1 david santoyo petal meeting: 24 october 2014 petal vs services: design concerns
TRANSCRIPT
1David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Petal vs Services:design concerns
2David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Petal vs services
From Afroditi (Nikheff) conclusions… (Itk General meeting sept-14) The current tube diameter seems not optimum…
- “If tube diameter can’t be reduced because of welding concerns…”
- “Other possibilities: put 2 (or more) petals in series and use same diameter tube as SS staves - double the flow can lift you out of the Stratified-Wavy flow regime…”
It would be good also to understand……how does affect to these simulations; the tube diameter and length for
the service tray inlet pipes, capillaries and outlet pipes?…
3David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
How does affect services to petals and vice versa?
If for example, petals are cooled down in series, inlet and outlet pipes in service trays are reduced to half. This fact leads to two options:
- x16 service trays serving 14 petals- Reduces service tray complexity and size comparing to previous designs…- Service trays close to horizontals could be rotated loosing symmetry…- Petals are inserted in angle with respect the disk plane…- Petals are not allowed having one EoP on each side…
(…not space for petal insertion…)
- x8 service trays serving 28 petals- Increases service tray complexity and size comparing to previous designs…- Allows not having services trays on the horizontal line…- Although the size of service tray increases as the number is reduced the space
available for petal insertion increases. Petals are inserted in parallel to disks…- Petals could have one EoP on each side
4David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Service tray x8
Each x8 version service tray serves 28 petals increasing size and
complexity respect the version x16
Cables preferred to be below tubes for reparability
5David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Service tray x16
Cables preferred to be below tubes for reparability
Each x8 version service tray serves 14 petals
6David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Service tray x8
x8 service tray distribution
This solution avoids having services on
the horizontal (along the rails)
7David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Service tray x8
Space available to insert petals
increases
Petals are inserted parallel
to disk plane
8David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
How does the x8 version for service tray work?
Petals connected in series on both sides of the service
tray
By removing every second service module, the space
for petal insertion is increased
9David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Service tray x16
Rotation to avoid having services behind BH supports
and routing funny pipe shapes
Looses symmetry
10David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Pipe routing close to rails (x16 version)
Problem routing pipes to petals close to rails
All petals have same flavour
All service trays have same
flavour 16 in total
11David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Pipe routing close to rails (x16 version)
Possible solution to route pipes to petals close to
rails
All petals have same flavour
12 service trays (single) +
2 service trays (double)
12David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Service tray x16
Space available to insert petals decreases
Petals are inserted in angle with respect to
disk plane
13David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Service tray x16
If petals must be inserted in angle the local supports should be
adapted for that constrain
14David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 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
It’s been added the Silicone modules to the petals to check out how much they
affect to the EC structure behaviour
Petal local supports being studied
15David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
EC Finite Element Model
16David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 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?
PSD analysis1·10 -8 g 2 Hz -1
17David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Conclusions
Services affect to petal design: Insertion and assembly procedure Local supports and constraints Petal layout and EoPs
Services affect to EC structure: Thermal and humidity interfaces Interaction with BH and supports Structure stability
It would be important to focus and also take some decisions as a group on the cooling system and services
due to its implication in the overall design
18David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
Backup
19David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
FEM ENDCAPCF + HC structure:
Bulkhead disk
Inner cylinder
CF blades supports
Blades
CF structure:
Ring – Bulkhead disk
Rings – blades
Services
Rails
Materials
XN50/RS3
T300/RS3
Korex-5/32-2.4
20David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
FEM ENDCAP
CF + HC structure:
Petals
Materials
K13D2U
T300/RS3
UCF-119-3/16-3.5
21David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
FEM ENDCAPCF structure:
x Ring – Bulkhead disk
x Rings – blades
x Services
x Aluminum
x Raíls
CF + HC structure:
Bulkhead disk
Inner cylinder
CF blades supports
Materials:
XN50/RS3
T300/RS3
Korex-5/32-2.4
22David Santoyo Petal meeting: 24 October 2014
FEM ENDCAPCF + HC structure:
Blades
Materials
XN50/RS3
T300/RS3
Korex-5/32-2.4