breakdown Pessimistic Optimistic Most likely Min Req.

A0L1 36.06 50.49 43.28 35A0L2 7.65 10.71 9.18 N/AA0L3 0.45 0.63 0.54 N/AA0L4 0.45 0.63 0.54 N/AA0L5 2.55 3.56 3.06 N/AA0L6 3.88 5.43 4.66 N/AA0L7 9.25 12.95 11.10 N/A

Total flow to A0, (gal/min) 60.28 84.40 72.34 60.00

RECONFIGURATION OF F1 AND F2 SERVICE BUILDINGS TO HAVE 2 PUMPS

Unfortunately, F1 and F2 service buildings have only one pump per building:

9

Continued..

10

Continued..

RECONFIGURATION OF F1 AND F2 SERVICE BUILDINGS TO HAVE 2 PUMPS

11

In order to get a fairly good estimate of installing another pump, I am currently working with SEA contractor Jose Rangel Jose said: All the connecting piping would be stainless steel and not aluminum To install one pump, and re-pipe the headers such that two pumps would run in parallel, it would require:

Two contractors working full time Total number of 6” welds= 20-25

RECONFIGURATION OF F1 AND F2 SERVICE BUILDINGS TO HAVE 2 PUMPS

12

The completed service building would look something like:

Continued..

RECONFIGURATION OF F1 AND F2 SERVICE BUILDINGS TO HAVE 2 PUMPS

13

RECONFIGURATION OF F1 AND F2 SERVICE BUILDINGS TO HAVE 2 PUMPS

14

Importance of redundancy: According to Paul Czarapata, redundancy is not as

important as it was during Tevatron’s Run II However, it is desirable because the following

experiments would be expecting beam: The neutrino program 2 test beams at Meson Special projects

It costs close to $60,000/hr to run the accelerator complex, and if there is no redundancy the accelerator complex would have to be down for 3-4 days

Thus, a comparatively small investment to accommodate redundancy would prove to be fruitful from an operations perspective

RECONFIGURATION OF F1 AND F2 SERVICE BUILDINGS TO HAVE 2 PUMPS

15

CONCLUSIONS

Using E4 service building would not provide sufficient flow to all the loads in the MR remnant

Having 2 pumps at F1 and F2 would work for us

Redundancy is not as important as it was, but its still desirable

Future plans: There is talk about using the A and B Tevatron sectors for a

Plasma Accelerator project There is also talk about IARC (Illinois Accelerator Research

Center) using Tevatron’s cooling system water If these plans get approval, then Scenario B (2 pumps at F1

and F2) will not work

16

Questions, comments..