Meeting 5 October 2017

From Cuawiki
Revision as of 14:56, 6 October 2017 by Hornt (talk | contribs) (Created page with "PRESENTATIONS [https://wiki.jlab.org/cuawiki/images/4/40/Magnet-2_for_CPS.pdf Magnet Design] NOTES * Discussion of magnet updates ::* Previously make projections with toy...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

PRESENTATIONS

Magnet Design


NOTES

  • Discussion of magnet updates
  • Previously make projections with toy model, but in real magnet have coil and other things to take into account - this is addressed here
  • New design has shaped/flared field - allows to go to higher field (integrated Bdl is 1 T-m)
  • Shorter magnet
  • note: typically define magnet length through edges of magnetic field, coils may be longer - details have to be studied in simulation
  • originally had 2 T-m, now caps are small and put in copper core --> smaller field
  • Change materials for better heat conductivity (shield heat) - realistic materials
  • energy deposition decreases with distance - after 20 cm trajectory entirely in material (copper)
  • if conductivity was the only aspect and if volume is small, one may consider silver as central absorber - higher Z and better conductivity
  • Initial calculations show very small bend angle, so expect no significant focusing effects, but need to check in simulation
  • Discussion about not limiting design power to 30 kW to make a more uniform design with Hall A/C and Hall D
  • What is the max power limit for the Hall A/C design? - try to estimate
  • Discussion about safety factors that may come up in a readiness review
  • Handling of internal activation in context of decommissioning
  • Try to estimate after implementing the new materials - could compare CPS internal activation with that of beam dump


  • Discussion of readiness review and funding
  • Condition for experiment approval from PAC45 is to prove that design works at estimated price and show that this achieves a certain photon intensity
  • To achieve this, need to confirm/show feasibility of conceptual design and document CPS - time estimate is 6-9 months
  • Next is an internal review by the lab that needs to be scheduled with B. McKeown (can be documents, presentations or both)
  • One possible funding option is MRI program - need to look in more detail at precedents


  • CPS Collaboration Meeting
  • Will be in week of January 22 together with NPS Collaboration Meeting
  • Some talk suggestions: Magnet Concept, Rotatable Target Update, Additional Science ideas
  • Please send additional talk topic to hornt@cua.edu by 19 October
  • Also aim for having a talk on Status of CPS integrated into Hall A/C meeting taking place in the same week


HOMEWORK

  • Implement design into simulation and address questions
  • Power deposition
  • Prompt radiation
  • Activation
  • Other details
  • Start CPS documentation in context of readiness review
  • Estimate of max power limit for the Hall A/C design and comparison of internal CPS activation to that of beam dump