Agenda

1
Agenda
2
Early Involvement and Visibility

• To my knowledge getting safety involved at this
  stage is a Lab first.
• The primary reason to start now, rather than
  after more engineering, is to identify potential
  problems at a stage where corrective action is
  relatively inexpensive
• The timing of this first series of presentations
  is driven by the magnet procurement schedule,
  thus the goals of this meeting are to
• Familiarize the committees with MECO in general
  and the magnets in particular
• Obtain feedback from the committees that we can
  incorporate into the Request For Proposals for a
  commercial procurement

3
Some Caveats

• A necessary feature of early involvement is that
  many areas outside of the magnets have had little
  engineering development for lack of funds.
• It follows that
• In some cases we will present plans rather than
  designs
• We are not seeking a formal sign off at this
  stage. We simply want to build safety
  requirements into the RFP in parallel with the
  physics, engineering, QA, and financial
  requirements.
• If this process of early involvement proves
  fruitful, we will use it in other areas as they
  reach an appropriate level of maturity (i.e. a
  completed CDR in hand).

4
MECO Overview

• Michael Hebert
• UC Irvine
• MECO Magnet Safety Meeting
• BNL, June 3, 2003

5
A Four Order of Magnitude Improvement
1
The Sensitivity of Charged Lepton Flavor
Violation Searches by Year

• Goal reach a single event sensitivity of 2 ?
  10 17
• Effective mass reach is enormous, e.g. for
  leptoquark exchange

10-4
10-8
Sensitivity to Lepton Flavor Violation
?-N ? e- N ? ? e ? ? ? e e e- K0??
? e- K?? ??e-
10-12
MECO Goal
10-16
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
2000 2010
Year
6
MECO Collaboration

• Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow
• V. M. Lobashev, V. Matushka
• New York University
• R. M. Djilkibaev, A. Mincer,
  P. Nemethy, J. Sculli, A.N. Toropin
• Osaka University
• M. Aoki, Y. Kuno, A. Sato
• University of Pennsylvania
• W. Wales
• Syracuse University
• R. Holmes, P. Souder
• College of William and Mary
• M. Eckhause, J. Kane, R. Welsh

• Boston University
• J. Miller, B. L. Roberts, O. Rind
• Brookhaven National Laboratory
• K. Brown, M. Brennan, L. Jia, W.
  Marciano, W. Morse, Y.
  Semertzidis, P. Yamin
• University of California, Irvine
• M. Hebert, T. J. Liu, W. Molzon, J.
  Popp, V. Tumakov
• University of Houston
• E. V. Hungerford, K. A. Lan, L.
  S. Pinsky, J. Wilson
• University of Massachusetts, Amherst
• K. Kumar

7
MECO Project Organization
National Science Foundation RSVP Program Manager
Institutional Board
BNL ALD T. Kirk
Spokesperson W. Molzon
BNL Oversight Committee
Executive Committee
Project Manager M. Hebert
Project Manager Spokesperson
Project Office
Technical Board
ES H Officer W. Meng
Chief Mechanical Engineer
1.1 AGS Mods M. Brennan
1.2 Proton Beam K. Brown
Cost Schedule Manager
Chief Electrical Engineer
1.3 Target Shield TBD
1.4 Solenoids B. Smith
Quality Assurance Officer
1.5 Muon Beam W. Morse
1.6 Tracker E. Hungerford
1.7 Calorimeter J. Sculli
1.8 C R Shield J. Kane
More information in the MECO Project Management
Plan available at http//meco.ps.uci.edu
1.9 DAQ K. Kumar
1.10 Infrastructure TBD
8
Features of the Experiment

• 1000fold increase in m beam intensity over
  existing facilities
• High Z target for improved pion production
• Axially-graded 5 T solenoidal field to maximize
  pion capture

Superconducting Solenoids
Muon Beam
1 T
1 T
Calorimeter
2 T
Straw Tracker
Stopping Target Foils
Proton Beam

