take worst case

11
Take worst case MKI.D5R8.B2:TEMP_MAGNET_DOWN 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 08/03/2011 00:00 22/03/2011 00:00 05/04/2011 00:00 19/04/2011 00:00 03/05/2011 00:00 17/05/2011 00:00 31/05/2011 00:00 14/06/2011 00:00 28/06/2011 00:00 12/07/2011 00:00 26/07/2011 00:00 09/08/2011 00:00 23/08/2011 00:00 06/09/2011 00:00 20/09/2011 00:00 04/10/2011 00:00 18/10/2011 00:00 01/11/2011 00:00 T[C]

Upload: yahto

Post on 05-Jan-2016

26 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Take worst case. MKI.D5R8.B2:TEMP_MAGNET_DOWN. Analysis of heating. Took all fills (to end September) where in stable beams for longer than 10 h Considered only time from top of ramp onwards Used number of bunches, average bunch current and bunch length as inputs - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Take worst case

Take worst case

MKI.D5R8.B2:TEMP_MAGNET_DOWN

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

08/0

3/20

11 0

0:00

22/0

3/20

11 0

0:00

05/0

4/20

11 0

0:00

19/0

4/20

11 0

0:00

03/0

5/20

11 0

0:00

17/0

5/20

11 0

0:00

31/0

5/20

11 0

0:00

14/0

6/20

11 0

0:00

28/0

6/20

11 0

0:00

12/0

7/20

11 0

0:00

26/0

7/20

11 0

0:00

09/0

8/20

11 0

0:00

23/0

8/20

11 0

0:00

06/0

9/20

11 0

0:00

20/0

9/20

11 0

0:00

04/1

0/20

11 0

0:00

18/1

0/20

11 0

0:00

01/1

1/20

11 0

0:00

T [C

]

Page 2: Take worst case

Analysis of heating

• Took all fills (to end September) where in stable beams for longer than 10 h

• Considered only time from top of ramp onwards• Used number of bunches, average bunch current and

bunch length as inputs• Fitted initial heating rate (~linear) over first 2 hours

as measure of power in• Used cooling after beam off for measure of power

out

Page 3: Take worst case

Analysis (to end September)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2x 10

14

Fill

p+

Total intensity

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

x 10-9

Fill

s

Bunch length

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800

2

4

6

8

10

12

14x 10

10

Fill

Inte

nsity

p+

Bunch intensity

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 800

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Fill

Rat

e in

firs

t 2 h

(de

g/h)

Heating rate

Page 4: Take worst case

Model including cooling• Semi-empirical model makes reasonable predictions

– Replicates cooling after about 12 h– Assuming heating from beam power ( Nb, Ib^2, 1/Lb^2), cooling from

radiation ( DT^4) and from conduction ( DT)

0.00E+00

2.00E+13

4.00E+13

6.00E+13

8.00E+13

1.00E+14

1.20E+14

1.40E+14

1.60E+14

1.80E+14

2.00E+14

324

326

328

330

332

334

336

21:36:00 00:00:00 02:24:00 04:48:00 07:12:00 09:36:00 12:00:00 14:24:00 16:48:00 19:12:00

MKI.D5R8.B2:TEMP_MAGNET_DOWN

fit

LHC.BCTFR.A6R4.B2:BEAM_INTENSITY

Page 5: Take worst case

Cooling coefficients

• Used cooldowns at technical stops or MDs

295

300

305

310

315

320

325

330

12:00:00 0:00:00 12:00:00 0:00:00 12:00:00 0:00:00 12:00:00

Page 6: Take worst case

Outlook for 2012

315

320

325

330

335

340

345

350

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00

Tem

p [K

]

Time [h]

50 ns spacing

1.0e11

2.0e11

1.5e11

315

320

325

330

335

340

345

350

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00

Tem

p [K

]

Time [h]

25 ns spacing

0.8e11

1.4e11

1.1e11

2600 bunches

Page 7: Take worst case

Longer-term behaviour• Saturation of temperature after a few fills

– Assumed 15 h coast, 4h turnaround (to 3.5 TeV)

0.00E+00

1.00E+14

2.00E+14

3.00E+14

4.00E+14

5.00E+14

6.00E+14

7.00E+14

8.00E+14

9.00E+14

1.00E+15

315

320

325

330

335

340

345

350

0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 132 144 156 168

Inte

nsit

y [p

+]

Tem

p [K

]

Time [h]

50 ns, 1.6e11 per bunch

Page 8: Take worst case

0.00E+00

1.00E+14

2.00E+14

3.00E+14

4.00E+14

5.00E+14

6.00E+14

7.00E+14

8.00E+14

9.00E+14

1.00E+15

330

332

334

336

338

340

342

344

346

348

70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80

Inte

nsit

y [p

+]

Tem

p [K

]

Time [h]

Temperature at injection• Cooling at about 3 deg per hour

– Cool to ‘interlock’ level after less than 1 h after dump– Cool to 334 K (61 C) after 2 h

50 ns, 1.6e11 per bunch

Page 9: Take worst case

0.00E+00

1.00E+14

2.00E+14

3.00E+14

4.00E+14

5.00E+14

6.00E+14

7.00E+14

8.00E+14

9.00E+14

1.00E+15

330

332

334

336

338

340

342

344

346

348

70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80

Inte

nsit

y [p

+]

Tem

p [K

]

Time [h]

Temperature at injection• With 2e11 in 50 ns might be in trouble

– 2 h to cool to interlock limit– 4 h to reach 334 K (61 C)

50 ns, 2.0e11 per bunch

Page 10: Take worst case

0.00E+00

1.00E+14

2.00E+14

3.00E+14

4.00E+14

5.00E+14

6.00E+14

7.00E+14

8.00E+14

9.00E+14

1.00E+15

330

332

334

336

338

340

342

344

346

348

70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80

Inte

nsit

y [p

+]

Tem

p [K

]

Time [h]

Looks better for 25 ns• Cooling at about 3 deg per hour

– Cool to ‘interlock’ level after less than 1 h after dump– Cool to 334 K (61 C) after 2 h

50 ns, 1.6e11 per bunch

Page 11: Take worst case

Conclusions• Worse for 2012 if push 50 ns intensity

– Might affect operation at 2e11 per bunch

• 25 ns seems to have more margin – looks OK for 1.1e11 per bunch and 2600 b