busbar Spider Luis Mora Vallejo Rosario Principe TEMSC Technical Meeting 22 September 2016 EDMS 1721355 Introduction Goal Motivation New design FEM analysis Mechanical tests Others Conclusion ID: 783744
Download The PPT/PDF document "New design for the LHC 13 kA standard" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
New design for the LHC 13 kA standard busbar Spider
Luis Mora VallejoRosario Principe
TE/MSC Technical Meeting, 22 September 2016
EDMS 1721355
Slide2Introduction
Goal
MotivationNew designFEM analysis
Mechanical testsOthers
Conclusion
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Slide3Goal
Start to use the new spider in the LHC
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Slide4Motivation
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Spider, M3
Potential
dangers:
The metallic frame used is particularly weak on mechanical point of view during the assembly process.
There is a small distance between the metallic frame and the
busbars
.
Spider, M1,2
Slide5New design
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Objective
:
Insulating
material with good mechanical properties
Requirements:
Guarantee m
inimum free section required in the M1, 2 and 3 lines, following the LHC functional specification
(
P
.
Fessia
, “Specification for the consolidation of the LHC 13 KA interconnections in the continuous cryostat” [EDMS 1171853
]).
Block the longitudinal movement of one of the
busbars
and leave the other free.Allow the installation of the welding machine to fix the sleeve.
Drawing spider
M1,2: LHCMB__E0087
Drawing spider M3
: LHCMB__
E0088
Slide6FEM analysis (
i)
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Objectives:
Material choice
Worst case scenario: M1,2 vs M3
Characterize spider.
Lorentz Force
M. Moretti, D. Ramos
, “Mechanical Analysis of a new Spider For
Busbar
Interconnects”
[
EDMS 1556542]
Slide7FEM analysis (ii)
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Material
:
Ryton® PPS R-4-200
presents better
properties
than
Ultem
® 1000 .
Worst case scenario
: M1,2 more critical than M3.
Results
:
M. Moretti, D. Ramos
, “Mechanical Analysis of a new Spider For
Busbar
Interconnects”
[EDMS 1556542]
Slide8Mechanical tests (i)
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Tests (M3):
Fatigue
Tensile
Slide9Mechanical tests (ii)
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Fatigue
testConditions:
77K
1.5
kN
20.000 cycles *
Results:
Ok, no crack or deterioration found
* P
.
Fessia
, “Specification for the consolidation of the LHC 13 KA interconnections in the continuous cryostat” [EDMS 1171853]).
Slide10Mechanical tests (iii)
Tensile test
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Spider #
Test temperature
Max load (N)
Remarks
1
77 K
5289
Spider used in fatigue test
2
77 K
6015
N/A
3
RT
4923
N/A4RT4932
N/A
1
2
3
4
M. D. Crouvizier, “Splices and spiders characterizations” [EDMS
1580808]
Slide11Improvement: Add a chicane to prevent an electrical leak
MQXF:
Study ongoing new line
Other
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
F
1
F
2
Slide12Thank you very
much
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
Slide13Spare. Ultem 100 vs
Rython R-4-200
EDMS 1721355 luis.mora@cern.ch
PPS RYTON
R-4-200
is
an advanced 40% fiberglass reinforced
polyphenylene
sulphide compound
(composite material
).
ULTEM
1000
resin
is an amorphous, transparent
polyetherimide
plastic.