CLEX Two Beam Module lessons learned Two module
CLEX Two Beam Module lessons learned Ø Two module reviews in the past 2013 and 2015 Ø Review of experience with the CLEX module Ø Regular presentations and updates in workshops and project meetings Ø Numerous findings, clear recommendation work on a new generation module concept Steffen Döbert, BE-RF
CLEX Two Beam Module lessons learned Ø Superstructure SAS Ø Installation Ø Integration Ø Alignment Ø Experimental Program in CLEX Module review, June 22 nd , 2015 Steffen Döbert, BE-RF
CLEX experience review Summary of the CLEX module production and installation review Review held the 25. 2. 2015 in the module working group Presentation can be found at: http: //indico. cern. ch/event/366835/ • Superstructure SAS too complicated and fragile object, design issues identified SAS design needs to be reviewed fundamentally, taking into account rf design changes; will be followed by Nuria’s team • Improve and integrate cooling system design of modules, fix BPM to quad, how to align the structures longitudinally, better integration of subsystems ( BLM’s, cables other sensors) • Alignment issues identified, placing of fiducials, link between girder and cradles lost, motor failures, coupling of main and drive beam, BPM and Quad have o be linked improve integrated design, follow up with more measurements • Compact loads needed • General communication issues, more exchange needed between rf-design, mechanical design, experimental team, diagnostics and magnets. Several waveguides had the wrong phase
Final leak check CLEX Module experience review Localisation principale des fuites Attention au serrage des brides un gros risque de vriller les guides d’onde , risque de fissures en dessous des brides Prévoir un outillage pour bloquer les guide et WFM Serge Lebet
T 1 12 W T 8 D 11 8 24 SD W 11 12 V N W W G 1 SD N N. 8 T 2 VG SD SD KE V TD 4 1 1. K VG G K 2 2 W C 1. K 1. 8 N 2 TD 4 1 N N 2 S KE (20 2 2 W SD (K N 1 K 09 TD 4 1 DS VG EK KE (20 ) 24 2 W DV 1. 8 -S K 10 1 DS G T LA (20 ) TD 2 W DV 1. 8 N 1 C) 10 2 DS G T_ K (2 ) TD T 4 1 DV 1. 8 WF EK 010 2 D 2 2 W G T_ M (2 ) TD 4 R 4 1 DS 1. 8 WF N 1 010 24 05 2 W DV T_ M (20 ) R N 1 DS G 1 WF N 2 12 05 1 D. 8 M (20 ) N 2 W VG KE N 4 12 3 1 12 DS. 8 K N (20 ) D W V KE 1 12 SN DS G 1 K (20 ) V 3 DV. 8 N 2( 12) 70 G 1 KE 20 73. 8 K 12 5 KE (20 ) SN V V 3 (P DO K ( 12) S 70 I- 1 C 20 73 CE W 12 ) 5 SN V RN F V 3 (P DO ) ( N 1 70 SI- 2 C 20 73 CE W 12 TD ) 5 S V R F N 24 (P DO N) ( N 2 V 37 S 12 2 07 I-C 3 C 01 SM 2) W 3 E V 1 5 VD RN F N 80 (P ) 24 SI O 4 (20 3 _0 TD -C CW 12. 1 ER F ) C C TS R 26 N) N A C I ( 4 R B C C N 201 12 0 1 2 TD DD 5 W AVI (20 ) T 2 S IT Y 13 TD 6 C A-M H S (20 ) 2 LE o IC 13 TD 6 C X rika (20 ) N 2 LE 3 wa 13 TD 6 C X (20 ) N 26 LE 4( 13) X 20 (S C LE N 5 13 AS X (20 )(S ) N TD 6( 13) AS) 26 201 (SA C 3) S) C (S N AS 2( 20 ) 14 ) 24 TD History Chart 30 For the chart have 25 been used the maximum 20 measurements for each structure μm 15 10 5 0 1/19/2022 The data are set chronologically before bonding Eleni Zisopoulou BE-RF 5
First CLIC prototype module completely installed in CLEX Many compromises to use the module in CLEX !
RF network In the Lab. Needs fundamental redesign ! Less flanges, lower losses, lower centre of mass DB In CLEX PB DB 0 o 90 o A. Grudiev 90 0 o o PB PB 28 Jan. 2015 W. Farabolini - CLIC Workshop 7
CLEX Alignement Component Drive Beam PETS 1 DBQ 1 PETS 2 DBQ 2 Radial (μm) Error Vertical budget (μm) Enter 65 37 100 Exit -27 15 100 Enter -9 -4 20 Exit -2 19 20 Enter 28 78 100 Exit -51 58 100 Enter 8 11 20 Exit -3 -14 20 Component Main Beam AS 1 AS 2 Vivien Rude Error Vertical budget (μm) Enter -51 -59 10 Exit -161 -16 10 Enter -68 -85 10 Exit -139 -103 10 Component Main Beam AS 1 Radial (μm) Error Vertical budget (μm) Enter 29 -24 10 Exit -65 39 10 Enter 46 -8 10 Exit -10 -7 10
CLEX Roll (Main Beam) Roll (Drive Beam) +/- 2 μrad 120 theory 90 Roll (μrad) 560 530 500 30 theory 0 470 +/- 35 μrad 440 2015 -02 -25 W con ithou t The str ain ory ts -30 2014 -10 -10 2015 -02 -25 W con ithou str t Main The a Beam ory ints E ins nd ta of lat ion 2014 -10 -10 Drive Beam +/- 11 μrad 60 E ins nd ta of lat ion 590 Roll (μrad) 571 Without constraints End of installation Differe nce Roll (μrad) 0 Without constraints End of installation Differe nce Radial (μm) 232 573 449 124 μrad 0 0 56 56 μrad 0 173 64 μm Vertical (μm) 237 Radial (μm) 43 43 μm 1 1 μm 0 0 0 Vertical (μm) 0 2 2 μm
CLEX constraints Ceiling Vacuum Netwo Waveguide Support Constraints due to : • Connection to the waveguide • Connection to the vacuum network • Support
Experimental program for the CLEX module List of ideas Ø Two beam acceleration, rf signal consistency, power transfer, acceleration, phasing, breakdown handling, … Ø Alignment studies, with and w/o beam, girder coupling, beam based alignment using WFM and BPM data, perturbation by accelerator noise, precision , reproducibility, fiducialisation, reliability Ø BPM studies, resolution, performance Ø Wake Field Monitor studies, electronics, resolution Ø Temperature management, control flow rates, temperatures, measure changes in beam environment Ø Find, understand possibly solve shortfalls of present systems These studies have not been completed !
