IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 14, NO.

2, JUNE 2004

477

Advances in Superconducting Magnets for Particle Physics

Akira Yamamoto
AbstractThe paper reviews advances in superconducting magnet technologies for particle accelerators and detectors in high-energy and astro-particle physics experiments. In the accelerator magnets, the status of NbTi superconducting magnet is reviewed and the development of Nb3 Sn magnets is discussed. The advances in aluminum stabilized NbTi superconducting magnets for particle detectors, such as ATLAS and CMS, and for astro-particle physics such as AMS and BESS are also discussed. Index TermsParticle accelerators, particle detectors, superconducting magnets, superconductor.
TABLE I PRINCIPAL HARDON PROJECTS AND MAGNETIC FIELDS

I. INTRODUCTION HE development of superconducting magnets has greatly benefited from the requirements of the High Energy Physics (HEP) experimental programs, both for detectors and for accelerators [1]. The strong demand on superconductor such as high current density, fine filaments, control of the stabilizing matrix has been a prime motivator for the continued improvement of practical superconductors. The wider community has in turn benefited from this development with the industrial application of these materials, in particular for MRI magnets. Accelerator magnets have now reached a point where, in order to go reliably beyond the 9 T limit of the dipoles for the LHC, in construction at CERN [2][5], a significant coordinated effort is needed to make the next leap in the technology. Likewise, increasing demands on the performance of the detector magnets have led to the development of new materials of increased strength to stabilize the conductors, and thereby reduce the thickness, mass and cost of the coils. The commercial availability of these strengthened conductors is enabling scientists and engineers to improve the design of magnets and other devices of more general utility. This paper reviews the main characteristics of accelerator and detector magnets in the context of various HEP projects. II. MAGNETS FOR HADRON COLLIDERS The relation between the momentum of the charged particles, , and the magnetic bending field, , in a circular collider of bending radius is given by:

(a)

(b)

Fig. 1. Cross-sections of: LHC (a) main dipole and (b) an insertion quadrupole.

desirability of high fields is evident. In addition to the dipoles for bending the particle beam around its circular trajectory, quadrupole magnets are needed for beam focusing, and a number of smaller magnets are needed for correction of higher order multipoles and of beam orbit. In the main ring of a collider such as the LHC, the two counter-rotating beams are accelerated in synchrotron mode up to a flat top field 15 times greater than that at injection. Although the magnets must cover this dynamic range they experience a relatively moderate field ramp. Fast cycling superconducting accelerators present an additional constraint for the magnet design. The HEP superconducting accelerators built or studied to date are listed in Table I [5], [6]. Fig. 1 shows cross sections of the LHC main dipole and one type of insertion quadrupole as examples of the most up-to-date NbTi accelerator magnets with coil winding as described below. A. Status of Superconducting Accelerator Magnets

The effective radius is between about 60% and 70% of the tunnel mean radius due to the dipole filling factor and because of the long straight sections around the collision points. The
Manuscript received October 21, 2003. The author is with the High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Tsukuba, 305-0801 Japan (e-mail: akira.yamamoto@kek.jp). Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TASC.2004.829700

1) Magnet Design: A perfect dipole field is produced by current sheets having an azimuthal profile of surface current [7]. The same result is obtained with a density varying like uniform volume current density J in a coil cross-section with an , as shown in Fig. 2. A perfect azimuthal profile varying as dipole field is thus obtained with a winding that is the intersection of two ellipses with uniform and opposite current densi-

1051-8223/04$20.00 2004 IEEE

478

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 14, NO. 2, JUNE 2004

Fig. 2.

