Status of Mu2e Solenoids Michael Lamm for the Mu2e Project Working Group Meeting March 17, 2010 Organization Technical Progress Cost and Schedule

Status of Mu2e Solenoids

Michael Lamm

for the Mu2e ProjectWorking 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

experiments

How 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


Magnet Procurement Strategy

Fermilab 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…


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


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


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…


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


MECO (BNL) vs. Mu2e Magnet Concept

Copper Bar

SSC cable

MECO Mu2e switches to… why?

Coils 96 Solenoid Rings Longer SolenoidsLess 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 SchemeBath 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


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


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


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


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


Coil Design Progress

Toroid Coil ConceptSS Coil Profile


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


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


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


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

Documents

Status of Mu2e Solenoids Michael Lamm for the Mu2e Project Working Group Meeting March 17, 2010 Organization Technical Progress Cost and Schedule