Conclusions Ø Huge piece of work but finally successfully installed Ø Very valuable experience because much closer to the real requirements, vacuum, integration into a real machine, real rf structures which need right phase and calibration Ø A big step towards a realistic module even if it is quite different then the CDR module Ø First results with beam and from alignment confirm the importance of that module
List of changes and improvements for the next generation CLIC module Some documentation exist already: See Module review, lessons learned review CLEX installation, Critical item compendium Ø Let’s assume we go away from a tolerance based design to a adjustable design: Enough evidence found in existing module experience Necessary Improvements: § Support of rf structures and PETS: adjustability, two point support, longitudinal adjustability, fixations, alignment references § Vacuum system: separate or manifold, number of pumps, mechanical design of system (force free), cost ? § Coupling between girders: Need to be solved if we stay with independent girders, not good enough right now § Phasing of the structures: No clear tolerances and strategy, probably needs to be designed into the module § BPM fixation in DB Quad: New mechanical concept needed, couple fix or adjust, depends on PACMAN as well, current solution insufficient § Cooling system integration: system has to be designed in from the beginning. Too many pipes right now
List of changes and improvements for the next generation CLIC module Necessary Improvements: § Articulation point, girder support and regulations: Simply not practical in the current design, should we keep it or better independent girders § WPS supports and reference to girder: Reference get’s lost in current design and setup, integration with girder needed New features or concepts investigated: § § § § New girder design, made of cast concrete, one piece including cradle and WPS How about putting WPS on object which should be aligned ? RF-unit, numbers? One support for both beams, less movers, less sensors Longer support, less movers, less sensors DB- Quad support separate, beam dynamics requirements Relative orientation of the two beams Vacuum sectors New waveguide system, can we simplify, do we need the hybrid (save one load ) Thermal handling of the module, operating temperature vs alignment temperature Compensate with water cooling Breakdown response in terms of temperature management Tunnel cooling and temperature stabilisation overall New force free vacuum system design New waveguide concept, no choke mode flange
List of changes and improvements for the next generation CLIC module RF-unit: Currently double PETS + 2 superstructures, no flanges, is this really feasible, reasonable ? SAS-design: Mechanical design of outer part should be driven by module requirements: Support interfaces, deformability, alignment features, simplify vacuum and water cooling interfaces, Integrate double feed coupler to have only one rf flange, can we integrate high power load as well. High power load needs urgent validation in any case. Superstructure concept, valid ? , How long can we go Structure straightness not validated 4 x this!!
Some visionary sketches from the module crew Alex, Markus, Petri
More detailed analysis is needed, large potential for improvements Alex, Antti
How could a new concept look like ? Not worked out yet, more a design goal q Precise pre-alignment in the tunnel after transport, laser tracker (PACMAN) q Steel girder with WPS support integrated, adjustable supports for SAS Stiffness and vibration considerations, likely less costly q Introduce shorter vacuum sectors, 900 m unrealistic q Rough pre-alignment and assembly on surface in dedicated facility, ‘clean area’. Main point of quality control and acceptance test, likely at CERN q Produce, measure, test, fiducialise components, Quads, PETS*, SAS* possibly already integrated in a module (PACMAN) q Rf high power test would be best on assembled module, how ? Define better rf-unit q Re design structures , PETS and waveguide system for future assembly into the modules q Integrate vacuum system and cooling system
Conclusions Ø A large number of shortfalls/mistakes or possible improvements have been identified in the past Many related to integration of module components and manufacturability of the module but significant beam dynamics requirements are missing as well Ø New concepts have been studied and a vision of a new module is shaping up Ø Up to know we built PETS, Accelerating structures, cooling systems, vacuum systems, waveguide systems for single structure high power tests. Very little has been done towards a full module integration
High Power system: Maybe most specific to CLIC, high power handling, thermal stability, efficiency Waveguide system: Relevant for all projects, compact, low loss, assembly friendly, cost, phasing, stability Cooling and vacuum: Relevant for most projects, cost assembly, performance, integration Supporting system: Relevant for all projects, small cost, Has to meet beam dynamics requirements Emittance preservation All parts can be worked on separately but each time we combine we gain a lot towards a real CLIC module
References Ø Module reviews: https: //indico. cern. ch/category/5216/ Ø Module meetings: https: //indico. cern. ch/category/2630/ Ø LAB activities summary 2015 -2018, EDMS 2054219 Ø Critical design items, EDMS 2086287 Ø R&D since CDR, EDMS 2054199 Ø Thermal behavior of XBOX structure, EDMS 2086457 Ø Thermal tunnel studies, EDMS 2224093
- Slides: 21