• Curved transport selects low momentum m-
• Muon stopping target in a 2 T axially-graded
  field to improve
  conversion e- acceptance
• High rate capability e- detectors in a constant 1
  T field

2.5 T
5 T
Pion Production Target
9
The MECO Magnets
The superconducting solenoids define the critical
path for MECO

• Very detailed CDR completed
• Complete 3D drawing package
• Technical Specification and SOW for commercial
  procurement being prepared
• Industrial manufacturability studies completed
• Interface engineering ongoing as funds allow

PS
TSu
TSd
DS

• 5 T maximum field
• 150 MJ stored energy
• Uses surplus SSC cable
• Within industry capabilities

• Draft RFP to be released at the end of this
  summer

10
Magnet Design Management Group

• MDMG advises the Solenoids Subsystem Manager
  during oversight of final design, construction,
  and installation of the magnets
• Chaired by Solenoid Subsystem Manager and
  Contracting Officers Technical Representative
  B. Smith
• A MECO physicist knowledgeable in the detailed
  physics requirements of the solenoid system W.
  Molzon
• A BNL physicist or engineer able to address
  interface, installation, and operational issues
  for the system on the AGS floor M. Iarocci
• MECO Project Manager (advisory) M. Hebert
• BNL AGS Liaison Engineer for MECO (advisory) D.
  Phillips
• BNL AGS Liaison Physicist and ESH Officer for
  MECO (advisory) W. Meng

11
The Primary Proton Beam

• Two bunches in the AGS at 180? (?
  1.35 ?s) with 20 Tp each (40 Tp
  total) to match m lifetime
  in stopping target
• Slow extraction over 0.5 s in lt 50 ns wide
  bunches at g 8 (p 7.5 GeV/c)
• 1.0 s cycle time
• Inter-bunch extinction better than 1109
• Hardware addition inside the AGS
• External RF Modulated Magnet

12
AGS Inter-Bunch Cleanup Hardware

• Principle Excite coherent vertical betatron
  resonance for beam outside the two bunches
• Hardware
• Strong AC dipole at 80 kHz
• Fast (100 ns) kickers cancel AC dipole at the
  bunches

13
Proton Transport Upstream

• RF Modulated Dipole
• Improves extinction diverting inter-bunch beam to
  separate beamline
• Parameters
• 10 cm gap
• 5 meter magnetic length (6 m total)
• Vacuum of order 10-6

• Thick Septum and Thin Septum Lambertson Magnets
• Primary beam passes undeflected
• Empty buckets further bent into extinction beam
  line
• This is the original B line layout, new A line
  layout later today

Pitching Magnet
Lambertsons
External Kicker
14
Proton Transport Downstream

• Equipment Protection
• PLC system interlocks beam for flexibility
• Beam loss monitors near PS
• Steering magnet monitors
• Collimator / thick beampipe

• Pitching Magnets
• Extinction Beamline
• Counters sum out of time beam as an extinction
  monitor
• Originally horizontal, considering vertical
  deflection with counters above or below final
  dipole

Proton Beam Dump
Production Target
Pitching Magnet
Quads
15
Production Region

• Primary beam strikes production target in the
  warm bore of the PS
• Cu and W heat and radiation shield protects
  superconducting PS coils

2.5 T
Proton Beam
5 T
Production Target
Heat Radiation Shield
16
Production Target Options

• Radiation-cooled
• Minimal material to absorb pions and reduce MECO
  sensitivity
• Significant engineering difficulties to overcome
• Water-cooled
• Modest engineering difficulties associated with
  handling coolant
• Physics concerns due to water jacket material
  absorbing pions
• Not a critical path system we can study the
  water-cooled option now and fall back if
  insurmountable difficulties are encountered
• Funding limits current effort to physicist
  studies in the lab
• Once we have engineering at the conceptual design
  level another briefing like this on the details
  of the target will be appropriate