Schematic coil geometry to generate ideal field.

ties; the intersection of two crossed ellipses produces a perfect quadrupole field. The field B is proportional to where t is the coil thickness at the mid-plane, and J is the overall current density in the winding. For a given field the volume of the coil increases with the inner radius. Thus high J is required. As coils are often built with two or more shells and of course in the outer shell(s) the field is considerably lower than in the inner one, it is natural to take advantage of the steep increase at lower field by reducing the superconductor cross secof tion in the cable of the outer shell in the NbTi coil design. By grading the current density the ampere-turns in the outer shell can be increased by 5070%. For A15 and HTS conductors this advantage is less marked because of the weaker dependence of on field. Coil ends are usually a difficult design point, since each turn has to climb up around the beam tube. The bend is saddle-shaped with a complicated 3-D shape and has been the object of various studies both for mechanical stability and for magnetic design. A sophisticated 3-D field optimization program ROXIE has been developed in a cooperative work between CERN with the Technical University of Graz [8]. The program has been extended to include the possibility of calculating iron saturation effects using the reduced vector-potential method. ROXIE also includes the method of coupled boundary/finite-elements, which was developed at the University of Stuttgart, Germany, and which is specially suited for the calculation of 3-D effects in the magnets. The high field and very high current density lead to large e.m. forces. The total bursting force per unit length on an LHC dipole coil is up to 4 MN/m. To contain this force a strong structure is needed, and this is usually provided by collars clamped around the coils at high pressure. The azimuthal compression has to be at least as high as the e.m. forces: when the magnet is excited the action of the e.m. forces is, to a first approximation, to only partially release the pressure at the interface between collars and coils thus avoiding coil movement. A typical compression of 100 MPa is applied on the coils, with residual stress of 70 MPa when the external pressure is released. Alternatively, very thin collars can be used for locking the coils in position and for handling, and the large forces are reacted by the yoke/outer cylinder structure, with the advantage of enhancement of the field due to the vicinity of the iron yoke. This structure is applied in insertion quadrupoles as shown in the cross section presented in Fig. 1(b) [9], [10]. 2) Field Quality and Required Control: To avoid beam loss due to particular resonances, the field must be accurate to the . To meet this requirement, the coil geomlevel of dB/B . The field is analyzed etry tolerance needs to be less than 50 in its multipole components, and each individual term should be

known and controlled within some ppm of the main term. The harmonic or multipole content is generally given in units that of the main term at a given radius, usually 2/3 of the are coil radius. Each component grows as where n is the multipole order. Hard superconductors exhibit hysteretic behavior. Since the , the critical current density is high at low field persistent currents associated with magnetization are important scales and strongly affect the field quality. Magnetization and the effective diameter of the filaments. The persisas tent currents also drift during the stay at low field, so that when the magnet starts to be ramped again they resume their initial values, causing the so-called snap-back effect. To limit these are necessary. Aneffects, fine filaments of less than 10 other source of field errors is the coupling current within the cable. The crossing strands form an electrical network, and as the winding is pre-compressed to typically 80 to 100 MPa, the contact points have low resistance. The field is perpendicular to the broad face of most of the cable, so during ramping induced currents flow in the loops. The cure is a controlled oxidation of the cable to provide a reliably constant inter-strand resistance in . a range of 10 to 40 3) Stability and Quench Protection: A good measure of how stable a magnet is against heat releasing perturbations is the enthalpy margin, i.e., the energy necessary to increase a unit volume of coil from bath temperature to the transition (current sharing) temperature. The so-called temperature margin is 1.4 K for the LHC. It gives enthalpy margin based on . A practical rule for stability is to consider that the minimum amount of copper is about 55% in cross section for NbTi based conductor, and to only operate the magnets up to 8085% of . The magnet must be fully protected in case of quench. At the . spot where the quench starts, dissipated power The hot spot in the coil should not exceed room temperature; to avoid damage to the insulation in addition to avoid exces; and internal voltages sive thermal stresses . The quench propagation veshould be moderate locity along the cable is low (typically 20 m/s), so the quench is forced to propagate by firing heaters, in the form of stainless strips, inducing a large fraction of the winding to quench within 50 ms. The current through a chain of magnets in series is diverted through a diode while the energy of the whole circuit is discharged in an external resistance over some tens of seconds, this time being determined by the maximum discharge voltage (2 kV). B. Accelerator Magnets Beyond 10 T Despite extensive efforts with various approaches to reach 10 T using NbTi conductor, accelerator magnets face a practical field limit at 9 T. For magnets with field 10 T, only Nb Sn technology is viable at present [11][14]. In the future, progress on Nb Al and ceramic high superconductors (HTS) may provide an alternative. A few Nb Sn dipole magnets were built and tested at BNL in the period 198092 [15], where both React and Wind (R&W) and W&R techniques were explored. In 1989, 10 T

