M. Sullivan for the PEP-II team Machine Advisory Committee Review October 25-27, 2006
description
Transcript of M. Sullivan for the PEP-II team Machine Advisory Committee Review October 25-27, 2006
1
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
M. Sullivan
for the PEP-II team
Machine Advisory Committee ReviewOctober 25-27, 2006
IR Vacuum Update
2
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Outline• Brief recap of last January’s presentation
– History– General Characteristics– NEG heating tests– Last January Conclusions
• Attempts to pin down the source– More NEG heating tests– Software– Hardware
• The Answer– What it was– Present fix– Future fix
3
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
History
• We started to notice a large number of beam aborts from high radiation levels from the detector about mid December of last year. In retrospect, we have identified events of this type as early as the beginning of Dec.
• At that time, we were more concerned about the fast dI/dt LER aborts and some of us thought that perhaps these BaBar aborts were a new manifestation of the fast dI/dt aborts.
• It wasn’t until Monday, the day after New Years, that we discovered we had very fast vacuum spikes somewhere near the detector on the LER upstream side whenever the detector aborted the beam due to high radiation levels.
4
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Some Characteristics• Very fast high pressure spikes. Difficult to see with 6 min history buffers.
• Seen in single ring for each beam but at much higher currents than colliding beams. Conclusion: either close by or inside shared beam pipe.
• Insensitive to orbit (+/- 2mm in Y and +/-8 mm in X at the ends of the support tube)
• Radiation levels from the LER beam are consistently higher than radiation levels from the HER beam
• Exhibits more bunch charge dependence than total current dependence
5
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Interaction Region Layout
LER HER7039 gauge
SIG11LER sensitive
2187 gauge
3044 pump
LER frangible link
Detector
7043 pump
8020 pump
3027 gauge
Support tube end bellows
3027 pump
NEG pump
Backward Q2 NEG
Forward Q2 NEG
6
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
NEG heating test
• In order to try to localize the source of the vacuum spikes we tried heating up some of the NEG pumps and recording the vacuum readings from the various gauges and pumps
• We decided to heat up the two NEG pumps closest to the IP. These are the two NEGs just outboard of the ends of the support tube
• We did this without beam and we did not try to regenerate the NEG pumps
7
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
List of Vacuum spikesThe list of vacuum aborts that we had started in January grew to over 200 entries by the 3rd week of March.
8
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Pressure and Background Ratios
Forward Q2 NEG
Backward Q2 NEG
HER radiation event
LER radiation event
9
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Conclusions of Last January• In December we started encountering, with increasing
frequency, beam aborts associated with high radiation levels in the detector
• It took us a while to understand that these aborts were a new problem and not an alternate manifestation of the instabilities we were already trying to identify
• We have identified the cause of these beam aborts to be due to fast vacuum spikes in the IR.
• All present information points to a region on the forward side of the detector and probably in the LER beam pipe or in the shared beam pipe.
• The most likely location is the forward side support tube end bellows
• The most likely initiation for the event is an arc
10
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
The Story Continued….• Throughout Jan.-Mar. we made several attempts to try to locate the source of
these vacuum spikes– More NEG heating tests with and without beam (the IR vacuum model has
been greatly improved)– We first took out a NEG pump and then later replaced a chamber in the
incoming LER beam pipe– RGA readings indicated a large burst of nitrogen when we had a vacuum
spike– We installed the ability to remotely make a gas burst into the beam pipe.
This told us we did not have an air leak. – The BaBar detector collaboration used the events taken by the detector
when these vacuum spikes occurred to try to locate the source. Many different analysis techniques were used: from timing differences to track reconstruction to neutron counting rates…
– We also analyzed timing differences between gas signals from the various gauges and pumps in the area
– There was an analysis of the shape of the gas pulse from the gauges and pumps
– I’m sure I have forgotten a few more…
11
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Average of 8 events seen in March
normalized to 2187 gauge
LER HER
10.6
100
LER frangible link
Detector
0.61
10.7
939
Support tube end bellows
NEG pump
Backward Q2 NEG
Forward Q2 NEG
0 0.95
12
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Side view of BaBarBackward Q1/Q2 bellows
Forward Q1/Q2 bellows
Forward Q2 chamber
13
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Heating up the forward Q2 NEGLuminosity went down when we added gas.
The decrease is noticeable at a pressure of about 30 nTorr
Traced to the HER vertical spot size increasing.
Luminosity restored as the pressure goes down.
This told us that the HER was sensitive to relatively small gas bursts
14
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
BaBar Analyses from Brian’s Talk
15
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
The Answer
• In late February we were looking at the Q1/Q2 bellows with a bore scope and trying to see if any of the tiles had come loose when it suddenly became clear that we had incorrectly designed the RF seals that are next to the tiles. The seals were touching the tiles instead of touching the Cu under the tiles.
• With this knowledge we made new RF seals and prepared for a ten day access starting on March 19
16
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Forward Q1/Q2 bellows section
Q1 side of bellows
17
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Close up of damage to the tiles
18
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
RF seal – note the bolt head
RF finger seen in borescope videos
19
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Close up of RF seal
20
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Another dark spot on another finger
21
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Dark spot corresponds to a pit on the tile
22
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Why was the failure located here?
• No real answers
• Something to do with the corners of the tiles?
• Something to do with the edges of the RF fingers?
• Perhaps a weak point in the tile? A crack?
23
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Picture of bellows before installation in 2002
This picture is a miracle!! The correct bellows section in the correct orientation!!!Thank you Scott!!
24
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
RF seal repositioned onto bellows
Tile damage is here
25
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Cu posts not brazed to the tile
26
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Present Fix• We designed and built a set new RF seals so that
they engage the Cu underneath the tiles
• We took out the bellows section from the other side of the detector and placed it in the location of the damaged bellows section
• We then reinstalled one of the Mk I bellows on the backward side of the detector. This side collects about half as much power as the forward side
• All locations had new RF seals in stalled
27
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
New Q1/Q2 Bellows RF Seal
• 3/6 - New RF Seal Plate submitted to MFD
• 3/3 - Prototype RF Seal made using existing SPEAR3 RF seal die and another existing die.
28
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
New RF seal – Compound J seal
29
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
New RF seal – Side away from Tiles
30
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
New RF seal – Close up of tile side
31
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Improved Design
• Current bellows in the forward side (MkII) can absorb 5-10 kW and is currently absorbing about 7 kW
• When we go to higher currents and shorter bunches we will absorb even more power
• Presently building a new design bellows (MkIII) that will absorb less direct power from the beam
• Plan to install the new design this down time
32
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Q1/Q2 Blws – New Design MkIII• New concept
developed – based on best
information available.
• Maximum Tile/slot length– ~2.4”
• Absorbing tiles are open to the convolutions– No additional tile
sets needed in bellows cavity.
• HER Arc Style Bellows – Spring– Stub– RF shieldPossibly reduce
further the travel and offset requirements to increase length.
33
IR VacuumM. Sullivan
MAC ReviewOct. 25-27, 2006
Summary• We finally tracked down the problem to a design flaw in how
the RF seal was engaged at the edge of the absorber tiles in the Q1/Q2 bellows section
• An arc track had developed on the surface of the tile. This explains why the beam current threshold came down initially and then stabilized.
• Once the problem was figured out, new RF seals were made and installed
• Since the repair, we have had NO unusual abort causing vacuum activity in this area
• We would like to thank all of the people who helped us with this tough problem – BaBar collaborators, engineers, technicians, machine shops, experts from other groups, etc.