Conventional Facilities Status S Dixon PIP-II Management Meeting - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
conventional facilities status
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Conventional Facilities Status S Dixon PIP-II Management Meeting - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 18, 2023 336 likes •649 views

Conventional Facilities Status S Dixon PIP-II Management Meeting 02 September 2016 Thanks Alessandro Vivoli, Anindya Chakravarty, Anthony F Leveling, Arkadiy L Klebaner Beau F. Harrison, Curtis M. Baffes, David E Johnson, David W Peterson Don

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Conventional Facilities Status

S Dixon PIP-II Management Meeting 02 September 2016

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Thanks

Alessandro Vivoli, Anindya Chakravarty, Anthony F Leveling, Arkadiy L Klebaner Beau F. Harrison, Curtis M. Baffes, David E Johnson, David W Peterson Don Cossairt, Donald V Mitchell, Emil Huedem, Fernanda G Garcia Jerry R Leibfritz, Jerzy Czajkowski, John E Anderson Jr, Luisella Lari Matthew Quinn, Maurice Ball, Paul Derwent, Ralph J Pasquinelli Ronald Jedziniak, Thomas W. Lackowski; Todd M Sullivan Valeri A Lebedev, William A Pellico

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Agenda

  • Siting
  • Enclosures/Buildings
  • Cooling
  • What’s Next

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Agenda

  • Siting
  • Enclosures/Buildings
  • Cooling
  • What’s Next

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

4

Goal: Document the spatial and infrastructure requirements for the PIP-II conventional facilities to support CD-1.

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Where We Started

02SEP16 5

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status
slide-6
SLIDE 6

Key Plan

02SEP16 6

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status
slide-7
SLIDE 7

Siting

02SEP16 7

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Updated wetlands from 2016 delineation (increase from 2010)

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Siting – Future Expansion

02SEP16 8

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status
slide-9
SLIDE 9

PIP-II Campus Plan

02SEP16 9

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Cryo Plant Utility Building Linac and Linac Gallery Transport Enclosure (with Beam Absorber)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Plan

02SEP16 10

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Ion Source HWR RFQ

Staging Area

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Building Section at Front End

02SEP16 11

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Ion Source HWR RFQ Loading Dock Staging Area

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Preliminary Shielding Considerations

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

12

6’ 17.5’ 7.5’ 18.5’ 18.5’

(transport line and absorber)

Preliminary Shielding Depths shown below. Further analysis required, especially at the Booster.

Thanks to D. Cossairt, T. Leveling and M. Quinn

Used the 10W/m curve for the conceptual design

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Typical Section – Linac Enclosure

02SEP16 13

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

RF Zone Cryo Zone LCW Zone 1’-10” Aisle 1’-10” Aisle

Thanks to C. Baffes, J. Leibfritz, R. Pasquinelli and M. Ball

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Plan at Linac Gallery (Coax)

02SEP16 14

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Only RF Amplifiers racks shown

SSR1 SSR2 SSR2 SSR2 SSR2 SSR2 SSR2 SSR2 SSR1

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Section at Coax

02SEP16 15

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Coax at Top of Racks Arrangement Still Needs Shielding Analysis For Control and Power Cables

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Plan at Linac Gallery (Waveguides)

02SEP16 16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Staggered RF Amplifers

LB650 LB650 LB650 LB650 LB650 LB650 LB650 LB650 LB650 LB650 LB650 HB650 HB650

Only RF Amplifiers racks shown

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Section at Waveguide

02SEP16 17

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Waveguides at Top of Racks Arrangement Still Needs Shielding Analysis For Control and Power Cables

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Transport Line/Main Ring Crossing

02SEP16 18

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

In Progress

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Transport Line Connection at Booster

02SEP16 19

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

In Progress

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Cryo Plant

02SEP16 20

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Thanks to A. Klebaner and A. Chakravarty

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Cryo Plant Cooling Requirements

  • Water Requirements

– 1,200 – 1,500 gpm flow

  • Pond System

– Chemical characteristics met by Pond system; – Solids content characteristics NOT met by Pond system; – No Pond - ~$500-$700k per acre;

  • ICW System

– Chemical characteristics met by existing ICW system; – Solids content characteristics NOT met by ICW system; – Sampling ICW;

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

21

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Cryo Plant – Water Quality Requirements

02SEP16 22

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

Thanks to A. Klebaner and A. Chakravarty

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Cryo Plant – Water Quality Test Stand

02SEP16 23

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

BZero Compressor Building

  • Installed as part of the Mu2e Cryo

work for CDF;

  • Installed test ports to sample the ICW

before and after the strainer;

  • Includes a Adams strainer with

“standard” slot sizes (baseline);

  • Two month rental of a Lakos strainer to

reduce the solids;

  • Replacement filter elements in Adams

strainer with smaller slot size;

  • Arranged for FESS/O water testing

service to increase the testing to include solids;

  • Scheduled testing on same duration as

CUB;

  • Compare strainer options with water

quality requirements.