YAMAMOTO: ADVANCES IN SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNETS FOR PARTICLE PHYSICS

479

was reached in a W&R Nb Sn dipole (with iron mirror) built by a CERN-Elin collaboration [16]. The University of Twente, also in collaboration with CERN, designed and built a 1 m long, 50 mm bore Nb Sn dipole that in 1995 reached more than 11 T, very near to the short sample limit of 11.512 T at 4.2 K, with almost no training [17]. This magnet featured conductor made by powder-in-tube (PIT) technology. A superconducting dipole, wound with Nb Sn cable, a 4-shell coil and graded conductor, was also designed and built by LBNL. The magnet recorded the maximum field of 13.5 T at 1.8 K, near to the critical current limit, in 1997 [18]. Twente University is developing, in collaboration with CERN, a 1 m long Nb Sn dipole to provide 10 T in a single 88 mm aperture suitable for LHC beam separation. The conductor is PIT type from SMI (NL), with 20 m filaments. In the R&D program for the VLHC (Very Large Hadron Collider, 50 50 TeV protons), Fermilab is developing smaller aperture (43 mm) dipoles with 12 to 12.5 T quench field operating at 4.2 K [19]. This magnet type, is intended for a final operating coil layout. Fermilab and LBNL field of 11 T, also has a are also designing large aperture ( 100 mm) quadrupoles suitable for an upgrade of the LHC low-beta insertions [20], [21]. This application implies an additional constraint of strong radiation heating. The European institutions are collaborating to develop Next European Dipole (NED) using Nb Sn with coil design [22]. strucWhen fields higher than 12 T are required, the ture calls for too high a pre-stress for materials such as A15 compounds or HTS, so the R&D focuses again on the block structures pioneered in early days for NbTi magnets [23]. One of such design is the Block Coil Dual Dipole [24]. The rectangular conductor, tape or cable, is only bent in the easy direction and the coils are subdivided into many small blocks. The vertical stresses are moderate, and by means of the strip/rib structure the peak horizontal stress is limited to 50 to 70 MPa. The space for passing the beam is provided by bending the coil ends up slightly in the hard direction. This bend should not be a problem for small ( 25 mm aperture) magnets. Even without the stress management feature, with the most recent conductors a block coil magnet has recently reached a peak field of nearly 16 T in the coil [25]. Another approach is the Common Coil Dipole Magnet, first proposed by BNL and now also the subject of study at LBNL. This design [26] relies on simple side-by-side race-track coils excited to produce opposing dipole fields. The coils are fully planar, so the design is ideal for HTS or brittle LTS tapes. The mainly horizontal and moderate forces, typical of a window frame design, are easy to contain, but the simplicity is somewhat marred by the need for pole-face windings to correct the field. Some noteworthy accelerator dipole development in both NbTi and Nb Sn magnets [12] is summarized in Table II. In order to be able to manufacture coils capable to generate fields beyond 15 T, an important breakthrough in the conductor performance is needed. For this reason research on material is a priority in this field. Currently, the conductors available in quantity are Nb Sn via the Internal Tin Diffusion(ITD) or Modified Jelly Roll(MJR) routes. The PIT technique pursued by the Twente team is also very promisingespecially as it can be pro-

TABLE II SUMMARY OF ACCELERATOR DIPOLE DEVELOPMENT

Fig. 3.

