ATLAS-NSW CERN MMM workshop MM Wedges made of 4 modules

Irfu.cea.fr

ATLAS-NSWCERN MMM WORKSHOP

MM WEDGES MADE OF 4 MODULES

21-22 of February 2013

Patrick PONSOT for the CEA-Saclay-Irfu group:

F.Bauer, P.Daniel-Thomas, E.Ferrer-Ribas, J.Galan, W.Gamache, A.Giganon, P-F.Giraud, P.Graffin, S.Hassani, S.Herlant, S.Hervé, F.Jeanneau, H.LeProvost, O.Meunier, A.Peyaud, Ph.Schune

CERN MMM workshop - CEA-Saclay/DSM/Irfu - Patrick PONSOT

OUTLINE

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 2

Layout with MM wedge made of 4 modules (quadruplets)• Version C to take in account the envelope of the sector• Version D in progress to simplify the layout (ATLAS layout drawing is available on CDD: ATUMHS___0004)

Design of the spacer-frame and of the module• A composite architecture with in-plane corridors included• Quadruplets are fixed with 4 kinematic mounts

sTGC wedge interface : 2 cases• The weight of the sTGC wedge is directly transferred to the structure of the wheel• The sTGC wedge is fix on the spacer-frame

Mechanical simulations• The spacer frame is fixed on the wheel with 3 kinematic supports• The spacer frame is fixed on the wheel with 4 kinematic supports

Thermal simulations• A first approach with temperature gradient (electronic power deposition?)

LAYOUT OF THE MM MODULES

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 3CERN MMM workshop - CEA-Saclay/DSM/Irfu - Patrick PONSOT

The assembly drawing has been updated (version C) and provided to the MM community on the 13th of February, but new modifications should be taken in account



From version B to version C• The sectors have been enlarged to increase the azimuthal overlaps• Inner radius has been reduced from 982 to 917mm, to increase the active area (eta=2.7)• No change for outer radius (eta=1.3) to keep clearance w.r.t. the position of the EIL4 chamber



A reference drawing has been provided to define the NSW envelope in ATLAS environment (ATUMHS___0004 on CDD)

• Large and small MM modules must be modified according to their integration in the envelopes of the sectors



Exchange of 3D models has been initialized to have more realistic dimensions to define the alignment system, the services and kinematic supports

• FE electronics and services should be defined asap to check if we have enough space inside the spacer-frame (~50mm)

• 100mm space has been required between the wheel structure and the envelope of the sectors to be able to fix the sectors on the structure

• In-plane alignment must be added (additional bars or using of the spacer-frame?)



2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 7

Next step: From version C to version D• Optimization of the size of the MM modules to stay inside the envelopes without lost of

the overlaps• Simplification of the shape of the sectors, if simplification of the structure of the wheel is

possible and if the “ears” are not necessary for overlaps• Increasing of space for in-plane alignment system if we cannot add the new longer bars

inside the spokes (if using spacer-frame instead of the bars is possible?)

DESIGN OF THE SPACER-FRAME


A composite architecture with in-plane corridors included (~130kg)• Spacer = Central plates = Rohacell 30mm (or honeycomb) + 2 FR4 laminates 0.5mm• Discontinuous central plate to provide space for alignment corridors• Frame = T profiles = aluminum profiles• Holes for alignment corridors

2 aluminum T profiles

12 central plates (Rohacell +FR4)

kinematic mount

M4

M3

M2

M1

DESIGN OF THE MODULE


The quadruplets are made of PCBs (0.5mm), G10 laminates (0.5mm) and honeycombs (~10mm)

• The weight of the 8 MM is ~440Kgs• Services are not included

M4

M3

M2

M1

Mass of quadruplets (Kg)M4 75 M3 65M2 50M1 30

M1

Each module is fixed on the frame with 4 kinematic mounts

sTGC WEDGES INTERFACE


Case 1: The weight of sTGC wedge is directly transferred to the structure of the wheel

• The kinematic mounts of the sTGC wedge can be installed on the spacer-frame but exactly at the same location of the kinematic mounts of the spacer-frame

