11th Injection Region Design Meeting

Thursday 12 Feb 2026, 11:00 → 12:00 Europe/Zurich

CERN

Agenda:

email from maria-carmen:

Position 3 – Expansion volume interface
This part of the line has not yet been discussed in detail. I understand the interface is CF40 and that the first connected element is a BPM, likely with an integrated bellow. I would therefore refer this point to BI. In any case, a 3 mm expansion seems more reasonable and could be accommodated with a small pre-stretch.

I take advantage to ask you and GWA which will be the foreseen temperature of the interfaces with vacuum (expansion volume flanges in position 1,2,3).

Thank you for your answers, Maria Carmen and Nicolas.

• It’s good to see that the situation upstream and downstream expansion volumes seems to be ok. Exact numbers to be confirmed.
• For the third expansion volume, we have noted your questions regarding radial and longitudinal displacement as well as the interface temperature. We will discuss these points in our next meeting, and I will get back to you afterwards.

 

Many thanks,
Marlene

 

Chillers: space ok?

 

mu-metal vittorio email:

Hi Marlene,

 

I think so, this should relax a bit the requirements on the mu, thus 1e-2 could be sufficient.

However, to be more confident with this choice, we can think of performing some magnetic simulations with a 2D model showing how the field errors evolves depending on different mus.

 

Let me know what you think.

 

Cheers,

Vittorio

 

---

Hello,

 

  Late piece of info ...

 

  There was a CSCP meeting last Wed.

 

  As far as integration was concerned, the next topic for us (Y-piece) is the support for it ... right?

 

  Nicolas wants to meet (with me) and discuss the general topic of supports ...

 

  Where do we stand? We said we would rig something that would also support some of the magnets neat the injection region to avoid interference at the supports level.

 

  However, magnets will be on movers with micron-accuracy motion, so I think it is better to let CERN people to deal with all that foes with these magnets.

 

  Nicolas proposed CERN(he, as draftperson) provides support for the 3rd expansion chamber ... are we OK with that, or should we support all of the Y-piece related parts?

 

I guess at some point we will have to draw lines where there is no interference (at the support level) ...

 

  Also, there will be double valves (CERN/source) along the pbeam line, but just one valve some place upstream of the 3rd ExpVol so we do not contaminate the gun with Rm when vapor is in but no ebeam is needed. So far there is space for one valve, not double valve and bypass for pumping ... we will have to deal with that in case of de-connection ...of the source ... just a note to self, I guess ...

 

  What do you think?

 

  Thanks,

 

  Patric