DOE Review of FNAL Superconducting Magnet Program

1
DOE Review of FNAL Superconducting Magnet Program

• Welcome !
• Introduction
• HEPAP long range Plan for HEP
• Recommendations from April Internal Review
• Agenda
• Logistics

2
Introduction

• Fermilab is a single purpose Laboratory whose
  mission is High Energy Physics research.
• Superconducting Magnet Technology is one of the
  enabling technologies required by FNAL to build
  and maintain the accelerators necessary to
  accomplish this Mission.
• At FNAL, the Superconducting Magnet RD program
  is located in the Technical Division.

3
Introduction

• The Mission of the Technical Division at FNAL
  includes The development, design, fabrication
  or procurement, and testing of accelerator and
  detector components.
• The Superconducting Magnet RD Program in the
  Technical Division is intended to serve both the
  Divisions laboratory mission AND to serve the
  overall national long-range high energy physics
  plan (as outlined by HEPAP).

4
HEPAP Long Range Plan(Jan 2002 HEPAP Subpanel
Report)

• 1st Priority Exploit existing HEP facilities
• For FNAL TD support Tevatron Collider for Run
  II
• SC magnet repairs specialty magnets if required
• Next Support US participation in the LHC
• Now production of the 1st Generation IR quads.
  
• This is in progress. (tour)
• 1st generation quads are known to have limited
  lifetime due to radiation damage. (approx 6-7 yrs
  at full L )
• Long lead times ? must start soon on 2nd
  generation IR quads
• more radiation hard, higher instantaneous L.
• Developing these quads becomes an important part
  of our long range magnet RD Plan

5
HEPAP Long Range Plan

• VLHC
• Beyond the linear collider, a Very Large Hadron
  Collider(VLHC) is an important long-range
  objective for our field.
• The 1998 HEPAP Sub panel recommendedan expanded
  program of RD on cost reduction, enabling
  technologies, and accelerator physics issues for
  VLHC.
• Detailed specifications for the VLHC must wait
  for physics discoveries at the LHC.
• eg high field vs low field staging options

6
HEPAP Long Range PlanJan 2002 HEPAP Subpanel
Report

• since a VLHC is so central to the long-term
  goals of our field, we strongly support RD
  toward such a machine.
• Funding continue at the same level
• take a long-term perspective toward developing
  new technologies and techniques relevant to such
  a machine.

7
Recent Internal Review

• As a New Division head and in preparation for
  this review I requested an internal review of the
  Technical Divisions Superconducting magnet
  program. This review took place on April 25-26,
  2002.
• Excellent Committee J. Peoples (Chairman), S.
  Gourlay (LBNL), J. Strait (FNAL), S. Van Sciver
  (NHMFL), and P. Wanderer (BNL)
• A copy of their draft report has been included in
  your handouts.
• I will review briefly their findings and
  recommendations.

8
Findings and Recommendations from April Internal
Review

• Tevatron Maintenance and Spares
• Maintenance and spares program for Tevatron is
  effective
• Should do a more systematic assessment of the
  value of various Tevatron improvements like HTS
  leads and re-coolers for spool pieces
• Should complete ongoing spares and vulnerability
  assessment in collaboration with Beams Division
• LHC Program
• Positive about Fermilab Technical Divisions role
  in LHC IR Quad development and production
• Appropriate to begin RD for 2nd generation IR
  quads at this time because of long lead times for
  this development
• Collaboration with LBNL, BNL was working well and
  should continue for 2nd Generation IR quad program

9
Findings and Recommendations from April Internal
Review

• High Field Magnet RD
• Committee was generally positive about overall
  progress on Nb3Sn technology, design studies, cos
  q dipole program, common coil approach to
  dipoles, racetrack coils for fast turn around,
  etc.
• 47 contributions to conference proceedings and
  papers is and impressive output for just two and
  a half years but
• Fermilab Program has not benefited as much as it
  could from experience and current work of other
  magnet programs, in particular those of LBNL and
  BNL
• Materials RD and testing facilities
• Generally positive comments, superb
  infrastructure
• Development of Nb3Sn wire is a challenging and
  essential objective.. but
• Effort should be more closely integrated with the
  national program managed by the DOE office of
  Science

10
Findings and Recommendations from April Internal
Review

• Management and scope
• Magnet program in Tech Div has been effective
• Responsive to HEPAP recommendations
• Size and organization in TD is well adapted for
  the needs of Fermilab and the national super
  conducting magnet program
• Recommended that FNAL continue to support the
  Tevatron, High Field, and materials programs at
  the current level
• Recommended that FNAL commit to be a major
  participant in the LHC 2nd generation IR
  development
• Improve communications with other labs via
  mini-workshops
• Conduct reviews of model magnets (with advice
  from other labs)
• Division head should appoint an advisory
  committee
• We clearly are interested in the recommendations
  from this review as well, but already we have
  begun planning for changes as a result of this
  internal review

11
Response to Internal Review Recommendations

• The head of the Technical Division ( ie me ) will
  appoint an Superconducting Magnet Advisory
  Committee (SMAC) to monitor and evaluate progress
  on superconducting magnet technology in the
  Technical Division and provide advice to the
  Division Head.
• Representation also from LBNL, BNL, and perhaps
  NHMFL will help improve lab-to-lab communications
• Conduct design reviews of model magnets before
  construction
• Improve communications and information flow with
  other labs
• We will seek closer collaboration with the other
  labs on common issues. (eg splices ? work more
  closely with LBNL)
• We will plan to host one or more mini-workshops
  each year at FNAL on accelerator magnet
  technology.
• Plan to set up regular meetings with other labs
  both as part of the LHC 2nd generation quad
  effort and to use these meetings to exchange
  technology information of a more general nature.
• Again, we welcome your comments and
  recommendations

12
AGENDA
13
Logistics

• Lunch will be provided here
• Dinner tonight at TriBellas at 7 PM map will be
  provided
• PCs needed for report writing ? Printers ?
  John Konc
• Secretarial or travel assistance ?
  Margie Bruce
• Thanks again for helping with this review !