Strainer

Port for Rental Strainer Port for Rental Strainer

slide-24
SLIDE 24

PM vs. CW Considerations

  • Driven by duty factor of the equipment

– 15% for Pulsed Mode – 100% for Continuous Wave Mode

  • Common For Both Modes

– Physical arrangement of heat producing equipment; – Electrical power supply (not usage); – Conventional Facilities handles the heat load to air (HLA);

  • Difference is Primarily Cooling

– 5.0 mw in pulsed mode; – 10.5 mw in continuous wave mode;

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

PM vs. CW Considerations - Cooling

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

25

Heat Loads Pulsed Mode (MW) Continuous Wave Mode (MW) Low Conductivity Water (LCW) 1.65 7.07 Cryoplant Cooling (Cryo) 3.4 3.4 Total (MW) 5.05 10.47

Industrial Cooling Water (ICW) Cooling Ponds (PW) Towers (close) Towers (open)

Pulsed Mode

MW to GPM Conversion 682.79 MW to Acres Conversion 800 kw/acre

LCW 1,125 gpm LCW 1.98acres LCW 1.0towers LCW 1.0towers Cryo 1,400 gpm @17 Fdt Cryo 4.08acres Cryo 2.0towers Cryo 1.0towers 2,525 gpm 6.06acres 3.00towers 2.00towers exclude standby exclude standby

CW Mode

MW to GPM Conversion 682.79 MW to Acres Conversion 800 kw/acre

LCW 4,827 gpm LCW 8.48acres LCW 4.0towers LCW 2.0towers Cryo 1,400 gpm @17 Fdt Cryo 4.08acres Cryo 2.0towers Cryo 1.0towers 6,227 gpm 12.56acres 6.00towers 3.00towers exclude standby exclude standby

Other Considerations Other Considerations Other Considerations Other Considerations Strainers, Drought Conditions Strainers, Heat Exchangers, Treatment Heat Exchangers, Treatment, Make Up Heat Exchangers, Treatment, Make Up Drought Conditions Building Costs Building Costs

Note: 1,400 gpm is the highest flow currently available from the existing ICW system

Thanks to E. Huedem

slide-26
SLIDE 26

PM vs. CW Considerations - Cooling

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

26

Heat Loads Pulsed Mode (MW) Continuous Wave Mode (MW) Low Conductivity Water (LCW) 1.65 7.07 Cryoplant Cooling (Cryo) 3.4 3.4 Total (MW) 5.05 10.47

Industrial Cooling Water (ICW) Cooling Ponds (PW) Towers (close) Towers (open)

Pulsed Mode

MW to GPM Conversion 682.79 MW to Acres Conversion 800kw/acre

LCW 1,125 gpm LCW 1.98acres LCW 1.0towers LCW 1.0towers Cryo 1,400 gpm @17 Fdt Cryo 4.08acres Cryo 2.0towers Cryo 1.0towers 2,525 gpm 6.06acres 3.00towers 2.00towers exclude standby exclude standby

CW Mode

MW to GPM Conversion 682.79 MW to Acres Conversion 800kw/acre

LCW 4,827 gpm LCW 8.48acres LCW 4.0towers LCW 2.0towers Cryo 1,400 gpm @17 Fdt Cryo 4.08acres Cryo 2.0towers Cryo 1.0towers 6,227 gpm 12.56acres 6.00towers 3.00towers exclude standby exclude standby

Other Considerations Other Considerations Other Considerations Other Considerations Strainers, Drought Conditions Strainers, Heat Exchangers, Treatment Heat Exchangers, Treatment, Make Up Heat Exchangers, Treatment, Make Up Drought Conditions Building Costs Building Costs

Note: 1,400 gpm is the highest flow currently available from the existing ICW system

Thanks to E. Huedem

Basis for Estimate

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Cooling Design Approach

  • Goal: Modular approach that allows for efficient operation in

both modes;

  • Pulsed Mode

– Heat Load to Air (HLA): Utilize chilled water from existing CUB for equipment cooling (this utilizes the available headroom at CUB); – LCW: (1) Cooling tower – Cryo: (2) Cooling towers

  • Continuous Wave Mode

– Heat Load to Air (HLA): Install a chilled water loop to supplement the pulsed mode system with (2) cooling towers; – LCW: Add (1) Cooling tower – Cryo: No change

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

27

slide-28
SLIDE 28

PIP-II Utility Building

02SEP16 28

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

7 Towers: HLA: 0 in PM, 2 for CW LCW: 1 for PM, 2 for CW Cryo: 2 for both modes N+1 Standby: 1 Separate Piping Runs For PM and CW modes

slide-29
SLIDE 29

What’s Next

  • September/October

– Complete conceptual design for Main Ring Crossing; – Complete conceptual design for Booster Tower; – Develop conceptual design for High Voltage Electrical;

  • October/November

– Life Safety Analysis with outside consultant; – Renderings of Surface Buildings;

  • November – January/February

– Select a design firm for Detailed Design/Final Design;

  • March-September 2017

– Update drawings; – Develop a detailed cost estimate;

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

29

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Questions

02SEP16

  • S. Dixon | Conventional Facilities Status

30