1 David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014 Petal Locking Points.
-
Upload
peyton-mustard -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
4
Transcript of 1 David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014 Petal Locking Points.
1David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
Petal Locking Points
2David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
EC stiffening disk is located between d6 and d7
Latest considerations – EC design
BH mechanically decoupled from EC at final positionLength of rails and inner cylinder reduced down to disk 7. service modules still extend beyond the BH
3David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
Service tray x16
We loose some space
to insert petals
between disk 7 and 6 due to
stiffening disk.
Petals have to be
inserted inclined
w.r.t. discs since there
is not enough RΦ clearance.
4David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
Blades
HC Korex-5/32-2.4(or Structural foam)
1mm thick ‘T’ beamCF T300/RS3
0.18mm thick XN50/RS3 CF facing
Petal insertion guide
In this model blades play an important structural role. They provide
Quasi-kinematic locking points for the petal andthe required stiffness while allowing to reduce the Z distance between petals in a disk
and cope with the required hermeticity for low momentum tracks and
They are very low density structures (can be made even lighter)
5David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
Locking points (nose side)
A peek through screw or a dowel pin. (R, Z and Φ constrains)
A rotating flap (Z constrain)
6David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
Locking points (opposite to nose)
If petals must be inserted in angle the local supports should be
adapted for that constrain
Preliminary design to insert petals in angle
7David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
Locking points (opposite to nose)
HC Korex-5/32-2.4(or Structural foam)
0.18mm thick XN50/RS3 CF facing
Insertion guideConstrains Z
and Φ
8David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
8 service trays ?
Petals connected in series on both sides of the service
tray
By removing every second service module, the space
for petal insertion is increased
Recent developments from NIKHEF show that cooling 2 petals in series would be more efficient for the given pipe diameter. https://indico.cern.ch/event/306927/session/0/contribution/23/material/slides/
We could reduce the number of module services by a factor 2.See “common mechanics session”.
9David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
Service tray x8
Space available to insert petals
increases
Petals can be inserted parallel to disk plane
May allow for new
insertion methods
10David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
EC Finite Element Model
Update to FEA results shown in
https://indico.cern.ch/event/306927/session/10/contribution/92/material/slides/
11David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
FEA global structure: adding Si modules
- Si wafers- 0.3 mm- 1.31 g/cc- 7 GPa
- Thermal glue- 0.2 mm- 2.34 g/cc- 112.4 GPa
Silicon sensors added to the petals to check out how much they affect to the EC
structure behaviour
Petal local supports being studied
12David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
1st CASE 2nd CASE 3rd CASE
Max. VM structure 2,34MPa 4,25MPa 5,29MPa 7,43MPa 5,54MPa 8,1MPa
Max. VM Petal 2,1MPa 4,03MPa 5,15MPa 7,26MPa 5,4MPa 7,92MPa
Max. VM Blade 1,92MPa 2,62MPa 1,98MPa 2,05MPa 1,65MPa 1,37MPa
Max. DX STATIC 12,9um 9,93um 14um 12,5um 13,9um 12um
Max. DY STATIC 19,5um 16,5um 23,8um 22,7um 23,1um 21,1um
Max. DZ STATIC 3,17um 2,64um 4,4um 4,08um 3,85um 5,08um
1st Frecuency Mode 22,163Hz 22,632Hz 21,834Hz 22,317Hz 21,957Hz 22,397Hz
Max. DX PSD 3σ 7,32um 6,75um 8,07um 7.95um 7,95um 7,65um
Max. DY PSD 3σ 5,52um 5,04um 5,85um 5.76um 5,76um 5,58um
Max. DZ PSD 3σ 9,45um 8,43um 9,75um 8.58um 9,78um 8,55um
How does affect Si wafers for EC structure analysis?
13David Santoyo Petal Locking Points: AUW Nov 2014
Summary
Still too “conceptual” Seems to work on the simulations We need to find proper implementations of the locking
mechanisms that do not hinder petal insertion and removal Shall we insert by
➘ sliding along blade or ➘ (if space allows) parallel to disk or➘ By first inner radius and then upper radius ?
Blade’s C-channel opposite to nose, constrain effectively in z and Φ “Nose” fixation and blade’s C-channels constrain R, Z and Φ Is the petal properly fixed in Z with the nose fixation and the flap?
We may want to add some extra fixation Is it petal insertion “friendly” ? Need to exercise and characterize
with Endcap mock-up