Conceptual Design of 20 T Hybrid Accelerator Dipole Magnets
Hybrid magnets are currently under consideration as an economically viable option towards 20 T dipole magnets for next generation of particle accelerators. In these magnets, High Temperature Superconducting (HTS) materials are used in the high field part of the coil with so-called "insert coils...
Saved in:
Published in | IEEE transactions on applied superconductivity Vol. 33; no. 5; pp. 1 - 7 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
New York
IEEE
01.08.2023
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Hybrid magnets are currently under consideration as an economically viable option towards 20 T dipole magnets for next generation of particle accelerators. In these magnets, High Temperature Superconducting (HTS) materials are used in the high field part of the coil with so-called "insert coils", and Low Temperature Superconductors (LTS) like Nb 3 Sn and Nb-Ti superconductors are used in the lower field region with so-called "outsert coils". The attractiveness of the hybrid option lays on the fact that, on the one hand, the 20 T field level is beyond the Nb 3 Sn practical limits of 15-16 T for accelerator magnets and can be achieved only via HTS materials; on the other hand, the high cost of HTS superconductors compared to LTS superconductors makes it advantageous exploring a hybrid approach, where the HTS portion of the coil is minimized. We present in this paper an overview of different design options aimed at generating 20 T field in a 50 mm clear aperture. The coil layouts investigated include the Cos-theta design (CT), with its variations to reduce the conductor peak stress, namely the Canted Cos-theta design (CCT) and the Stress Management Cos-theta design (SMCT), and, in addition, the Block-type design (BL) including a form of stress management and the Common-Coil design (CC). Results from a magnetic and mechanical analysis are discussed, with particular focus on the comparison between the different options regarding quantity of superconducting material, field quality, conductor peak stress, and quench protection. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | FERMILAB-PUB-22-856-TD; arXiv:2302.04940 AC02-07CH11359; SC0012704; AC02-05CH11231 USDOE Office of Science (SC), High Energy Physics (HEP) |
ISSN: | 1051-8223 1558-2515 |
DOI: | 10.1109/TASC.2023.3250382 |