Status of critical current density of Nb Sn and Nb Al.

duced with fine filaments . Over the last 5 years there has been an increase of a factor of 2 in the best obtained from Nb Sn, indicating a healthy renewal of interest in the material. Recently, a new approach, the so called Distributed Tin (DT) method has been developed to realize uniform characteristics of Nb Sn in the strand [27]. C. Combined Function Magnets for Future Applications In an effort to develop cost-effective superconducting magnet systems, the idea of using combined function magnets has been recently re-addressed. In this design the dipole field is combined with the quadrupole field in a single magnet. It has been investigated via two independent approaches. A combined function

480

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 14, NO. 2, JUNE 2004

TABLE III PROGRESS OF SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNETS FOR PARTICLE PHYSICS DETECTORS

magnet by using a set of race-track coils has been proposed and studied at BNL [29]. A combined function magnet with single coil design has been proposed at KEK, layer asymmetric and is being developed for a primary proton beam line at the J-PARC project [30], [31]. The main requirements for the conductor for such 1518 T at 12 T, 4.2 K, magnets are (1) a current density of 3 (2) an effective filament diameter of , (3) current capacity 20 kA, (4) stabilizer fraction 50% to total cross section and (5) low strain sensitivity. The problem of strain sensitivity would be solved if the high current density Nb Al were to be available in cable with adequate stabilizer. Fig. 3 shows the status of current density achieved with Nb Sn and Nb Al [28]. HTS materials are not far from meeting the requirements, at least on short samples. For Bi based compounds, it would be necessary to cool to 4.2 K in order to achieve sufficient current density. Recent progress with MgB indicates that this material may also have potential. III. DETECTOR MAGNETS A. General Progress Detector magnets have been developed to analyze charged particles in high energy and astro-particle physics experiments [32], [33]. The deflection angle, , of the charged particle in , and the magnetic field is determined by the sagitta, , of the trajectory is determined by , where is the path length in the magnetic field. In practical measurements in colliding particle detectors, it is most effective to enlarge the magnetic volume.

The solenoid field has been widely used in many colliding experiments as summarized in Table III [33]. It features uniform field in the axial direction with a self-supporting structure. However, the charged particle may pass through the solenoidal coil in part of the detector system, and material used in the coil and the cryostat must be minimized. Various design approaches are compared in Fig. 4. The magnetic flux has to be returned outside the solenoid coil and, in most cases, an iron yoke provides the flux return. Momentum analysis is usually made by measurement of particle trajectories inside the solenoid mag, is determined netic field, and the momentum resolution, by the sagitta. So for good momentum resolution a large coil radius is useful. The toroidal field provides a unique feature of closed-loop magnetic field with no iron flux-return yoke. Since no field exists at a beam collision point and along the beam line, there is no dependence and the moeffect on the beam. The field has mentum of the particle is determined by measurement of a deflection angle combined with the sagitta. The deflection power, , is approximately given by

where is the magnetic field strength at , the inner coil rais the outer coil radius, and is the angle between the dius, particle trajectory and the beam axis. The momentum resolution, as determined by the deflection, is expressed by

YAMAMOTO: ADVANCES IN SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNETS FOR PARTICLE PHYSICS

481

Fig. 4. Schematic diagrams for various detector solenoid designs.

