end cap support structure:

1David SantoyosLHC AUW 18/11/2012

END CAP support structure:

??????

- Castellated v2.0 - Castellated v3.0

“7 disks – L.O.I.” Layout


Introduction

Nominal Petal radius (Rsensitive=970 mm) is only achieved when the overlap is reduced to 2.5 mm in the sensitive area

New version of the EC disks and support structure triggered by the need of having a system hermetic to PT >= 1 GeV/c particles, this is only achieved:

by increasing petal overlap

by decreasing petal separation along Z

Castellated v2.0 Castellated v3.0

Castellated v1.0


Castellated v2.0 vs Castellated v3.0

castellated v2.0sensors separation: 20mm

castellated v3.0sensors separation: 15mm

active sensor overlap: 2.5mm

achieves Rout = 971mm

Two approaches to reduce the distance

between petals...

8m

m t

hic

kn

es

s8m

m th

ickness

connectors on both sides of petal

connectors on one side of petal

could be reduced with the angle...

22º


Castellated v2.0 vs Castellated v3.0 castellated v2.0 castellated v3.0

brown area seats on support structure

pipe layout remains equal for both concepts

303 mm303 mm

different EoP layout...


Castellated v2.0 structure

Services trays attached to disks...... some of them removable ...

Disks will have openings to optimize the relation stiffness/mass... (not shown in here)


Castellated v2.0: rods

nu

mb

er o

f ro

ds

to

be

op

tim

ized

...

CF Rods increased the first mode frequency from 7.06Hz to 23.82Hz (previous concept 5D)


castellated v2.0 & v3.0 service trays

126 mm

20 mm

service tray remains equal for both concepts

services trays (x14)

services trays close to rails (x2)


Castellated v2.0: max. envelope

Rout (max) = 1003mm

Services trays are attached to disks


Castellated v2.0 & v3.0: cooling pipe routing (I)pipe connections remains equal for both concepts

50 - 60mm required!!!

Wiggling the pipe for the EoP reduces the gap between barrel and EC


pipe connections remains equal for both concepts

Castellated v2.0 & v3.0: cooling pipe routing (II)

this services layout was developed for Castellated v1.0... Castellated v2.0 & v3.0 will not have this layout as this would required two petal flavours...



Services trays attached to outer rings...... some of them removable ...



CF blades 8mm thickness “skins +

honeycomb”

CF blades attached to inner and outer ring

Blades will have openings to optimize the relation

stiffness/mass... (not shown in here)


Castellated v3.0: rods

nu

mb

er o

f ro

ds

to

be

op

tim

ized

...

CF Rods increased the first mode frequency from 7.06Hz to 23.82Hz (previous concept 5D)


Rout (max) = 1006mmServices trays are attached to outer rings

Castellated v3.0: max. envelope

... needs to be optimized


Conclusions

Two new layouts for EC Castellated version modeled

EC envelope for both new layouts➘ Approximated dimensions➘ Assembly sequence feasible

Service channels modeled (grouped in 16 trays concept at outer radius)➘ Need to be optimized

Next steps...

Electrical cables routing...

Optimization studies for disks, blades, rings, rods... Material Stiffness

Services tray design for optimization... Manifolding, wall thickness, insulation, cable shielding...


Back-up


Castellated v1.0...Maximum number of petals should be replaced if needed...

...Reduce the system as much as possible in radius direction...

...Isolate services from sensors (petals)...

....Provide enough stiffness...


Castellated v1.0 substructure#1Inner shell:

“skins + (honeycomb or low density foam)”Could be also optimized with openings for mass

reduction

“Petals attached to substructure #1 (disks)”

CF disks 8mm thickness “skins + honeycomb”

optimized with openings

“CF Frames to keep disks separated (provide stiffness)”


Castellated v1.0 substructure #1CF Rods increase the first mode frequency from 7.06Hz to 23.82Hz (previous concept 5D)

CF Rods do not interfere with petal insertion...


Castellated v1.0 substructure #1

Openings width determined by FEA (mass optimization)

Openings width (previous

concept 5D)


Castellated v1.0 substructure #2

“CF Rings attached to rails... sustain service

trays”

“Substructure #2 is isolated from

substructure #1”

“Number of CF Rings to be confirmed by FEA”


Castellated v1.0 Front view services

16 service trays concept; the total number of service-channels are 18 (the

ones over the rails are split in two)


Castellated v1.0 Services trays

Petal layout (both sides)


Castellated v1.0 cooling pipes Petals cooling pipes should not interfere with insertion of adjacent petals (as much as possible...)


Castellated v1.0 cabling


Castellated v1.0 Envelope

R360: Inner Cylinder

R967: Silicon

R975: Petal

R978: Disk

R1025: Out. Ring

R992: GapR996: In. Ring

R1020: Services

R384: SiliconR377: Petal

R370: DiskR368: Gap


Castellated v1.0 Petal considerations320mm

310mm

EOS dimensions

Upgrade(M. Stanitzki)

Approx. 12mmSensor-to-disk

Sensor position: - No overlap between sensors mounted on petals- 3mm active sensor overlap adjacent petals on same disk- No overlap considered between disks

Number of ears (just one):

Petal width decreases Cabling and cooling -> unique exit

Electrical connections on both

sides (disk-side)


290 mm

Castellated v1.0 Petal considerations

How much petal width can be reduced?

end cap support structure:

Documents