qxfp01 heater hipotting and autopsy€¦ · •after physically removing the short, we repeated the...
TRANSCRIPT
QXFP01 Heater Hipotting and Autopsy
S. Krave, V Marinozzi, M. Parker, L. Elementi., M. Baldini
20 March 2019
• QXFP01 was the first long prototype coil
• Successfully tested in mirror configuration
• One of the OL midplane traces never failed, which is
consistent with what we found
• The other OL midplane trace failed at 2340 V (breakdown)
immediately after warmup, which is somewhat consistent
with what we measured: first failure measured by us was a
ramp-hi at 2.15 kV. However, after some testing, first
breakdown has been at 2.73 kV, so higher than the one
measure by Carlo.
• The two pole traces failed after warm up respectively at 1500
V and 2070 V (breakdown). All traces passed electrical test at
2500 V before testing
• The coil had 22 training quenches, and 30 QH induced
quenches
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued2
Background
After Dissassembly and Hipot testing,
heater 2 (Pole, Transition) A short was
created at a location that was determined
by thermal imagery. This location was later
verified by poking it and watching the
resistance change
A plan was determined as follows:
• Peel glass off of heater and observe
location, check if short is still there
• Separate heater from trace and examine
area
• Check for other shorts
And after discussion
Work to develop and identify more shorts
Practice heater and glass removal was
completed on inconsequential areas of the
coil and practice traces.
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued3
Background
Just above the black mark pointed out
a couple weeks ago
Verified by closer observation of
thermal camera
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued4
Burned Spot
Heater removal
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued5
The Short
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued6
Continuity measured from short location to coil
• Hipot failure on heater 2 led to
resistive condition
• Current was applied
• Short was detected using thermal
camera
• There was a concern that foreign
material may have been involved,
but upon closer inspection that
does not appear to be the case.
• The burning was likely a result of
the power applied during thermal
imaging.(6 volts ,0.5A in <1mm^2
for a prolonged period of time)
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued7
Kapton Removed From Short
• The short was one of 5 similar looking bubble areas in the region of the short.
– It was the only one that showed continuity with a multimeter.
• There was another similar looking bubble area ~3” away from the short.
• This bubble area looks similar to the blisters that appear on the ID of coils at
superfluid helium.
• It was relatively easy to remove the heater.
Other Observations
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued8
• After physically removing the short, We repeated the hipot test to look for failure
areas
• Breakdown and arc resulted in audible snap at failure location
Looking for more shorts…
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued9
After removing the heater in the region of the first short, and therefore the short, hipot of the
remaining part of the quench heater has been performed.
The list of all the tests performed, with results, is the following:
1) Target: 3.7 kV, 10 V/s, max leak current 10 μA Breakdown @ 2.57 kV, Ileak > 10 mA
2) Target: 3.7 kV, 100 V/s, max leak current 10 μA Arc fail @ 1.61 kV, Ileak = 1.4 μA
3) Target: 3.7 kV, 100 V/s, max leak current 10 μA Arc fail @ 1.95 kV, Ileak = 0.3 μA
4) Target: 3.7 kV, 10 V/s, max leak current 10 μA Breakdown @ 2.27 kV, Ileak > 10 mA
5) Target: 3.7 kV, 10 V/s, max leak current 10 μA Ramp-Hi @ 1.24 kV, Ileak = 10.1 μA
6) Target: 3.7 kV, 100 V/s, max leak current 100 μA Breakdown @ 1.75 kV, Ileak > 10
mA
7) Target: 3.7 kV, 100 V/s, max leak current 100 μA Arc fail @ 0.46 kV, Ileak = 33.4 μA
8) Target: 3.7 kV, 10 V/s, max leak current 100 μA Ramp-Hi @ 0.4 kV, Ileak = 174 μA
9) Target: 3.7 kV, 10 V/s, max leak current 100 μA Arc fail @ 0.65 kV, Ileak = 707 μA
EXAMPLE DATA FROM
SINGLE HIPOT LOCATION
Location Verification by antenna technique
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued10
Second Hipot failure location
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued11
2nd Hipot failure location
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued12
Not failure
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued13
Epoxy cracking as a result of loading? Potential for future failure?
• Hi-pot heater region
• Record ultimate voltage and failure mode (or pass)
• Verify region of failure (usually by listening)
• Physically remove shorted area of heater
• Repeat until there is nothing left or all passes
• Areas with visible fracturing or blistering were
catalogued by size. If the region failed hipot this was
noted in a spreadsheet
• Assume elliptical region
• Some length along coil
• Some Length Radially
• Calculate area
• Some areas had visible holes through the Kapton after
heater removal. These regions failed 3680V hipot
• Some that didn’t have visible blistering also failed, but
at a lower rate
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued14
Categorization of Bubble Areas ~15mm
~10mm
A ≈ 118 mm^2
Bubble Map
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued15
Bubble size represents relative area
of region. This dot is ~120 mm^2
Bubble Color Key
Passes 3680V Hipot
1500V Hipot Failure
2590V Hipot Failure
3680V Hipot Failure
Note several failures
at 2160 mm
Locations and voltage
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued16
Area vs Hi-pot Failures
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued17
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued18
• Gap along coil midplane provides
low resistance to epoxy flow
• Epoxy Racetracking
• Epoxy passes coil during fill
process and covers coil end,
trapping gas inside of coil
• Epoxy flows from this channel
radially inward
• Remaining trapped gas
coalesces near pole and is
unable to be extracted.
• FNAL has placed filler in this
region in coils after QXFP01b
• These fillers led to substantial
reduction in resin sucked back
into coil after potting typically
<20ml
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued19
Explanation for regions near pole?
Related Information
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued20
Blistered regions show
beach marks originating
from location of voids in
coil
• These marks travel
outward from origin,
sometimes in opposite
directions of
progression of trace
peeling and are not
likely a result of the
peeling operation
• Thought he actual
separation may be
• These look similar to
progression of fatigue
failure in materials
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued21
Fatigue
Examples of blistering
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued22
Example: Mechanics of tungsten blistering: A finite element study
Fracking?
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued23
From: Recent Advances in Global Fracture Mechanics of Growth of Large Hydraulic Crack Systems in Gas or Oil Shale: A Review
QXP105
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued24
QXFP105
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued25
2160mm (add 6cm to ruler to
compensate for position in
tooling)Shell Weld Seam
3/20/2019 S. Krave | QXFP01 Autopsy Continued26
QXFP103
Line at
~2180