This implies better momentum resolution in the forward (smaller ) direction [32]. A practical compromise is to 4. The coil is usually separated into 6 to 12 lumped components in order to have reasonable acceptance and accessibility. The mechanical structure needs to sustain complex electromagnetic forces, and the peak field in the coil is 3 to 5 times higher than the useful magnetic field. Dipole spectrometer magnets are either large versions of accelerator magnets or the traditional gap in an iron flux return yoke, excited by a pair of coils. The large electromagnetic forces on the coil need to be supported by additional structure. Various superconducting dipole magnet spectrometers have been built, but resistive magnets are often more practical for large-scale versions, replying to some specific constraints such as availability of electricity and the environment of the experiment. Recent examples of these are ALICE and LHCb [34], [35]. B. Experiments at Accelerators As summarized in Table III, the design of modern superconducting detector magnets has practically converged on the use of aluminum-stabilized superconductor, with the cooling of the coil supplied indirectly with two-phase helium in cooling tubes on the support structure. Coolant flow is provided by pumps or thermo-siphon. Solenoids are wound using the internal winding technique. The state-of-the-art technology can be illustrated through descriptions of the two large superconducting detector magnet systems, CMS and ATLAS, which are being constructed for the LHC at CERN [36], [37]. The main parameters are summarized in Table IV. The CMS detector is designed with a single solenoid magnet surrounded by a return yoke acting also as the external muon spectrometer. The solenoid is designed to provide a field of 4 T in a 6 m diameter warm bore. The total mass of the coil assembly is 225 t and the maximum stored energy will reach 2.6 GJ. The coil design features reinforced conductor with a hybrid configuration as discussed later and a four layer coil assembled from five modules as in the concept illustrated in comparison with other solenoids in Fig. 4. A central field of 4 T can be envisaged thanks to the innovative technique to reinforce the conductor. The coil is being wound using the internal winding method, and will be cooled by thermo-siphon. The ATLAS detector is optimized by combination of a solenoidal field in the central detector region with a sur-

TABLE IV MAIN DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE CMS AND ATLAS MAGNETS

rounding azimuthally toroidal field servicing the muon spectrometer. Thus the ATLAS magnet system consists of four major components; a central solenoid (CS), a barrel toroid (BT), and a pair of end-cap toroids (ET) [38][40]. In order to keep muon scattering to a minimum and facilitate the mounting of the chambers the experiment also requires the support structure to be light and open. The particular challenge of the ATLAS magnet system is its size and complexity. The ATLAS magnet system is to be the largest superconducting magnet system ever built. The ATLAS CS will provide an axial magnetic field of 2 T in a warm bore of 2.3 m in diameter to give a deflection power . Since the coil is placed in front of the liquid of 4.6 argon (LAr) calorimeter, the solenoid coil needs to be as thin and transparent as possible for the best calorimeter performance with minimum interaction of particles in the coil. The coil design features (i) high-strength aluminum stabilized superconductor, (ii) pure aluminum strip technique for uniform energy absorption in the thin coil, and (iii) a common cryostat with LAr calorimeter to save wall material. The radiation thickness of the . coil is only 0.66 The ATLAS BT is optimized with eight coils assembled symmetrically around the beam axis. It has an inner free bore of 9.5 m, outer diameter of 20 m and length of 26 m. It provides of 2 to 6 increasing with the a deflection power forward angle. The ATLAS ET also consists of eight coils, with its azimuthal orientation rotated by 22.5 with respect to BT to