• The handling of the full sector must be done with the same conditions

PrincipleKinematic mount of

the sector

Kinematic mount of the sTGC wedge

Same location for the

kinematic mounts

sTGC WEDGES INTERFACE


Case 2: The sTGC wedge is fixed on the spacer-frame• The design of the spacer-frame should take in account the weight of the 2 sTGC

wedges (local reinforcement of the T profiles)

Fixation of sTGC directly on the spacer-frame


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 12

The goal is to have under control the absolute positioning of the MM modules and sTGC wedges

• The mechanical structure of the spacer-frame should limit the displacement of each module and wedge under 100-150 microns (strips and wires must be parallel)

Loading conditions• Self weight• In all cases the tilt of the wheel at 0.7° is considered

Boundary conditions• Degrees of freedoms are driven by the location of the different kinematic mounts

1 (or 2) fully sliding link1 unidirectional sliding

link (2nd coordinate)1 pivot link


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 13

A first set of simulations have been done• With 3 kinematic mounts at optimized location (“bessel points”)• Location of degrees of freedom (different kinematic mounts) has been changed

according to the orientation of the sectors, for spacer-frame and also for modules• Equivalent Young modulus has been used for the modules• Case1: Without the sTGC weight

Material Aluminum FR4 Rohacell Module

Density (Kg/m3) 2770 1950 75 EquivalentYoung modulus (MPa) 71000 17000 92 17000

CEA-Saclay/DSM/Irfu/SIS/LCAP - Patrick PONSOT

MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/08 | PAGE 14

Vertical sector 05 with the optimization of the kinematic mounts

Pivot linkUnidirectional link (2nd coordinate)

Fully sliding link


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/08 | PAGE 15

Vertical sector 05 with the optimization of the kinematic mounts

Sector (spacer-frame + modules)

Spacer-frame only

Modules only (Quadruplets)

Maximum displacement

~0.06mm


~0.1mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/08 | PAGE 16

Vertical sector with the optimization of the kinematic mounts: Displacement of modules on each direction

X displacement0 to +0.02

Y displacement0 to +0.06mm

Z displacement-0.03 to 0mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/08 | PAGE 17

Horizontal sector with the optimization of the kinematic mounts

Pivot linkUnidirectional sliding link (2nd coordinate)

Fully sliding link

Fully sliding link


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/08 | PAGE 18

Horizontal sector with optimization of the kinematic mounts

Sector (spacer-frame + modules)



~0.02mm

Spacer-frame only


~0.03mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/08 | PAGE 19

Horizontal sector with the optimization of the kinematic mounts: Displacement of modules on each direction

X displacement0 to +0.01mm

Z displacement-0.01 to +0mm

Y displacement-0.01to 0mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 20

A second set of simulations have been done• With 4 kinematic mounts on the spacer-frame• To use the same location as for sTGC supports• To be far away from the center of the wheel (small space between spokes)• The stiffness of each panel of the module has been considered• Case1: Without sTGC weight

Material Aluminum FR4 Rohacell G10Density (Kg/m3) 2770 1950 75 1850Young modulus (MPa) 71000 17000 92 24000

4 kinematic mounts


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 21

Vertical sector 05 with optimization of the kinematic mounts

Sector (spacer-frame+modules)

Spacer-frame only



~0.05mm


~0.06mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 22

Vertical sector 13 at 180°

Fully sliding links

Unidirectional sliding link (2nd coordinate)

Pivot link

Fully sliding links

Pivot link


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS


Vertical sector 13 at 180° with optimization of the kinematic mounts


Spacer-frame only



~0.07mm


~0.1mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 24

Sector at 45°

Fully sliding links


Pivot link

Fully sliding links

Pivot link



Displacement of the modules will be reduced

by changing of the location of the unidirectional sliding

of the modules

MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 25

Sector at 45° without optimization of the kinematic mounts (worst case)


Spacer-frame

Modules (Quadruplets)


~0.18mm


~0.18mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 26

Horizontal sector

Fully sliding links


Pivot link

Fully sliding links

Pivot link



MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 27

Horizontal sector with optimization of the kinematic mounts




~0.03mm

Spacer-frame only


~0.04mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 28

Statement (without thermal analysis) : With 4 kinematic mounts on the spacer-frame which are not at the optimized position (not at “Bessel point”), it should be possible to keep the displacement of the MM modules under 0.1mm (but services should be added, local deformation of the support must be studied)

