Transcript Nuhn_EM_vs_PM_Quads_28_Jun_2004r2.ppt

Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Electromagnetic vs. Permanent Magnet
Quadrupoles
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
June 28, 2004
Pros for designs
NLC Prototype (30 being produced for Orion)
LCLS Design
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Permanent Magnet vs. Electromagnetic Quadrupoles
Pros of Permanent Magnet Quadrupoles
Reduced cost (No plumbing, no power supplies and cabling)
Reduced space requirements
Sufficient for baseline design
Not subject to power supply failures or instabilities.
(Low gradients would amplify trajectory error amplitudes)
Pros of Electromagnetic Quadrupoles
Allows to measure beam kicks due to quadruple offsets after
Beam Based Alignment Procedure to
as additional measure to verify BBA
as means to track field errors.
Allow for inclusion of dipole trim windings for fine control of
quad center
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
NCL Quadrupole (Isometric Draft)
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
NLC Quadrupole (Isometric View)
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
NCL Quadrupole (Front View)
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
SLAC Electrical Discharge Machine (EDM)
Used like jig saw but producing smooth
surfaces.
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
NLC Quadrupole (Measurement Bench Arrangement)
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
NLC Prototype Quadrupole
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
NLC Prototype Quadrupole (Side View)
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
NLC Prototype Quadruple (Rear View)
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
SLAC EM Quad Design (Carl Rago)
The NLC Electric Quad was designed a number of years ago attempting
to demonstrate that a 20% change in field, during beam based alignment,
would produce a magnetic center shift of less than 1 micron. This has
been repeatedly demonstrated by this prototype near maximum field. At
lower operating fields the center shift increases with a 20% change but
remains under 2 microns.
This quad is in competition with Fermilab’s development of an adjustable
permanent magnet which I believe has yet to reach the design goal but is
making significant progress. [Might be too weak for the LCLS]
This prototype was also designed to address manufacturing and
reliability improvements suggested to the standard SLAC quad design.
The changes included:
EDM profiling of a monolithic core assembly
High current ‘quick disconnect’ electrical terminals
Round copper conductor with ‘quick wound’ racetrack coils
I believe that this design concept can be successfully adjusted to the
needs of the Undulator. The design and prototype was produced for
about 11K$. In a quantity of 30 this should be a very cost effective
component.
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Undulator Electromagnetic Quad Isometric View
Extend of larger radius windings can be
reduced.
Including 1 trim winding on each quadrant for
additional dipole correction, equivalent to 16
microns displacement.
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Electromagnetic Quad Design Specifications ( Carl Rago)
r
kGdL
(Max)
kGdL
(Min)
Effective Length
B'
(Max)
Bp
(Max)
Amp-Turns
Coil-Turns
Layers
Conductor
Ideal Current
Core Efficiency
Real Current
m
T
T
cm
T/m
kG
AT
Turns
(Max)
Each
A
%
A
0.005
3
3
13.200
22.7
1.136
226.1
6
2
0.25 Rd
37.7
98.00%
38.4
0.005
3
3
6.050
49.6
2.479
493.2
6
2
0.25 Rd
82.2
98.00%
83.9
0.005
3.6
3
6.050
59.5
2.975
591.9
6
2
0.25 Rd
98.6
98.00%
100.7
0.005
3.6
3
5.050
71.3
3.564
709.1
17
2
0.25 Rd
41.7
98.00%
42.6
0.005
9
3
6.050
148.8
7.438
1479.7
6
2
0.25 Rd
246.6
98.00%
251.7
0.005
9
3
5.050
178.2
8.911
1772.8
17
2
0.25 Rd
104.3
98.00%
106.4
MTL ?
Resistance per ft conductor
Resistance per Magnet
in
Ohms
Ohms
23.838
0.00023852
0.01137
18.563
0.00023852
0.00886
18.563
0.00023852
0.00886
18.779
0.00023852
0.02538
18.563
0.00023852
0.00886
18.779
0.00023852
0.02538
1023.44
2232.96
2679.56
1133.00
6698.89
2832.50
V
V
V
0.44
3.43
3.87
0.74
7.49
8.23
0.89
8.99
9.88
1.08
3.80
4.88
2.23
22.46
24.69
2.70
9.50
12.20
W
W
kW
16.8
132.0
0.1
62.3
628.1
0.7
89.7
904.5
1.0
46.0
161.7
0.2
560.8
5653.2
6.2
287.4
1010.7
1.3
(Max)
Current Density
Voltage Drop Magnet (Max)
Voltage Drop Cable (Max)
Total Voltage
Power Magnet (Max)
Power Cables (Max)
Total Power (Max)
A/in2
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Conclusions
Going from permanent magnet to electromagnetic
quads appears feasible.
Needs cost estimate and refined design.
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]
Linac Coherent Light Source
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
End of Presentation
Undulator Meeting, June 28 - 29, 2004
EM vs. PM Quads
Heinz-Dieter Nuhn, SLAC / LCLS
[email protected]