482

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 14, NO. 2, JUNE 2004

TABLE V PARAMETERS OF AMS AND BESS-POLAR SUPERCONDUCTION MAGNETS

physical thickness of 3.4 mm and with an average wall material corresponding to a radiation thickness of density of 1.0 . The coil is assembled into a cryostat with a warm 0.056 bore and indirectly cooled with thermal conduction through aluminum shells/strips connected to a LHe reservoir at one end. Including cryostat material, the total effective wall material is , corresponding to a radiation thickness of 0.1 , 2.3 the thinnest ever achieved. The solenoid coil is made and has been tested up to 1.04 T. A technical balloon test flight has also been successfully carried out. D. Features of Detector Magnets 1) Al Stabilized Superconductor: Aluminum stabilized superconductor is a key technology in modern detector magnets. It contributes to stability of the superconductor with minimum material and weight. Fig. 5 shows progress of the aluminum-stabilized superconductors for various detector magnets in high-energy physics. The NbTi/Cu superconductor strand/cable is co-extruded with aluminum stabilizer having reliable diffusion bonding. Over the past ten years, aluminum stabilized superconductor has been much improved, especially in mechanical strength. One approach has been the homogeneous reinforcement of the stabilizer itself, and the other has been the hybrid configuration. The homogeneous reinforcement of the aluminum stabilizer was established by combining micro-alloying and cold-work hardening [43]. The micro-alloying hardening contributes to mechanical reinforcement and its long-term stability against annealing in a process such as coil curing. The cold-work hardening with area reduction gives major contribution for the mechanical reinforcement. Specific metals such as Mg, Si, Cu, and Zn have a common feature of smaller contribution to electrical resistivity under the condition of so-called solid-solution [44], [45]. On the other hand, although Ni is much less soluble, it is crystallized and precipitated. The composite with aluminum, Al Ni, is uniformly distributed with filament-like configuration, and it effectively contributes to mechanical strength while keeping lower electrical resistivity. The ATLAS CS and BESS-Polar superconductor have been developed by using this technology which is suitable for the smaller size conductor. In the CMS solenoid project, however, another technical approach for the reinforcement has been made by using the hybrid configuration, which consists of bonding high strength aluminum alloy (AA6082) to each side of the pure aluminum stabilized superconductor [46]. The mechanical bonding is achieved by electron-beam welding. The hybrid configuration is very effective in this conductor because its large size is well adapted for welding. It allows a hoop strain of 0.11% under elastic condition, and this is the key parameter for its adoption in the 4 T CMS solenoid. The main parameters of recent advanced aluminum-stabilized superconductor are summarized in Table VI. The aluminum stabilizer can now be made as strong as copper while maintaining high RRR, and another significant advantage is its lightness. Ratio: In detector magnet design, compactness and 2) transparency are important in order to create a magnetic field with minimum disturbance for the particles and with maximum detector acceptance. Moreover, manufacturing and handling

allow for radial overlap and to optimize the bending power in the interface region of both coil systems. The eight ET coils are assembled to be a single cold mass. This simplifies the mechanical support of the magnetic forces but it does not allow installation of muon chambers in the toroidal field volume. The particle traof jectory measurement is made with a deflection power at each end. 46 C. Experiments in Space Two superconducting detector magnet systems are under development to investigate cosmic ray antiparticles in space. Their parameters are summarized in Table V. The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) is a particle detector designed to search for antimatter, dark matter and the origin of cosmic rays in space. The AMS spectrometer will be operated on the International Space Station (ISS), in 2007, for a period of 3 years. This spectrometer features a dipole magnetic field enabling fully open access to the magnetic field volume without traversing coil wall material [41]. The magnet system consists of a pair of large Helmholtz coils together with two series of six racetrack coils, through which the flux is returned. There is no iron. This arrangement minimizes the stray field outside of the magnet, and cancels the magnetic dipole moment to avoid interaction with earth magnetic field. The required central field of 0.87 T gives rise to a peak field of 6.6 T in a set of race-truck coils. All superconducting coils are wound with high purity aluminum-stabilized NbTi conductor. The coils are indirectly cooled by superfluid helium at 1.8 K. The cooling loop is thermally connected with a superfluid helium vessel that serves as a cold reservoir. The magnet is under development. The BESS-Polar experiment is being prepared to study cosmic-ray antiparticles by ballooning over Antarctica [42]. The analysis of particle momentum will be done using the uniform magnetic field provided by an extremely thin two-layer superconducting coil, wound with high-strength aluminum stabilized superconductor similar to that of the ATLAS CS. The superconductor is designed to be sufficiently strong to itself support the electromagnetic force in the solenoid coil at a central field of 1.2 T. In flight under a peak acceleration load of 10 G, the solenoid coil is to be operated at a central or field of 0.8 (to 1) T with a field uniformity of better in the warm bore of 0.75 m. The peak field in the coil is calculated to be 1.1 tesla. The solenoid coil is designed with a

YAMAMOTO: ADVANCES IN SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNETS FOR PARTICLE PHYSICS

483

Fig. 5. Cross sections of Al stabilizer for particle detectors.

TABLE VI PROGRESS OF ALUMINUM STABILIZED SUPERCONDUCTOR

Fig. 6.