Next slide: Just to estimate the impact of the fixation of the modules on the spacer-frame without kinematic mounts (Warning! The same exercise must be done with thermal analysis before to conclude)


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 29

Vertical sector without kinematic mounts between the modules and the spacer-frame (without sTGC weight)


Spacer-frame only



~0.01mm

Stiffness of the modules and of the spacer-frame are compatible

but the worst case will come from thermal analysis


~0.03mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 30

Next slides : We consider that the sTGC wedges have been fixed directly on the spacer frame without kinematic mounts (only kinematic mounts outside the spacer frame)

Fixation of sTGC directly on the spacer-frame without kinematic mounts (4 supports)


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 31

Vertical sector with sTGC weight


Spacer-frame only



~0.07mm


~0.15mm


MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 32

Horizontal sector with sTGC weight



Maximum displacement~0.02mm

Spacer-frame only



MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 33

Statement 2: With the weight of the sTGC wedges applied on the spacer-frame (4 supports), we have a strong impact on the deformation of the spacer but not on the displacement of the MM modules. The kinematic mounts are needed to fix the sTGC on the spacer-frame to maintain the relative position of the sTGC w.r.t. the MM modules.

Statement 3: If the stiffness of the quadruplets (MM modules and sTGC wedges) is confirmed with mock-up (*), we can use a spacer-frame to do the assembly of them (Young modulus at least 17000 MPa)

But, we cannot conclude before thermal analysis (next step, we just begin the work)!

* Measurement of the stiffness of the composite panel is planned at Saclay


THERMAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 34

The goal is to have under control the deformation mode of the modules with the alignment systems

• To define the kinematic mounts of the modules (Z displacements?)• In this case we need a more precise description of the geometry of the module

Loading conditions• Self weight• In all cases the tilt of the wheel at 0.7° is considered• Temperature gradient ΔT=2°C• Today, the location of the electronic power deposition is not defined

Boundary conditions• Same boundary conditions as for mechanical analysis


A first approach• With 4 kinematic mounts on the spacer-frame• The stiffness of each panel of the module has been considered

THERMAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 35

Material Aluminum FR4 Rohacell G10Density (Kg/m3) 2770 1950 75 1850Young modulus (MPa) 71000 17000 92 24000Coefficient of thermal expansion 2,3 1,5 3,5 1,5Thermal conductivity 148 0,0025 0,03 0,0025

Very preliminary


Behavior of the modules• With 4 kinematic mounts on the module• The stiffness of each panel of the module has been considered

THERMAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 36

Very preliminary


Behavior of the module M4• With 4 kinematic mounts on the module• The stiffness of each panel of the module has been considered

THERMAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 37

Y displacement-0.13 to 0mm

Z displacement-0.03 to +0.02mm

X displacement~0mm

Very preliminary


THERMAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 38

Horizontal sector




Spacer-frame only


Very preliminary


Displacement of the modules can be reduced

by changing of the location of the unidirectional sliding

kinematic support

THERMAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 39

Sector at 45°

Sector (spacer-frame +modules)

Spacer-frame only



~0.2mm


~0.2mm

Very preliminary


THERMAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 40

Statement for the first approach with temperature gradient: Not critical with 4 kinematic mounts on the spacer-frame which are not at the optimized position (not at “Bessel point”), it should be possible to keep the displacement of the MM modules under 0.1mm (but services should be added, local deformation of the support must be studied)

Next slide: Just to estimate the impact of the fixation of the modules on the spacer-frame without kinematic mounts

Very preliminary


THERMAL ANALYSIS

2013/02/21-22 | PAGE 41

Vertical sector 05 without kinematic mounts on the modules


Spacer-frame only



~0.18mm


~0.55mm

Deformation mode is not under control, kinematic

mount are needed

Very preliminary


DSMIrfuSIS/LCAP (PC N°12, Bt 123)Patrick PONSOT

Commissariat à l’énergie atomique et aux énergies alternativesCentre de Saclay | 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette CedexT. +33 (0)1 69 08 79 30 | F. +33 (0)1 69 08 89 47

Etablissement public à caractère industriel et commercial | RCS Paris B 775 685 0192013/02/21-22

Thank you for your attention !

| PAGE 42

Documents

ATLAS-NSW CERN MMM workshop MM Wedges made of 4 modules