Superfluid Helium and its use at CERN

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy87
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cern Helium Superfluid
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the use of superfluid helium-4 at CERN for cooling superconducting magnets, comparing it to regular liquid helium. Participants explore the advantages of using superfluid helium at lower temperatures, the implications for superconductivity, and the challenges associated with containing superfluid helium.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the necessity of using superfluid helium at 2K instead of regular liquid helium at 4.2K, suggesting cost considerations.
  • Others argue that lower temperatures allow superconducting wires to carry more current before transitioning to a normal state.
  • A participant mentions the concept of critical current density, indicating that exceeding this limit can cause superconductivity to quench.
  • Concerns are raised about the containment of superfluid helium, with references to its ability to leak through microscopic pores and flow up container walls.
  • Some participants assert that superfluid helium has higher thermal conductivity and can support higher currents, while others challenge the practicality of using superfluid helium due to its properties.
  • There is a discussion about the differences between fermions and bosons, particularly in relation to quantum states and the implications for superconductivity and chemistry.
  • Multiple participants provide conflicting information regarding the quantity of helium used at CERN, with some stating it is 100 gallons while others assert it is 120 tons.
  • One participant mentions that a mixture of superfluid and non-superfluid helium is used, as pure superfluid cannot be pumped effectively.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the advantages and practicality of using superfluid helium versus regular liquid helium, with no consensus reached on the necessity or benefits of superfluid helium in this context. There are also conflicting claims about the quantity of helium used at CERN.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions regarding the properties of superfluid helium, the challenges of containment, and the implications for superconductivity, but these remain unresolved within the discussion.

Jimmy87
Messages
692
Reaction score
19
Hi,

Wikipedia says CERN uses 100 gallons of superfluid helium 4 to cool its superconducting magnets. Why use superfluid helium 4 (2K) as apposed to regular liquid helium (4.2K). As far as I can see from Internet sources, the helium serves to keep the magnets in order to keep them in a superconducting state. Surely it is cheaper to keep the superconducters at 4.2K using liquid helium as apposed to 2K using superfluid helium 4? What extra advantage do you have using superfluid helium? Does the superfluid state actually help further with the superconductivity of the magnets or is it purely to do with the temperature? I.e if helium 4 was not a superfluid at 2K would that make any difference in its use with superconductors?

Also, does anyone have links to any sources of superfluid theory? I can't find much at all - only on Wikipedia which is all over the place. I only get the general gist that at the lamda temperature the helium 4 acts as a boson and all the atoms are in a single quantum state/wave function but that's about all I can find.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jimmy87 said:
Why use superfluid helium 4 (2K) as apposed to regular liquid helium (4.2K).

There's your answer. It's colder.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
There's your answer. It's colder.
But if they are in a superconducting state at 4K, what is the advantage of bringing them to 2K?
 
The colder the wire, the more current it can carry before going normal.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Vanadium 50 said:
The colder the wire, the more current it can carry before going normal.
Thanks. So in the superconducting state although resistance is zero there is a maximum current you can send through it beyond which it won't be superconducting and the lower the temperature the bigger this can be? Is that what you mean?
 
Jimmy87 said:
Thanks. So in the superconducting state although resistance is zero there is a maximum current you can send through it beyond which it won't be superconducting and the lower the temperature the bigger this can be? Is that what you mean?

There is something called the critical current density. Above this, the magnetic field generated by the current itself can cause superconductivity to quench.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Solids/scbc2.html

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jimmy87
ZapperZ said:
There is something called the critical current density. Above this, the magnetic field generated by the current itself can cause superconductivity to quench.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Solids/scbc2.html

Zz.

Thanks just what I was looking for. How do they contain superfluid helium 4 at CERN because it says that it leaks through microscopic pores in plugs that would ordinarily contain liquid helium? And also they flow up the edges of containers.

Would you be able to answer a related question. Whenever you hear lecturers online discuss fermions and the uncertainty principle they make reference that if electrons were not fermions then they would all collapse into the ground state and there would be no chemistry. From reading the superconductivity info on Wikipedia bosons can be in the same quantum state but they only do this when forced to do so e.g. 2 Kelvin. It says at room temperature that almost every helium atom is in a different state. Is it therefore accurate for them to make this statement? If we pretend for a second that electrons were bosons then surely they wouldn't all collapse into the ground state inside an atom or would they?
 
Jimmy87 said:
it leaks through microscopic pores in plugs

Clearly you don't want any microscopic pores then!
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Clearly you don't want any microscopic pores then!
Clearly
 
  • #10
Jimmy87 said:
Thanks just what I was looking for. How do they contain superfluid helium 4 at CERN because it says that it leaks through microscopic pores in plugs that would ordinarily contain liquid helium? And also they flow up the edges of containers.