E/M ratio in superconducting solenoids for particle detectors.

cost are less for a light structure. For these reasons, a parameter useful to scale the lightness, compactness or efficiency of (stored energy/effective coil the magnet is the ratio cold mass) [43]. This ratio is approximately equivalent to the enthalpy of the coil, , and it determines the average coil temperature rise according to , is the average coil temperature after the full energy where is the initial temperature. Thus absorption in a quench, and ratios of 5, 10, and 20 kJ/kg correspond to 65, 80, and 100 K, respectively. In the case of the solenoid coil, it is also expressed by a ratio of the stress, , to the equivalent density, , of the coil, and it is given by

the SDC prototype reached 10 kJ/kg. The ATLAS central solenoid reached 8 kJ/kg, at a central field of 2.1 T, in the performance test. The CMS solenoid is designed to reach an ratio of 12 kJ/kg at . As an example of recent progress, a prototype BESS-Polar model magnet was successfully tested with full energy absorption with realizing an ratio of 14 kJ/kg. IV. SUMMARY An overview has been given of advances in superconducting magnet technologies for particle accelerators and detectors. Accelerator magnet technology based on NbTi has reached a practical field limit below 10 T at 1.9 K. Beyond 10 T, Nb Sn is viable and the block coil/common coil design appear to be more practical because of simple coil winding for the brittle conductor. A dipole field of 16 T has been reached, for the first time, with the block coil design at LBNL. In a new approach, a combined function magnet with an asymmetric single layer coil is being developed for a primary proton beam line at the J-PARC to Kamioka neutrino experiment. Great progress has been made in aluminum stabilization of NbTi superconducting magnets for particle detectors in the CMS and ATLAS detector projects at LHC, and in magnets for the BESS-Polar and AMS experiments. Manufacture of

The coil thickness is thus determined by . Fig. 6 shows ratios in various detector solenoid magratio of nets developed or under development. A typical 5 kJ/kg was realized in the early generation of thin solenoids. Based on the development of high strength aluminum stabilizer,

484

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 14, NO. 2, JUNE 2004

high strength aluminum stabilized superconductor has been successfully achieved by two different approaches, of hybrid or uniform reinforcement.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author would like to thank the following experts for help in this review work from around the world, L. Rossi, S. Gourlay, R. Gupta, P. Wanderer, A. Devred, A. Zlobin, S. Russenschuck, A. Herve, F. Kircher, B. Blau, H. ten Kate, R. Ruber, T. Shintomi, K. Tsuchiya, M. Wake, T. Ogitsu, and Y. Makida. Special thanks are due to T. Taylor for his cooperation and advice in preparing this review and the report.

REFERENCES
[1] M. N. Wilson, Superconductivity and accelerators, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 111121, June 1999. [2] LHC the Large Hadron Collider Conceptual Design, October 20, 1995. [3] L. Evans, Status of LHC. [4] L. Rossi, State-of-the-art superconducting accelerator magnets, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 219227, March 2002. , Superconducting magnets for accelerators and detectors, in [5] CERN AT 2003-2, Proc. of CHATS 2002, Karlsrluhe, 2002. [6] M. Anerella et al., The RHIC magnet system, Nucl. Instr. Meth., vol. A499, pp. 280315, 2003. [7] H. Brechna, Superconducting Magnet Systems. Berlin: SpringerVerlag, 1973, pp. 3046. [8] S. Russenschuck, ROXIE: Routine for the Optimization of Magnet X-Sections, Inverse Field Calculation and Coil End Design, 1999. [9] R. Ostojic, Superconducting Magnets for LHC Insertions. [10] A. Yamamoto et al., Design study of a superconducting insertion quadrupole magnet for the large hadron collider, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 747750, June 1997. [11] F. Asner, High Field Superconducting Magnets: Oxford Univ., 1999. [12] S. Gourlay, Post LHC accelerator magnets, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 6774, March 2002. [13] G. Sabbi, Status of Nb Sn accelerator magnet R&D, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 6774, March 2002. [14] M. Lamm, Nb Sn accelerator magnet development around the world, IEEE Trans Appl. Supercond., vol. 13, pp. 12781283, June 2003. [15] R. McClusky, K. Robins, and W. Sampson, A Nb Sn high field dipole, IEEE Trans. Magnetics, vol. 27, pp. 19931995, 1991. [16] F. Asner et al., First Nb Sn, 1 m long superconducting dipole model magnets for LHC break the 10 tesla field threshold, in Proc. of MT-11 Conference: Elsevier Applied Science, 1990, pp. 3641. [17] A. den Ouden et al., Application of Nb Sn superconductors in highfield accelerators magnets, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 733738, June 1997. [18] S. Caspi et al., Design and construction of a hybridNb Sn, NbTi-dipole magnet, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 347350, June 1997.