17
Water-cooled Target

• Simulations indicate that 0.5 mm water layer
  thickness, 0.5 mm Ti containment wall thickness,
  and a 3.0 mm radius target rod cost only 5 of
  stopped muons
• Supply return pipes double as supports

Water Channel
Au or Pt Target
Ti Shell
Proton Beam
18
Target Hydrodynamic Simulations Test

• Hydrodynamic simulations (Masters ME thesis)
  demonstrate feasibility of the cooling scheme
• Flow rates verified in prototypes
• Induction heating tests have begun to verify
  temperatures

Target Center
Target Surface
Water
19
Target Installation Concept

• Keystoning in inner W ring captures supply
  return pipes
• Quick disconnect and flexible supply return
  connections
• Requires only two axes of translation easing
  automation for remote handling

Installation Close-up
Installed Position
Installed Detail
20
Transport Region

• Curved solenoid eliminates line-of-sight
  transport of photons and
  reduces neutron flux
• Curvature drift and four collimators sign and
  momentum select beam
• Thin (replaceable) window separates production
  and detector region vacua, conceptual design
  completed by AGS engineers

Thin anti-proton stopping window between center
collimators
2.1 T
Collimator
2.5 T
21
Detector Region

• Axially-graded field near stopping target to
  increase acceptance and reduce cosmic ray
  background
• Uniform field in spectrometer region to simplify
  momentum analysis
• Electron detectors downstream of target to reduce
  rates from g and neutrons

Muon Beam Stop
Electron Calorimeter
Straw Tracking Detector
Stopping Target Foils
1 T
1 T
2 T
22
Fringe Field Contours

• Result of OPERA calculations at UCI
• Field contours calculated without PS and DS pole
  pieces
• Overlaid here on original B Line layout

600 gauss contour
5 gauss contour
23
MECO Status Schedule

• Scientific, Technical, and Management Approval
• Approved by BNL and by the NSF through level of
  the Director
• Approved by the NSB as an MREFC Project
• Endorsed by the HEPAP Subpanel on long-range
  planning
• Numerous positive reviews of project structure,
  technical progress and readiness
• Funding
• Currently operating on RD funds from the NSF
• RSVP is not in the Presidents FY04 budget
• The NSF FY04 Budget Request states that RSVP
  construction will begin in FY06 with increasing
  RD support in the interim
• Efforts are ongoing in Congress to obtain
  additional Pre-Project Development money and/or
  move up the project start
• Schedule
• NSF funding profile shows a five-year
  construction plan completing in FY10 and a magnet
  design completed in FY05 on PPD funds

24
Items from the Pre-Meetings

• NSF requirements are basically that the local
  institutional requirements are met, i.e. if we
  meet BNL/DOE requirements they will be content
• QA Plans Vendor will be required to provide one
  for the magnet design, construction,
  installation, test. Similarly we will develop
  plans for other MECO systems along the lines of
  the BNL QA plan ala US ATLAS, although that
  effort awaits a QA Officer hire to gain momentum.
• NEPA and external structures? No new
  information there that I know of
• Lift requirements see Peter Titus talk
• Personnel exposure estimates have not been
  performed yet
• Beam loss monitoring system see Kevin Browns
  talk
• Rad waste mass and activation calculations have
  not been performed yet.

25
Administrative Epilogue

• MECO Information
• Copies of the talks will be posted on the MECO
  web site
• The MIT CDR for the solenoids and a small, but
  growing, list of Reference Design Documents are
  also publicly available on the site providing
  some additional parameter and requirements
  details.
• Feedback from Safety Committees
• We would like to get guidance on specific
  sections of the BNL safety docs that should be
  included in the RFP package
• We need your notes, suggestions, and concerns in
  written form for massaging into the RFP package
• Given the RFP schedule and the short decay
  constant of detailed memory, it would be best to
  get this by the end of this week
• The RFP package will be sent to committee chairs
  for review of the safety information in its final
  form