Would you be able to answer a related question. Whenever you hear lecturers online discuss fermions and the uncertainty principle they make reference that if electrons were not fermions then they would all collapse into the ground state and there would be no chemistry. From reading the superconductivity info on Wikipedia bosons can be in the same quantum state but they only do this when forced to do so e.g. 2 Kelvin. It says at room temperature that almost every helium atom is in a different state. Is it therefore accurate for them to make this statement? If we pretend for a second that electrons were bosons then surely they wouldn't all collapse into the ground state inside an atom or would they?

The difference between the two is that at room temperature, a gas atom CAN and is usually in its ground state, while helium is a gas!

Secondly, "ground state" energy of liquid helium is the quantum ground state of the entire fluid, not the ground state of one liquid atom. This is the BE ground state. The atom may already it is ground state at a significantly higher temperature.

Superconductivity and superfluidity are many-body phenomena. You can't simply apply the physics of individual atom to the entire conglomerate.

Zz.
 
  • #11
Jimmy87 said:
Wikipedia says CERN uses 100 gallons of superfluid helium 4 to cool its superconducting magnets
Are you sure about that info?
Superconducting magnets do use liquid helium for cooling but not superfluid and there is a very good reason for not using superfluid helium - it creeps up along the walls of containers to a region of higher temperature then evaporates. So using superfluid helium would require much larger amount of liquid helium than just plain liquid helium and the critical current of most superconductors are not that much different between 4 and 2 Kelvin.
Plus there is a danger that all the superfluid would leak through even most minute hole into the vacuum space and that would invite a serious problem.
 
  • #12
The 100 gallons is definitely wrong - maybe they meant tons. But the helium is definitely superfluid.
 
  • #13
  • #14
Henryk said:
I just checked, yup, it is superfluid helium, the reason is higher current can be supported. The second reason, superfluid helium has very high thermal conductivity.
And the amount is not 100 gallons, it is 120 tons!
Check the CERN publication:
http://cds.cern.ch/record/2255762/files/CERN-Brochure-2017-002-Eng.pdf

Actually, they have to use liquid helium that is a mixture of non-superfluid and superfluid. The most obvious reason for this is that you can't pump on purely superfluid helium. It will never flow because there's nothing to drag a volume of it due to it having zero viscosity. With some fraction of non-superfluid He in it, that fluid can "push" on the superfluid volume.

Zz.
 
  • #15
Henryk said:
Superconducting magnets do use liquid helium for cooling but not superfluid and there is a very good reason for not using superfluid helium - it creeps up along the walls of containers to a region of higher temperature then evaporates. So using superfluid helium would require much larger amount of liquid helium than just plain liquid helium and the critical current of most superconductors are not that much different between 4 and 2 Kelvin.

it is not actually THAT difficult to deal with superfluid helium. Normal stainless steel vessels can contain it quite well, the fact that it has a potential to leak through pores etc is rarely a problem in real life.
It is also possible to design away some of the issues related to the film creeping up the wall; if all else fails one can install a "film burner" which is essentially just a heated wire some distance above the surface, this wire is held at just above 4K meaning when the film reaches the wire it heat up, goes normal and fall back into the bath. This used to be standard equipment on old pumped Helium 4 cryostats (which is why I know about it) but is rarely used these days (and I have no idea if it is used at CERN). Note that there are plenty of 2K cryocoolers on the market; this is very well understood technology.

Also, at a place like CERN they will try to get the most they can out of their equipment and the increase in critical current density between 4K and 2K can be significant. Moreover, the RF losses drop even more dramatically (it can be x10 for e.g. NbN at microwave frequencies) which would obviously be significant for the RF cavities.
 
  • #16
Ok, Ok,
My initial comment came from my personal experience working in low temperature lab. We did studies as a function of temperature and varied temperature by pumping on the liquid helium. It did work fine down to lambda point, below that, it was practically impossible to lower temperature any further.
I do understand why CERN keeps superconducting magnets below 2 K, the increase of the critical current is significant. Plus, flux creep must be reduced even more substantially.
I wonder why they don't switch to helium 3. Granted, way more expensive but doesn't go superfluid and easier to lower temperatures.
 
  • #17
Henryk said:
I wonder why they don't switch to helium 3.

You mean apart from the fact that the LHC needs 10x as much helium as the world has helium-3?

How about the fact that the heat capacity - what you want for cooling - of helium jumps at 2K because of the lambda point. It's heat capacity there is roughly twice that of water (peaking at three times) at room temperature.

Henryk said:
but doesn't go superfluid

You persist in thinking that the CERN cryo engineers are a bunch of ignorant stumblebums who can't handle superfluidity. History suggests otherwise. This is not a problem.
 
  • #18
Henryk said:
I wonder why they don't switch to helium 3. Granted, way more expensive but doesn't go superfluid and easier to lower temperatures.

Another reason is that the price of helium-3 is about $3000 per litre of GAS. Hence, 120 tons of He-3 would be something like 200-300 billion dollars.
Not that this is available; annually the world only uses a few tens of kg of He-3.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
12K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K