[19] V. Kashikhin et al., Magnetic designs and field quality of Nb Sn accelerator magnets, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 107110, March 2003. [20] A. Zlobin et al., Conceptual design study of Nb Sn low-beta quadrupoles for 2nd generation LHC IRs, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 12661269, March 2003. [21] G. Sabbi et al., Nb Sn quadrupole magnets for the LHC IR, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 12621265, March 2003. [22] A. Devred, High Field Accelerator Magnet R&D. [23] T. Shintomi, M. Wake, K. Tsuchiya, and H. Hirabayashi et al., The construction and test results of a 10 T dipole magnet, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Science, vol. NS-32, pp. 37193721, 1985. [24] A. Abreau et al., Block-coil dipole for future hadron collider, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 705708, June 1999. [25] S. Gourlay, High Field Magnet R&D in the USA. [26] R. Gupta et al., A high field magnet design for a future hadron collider, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercont., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 701704, June 1999. [27] M. Wake et al., Development of Nb Sn DT. [28] K. Tsuchiya et al., Development of Nb Al Superconducting Wire for Accelerator Magnets. [29] B. Parker et al., Magnet for a muon storage ring, in Proc. Particle Accelerator Conference (PAC), 2001, pp. 33953397. [30] T. Ogitsu et al., Superconducting Magnet System at the 50 GeV Proton Beam Line for J-PARC Neutrino Experiment. [31] T. Nakamoto et al., Design of Superconducting Combined Function Magnets at the 50 GeV Proton Beam Line for the J-PARC Neutrino Experiment. [32] T. Taylor, The choice of spectrometer magnets for LEP, Physica Scripta, vol. 23, pp. 459464, 1980. [33] A. Yamamoto, Advances in superconducting magnets for particle physics, Nucl. Instr. Meth. Phys. Res, vol. A 494, pp. 255265, 2003. [34] D. Swoboda, Toward Starting Up of the ALICE Dipole Magnet. [35] J. Andre, Status of the LHCb Dipole Magnet. [36] A. Herve et al., Status of the CMS magnet, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 385390, March 2002. [37] H. ten Kate, The superconducting magnet system for the ATLAS detector at CERN, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 347352, March 2001. [38] A. Yamamoto et al., Design and development of the ATLAS central solenoid, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 852855, June 1999. [39] P. Vedrin et al., Manufacturing and Integration Progressing the ATLAS Barrel Toroid Magnet at CERN. [40] E. Baynham et al., ATLAS end-cap toroid magnet cold mass design and manufacturing status, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 357360, March 2000. [41] B. Blau et al., The superconducting magnet system of AMS-02, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 349352, March 2002. [42] A. Yamamoto et al., A thin superconducting solenoid magnet for particle astrophysics, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 438441, March 2002. , Development toward, ultra-thin superconducting solenoid mag[43] nets for high energy particle detectors, Nuclear Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.), vol. 78, pp. 565571, 1999. [44] F. Fitch, A review of resistive mechanisms in aluminum, Cryogenics, pp. 349367, October 1971. [45] R. Reed, A review of deformation properties, of high purity aluminum and dilute aluminum alloy, Cryogenics, pp. 259291, August 1972. [46] B. Blau, D. Campi, and S. Horbath et al., The CMS conductor, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 345348, March 2002.